Category Archives: Educational change

Building the capacity for high quality education at scale: Can Vietnam transform the conventional model of schooling (Part 2)?

Despite a much more limited budget and a much larger population than “high performing” countries like Finland and Singapore, some common factors help explain Vietnam’s educational success. Drawing on observations from a trip to Vietnam, the second post in this 4-part series from Thomas Hatch focuses on some of the key elements that helped Vietnam make substantial improvements in education. Future posts explore Vietnam’s subsequent efforts to shift to a competency-based approach and some of the critical issues that have to be addressed in the process. For other posts related to Vietnam, see part 1 of this series, Can Vietnam transform the conventional model of schooling? Educational improvement at scale, and earlier posts including Achieving Education for All for 100 Million People: A Conversation about the Evolution of the Vietnamese School System with Phương Minh Lương and Lân Đỗ Đức (Part 1); Looking toward the future and the implementation of a new competency-based curriculum in Vietnam: A Conversation about the Evolution of the Vietnamese School System with Phương Lương Minh and Lân Đỗ Đức (Part 2); The Evolution of an Alternative Educational Approach in Vietnam: The Olympia School Story Part 1 and Part 2; and Engagement, Wellbeing, and Innovation in the Wake of the School Closures in Vietnam:  A Conversation with Chi Hieu Nguyen (Part 1 and Part 2).

What does it take to create a “high-performing” education system? For long-standing top-performers like Singapore and Finland a comprehensive educational infrastructure includes: 

  • Technical capital – adequate funding, facilities, curriculum materials, and assessments 
  • Human capital – well-prepared, well-supported, and well-respected educators
  • Social capital – shared understanding and strong connections and relationships among educators, policymakers, community members and between schools and the education sector and other parts of the society.

In Vietnam, a more limited budget and a much larger population have made it harder to produce and sustain high-quality facilities, a well-prepared and supported workforce, and a tightly connected and coherent education system. Nonetheless, the Vietnamese education system has been able to draw on and develop some key aspects of technical, human, and social capital that have contributed to the establishment of a system that provides almost universal access to education through 9th grade at a relatively high level of effectiveness.

Technical capital: Funding, Facilities, and Textbooks 

In terms of funding, the Vietnamese government demonstrated its commitment to education by increasing public spending on education from about 1% of GDP in 1990 to about 3.5% in 2006. Those investments were essential for the construction of large numbers of new primary and lower secondary schools in the 1990s and for the production and distribution of free textbooks for students whose families could not afford them. In turn, these efforts contributed to the substantial increases in enrollment and access to education during that time. 

Vietnam has continued that financial commitment to education by spending nearly 20% of its budget (almost 5% of its GDP) on education from 2011 – 2020,  a level of spending higher than countries like the US and even Singapore. That commitment was put into a law passed in 2019 that stipulates that the government should spend at least 20% of its budget on education moving forward, though it has not quite reached that level. Notably, the government commitment has included an investment in equity as Vietnam allocates more spending per capita to disadvantaged provinces and municipalities and pays higher salaries to teachers serving in those areas.

A graph of red bars

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Government-produced textbooks have also played a critical role in the evolution of Vietnam’s education system. These textbooks served as the “de facto” curriculum for some time, with teachers trained to deliver the content in the textbooks and large classes of students moving through the textbooks in a lock-step fashion. Like “managed instruction” approaches that have raised test scores and achievement levels in some districts in the US, textbooks produced by the government with centrally established learning goals may have provided the rapidly increasing student population with access to a common educational experience aligned to conventional assessments and international tests. As a history of the education system in Vietnam explained it, the replacement of textbooks at all school levels in the early 1990s “brought consistency to general education across the nation.” 

Human Capital: Respect for teachers and teachers’ expertise 

In Vietnam, explanations of the development of the educational system often cite the respect for teachers and their work and dedication as critical factors in the development of the education system. Notably, in OECD’s 2018 TALIS survey of teachers and teaching 92% of Vietnamese teachers report feeling valued by society, some of the highest rates among all OECD countries and astoundingly high compared to the OECD average of 26%. By comparison, slightly over 70% of teachers in Singapore (#2 in the rankings) and slightly less than 60% of teachers in Finland say they feel valued by society. In addition, 93% of teachers in Vietnam reported that teaching was their first choice of career (versus an average of 67% of teachers in other OECD countries).  Correspondingly, teacher absenteeism is virtually unknown in Vietnam. 

There is also some evidence to suggest that, overall, teachers in Vietnam have a relatively high level of expertise. For example, data from the Young Lives project shows that primary school math teachers’ pedagogical skills are the one school variable that explains a significant amount of the difference in the gap between the scores of students in Vietnam and their counterparts in India and Peru. Furthermore, the variance in the effects that teachers have on their students’ learning is much smaller in Vietnam than it is in many other countries, suggesting that there are relatively few really bad teachers. 

A graph of the teacher's values

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Social capital: Shared values, common commitment, and relationships

Along with Asian countries like China and Singapore, Vietnam shares Confucian traditions that have placed high value on education for hundreds of years. That commitment to education has also been a critical part of the economic and social development of Vietnam over the last half century of the 20th Century. In 1945, for example, Ho Chi Minh declared Vietnam’s future depended on the education of its children, and that same year, the government issued decrees announcing a call for “anti-illiteracy” campaigns and the establishment of literacy classes for farmers and workers. Shortly thereafter, 75 thousand literacy classes with nearly 96 thousand teachers were serving 2 and a half million people. 

The intertwining of education and national development was also evident in the 1980’s as Vietnam’s shift towards a more market-based economy aligned well with the interests of international NGO’s like the World Bank and the Asia Development Bank. These and other international organizations have provided crucial funding and guidance for economic and educational development in Vietnam since the 1990’s.  

Those I talked to in Vietnam also emphasized the importance of the commitment to education that parents demonstrate in their support for schools. Vietnam’s education minister in 2015, put it succinctly:  “Vietnamese parents can sacrifice everything, sell their houses and land just to give their children an education,”

Importantly, students also demonstrate a belief in the power of education and respect for their teachers. 94% of the Vietnamese students surveyed as part of the PISA tests in 2015 agreed with the statement that “It is worth making an effort in math, because it will help us to perform well in our desired profession later on in life,” and surveys from the latest PISA test in 2022 showed that the proportion of class time teachers in Vietnam have to spend keeping order in the primary classroom (9%) is one of the smallest among all participating countries. 

Along with these shared values and commitments, Vietnam also appears to have developed some strong relationships between educators, government officials, and community leaders and parents.  Attention to these relationships may have played a particularly valuable role in the effort to extend and support schooling in rural ethnic minority areas. Phương Minh Lương, who has worked and conducted research with several ethnic minority communities, explained it to me this way:  “That is the power of the collective or what we might call the ‘power with.’  There’s close coordination between authorities at grassroots levels and schools, with monthly meetings between the village or what we call the commune authorities and school leadership and educators. These include school officials like the headmaster and representatives of mass organizations like the Women’s Union, Youth Union, and Study Promotion Associations at the village level. These meetings are organized by the commune authorities, and they discuss all the problems related to the life of the local people in the village and in the school.  Then if there is a problem, like there are children who have dropped out, then the authorities can support the school in that area and they can come to see what are the reasons these children dropped out, and are there any solutions to get these children back to school.”

The HundrED Global Collection for 2025

This week’s post highlights the 2025 HundrED Global Collection of education innovations and shares links to some of the panels from the HundrED Innovation Summit.  This year’s Global Collection featured one hundred solutions from six continents selected from more than 700 submissions. Major themes in this year’s collection were access to education, equity, wellbeing, and creativity as well as a 100 percent increase in the number of innovations using some form of educational technology. To see how this year’s collection of innovation compares to previous years, see the IEN posts on the HundrED Global Collection for 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, & 2019.

Images & excerpts from the the HundrED Global Collection 2025 report

This year’s selections for the global collection include: Alpha Tiles (Mexico); 50/100 Period Education (Taiwan); Bright Eyed (Trinidad and Tobago); Board Games for Improved Learning Outcomes (Nigeria); Barabar (Bulgaria); 7 Gen Blocks (United States).

Towards a Collaborative, Open-Minded, Respectful Community of Global Learning: Lead the Change Interview with Tracy X. P. Zou

In the latest Lead the Change (LtC) interview, Tracy X. P. Zou discusses her efforts to develop a collaborative approach to scholarship and to incorporate global, international, and intercultural dimensions into the teaching and learning. Zou is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Administration and Policy at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. The LtC series is produced by Elizabeth Zumpe and colleagues from the Educational Change Special Interest Group of the American Educational Research Association. A pdf of the fully formatted interview is available on the LtC website.

Lead the Change (LtC): The 2025 AERA theme is “Research, Remedy, and Repair: Toward Just Education Renewal.”  This theme urges scholars to consider the role that research can play in remedying educational inequality, repairing harm to communities and institutions, and contributing to a more just future in education. What steps are you taking, or do you plan to take, to heed this call? 

Tracy Zou (TZ):  I believe that cultivating collaborations can be a meaningful approach to addressing inequality, repairing harm, and contributing to a more just future by giving voice to important stakeholders to enhance the relevance and impact of educational change research. In many education change projects in higher education, faculty members and students are only informed about, not involved in, the change. Such projects do not usually lead to a desirable impact on teaching and learning practices. To be impactful, changes need to be initiated with people, not imposed on them. 

Globally, many scholars are calling for a collaborative approach to scholarship, but in practice, we encounter many barriers, including faculty members’ heavy workload. Faculty face increasing demands to generate more research more quickly and with higher impact. This means that, in many parts of the world, including Hong Kong where I am based, engaging in educational change is less rewarded than doing research. Against this backdrop, much of my research has involved teaching and learning-focused collaborations among faculty members and between faculty members and students. My studies have included research on students as partners (SaP) and faculty member collaborations for cultivating communities of practice. 

The SaP study (Zou et al., 2023a) involved working with 43 undergraduates as partners in three research projects across two research-intensive universities in Hong Kong. SaP is considered challenging in Asia because it requires an equal relationship in teacher-student collaborations, and there is typically a larger power distance in many Asian regions. We show SaP is achievable in Hong Kong with proper alignment between SaP project designs and the student partners’ roles. Conducive designs include involving students in project configuration, providing them with peer collaboration opportunities, and designing project topics that interest the larger student community. We found that faculty who were previously skeptical about collaborating with students as ‘equals’ came to see the potential and became inspired to experiment with this practice.

In a faculty member collaboration study (Zou et al., 2022; 2023b), I investigated four government-funded cross-institutional teaching enhancement projects involving faculty from six universities in Hong Kong and Mainland China. While these collaborations aimed to bring systemic changes to teaching practices and curriculum design, we encountered various challenges including heavy workload of faculty members and incompatible credit systems in different universities. Our findings show that creatively aligning the larger project outcomes with the priorities of the institutions or departments of individual faculty members can tackle some of these challenges. Achieving this alignment requires faculty members to adjust elements of the larger project outcomes to match local needs and negotiate with the research team about new ways of achieving the planned outcomes. In this process, faculty members have opportunities to exercise considerable leadership at a local level.  These findings suggest a possibility of breaking down inequities in higher education by providing means for faculty—especially teaching-track faculty at research-intensive universities—to have voice and provide leadership in large-scale projects on educational change. 

I believe that this research on collaboration can enable a more equal and just educational system in two ways. First, the research involves carefully designed interventions that bring small, yet important collaborative initiatives that have the potential to be scaled up, introducing changes developed from the bottom up. Additionally, the findings provide implications that can encourage similar projects for a wider impact collectively. 

LtC: Your work has involved collaborative approaches to researching how teachers and students in higher education develop professional capacity and problem solving skills. What are some of the major lessons that practitioners and scholars of Educational Change can learn from your work and experience?

TZ: The most important lesson that can be learned from my research on collaborative approaches is that faculty members should involve students in educational change, trust them, and provide them with autonomy and freedom to experiment. This is easier said than done. One challenge is that project funding mechanisms, at least those in Hong Kong, tend to hold faculty members accountable if project outcomes deviate from the proposal. In some of my projects, faculty members have been concerned that giving students the autonomy to make decisions would be risky. 

However, our findings showed that giving students autonomy typically enhances their engagement. In a project about students’ learning experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, we involved students as co- researchers starting from the project planning stage, giving them voice in defining the specific topic and the scope of the research (e.g., what aspects of learning, which groups of students to be researched), designing the methodologies, and constructing the budget. These are tasks that are not typically handled by students, but we found that students became extremely committed to the project as they focused on the matters that were most relevant and exciting to them. For example, one group of students investigated the impact of the pandemic on international students studying in Hong Kong from developing countries and revealed how financial and resource constraints influenced students’ learning and well-being. 

Another important lesson learned is about proper and flexible project designs. Collaborative endeavors cannot be fully predicted up front and often require revision and re-direction in project outcomes. Our research findings provide evidence for the need for embedding flexibility in the research design.

Thirdly, my research suggests that practitioners, scholars, and grant-makers interested in collaborative research need to allow creativity in conveying the project outcomes. If you want to involve students, for example, you might find that students are less enthused about or academically prepared for writing rigorous reports—which scholars and grant-makers might typically expect as a project outcome—but can get excited about making a short video and creating memes to demonstrate their learning. Allowing creativity empowers students to use their expertise rather than being required to conform to traditional methods. 

Finally, regarding projects and initiatives that involve collaborations among faculty members, my research suggests that intervention designers, researchers, and grant-makers need to take into consideration the holistic professional development needs of the faculty members involved and build those needs into the design of the collaborative initiatives. For example, the collaborative projects could take into account how the research can result in learning and artifacts that might become part of participating members’ portfolios that they may need for longer-term career development. It is important to note that an equal and respectful relationship is the key to any collaborative professional capacity building.

LtC: One major strand of your work has focused on the internationalization of teaching and curriculum in higher education. What might practitioners and scholars take from this work to foster better school systems for all students?

TZ: Internationalization of teaching and the curriculum concerns the incorporation of global, international, and intercultural dimensions into the teaching and learning processes and the curriculum (Leask, 2015). It is basically about creating an open-minded, respectful community of global learning that aims to benefit all students. The notion of internationalization is sometimes misunderstood as merely developing intercultural skills or including international examples in teaching material. Internationalization fundamentally involves not only acknowledging other cultures but also deeper transformational work to become critically aware of one’s own identity and the cultural and political assumptions underpinning our curriculum and teaching practice. 

In my research, facilitating internationalization of teaching and the curriculum starts from understanding how faculty members make sense of the concept of internationalization and how they relate it to their courses and programs (Zou et al., 2020). This initial step helps build a common understanding between academic/educational developers and faculty or practitioners, engaging everyone in an open and critical discussion. For example, we discussed with a journalism faculty member about what it looks like to be an ethical and professional journalist in a global world, and which parts of the curriculum prepare students (or not) for the relevant attributes. We reached a consensus that, while there are international learning opportunities in the existing curriculum, they remain insufficient. This understanding allowed for further discussion on what actions to take. 

Furthermore, we found that educational developers should start these conversations by connecting internationalization efforts with specific faculty members’ disciplines. This connection is important because our study (Zou et al., 2023c) shows that faculty members from different disciplines engage internationalization differently according to what is seen as ‘knowing’ and ‘being’ in their disciplines. For example, in hard disciplines such as science, learners are expected to acquire foundational scientific knowledge before they can develop the identity of a scientist. In soft disciplines such as humanities, ‘knowing’ is achieved as learners use their own perspectives and experiences to make sense of the content. Accordingly, internationalization of the curriculum in hard disciplines may make more sense at a later stage of the learning process, such as through a capstone. In contrast, soft disciplines may productively leverage students’ diverse cultural experiences throughout their programs to develop multiple perspectives and critical thinking. Situating internationalization in disciplinary contexts also allows for deeper learning beyond superficial approaches such as language and skills training, becoming embedded in students’ development of professional identities and civic capacity to work and live together with people from different backgrounds. 

The SaP concept discussed earlier can also contribute to internationalization of teaching and the curriculum. Faculty members and scholars of Educational Change can consider involving students in collaboratively re-designing teaching materials and curricula, such as by asking students to share which topics inspire them and how they prefer to learn these topics. It is important to involve students from all backgrounds, particularly with representatives from local communities as well as from abroad, to build an open-minded, inclusive, and respectful community in which every student can find their place and thrive. 

LtC: Educational Change expects those engaged in and with schools, schooling, and school systems to spearhead deep and often difficult transformation. How might those in the field of Educational Change best support these individuals and groups through these processes?

TZ: Indeed, transformation is often difficult. Resistance to change is common in many school systems. I believe those in the field of Educational Change can offer support by encouraging more diversity in the formats through which we share our knowledge about transformation in various contexts at various scales and forms. For example, typically, the research field prefers journal articles written in the educational research genre. However, my previous 6-year experiences of editing a teaching and learning e-newsletter in a research-intensive university in Hong Kong taught me that some faculty members have important educational change expertise to share but lack skills and time to publish in venues designed for educational research. To encourage more diverse authors and perspectives, the journal, International Journal for Academic Development, for which I serve as an associate editor, welcomes ‘reflection on practice,’ a shorter piece (1,000-1,500 words) about the authors’ conceptualizations and reflections on academic development practices in their work contexts. This format offers a platform for practitioners to share their practices and thoughts, which helps engage more stakeholders and move the field towards a more inclusive space. 

The Educational Change field can also offer support by creating collaborative spaces that bring scholars and educators from different disciplines and cultures together. The space could be physical or virtual. What is important is to define a shared area of interest and create attractive themes within that area. Some scholars might describe these spaces as communities of practice (Wenger, 1998). In my own collaborative research with faculty members from different disciplines, including science, social science, engineering, and business, we cultivated many synergies when we focused on themes (e.g., undergraduate research, SaP) that interested all of us. Many of my research ideas emerged from the collaborative process, and some of my collaborators found my ideas useful to their teaching enhancement or course development. 

LtC: Where do you perceive the field of Educational Change is going? What excites you about Educational Change now and in the future? 

TZ: I am excited about how the field of Educational Change is changing and growing towards a focus on more just and sustainable futures. In recent years, I have noticed more studies that focus on disadvantaged and marginalized groups and communities (e.g., Walker, 2023; Zumpe, 2023) that did not receive much attention before. Stronger criticality can be seen in these studies as scholars work to challenge the dominance of certain theories and assumptions. I think these changes are necessary to move the field forward. 

What I feel most excited about Educational Change now is that change initiatives and research about them more often involve teachers’ and students’ engagement and development. When an educational change initiative starts and records even a small achievement, I have seen that the experience of success and the involvement of participants in the success lead to more conducive student learning and teacher satisfaction from the work. As a researcher, I feel proud to design effective interventions that generate positive changes or at least some insights about how to make improvement in the next implementation. 

I am excited about the huge potential of scholarship about Educational Change to elevate the quality of education at all levels. In this complex world, changes are inevitable, and the field of Educational Change can prepare students and teachers to adapt to changes, solve problems, and innovate through designing interventions that are supported by theories and attuned to the local contexts. For example, we know that the emergence of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and other technological advancement will bring substantial changes to educational experiences. In the absence of support and knowledge about how to adapt to and incorporate these technological advances, there might be undesirable consequences such as students uncritically relying on GenAI and failing to achieve intended learning outcomes. Scholars of Educational Change should work collaboratively with teachers from all backgrounds to design learning experiences and assessments that are valid and meaningful in a GenAI-mediated world. 

That said, I also see that there is still much room to improve in the field of Educational Change. Many scholars and practitioners in disadvantaged areas suffer from resource shortages that create systemic barriers for educational change to happen and for their work to be seen and valued. I believe that the field of Educational Change needs to cultivate inclusion and open-mindedness to diverse perspectives and different practices. We especially need to recognize how practices that are established in developed regions may involve significant learning and innovations to establish in more marginalized or under-resourced contexts. An open-mindedness is needed to keep the field moving towards a more just world. 

References

Leask, B. (2015). Internationalizing the curriculum. Routledge.Walker, M. (2023). Towards just futures: A capabilitarian approach to transforming undergraduate learning outcomes. Cambridge Journal of Education53(4), 533-550. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2023.2189227

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice:Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.

Zou, T.X.P., Chu, B., Law, L., Lin, V., Ko, T.,Yu, M., & Mok, P. (2020). University teachers’ conceptions of internationalisation of the curriculum: A phenomenographic study. Higher Education80, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00461-w

Zou, T.X.P., Hounsell, D., Parker, Q.A., &Chan, B.Y.B. (2023b). Evaluating the impact of cross-institutional teaching enhancement collaborations using a professional capital framework. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 9(1)68-82https://doi.org 10.1108/JPCC-03-2023-0021

Zou, T.X.P., Kochhar-Lindgren, G., Hoang, A.P., Lam, K., Barry, T. J., & Leung, L. Y. Y. (2023a). Facilitating students as partners: Co-researching with undergraduates in Asian university contexts. Educational Reviewhttps://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2023.2246674

Zou, T.X.P., Law, L. Y. N., & Chu, B.C.B.(2023c). Are some disciplines ‘hard to engage’? A cross-disciplinary analysis of university teachers’ approaches to internationalization of the curriculum. Higher Education Research & Development, 42(5), 1267-1282. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2023.2217092

Zou, T.X.P., Parker, Q.A., & Hounsell, D.(2022). Cross-institutional teaching enhancement and distributed leadership: An empirical study informed by activity theory. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 44(3), 276-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2021.2002791

Zumpe, E. (2023). School improvement at thenext level of work: The strugglefor collective agency in a school facing adversity. Journal of Educational Changehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-023-09500-x

Lead the Change Interview with Patricia Virella, Tayeon Kim, Lauren Bailes, and Elizabeth Zumpe

This month’s Lead the Change (LtC) interview features the new leaders of the Educational Change Special Interest Group of the American Educational Research Association, Patricia Virella, Tayeon Kim, Lauren Bailes, and Elizabeth Zumpe. This week IEN shares excerpts from those interviews focusing on the connections between their work and the work of the SIG and the wider field of educational change. The LtC series is produced by Elizabeth Zumpe and sponsored by the Educational Change SIG. A pdf of the full interview will be available on the LtC website.

Lead the Change Interview with Patricia Virella

Lead the Change (LtC): What are some of the ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change can learn from your work to inform practice, policy, and scholarship?

Patricia Virella (PV): Over the past year, I prioritized immersing myself in school environments, spending approximately 30 days actively engaging with students, teachers, and staff. This hands-on experience allowed me to gain profound insights into the unique challenges that students are facing in today’s educational landscape, including mental health issues, ongoing crises, and persistent inequities. Witnessing the resilience and joy demonstrated by students in the face of these challenges was incredibly inspiring. It reinforced the importance of understanding the realities of schooling in the present moment. All of us must pause and truly comprehend the current state of education before forging ahead with our plans and initiatives. This firsthand exposure has deepened my commitment to advocating for comprehensive support systems that address the multifaceted needs of students and educators alike. It has also fueled my passion for promoting holistic approaches to education that prioritize well-being and equity. I am driven to leverage these insights to inform my work and to champion initiatives that empower schools to create environments where every student can thrive.

LtC: What excites you about the field of Educational Change, and how might we further those ideas through the work of the Educational Change SIG?

PV: The idea of change is inherently exhilarating. While change often implies embracing entirely new approaches, I also ponder whether it involves a return to foundational concepts and theories that have yet to manifest their full potential, such as liberation, transformation, and experiential learning. This dual perspective prompts me to consider how we, as a collective of academics, can effectively support change that embodies the spirit of equity. I recognize that achieving equity can sometimes feel elusive, but it does not have to remain this way. My commitment to exploring the multifaceted nature of change and equity has deepened my resolve to advocate for inclusive and transformative practices within academic and institutional settings. By critically examining the intersections of change and equity, I am dedicated to fostering environments where all individuals have equal opportunities to thrive and contribute meaningfully. I am driven to channel these reflections into actionable strategies that promote systemic change and advance the realization of equity within educational and academic spheres.

Patricia Virella

Dr. Patricia M. Virella is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Educational Leadership at Montclair State University. Dr. Virella’s research focuses on implementing equity-oriented leadership through leader responses, organizational transformation and preparation. Dr. Virella also studies equity-oriented crisis leadership examining how school leaders can respond to crises without further harming marginalized communities.

Lead the Change Interview with Taeyeon Kim

LtC: What are some of the ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change can learn from your work to inform practice, policy, and scholarship?

TK: My research offers several contributions to the field of Educational Change, focusing on three main areas: revisiting policy through the voices of equity leaders, critically examining policies and systems by centering racially and linguistically marginalized communities, and promoting cross-cultural dialogue using transnational and decolonial perspectives. Given that my work was previously featured in the Lead the Change series (See the Lead the ChangeOctober issue of 2023), I would like to highlight some insights from my recent publication on leadership learning.

As a leadership educator, I view learning as a core tenet of leading educational change. My scholarship on educational leadership and policy has led me to explore how to guide meaningful learning for aspiring leaders who pursue equity and social justice. My recent work, published in the Journal of School Leadership (Kim & Wright, 2024), presents a conceptual-pedagogical framework that on guides students through emotional discomfort when learning about inequities and injustice. This research underscores the importance of emotion in learning, which can drive change at both individual and social levels. When negative emotions are not properly addressed and processed, meaningful learning cannot occur, undermining leaders’ efforts to redress inequities, injustice, and harm. However, with appropriate guidance, emotional discomfort can be a valuable source for transformative learning and changes (see Mezirow 1997). Traditional scholarship on educational change often relies on rationalistic approaches; however, my recent study emphasizes the role of emotions and the holistic aspects of learning in effecting change. It also highlights the crucial role of facilitators and educators in developing equity leaders. 

Thus, my work reveals that effective leadership learning involves addressing the emotional dimensions of learning about social justice issues. By integrating these emotional and holistic aspects, educational leaders can foster more profound and lasting changes in their practice, policy, and scholarship. This approach can help prepare leaders, better equipping them to navigate and address the complex challenges of inequity and injustice in education.

LtC: What excites you about the field of Educational Change, and how might we further those ideas through the work of the Educational Change SIG?

TK: The field of Educational Change is particularly exciting due to its emphasis on partnerships and interdisciplinary approaches, and its appreciation for international perspectives. As a transnational scholar, I often notice that AERA’s discourse tends to be US-centric and predominantly features scholarly thoughts and contexts published in English. This observation underscores the importance of the Educational Change SIG’s foundations and history, as it can potentially extend the boundaries of our educational scholarship.

To advance the field, I urge educational change scholars to critically engage with issues of geopolitics, coloniality, and global whiteness (e.g., Chen, 2010; Mignolo, 2008; Leonardo, 2002) that influence knowledge creation and dissemination. When we embrace “interdisciplinary” and “international” perspectives, it is crucial to interrogate whose knowledge is being prioritized and how it is being represented.

With our new leadership team, I aim to extend the field of Educational Change through several focuses. First, I urge the field to integrate diverse onto-epistemological understandings. The field can benefit significantly from including non-Western, indigenous, and other marginalized ways of being and thinking. By incorporating these perspectives, we can challenge the dominance of Eurocentric paradigms and enrich our understanding of educational practices and policies. Second, educational change scholars need to consider the power dynamics involved in knowledge production and dissemination. This means questioning who has access to academic platforms, whose voices are amplified, and whose are marginalized. Future activities organized by the Educational Change SIG could better support multilingual scholarship and inclusive platforms that are accessible to scholars from various regions and backgrounds, ensuring that a variety of voices are heard and valued. This will eventually promote cross-cultural and transnational collaborations. Finally, integrating critical theories such as postcolonial theory, critical race theory, and feminist theory can provide valuable lenses through which to examine and address systemic inequities in education. These theories can help scholars and practitioners understand the historical and structural factors that perpetuate educational inequalities and identify pathways to more just and equitable educational systems.

By taking these steps, the Educational Change SIG can play a pivotal role in promoting a more inclusive and globally informed approach to educational change, ensuring that the field continues to evolve and respond to the complex needs of educational communities worldwide.

Taeyeon Kim

Taeyeon Kim is an assistant professor in the department of Educational Administration at the University of Nebraska Lincoln. Her scholarship explores intersections of policy and leadership, with a particular focus on how educational leadership can challenge unjust systems and humanize educational practices to empower marginalized students and communities.The Educational Change SIG would like to acknowledge and congratulate Taeyeon Kim as the recipient of the 2024 Educational Change SIG Emerging Scholar Award. Her work was featured in the Lead the Change in October, 2023.

Lead the Change Interview Lauren Bailes

LtC: What are some of the ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change can learn from your work to inform practice, policy, and scholarship?

LB: I aim to share with the field a clear emphasis on systems change for equity, especially in the ways we think about who leaders are. My research focuses on identifying the systems, practices, and mindsets that perpetuate inequities in the careers of educational leaders. Most of my work problematizes the notion of ‘pipelines,’ especially in educational leadership and how career experiences like preparation, promotion, and evaluation are differentially distributed by race and gender (e.g., Bailes & Guthery, 2020; Bailes et al., 2023). When we consider careers to be pipelines, we might wrongly believe those pipelines are neutral, and that everyone has an equal chance of entering or flowing through the pipeline. That is fundamentally untrue: Women and People of Color, as well as people with intersectional identities, experience sorting at every career juncture, even when they are equivalently qualified relative to white or male peers. Further, these career inequities often result in adverse outcomes for faculty and students—especially faculty and students of color. 

A second thing I hope to share is the critical importance of partnering with current practitioners and myriad ways of incorporating their perspectives to deepen, clarify, and implement approaches to and findings of research. The profound systems changes required to shift unjust organizational practices are unlikely to come only from the academy. While research like mine can and does inform practice, I value, seek, and incorporate the perspectives of folks who have experienced injustice in their career trajectories. They are uniquely capable of showing me what I might be missing and how to better capture and learn from what they have experienced or what they know might work to change the system. I also want to be clear that there is much I am still learning from colleagues in this SIG and throughout our field. I’m looking forward to deepening those connections and bringing my own learning to bear on my research and partnership efforts to shift systems in service of equity. 

LtC: What excites you about the field of Educational Change, and how might we further those ideas through the work of the Educational Change SIG?

LB: I think there is a broad appetite—among researchers, policymakers, practitioners, and families—for change in education. That appetite often results in misguided and harmful movements toward neoliberalism, isolationism, or the erosion of schooling as a public good, but there may be opportunity for broad and supportive coalitions for some of the interventions, innovations, and structures that do preserve and enhance equitable and accessible education for every student. 

Lauren Bailes

Lauren P. Bailes is an associate professor of education leadership in the School of Education at the University of Delaware, where she is the coordinator of UD’s EdD in Educational Leadership. After teaching middle school language arts in New York City, she earned her doctorate at The Ohio State University. Now, she researches school leadership preparation, promotion, and evaluation; school organizational characteristics; and the intersection of school leadership and policy. Lauren’s favorite days are still the ones spent in schools alongside teachers and leaders. 

Lead the Change Interview with Elizabeth Zumpe

LtC: What are some of the ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change can learn from your work to inform practice, policy, and scholarship?

EZ: Prevailing ideas about Educational Change tend to come from scholars and policymakers who work far from the realities of schools. Too often, these ideas rest upon wildly false assumptions about existing capacities in schools, overlooking how many operate amid chronic adversity. Chronic adversity occurs when schools regularly face inadequate resources to meet their community’s needs, unproductive pressures to improve, and a lack of support for the profession. When designed from afar, educational reforms tend to presume that school challenges stem from educators’ ‘lack’ of motivation or competence and that improvement thus depends upon intensive intervention from the outside. 

My research offers a different perspective: school improvement amid adversity as a struggle to develop collective agency (Zumpe, 2024). Agency is an inherent driver of human motivation and of educational improvement. But agency can become constrained when people are regularly subjected to demands for which they do not have adequate resources and experience inevitable failure.

As part of one RPP described above, I collaborated closely with a school facing challenging circumstances (Zumpe, 2024). At the start of our collaboration, we realized that our partnership’s theory of action had not considered this school’s needs and context. Across years of being labeled as ‘failing’ and facing daily struggles to ‘reach’ students and cover classrooms, the school’s leaders had tried various initiatives to improve. However, most of their efforts faltered and sputtered out, leaving conflict and cynicism behind.  By their own account, the faculty struggled with the “basics” to get along well enough to launch and sustain improvement. 

When the school’s leadership team invited me to help, I tried to capture their efforts to develop a foundational capability to work together to solve problems, which I called collective agency. Through participant observation with several work groups, I traced how their collective agency became enabled and what shut it down. I also launched and studied a new group using action research.

Comparing groups, I found that efforts to develop collective agency collapsed when educators faced overwhelming and complex problems for which they could see no solutions within reach. In these situations, they avoided their problems, pointed fingers at each other, and expressed a sense of helplessness that nothing could be done. On the flip side, efforts to develop collective agency surged when someone charged the group to ‘do something,’ and when this initiative was combined with a simple solution that the group felt they had the capacity to enact. In these situations, members affirmed each other, perceived the group’s potential for success, and pulled together to make progress towards addressing a problem.

These findings suggest a need for policies and reforms aimed at enabling school improvement in the ‘next level of work’ (City et al., 2010). To do this, we need to partner with educators in challenging circumstances to define and frame goals for improvement within reach and incrementally build organizational problem-solving capacity. Policymakers and scholars need to recognize educators as partners in research and development, without whom our educational system cannot remedy or repair.

LtC: What excites you about the field of Educational Change, and how might we further those ideas through the work of the Educational Change SIG?

EZ: I find hope in the growing number of education researchers seeking answers to existential questions about the role of research in education. Many educators and scholars are deeply concerned about the future of our planet and our democratic values. Looking around at the pernicious grip of racism, the fracturing of civic values, and the erosion of our public education system, many scholars are asking, how does our research relate to this? What are we – as scholars– doing about it? Out of our collective angst comes a growing willingness to expand how we think about academic research and to innovate.

I am excited by the growing number of scholars, especially early career scholars, working to build a more humanistic and justice-forward academic culture. Within our Educational Change SIG and scholarly communities working in RPPs and continuous improvement in education, I am inspired by efforts to actively build a culture in which academics care about each other as people, carry our status with humility, open ourselves to be vulnerable as learners, and treat social impact as a core value. 

To further those ideas, I think the Educational Change SIG should reimagine how we organize and schedule AERA sessions with the intention involving more PK-12 practitioners. One way the SIG can do this is to develop a conference call and session formats that encourage and elevate practitioners’ voices and expertise. The SIG might consider offering sponsored conference registration awards for presenting practitioners. The SIG executive committee can also advocate with AERA to schedule specially designated conference sessions for practitioners that are held during after work hours.

I think the Educational Change SIG should support the diversification of our membership and international learning as a facilitator of cross-national and trans-global exchange. One way to do this is by furthering our existing partnerships with the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (https://www.icsei.net/about-icsei/) and journals that explicitly seek scholarship with an international perspective, including the Journal for Educational Change. I would also like to see our SIG do more to promote and support international participation in AERA and other remote events for scholarly exchange throughout the year.

Elizabeth Zumpe

Elizabeth Zumpe is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at the University of Oklahoma. A former K-12 public school teacher for over a decade with National Board Certification, Elizabeth holds a Ph.D. in Education from the University of California, Berkeley.

References

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Herder and Herder.

Virella, P., & Liera, R. (2024). Nice for what? The contradictions and tensions of an urban district’s racial equity transformation. Education Sciences14(4), 420.

Chen, K. H. (2010). Asia as method: Toward deimperialization. Duke University Press.

del Carmen Salazar, M. (2013). A humanizing pedagogy: Reinventing the principles and practice of education as a journey toward liberation. Review of Research in Education37(1), 121-148.

Kim, T., & Mauldin, C. (2022). Troubling unintended harm of heroic discourses in social justice leadership. Frontiers in Educationhttps://doi:10.3389/feduc.2022.796200

Kim, T., & Wright, J. (2024). Navigating emotional discomfort in developing equity-driven school leaders: A conceptual-pedagogical framework. Journal of School Leadership, 10526846241254050.  

Leonardo, Z. (2002). The souls of white folk: Critical pedagogy, whiteness studies, and globalization discourse. Race Ethnicity and Education, 5(1), 29–50. doi:10.1080/13613320120117180 

Mezirow J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1997(74), 5–12.

Mignolo, W. D. (2008).  The geopolitics of knowledge and the colonial difference. In M. Moraña, E. Dussel & C. Jáuregui (Ed.), Coloniality at large: Latin America and the postcolonial debate 

Bailes, L. P., Ahmad, S., Saylor, M., & Vitale, M. N. (2023). Quality or control: High-needs principals’ perceptions of a PSEL-based evaluation system. Journal of Research on Leadership Education18(4), 622-648.

Bailes, L. P., & Guthery, S. (2020). Held down and held back: Systematically delayed principal promotions by race and gender. Aera Open6(2), 2332858420929298.

City, E. A., Elmore, R. F., Fiarman, S. E., & Teitel, L. (2009). Instructional rounds in education (Vol. 30). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

J., & Steup, L. (2021). Research-practice partnerships in education: The state of the field. William T. Grant Foundation.

Mintrop, R., & Zumpe, E. (2019). Solving real life problems of practice and education leaders’ school improvement mind-set. American Journal of Education125(3), 295-344.

Mintrop, R., Zumpe, E., Jackson, K., Nucci, D.,& Norman, J. (2022). Designing for deeper learning: Challenges in schools and school districts serving 

The Desire for Innovation is Always There: A Conversation with Yong Zhao on the Evolution of the Chinese Education System

What’s changing in China’s education system? What might change in the future? Those are some of the questions that led Thomas Hatch to spend almost a month in China this spring. In preparation for that visit, he talked with Yong Zhao to get his perspective on what’s been happening in education in China in the past few years. Zhao was born in China and now works all over the world, including in China, exploring the implications of globalization and technology on education. In the first part of this two-part post, Zhao shares his observations about some of the educational innovations he’s seen in China and about some of the work he’s been involved in there. In part two, Zhao offers his impressions of recent changes in addressing students’ mental health and discusses the broader context of the Chinese education system and some of the challenges and opportunities for changes in the future. 

Thomas Hatch (TH): You’ve written extensively about China in the past, but I’m particularly interested in what’s happening in the Chinese education system over the last few years. Are you seeing some innovations or changes in classrooms and schools in China since the COVID-19 pandemic and the school closures? 

Yong Zhao (YZ): I think there’s a huge hunger for innovation in China. Let me give you an example. I was just talking to a group of school principals and heads of the Education Commission in the Chaoyang District in Beijing. It’s the largest district in Beijing, and it’s where most of the embassies and many foreign companies are located. We were planning to do a summer camp for students from different countries based on my education philosophy, which is very much child-centered, focused on uniqueness, personalization, project-driven instruction, and problem-solving. We wanted to make the camp very big, involving kids from different countries, and they were open to the idea. Alongside the camp, we planned to organize learning festivals to discuss topics like artificial intelligence and what I call “Re-globalization.”

We started this conversation in January, and the issue is that very few schools outside China are willing to send their students and teachers here at the moment, so we’re planning to do it next year. But this kind of summer camp is something I began working on before COVID, in May 2018 in Chongqing. Every year since, we’ve been running similar innovative programs in the summer. Even during COVID, we tried it out. The first year in Chongqing, we had students from US schools, Australian and British schools, with hundreds of students and teachers staying in the same dorms, interacting. 

In addition, in the public schools in Chongqing, we have students enrolled in a special course I helped design called ICEE, which stands for innovation, creativity, and entrepreneurship education. It’s expanding in the public schools even though students have to pay extra to participate, which shows that parents and schools are interested in it. Beijing Academy is another school that is particularly innovative. I was partially responsible for co-designing that school. We formed a global advisory group, including people like Richard Elmore and Kurt Fischer and Ron Beghetto. It was an international collaboration. They built a brand-new school based on our advice. It just celebrated its 10th anniversary in Beijing. Now they have over 9 or 10 campuses. 

I think this shows that many parents and students and teachers actually want change. You cannot make massive changes like, for example, saying, let’s forget about the major policies like the double reduction policy, but many people are still trying to find ways to change. It also shows that working in the Chinese education system might be one of the most difficult things in the world. On the one hand, you have to do this. On the other hand, you have to do that. But ultimately, your school’s reputation matters, and innovation as a school leader in China is crucial. 

TH: So, on the one hand, you can’t do anything, but on the other hand, you have to do something…

YH: Yes, exactly. It’s fascinating. I’m puzzled by this system, you know? Right now, I’m getting older. When I was younger, I didn’t really think a lot about it, but I cannot think of how human societies can be organized like that. You cannot do anything, but you have to do something. It’s a fascinating way to think about it, isn’t it?

 TH: It is! But if we step back for a second and try to characterize what’s happening with educational innovation overall right now, my understanding is that the education ecosystem in China has contracted. There were more innovative schools and smaller schools starting, more tutoring programs, more after-school programs. But now, following the school closures and the double reduction policy, in a sense, this seems to be period of consolidation. People I’ve talked to say it’s not a prime time for innovation. Is that the way you see it? (For more on the double reduction policy see “Surprise, Controversy, and the “Double Reduction Policy” in China” and “China reiterates implementation of ‘double reduction’ policy”)

YZ: Yes, your description is right from a general, outside perspective. You can see the contractions. Even the Gaokao has become more nationalized. It was decentralized, with some differences across regions, but it’s gotten more centralized. Now they’re all saying they are using the national tests and very few provinces use their own. The curriculum has become more centralized too with more centrally required courses and teaching materials. But honestly, I think the beauty of the Chinese ecosystem is that, at the same time, children are children, and parents understand that their children, growing up, need innovative education.

They do see the power of artificial intelligence, and AI is becoming more prevalent. They also see new geopolitical conflicts, or what I call “re-globalization.” China always has this happening, and what’s underground is different. Yes, some international schools have closed, and private schools are becoming public. But at the same time, public schools have to become more innovative. The desire for innovation is always there. It’s bubbling up everywhere, but it’s happening. Many local schools have to think about innovation, and even the government, if you look at the most recent speech by the Minister of Education, talks a lot about AI. They are thinking about it in every part of teaching and teacher training. I don’t know how well it’s been implemented, because it’s still very new, but the same is true in the US. China also issued a call last year for schools that were willing to be part of experiments with AI in education. The central government awarded several hundred of these grants to create pilot sites and to spread the message to other places. So, it’s a lot more complex in China than what many people think. The whole system is evolving.

TH: Despite that, have you seen some schools or initiatives or afterschool programs or other things that you think are particularly interesting or innovative in the Chinese context?

YZ: In the book Let the Children Play, Pasi Sahlberg and William Doyle described an approach in the Zhejiang Province near Shanghai that developed genuine playhouses for preschool and kindergarten (Anji Play). It was really play-driven, play-based, and it started in one kindergarten and then it spread around the whole province. It wasn’t country-wide, but it was a model recognized by the Chinese Ministry of Education, and they began to promote it across the country. I don’t know how it’s going now, but that is something that I think it’s definitely worth looking at.

There are also a number of schools that are trying to do something different. The Beijing City International School just had me visit for three days. Their student population is over 90% Chinese students, and they are struggling with the fact that parents have invested significant amounts of money, expecting their children to attend prestigious universities like Harvard and Columbia.  But they also want to change, so they had me over to discuss transitioning to personalized education. Whenever someone has me presenting, they are willing to be challenged.

The Beijing National Day School and a couple of other public schools are also known for being innovative. Another interesting school is the one called #80 Secondary School in Beijing. I was just there, and I was impressed. If you are a good student in some areas, then you don’t have to take certain courses. They would allow you to explore on your own, which shocked me. It’s a Chinese government high school, and it’s quite powerful. 

Thomas Hatch: Coming from Teachers College, where there’s a history of connection with China through John Dewey’s visits, I’m fascinated to see that there has been a long-term interest in China in progressive education. As I began to get ready for my trip, I’ve realized there are a number of educators in China over the years, who have become very well known for being innovative and supporting innovative education. Can you talk about any of those enduring traditions related to alternative education?

Yong Zhao: It’s a very interesting question. But first of all, let’s not underestimate the power of the Gaokao – the college entrance examination. Similar pressure is widespread, happening not only in China but also in Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan. Let’s not forget that the Gaokao and the imperial exam tradition, dominates and controls parents’, students’, and teachers’ minds. But continuously, there has been talk about change in China, and I’ve found that the conversation about needing a different kind of student from the “Gaokao type” has never stopped. It’s always been there. 

Even in the 1950s, Mao was very against the Gaokao exam. Regardless of who he was or what he is – I’m not debating that – he was actually very innovative in education. Ideologically, he never really wanted exams. During the Cultural Revolution, people think he destroyed the Chinese education system. But on the other hand, he was basically saying education does not need to be so pedantic, does not need to be traditional and academic in an ivory tower. He started education in my village. That’s how I went to school.  He said education needs to be shorter. It only has to be 10 years and it can happen in rural villages or in factories. If you think about that, that’s very much the progressive tradition. But the long tradition of using exams to select government officials has also always stayed in the Communist education philosophy, and the tradition of using exams to select and reward people is a long-standing cultural problem.

Next Week: Schools do not Change, But They’re Always Changing: A Conversation with Yong Zhao on the Evolution of the Chinese Education System (Part 2)

Dr. Yong Zhao is a Foundation Distinguished Professor in the School of Education at the University of Kansas and a professor in Educational Leadership at the Faculty of Education, University of Melbourne in Australia. He previously served as the Presidential Chair, Associate Dean, and Director of the Institute for Global and Online Education in the College of Education, University of Oregon, where he was also a Professor in the Department of Educational Measurement, Policy, and Leadership. Prior to Oregon, Yong Zhao was University Distinguished Professor at the College of Education, Michigan State University, where he also served as the founding director of the Center for Teaching and Technology, executive director of the Confucius Institute, as well as the US-China Center for Research on Educational Excellence. He is an elected member of the National Academy of Education and a fellow of the International Academy of Education

Tutoring takes off – Scanning the news on the emergence of tutoring programs after the school closures (Part 1) 

How effective are tutoring programs likely to be? What kinds of challenges need to be addressed for tutoring to contribute to real improvements in schooling on a large scale? In this extended series of posts, IEN continues to scan the news and research on the emergence of tutoring as a key strategy to help students “recover” from the school closures of the COVID-19 pandemic. The first part of this series describes some of the funding initiatives contributing to the emphasis on “high-dosage” tutoring as a “recovery” strategy, as well as some of the initiatives to expand access to tutoring being pursued in the US in particular. Part 2 of this scan will describe some of the challenges educators are experiencing as they try to develop and implement tutoring approaches, and Part 3 will survey some of the specific new developments and “micro-innovations” that could make tutoring more effective in the future. This series is part of IEN’s ongoing coverage of what is and is not changing in schools and education following the school closures of the pandemic. For more from the series, see “What can change in schools after the pandemic?” and “ We will now resume our regular programming.” For IEN’s previous coverage of news and research on tutoring, see Scanning the News on High Dosage Tutoring, Part 1: A Solution to Pandemic Learning Recovery, and Part 2: Initiatives and Implementation So Far. This post was written by Thomas Hatch and Jonathan Beltran Alvarado.

In the wake of the COVID-19-related school closures, “high dosage” tutoring represents a rare instance of a “recovery” strategy that seems to have wide support, willing funders, and available resources. Under the circumstances, it’s no surprise that over the past two years, tutoring initiatives have taken off around the world, particularly in the US. 

Tutoring around the world 

The global interest in tutoring has always been reflected in the enormous investments in “shadow education” – often private programs that children attend to supplement and support their schooling. In China, survey estimates suggest that while 65% of families with school-aged children took advantage of private tutoring in 2016, that number may have surged to 92% by 2021. In response, the Chinese government passed regulations designed to ban for-profit companies from tutoring in core curriculum subjects. 

In China, survey estimates suggest that while 65% of families with school-aged children took advantage of private tutoring in 2016, that number may have surged to 92% by 2021

Although the size, scale, and pressure of private tutoring are often highlighted in Asian countries, the interest in tutoring is evident across the globe. In England, according to the Sutton Trust’s 2023 report “Tutoring: The New Landscape,” almost 1 in 3 young people aged 11 – 16 report they have had private tutoring, up from 18% in 2005.  In Spain, nearly half of families pay for children to get private lessons, with those families spending about 1.8 billion dollars (USD) on classes with languages – particularly English – as the main priority. In Egypt, the New York Times reports, “Students in Egypt are flocking to private tutoring centers as the country’s public schools remain overcrowded and underfunded,” explaining that estimates suggest that Egyptian families are spending over one and a half times more on pre-college education than the government does.  A “mind-blowing” amount, as Hania Sobhy, an expert on Egyptian education, described it. 

Tutoring: The New Landscape, The Sutton Trust

At least for wealthy elites, private tutoring may have no international boundaries or many other constraints.  Sarah Thomas, in “My Surreal Years Tutoring the Children of the Super-Rich,” explained: “I wanted a job that allowed me free time, so I registered with a tutoring agency. A few weeks later, I found myself in a speedboat cutting across the Indian Ocean towards a superyacht the size of a ferry.” That job soon led to other tutoring arrangements where her “classrooms would be on yacht decks surrounded by dolphins, in Monaco penthouses with infinity pools, and in Mayfair townhouses with halls full of Mapplethorpes.”

I wanted a job that allowed me free time,” she writes, “so I registered with a tutoring agency. A few weeks later, I found myself in a speedboat cutting across the Indian Ocean towards a superyacht the size of a ferry. – Sarah Thomas, My Surreal Years Tutoring the Children of the Super-Rich

To some extent, the recent growth in tutoring has been fueled by the pandemic (as predicted by the Economist). In South Korea, for example, post-pandemic spending on private supplementary education reached a record high of 20 billion dollars. As that headline put it, “Korean households spend more on tutoring than food, housing.” In places like South Africa, private initiatives like Ikamva Youth and the Kliptown Youth have long drawn on tutoring as a crucial strategy to improve learning. Still, a number of new tutoring ventures have been launched since the school closures of the COVID-19 pandemic (Nonprofit help2read steps in to help save a ‘lost generation’; Free maths and science tutoring for all grade 11 and 12 learners).

On top of these private initiatives, numerous countries have also made significant public investments in expanding tutoring both in school and out in response to concerns about learning loss related to school closures. England was one of the first countries to embark on a major, public tutoring initiative (£1bn catch-up tutoring fund for England’s pupils; Funding for national tutoring programme in England to be doubled next academic year); but public tutoring initiatives are also being pursued in places like the Netherlands (Are the Dutch Solving the Covid Slide with Tutoring? Netherlands to spend €105 million to reduce classroom sizes, add tutoring); Australia (New South Wales Labor promises permanent tutors, end to ‘underfunding’ public schools; Victoria and NSW are funding extra tutors to help struggling students); and New Zealand (where 20 million dollars have been dedicated to additional teaching and tutoring services). 

Tutoring takes off in the US 

In the US, tutoring has always been a popular strategy for providing “extra help,” but following the school closures, tutoring is emerging as a more integral part of schooling across the US. According to a Education Week survey of school leaders and teachers in 1,287 districts at the end of the 2021-22 school year, almost 90% of those responding said that their school or district was offering some kind of tutoring (interesting, only 75% said that they “somewhat agreed” or “completely agreed” that “tutoring is an effective intervention for students in my district or school”).  Backing up those numbers, by the spring of 2022, estimates suggest that districts had dedicated over $1.7 billion in Federal funding to tutoring-related efforts and predicted spending could reach 3.6 billion by 2024. Correspondingly, the Department of Education reported that in the 2023-24 school year, more than four out of five schools reported offering tutoring programs, ranging from traditional after-school homework help to intensive tutoring. 

The Rise of Tutoring and Where It Falls Short, in Charts, Education Week

A whole series of funding initiatives have contributed to this widespread use of tutoring. With (unusual) bipartisan support, Congress and the Biden administration included support for tutoring in the package of $123 billion in emergency federal aid to schools. The U.S. Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona, has urged schools to use their funds to provide at least 90 minutes of weekly tutoring to students most affected by the pandemic. Furthermore, in 2022, the Biden administration launched the National Partnership for Student Success – a three-year effort to create a coalition of organizations to “recruit, screen, train, support, and engage an additional 250,000 caring adults in roles serving as tutors, mentors, student success coaches, wraparound service coordinators, and post-secondary transition coaches”.

Private funders are also supporting tutoring efforts by establishing Accelerate, a new organization dedicated to developing and scaling affordable “high-impact” tutoring programs across the country. With funding from The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Arnold Ventures, and the Overdeck Family Foundation, Accelerate set out to raise at least 100 million dollars to develop a network and make grants to support some of the most innovative tutoring models. According to later reports, Accelerate has provided 10 million dollars to 31 organizations developing “innovative” tutoring models and a million dollars to five different states to establish support and “infrastructure” for integrating tutoring into the regular school day that can serve as a model for other states.

States and cities have also participated in increasing the number of tutoring programs available around the country. New Hampshire’s approach includes offering a Yes, Every Student scholarship providing $1,000 for private tutoring from “state-approved educators” for “any young person whose education was negatively impacted by the pandemic.”  New Hampshire Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut described the reaction to the program this way: “When I explain the program to [parents], they become very excited, like, ‘Oh, this is great. In some cases, they’re almost like, ‘It’s too good to be true. How can this possibly be?’”

“When I explain the program to [parents], they become very excited, like, ‘Oh, this is great. In some cases, they’re almost like, ‘It’s too good to be true. How can this possibly be?’”

–New Hampshire Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut Quoted in ‘Too Good to Be True’: NH Gives Students $1,000 for Tutoring, The74

 Tennessee has launched a three-year tutoring project called Tennessee Accelerating Literacy and Learning Corps (TN ALL Corps), expected to cost almost 200 million dollars. The initiative hopes to serve 150,000 in 79 districts students who are just below proficiency in reading or math. In Texas in 2021, the state legislature passed a bill requiring schools to provide at least 30 hours of tutoring for students who did not pass the state tests in math or reading in grades three, five, or eight. To help meet the ensuing demand for tutoring, the Texas Education Agency established the Vetted Texas Tutor Corps, which seeks to offer support for over one million students by reviewing and approving eligible tutoring providers and offering a High Impact Tutoring Toolkit. 

In Ohio, most families now qualify for $1,000 to pay for tutoring. Through its Afterschool Child Enrichment program, called ACE, the Ohio State Department of Education supports educational activities for students who “experienced learning disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic.” In Ohio’s case, however, families who meet the income restrictions can use those funds for a range of activities, including summer camps, language and music lessons, and after-school programs, in addition to tutoring. 

Next week: “Predictable challenges and possibilities for effective tutoring at scale – Scanning the news on the emergence of tutoring programs after the school closures (Part 2)

Leveraging Teacher Leadership for Innovation and Equity: Lead the Change Interview with Justin Reich

In this month’s Lead the Change interview, Justin Reich reflects on his work on educational systems improvement by targeting the instructional core through adaptive design models. Reich is an associate professor of digital media in the Comparative Media Studies/Writing department at MIT and the director of the Teaching Systems Lab. He is the author of Iterate: The Secret to Innovation in Schools and Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can’t Transform Education, and he is the host of the TeachLab Podcast. He earned his doctorate from the Harvard Graduate School of Education and was the Richard L. Menschel HarvardX Research Fellow. The LtC series is produced by Alex Lamb and colleagues from the Educational Change Special Interest Group of the American Educational Research Association. A pdf of the fully formatted interview is available on the LtC website.

Justin Reich: I’ve had the great privilege of doing a little bit of work with AERA Past President Rich Milner. In a webinar in 2021, Rich explained that twenty years ago he felt isolated and off the beaten path in his work on advancing racial equity in schools. Then, he expressed his excitement at the current surge of interest in these crucial issues. The field caught up to where Rich had been for many years. His welcoming frame reminds me that some work in educational change and improvement hasn’t always centered these issues, and there are other scholars who have been building in this domain for many years. So, as any of us take up this “call to action” to dismantle injustice and construct possibility, we’d do very well to look back on prior bodies of research to discover what we can learn from folks who have been doing the work for some time. 

Justin Reich

When you ask about “steps,” it reminds me of some of the research that I did for Iterate. Over the last decade, human-centered design has developed and become more prevalent, as has the field of “Design Justice,” the name of a book by my colleague Sasha Costanza-Chock. And, of course, human centered design has encountered the same turn to anti-racism/ anti-oppression that education reform and many other humanistic endeavors have in recent years. My question was this: In design models that take design justice seriously, does this entail new “steps” in design processes, or new attitudes, frames, and moves within existing steps? In Plan-Do-Study-Act or Design Based Implementation Research or ideo/d.school style Design Thinking, does design justice show up as a new “step” or as modifications to existing phases? My investigation revealed the near universal consensus is that there isn’t a “justice” step. It’s a set of values, mindsets, and actions that affect all the parts of our work.

All that’s to say, in improvement cycles, there probably isn’t a “justice step” or an “anti-racist step” but rather a commitment to those principles throughout our work. 

JR: A distinctive feature about improvement work in schools is that the changes that matter most happen in what Richard Elmore called the instructional core, the place where teachers, students, and the resources for learning connect. Schools have lots of other parts–HVAC systems, busses, cafeterias, parking lots, standardized tests, intercoms, and on and on–but if you are interested in improving learning, the action is in the instructional core. 

Schools have lots of other parts–HVAC systems, busses, cafeterias, parking lots, standardized tests, intercoms, and on and on– but if you are interested in improving learning, the action is in the instructional core.

The work that teachers do in this instructional core is astonishingly varied and fine grained. On any given school day, we teach kids to sound out diphthongs, tie their shoes, stand in line, factor polynomials, convert carbohydrates to ATP in the Krebs Cycle, conjugate Spanish verbs, hit a shuttlecock with a badminton racket, how to have sex safely, why they should not have sex until marriage, to obey their government, to challenge their government, and on and on and on. So if you are a superintendent with an idea like, “let’s use formative assessment more frequently to guide our instruction,” and you want the school system to use those assessments weekly, then, functionally, you’ve just placed an order for 45 weeks of assessment multiplied by 13 grades multiplied by the number of subjects that you teach in your district. These are not interchangeable assessments: if someone makes a great formative assessment about factoring polynomials it probably won’t help you in evaluating students sounding out diphthongs. In fact, a formative assessment in your earth science unit on meteorology may not help you much in the next unit on plate tectonics.  

The only people in the system numerous enough to generate the variety of specific, contextual innovations needed to implement a straightforward change like “add more formative assessment” are teachers. There are simply not enough coaches, TOSAs, APs, principals, central office people, etc. to do that work. So, this is my first point: teacher leadership is absolutely essential to innovation. The only people who can make the fine-grained modifications to each local classroom context are teachers. 

So how do teachers choose to adopt new practice? How do they pick up new innovation? If you ask them, as John Diamond did in his article “Where the Rubber Meets the Road” they will tell you their main source of inspiration is “other teachers.” So, every change leadership or innovation problem is actually a peer learning problem. 

When you put these two stylized facts together—that teacher leadership is essential to generating innovation and teacher peer learning is essential to scaling innovation, in my mind, you have the basic model for the conditions of innovation. Want new things? Teachers will have to build and adapt them. Want new things to spread and scale? There need to be time and space for teacher to teacher peer learning. Even when you see things that look top down, like some of the science of reading initiatives going on, look under the hood and you’ll see this same basic process. A small cohort of enthusiastic teachers chooses to adopt a new practice, while the bulk are patient pragmatists–participating in limited compliance until they see results and learn from their peers. 

In Iterate, I call this the Cycle of Experiment and Peer Learning, and it’s the core model that I use to explain how schools change, and how we can think about supporting that change. 

If there were known, immediate, dependable, effective steps to improve educational environments or to make them more equitable, we would do them! Even things that work well in one place, do not easily translate to new spaces. They need to be broken apart, reassembled, and grafted into their new environment. 

So, to me, “immediate change to more equitably serve students” is not a realistic option. There is only the slow, steady, shoulder-to-the-wheel work of tinkering and incremental improvement. I happen to think iterative cycles of experiment, testing, feedback, and sharing are great ways of doing this shoulder to the wheel work, but there are other more linear models as well. 

Change takes time! Start today!

JR: I have a few thoughts in Iterate about this.  One is to take joy seriously, and to cultivate environments where faculty sincerely enjoy working with each other, because it’s fun. With the incentives and career ladders that we have in schools, and with the demands we have on teachers contracted time, work on systems improvement essentially takes place during teacher discretionary time. Maybe they’ll make schools better. Or maybe they’ll grade or go home and play with their kids. In my experience, the schools where faculty effectively collaborate with each other are places where the teachers really enjoy their time working together to make schools better. So, joy, enjoyment, satisfaction matter. 

On the flipside, we need to acknowledge that all change involves loss. Doing new things involves saying good-bye to old things. Launching new ideas requires leaving old practice behind. That means experienced teachers needing to grieve as they say goodbye to old practices. Even when there is a certain joy in picking up something new, there needs to be time to mourn what we leave behind. Robert Evans The Human Side of Change has good ideas on this.

Take joy seriously and cultivate environments where faculty sincerely enjoy working with each other because it’s fun...the schools where faculty effectively collaborate with each other are places where the teachers really enjoy their time working together to make schools better. So, joy, enjoyment, satisfaction matter. 

I also share some research in Iterate that my colleague Peter Senge did with folks at the MIT Sloan School of Management and others. I like to tell the story this way. Peter and colleagues are trying to figure out how to make firms better. Where does work get done in firms? In teams. What do teams do? Well, fundamentally, they communicate and collaborate. What are some of the best predictors of effective communication? One turns out to be “the quality of listening.” Typically, we listen to hear moments in a conversation where we can break in with our ideas, or we listen to see if people agree or disagree with us. But we can also choose to listen to sincerely understand the perspective of others– not to wait to say our next piece, but to really hear another person out. I love this story because these nerdy MIT guys look at firms and economic success and they identify “the quality of listening” as an essential element of success.  But of course, the other thing to do is to pay teachers more, which is probably the best way to show and offer support. 

JR: There are many folks who know a lot more about the field than I do; in some respects, I approach it much more like a practitioner than a researcher. As an observer of the field, I’m excited about growing interest in issues of racial injustice. I’m also heartened by a general consensus across multiple models–design based implementation research, networked improvement communities, some of Peter Senge’s work on Learning Organizations, and others– about how schools get better. I don’t think Iterate pushes a whole lot of new ground forward in terms of theory or principles, it’s really about getting these ideas to educators in an accessible format. Put another way, we know a lot about the broad contours of how effective school improvement can work: the core challenges are how to implement these sound ideas in the infinite variety of contexts and specifics. Even if we don’t have a map for every context, we have a pretty good compass. 

[W] e know a lot about the broad contours of how effective school improvement can work: the core challenges are how to implement these sound ideas in the infinite variety of contexts and specifics. Even if we don’t have a map for every context, we have a pretty good compass.

To me the most exciting thing about this particular moment for working in school change is this: while the pandemic was devastating in many respects for schools, teachers, and students, it also showed how incredibly malleable schools are. Everything we thought was fixed turned out to be contingent–schedules, buildings, routines, busses, grades. As a teacher in Madison, Wisconsin told me, “We know how to change. We’ve been changing every three weeks for the past 18 months.” Teachers are tired and beaten down, but I think this newfound sense of possibility remains a latent seed that we can cultivate and help grow. 

Transforming the Educational Landscape Through Challenging Eurocentric Norms: Lead the Change Interview with Taeyeon Kim

In this month’s Lead the Change (LtC) interview, Taeyeon Kim shares her work in raising the voices of marginalized Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) scholars in the field of educational leadership. Her research places emphasis on the intersection of leadership and policy. Before serving as an Assistant Professor of Educational Administration at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, she completed her Ph.D. in Educational Administration at Michigan State University. The LtC series is produced by Alex Lamb and colleagues from the Educational Change Special Interest Group of the American Educational Research Association. A pdf of the fully formatted interview is available on the LtC website.

Teayeon Kim

Lead the Change (LtC): The 2024 AERA theme is “Dismantling Racial Injustice and Constructing Educational Possibilities: A Call to Action.” This theme charges researchers and practitioners with confronting racial injustice directly while imagining new possibilities for liberation. The call urges scholars to look critically at our global past and look with hope and radicalism towards the future of education. What specific responsibility do educational change scholars have in this space? What steps are you taking to heed this call?

Taeyeon Kim (TK): When I think about the 2024 AERA theme in the context of educational change, it’s all about asking ourselves, “What kind of changes are we striving for and how do we get there?” This year’s AERA theme strongly encourages us to focus on transforming the educational landscape, which has long been marred by racism and White supremacy, into a more humane and liberating space.

In response, it’s crucial for scholars in the field of educational change to take responsibility for harnessing our collective knowledge to create more equitable education systems. Traditional approaches to change, usually labeled as “reform” and “improvement” in education, have often been driven by accountability policies rooted in neoliberal thinking (See critique from Au, 2022; Lipman, 2007; Tuck, 2013). Many educational change scholars have pushed back against this trend, exploring system perspectives (Fullan, 2015), professional capital (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012), social justice (Flórez Petour & Rozas Assael, 2020; Rincón-Gallardo, 2018), and organizational learning (Mulford, 2005) as valuable tools for driving change. At the same time, it is essential to reevaluate these approaches through a critical lens and align them with more recent scholarship on disrupting institutional racism and Whiteness (Diamond & Gomez, 2023; Irby, 2022; Ishimaru & Galloway, 2021; Pailey, 2020; Ray, 2019).

As a leadership scholar, I see my role through three interconnected strands in my scholarship. First, my research focuses on reexamining policy through the lens of equity-centered leadership practices. This work closely aligns with my role as an educator, where I frequently emphasize the concept of the “administrative posture of neutrality” (Khalifa, 2020, p. 47). This concept underscores how administrators often concentrate solely on quantifiable factors and Khalifa (2020) warns that this tendency allows leaders “to avoid and deny racialized claims held against them by focusing on indisputable factors and maintain full control of the discourse around the school” (pp. 46-48). Through my research, I shed light on how policy mandates and rules shape administrators’ actions and how these,
sometimes inadvertently, perpetuate racism and White supremacy. This perspective informs my teaching as many of my students are aspiring educators looking to take on administrative roles. I take seriously my
responsibility of supporting them to critically analyze the system, imagine new possibilities for liberation, and empower marginalized students.

My research also amplifies the voices of racialized communities. For instance, in a recent collaborative inquiry (Kim et al., 2023), I had the opportunity to revisit and make sense of my own experiences as a racialized individual in the U.S. My co-authors and I challenged systemic racism and White supremacy by
collectively sharing counter narratives from Asian American communities. Another example is that I’ve been working closely with other Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) scholars, to convene AAPI-focused sessions the University Council of Educational Administration (UCEA) convention meetings. Despite being one of the fastest-growing populations in the U.S. (Budiman & Ruiz, 2021), research on this topic in P-12 leadership has been limited. Throughout these efforts, I aim to normalize and center the voices of marginalized AAPI communities in the field of educational leadership while challenging White and Eurocentric norms in research and practice.

Furthermore, as a transnational immigrant scholar, I bring a global perspective to understanding racism. I acknowledge that racism operates differently in various parts of the world, often intertwined with imperialism, colonization, and capitalism in the global history. These historical factors have left a
lasting impact on many countries that were colonized and Global South. This transnational view enables me to explore multiple dimensions in shaping social construction of race and racism. While in the United States, racialized groups are often categorized as people of color, in other places like East Asian
countries, nationality and ethnicity play a significant role in shaping perceptions of race (See N.Y. Kim 2008, 2015; Yu, 2022). Consequently, I’m committed to promoting cross-cultural dialogues about racial injustice and “equity grammar” (Kim et al., 2023, p. 9).

LtC: In your work, you apply critical lenses and interrogate commonly used educational terms and
narratives to examine how educational leaders navigate accountability landscapes. What are some of the major lessons the field of Educational Change can learn from your work and experience?

TK: In my research on the intersection of leadership and policy, I’ve delved into the concept of “accountability.” While typically associated with responsibility, the term has taken on various meanings across different fields, leading to an expansive operational definition. Within education policy, accountability serves both as a means and an end goal (Suspitsyna, 2010). However, I’ve observed that the prevailing discourse on accountability, shaped by large policy initiatives like Every Student Succeed Act (ESSA), tends to emphasize high-stakes policies, at the expense of relational aspects of accountability working in P-12 schools. This led me to investigate how leaders in practice perceive and enact accountability in their day-to-day roles.

My research in this area urges Educational Change scholars to consider whose viewpoints are driving transformative changes. Drawing from my background as a former elementary school teacher in South Korea and a current leadership scholar, I focus on equity-driven leaders’ perspectives. Recognizing the power dynamics between policymakers at the top and practitioners implementing accountability
efforts for diverse stakeholders, I frame accountability based on how policies are enacted and how these professionals operate within their contexts. Informed by policy sociology (Ball, 1993, 2015) and the idea of street-level bureaucracy (Lipsky, 2010), my research resists confining accountability within predefined policy scripts (See Kim, 2022, 2023). My framing of policy from the viewpoints of leaders also aligns with my methodological approaches to understand accountability. I use qualitative methods inspired by portraiture (Lawrence-Lightfoot & Davis, 1997), which blends elements of phenomenology and ethnography. This approach enables me to reveal rich, contextualized narratives that shed light on the
intricate challenges of accountability enactment in school settings. These examples underline the importance not only of the nature of changes being pursued, but also whose interpretations hold significance. Recent trends in the field of Educational Change emphasize the importance of including voices from communities and students, providing deeper insights into fundamental questions about change and its implementation through policies.

Moreover, my research accentuates the human facet of leading change. In my Harvard Educational Review paper, I theorize the “human side of accountability” (Kim, 2023, p. 313). This concept spotlights the leadership space where school principals grapple with the dual pressures of meeting student needs and adhering to policy mandates while minimizing inadvertent harm to marginalized students. This might involve complying with the law and policy mandates they disagree with for job continuity. Navigating such complexities necessitates ethical decision-making and a dedication to rebuilding trust and prioritizing underserved students. Given the unpredictable and multifaceted nature of implementing
changes, I argue that leaders must adopt a multidimensional comprehension of the change process, grounded in values of equity and social justice, to ensure sustainable and meaningful changes. With COVID-19 and rapid technological advancement, our educational landscapes have become infused with AI and technology-induced transformations. Within this context, my research also prompts
questions to educational change scholars: How can we incorporate these non-human (or posthuman) elements into the endeavor of “humanizing” leadership for driving change?

LtC: In some of your recent work, you use AsianCrit to examine your experiences as a Korean woman living in the racialized context of the United States. This deeply personal and incredibly important piece shares the narratives of fellow early career scholars in higher ed as well. How might your insights help us realize inclusion and justice in higher education and K-12?

TK: In light of the profound impacts of COVID-19 on Asian American communities and the surge of Asian Hate crimes, my inquiry team of five early career Korean American faculty members explored our racialized experiences in the U.S. We approached this inquiry through the lens of AsianCrit (Iftikar & Museus, 2018; Museus & Iftikar, 2014), which is a subgroup of critical race theory (CRT) (See Kim et al., 2023). We initially formed a reading group to deepen our understanding of AsianCrit. Over time, this group organically transformed into an identity-informed peer-mentoring space, where we came to recognize the immense value of collaborative inquiry and collective storytelling. There are two significant
contributions our research makes in the pursuit of inclusion and justice.

First, our research underscores the utility of CRT, particularly AsianCrit, in empowering Asian-immigrant or international students as they navigate the process of “Asianization.” This term refers to the process of racially marginalized individuals in the U.S. becoming “Asian” due to the influence of Whit supremacy and nativist racism that shape our daily lives (Iftikar & Museus, 2018; Museus & Iftikar, 2014). Our study shows that AsianCrit can be a valuable tool for Asian Americans and Asians living in the U.S. to challenge the multiple labels placed upon Asian Americans through discourses like the model minority myth, yellow peril, and perpetual foreigner. Additionally, our stories provide insight for other racial groups to understand the systemic racism and biases that affect Asian communities in the U.S.

Our work also extends the AsianCrit scholarship by adding a layer of transnationality to AsianCrit, emphasizing an intersectional understanding of identities. As we found the images of Asian Americans being constructed by Western gaze, we argue that the existing AsianCrit scholarship does not fully address experiences and voices of the first-generation Asian immigrants and/or newcomers in the U.S. (Kim et al., 2023). In this way, our research aligns with decolonial efforts to challenge the prevailing Black-White framing of racialized experiences in building coalition for social justice and solidarity (See
Liou & Boveda, 2022). We urge leaders in K-12 and higher education to acknowledge the hybridity and complexities within the umbrella terms created to categorize racialized groups, such as Asian American, AAPI, and BIPOC.

Second, in fostering a sense of belonging and inclusion, my research suggests that higher education systems should recognize the value of identity-based communities where scholars can establish their scholarly positions, challenge multiple layers of marginalization, and foster solidarity and healing (hooks,
2003). We noticed that opportunities for discussing our racial identities were scarce during our graduate school experiences. Even though we often collaborate in academia, the support from the system often prioritizes research quantification and “funding” (Yoon & Templeton, 2019). Contrary to university Diversity Equity Inclusion (DEI) statements, international students, especially non-native English speakers, are sometimes viewed through a deficit lens (Wang & Sun, 2021) and seen merely as revenue
sources (Yao & Mwangi, 2022). Our research prompts essential questions: What does “diversity” truly mean? For whom? How can we create genuine support networks? In navigating these questions, it’s worth noting that peer-mentoring can provide enhanced chances for collaboratively building knowledge and fostering relationality. Unlike traditional mentoring, peer mentoring fosters equitable partnerships and creates a “third space” (Gutiérrez, 2008) where members can feel safe to share and revisit themselves. This ultimately can contribute to racial identity development toward solidarity.

LtC: Educational Change expects those engaged in and with schools, schooling, and school systems to spearhead deep and often difficult transformation. How might those in the field of Educational Change best support these individuals and groups through these processes?

TK: There are various approaches to consider, and one valuable insight I’d like to share is rooted in the scholarship that views leadership as organizing, moving away from the traditional heroic and individualistic approaches that still dominate the field of educational leadership, even within discussions of social justice leadership (Kim & Mauldin, 2022). To shift this mindset and challenge the status quo, as
highlighted by Ethan Chang in the Lead the Change issue of February 2022, it’s crucial to reconceptualize leadership as a praxis of organizing (Ishimaru, 2013). This means building systems and partnerships that prioritize equity and solidarity with those who are most affected by the changes we seek to implement. Embracing power “with” approaches (Loomer, 1976) to lead change is instrumental in creating a space for a more nuanced perspective on the challenges we face and the potential solutions. By adopting these power “with” approaches to leadership, I think the field can foster discussions about the types of systems that can be most effective and how these systems can be utilized to promote more
equitable educational experiences. This shift in perspective has the potential to open up new avenues for dialogue and action, ultimately contributing to a more just and inclusive educational landscape.

LtC: Where do you perceive the field of Educational Change is going? What excites you about Educational Change now and in the future?

TK: To answer this question, let me start by reflecting on some key moments in my life that resonate with the field of Educational Change. One standout memory goes back over a decade when I first delved into the second edition of the Handbook of Educational Change. I was captivated by the interdisciplinary nature of the theories and their application to empirical evidence across various educational contexts. This experience had a profound impact on me, leading me to choose the analysis of professional capital as the topic for my Masters’ thesis. Another significant moment occurred at the art museum in Toronto during the Educational Change SIG meeting at the 2019 AERA conference. I found myself surrounded by scholars from different regions and with diverse disciplinary backgrounds. We sat together, engaging in dynamic conversations about the essence of change in education – not just the “how” but also the
“why.” During this meeting, I had the privilege of connecting with both established leaders and enthusiastic students based in Toronto, further enhancing my perspective on educational change. More recently, the COVID-19 pandemic has prompted Educational Change scholars to generate knowledge and innovative ideas, challenging the conventional grammar of schooling. This collective effort was exemplified in the special issue titled “The Changes We Need: Education Post COVID-19,” in which I had the opportunity to contribute an essay informed by a project in Korea.

Reflecting on these moments, it becomes evident that Educational Change is a field that thrives on partnerships and foundational knowledge. It is open to embracing diverse perspectives and has strong capacities to organize and foster changes that prioritize equity and justice, transcending geographical
and epistemological boundaries. In fact, the Journal of Educational Change has published papers that delve into racism in global settings (e.g., Arber, 2003; Rizvi, 2003; Tomlinson, 2003) and critical examinations of biases within educational practices and policies (e.g., Gatimu, 2009; Giroux & Schmidt, 2004). I envision Educational Change as a field that should revisit these foundational principles and actively engage with the latest theoretical advancements in the realm of racial equity to
advance knowledge and practice. By embracing an equity- and justice-oriented mindset with a
sense of urgency, Educational Change can become a catalyst for critical hope (Freire, 2021) in driving meaningful and transformative changes in education.

References

Arber, R. E. (2003). The Presence of an-other: The prescience of racism in post-modern times. Journal of Educational Change, 4(3), 249–268. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:jedu.0000006163.10946.13

Au, W. (2022). Unequal by design: High-stakes testing and the standardization of inequality. Routledge.

Ball, S. J. (1993). What is policy? Texts, trajectories and toolboxes. The Australian Journal of Education Studies13(2), 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0159630930130203

Ball, S. J. (2015). What is policy? 21 years later: Reflections on the possibilities of policy research. Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education36(3), 306-313. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2015.1015279

Budiman, A. & Ruiz, N. G. (2021). Asian Americans are the fastest-growing racial or ethnic group in the U. S. Retrieved from https://pewrsr.ch/3tbjILO

Chang, E. (2022, Feb). Lead the Change Series Q & A with Ethan Chang. Lead the Change Series, 126, 1-9. Retrieved from https://www.aera.net/Portals/38/docs/SIGs/SIG155/Lead%20the%20Change_EC_Feb%202022.pdf?ver=ExiALXp7L6gxlYoYk-NIOg%3d%3d

Diamond, J. B., & Gomez, L. M. (2023). Disrupting White supremacy and anti-Black racism in educational organizations. Educational Researcher, https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189×231161054 

Flórez Petour, M. T., & Rozas Assael, T. (2020). Accountability from a social justice perspective: Criticism and proposals. Journal of Educational Change, 21(1), 157–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09361-3

Freire, P. (2021). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Fullan, M. (2015). The new meaning of educational change. Teachers College Press.

Gatimu, M. W. (2009). Undermining critical consciousness unconsciously: Restoring hope in the multicultural education idea. Journal of Educational Change, 10(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-008-9087-5

Giroux, H. A., & Schmidt, M. (2004). Closing the Achievement Gap: A Metaphor for Children Left Behind. Journal of Educational Change, 5(3), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:jedu.0000041041.71525.67

Gutiérrez, K. D. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(2), 148–164. https://doi.org/10 .1598/RRQ.43.2.3

hooks, b. (2003). Rock my soul: Black people and self-esteem. Washington Square Press.

Iftikar, J. S., & Museus, S. D. (2018). On the utility of Asian critical (AsianCrit) theory in the field of education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 31(10), 935–949. https://doi.org/10 .1080/09518398.2018.1522008

Irby, D. (2022). Stuck improving: Racial equity and school leadership. Harvard Education Press

Ishimaru, A. (2013). From heroes to organizers: Principals and education organizing in urban school reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(1), 3-51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X12448250

Ishimaru, A. M., & Galloway, M. K. (2021). Hearts and minds first: Institutional logics in pursuit of educational equity. Educational Administration

Quarterly57(3), 470-502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X20947459

Khalifa, M. (2020). Culturally responsive school leadership. Harvard Education Press.

Kim, N. Y. 2008. Imperial citizens: Koreans and race from Seoul to LA. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Kim, N. Y. 2015. The United States arrives: Racialization and racism in post-1945 South Korea. In Race and Racism in Modern East Asia (Vol. II): Interactions, Nationalism, Gender and Lineage, edited by R. Kowner, W. Demel, 274–295. Boston/the Netherlands: Brill

Kim, T. (2022). Reimagining accountability through educational leadership: Applying the metaphors of “agora” and “bazaar”. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. Online Advanced. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221132100 

Kim, T. (2023). The human side of accountability: Dilemmas of reaching all learners. Harvard Educational Review93(3), 313-341. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-93.3.313

Kim, T., & Mauldin, C. (2022). Troubling unintended harm of heroic discourses in social justice leadership. Frontiers in Education.  https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.796200

Lawrence-Lightfoot, S., & Davis, J. H. (1997). The art and science of portraiture. Jossey-Bass.

Lipman, P., & Haines, N. (2007). From accountability to privatization and African American exclusion: Chicago’s “Renaissance 2010”. Educational policy21(3), 471-502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904806297734

Liou, D. D., & Boveda, M. (2022). The coloniality of false racial binaries: Intersectional consciousness as antiracist expectations for multiracial coalition-building. Educational Studies – AESA, 58(3), 368–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2022.2033751

Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. Russell Sage Foundation.

Loomer, B. (1976). Two conceptions of power. Process Studies, 6(1), 5–32.

Mulford, B. (2005). Organizational learning and educational change. In Extending educational change: International handbook of educational change (pp. 336-361). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

Museus, S. D., & Iftikar, J. (2014). An Asian critical theory (AsianCrit). In M. Y. Danico (Ed.), Asian American society: An encyclopedia (pp. 95–98). SAGE Publications and Association for Asian American Studies. 

Pailey, R. N. (2020). De‐centring the ‘white gaze’of development. Development and Change51(3), 729-745. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12550

Ray, V. (2019). A theory of racialized organizations. American Sociological Review84(1), 26-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122418822335

Rincón-Gallardo, S. (2018). Social Justice: Section Introduction. In Future Directions of Educational Change (pp. 11-15). Routledge.

Rincón-Gallardo, S. (2020). Educational change as social movement: An emerging paradigm from the global south. Journal of Educational Change21(3), 467-477.

Rizvi, F. (2003). Globalization and the cultural politics of race and educational reform. Journal of Educational Change4(3), 209.-2011. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JEDU.0000006274.28470.68

Suspitsyna, T. (2010). Accountability in American education as a rhetoric and a technology of governmentality. Journal of Education Policy25(5), 567-586. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930903548411

Tomlinson, S. (2003). Globalization, race and Education: Continuity and Change. Journal of Educational Change, 4(3), 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:jedu.0000006161.69737

Tuck, E. (2013). Neoliberalism as nihilism? A commentary on educational accountability, teacher education, and school reform. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies11(2), 324-347. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/117718011300900407

Wang, X., & Sun, W. (2021). Unidirectional or inclusive international education? An analysis of discourses from U.S. international student services office websites. Journal ofDiversity in Higher Education, 15(5), 617–629. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe000035

Yao, C. W., & Mwangi, C. A. G. (2022). Yellow Peril and cash cows: The social positioning of Asian international students in the USA. Higher Education, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00814-y

Yoon, H. S., & Templeton, T. N. (2019). The practice of listening to children: The challenges of hearing children out in an adult-regulated world. Harvard Educational Review, 89(1), 55–84. https://doi.org/10 .17763/1943-5045-89.1.55

Yu, J. (2022). The racial learning of Chinese international students in the US: a transnational perspective. Race Ethnicity and Education, Online Advanced. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2022.2106878