Category Archives: Lead the Change

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

Posted on July 4, 2024 by | Leave a comment

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.

“To advance the field, I urge educational change scholars to critically engage with issues of geopolitics, coloniality, and global whiteness.”

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. 

“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.”

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 Sciences, 14(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 Education, 37(1), 121-148.

Kim, T., & Mauldin, C. (2022). Troubling unintended harm of heroic discourses in social justice leadership. Frontiers in Education, https://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 Education, 18(4), 622-648.

Bailes, L. P., & Guthery, S. (2020). Held down and held back: Systematically delayed principal promotions by race and gender. Aera Open, 6(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 Education, 125(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 

Leave a comment

Posted in education reform, Educational change, Educational Leadership, Educational Policy, equity, Interviews, Lead the Change

Tagged , , , ,

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

Posted on June 12, 2024 by | 1 comment

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.”

Chaoyang District Beijing

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. 

 ICEE – Innovation, Creativity, and Entrepreneurship Education Program

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. 

“I think 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.

“Yes, some international schools have closed, and private schools are becoming more public. But at the same time, public schools have to become more innovative. The desire for innovation is always there…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.

AnjiPlay

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. 

Beijing #80 Secondary School

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. 

1 Comment

Posted in education reform, Educational change, Global Reports/Studies, Journal Articles, Lead the Change, Leading Futures

Tagged , , ,

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

Posted on November 8, 2023 by | Leave a comment

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.

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?

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. 

LtC: In much of your work, you offer strategies for teachers and their organizations to approach educational change in manageable and thoughtful steps that leverage strengths. Across this work, what are some of the major lessons practitioners and scholars of Educational Change can learn from your work and experience?  

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. 

LtC: In your new book, Iterate, you offer different models for envisioning and enacting change. How do you think about balancing the need for immediate change to more equitably serve students and the iterative processes that quality work requires?

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!

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?

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. 

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

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. 

Leave a comment

Posted in About K-12 International Education News, Educational change, Educational Leadership, equity, Lead the Change

Tagged , , , , ,

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

Posted on October 25, 2023 by | Leave a comment

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.

“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.

“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.”

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.

“What does “diversity” truly mean? For whom? How can we create genuine support networks?”

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.

“Educational Change is a field that thrives on partnerships and foundational knowledge.”

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 Studies, 13(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 education, 36(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

Quarterly, 57(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 Review, 93(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 policy, 21(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 Change, 51(3), 729-745. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12550

Ray, V. (2019). A theory of racialized organizations. American Sociological Review, 84(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 Change, 21(3), 467-477.

Rizvi, F. (2003). Globalization and the cultural politics of race and educational reform. Journal of Educational Change, 4(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 Policy, 25(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 Studies, 11(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

Leave a comment

Posted in About K-12 International Education News, education reform, Educational change, Educational Policy, equity, Lead the Change

Relationship Building for Educational Advocacy: Lead the Change Interview with Nicole Patterson

Posted on August 17, 2023 by | Leave a comment

In this month’s Lead the Change (LtC) interview Nicole Patterson shares her experiences as a principal working to create equitable opportunities and sustain educational change for her students. Patterson recently completed her Doctoral degree in Educational Leadership at Saint Joseph’s University. She has worked as a teacher, instructional coach, assistant principal, and is currently a principal — all within inner-city communities.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.

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?

Nicole Patterson: Educational change scholars have a responsibility to ensure they operate with a sense of urgency as they advocate for sustainable change for those entrusted in our care. In short, this looks like educational scholars staying updated on the latest research on racial injustices, applying these findings to their everyday work, committing to the feeling of discomfort, and understanding change is often on the other side of this feeling. 

Nicole Patterson

My latest research titled, Taking a Knee (Patterson, 2022) is connected to the 2024 AERA theme of “Dismantling Racial Injustice and Constructing Educational Possibilities: A Call to Action” by examining the level of cultural competence and awareness of structural inequities educators used in their daily teaching practice of Black and Brown students. 

“Taking a Knee” is a phrase with various meanings. To some, taking a knee was perceived as a disrespectful act to the flag of the United States of America. To some, taking a knee was a stand against an American history of oppression and injustice. Forothers, the phrase represents the lack of regard for human life evidenced by the Minneapolis police officer’s murder of George Floyd. The difference between these aforementioned perspectivesis that oftentimes when Black and Brown people take a stand to uplift and overcome the plight and oppression that they’ve experienced for over 400 years by promoting their natural given birth right to live without oppression and within a life full of joy, opportunities, and advancement, the intent is misconstrued. Individuals without awareness of the plight of Black and Brown people, in turn, can intentionally or unintentionally use the same behavior of continuous oppression to crucify the dreams and ambitions of Black and Brown people, and this process can be defined as cognitive dissonance.

“Overt and covert acts of violence and disservice represent the need for increased levels of cultural competence for all educators.”

For me “Taking a Knee” represents the consistent murder of Black and Brown people through police brutality and how such events mirror the treatment of Black and Brown children in the United States’ educational system. We are currently amid two global pandemics, the COVID-19 pandemic and the pandemic of Social Injustice. The pandemic of Social Injustice in America begins in 1619 when chains were worn instead of masks and the only viable vaccine was the risk of traveling the underground railroad with Harriet Tubman. We see evidence of this pandemic in the field of education when educators unintentionally and intentionally “kneel” on the necks of Black and Brown students, sucking the breath of air, knowledge, passion, and opportunity from Black and Brown youth. These overt and covert acts of violence and disservice represent the need for increased levels of cultural competence for all educators including educators who mean well but show levels of cognitive dissonance by participating in actions they previously stated they would not. Educators need to engage in reflectionand engage in the process of unlearning and relearning or dismantling and constructing a system full of possibilities. 

LtC: As a principal and scholar, you bridge research and practice through your work in both spheres. What are some of the major lessons the field of Educational Change can learn from your work and experience? 

NP: It is truly a blessing to serve in the capacity as school principal and scholar. I truly did not understand the blessing until I was within my dissertation work. I felt such liberation in the access to relevant information to inform my practice as an educator.  Lessons I have acquired along the way are: 

●      Power of relationships

●      Advocacy

●      Consistent Action 

Relationships have been the greatest lesson in this sphere. Meeting like-minded individuals and others that challenge perspectives has been an asset to my overall paradigm in education. These relationships have afforded me the privilege to get into the spaces and places of those who came before me. These relationships have also allowed me to lift those up that come after me to bring them into the same spaces and places as I was. I often say, “relationships are worth more than money.” The power of a relationship can take you so much further than any dollar amount. My professional and personal relationships have allowed me to develop into the scholar- practitioner that I am today. I will continue to reach back and support those as was done for me. 

“Each day as scholar-practitioners we are either moving closer to a more equitable system or further away.”

As a scholar-practitioner I have found my voice as an advocate in my field. Understanding and having the level of discernment on when and what to advocate for is paramount. This season and growth in advocacy that did not occur until I realized the power and privilege I have as a Black female educator. In other words, although I have intersections of race and gender, I still have a privilege regarding access to educational advancement and financial means to attain schooling. Understanding this, I use my education to empower and educate others. On a daily basis, the power of advocacy is a lesson learned and utilized to ensure I continue to pave the way for the students and families that are so deserving of an educational and life experience that is oftentimes not equitable. 

Last, consistent action! One of my favorite quotes is, “What you do every day matters more than what you do every once in a while.” This quote applies to all areas of life, and while I typically reference this regarding my health and fitness journey, these words hold true in service in the educational field. Each day as scholar-practitioners we are either moving closer to a more equitable system or further away; I do not believe that anything stays the same. With this mindset, I am committed to ensuring consistency in all that I do for educational advancement. I am also cognizant of those who are constantly watching what I do and say. I need to model leadership to empower those in my care.

“Each day as scholar- practitioners we are either moving closer to a more equitable system or further away.”

LtC: In some of your recent work, you investigate how teachers and administrators lead for learning and cultural proficiency during times of disruption. How might your findings help inform our understanding of professional development, educational justice, and educational change more broadly? 

NP: My research allowed the space for educators to evaluate their sense of cultural competency on a pre-existing Cultural Competence Self-Assessment for Teachers (Adapted from Lindsey, Robins & Terrell [2009] Cultural Proficiency: A Manual for School Leaders). This survey paired teacher voices to the interpretation of their score to their daily instructional pedagogy. Once the teacher was provided their numerical cultural competence score, the teacher was able to answer a series of questions to bring life to that number. Their responses were able to transition a number to words and experience of current teaching practice based upon their belief systems and lived experiences. The findings and lived experiences display that there is a clear need for educators to be aware of their level of cultural competence and differences with those they interact with. My recent work reviewed cultural competence in the context of three structural inequities: healthcare, housing, and education and all three of these structural inequities show the need for cultural competence of educators and individuals.  

The implications for practice of school leaders and classroom teachers are as follows:

  1. use cultural competence as an umbrella for the development of teachers,
  2. provide consistent relationship building opportunities,
  3. fund programs focused on financial literacy and entrepreneurship to reach diverse populations of post-secondary student interest
  4. use embedded/required instructional materials that reflect student cultures and address current/future structural inequities that will mutate from current ones
  5. stay up to date on the digital world and provide students with needed resources
  6. mentor teachers in the field to address and develop understanding of their bias/feelings,
  7. codify a process to continue the work of educators self-assessing their cultural competence and awareness of structural inequities. 

Through the findings of this work, a new process emerged that will assist educators, researchers, and students to gain an understanding of their cultural competence level and awareness of structural inequities.

This process of authentic self-assessment must takeplace for sustainable change within the educational system. This process allows educators to self-assess where they currently stand with cultural competence and structural inequities and where they think they can continue to grow and develop to make a difference through their instructional practice.

From Patterson 2022

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?

NP: Prior to supporting those who are in our care, we have to first understand and evaluate the change we are asked to spearhead and transform. Individuals in our care are in an organizational structure. It is important that teachers use this self-assessment on a continuous basis and that reflection take place at all levels to enact sustainable change. Connected to self-assessment, there must be collaboration and support systems for leaders facilitating these transformation efforts. Leaders are chameleons, and we must adapt to the needs of those we support but also use wisdom in the supports we are in need of. At times, support for leaders can be as simple and impactful as a listening ear, mentorship, and self-care,to name a few examples. 

Expectations, accountability, and support are the key ingredients to needed educational change of academic and life outcomes for marginalized communities. Additionally, in order to evoke change we must include those whom the change will impact in the conversation. I often think of the saying, “nothing for me, without me.” Courageous conversations must happen at the individual and group level to ensure we are uplifting the voices of those who are involved in the change process. Everyone wants to be heard. Everyone also wants to be a part of something bigger than themselves. This can be achieved through transparency, consistent communication, and partnership during the transformational process. 

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

NP: Hope is amazing and the strongest thing to hold on to! I hope that with the rise of advocacy for cultural competence and access to relevant research, the field of education will truly become a space that benefits all the children we are blessed to serve. I am excited and encouraged by the youth! Working with such brilliant, bold, and brave students on a daily basis excites and inspires me to continue to work for educational change. The innovation, creativity, and relentlessness of our youth is a joy to experience as an educator and leader. I am encouraged by the advocacy I see young people engage in, by the multiple ways success is defined for them, and the no fear mindset that allows them to go for the goals they desire without a fear of failure. I am encouraged that as current scholar-practitioners we can contribute to the future success of students by keeping an open mind and holding onto hope. Hope is one of the most powerful things this world has to offer. Maintaining a growth mindset is needed to experience the true value of hope and dealing this hope to others. 

I foresee continuous growth in the areas of educational technology. I am curious to see how artificial intelligence will continue to influence education. Currently, there are several systems that are being used by scholar-practitioners and students regarding artificial intelligence. I can only hope that as the times continue to change, schools will be ahead of the curve by providing opportunities and spaces to educate students and educators on how to best use these various technologies. I hope to see a major change in the mandates regarding curriculum and instruction to focus on financial literacy requirements, fostering entrepreneurship, courses in social emotional well-being, and courses that teach conflict resolution/self-regulation. These courses are especially imperative in Black and Brown communities where we see and experience tragedy due to gun violence on a daily basis. 

Last, at the policy level, I hope to see change connected to continuous efforts to encourage and uplift the Black vote. These are the views of the silent majority and reflect the importance of the future of elections for us and our children. I am fully aware that this process is not an immediate one and will take strategic and intentional advocacy, collaboration, and resistance. I am also fully aware that the students, families, and individuals for whom we continue this heart work, will bring about a promising future for those that come after them.

References: 

Guerra, P. L., & Wubbena, Z. C. (2017). Teacher beliefs and classroom practices cognitive dissonance in high stakes test-influenced environments. Issues in Teacher Education, 26(1), 35-51.

Lindsey, R. B., Robins, K. N., & Terrell, R. D. (2009). Cultural proficiency: A manual for school leaders (3rd ed.). Corwin Press

McGrath, A. (2020). Bringing cognitive dissonance theory into the scholarship of teaching and learning: Topics and questions in need of investigation. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 6(1), 84-90. 10.1037/stl0000168

Patterson, N. (2022). Taking a knee: A mixed methods study evaluating awareness of structural inequities and levels of cultural competence of middle school in-service teachers of Black and Brown students (Publication No. 28967538) [Doctoral dissertation, Saint Joseph’s University]. Saint Joseph’s University ProQuest Dissertations Publishing

Leave a comment

Posted in About K-12 International Education News, education reform, Educational Leadership, Interviews, Lead the Change