Lifelong learning: policies and programme
European Policy Network On School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Grant Agreement EAC-2010-1388 Specific Agreement number: EAC-2010-1388/1
Progress made on culturing and structuring SL in Europe
Version: Final Date: 20-7-2015
With the support of the Lifelong Learning Programme of the European Union
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Work Package:
WP5: School Leadership Policy Developments beyond EPNoSL
Prepared by:
Pavlos Hatzopoulos and Kathy Kikis-Papadakis
Status, Version No.
Final
Submission date:
22/7/2015
Start Date of the Agreement:
12 December 2012
Duration of the Specific Agreement
18 Months
Dissemination Level:
Public
Project coordinator:
Kathy Kikis-Papadakis, FORTH/IACM katerina@iacm.forth.gr With the support of the Lifelong Learning Programme of the European Union
Financing:
This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
Page 2 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 5 SECTION I – THE EPNOSL NICE PLA ............................................................................................................ 6 POSITIONING SCHOOL LEADERSHIP IN THE AGENDA FOR SCHOOL REFORMS ................................................................ 7 ADDRESSING THE OBJECTIVES OF THE NICE PLA............................................................................................................ 7 THEME 1: INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES .................................................................................................................... 9 THEME 2: CASE STUDIES ON SCHOOL LEADERSHIP GOOD PRACTICES ............................................................................... 10 THEME 3: PROMOTING SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY INNOVATION ................................................................................. 14 THEME 4: REFLECTION TOOLS FOR POLICY DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION....................................................................... 16 THEME 5: SCHOOL LEADERSHIP ACTION PLANNING...................................................................................................... 19 THEME 6: SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY DEVELOPMENT IN FRANCE ................................................................................. 22 EVALUATION OF THE NICE PLA ...................................................................................................................... 23 SECTION II – THE EPNOSL HERAKLION PLA .............................................................................................. 42 SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY DEVELOPMENTS: THE WAY FORWARD TO SUPPORT INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN EUROPE ......... 43 ADDRESSING THE OBJECTIVES OF THE HERAKLION PLA................................................................................................. 43 THEME 1 – EPNOSL’S CONTRIBUTION TO THE PROMOTION OF THE SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY AGENDA ............................. 45 THEME 2: INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES .................................................................................................................. 46 THEME 3 – EQUITY AND LEARNING AS CRITICAL EDUCATIONAL GOALS ............................................................................. 47 THEME 4- NETWORKING FOR SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY DEVELOPMENT ....................................................................... 48 THEME 5 – THE EPNOSL SCHOOL LEADERSHIP TOOLKIT .............................................................................................. 50 EVALUATION OF THE HERAKLION PLA ............................................................................................................. 55 SECTION III – THE EPNOSL PLAS: PROGRESS MADE TOWARDS SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................................................................................................. 58 PROGRESS MADE IN RELATION TO NETWORKING ................................................................................................ 59 PROGRESS MADE IN RELATION TO EPNOSL’S WORK ON SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY DEVELOPMENT............................... 60 PROGRESS MADE IN RELATION TO PROMOTING THE SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY AGENDA ............................................ 61 ANNEX 1: NICE PLA MATERIALS .............................................................................................................. 63 LIST OF NICE PLA PARTICIPANTS .................................................................................................................... 64 NICE PLA ANNOUNCEMENT ......................................................................................................................... 68 NICE PLA VENUES ...................................................................................................................................... 69 NICE PLA BACKGROUND MATERIALS .............................................................................................................. 69 NICE PLA DOCUMENTATION ......................................................................................................................... 69 NICE PLA PROGRAMME .............................................................................................................................. 70 ANNEX 2: HERAKLION PLA MATERIALS ................................................................................................... 76
Page 3 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) LIST OF HERAKLION PLA PARTICIPANTS ........................................................................................................... 77 HERAKLION PLA ANNOUNCEMENT ................................................................................................................. 82 HERAKLION PLA VENUES ............................................................................................................................. 84 HERAKLION PLA BACKGROUND MATERIALS ..................................................................................................... 84 HERAKLION PLA DOCUMENTATION ................................................................................................................ 85 HERAKLION PLA PROGRAMME ...................................................................................................................... 85
Page 4 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Introduction This report is developed in the frame of the European Policy Network of School Leadership (EPNoSL) project’s fifth work package (WP5) entitled “School Leadership Policy Developments beyond EPNoSL”. The main objective of this WP is “the promotion of the implementation of the priorities for the development of School Leadership” under the perspective of equity and learning. The report is divided in three main sections. The first section analyses the outcomes of the first EPNoSL PLA event that was held in Nice, France between 25-26 September 2014. The discussion focuses first on the objectives of the PLA and how these were addressed by the event. It then moves on to briefly highlight the main themes that were under consideration from the perspective of strengthening EPNoSL’s role in the promotion of the school leadership policy agenda. It, finally, present the results of the evaluation of the Nice PLA. The second section analyses the results of the second EPNoSL PLA event that was held in Heraklion, Greece between 28-29 May 2015. It, first, lays out the objectives of the Heraklion PLA and shows how these were tackled. It then analyses the main themes that came under discussion via the organisation of keynote addresses, panel sessions, and working groups. It, finally, offers a comparative analysis of the evaluation of the Heraklion PLA in relation to the event held in Nice. The scope of the third section of the report is to highlight the progress made in relation to structuring and culturing school leadership in Europe. The discussion is organised along three main concerns: a) progress made in relation to networking, b) progress made in relation to EPNoSL’s work on school leadership policy development, and c) progress made in relation to promoting the school leadership policy agenda. The Annexes that are included at the end of the report provide all the compiled documentation for the Nice and the Heraklion PLAs respectively. These include all the preparatory material produced for the PLAs, as well as the presentations, photos, and videos of the proceedings.
Page 5 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Section I – The EPNoSL Nice PLA
Page 6 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Positioning School Leadership in the Agenda for School Reforms Addressing the objectives of the Nice PLA The PLA intended to promote the implementation of the priorities for the development of School Leadership and to stimulate knowledge exchange between policymakers, practitioners, researchers and other stakeholders towards enhancing school leadership for equity and learning. Specifically, the discussions in the context of the PLA contributed to:
The validation of reflection tools for school leadership policy design and implementation The consolidation of case studies on school leadership good practices The development of place-relevant action plans on school leadership
There were dedicated sessions of the Nice PLA event on were designed to support the validation and consolidation of EPNoSL’s work on a) the policy reflection and planning tools, b) the case studies on good policy practices, and c) the place-relevant action plans on school leadership. In all these sessions, the preliminary results of the work conducted by EPNoSL partners were first presented in the plenary. PLA participants were then split into groups for engaging in targeted, context-specific discussions depending on their country of origin and/or professional affiliation. The conclusions of the group discussions were finally presented in the plenary by group coordinators. The sessions followed a world café methodology. In particular the PLA sessions contributed in the following ways to achieving the objectives set by PLA organisers. EPNoSL Policy tools
Emphasis was placed by PLA participants (on the basis of the draft policy response animation) on the use of multimedia, user-friendly, material for illustrating the main issues and drawing the main conclusions of the toolsets. Toolset developers thus agreed to utilise multimedia material as far as this would be possible. To this effect, the production of all the toolsets was agreed to conform (both in terms of context and form) to the development of a specialised online platform on the EPNoSL Toolkit Based on the diversity of comments received during the PLA by different SL stakeholders, tollset developers agreed to further test their toolsets in locally organised meetings
Case studies on good policy practices
The PLA discussions strengthened the view that there could be no full synthesis of the case studies on good policy practices, since these reflect the context-specific nature of successful policy initiatives in the field of school leadership PLA participants stressed the need for a user-friendly presentation of the finalised case studies and undertook to examine the possibility of developing a specialised online platform that will include the main results of this work.
Page 7 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) School Leadership Action Plans The PLA discussion reflected the difficulties of developing a coherent set of school leadership action plans. To ensure that this would the case at the end of the process, the network decided that it will first need to produce:  A set of policy planning principles that will be followed by the action plan development teams.  A common developmental process that will involve the participation of a variety of School Leadership stakeholders, through which the action plans would be developed.
Page 8 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Theme 1: International perspectives The PLA intended to link the work being done by EPNoSL to selected international perspectives in the area of school leadership policy and practice. This was made possible via the inclusion of four keynote addresses that touched upon different facets of international developments. The first area that was covered related to the emergence and increasing importance that “Leader Learning Networks” have in US educational policies. The presentation by Prof. Jonathan Supovitz exemplified the increasing attention to a range of social learning strategies as ways to increase school and district leadership capacity in the United States. Social learning strategies are systems and networks are intended to increase leaders' lateral opportunities to learn from colleagues, to facilitate the spreading of knowledge and innovation strategies, and reduce school leaders’ isolation. This presentation will examine several strategies being used in the United States for developing and sustaining leadership networks and discuss ways that policymakers are supporting and facilitating this process. The second presentation focused on school leadership developments in France (also as a way to familiarise the PLA audience to the dedicated French session that would follow). Prof Romuald Normand argued that “leadership is far from being a common issue in the French education system”. For cultural reasons but also for some gaps between policy, research and practice. From the international research literature, this communication will tend to map the recent trends and reflection on management and governance of schools in the French education system, the challenges faced by principals in their daily experience, and it will propose some ways to reduce the gap between practitioners and policy-makers in investigating the potential of networking of schools, professional development of principals, but also the structuring of a new field of research in the French context. The third focus of the Nice PLA on international perspectives on school leadership took issue with the work of international organisations, and particularly the OECD. David istance, from the Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI), presented the framework for innovative and powerful learning environments developed through the OECD 'Innovative Learning Environments' (ILE) project. Istance illustrated the concept of 'learning leadership' developed in ILE, and how the interrogatives – Why? What? Who? Where? When? and How? – offer a simple but useful framework for disentangling the different dimensions of learning leadership. He also presented draft tools, suitable for the micro/school level or the wider macro and meso levels, that use these frameworks and concepts as yardsticks for those in positions of leadership and practice to compare their own circumstances. Finally, this theme was considered through a focus on pre-primary education. Eeva Hujala argued that leadership is always a contextually defined phenomenon. In her presentation leadership was considered mainly in the context of preprimary education. According to contextual orientation to leadership, the vision of the organization shows the way for leadership. Leadership has foundation on the mission and core tasks of the school organization. The leaders’ responsibilities as well as management functions are based on mission and shared vision of the school. The strategy helps the whole school society in developing school practices to gain the quality of teaching and learning. In the school, knowledge management, staff wellbeing and quality of education are always interdependent. Leadership takes care of these elements and supports their integration.
Page 9 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Theme 2: Case studies on school leadership good practices The PLA included a dedicated session to the EPNoSL case studies of good policy practices in the area of school leadership. The goal of this session was a) to effectively disseminate good practices in the field of school leadership in Europe and b) to contribute to the consolidation of these case studies through an open discussion with the variety of stakeholders who were present during the event. This consolidation was achieved through the use of the world café method, where each case study was discussed in small round tables getting detailed feedback from experts in the field. Ultimately, this session enabled policy makers and other stakeholders in the field of school leadership at local, regional, national and cross-national levels to share knowledge, experiences and lessons learned about school leadership. The case studies identified in this session informed policy making in relation to school leadership, with a focus on the following themes: • • • • •
school autonomy, accountability, distributed leadership, policy response and capacity building.
The case studies adopted a national and/or regional perspective in order to supplement EPNoSL’ task of promoting networking activities on school leadership at the national and regional levels. Swedish case study on capacity building The Swedish case study focused on the national training program for school leaders in the country. It was presented by Jonas Höög from Umea University. The training program is special since it is governed by the Swedish National Agency for Education, it is designed for the advanced university level (Master) formulated in the Bologna process. The responsibility for carrying through the program is delegated to 6 universities, and it is mandatory for all newly appointed principals. The content of the case report is structured in this way:
The background and rational for the choice of this case. A short history of the principal training in Sweden. A training program for principals has existed since 1967 in Sweden. It has been changed several times and lastly 2000, 2009 and 2015. The character of the changes is shortly described. The mission and role of the National Agency for Education. The Swedish Riksdag (parliament) and the Government set out the goals and guidelines for the preschool and school through e.g. the Education Act and the Curricula. The mission of the Agency is to actively work for the attainment of the goals. One part of this is the School Leadership Training Program. The aim of the training program. It is formulated to contribute to a creation of a school characterized by equity and learning. Principals, heads of preschools and assistant heads all play a key role in centrally regulated education that is governed by the curricula. The task is to create a school and preschool of high-quality for everyone where the national goals are achieved and learning is experienced as meaningful, stimulating and secure. The National School Leadership Training Programme aims at providing Principals, heads of preschools and other school leaders with the
Page 10 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
knowledge and skills required to be able to manage their responsibilities and achieve the goals set up. Tasks of the Principal. Principals play a crucial role in the implementation of national education. As the pedagogical leader of the school, and head of the teachers and other personnel, the Principal as laid down in the curricula has overall responsibility for the education. Based on these factors and the conditions provided by the principal organizer, the role of the Principal together with teachers is to provide structure and content to the work of the school. The Principal is responsible for the results achieved by the school, and also for follow up and evaluation in relation to the national goals. The Education Act stipulates that the Principal shall keep abreast of the daily work of the school, and focus in particular on developing the education. The structure and goals of the program and its Scope. The program consists of three courses: (a) Legislation on schools and the role of exercising the functions of an Authority, (b) Management by goals and objectives and, (c) School leadership. These areas of knowledge are crucial for the practical implementation of school leadership. They are closely linked to each other, and head teachers must be able to manage them simultaneously since they form parts of a complex interacting system. The programme is completed when participants have achieved the course requirements of 30 higher education credits with 10 higher education credits in each of the three modules. Result so far as the participating principals and preschool heads experiences it. Central and local evaluations show that the participants have been most satisfied with the program.
Austrian case study on system wide reforms for enhancing equity and learning The Austrian case study focused on the New Middle School (NMS) that was piloted by the Ministry of Education (BMUKK) in 2008 and then mandated in 2012 by the Austrian Parliament. A main reason for introducing the NMS was to enhance equity by responding to growing diverse student learning needs and to reduce early streaming after primary school. It eventually should lead to a joint lower secondary school for all students. As effective school reform occurs on the school level, as part of the reform process several new teacher leadership roles have emerged since then. Of these teacher leaders, Lerndesigners are the most visible. They are teacher leaders with specific expertise in areas of curriculum and instructional development (“Lerndesign”) related to the reform goals of equity and excellence. Ideally Lerndesigners act as change agents in a shared leadership dynamic with school principals and other teacher leaders (subject coordinators, school development teams, etc.) with the aim to foster innovative learning environments and increase equity in the lower secondary education. As teacher leaders require networking and communities of practice in the context of school reform (Schley, Schratz, Hofbauer, & Westfall-Greiter, 2009), and to structure and strengthen shared leadership, school principals are invited with their Lerndesigners to one national Lernatelier per year. Inviting these “dynamic development duos”, as they come to be called, to work together in a learning atelier has been recognized as key for the Lerndesigners to become effective teacher leaders at their respective school sites. The two-year qualification program consists of 12 ECTS credits and occurs parallel to the implementation of the school reform at their schools. The program consists of national and regional Lernateliers for networking and qualification purposes as well as self-study which is coordinated online and includes practice-based tasks for exploration in school-based Professional Learning Communities (Westfall-Greiter, 2013).
Page 11 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Beyond face-to-face events, the NMS development is supported by an online platform, comprising some 200 eduMoodle courses. In addition, the NMS Online Library, was implemented in autumn 2012 and serves as a portal for NMS-related resources, including dissemination of the newest resources for curriculum and instruction, a biweekly newsletter for school principals and insights into the NMS experience through personal anecdotes and a series of online events and publications called “NMS Insights”.
Scottish case study on reviewing, revising and republishing the teacher education standards The Scottish case study took issue with the process of establishing teaching and training standards that is coordinated by the General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTC). GTC Scotland is the independent professional statutory regulatory body which promotes and regulates the teaching profession in Scotland. One of its statutory functions is to establish and review the standards of education and training appropriate to school teachers in Scotland. Scotland has had a suite of teacher education Standards since early in this century but a change in legislation meant that as from April 2012 all of the Standards came under the guardianship of GTC Scotland. A review of Teacher Education (Teaching Scotland's Future, Donaldson 2011) had recommended that all of the Standards should be reviewed and from April until December 2012, GTC Scotland undertook this exercise. The case study will explore how this process was undertaken including how leadership was seeded across all of the Standards and how issues of equity were included.
Portuguese case study on the use of self-evaluation The Portuguese case study, presented by Ana Paula Silva, was carried out in deprived social contexts, highlighting practices in school self-evaluation that are being used to design, implement and monitor improvement. When this policy started to be in force in Portugal, people in schools reacted negatively with suspicion, and in general it was verified an increasing bureaucracy in the field procedures, which some other studies indicate as a tendency. However, the selection of case studies to be presented show a different reality, within which self-evaluation has been handled as a tool to produce knowledge and reflection on the school as a whole. This perspective against below expected school results in standardized tests, allowed a basis to promote a positive self-image and self-esteem to counterbalance the negative image of schools built on results. This is extremely important once the case studies also show that it has been fruitful to restructure, re-culture, distribute leadership and empower educators in school improvement processes.
Italian case study on students’ voice and art performances The Italian case study focused on "student leadership": the agency the students can have as learners and as actors in the school, the access to what counts for the school life they can benefit from their position as students. The case study adopted a micro perspective and presented the case of a lower secondary school in Tuscan country where a special music project is enacted "musically minded" involving all the students, the 25% of which also play in the school band. Recently (2014) In the school, a movie (docu-film) was filmed inspired by the band’s adventures. The occasion of the movie and the observation of the school band, with its regulations and performances, has become the opportunity to get closer to some aspects of student expression and its mechanisms.
Page 12 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The Italian research team undertook focus groups and in depth semi-structured interviews with 49 students (aged 12-13) in order to investigate how the experience of “critical events” of art (both the movie and the music) can have a relevant impact on student leadership and on students’ sense of agency in general.
Page 13 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Theme 3: Promoting school leadership policy innovation The Nice PLA featured a separate session focusing on existing policy initiatives in the area of school leadership. Representatives from Ministries of Education across Europe were thus given the opportunity to highlight specific policies that are implemented, or are that are currently under development, in their respective countries. The first case that was under discussion was Malta in relation ot its new strategy on professional development programmes. Salvina Muscat and John Portelli, from the Ministry of educatona and Employment, outlined the underlying principles and beliefs, content, and initial evaluation of a professional development programme that is currently implemented with top management in the Education Department, Malta, and the senior and middle management personnel of state schools in Malta. The programme, consistent with the National Framework for Education 2014-2024, is based on the principles of equity, diversity and social justice and inclusive and critical-democratic leadership. The programme has been offered to over 1000 personnel in small groups of 30. Initial data analysis indicates that participants are very appreciative of a critical-praxis approach based on real cases identified from the field. Kerstin Hultgren, from the Ministry of Education and Research, provided an analysis of the Swedish National School Leadership Training Program in relation to the themes of Accountability, Distributed Leadership and Educating School Leaders – for equity and learning. Accountability for equity and learning can be related to the state level as well as to the local level in the Swedish school system. The state sets out the Education Act, ordinances and curricula. The state also decides on national tests, grades and special measures. The local organiser, with school leaders, has a great responsibility for student outcomes and all students’ right to equal education. On local level there is also a responsibility to employ qualified teachers and to arrange support for students in need of special support – so that all students can reach the knowledge requirements. It is stipulated in the Education Act that the pedagogical work within one school unit should be led and coordinated by one principal, but distributed leadership is partially possible if there are people in the staff who have sufficient competence and experience. All principals play a key role in education and it is important that they have good knowledge of their responsibilities as laid down in The Education Act and other steering documents. Principals must also understand his or her role as a school leader in the Swedish school system. Therefore, Sweden has a National School Leadership Training program on university level, which is compulsory for newly employed principals. José Manuel Lemos Diogo, from the Ministry of Education and Science, Portugal, emphasised the general preconditions for school leadership policy innovation without specific references to the Portuguese national context. Diogo focused on tree general ideas that must be intentionally combined in order to promote School Leadership Policy innovation, regarding school leadership development for equity and learning: a) The need of school leadership(s) to adopt a school systemic vision, in order to promote effective change and school improvement; b) the strategic role of significant school self-evaluation procedures, centered in a methodological triangulation that involves school actors in a collective process of meaning construction for their schools; c) to adopt the “jazz band” metaphor for school leadership in opposition to the “symphonic orchestra” conduction.These kinds of policies didn’t succeed by top down governmental initiatives and must be consolidated in the school culture by a bottom up intentionality that needs to be powered and driven by effective and consistent teacher lifelong learning programs.
Page 14 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
The final presentation focused on the Norwegian National Leadership Training Program for Headmasters. Per Tronsmo and Terje Kato Stangeland, from the Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, gave an overview of the decentralised form of the Norwegian school system, whereby 448 municipalities are responsible for the schools. In a decentralized system we need responsible leaders who are powerful, loyal, competent and courageous. We need leaders who have the “right” role, with enough focus on learning leadership, and who have legitimacy from the teachers. There are big differences between the quality of municipalities, between schools and between school leaders. The overall picture in Norway is that we have
Too weak leadership, at all levels Too little expertise and strength among school owners Fragmented sector, too weak focus on the sector as a system. Fragmented schools, too weak focus on schools as organisations
Our national policy is to give leaders more support, help and professional training and development. In 2008 a national management training programme was established in Norway. It shall:
be offered to all newly employed head teachers in primary and secondary education be an answer to the challenges the school system is facing be well-managed and goal-oriented be based on the actual needs that school managers and others experience have a practical aim be a part of a Masters program, approved in the universities
As formulated in the assumptions for the national program, what is required and expected of a headmaster can be divided into five main areas: 1. The pupils’ learning outcomes and learning environment 2. Management and administration 3. Collaboration and organization development; supervision of teachers 4. Development and change 5. The leadership role Today 1800 school leaders have finished the program. 500 have just started. The Leadership Training program has been evaluated by highly competent research institutions. They have finished three out of four reports. They are extremely positive. You can read them in English. The Minister has just decided to expand the activities.
Page 15 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Theme 4: Reflection tools for policy design and implementation One PLA session was dedicated to the presentation and discussion of the Policy reflection tools that are currently under development by EPNoSL. The purpose of the EPNoSL toolsets is to guide reflections on the requirements for school leadership policy action planning in several national/regional contexts across EU, supported by the inclusion of diverse stakeholder groups’ positions on/for School Leadership and related issues. The EPNoSL toolsets ensure that from the outset equity and learning considerations underlie reflections on School Leadership policy planning. The EPNoSL Toolsets stress the importance of understanding public policy not only as laws, regulations, strategies, programmes or projects but also as discourse and as an emergent phenomenon. The implication regarding the transformation of the EPNoSL resources into policy and practice relevant tools, is that these tools should enable reflections concerning the requirements for policy developments on SL both at the level of laws, programmes, projects etc., and at the wider level of policy discourse(s) and its interrelationships with discourse(s) within and between various stakeholder groups, such as school communities, professional associations, academics and researchers etc. The session provided the opportunity for in depth discussion on the scope and the usefulness of each tool through the use of the world cafe method. The development teams of each policy tool tested the impact of the tools on different types of policy-makers, whilst policy-makers voiced their views on the tools both as discussants in the session and as participants in the world café roundtables. The development teams agreed that the final versions of the tools should incorporate engaging, interactive elements that would facilitate their dissemination amongst policy-making circles. Finally, a special web platform will be developed for hosting the finalised versions of the policy tools and enhancing their visibility.
Distributed Leadership Policy Toolset The purpose of this toolset is to help policy-makers develop and implement policy that supports distributed leadership (DL) in schools, and to do this in ways that advance equity and learning. The toolset draws from knowledge and understanding about distributed leadership that was built up in the context of the EPNoSL project. The toolset promotes knowledge and understanding, that is understandable to a wide, nonacademic audience and explains to policy-makers, on:
what distributed leadership is the benefits it can bring to schools and why it is important for policy-makers to support the development of DL the need to ‘deepen’ DL and the implications of making equity an explicit part of DL what the consequent concept of distributed leadership for equity and learning (DLE) and what it adds to DL what is known from research about the factors important in developing effective DL and therefore DLE questions and a review tool helpful in reviewing how well DLE is operating in a school.
The presentation and world café discussion was led by Philip Woods and Amanda Roberts.
Page 16 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Policy Response Toolset The Policy Response Toolset is intended to help policy makers and school leaders develop solutions to problems around policy implementation. This toolset is informed by the principles of creative interpretation and the translation of abstract ideas into practice, and views policy as a process of creative social action. It therefore aims to facilitate school leaders’ active participation in the policy process to develop contextually relevant and responsive policy that effectively supports equity and learning. Research conducted by the European Policy Network on School Leadership found that school leaders sometimes find it difficult to engage with ‘top down’ policy. This toolset does not, therefore, prescribe ways of engaging with policy, but instead aims to help policy makers and school leaders under the wider heading of policy response to (i) employ creative strategies to overcome obstacles to policy implementation and (ii) co-create ways to engage with policy and share best practice. The presentation and world café discussion was led by Carl Bagley and Sophie Ward.
Accountability Policy Toolset The toolset proposes the urgency of stimulating policy reflection along two axes: First, accountability mechanisms should be better integrated with educational policies on equity. The overreliance of existing accountability practices on school performance outcomes can limit the scope of policies promoting equity in education. School performance accountability is relatively oblivious to the evaluation of other educational aims such as socialisation, inclusion, recognition and valuing of diversity and difference, and personal development, which are critical to the establishment of a more equitable school environment. Second, the operation of enabling and efficient accountability practices across the education system requires supportive policy measures (e.g. provision of adequate training, open access to data) that promote evidence-based school leadership practices. The presentation and world café discussion was led byJonas Hoog and Olof Johansson.
Autonomy Policy Toolset The use of the concept, autonomy, seems to indicate full and unrestricted self-governance as if the actors, the organisations or the states are free floating entities with no strings to the context, surrounding and other people. This is of course not so in contemporary societies. Here, we are extremely interdependent of the other. Autonomy then is only interesting as a term if it indicates that an organisation or professional actors are given some room for manoeuvre, and that constrains from the outside and inside are reduced to the necessary and legitimate frames, values and norms. The presentation and world café discussion was led by Lejf Moos.
Capacity building Policy Toolset This toolset on educating school leaders as change agents explores the relationship between management and leadership in the school context, where school leaders form the important link for the synchronization Page 17 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) of top-down and bottom-up processes. School leaders are the key actors in promoting quality processes in schools, but there is no linear transfer from the school heads’ leading to the students’ learning unless a more dynamic view of a learning school is taken up which is anchored in the relationship between the people involved. In complex change processes successful leadership for learning depends on the interplay between thinking, feeling and doing. The presentation and world café discussion was led by Silvia Krenn and Helmuth Aigner.
Stakeholders’ collaboration Policy Toolset The Stakeholders Collaboration toolset addresses the following concerns:
What kind of information on the education delivery processes do the different stakeholders need, so that they may be involved in the discussion of the schooling issues, such as the internal organization, staffing and resourcing, the curriculum management issues, so that they may be informed and empowered to participate in the decision making? What specific information do parents need that distinguish them from other partners in the education services, such as the teachers, the local politicians , the employers or any informed citizen? What information the post bureaucratic school has to provide to guarantee equality in the access to “readable” information, and social justice in the analysis of learning quality?
The toolset will propose useful assessment indicators (hard and soft) in alternative models of schools’ evaluation, which may lead us towards provisory answers and therefore some guidance for public discussion involving as many educational stakeholders as possible. The presentation and world café discussion was led by Carmo Climaco and Ana Paula Silva.
Page 18 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Theme 5: School leadership action planning The Nice PLA gave emphasis on the development of school leadership action plans by the EPNoSL consortium. The PLA provided a forum where the teams responsible for drafting these action plans had the opportunity to discuss with a wider community of SL stakeholders: 1. The main policy goals that should be covered by the SL action plans 2. The main Principles guiding School Leadership Policy Action Planning 3. The specific process via which they will develop the SL action plans The work on the action plans during the PLA was organised on a regional basis, as to facilitate the involvement of all participants in context-specific discussions. Four regional groups were formed: a) the Germanic context, led by Wolfgang Meyer, b) the Southern European, led by Ana Paula Silva, the East European, led by Tomasz Kasprzak , and d) the Baltic, led by Hasso Kukemelk. The PLA discussions led to the adoption of a clear, common framework of school leadership policy action planning. 1. The EPNoSL action plans will be based on the policy goals that have been identified and discussed in previous EPNoSL policy work and are outlined below: Policy goal I: Promotion and establishment of an enabling school leadership environment Policy goal II: promotion of professional standards, evaluation and research on school leadership for equity and learning Policy goal III: School leadership capacity building for equity and learning 2. Overall, the EPNoSL approach will take into account the following interrelated principles in school leadership policy planning: Participative Planning In the process of school leadership policy planning there should be actively involved critical stakeholders such as school managers, teachers, students, parents, local education authorities, providers of training programmes for school leaders, academics and researchers in the field, etc. Comprehensive Planning Policy planning should take into account all issues and policy areas related to the achievement of given school leadership policy goals. Realistic Planning School leadership policy planning that sets targets that are highly unlikely to be achieved within the chosen time-frame, ignore budget constraints, overlook human resource limitations, under-estimate the power of those who resist change (particularly those who are called to implement it), or disregard needs for training for the individuals or agencies responsible to implement policies, are doomed to fail. Therefore, policy planners need to make ensure the feasibility of their plans.
Page 19 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Coherent Planning School leadership policies for equity and learning can be effective to the degree that they enhance coordination between related policies implemented by different government departments or other agencies.
3. Four major concerns were discerned in relation to the process that will be followed in the development of the action plans. A good start for policy planning is the organisation at national or state/regional level of a kick-off event where EPNoSL members/experts meet with representatives of competent authorities and critical stakeholders to discuss, reach consensus and plan policies that are aimed to promote and empower school leadership for equity and learning. Prior to this kick-off event, organizers have to make some important preparations. What will be the major focus of this event is a first major concern. In a kick-off policy planning event it is expected that participants: 

develop a shared understanding of the overarching aims and objectives of school policy planning in their national/regional/state context in view of the policy challenges of equity and learning in schools, and specify what is the place and role of school leadership policies (if any) within them.
On the above basis, participants should go on to discuss various school leadership policy options that may address challenges of equity and learning, and the scope and rationale of such policies. In later meetings, the school leadership policy planning team will deepen into those policy options that appear to be more promising, given that they satisfy the criteria adopted, such as feasibility, cost-effectiveness, sustainability etc. Who to invite in this event is a second major concern. EPNoSL strongly supports the engagement of all critical stakeholders already from the policy planning phase and not just on, the usually short, public consultation phase, or during the implementation phase. Yet, the group of participants should be kept relatively small in order to secure that all voices have ample time to be heard, that participants get to know each other better and develop trust, that the group can elaborate in-depth on different issues, specify differences in views and discuss ways to reach consensus. In latter stages of policy planning the group can be widened depending on the feedback and expert consultancy needs. A third important concern is to ensure that all participants are well informed about what is expected from them during this first event (see focus). To this purpose, participants should be assigned with specific roles and tasks beforehand. For example, some participants could be asked to present to the group evidence indicating challenges/problems of equity and learning in schools, other participants to present an overview of the government's overarching policy aims and objectives and discuss how these respond to challenges/problems of equity and learning, while others to deepen upon whether and how existing policies affecting school leadership relate to equity and learning challenges. To facilitate the action planning process, EPNoSL has developed an Action Plan Template which can be provided to participants so that they can get a better idea of the tasks ahead. A fourth important concern is to ensure that by the end of the kick-off meeting all participants will have developed a shared understanding and will have agreed on an agenda for their next meetings. This concern is primarily of a methodological nature. EPNoSL envisages that by June 2015 at least 18 Action Plans will Page 20 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) have been developed, most of them with the active involvement of the competent school policy authorities in different national/state/regional contexts (i.e., Ministries of Education or policy planning agencies under their supervision). In some of these contexts there is great experience in devising and implementing school leadership policies while in others such policies either consist of one-off, sporadic, interventions or they are at very early stages of development.
Page 21 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Theme 6: School leadership policy development in France One of the additional aims of the Nice PLA was to provide the opportunity of deepening EPNoSL’s impact on the French education context. To address this aim, the PLA included in its program a dedicated French session that was organized by the local French EPNoSL partners in cooperation with the French Ministry of Education and the Academie de Nice. Several school leadership stakeholders from the French context were especially invited to participate and contribute in this session. The French session focused particularly on policy innovations that have been deemed to be successful in the local and national levels in France. The first such case study focused on the local area in Nice and the initiation of a project on school networking as a way towards enhancing school leadership capacity building. Frédérique Cauchi-Bianchi and Patrice Lemoine, from the Academie de Nice, presented this project in detail. Arguing that communication presents an experiment launched in 2001 to develop the networking of primary and secondary schools at local level. Through different moments of supervision, support and professional development, head teachers have experienced a new shared and systemic leadership. This experiment has been proved to be effective and served as a reference at national level. The team has received the public prize for innovation during the 2013 national conference on innovations at the UNESCO. The second case study tackled the role of new technologies in policy innovation. François Muller, from the French Ministry of Education, illustrated the potentialities of the use of digital technologies in education by an analysis of RESPIRE. RESPIRE is a social and digital network for sharing knowledge and resources among educators. Each practitioner has a personal identity and can use the network according to different scales of interests and commitments. The social network includes several thousand of professional groups sharing information and tools to support local school teams and leaders. It contributes to the emergence of professional learning communities at national and local levels. In 2012, RESPIRE has obtained the prize of innovation in the National Civil Service. The French session concluded with a round table focusing on school leadership in relation to the local governance of schools in France. School leadership stakeholders (policy makers, school inspectors, practitioners, and researchers) discussed role of local governance of schools is searching its way in a time of reforms. After the first acts of devolution allowing school autonomy, some needs have been identified to strengthen the building capacity of French schools. Self-evaluation, innovation, Human Resources Management, a new devolution are objects of reflection and debate in the French education system. Headteachers have new roles in leading education and pedagogy within schools. Accountability has been implemented. How can a new local governance promote intermediary functions for leadership and school improvement? What is at stake in the local management of schools? Are the responsibilities of HeadTeachers and inspectors are changing?
Page 22 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Evaluation of the Nice PLA The Nice PLA was evaluated by the organisers based on responses from participants on a online questionnaire which included a mixture of open-end and closed-end questions. The questionnaire was distributed electronically to all PLA participants, while 3 additional reminders for filling it were sent via email. Local participants where sent a link to the questionnaire translated in French. 1 The response rate was overall satisfactory: 47% of PLA participants responded to the evaluation questionnaire. In total, there were 137 PLA participants: • 57 from France • 79 from across Europe – Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and UK • 1 from USA In total 65 participants filled in the Nice PLA evaluation feedback • EN survey - 39 • FR survey - 26 The main results of the evaluation are summarised below, while a complete list of charts can be found at the end of this section.
1
PLA participants claimed overwhelmingly that the “overall objectives of the PLA were clear to them” and that the PLA sessions “were relevant” towards meeting these objectives. (On a scale of 0 to 6, the average rating of responses was 4,56/6 and 4,19/6 on these two questions)
PLA participants considered that, to a great extent, “the presentations provided deep insights“, while there did not seem to be satisfied with the time that was left for discussions. (On a scale of 0 to 6, the average rating of responses was 4,13/6 and 3,32/6 on these two questions)
Respondents felt relatively strongly that their “knowledge and understanding of school leadership” considerably improved through their participation in the PLA, while they also thought that they “developed a deeper understanding of the issues and challenges that face School Leadership policy design, implementation and innovation”. (On a scale of 0 to 6, the average rating of responses was 3,95/6 and 4,02/6 on these two questions)
In terms of its networking effects, PLA participants were unequivocally satisfied with the event as a space “for exchange of different views and perspectives on School Leadership”, with how the event helped them “to establish useful new professional relationships”, and with the “mix of different types of SL stakeholders”. (On a scale of 0 to 6, the average rating of responses was 4,95/6, 4,65/6 and 4,79/6 on these three questions, respectively)
Thanks to Peter Nemec for preparing the evaluation questionnaire and undertaking an initial analysis of the results. Page 23 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
PLA participants gave very positive feedback on all organisational aspects of the PLA, apart from the choice of venue. (On a scale of 0 to 6, only 3,95/6 thought that the venue “was well suited and practical for the PLA“).
In sum, PLA participants responded that they overwhelmingly “liked/enjoyed the Nice PLA event” and expressed a strong interest in “attending future events organised by EPNoSL”. (On a scale of 0 to 6, the average rating of responses was 4,81/5 and 5,1/6 on these two questions)
The open ended questions confirmed the overall satisfaction of PLA participants with the networking aspects of the PLA, the content of all the sessions, and the general objectives set by the organisers, while they confirmed that the two biggest weakness of the Nice PLA was the limited time that was left for discussions amongst participation, and the choice of venue.
Q1. Profile of PLA participants (65) - stakeholder status
Page 24 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Q2. What were the main reasons for attending Nice PLA? (please fill in all the boxes that apply)
Page 25 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Q3. PLA content (To what extent do you agree with the following statements?)
Page 26 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Page 27 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Page 28 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Page 29 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Q4. At Nice PLA event various types of activities were used to explore topics and themes. Please indicate the degree to which each impacted your knowledge and understanding of topics/themes.
Page 30 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Q5. PLA Outcomes
Page 31 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Page 32 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Page 33 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Q6. Networking
Page 34 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Page 35 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Page 36 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Page 37 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Q7. Sharing PLA content Following the PLA event I will share knowledge, understandings and ideas with: (please fill in all the boxes that apply)
Page 38 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Q8. Organization and logistics To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
Page 39 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Q9. Overall opinion To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
Page 40 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Page 41 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
SECTION II – The EPNoSL Heraklion PLA
Page 42 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
School Leadership Policy Developments: The Way Forward to Support Inclusive Education in Europe Addressing the objectives of the Heraklion PLA The Heraklion PLA intended to promote the outcomes of EPNoSL with the intention of influencing the development of school leadership policies and to stimulate knowledge exchange between policymakers, practitioners, researchers and other stakeholders towards enhancing school leadership for equity and learning. Specifically, the Heraklion PLA aimed to:
present the key outcomes of the EPNoSL project; reflect on the strengths and limitations of these outcomes and of networking activities amongst SL stakeholders; increase the visibility of EPNoSL's final outputs amongst policy makers at all levels of governance, educational leaders (including school principals and head teachers, and teacher educators), researchers, representatives of professional associations, parents, students, and other stakeholders; highlight examples of international perspectives on school leadership policy and practice; discuss recent European developments on school leadership policy initiatives; contribute to the planning of future EPNoSL activities.
The organisation of the particular sessions of the Heraklion PLA were planned to meet these objectives. In particular: EPNoSL key outcomes The PLA provided a forum for the discussion of EPNoSL key outputs both,
in the more general context of the broader school leadership developments. by focusing on the EPNoSL School Leadership Toolkit and how it could be further exploited for policy purposes beyond the current programme.
In addition, PLA participants were given book copies of the EPNoSL Toolkit and electronic copies of some key outputs of the project. In these respects, the PLA ensured for a useful summary of EPNoSL’s contributions to the school leadership policy agenda and for increasing the visibility of some of these material to a wider audience. Networking The PLA engaged in in-depth discussions on the networking effects that EPNoSL has had in terms of policy development. Concretely, the PLA became the occasion:
To highlight the most productive approaches to networking that were undertaken by EPNoSL partners in national and local contexts (ie. In Lithuania and Portugal). To reflect on the barriers to effective networking that EPNoSL partners have faced (ie. contextspecific policy and other institutional structures). Page 43 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
International perspectives and European developments The PLA became a meeting point amongst EPNoSL and other initiatives on school leadership policy practice at the international level. Along these lines, the PLA played a significant role in connecting EPNoSL a) with the work of the Scottish College of Education Leadership in relation to their projects on school leadership education and CPD programmes, b) with the University of Teacher Education, Zug in relation to their research projects on school leadership and health, and c) with Prof. Mac Beath’s work and the impact it has had in putting school leadership as a priority area in the policy agendas on educational reforms. Planning future activities The PLA provided a forum for discussing aspects of EPNoSL’s sustainability and future activities. On the one hand, EPNoSL partners had the opportunity to discuss and take decisions on particular sustainability initiatives that will be undertaken from August 2015 onwards (s=these are detailed in D5.3 http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/deliverable/epnosl-sustainability-plan). On the other hand, the local networking that took place during the Heraklion PLA, gave rise to further cooperation of EPNoSL with other institutional partners, such as the SCEL and the University of Teacher Education, Zug and opened up the possibility of EPNoSL’s participation in future school leadership events that will be organised by these institutions.
Page 44 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Theme 1 – EPNoSL’s contribution to the promotion of the school leadership policy agenda The opening of the Heraklion PLA intended to provide all participants with a brief overview of the key achievements of the EPNoSL project. Michael’s Schratz keynote address was an attempt to highlight these achievements and at the same time integrate within broader developments in the area of school leadership. Schratz emphasised the main task of the network as, “The promotion of school leadership for equity and learning”, by • • •
Addressing the wide divergences amongst European education systems; Providing a coherent and comprehensive framework for policy development; Adopting a participatory model, ensuring the active engagement of school leadership stakeholders in the network's activities.
He then summarised the major outcomes of the work performed by EPNoSL partners in terms of:
Networking at European, national, and local levels The production of case studies on good policy practices The development of the EPNoSL school leadership toolkit The drafting of context-specific school leadership action plans
Schratz argued that although policy cultures are different from country to country, striving for excellence and equity is the common ground of reforms almost everywhere: Because equity cannot be prescribed and learning is not visible, reform interventions involve manifold voices between policy and practice. EPNoSL has created European, national and regional networks giving stakeholders a voice to enhance capacity building. However, in a rapidly changing world, the greater a system’s complexity is, the more critical is the capacity to operate from the deeper fields of social emergence. We need to look for leadership which allows different stakeholders to see and act from the emerging whole by collectively sensing, shaping, and creating our future.
Page 45 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Theme 2: International perspectives The Heraklion PLA intended to link the work being done by EPNoSL to selected international perspectives in the area of school leadership policy and practice. This was made possible via the inclusion of three keynote addresses that touched upon different facets of international developments. Stephan Huber, from the University of Teacher Education Zug, reported on recent research projects undertaken by his research team, focusing on school leadership practices, school leadership health and helpful ways of self-assessment and coaching. His presentation analysed what activities 5394 school leaders like, and what they experience as strain. Secondly, it showed what they actually do by analyzing 4430 diaries of school leaders. Thirdly, it demonstrated the impact of individual and institutional factors on the health of school leaders which is operationalised in this study in terms of the job satisfaction, general job strain, and emotional exhaustion as well as of specific job strains (caused by specific leadership activities). It focuses on the predictors of job satisfaction, general job strain and emotional exhaustion based on regression analyses and path modeling with SEM. Additionally, it reported on the size of risk groups using cluster analysis and LCA. Moreover, qualitative in-depth studies contrast two different groups of school leaders. Finally, strategies to support school leaders were presented, particularly focusing on the impact of self-assessment and coaching. The presentation by John Mac Beath, from the University of Cambridge, attempted to problematize the concept of the school leader. Hos presentation reflected on the question of how much of our discourse on leadership is framed by latent images of the ‘big leader’? How much of the leadership literature refers to individuals at the apex of their organisations? This presentation will examine some of the popular images of leadership and consider how these may constrain the exercise of leadership by teachers and students, asking what opportunities might there be for a more distributive, or shared leadership? The presentation will draw on Hofstede’s six dimensions of culture to explore conceptions of leadership in different countries, how these play out in school and classroom practice and how things might be different.
Finally, the discussions on international developments turned to the Scottish case in relation to the professional development of school leaders. John Daffurn and James Helbert, from the Scottish College for Educational Leadership – SCEL, analysed the programmes of far reaching reform following the Donaldson Review of initial and continuing teacher education, Teaching Scotland’s Future (Donaldson 2011). A significant element of this programme is leadership development across a teacher’s career. There is a systems needs to build both leadership capability required to fulfil policy aspirations around school improvement as well as ensure succession planning to secure enough teachers aspiring to management roles, particularly headship. The final recommendation of the Donaldson Report (2011, p. 101) was the establishment of a college for educational leadership to support leadership development at all levels in Scottish Education. This was in part a response to longstanding concerns about issues related to access and quality assurance in leadership development opportunities available to teachers in different parts of Scotland. Since then, work has been undertaken to scope out and establish the Scottish College for Educational Leadership (SCEL). SCEL’s current developments include the revision of the Framework for Educational Leadership, a review of existing provision for the Standard for Headship and the introduction of a Fellowship programme for experienced Headteachers with a key focus on system level leadership.
Page 46 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Theme 3 – Equity and learning as critical educational goals The PLA included a dedicated panel session that reflected on how an “improved school leadership” might become a solution to the problem/challenge of equity and learning and open up a discussion on the policy problems/challenges for attaining equity and learning in relation to different national or regional educational contexts. In this session, representatives from ministries of education, capacity-building organisations, practitioners, and researchers had the opportunity to assess the framework for policy development that was adopted by EPNoSL in the past two years of implementation. The EPNoSL project specifically focuses on school leadership from the perspective of equity and learning. This implies that the EPNoSL project considers these as the most critical challenges leadership in European schools has to address effectively. The EPNoSL project builds upon the conceptual framework defined by the OECD report “No More Failures” which suggests that equity in education can be understood through two closely intertwined dimensions: fairness and inclusion. Fairness implies ensuring that personal and social circumstances, such as gender, socio-economic status, cultural background or ethnic origin, should not be an obstacle to students to achieve to the best of their educational potential. Inclusion implies ensuring a basic minimum standard of education for all. The perspective of learning in school leadership does not only refer to students’ experiences in the school but also to professional learning experiences of the professionals involved in the arena of schooling. Since learning is not a visible process, it cannot be observed or measured. In this sense, learning is always about something we do not know (yet). Tests both on the micro level (classroom) and macro level (system, i.e., PISA) do not assess learning as such, but only its results. Therefore, student achievement results only show how students respond to certain test items and do not mirror a student’s capacity for learning. Learning is characterised by a high interconnectedness between cognitive, emotional and action processes and, as such, is a total human experience The panel session concluded that the inclusion of equity as an integral part of EPNoSL’s work is one of most important contributions of the network to the policy agenda on school leadership. The session noted how this contribution has already found its ay not only to policy discourse, but also in the preparation of professional development programs for school leaders – here, the example of Malta was discussed in length.
Page 47 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Theme 4- Networking for school leadership policy development Since the main mandate of EPNoSL was to pursue networking activities, the Heraklion PLA attempted to undertake an overall assessment of how well has the network fared in this respect. A dedicated panel session was organised with the objective of facilitating dialogue on school leadership between different stakeholders across Europe, one of EPNoSL’s key activities lies in fostering networking both at the international and the national level. The panel session on networking presented some of the approaches the different European partners adopted. Panellists – representing the perspectives of different stakeholders: researchers, practitioners, trainers and policy-makers – discussed the strategies, the outcomes and benefits of networking with regards to school leadership policy development from their particular point of view and will share the challenges they faced. Besides the specific experience of some countries (Portugal, Lithuania, UK – Scotland, Belgium – Flanders), the session reflected on European level networking through the viewpoint of a European organisation (EFEE) and with the help of the EPNoSL evaluation outcomes. In particular, this session highlighted the networking approaches, which stand out in terms of their impact on national stakeholders or the new method of building networks in the area of school leadership. One of the specific approaches was presented by Lithuania. Besides organising regular informational campaigns via the University’s web pages, delivering booklets and EPNoSL materials, and communicating directly by e-mail or phone, a so called “Continuing Innovative Conference” on the “Importance of Leadership for the Improvement of the Education Process” was organised in a blended learning methodology by linking EPNoSL VIP events with individual and group work. The Lithuanian partner organised a learning group involving school leaders, teachers, ministry officials, heads of department of higher education institutions and project coordinators and invited them to face- to-face meetings that were structured in 6 events linked to EPNoSL VIP events. The objective of this activity was to “transfer EPNoSL knowledge into national context and encourage rethinking the existing educational policy and practice for equity and learning. ” The thematic focus overlapped with main EPNoSL themes such as “Policy Response”, “Distributed Leadership”, “Capacity Building”, “Autonomy and Stakeholders’ Cooperation”, “Accountability”. The participants expressed a high level of satisfaction about the opportunity to be part of VIP events and receiving first-hand information about latest EPNoSL findings and European trends in education and to have the possibility to bring in their own ideas and experience and work together on the spot. A general conclusion was that participants became motivate d looking forward to “further learning, participation, involvement and change. ” Another interesting example was provided by Portugal. The Portuguese network didn't expand significantly in the last period of the project but they tried to consolidate the work developed in previous years. There was a strong cooperation with the Heads of Teachers' Training Centres and also with the Ministry of Education and Science, which became a project partner for 2014 - 2015. The main focus of activities was the organization of specific conferences, workshops and seminars for school heads and middle leaders, teachers and mentor teachers “having in mind their functional and individual needs as school leaders, according to their specific areas of responsibility. The Ministry (MEC) has actively participated and contributed to the events, contributing significantly to the consolidation of school staff knowledge and good practices in Portugal. In Belgium (Flanders) network activities have focused on using EPNoSL as leverage to initiate activities and provide tools to “put school leadership into the picture”. The formulation of this network required very good lobbying capacities and as a result the maintenance and the operations are also easier. The possible danger of top down organised networks is that it could be ambiguous after a while who is informing and influencing whom.
Page 48 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The European Trade Union Committee for Education (ETUCE), the European Federation of Education Employers (EFEE) and the Secondary Education Council of the Netherlands (VO-raad) also implemented active networking activities in the project. During the past two years these organisations have been examining in their joint project the role of social dialogue and social partners in efficient school leadership. The three partners organised Peer Learning Visits to the Netherlands, Malta and United Kingdom and a final conference was held in November 2014 with 50 participants as well. These events enabled ETUCE and EFFEE members to exchange best practices and experiences on “Professional autonomy, accountability and efficient school leadership”. The partners used this platform to inform their members about the results of the European Policy Network on School Leadership, particularly on the Policy Toolkit. The main conclusion was that “the dialogue between and among teachers and school leaders, between trade unions and employers, between schools and their direct community is of utmost importance in guaranteeing good school leadership, in enhancing mutual trust and good - will and in striving for education quality. ”
Page 49 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Theme 5 – The EPNoSL School Leadership Toolkit The School Leadership Toolkit is designed to provide policy makers, school authorities, schools, researchers and teacher training institutes with the tools to reflect upon, identify challenges and prioritize areas for policy action to support and enhance school leadership for equity and learning. Furthermore, the School Leadership Toolkit is designed to support analyses of the ways different school leadership policies and programs interplay and influence the overall capacity of school leaders and their schools to effectively and persistently address equity and learning challenges in their schools. The Heraklion PLA was an occasion to showcase the Toolkit, but also to test its impact on an audience that was composed by a variety of school leadership stakeholders. For this reason, the PLA included parallel workshops on all of the themes that have been included in the Toolkit, as to give ample time for testing its use and relevance for stakeholders. A short conclusion of the 8 workshops that were held on the Toolkit can be found below:
Teacher Leadership for Equity and Learning (Michael Schratz, Helmuth Aigner and Silvia Krenn - University of Innsbruck, Austria) After describing the background of the toolset, teacher leadership was defined: Teacher leaders are highly effective teachers who accept responsibility beyond classroom instruction for a task or a function which contributes to quality development for equity and learning at their schools. Twenty-six participants took part and discussed the 6 tools of the toolset according to the questions which were offered to them. The main results of the intensive discussions are:
The toolset is relevant, if it is linked with equity and learning. It has application on various levels, depending on the context of more formal or more informal hierarchy. Important are self-reflection and attitude of teacher leaders, especially within change and resistance. Challenge, support and balance must be recognised. Teacher leaders should involve all stakeholders and dialogue, establish teamwork and communication for inclusion in P(rofessional)-Groups. Soft-skills are necessary. School leaders should take the initiative, involve all key stakeholders from the beginning, inspire and get an example. School improvement needs 4Cs: communication, co-ordination, co-operation and collective responsibility. A helicopter-perspective is necessary to get a shared view and shared aims, to lead the change process by reflection, implementation and evaluation. Policy makers can be convinced, if you exchange good practice, connect teacher leadership to policy issues and involve unions and make use of data from science.
Educating School Leaders for Equity and Learning (Michael Schratz, Helmuth Aigner and Silvia Krenn - University of Innsbruck, Austria) The workshop started with the philosophy behind the toolkit and gave an overview to the toolset on the website of EPNoSL. Details of the Central Five – The Building Blocks of a Competency Framework - were discussed in working groups: Leading and managing self, others, institution, change and teaching for equity and learning. The engaged discussions were held on a high energy level.
Page 50 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) In general the 22 participants found the toolset with its five tools inspiring and helpful for school leaders, school leadership teams, policy makers and trainers. It can give orientation for professional development, educational institutions and education programmes, it may organise discourse and it supports self-reflection and self-evaluation. All relevant descriptors are included, but good practice examples for the key descriptors could be added to get an idea on how the descriptors can look like in reality. The relevance and the benefits for equity and learning were difficult to keep in mind.
Distributed Leadership for Equity and Learning (Amanda Roberts and Philip Woods - University of Hertfordshire, UK) We were pleased to welcome 20 participants in the workshop, from 13 countries, representing ministries, schools, universities and other agencies. The foundations of the toolset for distributed leadership for equity and learning (DLE) were presented: in research over several years on democratic and distributed leadership and in experience in teacher and student leadership development, as well as the discussions and sharing of experience and research within EPNoSL. The importance of ‘deepening’ distributed leadership was explained and how this led to the detailed conceptualisation of DLE which provides the structure for the toolset. It was emphasised that developing DLE is not only about developing (positional and non-positional) leaders but also requires organisational change. Having outlined the key levers of change as presented in the toolset, participants worked in groups on selected tools from the toolset. Generally participants found the tools interesting and useful as starting points for dialogue where policymakers and/or school practitioners were wanting to develop or enhance DLE. Points raised through discussion included:
the need to be sensitive to context (national, regional and local) in applying and adapting DLE the absence in the toolset of discussion about power and power relationships (though addressing these is implicit to the focus on equity and inclusiveness in the toolset) the need to make explicit the implications for the role of headteacher or principal in a school that applies DLE (as it was felt that in much of the literature and work on distributed leadership the role of the headteacher is invisible) the importance of passion and inspiration if a school is to develop DLE (because it is much easier to stay within the norm of conventional hierarchical leadership). the importance of recognising that DLE is not only about how the school works on the inside, but also how it works outwardly in its relationships with parents and the community the value of having further, more detailed, concrete examples of the development and practice of DLE which would be of great help to policy-makers and others.
It was clear also that greater elaboration of the ideas in the toolset would be helpful to those who wanted to use the toolset.
Policy Assessment for Equity and Learning (Andreas Kollias, Anna Anastasopoulou and Pavlos Hatzopoulos - IACM, FORTH) In our workshop 9 people participated, among them 5 policy makers, 3 academics/researchers and 1 headteacher coming from Greece, Malta, Lithuania, Estonia, Slovakia, and Ireland. During the workshop participants were engaged in group work based on a scenario of policy development and assessment. The main conclusion of the workshop was that different types of schools and schools with Page 51 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) different student intake (e.g. with a high proportion of students from disadvantaged backgrounds as compared to schools with students from privileged backgrounds, rural area schools vs inner city, etc) may have different perspectives and, more importantly, priorities on any given or planned nation-wide school policy affecting school leadership (e.g. whole school evaluation). While there is ample room for reaching a common policy ground for all types of schools and student populations, policy planning should be context sensitive so as to ensure that the policy aims, the criteria, the stakeholders involved, the methodologies and the data used in the design, implementation and assessment of a policy are relevant and responsive to the needs of different schools. What was further discussed was that the policy assessment toolset should be further developed to provide alternative scenarios and guidance on policy assessment for policies implemented in different types of schools and schools with different student populations.
Promoting Stakeholder Collaboration for Equity and Learning (Carmo Climaco and Ana Paula Silva - Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Portugal) The workshop was developed in three parts: 1) a brief presentation of the tool set 2) small work groups (4) discussion the questions of the tool for fostering stakeholders collaboration 3) a plenary session where the small groups representatives presented their thoughts, followed by discussion among the all group It seems like the tool set is appropriated to foster discussion on stakeholders’ collaboration, though people pointed out that a word was missing in the tool set: "communication" "instead of too much information". And when I asked the participants if they would have any question to add in the tool set, they suggested two more questions: 1. What is needed to be done to empower each stakeholder/partner group for collaboration? 2. What power relations need to be taken into account to have true and meaningful involvement and collaboration? In the end we came out with a statement: "For fostering successful stakeholders collaboration we must start with seeing them as partners with their own potential and responsibilities that need to be empowered/developed, for which we have to improve communication, be aware of power relationships and together prioritise values to pursue social justice (equity and learning)."
School Accountability for Equity and Learning (Jonas Höög and Olof Johansson -Umeå University, Sweden) The 4 tools for assessing accountability displayed on the online platform and in the book publication were presented and discussed. Representatives from 5 countries and EU were participating. They showed great interest in the topic and analysis and discussions of the different tools were lengthy. The first tool about social and civic objectives based on the curricula was considered as very important. Presentations from the participants showed differences between countries concerning the spread of this type of tool but no country has a comprehensive system for assessing accountability in this respect and there are now developed standardised ways to do that. This should be something for EPNoSL to engage in. The assessment of relations between pass and marks in schools is something none besides Sweden has data to compute. The Page 52 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) issue of schools with different focus, either high marks or high percentage that pass exam was perceived as important in relation to the character of school leadership and the necessity for leaders to keep focus on both targets. Also assessing the effect of social background on school results was discussed in relation to equity and all countries develop ways to achieve this task. The topic that aroused some agitation was that about inflated marks. Sweden has a system to calculate the difference between marks the students get in their leaving certificate and the results they had on the national tests but no other country have that. The arguments presented against these comparisons meant that marks are something completely different than results of a test because the situations are so different and a lot more information about the students’ performance is taken into consideration in the given marks. Anyway, the workshop leader concluded that although there’s a discussion about this also in Sweden the National agency in its database SIRIS publish the data and the school inspection expects use the data in their systematic quality assessment. As final information on the Swedish standpoint in this accountability errand the Agency has asked the Principal training institutions to make a bid on conducting a study of principals’ knowledge in the field of assessment and how the principals lead this important part of school work where the issue of equity is on its edge.
School Autonomy for Equity and Learning (Lejf Moos - Aarhus University, Denmark) This is the summary conclusion from this workshop: We need to be very aware of the balances and the imbalances between autonomy (understood as the OECD top-down governance) and autonomy (understood in the traditional way as self steering). In order to do so we should look at the what (issues that are delegated) and the how (the form of power used), but of course also the why (should authority be devolved?), the when and who and when. Workshop participants discerned and discussed the following key question: - What kind of school autonomy? School autonomy policies for equity and learning should specify: what decision-making areas school autonomy should be widened (or even narrowed down), for what purposes is autonomy granted, and what should be the appropriate mechanisms (accountability systems, overarching frameworks, standards) through which school autonomy can be controlled or counterbalanced. - While they also raised the issue of how ”more autonomy demands targeted professional development initiatives”. Among the implications of policies that widen school autonomy is that the work of school leaders becomes more demanding and complex. Therefore, reforms that introduce more decision-making powers at school level should be accompanied by targeted professional development opportunities for school leaders and changes in the curricula of programmes that prepare future school leaders.
Policy Response for Equity and Learning (Carl Bagley – Durham University, UK) The workshop was organised around a discussion of the Policy Response Animation. Participants were called to identify particular barriers to policy implementation that are present in their won national/local contexts. They were then asked to think of concrete solutions to the barriers that were mentioned, solutions that are Page 53 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) based on using available community resources and the creativity of practitioners. Through this excercide, the workshop concluded that:
policy implementation is a creative process in which school leaders draw upon their professional knowledge to adapt policy to their schools’ needs, and that networks help school leaders share best practice policy implementation involves communication; ensuring policy is ‘fit for purpose’, and ensuring that all stakeholders are ‘on board’ with the policy message. When communication and participation are at the heart of policy response, creative social action appears to flourish.
Page 54 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Evaluation of the Heraklion PLA The Heraklion PLA was evaluated by the organisers based on responses from participants on a online questionnaire which included a mixture of open-end and closed-end questions. The questionnaire was distributed electronically to all PLA participants, while 3 additional reminders for filling it were sent via email. The response rate was relatively low: 32% of PLA participants responded to the evaluation questionnaire. In total, there were 123 PLA participants: • 32 from Greece • 91 from across Europe – Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and UK In total 39 participants filled in the Heraklion PLA evaluation feedback, a relatively low number. The evaluation results are compared below with those of the Nice PLA, in order to arrive at a conclusion on whether lesson learnt where applied to the organisation and implementation of the final EPNoSL PLA. PLA objectives and session assessment
Heraklion PLA participants claimed with much greater conviction that the “overall objectives of the PLA were clear to them” and that the PLA sessions “were relevant” towards meeting these objectives. (On a scale of 0 to 6, the average rating of responses was 5,1/6 and 4,9/6 on these two questions)
The participants’ assessment of PLA objectives and sessions rose in comparison to the Nice PLA to 12% for the first and 17% for the second question.
PLA presentations and time for discussion
PLA participants considered that, to a much great extent than the Nice PLA, “the presentations provided deep insights“, while there did not seem to be satisfied with the time that was left for discussions. (On a scale of 0 to 6, the average rating of responses was 4,9 4,13/6 and 4,77 3,32/6 on these two questions)
The participants’ assessment of PLA presentations and of the time left for discussions rose in comparison to the Nice PLA to 19% for the first and 44% for the second question.
Knowledge and understanding of school leadership
Respondents felt far more strongly that their “knowledge and understanding of school leadership” considerably improved through their participation in the PLA, while they also thought that they “developed a deeper understanding of the issues and challenges that face School Leadership policy design, implementation and innovation”. Page 55 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) (On a scale of 0 to 6, the average rating of responses was 4,74/6 and 4,61/6 on these two questions) The participants’ assessment of how the PLA improved their knowledge and understanding of school leadership rose in comparison to the Nice PLA to 20% for the first and 14,6% for the second question.
Networking
In terms of its networking effects, PLA participants were unequivocally satisfied with the event as a space “for exchange of different views and perspectives on School Leadership”, with how the event helped them “to establish useful new professional relationships”, and with the “mix of different types of SL stakeholders”. (On a scale of 0 to 6, the average rating of responses was 5,05/6, 4,73/6, and 4,85/5 on these three questions, respectively)
The participants’ assessment of the networking opportunities that were provided by the PLA rose in comparison to the Nice PLA to 0,02% for the first, 0,017% for the second, and 0,012% for the third question.
PLA organisation
PLA participants gave very positive feedback on all organisational aspects of the PLA, and commended this time around the suitability of the choice of venue. (On a scale of 0 to 6, the overwhelming majority of 5,28/6 thought that the venue “was well suited and practical for the PLA“).
The participants’ assessment of the choice of venue for the PLA improved in comparison to the Nice PLA by 33%.
Overall assessment
In sum, PLA participants responded that they overwhelmingly “liked/enjoyed the Nice PLA event” and expressed a strong interest in “attending future events organised by EPNoSL”. (On a scale of 0 to 6, the average rating of responses was 5,18 4,81/5 and 5,15 5,1/6 on these two questions)
The participants’ overall enjoyment of the PLA and their willingness to participate in future similar activities rose in comparison to the Nice PLA by 0,08% for the first and 0,01% for the second question. The open ended questions confirmed the overwhelmingly positive assessment of the Heraklion PLA in all its aspects: the networking effects of the PLA, the content of all the sessions, the general objectives set by the organisers, and its effective organization. This brief comparative analysis of he Heraklion PLA in relation to the previous event in Nice shows reflects the growing level of maturity of the EPNoSL project. This maturity can be seen in the significantly more Page 56 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) positive evaluation that the Heraklion PLA enjoyed, proving also the increasing re;evince that EPNoSL outputs and events have had to a variety of school stakeholders across European states.
Page 57 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Section III – The EPNoSL PLAs: Progress made towards school leadership policy development
Page 58 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Progress made in relation to networking The PLAs constituted the central nodes of EPNoSL’s networking activities. It is clear from the evaluations of the Nice and Heraklion PLAs that participants found these events to be conduce to formal and informal networking opportunities, while they were also seen as extremely useful for establishing new professional developments. Beyond their function as networking milieus, the PLAs played a critical role in the achievement of two of the most important networking goals set by the EPNoSL project.
Networking at high policy level First, the PLAs became increasingly the forum where EPNoSL could network with representatives from Ministries of Education of European countries. This was overview of the progress On the one hand, this effect that the PLAs have had, brought new members to the project consortium. The inclusion of the Ministries of Education of Portugal, Malta, and Slovenia in the project consortium and their active involvement in EPNoSL’s work was a result of their participation in the Vilnius PLA in November 2013. On the other hand, this development ensured the disseminating knowledge and raising the awareness of policy makers for School Leadership policy development beyond the limits of the project consortium. - Ten Ministries of Education that are not full members of the EPNoSL consortium sent representatives to attend the EPNoSL Nice and Heraklion PLAs. The additional Ministries that were present in Nice and Heraklion included: 1. Ireland – Ministry of Education and Skills 2. Romania – Ministry of Education and Scientific Research 3. Norway – Ministry of Education and Research 4. Northern Ireland – Department of Education 5. Hungary – Ministry of Human Resources, directorate for Education 6. Cyprus – Ministry of Education and Culture 7. Germany (Schleswig-Holstein) - Ministry for Education and Science 8. Bulgaria - Ministry of Education and Science 9. Germany (Baden-Württemberg), Ministry of Education 10. Lithuania - Ministry of Education and Science
Development of regional/national/local networks Since the Vilnius PLA that was held in November 2013, all the next events included a national/regional/ local dimension in the rationale of their organisation. The effort of the organisers was to utilise the organisation of the PLAs as a driving force for setting up or pushing further regional/national/local networks on school leadership. All PLAs since Vilnius have been quite effective in this respect. The Vilnius PLA gave the impetus for: the establishment of a regional Baltic network on school leadership (with the participation of the Latvian, Lithuanian, and Estonian EPNoSL partners). This regional Balitc network collaborated in the
Page 59 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
further organisation of workshops and professional development events and coordinatedthe preparation of school leadership action plans for the three countries. establishing closer connections between the national Lithuanian network with the national Ministry of Education, and thus helping the Lithuanian network to plan a new national networking strategy that was implemented during the past two years and which was deemed possibly the most successful in terms of reach and creative engagement of school leadership stakeholders.
The Rome PLA contributed to: the development of a much more active Italian national network on school leadership, which produced a case study on student leadership that was based on original fieldwork and an special website feuaturing translated EPNoSL outputs. further cooperation between South European networks (Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece), which resulted in a common publication of a special issue journal on school leadership policy developments in Southern Europe. The Nice PLA was the driving force for: Connecting EPNoSL to French developments in the area of school leadership policy development, which culminated in a face-to-face meeting with Ministry advisors in Paris. Establishing a national network on school leadership, which was significant in that it stressed the importance of looking at educational innovations at local levels. The Heraklion PLA was significant in: Bringing together the Greek network and connecting it with local networks in the region of Crete and also allowing for the organisation of a dedicated policy workshop in preparation for the national school leadership action plan Allowing the meeting of the other regional networks on school leadership to decide on the organisation future activities beyond the EPNoSL current funding period. As an outcome of these deliberations, two regional events have been planned (one in Estonia and one in Lisbon).
Progress made in relation to EPNoSL’s work on school leadership policy development The Nice and Heraklion PLAs were key moments in the process of developing EPNoSL’s key outputs on school leadership policy development: namely, the EPNoSL School Leadership Toolkit, the School Leadership Action Plans, and the Case Studies on Good Policy Practices. In particular the PLAs shaped the production of these outputs in the following ways:
PLA sessions became open work spaces for collaboration amongst EPNoSL partners on finding common grounds and processes for developing policy tools, case studies and action plans. PLA sessions became test grounds for draft versions of policy tools, case studies, and action plans, benefiting from the comments and contributions of school leadership stakeholders (policy makers at all levels of governance, educational leaders (including school principals and head teachers, and teacher educators), researchers, representatives of professional associations, parents, students,), coming from most European countries. PLA sessions became occasions for consolidating and validating the already tested and revised policy tools, case studies, and action plans, benefiting from the wide presence of school leadership stakeholders from most European countries. Page 60 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
PLA sessions became sites, where the finalised EPNoSL rerources where put into practice and where new ideas for their further use and exploitation emerged.
In sum, the extensive character of the EPNoSL consortium posed the serious challenge of ensuring the coherence and cohesiveness of the major EPNoSL policy outputs, without compromising the place-based nature of the EPNoSL approach to school leadership policy development. The PLAs were key tools for addressing this challenge, ensuring on the one hand, the openness of this process of collaborative work, and systematising, on other, the production of this set of school leadership resources.
Progress made in relation to promoting the school leadership policy agenda The PLAs were, finally, critical in the efforts of the EPNoSL consortium for the promotion of the school leadership policy agenda. Beyond their impact on disseminating EPNoSL’s work on the promotion of this policy agenda and of their networking impact, the PLAs allowed for the development of a common EPNoSL framework on school leadership policy development. In comparison to similar events of the second period of implementation, the Nice and Heraklion PLAs illustrated the work that the network has been doing in developing this common framework and more importantly of integrating it in all the facets of its work. In this respect, the PLAs contributed to the systematisation of EPNoSL’s approach on the school leadership policy agenda and allowed the Network to network with school leadership stakeholders with a common voice, using a coherent and comprehensive policy relevant discourse. Concretely, the Vilnius PLA was crucial for connecting EPNoSL’s work with the notion of school leadership for equity and learning. Equity and learning achievement were then dealt throughout the rest of EPNoSL’s work as the most critical challenges leaders in European schools are faced with in everyday school life. Despite differences in the ways school systems are structured and in the legislative frameworks under which schools operate in Europe, the common ground upon which the education of our children is rooted is composed by:
the ideals of fairness and inclusion for all, irrespective of their race, nationality and gender, their economic, social or cultural background, their sexual orientation or health condition, and a strong commitment in supporting children learn and develop to the best of their abilities.
In the Nice PLA, the work of EPNoSL on school leadership policy development was directed towards the adoption of three central policy goals:
The promotion of an enabling school leadership environment for equity and learning The promotion of school leadership capacity building for equity and learning The promotion of policy evaluation research on school leadership for equity and learning
All the policy work that was undertaken, thereafter, focused on these three goals via a variety of approaches; in terms of developing policy tools, case studies on good policy practices, and action plans. In particular the main themes that were linked to addressing the first policy goal were: a) school autonomy, b) distributed leadership, and c) school accountability. For tackling the second policy goal, two main themes Page 61 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) were discerned: a) the establishment and/or upgrading of the school leaders’ system of initial education and training and b) the promotion of continuing professional development on school leadership for equity and learning. The third goal was approached through two themes: a) research for policy planning and b) research for policy implementation. The Heraklion PLA was the occasion were all the different outputs comprising EPNoSL’s contribution to school leadership policy development came together. What became evident in the Heraklion PLA session, was the cohesiveness of these outputs; in these respect, this process has allowed for the production of a set of outputs that are ready to use by stakeholders for policy and/or educational purposes.
Page 62 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Annex 1: Nice PLA Materials
Page 63 of 88
Participants Peer Learning Activity (PLA): Positioning School Leadership in the Agenda for School Reforms 25-26 September 2014 Nice, France Organisation
First Name
Last name
Employement
European Commission
João
Delgado
Head of Unit, DG for Education and Culture Joao.Delgado@ec.europa.eu School Education; Erasmus+
OECD
David
Istance
Academic/Researcher
Association EFEE
EPA
First Name
Last name
Country
Employement
Bianka
Stege
European social partner-Education Employer organisation
bianka.stege@educationemployers.eu
Nelly
Guet
Head teacher, NGO / Capacity building organisation representative
nellyguet@yahoo.com
Peter
Kollár
NGO / Capacity building organisation representative
Kolpika500@gmail.com
Eszter
Salamon
NGO / Capacity building organisation representative
salamoneszt@gmail.com
Ton
Duif
president ESHA
t.duif@avs.nl
Chris
Harrison
NGO / Capacity building organisation representative, Vice President
chris@oultonbroad.eu
Paola
Cammilli
Policy maker
paola.cammilli@csee-etuce.org
ESHA ETUCE-CSEE
David.ISTANCE@oecd.org
Organisation
Austria
University Innsbruck
Belgium
Flemish Community – Department of Education & Training
First Name
Last name
Employement
Helmuth
Aigner
Head teacher
ha.tyrol@gmail.com
Silvia
Krenn
Academic/Researcher
silvia.krenn@ph-tirol.ac.at
Katrijn
Ballet
Policy maker
Katrijn.ballet@ond.vlaanderen.be
Hilde
Lesage
Policy maker
hilde.lesage@ond.vlaanderen.be
Marc
Leunis
Policy maker
marc.leunis@telenet.be
Cyprus
Ministry of Education & Culture
Ioannis
Savvides
Policy maker
ioansav@gmail.com
Denmark
DPU
Lejf
Moos
Academic/Researcher
moos@edu.au.dk
Integration Migration
Jana
Tondi
Policy maker
jana.tondi@gmail.com 64
Country
Organisation
First Name
Last name
Employement
Foundation Your People Estonia
Finland
France
Ministry of Education and Research
Triin
Noorkõiv
Policy maker
triin.noorkoiv@hm.ee
University of Tartu
Hasso
Kukemelk
Academic/Researcher
hasso.kukemelk@ut.ee
University of Jyväskylä
Mika
Risku
Academic/Researcher
mika.risku@jyu.fi
University of Tampere
Eeva
Hujala
Academic/Researcher
eeva.hujala@uta.fi
Ecole Normale Supérieure
Jean-Louis
Derouet
Academic/Researcher
jeanlouis.derouet@ens-lyon.fr
SNPDEN UNSA
Alain
Dani
Head teacher
alain.dani@ac-nice.fr
SNPDEN
Jacques
Bacquet
Head teacher
jacques.bacquet@ac-nice.fr
University of Strasbourg
Romuald
Normand
Academic/Researcher
rnormand@unistra.fr
Bernd
Jankofsky
Education for Schoolleaders
bernd.jankofsky@lisum.berlinbrandenburg.de
Steffi
Dr. Missal
Policy maker, Education for Schoolleaders
steffi.missal@lisum.berlin-brandenburg.de
Gerhild
Rehberg
Policy maker, Education for Inspectors
gerhild.rehberg@lisum.berlinbrandenburg.de
Dr. Thomas
Riecke-Baulecke
Policy maker
dr.riecke@wtnet.de
Wolfgang
Meyer
Academic/Researcher
wakmeyer@t-online.de
Jens
Bolhöfer
Policy maker
jens.bolhoefer@mk.niedersachsen.de
Iris
Jansohn
NGO / Capacity building organisation representative
i.jansohn@web.de
Kathy
Kikis-Papadakis
Academic/Researcher, Capacity building organisation
katerina@iacm.forth.gr
Pavlos
Hatzopoulos
Academic/Researcher
phatzopoulos@gmail.com
Andreas
Kollias
Academic/Researcher
an_kollias@yahoo.gr
Renia
Papanastasiou
Academic/Researcher
renia@iacm.forth.gr
Lampros
Karageorgos
Academic/Researcher
lampros.karageorgos@gmail.com
Vassilis
Kourbetis
Policy maker
vk@iep.edu.gr
Μaria
Gelastopoulou
Policy researcher
gelm@iep.edu.gr
Anna
Spanaki
Policy researcher
aspan@iep.edu.gr
Emmanouil
Kontogiannakis
Head teacher
ekontogiann@yahoo.gr
Thaisz
Policy maker
miklos.thaisz@emmi.gov.hu
LISUM Germany Ministry / State Institut
NLQ
FΟRΤΗ/IACM Greece
IEP Palekastro Primary School
Ministry of Human Resources,Miklós
65
Country
Organisation
First Name
Last name
Employement
Secretariat of Education Hungary Nora
Revai
NGO / Capacity building organisation representative
nora.revai@tpf.hu
AdĂŠl
Csernovitz
Project coordinator
adel.csernovitz@tpf.hu
Education Ministry
Eddie
Ward
Policy maker
eddie_ward@education.gov.ie
Department of Education and Skills
Deirdre
Mathews
Policy maker
deirdre_mathews@education.gov.ie
University College Dublin
Gerry
Mac Ruairc
Academic/Researcher
gerry.macruairc@ucd.ie
Zoller
Head teacher
laura.zoller12@gmail.com
Tempus Public Foundation
Ireland
Istituto Tecnico Tecnologico "G. Marconi" -Rovereto Trento Laura Italy
Latvia
Ministry of Education
Giovanna
Barzano
Policy maker
dott.giovanna.barzano@gmail.com
School
Loredana
Matarrese
Teacher
lorimata13@yahoo.it
Giovanni
Moretti
Academic/Researcher
giovanni.moretti@uniroma3.it
University of Roma Tre
Arianna
Morini
Academic/Researcher
ari.morini@hotmail.com
National Centre for Education
Guntra
Kaufmane
Policy implementer
guntra.kaufmane@visc.gov.lv
Inta
Baranovska
Policy implementer
inta.baranovska@visc.gov.lv
Centre for School Improvement
Egle
Pranckuniene
NGO / Capacity building organisation representative
egle@mtc.lt
Marina
Vildziuniene
NGO / Capacity building organisation representative
marina@mtc.lt
Algimantas
Sventickas
Academic/Researcher
Algimantas.sventickas@leu.lt
Danguole
BylaiteSalavejiene
Academic/Researcher
danguole.salavejiene@leu.lt
Lithuania LEU PKTI
Salvina
Muscat
Ministry Advisor
salvina.muscat@gov.mt
Ministry of Education and Employment
John-Peter
Portelli
Academic/Researcher, Policy maker
john.portelli@utoronto.ca
Netherlands
NSO
Huub
Friederichs
NGO / Capacity building organisation representative
h.friederichs@ijzee.nl
Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training
Terje Kato
Stangeland
Policy maker
Norway
Per
Tronsmo
Policy maker
ptr@udir.no
Poland
Educational Research Institute
Tomasz
Kasprzak
Academic/Researcher
t.kasprzak@ibe.edu.pl
FPCEUP
Elisabete
Ferreira
Academic/Researcher
elisabete@fpce.up.pt
Malta
terje.kato.stangeland@utdanningsdirektoratet.no
66
Country
Organisation Ministry of Education and Science
First Name José
Last name
Policy maker
jose.diogo@mec.gov.pt
Ana Paula
Silva
Academic/Researcher, NGO / Capacity building organisation representative, Teachers trainer/educator
profa.ap.silva@gmail.com
Carmo
Climaco
Academic/Researcher, retired
carmo.climaco@mail.telepac.pt
Ministry of National Education
Megdonia
Paunescu
Policy maker
megdonia@gmail.com
Ministry of Education, Science and Sport
Aleš
Ojsteršek
Policy maker
Ales.ojstersek@gov.si
Vlasta
Poličnik
Acting Director
vlasta.policnik@solazaravnatelje.si
Peter
Markič
Academic/Researcher
peter.markic@solazaravnatelje.si
Majda
Cencič
Academic/Researcher
majda.cencic@guest.arnes.si
Žilina Self-Governing Region Dana
Mažgútová
Policy maker
dana.mazgutova@zask.sk
University of Žilina, Faculty of Humanities
Peter
Nemec
project coordinator
peter.nemec@fhv.uniza.sk
Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports
Rodriguez Mara Noemi Fonteboa
Policy maker
mara.rodriguez@mecd.es
Centre for Principal Development
Jonas
Höög
Academic/Researcher
jonas.hoog@umu.se
Ministry of Education and Research
Kerstin
Hultgren
Policy maker
kerstin.hultgren@gov.se
Umeå University
Olof
Johansson
Academic/Researcher
olof.johansson@pol.umu.se
Department of Education – Northern Ireland
Peter
Geoghegan
Member of the Education and Training Inspectorate
peter.geoghegan@deni.gov.uk
ULHT, CeiED
Slovenia
National Institute for Leadership in Education University of Primorska, Faculty of Education
Slovakia Spain
Sweden
UK
USA
Diogo
Portugal
Romania
Employement
Carl
Bagley
Academic/Researcher
c.a.bagley@durham.ac.uk
Durham University
Sophie
Ward
Academic/Researcher
s.c.ward@durham.ac.uk
GTC Scotland
Tom
Hamilton
Policy maker
tom.hamilton@gtcs.org.uk
Philip
Woods
Academic/Researcher
profphilipwoods@aol.com
University of Hertfordshire
Amanda
Roberts
Academic/Researcher
a.roberts2@herts.ac.uk
University of Pennsylvania
Jonathan
Supovitz
Academic/Researcher
jsupovitz@gmail.com 67
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Nice PLA Announcement EPNoSL Peer Learning Activity (PLA), 25 -26 September2014 The fifth EPNoSL Peer Learning Activity (PLA) will take place in Nice, France between the 25-26 September 2014. Scope: The main aim of the PLA will be to enhance a knowledge exchange process between and within national policy makers, professionals, researchers and other School Leadership stakeholders that is transferable to the national and regional contexts. The PLA will mediate the knowledge and understandings generated by the European Policy Network on School Leadership (EPNoSL) in its first two periods of activity by developing ways of enabling co-operation between the stakeholders engaged directly or indirectly on School Leadership policy design and implementation. Outcomes: The PLA intends to promote the implementation of the priorities for the development of School Leadership and to stimulate knowledge exchange between policymakers, practitioners, researchers and other stakeholders towards enhancing school leadership for equity and learning. Specifically, the discussions in the context of the PLA will contribute to: - The validation of reflection tools for school leadership policy design and implementation - The consolidation of case studies on school leadership good practices - The development of place-relevant action plans on school leadership Target group: The target audience of the PLA consists of policy makers, educational leaders (including school principals and head teachers, and teacher educators), researchers, representatives of professional associations, parents, students, and other stakeholders.
Announcement
and
further
Nice
PLA
information:
http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/event/epnosl-pla-nice-positioning-school-leadershipagenda-school-reforms
Page 68 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Nice PLA Venues The EPNoSL Nice PLA was hosted by the Academie de Nice. The PLA was organised under the auspices of the La ministre de l'Éducation nationale, de l'Enseignement supÊrieur et de la Recherche, France. Wednesday, 24/9, pre-event venue: Apogia Hotel, Nice Thursday, 25/9: Centre International de Valbonne, Sophia Antipolis Friday 26/9: Centre International de Valbonne, Sophia Antipolis Google map (for all venues): https://mapsengine.google.com/map/edit?mid=zYky9OPJX28I.k4Sovzwjnp6U
Nice PLA Background Materials A set of background materials was uploaded on the EPNoSL portal and distributed prior to the event via email to all registered participants:
| Briefing Notes on School Leadership Policy Development | Promoting the policy agenda on school leadership from the perspective of equity and learning | Background material on regional case studies on SL good practices | External Evaluation of EPNoSL - Effectiveness and Efficiency of Work Processes | Background material on policy reflection toolsets | EPNoSL infographics on School Leadership policy development | The EPNoSL Framework for School Leadership Action Planning | EPNoSL Infographics on the benefits of School Leadership Policy Action Planning | EPNoSL infographics on the Guiding principles of School Leadership Policy Action Planning | EPNoSL Infographics on Dealing with complexities of School Leadership Policy Action Planning
Nice PLA Documentation All documentation of the Nice PLA has been uploaded to the EPNoSL portal and has been distributed via email to the PLA participants as well as to the wider community of recipients of the EPNoSL newsletter. Presentations: http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/event/page/nice/presentations Page 69 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Photo Gallery: http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/event/page/nice/photos Video recordings: http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/event/page/nice/videos
Nice PLA Programme PLA AGENDA
Wednesday, September 24th - Pre-Event for EPNoSL partners only VENUE: Apogia Hotel, Nice
15.00 – 15.45 Nice PLA Organizing Committee (OC) Meeting 16.00 – 17.00 EPNoSL Project Management Committee (PMC) Meeting 17.00 – 18.00 EPNoSL Project Meeting: PLA organizational issues / Implementation of 3rd period Work Plan
First Day - 25 September 2014 VENUE: Centre International de Valbonne, Sophia Antipolis Themes: The first day of the PLA will be devoted to reflection on the development of case studies on school leadership good practices across Europe. It will also feature a dedicated French session on school leadership policy development in France with the participation of a variety of stakeholders within the French educational system. Format: All participants meet in the plenary session for the Opening Session, Session A and Session B includes an open discussion based on the ‘world café’ method. The world café approach can be described in brief as a several small round table concurrent discussions encouraging the writing and drawing of ideas, with specific questions for each theme and table hosts that summarize rounds. In the final round, involving all participants, table hosts summarize their table highlights. Outcomes: We expect participants to engage in discussions over the consolidation of case studies on school leadership good practices that are developed by EPNoSL and also to become more aware of the challenges facing school leadership policy innovation in the French context. Page 70 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
9.00 - 9.30 Registration and Informal Networking 9:30 - 11.00 Opening of the PLA event - Kathy Kikis-Papadakis (EPNoSL coordinator) - Joao Delgado (European Commission Directorate - General for Education and Culture School Education; Erasmus+) -Representative from the French Ministry of Education (tbc) - Jonathan A. Supovitz, Leader Learning Networks in the United States (University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education) - Romuald Normand, School Leadership in France: Challenges and Perspectives for Research and Policy-Making (University of Strasbourg) Chair: Hasso Kukemelk (University of Tartu, Estonia) A. 11.00 - 13:00 Regional Case Studies on School Leadership Good Practices and the State of EPNoSL National and Regional Networking Coordinated by Nora Revai (Tempus Public Foundation, Hungary) - Presentations by Ana Paula Silva and Carmo Climaco (Universidade Lusófona, Portugal) on Southern Europe Jonas Höög (Umeå University, Sweden)on Scandinavia Silvia Krenn (University of Innsbruck) on Central Europe Tom Hamilton (General Teaching Council, Scotland) on United Kingdom Giovanna Barzano (Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca, Italy) on Italy - Presentation by Adél Csernovitz and Nora Revai (Tempus Public Foundation, Hungary) on the State of EPNoSL National and Regional Networking - Discussions in world cafe style on Lessons Learnt from Case Studies on Good Practices for SL policy design and implementation - Discussants: José Manuel de Lemos Diogo (Ministério da Educação e Ciência, Portugal), Marc Leunis (Flemish ministry of Education and Training) Page 71 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
13:00 - 14:00 Lunch
B. French session on school leadership policy development *
14:00 - 14:30 Introduction Claire Lovisi (Superintendent of the State Local Authority of Nice) Jean-Louis Derouet (Professor, Ecole Normale Supérieure of Lyon) 14:30 - 15:00 School networking and leadership: a successful local innovation Frédérique Cauchy-Bianchi, Patrice Lemoine (Regional Inspectors, State Local Authorities of Nice and Strasbourg) 15:00-15:30 Digital technologies, national networking and leadership: the case of RESPIRE François Muller (Department of Research, Development and Innovation, Ministry of Education, France) 15:30 - 15:45 Coffee Break 15:45 – 17:15 Round-Table: From school autonomy to leadership: the challenges of local governance Alain Bouvier, chair, (former superintendent and member of the High Council of Education) Jean-Marie Panazol (Head of the National College of School Administration) Claude Bisson-Vaivre (General Inspector of Education and Dean of the Group “Schools”) Yannick Tenne (General Inspector of Education, former deputy-Head of the Cabinet at the Ministry of Education) Lejf Moos (President of the European Educational Research Association)
Page 72 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) * The French session will be held in French. Simultaneous translation to English will be provided for PLA participants
20:00 Conference Dinner (for all registered PLA participants) VENUE: Galion plage
Second Day - 26 September 2014 VENUE: Centre International de Valbonne, Sophia Antipolis Themes: The second day of the PLA will be devoted to discussions on the reflection tools for policy makers and the generic action plans on school leadership that are developed by EPNoSL partners. Format: All participants meet in the plenary for Sessions C, D, E, F, G and H. Sessions F and G include open discussions based on the ‘world café’ method. The world café approach can be described in brief as a several small round table concurrent discussions encouraging the writing and drawing of ideas, with specific questions for each theme and table hosts that summarize rounds. In the final round involving all participants table hosts summarize their table highlights. Outcomes: We expect participants to engage in discussions over the development of policy reflection tools and the generic action plans and also to become more aware of recent policy initiatives for the development of school leadership policies for equity and learning.
C. 9.00 - 10.30 Keynote presentations - David Istance, Leadership in OECD's ILE Project: Frameworks and Tools (OECD, Centre for Educational Research and Innovation - CERI) - Eeva Hujala, Leadership as a pathway to quality education (Professor, Early Childhood Education, University of Tampere, Finland) Chair: Eszter Salamon (European Parents Association) 10:30 - 11:00 Coffee break
Page 73 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
D. 11.00 - 12.30 Promoting School Leadership: Policy innovation - Salvina Muscat and John Peter Portelli (Ministry for Education and Employment, Malta) - Kerstin Hultgren (Ministry of Education and Research, Sweden) - José Manuel de Lemos Diogo (Ministério da Educação e Ciência, Portugal) - Ton Duif (European School Heads Association - ESHA) - Per Tronsmo and Terje Kato Strangeland (The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training) Chair: Philip Woods
E. 12:30 - 13:00 Evaluating EPNoSL Gerry Mac Ruairc (University College Dublin) 13:00 - 14:00 Lunch F. 14:00 - 16:00 Influencing Policy: EPNoSL Reflection Tools for Policy Design and Implementation Coordinator: Andreas Kollias (IACM-FORTH) Presentations: Andreas Kollias (IACM-FORTH) on the EPNoSL Framework for Policy Toolsets Philip Woods and Amanda Roberts (University of Hertfordshire, UK) on Distributed Leadership Carl Bagley and Sophie Ward (Durham University) on Policy response Mika Risku (University of Jyväskylä, Finland), Jonas Hoog and Olof Johansson (Centre for Principal Development, UMEÅ University) on Accountability Lejf Moos (Aarhus University, Denmark) on Autonomy Helmuth Aigner (University of Innsbruck, Austria) on Capacity building Ana Paula Silva and Carmo Climaco (Universidade Lusófona, Portugal) on Stakeholders’ collaboration - Discussions in world cafe style on the EPNoSL policy reflection tools - Discussants: Ton Duif (European School Heads Association - ESHA), Kerstin Hultgren (Ministry of Education and Research, Sweden), Jens Bolhoefer (Lower Saxony Ministry of Education, Germany)
Page 74 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
16:00 - 16:15 Coffee break G. 16:15 - 18:15 Generic action plans on School Leadership Coordinated by Mika Risku ((University of Jyväskylä, Finland) Presentations by Andreas Kollias (IACM-FORTH) on the EPNoSL Framework for Action Planning Wolfgang Meyer (Niedersächsische Landesinstitut für schulische Qualitätsentwicklung - NLQ, Germany) on the Germanic context Ana Paula Silva (Universidade Lusófona, Portugal) on Southern Europe Tomasz Kasprzak (Educational Research Institute, Poland) on Eastern Europe Hasso Kukemelk (University of Tartu, Estonia) on the Baltic context - World cafe group discussion on the development of place-relevant action plans on SL policy initiatives Discussants: Giovanna Barzano (Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca, Italy), Guntra Kaufmane (National Education Centre, Latvia), Bianka Stege (European Federation of Education Employers - EFEE) H. 18:15 - 18:45 Closing: What have we learnt, How we move forward Coordinated by Kathy Kikis-Papadakis (IACM-FORTH)
Page 75 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Annex 2: Heraklion PLA Materials
Page 76 of 88
EPNoSL Peer Learning Activity (PLA) Participants School Leadership Policy Developments: The Way Forward to Support Inclusive Education in Europe 28-29 May 2015 Heraklion, Greece Organisation
First Name
Last name
Employement
European Commission
Thomas
Pritzkow
Policy maker
thomas.pritzkow@ec.europa.eu
UNESCO
Hilaire
Mputu
Policy maker
H.Mputu@unesco.org
Association EFEE
First Name
Last name
Employement
Sarah
Kik
European Social Partner
sarah.kik@educationemployers.eu
Bianka
Stege
European Social Partner in education
bianka.stege@educationemployers.eu
Nelly
Guet
Head teacher, Consultant
nellyguet@yahoo.com
Eszter
Salamon
NGO / Capacity building organisation representative
salamoneszt@gmail.com
EPA Ton
Duif
ESHA Past president
tonduif@planet.nl
ESHA
Chris
Harrison
Head teacher
chris@oultonbroad.eu
ETUCE
Dennis
Sinyolo
NGO / Capacity building organisation
dennis.sinyolo@ei-ie.org
Country
Organisation
First Name
Last name
Employement
Silvia
Krenn
Academic/Researcher
silvia.krenn@ph-tirol.ac.at
Austria
University Innsbruck
Michael
Schratz
Academic/Researcher
michael.schratz@uibk.ac.at
Belgium
Ministry of Education & Training
Katrijn
Ballet
Policy maker
Katrijn.ballet@ond.vlaanderen.be
Marc
Leunis
Policy maker
marc.leunis@ond.vlaanderen.be
Ministry of Education and Science
Evgeniya
Kostandinova
Policy maker
e.kostadinova@mon.bg
Bulgaria
Remy
Rangelova
Policy maker
r.rangelova@mon.bg
Denmark
DPU
Lejf
Moos
Academic/Researcher
moos@dpu.dk
City Government of Tartu
Kaspar
Kreegim채e
Policy maker, Local Government
kaspar.kreegimae@raad.tartu.ee
Ministry of Education and Research
Triin
Noork천iv
Policy maker
triin.noorkoiv@hm.ee
MISA -Integration Migration Foundation Your People
Jana
Tondi
NGO / Capacity building organisation jana.tondi@gmail.com
Estonia
77
Country Estonia
Finland
France
Organisation University of Tartu Association on Finnish Independent Education Employers
First Name Hasso
Employement
Academic/Researcher
hasso.kukemelk@ut.ee
Esa-Pekka
Kauppinen
Policy maker, NGO / capacity building organisation
esapekka.kauppinen@sivistystyonantajat .fi
Mika
Risku
Academic/Researcher
mika.risku@jyu.fi
University of Jyväskylä
Meng
Tian
Academic/Researcher
meng.tian@jyu.fi
Ecole Normale Supérieure
Jean-Louis
Derouet
Academic/Researcher
jeanlouis.derouet@ens-lyon.fr
LISUM
Bernd
Jankofsky
Policy maker, Practitioner
bernd.jankofsky@lisum.berlin-brandenburg.de
Steffi
Dr. Missal
Education for Schoolleaders
steffi.missal@lisum.berlin-brandenburg.de
Riecke-Baulecke
Policy maker
thomas.riecke-baulecke@iqsh.de
Jens
Bolhöfer
Policy maker
jens.bolhoefer@mk.niedersachsen.de
Dagmar
Brunsch
Policy maker
d.brunsch@web.de
Jens
Mau
Policy maker
jens.mau55@googlemail.com
Wolfgang
Meyer
Academic/Researcher
wakmeyer@t-online.de
Sofia
Papadimitriou
Academic /Researcher, Policy maker sofipapadi@gmail.com
Kathy
Kikis-Papadakis
Academic/Researcher, Capacity building organisation
katerina@iacm.forth.gr
Pavlos
Hatzopoulos
Academic/Researcher
phatzopoulos@gmail.com
Lampros
Karageorgos
Academic/Researcher
lampros.karageorgos@gmail.com
Andreas
Kollias
Academic/Researcher
an_kollias@yahoo.gr
Eleni
Karagianni
Academic / Researcher, Policy maker, Scientific staff
ekaragianni@iep.edu.gr
Yiannis
Roussakis
Academic / Researcher, Policy maker, Councelor A'
yiannis.roussakis@iep.edu.gr
Ministry of Culture, Education Marianthi and Religious Affairs
Karatsiori
Policy maker
marianelw@yahoo.com
Open University
Anna
Anastasopoulou
Academic / Researcher
anastasopoulou_anna@yahoo.gr
Regional Directorate of Education of Crete
Evgenia
Psaltaki
Teacher, Promoter of European Projects in Crete
prathmias@kritis.pde.sch.gr
School of European
Amalia
Filippaki
Head teacher
afilippaki@edc.uoc.gr
IQSH Ministry /State Institute Dr. Thomas Germany NLQ - Niedersächsisches Kultusministerium
Educational Radiotelevision
FΟRΤΗ/IACM
Greece
Last name Kukemelk
IEP - Institute for Education Policy
78
Country
Greece
Hungary
Organisation
First Name
Last name
Italy
Kasmirli
Academic / Researcher, Teacher
m.kasmirli@gmail.com
Special Education Needs Diagnostic Support Centre
Anastasia
Gkouvatzi
Policy maker, Director
anasgouv@otenet.gr
University of Crete
Eleftheria
Argyropoulou
Academic / Researcher
eargirop@edc.uoc.gr
University of Peloponnese
George
Bagakis
Academic / Researcher
gbag@otenet.gr
University of Thessaly
Aggeliki
Lazaridou
Academic / Researcher
alazarid@uth.gr
Centre for Higher Education Management
István Vilmos
Kovacs
Academic / Researcher
kovacs.istvan.vilmos@ppk.elte.hu
Thaisz
Policy maker
miklos.thaisz@emmi.gov.hu
Adél
Csernovitz
NGO / capacity building organisation adel.csernovitz@tpf.hu
Nora
Revai
NGO / Capacity building organisation nora.revai@tpf.hu representative
Eszter
Szegedi
NGO / capacity building organisation eszter.szegedi@tpf.hu
University College Dublin
Gerry
Mac Ruairc
Academic/Researcher
gerry.macruairc@ucd.ie
Iprase
Paolo
Dalvit
Head teacher
padalvit@gmail.com
Ministry of EducationMIUR
Giovanna
Barzano
Policy maker
dott.giovanna.barzano@gmail.com
Massimo
La Rocca
Head teacher
mas.larocca@gmail.com
Carola
Gavazzi
School principal
czgavazzi@gmail.com
Inta
Baranovska
Policy implementer
inta.baranovska@visc.gov.lv
Guntra
Kaufmane
Policy implementer
guntra.kaufmane@visc.gov.lv
Centre for School Improvement
Daiva
Stasiulioniene
NGO / capacity building organisation daiva@mtc.lt
Education Development Centre
Ramunė
Korenkienė
Policy maker
ramune.korenkiene@upc.smm.lt
Education Supply Centre, at the Ministry of Education and Science
Rasa
Snipiene
Policy maker
rasa.snipiene@sac.smm.lt
LEU PKTI
Danguole
Bylaite-
Academic/Researcher
danguole.salavejiene@leu.lt
Ministry of Human Capacities, Department for Public Education Programs and Relations Miklós
Upper Secondary Technical School Latvia
Lithuania
Maria
Tempus Public Foundation
Ireland
Employement
Education Heraklion
National Centre for Education
79
Country
Organisation
Lithuania
LEU PKTI
Malta
Ministry of Education and Employment
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
First Name
Last name
Employement
Salavejiene Algimantas
Sventickas
Academic/Researcher
algimantas.sventickas@gmail.com
Claire
Felice Pace
Policy maker
claire.felice-pace@gov.mt
Salvina
Muscat
Policy maker
salvina.muscat@gov.mt
John-Peter
Portelli
Academic/Researcher, Policy maker john.portelli@utoronto.ca
NSO
Huub
Friederichs
NGO / capacity building organisation h.friederichs@ijzee.nl
Educational Research Institute
Tomasz
Kasprzak
Academic/Researcher
t.kasprzak@ibe.edu.pl
Jagiellonian University
Roman
Dorczak
Academic / Researcher
roman.dorczak@interia.pl
FPCEUP
Elisabete
Ferreira
Academic/Researcher
elisabete@fpce.up.pt
Ministry of Education and Science
José
Diogo
Policy maker
jose.diogo@mec.gov.pt
ULHT, CeiED
Carmo
Climaco
Academic/Researcher
carmo.climaco@mail.telepac.pt
Ana Paula
Silva
Academic/Researcher
profa.ap.silva@gmail.com
Žilina Self-Governing Region Dana
Mažgútová
Policy maker
dana.mazgutova@zilinskazupa.sk
University of Žilina
Peter
Nemec
Academic / Researcher
peter.nemec@mediamatika.sk
Ministry for Education, Science and Sport
Ema
Perme
Policy maker
ema.perme@gov.si
National Institute for Leadership in Education
Peter
Markič
Academic/Researcher
peter.markic@solazaravnatelje.si
Vlasta
Poličnik
Director
vlasta.policnik@solazaravnatelje.si
University of Primorska, Faculty of Education
Majda
Cencič
Academic/Researcher
majda.cencic@guest.arnes.si
Tina
Štemberger
Academic / Researcher
tina.stemberger@pef.upr.si
Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports
Henar
García Aparicio
Spanish Education Adviser
henar.garcia@mecd.es
Ministry of Education and Research
Kerstin
Hultgren
Policy maker
kerstin.hultgren@gov.se
Jonas
Höög
Academic/Researcher
jonas.hoog@umu.se
Umeå University
Olof
Johansson
Academic/Researcher
Olof.CA.Johansson@umu.se
University of Teacher Education Zug
Stephan Gerhard
Huber
Academic/Researcher
Steph@nhuber.com
80
Country
Organisation Durham University Scottish College for Educational Leadership
UK
The General Teaching Council for Scotland University of Cambridge
First Name
Last name
Employement
Carl
Bagley
Academic/Researcher
c.a.bagley@durham.ac.uk
John
Daffurn
Programme Leader
john.daffurn@Scelscotland.org.uk
James
Helbert
Academic / Researcher
James.helbert@argyll-bute.gov.uk
Lesley
Whelan
Depute CEO
Lesley.whelan@Scelscotland.org.uk
Tom
Hamilton
Policy maker
tom.hamilton@gtcs.org.uk
MacBeath
Academic/Researcher
jecm2@cam.ac.uk
Prof John EC Amanda
Roberts
Academic/Researcher
a.roberts2@herts.ac.uk
University of Hertfordshire
Philip
Woods
Academic/Researcher
profphilipwoods@aol.com
University of Leeds
Maria
Rapti
Academic/Researcher
mariaraptip@hotmail.com
University of Southampton
Jacky
Lumby
Academic/Researcher
jlumby@soton.ac.uk
81
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Heraklion PLA Announcement The final EPNoSL Peer Learning Activity (PLA) will take place in Heraklion, Crete between 28-29 May, 2015. ----------------Conference Venue: Foundation for Research and Technology-Hellas (FORTH) Conference hotel: Capsis Astoria Heraklion Hotel Conference map -------------Scope: The PLA will be the occasion to present and critically reflect on the outcomes of the work conducted by the European Policy Network on School Leadership (EPNoSL). The PLA will focus on identifying ways in which EPNoSL’s outcomes can impact upon policy and practice. The PLA will provide a forum for in-depth discussions amongst SL stakeholders with the aim of establishing actions that can be taken to improve school leadership policy development and implementation in European, national, regional, and local contexts. Objectives: The PLA intends to promote the outcomes of EPNoSL with the intention of influencing the development of school leadership policies and to stimulate knowledge exchange between policymakers, practitioners, researchers and other stakeholders towards enhancing school leadership for equity and learning. Specifically, the PLA will: - present the key outcomes of the EPNoSL project; - reflect on the strengths and limitations of these outcomes and of networking activities amongst SL stakeholders; - increase the visibility of EPNoSL's final outputs amongst policy makers at all levels of governance, educational leaders (including school principals and head teachers, and teacher educators), researchers, representatives of professional associations, parents, students, and other stakeholders; - highlight examples of international perspectives on school leadership policy and practice; - discuss recent European developments on school leadership policy initiatives; - contribute to the planning of future EPNoSL activities.
Page 82 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Target group: policy makers at all levels of governance, educational leaders (including school principals and head teachers, and teacher educators), researchers, representatives of professional associations, parents, students, and other stakeholders.
Page 83 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Heraklion PLA Venues The EPNoSL Nice PLA was hosted by the Foundation for Research and technology, Greece. Wednesday, 27/5, pre-event venue: Capsis Astoria Heraklion Hotel Thursday, 28/5: FORTH Friday 29/5: FORTH
Google map (for all venues): https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=zYky9OPJX28I.kc6Qdvd17Mno
Heraklion PLA Background Materials A set of background materials was uploaded on the EPNoSL portal and distributed prior to the event via email to all registered participants:
General background material on School Leadership policy development | Briefing Notes on School Leadership Policy Development | Promoting the policy agenda on school leadership from the perspective of equity and learning
Workshops on EPNoSL School Leadership Toolkit | EPNoSL Toolkit (online version) | EPNoSL Toolkit (PDF)
School Leadership for Equity and Learning | Equity and Learning as Critical Educational Goals
Keynotes | Teaching Scotland's Future: Report of a review of Teacher Education in Scotland
Page 84 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Heraklion PLA Documentation All documentation of the Heraklion PLA has been uploaded to the EPNoSL portal and has been distributed via e-mail to the PLA participants as well as to the wider community of recipients of the EPNoSL newsletter. Presentations: http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/event/page/heraklion/presentations Photo Gallery: http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/event/page/heraklion/photos Video recordings: http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/event/page/heraklion/videos
Heraklion PLA Programme PLA AGENDA First Day | 28 May 2015 VENUE: Foundation for Research and Technology-Hellas (FORTH)
9:00 – 9:30 Registration 9:30 - 10:00 Opening of the PLA event Coordinated by Kathy Kikis-Papadakis (EPNoSL coordinator) - Panayiotis Symandirakis (Vice governor for Education, Lifelong learning and Employement, Region of Crete) - Giorgos Terzakis (Director, Regional Directorate of Primary and Secondary Education of Crete) - Thomas Pritzkow (European Commission Directorate - General for Education and Culture) 10.00 - 10.45 Keynote address Michael Schratz, Promoting school leadership for equity and learning is leading towards the emerging future in a rapidly changing world (University of Innsbruck, Austria) 10:45 - 11:15 Keynote address Stephan Gerhard Huber, School Leadership Practices and Health – Selected Findings From a MultiMethod Longitudinal School Leadership Study (University of Teacher Education, Zug) 11:15-11:30 Discussion Page 85 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Chair: Hasso Kukemelk (University of Tartu, Estonia) 11:30-12:00 Coffee break 12:00-13:30 Panel Session – Equity and learning as critical educational goals Coordinator: Jacky Lumby (University of Southampton, UK) Interventions by: - John Portelli and Salvina Muscat (Ministry for Education and Employment, Malta) - Eszter Salamon (European Parents' Association - EPA) - Giovanna Barzanò (Ministry of Education, University and Research, Italy) - Yiannis Roussakis (Institute of Educational Policy - IEP, Greece) - Aggeliki Lazaridou (University of Thessaly, Greece) 13:30 - 14:30 Lunch 14:30 - 16:30 Parallel workshops – The EPNoSL Toolkit on School Leadership for equity and learning - Workshop 1: Educating School Leaders for equity and learning Coordinators: Michael Schratz, Helmuth Aigner and Silvia Krenn (University of Innsbruck, Austria) - Workshop 2: Distributed Leadership for equity and learning Coordinators: Amanda Roberts and Philip Woods (University of Hertfordshire, UK) - Workshop 3: School Accountability for equity and learning Coordinators: Jonas Höög and Olof Johansson (Umeå University, Sweden) - Workshop 4: Promoting stakeholder collaboration for equity and learning Coordinators: Carmo Climaco and Ana Paula Silva (Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Portugal) 16:30- 16:45 Coffee break 16:45 – 17:15 Conclusions from parallel workshops Coordinated by Philip Woods (University of Hertfordshire, UK) 20:00 Conference Dinner (for all registered PLA participants) VENUE: Galaxy Hotel, Heraklion Page 86 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
-----------------------
Second Day | 29 May 2015 VENUE: Foundation for Research and Technology-Hellas (FORTH)
9:30 - 10:15 Keynote address John Mac Beath, Leading and Learning: who leads and who follows? (Professor Emeritus at the University of Cambridge, UK) 10:15 – 10:45 Keynote address John Daffurn, Lesley Whelan, and James Helbert, Learning for leadership, leadership for learning (Scottish College for Educational Leadership - SCEL) 10:45-11:00 Discussion Chair: Mika Risku (University of Jyväskylä, Finland) 11:00 - 11:30 Coffee break 11:30 - 13:30 Parallel workshops - The EPNoSL Toolkit on School Leadership for equity and learning - Workshop 5: Teacher Leadership for equity and learning Coordinators: Michael Schratz, Helmuth Aigner and Silvia Krenn (University of Innsbruck, Austria) - Workshop 6: School Autonomy for equity and learning Coordinator: Lejf Moos (Aarhus University, Denmark) - Workshop 7: Policy Response for equity and learning Coordinators: Carl Bagley and Sophie Ward (Durham University, UK) - Workshop 8: Policy assessment for equity and learning Page 87 of 88
European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)
Coordinators: Andreas Kollias, Anna Anastasopoulou and Pavlos Hatzopoulos (IACM, FORTH) 13:30 - 14:30 Lunch 14:30 - 14:45 Conclusions from parallel workshops Coordinated by Philip Woods (University of Hertfordshire, UK) 14:45 – 16:15 Panel session – Networking for school leadership policy development Coordinators: Nora Revai and Adel Csernovitz (Tempus Public Foundation – TPF) Interventions by: - Danguolė Bylaitė-Šalavėjienė (Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences) - Ana Paula Silva (Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Portugal) - Tom Hamilton (General Teaching Council, Scotland) - Gerry Mac Ruairc (University College Dublin, Ireland) - Bianka Stege (European Federation of Education Employers - EFEE) - Marc Leunis (Flemish Ministry of Education and Training) 16:15 - 16:30 Presentation - Creating virtual enterprises in order to connect school with local community with a view to promote traditional and other kinds of products With the participation of students of Krousonas High School, Crete 16:30 - 16:45 Coffee break 16:45 - 17:15 Closing: What have we learnt, How we move forward Coordinated by Kathy Kikis-Papadakis (IACM-FORTH) With the participation of: - John Portelli and Salvina Muscat (Ministry for Education and Employment, Malta) - Stephan Gerhard Huber (University of Teacher Education, Zug) - Thomas Pritzkow (European Commission Directorate - General for Education and Culture)
Page 88 of 88