The Alberta Teachers’ Association

Prospects and Perils?

Jim Parsons, Christine Stobart, Bobbi Compton, Melissa Humby and Raime Drake

The following is reprinted from Rethinking School Leadership—Creating Great Schools for All Students (Couture and Murgatroyd 2012.) The article has been edited for length and to conform to ATA style.

During the summer of 2010, the University of Alberta’s Faculty of Education and the Alberta Teachers’ Association joined to teach a graduate-level course on teacher leadership. EDSE 501: Teacher Leadership in School Improvement was based in part on the foundational work of the Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI) and its effect on grassroots school leadership.

The course was offered as an intense weeklong institute. Graduate students were given presession assignments (course readings) and postsession assignments (a group- designed project to be conducted at the site of their teaching). Twenty-four professional teachers enrolled in the class and worked with colleagues and faculty to develop the project proposal for the work they’d complete during the 2010/11 school year. There was an expectation that the teachers, who were also graduate students, would meet at year’s end to discuss their findings and the outcomes of their projects.

However, even great ideas don’t always work as planned. Given the realities of school life and personal life,

time and schedules made it difficult for participants to complete their projects. Some teachers moved schools, AISI project funding was stopped and not all teachers were visited by faculty members.

In retrospect, the course designers should have created one course (offered during the summer) to create the project proposals, and one course (offered throughout the year) and more supervision to complete the projects.

Several projects were completed, however, and teachers experienced growth in their leadership skills. As a course follow-up, four students were chosen to work collectively on a report reviewing the projects.

The course and the projects affirm what we have learned over the past 11 years of AISI and in previous research with instructional leadership in Alberta. Teachers are ready and able to work constructively as school leaders. Students and schools benefit when teachers accept and build their leadership capabilities.

The reports featured in this article offer insight into the possibilities that emerge when teachers lead educational change and improvement. We can only imagine the educational growth that will occur as teachers assume more leadership roles across Alberta.

We have also learned that teacher leadership should be supported further by creating spaces where teachers can discuss and plan positive changes that affect their students and schools.

We have begun to learn ways to support teachers in their growth. In speaking to teachers who were part of the initial course, without exception they lauded the experience. They met and worked with great people and were inspired by experienced leaders who allowed them to explore opportunities for change.

Bridging Theory and Practice for Preservice Teachers

Christine Stobart

My project was based on an issue I observed in the preservice teacher practicum program at the University of Alberta. Student teachers were perplexed and mentor teachers confused by the pedagogical differences that they perceived between what was taught at the university (theory) and what was modelled and/or expected in the classroom (practice). The two did not match. Often, both parties were frustrated by discrepancies, and I believed these needed to be addressed through dialogue with the university. As a university facilitator, I believed I could initiate interventions that allowed all constituents to share common understandings of the theory promoted at the university and the practices demonstrated and desired in the classroom. In this way, student teachers would have an enriching and rewarding practicum and benefit from consistent teaching.

During the practicum, student teachers and mentor teachers feel overwhelmed. Because orchestrating meetings between student teachers, mentor teachers and university facilitators is unfeasible, it seemed that technology might be a viable alternative. Because mandatory daily reflective professional journals are a course requirement, and mentor teachers and university facilitators comment on the student teacher entries, this forum seemed fruitful. I believed that reflective journals could become blog entries where student and mentor teachers, as well as university facilitators, could comment regularly on postings, as opposed to occasional paper versions. Such technology could provide a running conversation with rich dialogue that might alleviate confusion between theory and practice.

In the first term of the course, I proposed the optional blog idea to all 15 of my student teachers. There were no takers. I had believed that student teachers, already digital natives, would opt for the chance. However, they seemed reluctant. Despite cajoling, no online journals occurred first term. In the second term, I asked pairs of student and mentor teachers if they’d participate. Two pairs agreed. Unfortunately, one willing student teacher withdrew. The second pair completed the term and considered the experience a success, although, from my point of view, dialogue remained superficial and didn’t broach the issues of theory/practice. The pair liked the format because “it saved paper!”

The second term, I told my university facilitator colleagues that I was trying to increase dialogue through blogging. I received positive feedback but little else. I assumed that implementing technology did not appeal to the group, because many saw themselves as “digital immigrants” who were just learning technology.

To better assess my project, I implemented Schein’s conceptual model for managed culture change, based on five principles for creating conditions for innovation (Schein 2010-for a simple summary, see www.tnellen.comjted/tcjschein.html). The application is rudimentary, but identifies the flaw in the change I initiated. As a university facilitator, I could see that survival anxiety was evident, and I was aware that preservice teachers cited discrepancies with their mentor teachers in regard to pedagogy. Mentor teachers also noted inadequacies present in student teachers and the program. What I saw for a period of time as whining (suppression) became substantially more disconfirming.

This data highlighted an underlying lack of collaboration between parties. The university taught education theory, mentor teachers taught education practice and student teachers attempted to synthesize the information. This initial stage of unfreezing my survival anxiety manifested itself in guilt and frustration, and generated learning anxiety (Principle 1) that eventually forced me to approach my supervisor suggesting an operational change (Principle 2). The operational change, based on a need for more collaboration, focused on implementing online reflective journals that all parties could access (Principle 3). Most student teachers were indifferent to this proposed change; however, several were willing to take a risk and implement the blog (Principle 4). At the end of the term, success was uncertain and pressing forward for another term seemed questionable (Principle 5). Schein’s conceptual model of culture change illuminated the weakness of my proposed cognitive restructuring. It is now apparent that the disconfirming data did not result in enough survival anxiety to reduce the learning anxiety of student teachers, mentor teachers or my colleagues. They simply did not feel a need to change, and were content to accept that the classroom attempts to merge theory and practice would continue to generate frustration, albeit minor in their estimation.

Leading as a Learning Coach

Bobbi Compton

For my project, Leading as a Learning Coach, I proposed to further my role as a learning coach to influence staff development and student learning. I intended to show how coaching, as a part of distributed leadership, can lead to school improvement. I planned to work with staff to use First Steps in Reading as a tool to implement literacy changes, and I believed that student learning would be positively affected by supporting the teaching process. I believed that PD and teacher collaboration would engender teaching and learning practices that engaged students and improved literacy skills. Through my leadership project, I hoped to establish coaching into the school culture, further develop my abilities as a leader, facilitate PD and collaborate with staff to improve literacy practice.

In 2010, I presented my project to the school’s administration team with a proposed yearlong plan to use my learning coach position to effect student development and learning, including the following:

• Work with the AISI lead and professional development facilitator
• Educate staff on First Steps in Reading, running records and guided reading
• Observe classroom practice and student engagement and provide feedback
• Work with staff on different data collection methods of and for student learning
• Model teaching and collaborating with teachers
• Work with teachers on instructional approaches to First Steps in Reading
• Collect data to report to administrators and district leaders
• Liaise with other learning coaches, administrators and parents

The importance of leaders and teachers working together to ensure that teaching practice meets the needs of learners is profound. While this leadership project was meant to improve learning, I focused on working with teachers on their pedagogical practice. Throughout the school year, we maintained the project focus through relationship building, ongoing collaboration, staff training in First Steps in Reading, monthly literacy newsletters, and classroom observations and feedback.

Although students benefited through classroom teaching and learning, I am concerned that the work of learning coaching must continue to include site­ based PD, collaboration, classroom observations and

feedback in school culture. Recent government cutbacks might halt the continuation ofleadership initiatives such as coaching in schools. My role as a learning coach emerged from AISI funding and my district’s initiative and vision to support PD. Sadly, AISI budget cutbacks during the fourth round of funding scaled back the coaching model and reduced the impact on teacher practice, student learning, future leadership opportunities and research.

My project was an opportunity to conduct action research as school improvement through leadership. The success of my leadership project was indicated by positive feedback on staff surveys, support from relationships and acknowledgement of my leadership skills from my administration. Administrative support has been crucial to my leadership project and coaching role. My district showed confidence in the learning coach model by continuing funding despite government cutbacks. I believe the project established the role of learning coach and improved my leadership skills. I learned the importance of building relationships and establishing strong foundations. The 2011/12 school year was the third for the learning coach initiative and I plan to continue my leadership project and research.

Improving Parental Engagement

Melissa Humby

My project was based on parental involvement at the high school level. I targeted all the parents of the students I taught, including parents who had not had involvement at school in the past. I wanted parents to be more involved in their children’s education and know what was happening at school. I made positive phone calls or sent e-mails home-at least one phone call or e-mail per student each month-and I kept a log of my home communication progress.

My project goal was to encourage more parents to become part of the school community and their children’s learning. A challenge I faced was the historical lack of parental involvement. My school is located in a small town in rural Alberta. Our population includes First Nations, Metis and Inuit (FNMI) students, foster parents and single parents. Currently, two or three parents attend parent council meetings. At most, 25 parents attend two-day parent/teacher interviews. Few parents volunteer at school dances, hot lunches, school trips or other functions. Generally, the same five or six parents volunteer for every school activity. Often parents are intimidated, view the school negatively or are overwhelmed with their own work, family or other activities.

Teacher caring has been ranked as poor in the eyes of parents and students. Issues identified included teachers providing few opportunities for talking with parents (whether by e-mail or phone updates) about student progress, and lack of updates to our school website. Moreover, teachers often believe they have too little time to contact every parent because we assume roles as teachers, coaches, counsellors or leaders of extracurricular activities. If parents are contacted, it’s likely that their children have done something wrong, which has warranted a phone call from school.

The impetus for my leadership project was a parent who told me that I had been the only teacher to ever call home to update her on her child’s progress. I thought, “How can this be happening?” Because this parent had never attended parent/teacher interviews or parent council meetings and had never volunteered at school, the only contact she had with the school was my occasional phone calls.

I anticipated that more parents would become involved in the school community and in their children’s learning. My goal was to encourage teachers to contact parents without always reporting negatives, and I aspired to see a positive response among students. If parents knew more about what was happening at school and had positive relationships and open communication with teachers, I believed this openness would help students view school in a more positive and productive manner.

At the beginning of the school year, I sent home a letter with every student I taught requesting an e-mail address and phone number. Several times a month, I sent personalized positive e-mails or made phone calls to parents about their children’s progress and behaviour in my class. Additionally, I e-mailed parents about tests, quizzes, assignments, extra help and upcoming school events, and I kept parents informed through our school website with daily school activities and homework updates. During the semester, I distributed a survey asking parents and students about their thoughts on parental communication. I received positive feedback from parents and students and saw encouraging progress in student behaviour, class work and homework completion. The majority of parents welcomed my e-mails (some parents preferred phone calls) and felt they knew more about what was happening at school. Surprisingly, students reported that they looked forward to my e-mailing their parents and were curious about what I said. In addition to positive feedback from parents and students, I experienced a breakdown in barriers and increased parental trust.

As a result of my project, parents become more involved at school and with their children’s education. Positive phone calls ore-mails helped teachers show parents that they cared, and parents seemed more comfortable making contact and coming to school. Student behaviour and homework completion improved. I hope to extend this project further by encouraging other staff members and teachers to do the same. Teachers’ positive communication with home encourages parents to view the school and teachers optimistically. At the high school level, I have found that most parental communication from teachers is negative. Attempting to build positive communication is a good way to encourage parents to become more involved and have a voice.

Informed Transformation: Improving Success for First Nations, Métis, and Inuit Students

Raime Drake

During the 2010 summer course, I read The Fourth Way-The Inspiring Future for Educational Change (Hargreaves and Shirley 2009) and connected their ideas to improving the success of First Nations, Metis and Inuit (FNMI) students in our schools. Although I do not hold a formal leadership position in my school, I consider myself a teacher leader with a passion for improving education for at-risk students.

We have a high percentage of FNMI students at our school, and staff identified a need to support our FNMI students by increasing cultural awareness. Metis dancers performed at our school and the district FNMI liaison worker has made presentations to our students. However, after reading many articles centered on social justice, I felt compelled to do more.

Many of our staff members have no experience teaching FNMI students. I wanted staff to consider their own learning and teaching experiences to better respond to students’ needs. With the full support of my principal, I led a series of discussions to raise the achievement of our FNMI students. From the Samson Cree Nation, I invited Elder Roy Louis and his wife, Judy, who is also an educator, to speak to staff. Roy enlightened us about traditions, protocol, spirituality and the Cree language and led us through a smudge ceremony. Judy spoke about learning styles and fostering relationships with students and their families. Resources were presented and discussed. We ended the day with each staff member sharing what he or she had learned.

I surveyed staff to find out if the information helped change their teaching practice. There was an overwhelming desire from teachers and program assistants to apply what they had learned to their classroom practice. Staff also wanted more information and resources.The discussions on our PD day and results from the survey sparked conversations that have since shaped our staff meetings and PD sessions.

I hoped this project would affect students’ learning by acknowledging their differences and similarities. Teachers can better create positive learning environments when they know how students learn and interact with others. When I have visited my colleagues’ classrooms, I’ve seen many strategies used to support FNMI students. We learned to increase the use of visual supports, placed desks in a circle, used peer teaching and helped students see the steps needed to complete assignments.

This project has also worked well with our district’s AISI initiative to use formative classroom assessment. Richards, Brown and Forde (2007) acknowledge that “Tests that are not sensitive to students’ cultural and linguistic background will often merely indicate what the students don’t know ...and very little about what they do. Thus, the opportunity to build on what students know is lost” (p. 67). Teachers in my school are using alternative assessments to determine what students know, rather than focusing strictly on summative tests and activities.

Our district FNMI liaison worker has a strong presence in our school. She also attended the PD day with our staff, and I see more staff calling upon her expertise. She facilitates connections between families and the school to support our FNMI students. As a result of this project, I commissioned an artist to sketch our school with the four traditional Metis colours held by an eagle’s feather. “Our hearts and spirits for our children” is written in Cree syllabics. I presented the picture to our staff in April to celebrate the changes that have occurred in our school. The picture hangs in our foyer to remind us of our commitment to our most at-risk learners.

The title of my project was Informed Transformation. I believe that staff members have come a long way in supporting our FNMI students. There had to be an open readiness for change. Staff recognized that following the status quo was not the answer. To bring about change, we had to re-engineer roles and responsibilities. As teachers, we must be aware of our own cultures and biases and how these affect our teaching. By understanding where our students come from, we can better address their needs, rather than applying a one-size-fits-all approach to teaching and learning. Teachers have the responsibility to teach all students. Finally, we must be resilient. Beliefs and actions can’t be changed in one-day PD sessions or even over one year. Discussions and critical dialogue will need to continue over a long period of time to promote self-reflection and meaningful change.

Future Prospects for Rethinking School Leadership in Alberta Schools

School leadership makes a difference in student learning. For example, in a large, mixed-methods study, Sammons, Gu, Day and Ko (2011) explored the effect of school leadership (particularly the principal/head teacher) on school improvement in England. Their findings support both formal and informal links between school leadership, school improvements and school academic performance. In other words, leadership influences school improvement and academic performance of students.

However, studying the effect of teacher and principal leadership is complex. Ballinger and Heck (2011) believe that studies of school leadership and student learning are so influenced by school setting and environment that traditional school leadership studies provide incomplete pictures ofhow school leadership affects student learning. The authors theorize that leadership is a reciprocal, mutual-influence process, and that anyone who wishes to study this area must engage complex conceptual and methodological issues before they can understand how school leadership contributes to student learning.

So much depends upon how principals practice their work. For example, May and Supovitz (2011) examined “the scope of principal efforts” (the extent to which principals target or distribute teacher instructional leadership). Obviously, principals shape instructional leadership activities differently. Some principals target the entire faculty; some focus on single teachers. May and Supovitz found that the frequency of principal instructional leadership with individual teachers directly influences instructional changes reported by that teacher. They also found that principals who focus on instructional improvement, both with specific teachers and using broader approaches, help engage teachers in instructional leadership.

Finally, research suggests that sharing school leadership shapes teaching careers. The study “Teacher Professional Leadership in Support of Teacher Professional Development” (Taylor, Yates, Meyer and Kinsella 2011) found that teachers who engaged professional leadership opportunities warded off flat career trajectories because they grew in subject expertise and leadership skills as they engaged in leadership opportunities. The study’s findings suggest that expanded leadership roles helped experienced teachers both advance their teacher knowledge and promote educational reform.

Clearly, teacher leaders in our course engaged in both school improvement and instructional leadership. What have we learned from our work with teacher leaders? How might we build teacher professional learning that better supports teacher leadership? The genesis of the course emerged from working closely with AISI and teachers who had grown in their leadership skills and willingness to engage leadership more broadly. AISI is now entering Cycle 5 and has grown more confident in its programmed research focus. In other words, what began in 1999 as singular site-based-only school improvement projects has grown in 2012 into a site­ based research agenda widely shared and synthesized throughout Alberta. At each step, however, new learning has naturally pushed teacher comfort zones. It should be no surprise that fully embracing a research agenda as the focus of AISI projects demands that teachers and school division leadership take a deep breath before they plunge ahead.

It is clear that the emergence of teacher leaders in Alberta is a strength of AISI. What do the findings of this course suggest for future action? First, the school improvement projects in which these teachers engaged during this course suggest how invested teachers are and can be in their students’ learning. Findings also suggest that teachers can read the needs of the sites where they work. Leadership projects were engaged logically, followed successfully and altered as needed to shape the work-the very skills needed for conducting site-based research within the schools.The success of these projects suggests that teachers are able to become research leaders within their settings. As AISI Cycle 5 is engaged, this learning is key.

The success of these teacher leaders also suggests that engaging teachers in graduate-level course work can bridge from learning to positive school actions. For example, our earlier meta-analysis of student engagement (Taylor and Parsons 2011) found that project-based teaching promoted student engagement and learning; there is every reason to believe that project-based learning would also work with teachers.

Finally, the success of these teacher leaders offers district leaders a glimpse of how they might more fully engage teachers in creating environments and structures that support the development of teacher leaders. Recent research on instructional leadership (Parsons and Beauchamp 2011) found that distributed leadership was a key factor in highly successful elementary schools. Such research suggests that engaging teachers in research leadership at the school and district site would pay huge benefits for school improvement and student learning.

In summary, the success of teachers in this single summer course shows how learning in graduate course work in education might bridge to school settings. Such bridging offers us a picture of how Alberta teacher leadership might be developed within Alberta and suggests possible changes in three areas:

1. How education graduate courses and programs that claim to develop teacher leaders might be improved
2. How school division leaders might better engage and support teacher leadership within their own district
3. How provincial level educational ministry policy people might envision how they use teachers as grassroots leaders in the formation of practical educational policy and activity

References

Couture, J-C., and S. Murgatroyd, eds. 2012. Rethinking School Leadership-Creating Great Schools for All Students. Edmonton, Alta:futureTHINK and Alberta Teachers’ Association.

First Steps Reading Map of Development,Canadian Edition. 2008. Toronto, Ont: Pearson Education Canada.

First Steps Reading Resource Book, Canadian Edition. 2008. Toronto, Ont: Pearson Education Canada.

First Steps Linking Assessment, Teaching and Learning. 2008. Toronto, Ont: Pearson Education Canada.

Hallinger, P., and R. H. Heck. 2011. “Conceptual and Methodological Issues in Studying School Leadership Effects as a Reciprocal Process.” School Effectiveness and School Improvement 22, no. 2: 149-73.

Hargreaves, A., and D. Shirley. 2009. The Fourth Way-The Inspiring Future for Educational Change. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin.

May, H., and J.A. Supovitz. 2011. “The Scope of Principal Efforts to Improve Instruction.” Educational Administration Quarterly 47, no. 2: 332-52.

Parsons, J., and L. Beauchamp. 2011. Living Leadership for Learning: Case Studies of Five Alberta Elementary School Principals. Edmonton, Alta: Alberta Teachers’ Association.

Richards, H., A. Brown and T. Forde. 2007. “Addressing Diversity in Schools: Culturally Responsive Pedagogy.” Teaching Exceptional Children 39, no. 3: 64-68.

Sammons, P., Q. Gu and C. Day and J. Ko. 2011. “Exploring the Impact of School Leadership on Pupil Outcomes: Results from a Study of Academically Improved and Effective Schools in England.” International Journal of Educational Management 25, no. 1: 83-101.

Schein, E. 2010. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 4th ed. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass.

Taylor, L., and J. Parsons. 2011. “Improving Student Engagement.” Current Issues in Education 14, no. 1. Available at http://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/issue/view/12 (accessed August 28, 2012).

Taylor, M., A. Yates, L.H. Meyer and P. Kinsella. 2011. “Teacher Professional Leadership in Support of Teacher Professional Development.” Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies 27, no. 1: 85–94.

Jim Parsons is professor of education in the Faculty of Education, University of Alberta.

Christine Stobart is a doctoral student at the University of Calgary.

Bobbi Compton is a learning coach with Fort McMurray Local No. 48.

Melissa Humby is the vice- principal of Buck Mountain Central School, in Buck Lake, Alberta.

Raime Drake is a teacher at Eleanor Hall School, in Clyde, Alberta.