This paper is about the two million students in Ontario’s publicly funded school system.
In our first mandate (2003-2007) the government inherited a crisis in education. We responded by making education our first priority, set bold targets, and invested in the improvement of schools in partnership with local educators and communities. Together we were successful— test scores are up, the graduating rate from high school has increased, teacher morale has improved, and overall, people are satisfied with the direction of the reform.
But this is not nearly enough as we begin a second mandate. There are two kinds of dangers. One that we merely continue down the linear path of incremental improvements, or two that we enlarge the agenda so much that it becomes unwieldy and diffuse. We have struck a middle ground in this paper that involves substantially extending and building on our first platform.
It is common for second term governments to lose the fresh momentum they had created in their first term. England obtained substantial improvements in literacy and numeracy in its first term under Prime Minister Tony Blair in 1997-2001. Then performance plateaued as the government lost focus in its second term (2002-2006) even though it had received a decisive majority from the electorate. Recently, Sir Michael Barber, the chief architect of England’s literacy and numeracy strategy was asked what he wished they had done differently in their second term. He responded by saying, “I wish we had:
The instructional leadership role of the school principalship has become all the rage. The main stumbling block for most principals is that they don’t know what it means and/or how to do it. This article names three successively rigorous criteria that the new leadership development will have to meet if the new role is to be realized. A minority of programs meet the first criterion hardly anyone meets the other two.
The three successively difficult characteristics of that future programs must meet are job embedded learning, organizationally embedded leadership, and system embedded leadership and learning.
This short piece addresses the question: “What strategy-based knowledge do we possess that will be effective in addressing the needs of the lowest performing 20% of students in large education systems?”
My first and most important response is that in order to improve part of the system you have to focus on the entire system — raise the bar and close the gap for all. But let me start with a single school example.
There is no substantial gap in what we need to know in order to improve schools and student learning and achievement on a very wide scale. In this brief paper I will (1) encapsulate what we obviously know; (2) what we should know but fail to understand (which thus makes finding the solution less likely); and (3) identify the action implications for teachers themselves, principals, district leaders, and system leaders.
In their aptly named book on organizational management, Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert I. Sutton write about Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths, and Total Nonsense. A hard fact is something for which there is solid evidence. A dangerous half-truth is when this fact is superficially applied. And total nonsense is often the outcome of not knowing the difference.
We can gain insight about the current state of school leadership by applying this organizational thinking to two of education’s hard facts: The principal is crucial to school success, and professional learning communities are more effective than individual professionals working in isolation. In doing so, we should remember that the danger in the half-truth is not just that it is incomplete or misleading, but that its proponents are unaware that it is not true.
This article represents a conceptual history of the concept of school development and its relationship to related concepts of school effectiveness, school improvement, implementation, organizational development, learning theories, system reform and so on.
It is not an empirical review or a detailed chronological account. Rather, it is a ‘thought piece’ on the philosophy and practice of education reform in terms of where we have come from and where we are today. I have drawn heavily on my own work in which I have chronicled and contributed to this broad education improvement field since 1975.
The crisis — and there is no other word for it — in public schooling is a function of the interaction of an enormous push-pull dynamic. The push factor is that students find schooling increasingly boring as they proceed across the grades. Studies from many countries show that among high school students less than 40% of upper secondary students are intellectually
engaged (Jenkins, 2013; Willms et al., 2009). And, not unrelated, signs of teacher frustration are growing. For example, in the U.S the percentage of teachers who are satisfied with teaching has plummeted from 65% to 38% from 2008 to 2012. Teachers and students are psychologically if not literally being pushed out of school. Meanwhile prodigious technology is alluring all, kids and
adults alike, to the digital world, not necessarily productively. Within this allure we are seeing exciting new learning modes emerging from the interaction of pedagogy and technology. Education under these terms needs to be radically rethought — partly to stop the boredom, but mostly to blow the lid off learning, whereby students and teachers as partners become captivated by education day in and day out.
Do your school reform efforts frequently sputter or stall? In this indispensable sequel to the
bestseller Motion Leadership, Michael Fullan shares the real-life strategies and results of educators who have
used motion leadership to propel entire organizations and systems forward. Success stories from the
US and around the world illustrate how educators can use a small number of specific actions to
generate momentum for lasting change. Motion Leadership in Action addresses:
• Creating and leading movement in the right direction and at the right time
• Implementing a "ready-fire-aim" mindset
• Emphasizing the importance of collaboration
• Forging relationships while handling resistance
• Establishing your change stance in order to get better results
The first edition of The Challenge of Change was published in 1997. It turned out that this was precisely the year when the field of educational change began a major shift toward deeper action and large-scale reform.
The occasion was Tony Blair’s first term election in England in May, 1997. He came into power with a clear and explicit education platform in which literacy and numeracy were named as the core priorities. Blair and his government committed in advance to targets of 80% proficiency in literacy and 75% in numeracy for 11-year-olds — starting at a base of 62%. This was an enormous undertaking because it involved the entire system of 20,000 schools and a timeline of essentially four years.
Professional capital has a fundamental con-nection to transforming teaching every day, and we’ve seen many examples of this at work in schools and school systems around the world. Here, we explore the powerful idea of capital and articulate its importance for professional work, professional capacity, and professional effectiveness. Systems that invest in professional capital recognize that education spending is an investment in developing human capital from early childhood to adulthood, leading to rewards of economic productivity and social cohesion in the next gen-eration (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012).
Professional capital requires attention not only to po-litical and societal investments in education but also to leadership actions and educator needs, contributions, and career stages.
Whatever one’s style, every leader, to be effective, must have and work on improving his or her moral purpose. Moral purpose is about both ends and means. Authentic leaders, in other words, display character, and character is the defining characteristic of authentic leadership.
Whether people are driven by egoistic (self-centered) or altruistic (unselfish) motives, the fact is that all effective leaders are driven by both.
There is currently a powerful push-pull factor in schooling. The push factor is that school is increasingly boring for students and alienating for teachers. The pull fac-tor is that the exploding and alluring digital world is irresistible, but not necessarily productive in its raw form. The push-pull dynamic makes it inevitable that disruptive changes will occur. I have been part of a group that has been developing innova-tive responses to the current challenges. This response consists of integrating three components: deep learning goals, new pedagogies, and technology. The result will be more radical change in the next five years than has occurred in the past 50 years.
A theory is a way of organizing ideas that makes sense of the world. A theory of action is a way of understanding the world in a way that identifies insights and ideas for effectively improving it.
This chapter is about a theory of action for whole system improvement in education. There are three conditions that such a theory must meet for the task at hand. First, it must meet the systemness criterion. Do the ideas stand a chance of addressing the whole system, not just a few hundred schools here and there? Second, our theory must make a compelling case that using the ideas will result in positive movement. We are talking about improvement after all — going from one state to another state. Third, such a theory must demonstrably tap into and stimulate people’s motivation. I ask the reader to keep these three criteria in mind in assessing the theory I am about to offer, and in comparing it with other competing theories of action. Thus, to what extent do other theories or mine measure up to the systemness, movement, and motivation criteria.
Education PLUS is the hidden dividend that learners come to acquire if they are educated in what we call the new pedagogies ‐ powerful new learning modes steeped in real world problem solving now made more telling through recent, rapid developments in the use of technology for interactive learning.
We can and will define the core learning outcomes as the ‘Six Cs of Deep Learning’, but we first must understand the existential essence of this new human being. It is no exaggeration to say that the new pedagogies have the potential to support a fundamental transformation in human evolution. The result is that action, reflection, learning and living can now become one and the same. This seamless ‘ecology’ of life and learning occurs during what we used to know as formal schooling, post‐secondary and higher education, but then continues throughout life. In this model, learning, doing, knowing, adapting, inventing and living become practically indistinguishable. Although we offer here a philosophical note on Education PLUS we are deeply involved with practitioners around the world in doing this new work of learning on an increasingly large and deep scale. The
developments we describe are happening in real time, and we predict will take off in the immediate future.
In 2003 Ontario’s schools were in a troubled state. The achievement of students was ‘good’ but flat lined — stagnant results year after year. Morale of teachers was low; the schools as a whole could be characterized as ‘loosely-coupled’ and without focus. The system was downtrodden.
Now in early 2013, the overall performance of the almost 5,000 schools in the province has dramatically improved on most key measures, and continues to improve. According to international measures and independent expert assessment, Ontario is recognized as and is proven to be the best school system in the English-speaking world — and right up at the top with Finland, Singapore and South Korea.
I am very pleased to present this issue of In Conversation as it provides me with the opportunity to say once again that I have long believed that we are well on our way to achieving a level and quality of school and system leadership that is second to none in the world. Since the launch of the Ontario Leadership Strategy (OLS) in 2008, we have been recognized internationally as one of the world’s top school systems, and as a system that is building leadership capacity for the future. And that, I believe, is a tribute to the work of our school and system leaders.
My work in change over the past 40 years started with the premise of finding out as much as possible about the problems of
implementation. The more we found out the more we got drawn to doing something about it. In the last decade and a half in particular, we have been teaming up with local practitioners and system politicians to cause greater implementation. What we discovered is wonderful news for research, namely ‘to do is to know more.’
In the last decade, the Canadian province dramatically improved its education system to become one of the best in the world. Its innovative strategy can provide a blueprint for U.S. reform.
Ontario is Canada's largest province, home to over 13 million people and a public education system with roughly 2 million students, 120,000 educators, and 5,000 schools. As recently as 2002, this system was stagnant by virtually any measure of performance. In October 2003, a new provincial government (Canada has no federal agency or jurisdiction in education) was elected with a mandate and commitment to transform it.
The results of the latest MetLife Survey of the American Teacher confirm what many of us are experiencing and seeing in the depressing descent of the teaching profession. In the past two years, the percentage of teachers surveyed who reported being very satisfied in their jobs has declined sharply, from 59 percent to 44 percent. The number who indicated they were thinking of
leaving the profession has jumped from 17 percent to 29 percent. Imagine being a student knowing that every other teacher you encounter is becoming less and less satisfied, and close to one in three would rather be somewhere else.
Introducing the drivers for whole system reform
‘Whole system reform’ is the name of the game and ‘drivers’ are those policy and strategy levers that have the least and best chance of driving successful reform. A ‘wrong driver’ then is a deliberate policy force that has little chance of achieving the desired result, while a ‘right driver’ is one that ends up achieving better measurable results for students. Whole system reform
is just that – 100 per cent of the system – a whole state, province, region or entire country. This paper examines those drivers typically chosen by leaders to accomplish reform, critiques their inadequacy, and offers an alternative set of drivers that have been proven to be more effective at accomplishing the desired goal, which I express as … the moral imperative of raising the bar (for all students) and closing the gap (for lower performing groups) relative to higher order skills and competencies required to be successful world citizens.