Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change

Professional Learning FlagshipProgram: Leading Curriculum ChangeLiterature ReviewOctober 2011Emeritus Professor Rob GilbertSchool of EducationThe University of Queensland

Published: Melbourne Australia October 2011This literature review was commissioned by AITSL in May 2011 to inform the learning design ofthe Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change. The first round of thisprogram commenced in August 2011.The views, findings, conclusions and recommendations herein are those of the authors ad do notnecessarily represent the official positions or policies of AITSL or the educational institutions of theauthors.AITSL is funded by the Australian Government. Copyright ©2011 the Australian Institute for Teachingand School Leadership (AITSL).All rights reserved.aitsl.edu.auFor more information contact professionallearning@aitsl.edu.au

ContentsIntroduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1Curriculum change: Implications for leadership ............................................................................ 2The challenge of curriculum change .................................................................................................... 4Factors which promote curriculum change .......................................................................................... 5Recommendations ............................................................................................................................... 8Research on professional learning ................................................................................................. 9The potential of professional learning ................................................................................................. 9Features of successful professional learning programs ..................................................................... 10Online professional learning .............................................................................................................. 12Teacher preferences in professional learning ................................................................................... 13Professional learning communities ..................................................................................................... 14Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 17The processes of leadership ........................................................................................................... 18Distributed leadership ......................................................................................................................... 20Teacher leadership ............................................................................................................................. 22Curriculum leadership ......................................................................................................................... 27Curriculum leadership and social justice ............................................................................................ 32Recommendations ............................................................................................................................. 33Conclusion and recommendations ................................................................................................ 34References ....................................................................................................................................... 35

IntroductionThis review aims to inform the design and implementation of the Professional Learning FlagshipProgram: Leading Curriculum Change developed by the School of Education and the Centre forInnovation and Professional Learning at The University of Queensland for the Australian Institutefor Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) 1 . Accordingly, it addresses the key role componentsand required capacities of curriculum leaders in a context of curriculum change, and the nature of aprofessional learning process which would prepare lead teachers for this role.The review is organised in four sections:1. Curriculum change: Implications for leadership2. Research on professional learning3. The processes of leadership4. Conclusion and recommendations.The review has been informed by the work of AITSL represented in a number of documents:• Interim Standards for Professional Learning Programs (2010)• The Review of the AITSL Draft Standards for Professional Learning Programs (Lloyd andMayer 2010)• The Lead Teacher career stage in the National Professional Standards for Teachers (2011).• The review has also been informed by The Shape of the Australian Curriculum Version 2.0.(ACARA 2010).Throughout the review the aim is to identify the key needs for mounting a successful professionallearning program to develop teachers’ capacity for leading curriculum change. For this reason, whilethe review scrutinises research for its validity and usefulness, it differs from a standard research reviewaimed at identifying needs for future research.While an overwhelming emphasis in the literature on educational leadership focuses on the schoolprincipal, this is not the concern of this review. Rather, the review is motivated to contribute to thepreparation of lead teachers who meet, in its broadest sense, the aspiration of the AITSL NationalProfessional Standards for Teachers that:Inside and outside the school they initiate and lead activities that focus on improving educationalopportunities for all students.1 The author acknowledges the assistance of Janine Roberts and Han Le in the preparation of this review.1 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Curriculum change: Implications for leadershipUnderstanding the process of curriculum change is necessarily based on concepts of the natureof curriculum. Hamilton’s claim that, ‘To create a curriculum is to systematise stored-up humanexperience’, is deceptive in its simplicity. A more comprehensive view of the curriculum process is onein which valued forms of knowledge are interpreted and reinterpreted through processes of conception,translation, production, and implementation (Gilbert 2010). Such a view is elaborated by Moreno:Curriculum is a socio-historical construction which is expressed through general systems ofknowledge characterization and hierarchy; these systems are in turn translated and transformedinto legislative and administrative regulations, academic achievement standards, textbooksand teaching aids, and the practice of teaching and learning in classrooms and schools(Moreno 2006, p. 195).This somewhat linear view needs to be combined with the recognition that curriculum specificationsare articulations of meanings in social practices. As Muller points out, this process does not ‘proceedor progress seamlessly nor is it an aggregate of incremental steps’; rather, ‘The embodiment in thecurriculum of the values and practices of any particular group is the result of a process of struggle,usually symbolic, although it is always also related to the broader field of power in society’ (Muller 2000pp. 10, 11). To see the curriculum in this way is to recognise that curriculum change is a process whichlinks to broader social contexts, and which calls up deep-rooted questions about school and society,issues recognised in the references to globalisation and technological, social and environmental changein The Shape of the Australian Curriculum (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority(ACARA) 2010, p. 5).The challenge of curriculum changeThe Australian curriculum is characterised in The Shape of the Australian Curriculum (ACARA 2010,p. 25) as a dynamic and futures-oriented document subject to ‘ongoing monitoring and review’, andupdating in the light of ‘review and evaluation data; new national and international knowledge andpractice about learning, teaching, curriculum design and implementation; and contemporary researchin discipline and cross-discipline areas’. Consequently, curriculum change is not a process limited to aperiod of time, but an ongoing and necessary part of the routine practice of schools.Observers have a generally pessimistic view of the experience of curriculum reform (Leithwood,Jantzi and Mascall 2002; McDonald 2003), and it is hard to deny McCulloch’s claim that ‘longerterm curriculum reform has generally failed to generate educational change of a fundamental kind’(McCulloch 1998, p. 1203). Some commentators have pointed to curriculum change as an erratic orfortuitous process dominated by fads and pendulum-like swings from one ideology or theory to another(Good, Clark and Clark 1997; Ravitch 2001).The range of factors which affect the success of curriculum implementation is as broad as educationitself (Sims and Sims 2004; Smith 2008). Table 1 from Altrichter (2005, p. 8) illustrates this range.Ellsworth has identified various causes of resistance to change, including cultural, social, organisationaland psychological barriers (Ellsworth 2000). McDonald reviewed three models of curriculum reform,the top-down approach of the ‘teacher proof’ curricula of the 1960s and 1970s (reappearing in somerecent standards bases approaches), the bottom-up approach of school-based curriculum developmentand the action research movement, and more recent approaches through collaborative partnerships ofschools, professional associations and other stakeholders (McDonald 2003). McDonald suggests thatthese approaches are limited in their modernist assumptions about knowledge and the role of studentsas consumers in a regulated institutional order, and that a more flexible and open approach is needed.An OECD analysis of curriculum reform in a range of countries identified a similar dichotomy which… reveal rather contradictory conclusions about the systemic reform endeavour. On the one hand,they reinforce the idea of the inter-connectedness of the different elements. On the other, someProfessional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 2

would argue that the dominant metaphor used in proposals for systemic reform is mechanistic,relatively static and linear. It owes too much to images of machines and of self-regulating systemsdrawn from the industrial production models. These characteristics mean that, despite its strengths,such proposals do not capture the complex nature of educational change.(Centre for Educational Research and Innovation 1998, p 30)Rosenmund has pointed out that ‘... curriculum change cannot simply be seen as a planned“technocratic” reform to improve the productivity of the education system, but should also be understoodas a political measure that re-shapes relationships between individuals and institutions of the nationstatethrough the selection and organization of school knowledge’ (Rosenmund 2006).In their study of educational change over the long term, Hargreaves and Goodson (2006) identify fiveforces for change which interact to determine the sustainability or non-sustainability of change: thewaves of change of educational policy at specific points in time and their consonance with schools’and teachers’ identities; changes in school leadership; student and community demographics; theprofessional identities and career stages of teachers; and the interrelations among schools in a contextof both standardisation and competition.3 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Table 1: Overview of factors affecting implementation (Altrichter, 2005, p. 8)A. Characteristics of the innovation itself • perceived or felt need• clarity (about goals and means)• complexity• quality, contextual suitability and practicalityB. Local characteristics • regional administration (e.g. school district)• history of negative experiences• adequate follow-through• active knowledge and understanding• active support• community characteristics• contextual stabilityC. Organisation C1. Actors• management (e.g. principal and school management team)• level of commitment• obtaining resources• shielding from interference• encouraging staff / recognition• adapting standard procedures• teachers• competencies and attitudes• decision-making participation• quality of collegial relationships• students’ and other participants’ competencies and attitudesC2. Organisational characteristics• compatibility of the innovation goals with the strategic goals of the organisation• organisational culture, structures and processes• system of incentives and career patterns• characteristics of the existing curriculum and assessment proceduresD. Government and external agencies • quality of relationships between central and local actors• resource support and trainingProfessional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 4

Even when innovation is successful, it is difficult to sustain. Giles and Hargreaves’ (2006) longitudinalstudies of innovative schools identified three common forces behind their eventual decline: envyand anxiety from competing institutions in the surrounding system, the evolutionary process of agingand decline in the organisational life cycle, and the regressive effects of large-scale, standardisedreform strategies. Their recommended solution was to promote the concept of schools as learningorganisations which they argued could ameliorate the effects of these forces.A number of authors have distinguished three key dimensions of barriers to change (Anderson 1996;Hall 1997; House 1981; Johnson 2007). The technical dimension relates to professional knowledge andskills and their acquisition, as well as classroom management issues, time for planning and professionallearning provision. In Hall’s view (1997, p. 343), it is ‘founded on production, task orientation, efficiency,and a mechanistic view of innovation’. The political dimension relates to power and influence, includingadministrative support and leadership, collaboration, and the negotiation and resolution of conflict. Thecultural dimension includes values, beliefs and norms, both consensual and competing in individuals,groups and organisations.Given these analyses, leading effective and sustainable curriculum change must be seen as a complexand difficult task and a challenge to the work of curriculum leaders. The range and dynamic nature offactors to be considered suggest a need for strategies to address complexity, most readily found inliterature on systems thinking (Dawidowicz 2009; Dyehouse 2010) and strategic leadership (Preedy,Glatter and Wise 2003).Given the role of the teacher in interpreting and implementing the curriculum, the importance of theteacher in curriculum reform has long been argued (Elliott 1994). This was the rationale for the teacherledapproach to curriculum innovation and development, which acknowledged that the curriculumthat matters most is the one enacted by teachers and experienced by students. Recent researchhas highlighted the ways in which teachers’ involvement in innovation involves personal, social andemotional responses to change which influence their commitment (Zembylas and Barker 2007).However, McCulloch points out that the early hopes for teacher-led curriculum reform underestimatedthe constraints of their environments (McCulloch 1998). Anderson (2004, p. 109) identifies three‘understandable’ reasons for teachers’ reluctance to change: a lack of awareness that change isneeded; a lack of knowledge, particularly procedural knowledge, concerning how to change; and thebelief that changes will not make any difference to them or their students.The challenges of curriculum change are not to be underestimated, but a considerable research efforthas recently been applied to enhance the prospects of change. This work has identified a number ofimportant strategies which can improve the process of curriculum change.Factors which promote curriculum changeIn their research into factors influencing the transfer of good educational practice Fielding et al. (2005)identified four elements of practice transfer that were of special significance, all relating to teacherslearning with and from each other over periods of time. Most important was that teacher learning isa social process sustained by relationships and trust. In addition, it is a personal and interpersonalprocess that has to engage with teachers’ individual and institutional identity, and which requires supportfor learner engagement by fostering the willingness to try something out; and, lastly, that the work oftransfer has to be sustained over time to a greater extent than is commonly done.Hall’s (1997) study examined the relationships between curriculum change and the practices ofknowledge used by teachers. He found that there was a significant association between teachers’ useof assistance and information and more enriched curriculum implementation, and between a capacitybuildingorientation to knowledge use (becoming more self-sufficient and less reliant on externalassistance) and greater teacher autonomy and control over the implementation. In other words,teachers become more independent in curriculum innovation the wider and more intensive their use ofinformation, a finding which has clear implications for professional learning.5 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

This emphasis on capacity-building is endorsed by Levin and Fullan in their review of effectivechange and large-scale reform. While change is complex, they identify capacity-building as the mostimportant single element of successful change strategies, defining capacity-building as ‘any strategythat increases the collective effectiveness of a group’ (Levin and Fullan 2008, p. 295). This involvesdeveloping individual and collective knowledge and competencies, resources and motivation: ‘nothinglasting will happen unless people develop new capacities. At the same time, new capacities buildmotivation because they generate clarity, skills and success’ (Levin and Fullan 2008, p. 295). They pointout that capacity-building ‘is not about one way transmission of knowledge’ but requires ‘learning incontext ... creating cultures where learning in context is endemic’ (p. 296), quoting Elmore:Cultures do not change by mandate; they change by the specific displacement of existing norms,structures, and processes by others; the process of cultural change depends fundamentally onmodeling the new values and behavior that you expect to displace the existing ones.(Elmore 2004, p. 11)At a more concrete level, and particularly relevant in the context of professional learning, is theConcerns-Based Adoption Model which acknowledges that learning brings change, and that critical toensuring that learning ‘takes hold’ is the need to support people through the process of change (Loucks-Horsley 1996). The model claims that people considering and experiencing change evolve in the kindsof questions they ask and how they deal with the change. Early questions tend to be self-oriented: ‘Whatis it? How will it affect me?’ Later questions are more task-oriented: ‘How do I do it? How can I use thesematerials efficiently? How can I organise myself? Why is it taking so much time?’ Finally, if self and taskconcerns can be resolved, the individual can focus on impact by asking: ‘Is this change working forstudents? Is there something that will work even better?’ Leading change requires an appreciation ofthis developmental sequence and the ability to respond to it.Owston (2007) reviewed the literature on educational innovation for his study of the sustained use ofeducational technology in 59 schools, and identified three contextual levels that affect and mediatechange. The micro-level comprises such factors as classroom organisation and personal characteristicsof the teachers and students. The meso-level includes the school organisation and culture and therole of administrators, parents and community leaders. The macro-level encompasses the previoustwo levels, and concerns state and national policies and international trends which might influencecurriculum and assessment, professional development, and telecommunications. Owston (2007, p. 73)concluded that:The foremost essential requirement for sustainability in the model is teacher support of theinnovation. Support from the school principal and students is also essential, as is the need forteachers to perceive the innovation to be of value and for teacher professional development.Priestley (2011) offers a theoretical framework for understanding educational change based on Archer’smorphogenetic approach (Archer 1988, 1995, 2000), arguing that it is an important improvement onthe simplistic notions of the linear implementation of monolithic policy which have been widely critiqued(Cuban, 1998). Priestley (2011 p. 6) argues that ‘policymakers and practitioners need to be more explicitin differentiating between innovation—the policies, ideas, and texts that promote and articulate changesin practice—and actual changes in social practice that may occur following a particular innovation’.This then accentuates the need for ‘the building of professional capacity to engage with policy, boostingthe ability of teachers to respond creatively from a wide repertoire for maneuver ... to the problemsfaced when engaging with innovation’ (p. 8). Also important is the need to see capacity as more thanan individual quality or ability, and to ensure that ‘all involved in the process of change become awareof structural factors that might enable or constrain agency including school systems, the demands ofattainment and quality assurance, relationships and power structures within schools, available artifacts,and the physical layout of buildings’ (p. 8). Finally, such an approach recommends an understanding ofcultural considerations such as the values and attitudes that limit or promote agency and the access thatpractitioners have to alternative cultural resources.From this framework, Priestley (2011) developed a research strategy for studying change which focusedon three sets of questions dealing with culture and the kinds of knowledge which inform everydayProfessional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 6

practice and shape teacher values; social structure, the ‘webs of relationships in which teachers areinvolved’; and teachers’ individual experiences and values which affect their identities and practices.While there were important differences among the schools Priestley studied, he claims that the modelthrows light on the processes of curriculum construction and educational change which would be usefulas a guide for those enacting change.Similar arguments are put by Weston and Bain (2009), who criticise assumptions that stakeholdershave a common understanding of change - assumptions which are not borne out in their research. Thelinear and rational needs analysis approach needs to be combined with an appreciation of the looselycoupled informal culture of schools. A reconciliation of these two approaches must assist stakeholdersto ‘undertake a realistic analysis of their circumstances; learn about themselves in ways that informcommitment to change; and build a school-level schema that reflects commitment and support for thedesired changes’ (Bain 2007, cited in Weston and Bain 2009, p. 159). The process of change must beintegrated with a process of self-understanding which builds the school’s capacity for improvement.Woodbury and Gess-Newsome (2000) review research on school change and identify four potentialexplanations for what they call ‘the phenomenon of change without difference in educational reform’(p. 765), each based on a different perspective on change. These perspectives are the ‘school system’perspective, a functional approach to change, often seeing this as a closed system immune to influencefrom the community and political and other influences. The cultural and structural perspective focuseson the culture of teachers’ and administrators’ habits of mind, shared beliefs and patterns of interactionand behaviour, as well as the structures of teaching such as space, timetables, mandated curricula andassessment and the like.An ‘intent of reform’ perspective distinguishes first-order change aimed at increasing the efficiencyor effectiveness of existing school practices, and second-order change, which seeks to transformfundamental structures and practices, and requires ‘new ways of thinking, acting and organizing ratherthan an assimilation of new ideas into existing patterns’ (Woodbury and Gess-Newsome 2000, p. 770).A particularly important factor, which appears also in the literature on the success of collaborativeprofessional learning, is the degree of trust which characterises professional relationships in schools.While trust is difficult to measure, a number of studies have shown the importance of trust in schoolchange and improvement (Cosner 2009; Daly 2009; Forsyth 2008; Hoy, Gageand Tarter 2006;Tschannen-Moran 2009). Bryk and Schneider’s(2002) 10-year study of more than 400 Chicagoelementary schools found a link between the level of trust in a school and student learning, observingthat ‘trust fosters a set of organizational conditions, some structural and others social-psychological,that make it more conducive for individuals to initiate and sustain the kinds of activities necessary toaffect productivity improvements’ (p. 116). They found that trust among educators lowers their senseof vulnerability as they engage in ‘the new and uncertain tasks associated with reform’, facilitatesproblem-solving, and ‘sustains an ethical imperative … to advance the best interests of children’, andthus ‘constitutes a moral resource for school improvement’ (p. 34). Hoy and Tschannen-Moran, (2003)suggested that when teachers perceived greater levels of trust, they had a greater sense of efficacy.They also found a link between teachers’ trust of principals, colleagues and parents and their willingnessto collaborate with them. Brewster and Railsback (2003) offer useful guidance for leaders on developingtrust in schools.Finally, the teacher thinking perspective focuses on teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about suchthings as the nature of subjects, how students learn, what students are capable of learning, and howchange relates to their understandings and attitudes about institutional and curricular goals of theschool and system in which they work. If teachers’ knowledge and beliefs are incompatible with reformgoals, change will be limited. Equally, Woodbury and Gess-Newsome (2002, p. 771) cite Cohen andBall (1990) in observing that, ‘Teachers’ assimilation of new ideas into the status quo of their practiceengenders their reports of making change where none can be observed’. Roehrig, Kruse and Kern(2007) also highlight the importance of teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning in curriculumimplementation.7 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Much of the foregoing discussion is encapsulated in Fullan’s (2006, p. 8) seven core premises that, heargues, underpin an understanding of change:1. a focus on motivating people for change2. capacity-building, with a focus on results3. learning in context4. changing the larger context, including schools and districts learning from each other5. a bias for reflective action to produce shared vision and ownership6. ‘tri-level’ engagement of school and community, district and state7. persistence and flexibility in staying the course.Teachers are at the centre of curriculum change, but their preparedness (in both senses of theword) cannot be assumed. Leaders of curriculum change need the capacities to engage teachers incommitting to the process.RecommendationsProfessional learning for leading curriculum change should prepare leaders to:• Understand and address the key influences on successful curriculum innovation identified inthe literature, including such factors as clarifying goals, supportive organisational structures andmanagement processes, school cultures and beliefs, collective capacity-building through learningand reflection, and trust and collegiality.• Appreciate the complexity of institutional processes and the relevance of strategic leadership andsystems thinking, to planning a comprehensive approach to innovation.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 8

Research on professional learningThe early history of professional learning (PL) reveals an emphasis on one-off exercises focused onspecific tasks related to teachers’ work, usually determined by system priorities. However, a broaderapproach is now recommended, recognising the range of ways in which teacher learning can takeplace. Little (2001) proposes four categories of ‘learning opportunities’ for teachers in the context ofreform agendas which point to the multidimensional ways in which professional learning can informpractice. They are: PL as inspiration and goal-setting to expand and enrich school practice; PL as thedevelopment of knowledge and skills related to ‘school-wide’ or government-identified priorities(typical of the early history mentioned above); PL as inquiry, which generates a problem-solvingapproach to practice; and PL as collaboration where teacher learning builds from within establishedprofessional communities.The potential of professional learningResearch and evaluation studies show clear evidence of the potentially valuable effects of PL on studentlearning. Yoon et al. (2007, p. iii) identify nine experimental studies of the effects of PL which met thestandards required by the US Institute for Education Sciences for such research, and found:... that average control group students would have increased their achievement by 21 percentilepoints if their teacher had received substantial professional development .... The effect size wasfairly consistent across the three content areas reviewed.In a large-scale statistical analysis of PL, Wallace (2009, p. 573) found:... moderate effects on teacher practice and very small but sometimes significant effects on studentachievement when the effects of professional development are mediated by teacher practice. Inspite of differences in samples, academic subjects, and assessments, the effects of professionaldevelopment on teacher practice and student achievement persist and are remarkably similaracross analyses.Like most educational research, findings of a positive effect on student learning are not universal. Forinstance, Garet et al. (2008), in an experimental study of a one year PL program on the teaching ofreading, found positive impacts on teacher knowledge and teaching methods but no significant effecton student learning, though this seems to raise more questions about the curriculum approach whichwas the subject of the PL than the PL itself. Nonetheless, it does suggest that a wide range of factorscan affect the potential impact of PL, and that PL is unlikely to succeed without careful considerationof them.Research into professional learning in recent times, both within and beyond PL for teachers, has beenvoluminous, and a strong consensus has developed about what forms of professional learning are mosteffective. From her review of PL across professions, and drawing on research in community and adulteducation, workplace learning, and professional undergraduate education, Webster-Wright (2009, p. 703)defines this consensus as recommending PL which is ‘continuing, active, social, and related to practice’.In research on PL for teachers, there is increasing evidence and agreement around a range ofapproaches, conditions and strategies (Bubb and Earley 2008; Colbert, Brown, Choi and Thomas 2008;Croft, Coggshall, Dolan, Powers and Killion 2010; Darling-Hammond, Wei, Andree, Richardson andOrphanos 2009; Doecke et al. 2008; Garet et al. 2008; Loucks-Horsley and Matsumoto 1999; Meiersand Ingvarson 2005; Mitchell and Cubey 2003; Penuel, Fishman, Yamaguchi and Gallagher 2007;Training and Development Agency 2007; Watson 2005; Yoon, Duncan, Lee, Scarloss and Shapley2007; Zaslow et al. 2010). These studies and recommendations confirm the relevance of principlesof adult learning (Beavers 2009; Brown 2006), as well as research on teachers’ learning processes(Meirink, Meijer, Verloop and Bergen 2009; Shank 2006). The results of these studies are combined inthe following summaries.9 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Features of successful professional learning programsCombining the research studies cited above leads to the following broad conclusions about the features,strategies and conditions of successful PL. In terms of program features, successful PL programs will:• Respond to participants’ aspirations and understandings (including what one study called‘winning hearts and minds’)Connections to participants’ own felt needs are important to generate commitment to the PLgoals and process. This is sometimes achieved through performance management and careerdevelopment as well as self-evaluation and school improvement. Using data to identify problemsin school performance can be useful here. Research also suggests that participants in PL within aschool often take on leadership roles which can increase professional satisfaction. In their study ofteacher-driven, team-based PL, Colbert et al. (2008, p. 139) found that it ‘provides teachers withthe autonomy to define the objectives, establish professional networks, and identify and utilizestrategies that improve pedagogy and student learning’. An important implication here is the needto provide curriculum leaders with choice within PL.• Engage participants in collaborationOne of the strongest recent recommendations from research on PL is that it should involve thecollective participation of teachers from the same classrooms or schools in professional learning.McCormick et al., (2008, p. 6) observe that, ‘Collaboration ... is well supported by the evidence interms of its effectiveness and it can lead to a wide range of impacts. Collaboration is especiallyimportant to innovations in practice, as distinct from improving existing practice’. These ‘reformorientedprofessional development activities ... include being mentored or coached, participating ina committee or study group, or engaging in an internship’ (Penuel et al. 2007, p. 928).• Include investigations into their own settingsResearch recommends that participants analyse data from their own settings, since therevelation of discrepant data can motivate interest and revise understanding. This is an aspect ofdeveloping a learning-centred culture which is an important approach to PL (see the later sectionon professional learning communities). In their review of PL in the UK, McCormick et al. (2008,p. 6) have commented that, ‘Enquiry is seen to be important and there is strong evidence of itsimportance in ensuring changes in practice’. Scheerens (2010, p. 32) notes that ‘researchershave emphasised the notion of ongoing and lifelong professional learning embedded in schoolsas a natural and expected component of teachers’ professional activities and a key component ofschool improvement’. The goal should be that PL will ‘promote continuous enquiry and problemsolvingembedded in the daily life of schools’ (Training and Development Agency 2007, p. 3).• Engage participants in critical reflection and challenge assumptionsCritical reflection is a core aspect of successful PL when it enables participants to becomeaware of their own thinking, actions, and influences, to investigate and challenge assumptionsand to extend their thinking. Continuous assessment of their own practice is an important partof this. Loucks-Horsley (1999, p. 263) identifies the need to ‘Create cognitive dissonance todisturb existing beliefs’ and ‘Ensure that dissonance-creating and dissonance-resolving activitiesare connected to the teachers’ own students and context. It is widely accepted that changingeducational practice also requires changes to practitioners’ beliefs, understanding, and/or attitudes,and critical reflection is an important strategy for achieving this.• Establish clear shared understandings of purposeThe goals of the PL, and the reasons for them, must be clear, as should their ultimate connectionto educational outcomes. The UK Training and Development Agency (2007, p. 2) notes that PL iseffective if ‘it is planned with a clear vision of the effective or improved practice being sought’, and if‘this vision is shared by those undertaking the development and by people leading or supporting it’.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 10

• Include both theory and content and provide information about alternative practicesWhile this conclusion is drawn mainly from research into changing classroom teaching practicethrough subject-related PL, it also applies more broadly. The key principle is that teachers need tounderstand the theory underlying recommendations for practice, since successful practice requiresa clear purpose and an integrated understanding of the various aspects of any initiative.• Ensure continuous evaluation of the PLThe process of PL should be monitored and its impact needs to be evaluated. As Bubb and Earley(2008, p. 37) note in their UK study:Evaluating the impact of staff development was found to be the weakest link in the trainingand development cycle; how outcomes had been improved and the quality of teaching andlearning enhanced in our case study schools were not made clear. In part this was becauseCPD is usually conceived in terms of activities to be engaged in (inputs) rather than as theactual development of knowledge and expertise (outcomes).Similarly, the UK Training and Development Agency (2007, p. 2) states that quality PL requiresthat, ‘Each activity is part of a coherent long-term plan that gives the participants opportunities toapply what they have learned, evaluate the effect on their practice, and develop their practice.• Be a long-term processIntegrating innovations into normal practice is in most cases a long-term process, requiringcontinuing help in the cycle of resolving problems and dealing with new issues and problemsthat will inevitably arise. As Penuel et al. (2007, p. 928) point out, ‘Professional development thatis of longer duration and time span is more likely to contain the kinds of learning opportunitiesnecessary for teachers to integrate new knowledge into practice’. This should include ‘follow-upand support for further learning—including support from sources external to the school that canprovide necessary resources and new perspectives’ (Meiers et al. 2005, p. 16). An analysis byYoon et al. (2007) found that identifiable effects on learning occurred only with PL programs of over50 hours.• Ensure high-quality design and deliveryThis requires that PL is based on the best available evidence about the field which it is promoting,including the input of expert knowledge, but also modelling effective strategies through activelearning.Successful PL which incorporates these principles uses a range of strategies, including discussing,coaching, mentoring, observing others/lesson study, networking, collaboration, modelling strategies,creating a learning community, action research, case discussions, critical friends groups, data teams/assessment development, examining student work, portfolios and professional learning communities/study groups. The importance of collaboration in these strategies is obvious.Finally, research has identified a range of conditions in which PL should operate if it is to be effective.• ResourcesWhile this is an obvious need, it is an essential consideration. Staffing levels must be sufficientto provide for time for PL. Special provision may be needed for tools and support to assist withanalysis, evaluation and planning.• Organisational supportThis is largely a matter of the leadership and management of staff development. School leadersneed to support PL initiatives in the ways listed above but also in vision-building and providingindividual support through such strategies as coaching or mentoring from experienced colleagues.As mentioned above, the degree of participants’ control over tasks is relevant to quality PL,so contexts which encourage and provide for staff initiative will lead to more successful PL.Professional learning works best if the school operates as a community:11 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

p. 1051) conclude that, ‘Findings validate the need for alternative teacher professional development(TPD) models and the value of professional communities and knowledge acquired through technologyfacilitatedlearning’.Teacher preferences in professional learningWhile there is considerable research on the features of PL which have identifiable effects on teachers’knowledge, beliefs and practices, there is less evidence of teachers’ preferences for particular modesof PL.A UK survey was designed to capture a nationwide, representative sample of teachers, headteachersand schools to identify patterns of variation in the professional learning practices, values and beliefs ofteachers in English primary and secondary schools (Opfer, Pedder, and Lavicza 2008). Factor analysiswas used to identify underlying dimensions of teachers’ PL-related values and practices. The findingsidentified four factors related to organisational practices and patterns and school support:• A clear vision and formal systems of professional support and impact evaluation, which were highlyvalued. This included items referring to school leadership and staff commitment around a clearschool vision, as well as provision of PL opportunities and evaluation.• Performance management processes, which were valued by primary school teachers, schoolleaders, teachers in rural schools and advanced skills as well as novice teachers, but less so byothers. Performance management helped teachers link PL to professional standards and individualcareer goals.• Building social capital, which was the highest of all dimensions of school support, and referredto ‘fostering a learning culture in which teachers trust one another to take risks, plan together,and network as part of their CPD’ (Opfer et al. 2008). Items dealt with the occurrence of opencommunication where discussion, advice and collective decision-making about teaching occurred.• Supporting collaboration, networking and experimentation, though here values were only ‘fairlyhigh’, except for advanced skills teachers who recorded high values for this dimension.The survey by Opfer et al. (2008) also asked teachers about their values and practices for differentkinds of classroom-based professional learning activity, leading to the identification of three factors:• Experimental and adaptive learning, where ‘teachers learn by experimenting and adapting theirclassroom practices, reflection, self-evaluation, and responding to feedback from pupils andcolleagues’ (Opfer et al. 2008). The highest levels of values were recorded for this dimensionacross all sectors of schooling.• Research orientation had low levels of support from most teachers, but higher levels fromheadteachers, senior leaders and advanced skills teachers. This included reading researchreports, relating practice to research findings and modifying practice in the light of research.• Collaborative classroom-based learning and research, which was fairly highly valued, and includedjoint research/evaluation with colleagues, reflective discussions about practice, and collaborativeteaching and planning.The most comprehensive Australian evidence of teachers’ PL beliefs and preferences comes from a2008 study which surveyed 4574 teachers in 2000 schools across all States and Territories (Doecke etal. 2008). The survey found that:• The most preferred PL activities were those which provided ideas which could be incorporatedinto teaching (90%), included the latest trends in educational thinking (45%), challenged thinkingwith ‘big ideas’ (43%) and led to talking about work to other teachers (42%).• The reason for participation in PL was usually a personal choice from available options (55%),but often a decision by school administration (35%) or school administration influenced by externalpriorities (24%) or a school- based committee (22%).13 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

• In terms of location, most respondents did not mind whether the PL occurred in school or offsite(61%), but 31% preferred the latter.• On timing, when asked if they preferred that PL was held out of school hours, 52% said No, 6.5%said Yes, and 41% did not mind.• The most commonly experienced PL formats were workshop discussions with colleagues froma range of schools (68%), an outside speaker followed by discussion (68%), workshop discussionwithin the school (60%) and conference attendance (48.5%). 22% had participated in onlineinformation technology resources.• The most preferred PL formats were workshopping with colleagues (63%), listening to speakersexpert in teachers’ subject field (62%), listening to other teachers’ speak about their work andideas (52%), and visiting other schools or educational settings (45%). Use of online informationtechnology resources was preferred by 17% of respondents.• Change in practice as a result of PL was rated as significant by 23% of respondents, ‘a bit’ by63% and not really by 12.5%.• Credit for academic credentials was reported for all or most PL by 5% of respondents, but 78%reported that none of their PL was credited in this way.• Hindrances to PL participation were other work priorities (42%), cost (29%), distance issues(23.5%) and lack of available activities suited to needs (19%). For teachers in small towns,distance issues were mentioned by 72% and cost by 35%.Teachers’ preferences and evaluations of professional learning in many respects tend to support thefindings of research into the most effective professional learning: namely, that PL should be clearlylinked to practice and goals, should work through collaboration, and engage teachers in challengingthinking over sustained periods of time.Professional learning communitiesThe emphasis on collaboration and inquiry in research on teacher PL has led to a focus on professionallearning communities (PLCs), not only as the chief mode of implementation of PL, but also as a basis forsustaining successful educational practice within schools in general. The scope of the potential of PLCsis illustrated by Stoll et al. (2006 p. 221) in the conclusion of their wide-ranging literature review of PLCs:International evidence suggests that educational reform’s progress depends on teachers’ individualand collective capacity and its link with school-wide capacity for promoting pupils’ learning.Building capacity is therefore critical. Capacity is a complex blend of motivation, skill, positivelearning, organisational conditions and culture, and infrastructure of support. Put together, it givesindividuals, groups, whole school communities and school systems the power to get involved inand sustain learning over time. Developing professional learning communities (PLCs) appears tohold considerable promise for capacity building for sustainable improvement.Based to a large extent on the early work on learning organisations, notably Senge’s (1990) The FifthDiscipline, and the work of Lave and Wenger (1991) on communities of practice, PLCs are becomingthe most commonly used form of collaborative inquiry. The approach encapsulates the strengths of PLthrough a culture of inquiry identified in the literature by Colbert et al. (2008, p. 138):A culture of inquiry supports the use of data to evidence success, identify strengths andweaknesses, and measure progress toward goals. Cultures of inquiry can provide teacherswith opportunities to dialogue about learning as learning relates to lesson planning, studentachievement, and student work ... teachers have the opportunity to give and receive feedbackabout learning amongst their colleagues.A range of studies has shown the effectiveness of PLCs as an approach to PL, both in terms of teacherpractice and student learning (Cordingley, Bell, Thomasonand Firth 2005; Doecke et al. 2008; Fulton,Doerr, and Britton 2010; Giles and Hargreaves 2006; Goddard, Goddard and Tschannen-MoranProfessional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 14

2007; Gruenert 2005; Printy 2008; Scheerens 2010; Vescio, Ross, and Adams 2008), though theireffectiveness depends on the extent to which their use matches the research on successful features,strategies and conditions discussed above. For instance, Graham (2007) found that the success ofPLCs depended on the leadership and organisational practices which supported it, the extent to whichteam meetings engaged positively in dialogue about action (lesson plans, student work, assessment,etc.), and the development of community among teams. Printy (2008) found that, in US high schools,the strength of departmental chairs was the most influential factor in determining the quality of teachers’participation in communities of practice.Features of successful PLCs are widely reported in the literature (Stoll, Bolam, McMahon, WallaceandThomas 2006), and to a large extent reflect the features of successful PL in general:• Shared values and visionUnity of purpose and a clear agreement about the school mission was one of the three strongestcorrelations with effective collaborative schools in Gruenert’s (2005) study. Doecke et al. (2008,p. 9) also point to the importance of teams having ‘a shared vision of the capabilities of studentsand teachers’.• Collective responsibilityTaking responsibility for results and outcomes, and for professional learning (both individual andcollective), are a key feature of successful PLCs (Bolam, McMahon, Stoll, Thomasand Wallace2005). Doecke et al. (2008, p. 9) recommend that, ‘Team members should have shared andappropriately differentiated responsibilities based on their experience and knowledge levels.There should be a mutual accountability for student achievement among all members of thelearning team’.• Effective leadershipBoth shared leadership and organisational support from principals are important. Doecke et al.(2008, p. 10) observe that, ‘Successful teams are supported by their school leaders who build aclimate of openness and trust in the school, empower teams to make decisions based on studentneeds, and apply appropriate pressure to perform’.• Reflective professional inquiryActive deconstruction of knowledge through reflection and analysis is combined with itsreconstruction through action in a particular context as well as co-construction throughcollaborative learning with peers (Stoll et al., 2006,p. 233). Gruenert (2005) found that teachersvaluing the idea of themselves as learners was one of the three most important features ofsuccessful collaborative schools.• A sound knowledge baseStoll et al. (2006, p 232) observe that, ‘A PLC cannot be built solely through providing professionaldevelopment opportunities for staff. Nevertheless, if the community is to be intellectuallyvigorous, members need a solid basis of expert knowledge and skills, strongly emphasising theprofessionalisation of teachers’ work through increasing expert knowledge’. Dede (2003) identifiesdiversity of expertise among members as important.• CollaborationGroup as well as individual learning is promoted, especially around evidence: ‘the school learningcommunity interacts, engages in serious dialogue and deliberates about information and data,interpreting it communally and distributing it among them’ (Stoll et al. 2006, p. 227).• Trust and positive working relationshipsOpenness, mutual trust, respect and support are keys to successful teams (Bolam et al. 2005).15 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

• Work-basedBased on self-development and work-based learning through tools such as coaching, mentoringand peer-assisted learning.• Community partnershipsGruenert’s (2005) study identified relationships with parents as a key feature of successfulcollaborative schools.Bolam et al. (2005, p. i) conclude that ‘PLCs are created, managed and sustained through four keyoperational processes: optimising resources and structures; promoting individual and collective learning;explicit promotion and sustaining of an EPLC [educational PLC]; and leadership and management’.Effective group processes are crucial to PLCs, but these processes require particular expertise whichcannot be taken for granted. As Trotman (2009, p. 352) observes:... network participants are often unprepared for, and are then frustrated by, group tensionsresulting from an inattention to group processes. Moreover, our observations lead us to believe thatan understanding and assimilation of change management processes is crucial to the developmentof strategic intelligence in network practices, and that it is only amongst a small minority ofparticipants that this is recognised and valued as important professional expertise..... networks that develop and integrate a strong sense of strategic ‘withitness’ (where roledefinition, developmental sequence, conceptions of community and management of changeprocesses are fully attended to) have a considerable advantage in developing meaningfulcollaborative partnerships over those that do not. This requires the acquisition of professionalexpertise in hitherto under-developed areas: tolerance of role flexibility, sensitivity to the pulses inmicro-political power in new educational contexts, and a personal commitment to the obligationsof community participation amongst institutions. Expertise of this sort necessarily involves adeep knowledge of self, trust in professional intuition and alertness to the anxiety-provokingcharacteristics of change.Online PLCs share the general aspects of the potential and the challenges of PLCs outlined above.Particular advantages lie in the capacity in online communities for both synchronous and asynchronouscommunication (Fulton, Doerr, and Britton 2010). This has been found to positively affect participationand individual learning (Dede 2003). However, there are particular challenges as well. For instance,online platforms are built as generic frameworks, yet need to be responsive to particular teams andcontexts. Barab, MaKinster, and Scheckler(2003, p. 242) suggest this requires a minimalist design ‘...to create a tentative platform and then facilitate the community in growing and evolving its own space, aprocess that involves walking the tightrope between designing the community and allowing it to emergefrom the needs and agendas of its members’. Fulton, Doerr and Britton (2010) cite studies which foundthat developing supportive and shared leadership in the online environment was a particular need.Professional learning communities offer clear potential for successful PL. On the other hand, they are nosilver bullet. Like PL and educational change in general, they face the challenges of local agendas andreversion to conventional practice. However, as a means of providing engaging PL and as a basis forcontinuing school improvement, especially when tied to the possibilities of scale in online provision, theyoffer the most likely avenue for successful professional learning at the present time.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 16

RecommendationsProfessional learning for leading curriculum change should:1. Be informed by the features and strategies for successful professional learning identified in thisreview.2. Enable participants to identify the conditions and needs for professional learning which are mostrelevant to their professional contexts, and to identify strategies for acquiring them.3. Use the potential of online professional learning to engage curriculum leaders in professionalcommunities to maximise access to ideas, practices and resources for curriculum change,unrestricted by location.4. Respond to teachers’ preferences for professional learning, including linking to practice,challenging thinking and engaging with colleagues.5. Develop the required capacities and support for teachers’ engagement in professional learningcommunities characterised by the features of effective PLCs identified in this report.17 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

The processes of leadershipThe idea of leadership is neither precise nor unified, reflected in the fact that Yammarino, Dionne, Chun,and Dansereau (2005) identify 21 leadership approaches that have been the subject of research. In themanagement literature this range can be placed on a continuum from administration to managementto leadership, with the last being more ‘visionary, creative, inspirational, energising’ than the other roles(Thorpe and Gold 2010). From this perspective, management focuses on setting targets, planning,creating organisational structures, and setting up control systems to solve problems and correct errors,while leadership involves envisioning futures and strategies for achieving them; engaging people in thevision, empowering, motivating and inspiring them to act; and ensuring recognition and reward.The general literature on individual leadership traces the concept through the charismatic to thetransactional to the transformational leader (Sarros 2008). Charismatic leadership can sometimessimply depend on attributions of leadership qualities by followers, and even its more authentic forms canrely on leader dominance and the ideological compliance, if not subservience, of followers, features thatare inappropriate for the professional context. Transactional leadership operates on the basis of rewardcontingent on satisfactory work, and consists largely of corrective action for mistakes, and could be seenas relatively routine.On the other hand, transformational leaders are said to ‘achieve performance beyond expectations bytransforming followers’ attitudes, beliefs, and values as opposed to simply gaining compliance’ (Sarros2008, p. 17), and to ‘inspire followers to perform beyond expectations while transcending self-interestfor the good of the organization’ (Avolio, Walumbwa and Weber 2009). Avolio, Walumbwa and Weber(2009, p. 423) also identify a related concept, which they call authentic leadership, as ‘a pattern oftransparent and ethical leader behaviour that encourages openness in sharing information needed tomake decisions while accepting followers ‘inputs’. Transformational leadership is in part a response tothe increasing complexity of organisations, but also a means of maximizing individual and group talent,expertise and initiative. Consequently, transformational leadership is widely seen as the most desirableof current approaches to individual leadership.The features of transformational leadership (Sarros 2008) are:• Idealised influence, when leaders act as role models and are respected and trusted by followers;• Inspirational motivation, providing meaning and challenge to work as well as optimism aroundshared visions;• Intellectual stimulation, stimulating innovation and creativity by questioning assumptions, reframingproblems and practising and encouraging new ways of thinking about problems;• Individualised consideration, addressing individuals’ needs for achievement and growth and newlearning opportunities.Illustrating the lack of consensus over terminology, Denning (2010 p. 12) describes a radicalmanagement model which looks very like transformational leadership: ‘To ensure the high performanceof self-organizing teams, radical management organizes work in client-driven work cycles; with valuedelivered to clients during each iteration, in an environment of radical transparency; continuous selfimprovementand interactive communications’.In education, research and development on leadership and management have followed a similartrajectory, and produced a range of models based on different institutional analyses leading to differentemphases and approaches. Bush (2003) describes models which focus on:• organisational structures (a form of transactional leadership)• systems models stressing the unity and coherence of the organisation• bureaucratic models dominated by concerns for maximum efficiency through rational hierarchicalmanagement approaches characterised by division of labour, rules and regulations andProfessional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 18

impersonal relationships• rational models emphasising processes of problem-solving and decision-making• formal managerial models where the focus is on the competent performance of functions and taskssuch as supervision, staffing, testing, community responsiveness etc.• collegial models and participative leadership, where power and decision-making are shared• transformational models, where the central focus is the commitment and capacities oforganisational members• interpersonal leadership, with an emphasis on supportive teamwork, reminiscent of authenticleadership as described by Avolio, Walumba and Weber (2009). (See above page 22.)Transformational leadership, usually in combination with collegial and interpersonal models, is seen asa key to successful individual leadership. Davies (2010, p. 11), who uses the term strategic leadership,describes the role as ‘creating a vision and setting the direction of the school over the medium tolonger term’ and creating ‘strategic conversations to build viable and exciting pathways to create thecapacity to achieve that future’. While the reference here is to principals, the characteristics of strategicleaders which Davies identifies are more generally relevant. Strategic leaders are strategic thinkers andlearners, as well as talent developers who balance the strategic and the operational, deploy strategicplanning and action, and define measures of success.The literature on school leadership has until the last decade or so been overwhelmingly dominated bya concern for principal leadership, and this remains the key focus of the literature. However, since therise of collegial, transformational and interpersonal models of leadership, increasing attention has beengiven to the relations between principal and staff, and in particular the increased engagement of staffin decision-making (Goddard and Miller 2010). The result has been a strong shift to considerations ofcollaborative leadership as an approach to school improvement and change, and the introduction of thecorresponding concept of distributed leadership (Hallinger 2007; Hallinger and Heck 2010; Kochan andReed 2005; Louis et al. 2010).Research provides clear evidence that collaborative leadership can positively affect student learningthrough building the school’s capacity for academic improvement (Hallinger and Heck 2010; Harris,Leithwood, Day, Sammons and Hopkins 2007). In a study of 192 US elementary schools over afour-year period, Hallinger and Heck, (2010, p. 654) found ‘significant direct effects of collaborativeleadership on change in the schools’ academic capacity and indirect effects on rates of growth instudent reading achievement’.Leithwood and Mascall (2008) studied the impact of collective, or shared, leadership on key teachervariables and student achievement through an analysis of 2570 teacher responses from 90 Englishelementary and secondary schools. They concluded that collective leadership explained a significantproportion of variation in student achievement across schools, as higher-achieving schools awardedleadership influence to all school members and other stakeholders to a greater degree than lowerachievingschools. These differences were most significant in relation to the leadership exercised byschool teams, parents, and students.However, the means by which leadership achieves its effects are complex. Noting that leadership andcapacity-building are mutual influences on each other, rather than either acting in isolation, Hallinger andHeck (2010, p. 106) observe:The research implies that while leadership acts as a catalyst for school improvement, both thenature of leadership as well as its impact are shaped by both historical and current conditionsin the school. Academic structures (e.g., curriculum standards, team-based collaboration),school norms (e.g., tangible support for students and teachers, professional learning, opencommunication), and ongoing organizational processes (e.g., opportunities for participation indecision-making, resource allocation, external policies) create both opportunities and constraintsfor leadership (Bridges, 1977). Effective leadership for school improvement must be responsive to19 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

these contextual characteristics. Our findings indicated that at each point in time, the impact of theschool’s culture on leadership was greater than vice versa.Continuing this research into the mediators of leadership, Leithwood, Pattern, and Jantzi (2010) studiedthe relationship between leadership and four ‘paths’ along which leadership influence might flow. Thepaths were represented by variables as follows: the rational path by academic standards and classroomdiscipline; the emotions path by collective teacher efficacy and trust of colleagues; the organisationalpath by efficient organisation of time and involvement in professional learning communities; and thefamily path by home support for homework and family computer ownership. The results showed similarlysized, significant, and positive contributions by the rational, emotions and family paths, but no significanteffects for the organisational path. The key issue here seems to be that principal leadership has nodirect effects in itself, but only as it affects and is mediated by other aspects of the school’s operation.On the other hand, the importance of the emotions path, where collective teacher efficacy was the mostinfluential element, further endorses the importance of collaboration.By virtue of its potential for engaging a range of staff in initiating the change process, collaborativeleadership is the most relevant approach for developing curriculum leadership throughout a school, andconsequently warrants close consideration as a model for developing leaders of curriculum change. Itsmost well-developed form in recent times is distributed leadership.Distributed leadershipA commonly cited definition of distributed leadership (DL) is that of Copland (2003, p. 376), who seesDL as:... a set of functions or qualities shared across a much broader segment of the school communitythat encompasses administrators, teachers and other professionals and community members bothinternal and external to the school. Such an approach imposes the need for school communities tocreate and sustain broadly distributed leadership systems, processes and capacities.In their review of the literature on DL, Bennett, Wise, and Woods (2003) identify three distinctiveelements of the concept:• DL is an emergent property of a group or network of interacting individuals in which the outcome isgreater than the sum of the parts.• DL suggests openness of the boundaries of leadership so that any or all members can play someleadership role.• DL recognises that expertise and valuable ideas and capabilities can be found in individuals spreadthroughout the organisation. DL picks up on a range of developments in leadership and schoolchange. It links closely to the importance of teamwork, collaboration, collective responsibility andflexible application of expertise.In her study of DL in schools, Harris (2008) identified common principles underlying DL in practice. DLwas a broad-based leadership activity, with multiple levels of involvement in decision-making focusingprimarily on classroom practice. It encompassed both formal and informal leaders, linking vertical andhorizontal leadership structures, and extending to students and the encouragement of student voice. Itsflexibility meant that groups were not permanent, but fluid and interchangeable. The cases gave rise toeight characteristics of distributed leadership:• Vision is a unifying force when clearly articulated and shared.• Leaders have expert rather than formal authority, which shifts according to need and task.• Collaborative teams are formed for specific purposes, with fluid membership.• Communities of practice emerge and maintain their affiliation long after the collaborative activitiesof the task are completed, often to brainstorm future needs and further possible collaborations.• Individuals perceive themselves as stakeholders, and are willing and able to assume leadershippositions when needed.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 20

• The organisational goals are disaggregated to be distributed to the teams best able to achievethe tasks.• Distributed roles and tasks take place at different times, places and under widely varying conditions.• Enquiry is central to organisational change, renewal and innovation, with the ultimate goal of DLbeing knowledge creation and organisational improvement (Harris 2008).An important issue here is how the idea of distributed leadership can be combined with the continuingresponsibilities of school principals. Crowther, Hann and McMaster (2001), Crowther, Kaagan, Fergusonand Hann (2002) and Lewis and Andrews (2009) use the term ‘parallel leadership’ in describing thekinds of practices and relationships which allow both principal leadership and teacher leadership toflourish together. Bennett, Wise and Woods (2003, p. 10) note that DL has implications for professionallearning, since developing leadership capability becomes an issue throughout the school. They identifyin particular the need for wide-ranging staff development dealing with:• basic ideas in leadership and management• working constructively in teams, including conflict resolution• engaging with different levels in the hierarchy, including students and members of the school’sexternal community• the role of informal leadership in relation to formal leadership• the importance of a school culture which supports distributed leadership, and ways by which thisculture can be developed and changed.It follows also that DL is best developed in teams, and lends itself especially to the use of professionallearning communities. Bennett, Wise and Woods (2003) also point to the evidence that leadership isstrongly related to context, so that situational and organisational analysis is an important skill.Distributed leadership can be related to a range of similar leadership concepts, such as shared,collaborative and democratic leadership, though distinctions have been drawn among these (Gronn2008; Gunter 2005; Harris 2007; Mayrowetz 2008; Timperley 2008; University of Cambridge, EasternLeadership Centre, MacBeath, Oduroand Waterhouse 2004; Woods, Bennett, Harveyand Wise 2004;Woods and Gronn, 2009)The strongly interpersonal nature of DL gives rise to emphases on the ethical dimensions of leadership.Given the public nature of schooling and the professional standards surrounding educational practice,an important responsibility of leadership lies in the ethical dimension (Shapiro and Stefkovich 2011).Starratt (2010) identifies three aspects of this: the ethic of justice in relation to community, the ethicof care in interpersonal relationships, and the ethic of critique within institutional life. The capacity forethical leadership across these dimensions is an important need for curriculum leaders.21 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Teacher leadershipThe development of distributed leadership raises questions about what kind of leadership teachersmay be involved in, and what capacities they might need to make it successful. Pounder (2006) pointsout that teacher leadership is a process rather than a formal role, so is not determined by formalorganisational structures. Teacher leadership is diverse and will occur in different forms at different timesand contexts, which implies a wide range of relevant activities.Harrison and Killion (2007) identify ten roles which teacher leaders can perform: resource provider;instructional specialist; curriculum specialist; classroom supporter (e.g. co-teaching, coaching);professional learning facilitator; mentor; contributor to school leadership; data coach; catalyst forchange; and modelling continual learning and improvement. More detailed definitions are proposed byDanielson (2006)and York-Barr and Duke (2004) and are listed in Table 2.Even more detailed is the US Teacher Leadership Exploratory Consortium (2010) specification of sevendomains of teacher leadership, along with an elaboration of the functions associated with each domain,which serves as an excellent framework for defining the role. The domains, with selected illustrativefunctions are:Domain I: Understanding adults as learners to support professional learning communitiesFor example, the teacher leader:• Utilises group processes to help colleagues and team members work collaboratively to solveproblems, make decisions, manage conflict and promote meaningful change;• Models effective skills in listening, presenting ideas, leading discussions, clarifying, mediating andidentifying the needs of self and others in order to advance shared goals and professional learning.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 22

Table 2: Two views of teacher leadershipWhat do teacher leaders do?(Danielson 2006)Who are teacher leaders?(York-Barr 2004)Leadership skills:• Using evidence and data in decisionmaking• Recognising an opportunity and takinginitiative• Mobilising people around a commonpurpose• Marshalling resources and taking action• Monitoring progress and adjusting theapproach as conditions change• Sustaining the commitment of othersand anticipating negativity• Contributing to a learning organisationDispositions:• Deep commitment to student learning• Optimism and enthusiasm• Open-mindedness and humility• Courage and willingness to take risks• Confidence and decisiveness• Tolerance for ambiguity• Creativity and flexibility• Perseverance• Willingness to work hardThe administrative role• Set the tone and culture and maintainthe vision• Convey and build confidence in teachers• Clarify ideas and plan an approach• Marshall support from downtown• Locate additional resources• Demonstrate support to the ranksAs teachers• Significant experience in teaching fields;excellent teaching skills• Extensive knowledge of teaching,learning, curriculum, content area• Clearly developed personal philosophyof education• Creative, innovative, seekers ofchallenge and growth, lifelong learners,enthusiasm for teaching• Assume responsibility for actions• Respected and valued by colleagues,viewed as competent• Sensitivity and receptivity to the thoughtsand feelings of others• Cognitive and affective flexibility• Hard-working, able to manage workload,strong administrative and organisationalskillsAs leaders• Build trust and rapport with colleagues,work collaboratively, influence schoolculture through relationships• Support of colleagues, promote growthamong colleagues• Effective in communicating, includinggood listening skills• Handle conflict, can negotiate andmediate• Ability to deal with process, effectivegroup processing skills• Ability to assess, interpret, and prioritisedistrict and teacher needs and concerns• Understanding organisationaldiagnosis and ‘big picture’ issues23 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Domain II: Accessing and using research to improve practice and student achievementFor example, the teacher leader:• Assists colleagues in accessing research, student learning data and other resources;• Guides colleagues in selecting appropriate research-based strategies, designing action and otherforms of research and measuring results.Domain III: Promoting professional learning for continuous improvementFor example, the teacher leader:• Responds to the diverse learning needs of colleagues as well as students by identifying andpromoting a variety of appropriate professional learning;• Advocates sufficient time for colleagues to work in teams to engage in job-embedded professionallearning, in which teachers collaboratively design instruction, develop new teaching strategies,utilise common assessments and analyse student work.Domain IV: Facilitating improvements in instruction and student learningFor example, the teacher leader:• Engages in reflective dialog with colleagues based on observation of instruction, student work andassessment data and helps to make connections to research-based effective practices;• Supports colleagues’ individual and collective professional growth by serving in roles such as amentor, coach, content facilitator, critical friend or peer evaluator.Domain V: Using assessments and data for school and district improvementFor example, the teacher leader:• Increases the capacity of colleagues to access resources and expertise both inside and outsidethe district to help identify and use appropriate assessment instruments aligned to state and localstandards;• Facilitates teams of teachers in designing and implementing classroom-based formativeassessments, scoring and interpreting student work and other performance data, and applyingfindings to improve educational practice and student achievement.Domain VI: Improving outreach and collaboration with families and communityFor example, the teacher leader:• Uses knowledge and understanding of the different backgrounds, ethnicities, cultures andlanguages in the school community to promote effective interactions among colleagues, familiesand the larger community;• Models effective communication and collaboration skills with families and other stakeholdersfocused on improving educational outcomes.Domain VII: Advocating for student learning and the professionFor example, the teacher leader:• Works with colleagues to identify and use research to advocate teaching and learning processesthat meet the needs of all students;• Represents and acts as an advocate for the profession in contexts outside of the classroom (e.g.being a member of committees or task forces addressing curriculum, assessment, professionaldevelopment or other educational issues).Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 24

A range of specifications and standards of teacher leadership roles and capacities has been createdin recent years, and a summary of the components can be seen in Table 3. There is a reasonableconsensus around the importance of these standards, and any program in learning for leadership shouldinclude them.However, even these capacities do not guarantee success unless the context allows them to be applied.For instance, Muijs and Harris (2006, p. 961) identified conditions which they said were required forsuccessful teacher leadership, including ‘a culture of trust and support, structures that supported teacherleadership but were clear and transparent, strong leadership, with the head usually being the originatorof teacher leadership, and engagement in innovative forms of professional development’.A corollary of the importance of context is that it has the potential to undermine teacher leadership incertain circumstances. Teacher leadership presents challenges by virtue of the institutional contextand the history of bureaucratic control of schools. For instance, Scribner and Bradley-Levine’s (2010,p. 491) study of teacher leadership found that the cultural conditions of the school influence teachers’construction of leadership, and that:... teachers’ construction of teacher leadership was connected to positional or personal powerlegitimized by particular institutional, organizational, and sociocultural rules. These rules wererelated to the value of content area expertise, organizational positions and accolades, andgendered notions of leadership practice.It follows that curriculum leaders need the organisational, political and interpersonal skills to deal withobstacles which might arise from institutional, organisational and sociocultural rules.25 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Table 3: Analysis of components from 8 studies of teacher leadershipComponents of teacher leadershipSource1Source2Source3Source4Source5Source6Source7Source8Articulating and developing shared vision and goals x x x x xPlanning curriculum x x x x xDeveloping assessment x x x xPlanning instruction x x x x x xUsing data and research and evidence-based practice x x x x x xProcess improvement (strategic planning, decision-making) x xPromoting a learning culture and staff PL x x x x xEffective and open communication x x xPractising and promoting collaboration and teamwork(with colleagues and administrators)x x x x xStaff relationships (staff engagement, sense of belonging,school culture, morale)x x x x xExternal relationship leader(parent, community engagement)x xManaging performance(accountability, monitoring progress, mentoring)x xEnsuring support and effective operations (managingresources budget, time allocation)x x xLeading change (processes and principles) x xAdvocacy (learning and student needs, school reform) x x xDocuments Analysed1. Georgia Leadership Institute for School Improvement (2011). 5. Goldring, E., Porter, A., Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N., and Cravens, X. (2009).2. Anthes, K. (2005). 6. Phelps, P. H. (2008).3. Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession (2009). 7. Gabriel, J. (2005).4. Wynne, S. (2009). 8. Teacher Leadership Exploratory Consortium (2010).Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 26

In secondary schools, teacher leaders are often faculty or department heads, and research hasanalysed the nature and requirements of these roles (Busher and Harris 1999; Feist 2008; Hannay andRoss 1999), pointing to the significance of the personal and professional identities of their members,their interactions, and their values about teaching. The challenge here is often to find ways of generatingsustainable teams among large and often diverse groups of people within a hierarchical organisation.Feist (2008, p. 62) quotes Thrupp and Willmott (2003, p. 181) that this is ‘difficult to organize in amanagerialist context which favours a chief executive model of leadership and where workloadsare intensifying’. Feist (2008) found that department heads prioritised their work around supportingteachers in their classroom roles in a collegial way, but that principals often gave more emphasis to themanagement aspects of the role. Hannay and Ross (1999) note that heads may experience role conflictin promoting change while at the same time protecting what they see as successful existing practice.Finally, Ward and Parr (2006, p. 126) identified challenges for teacher leadership in participating inonline distributed leadership communities, which they conclude ‘will work only where there is a sharedinterest or purpose strong enough to connect otherwise disparate groups of people and as such riskbeing transitory in nature as interests and purposes change’. Teachers in the study seemed to seetheir involvement as going beyond their primary professional role, so that sustenance of the onlinecommunity was not a priority. Ward and Parr (2006, p. 127) conclude that successful communitiesrequire ‘norms of collaboration, critical discourse, and collective responsibility’ and that this would beassisted by ‘professional development aimed at developing their leadership capacity, their ability tocreate a community and their ability to facilitate sharing in an online world’.Curriculum leadershipWhile the literature on teacher leadership includes important elements of curriculum leadership, thenotion of curriculum leadership needs further clarification in its own right.The earliest work to address aspects of curriculum leadership was based on the idea of instructionalleadership (Robinson 2010). However, this was not an adequate base for curriculum leadership, fortwo reasons. First, instructional leadership tends to take the curriculum as given, so that it focuses onimplementation at the classroom level rather than the prior and more fundamental task of developingschool programs which emphasise deep learning, inclusive and authentic learning experiences andcoherently aligned learning and assessment programs. Second, like most of the early literature, much ofthe instructional leadership literature was aimed at the principal. Nonetheless, the work on instructionalleadership is very relevant to the role of curriculum leader.A typical statement of instructional leadership comes from Brundrett and Rhodes (2010, p. 60), whostate that:Instructional leaders talk to teachers about teaching, encourage collaboration between teachers,empower teachers to make decisions, and encourage professional growth, teacher leadership,autonomy and self-efficacy ... Successful instructional leaders are able to encourage thoseconditions that can constitute a professional learning community of students and teachers.Noting that the move to distributed leadership has spread the obligations for curriculum leadershipbeyond the principal, Brundrett and Rhodes (2010, p. 105) identify characteristics of a school faculty ordepartment culture which would encourage continuous improvement. It follows that curriculum leadersshould contribute to the development of teams and departments which have these characteristics.Curriculum leaders need to develop curriculum teams and departments characterised by:• shared values and beliefs• moral purpose linked to a focus on learning and learners• sharing, collaboration and co-operation• enquiry, reflection and evaluation• criticality and involvement27 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

• leadership from different people on different tasks• good interpersonal relationships• a sense of direction linked to a sense of achievement• clear departmental policies and procedures ... that are developed from a clear overall improvementplanIn a review of research into subject leaders, middle managers, department heads and curriculumcoordinators, Bennett, Newton, Wise, Woods, and Economou (2003, p. 3) identified a number ofconsistent points, which are interesting for the insight they provide into the somewhat ambiguousposition of middle leaders. They found that:• Middle leaders play a crucial role in developing the nature and quality of pupils’ learningexperience, but the ways in which they do this are strongly influenced by the circumstances inwhich they work.• There is a strong rhetoric of collegiality in how middle leaders describe the culture of theirresponsibility areas, and how they discharge their responsibilities. However, this is sometimesmore aspired to than real, and it may sometimes be a substitute term for professional autonomy.• Middle leaders are reluctant to monitor their colleagues’ work, especially by observing them inthe classroom, which is seen as a challenge to professional norms of equality and privacy, andsometimes as an abrogation of trust. Subject leaders who introduced classroom observation did soas a collaborative learning activity for the entire department rather than as a management tool forthe subject leader.• Subject leaders’ authority comes not from their position but their competence as teachers andtheir subject knowledge. However, high professional competence did not necessarily imply theperceived right to advise other teachers on practice.• Subject knowledge provides an important part of professional identity for both subject leaders andtheir colleagues. This can make the subject department a major barrier or a strong impetus tolarge-scale change.• Senior staff look to middle leaders to become involved in the wider whole-school context, butmany are reluctant to do so, preferring to see themselves as departmental advocates. This isexacerbated by the tendency of secondary schools, in particular, to operate within hierarchicalstructures, which act as a constraint on the degree to which subject leaders can act collegially.Another important consideration arises from the research by Newmann, Smith, Allensworth, and Bryk(2001), who found that schools demonstrating strong instructional program coherence were more likelyto advance student learning. Instructional program coherence is ‘a set of interrelated programs forstudents and staff that are guided by a common framework for curriculum, instruction, assessment, andlearning climate and that are pursued over a sustained period’ (Newmann et al. 2001, p. 297). This isevident when:• A common instructional framework guides curriculum, teaching, assessment, and learning climate.The framework combines specific expectations for student learning with specific strategies andmaterials to guide teaching and assessment• Staff working conditions support implementation of the framework• The school allocates resources such as funding, materials, time, and staff assignments to advancethe school’s common instructional framework and to avoid diffuse, scattered improvement efforts.Baines, Blatchford, and Chowne (2007, p. 4) describe the process followed by schools in the UKengaged in developing innovative curriculum. They identified five components of leading curriculuminnovation, with associated questions, which could act as a guide for curriculum leaders planningcurriculum change:Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 28

1. Stimulus for innovation — Why innovate? A question of values, vision, and professional duty.2. Stimulating innovations — What do leaders do to stimulate interest and engagement? A question oftrust, values and vision.3. Developing strategy for innovation — What is the strategy to ensure that innovation is led andimplemented effectively? A question of capacity, sustainability and evaluation.4. Implementing innovation — How is the innovation led and its leaders supported? A question ofvision into practice.5. Evaluating the impact of innovation — How will we know whether the innovation has made adifference to the outcomes we value? A question of moral purpose.A central responsibility of a curriculum leader must be to understand and be able to lead others tounderstand the essence of school subjects. This can involve a number of considerations. First, aclear understanding of the purposes of the subject will be the starting point, including the multiple andsometimes competing interests which any curriculum seeks to combine. There is also the structure orgrammar of subjects which gives them their essential intellectual value. In his discussion of sciencecurriculum, Deng (2007) illustrates the three dimensions of this which apply to any school subject:• the logical dimension which ‘entails knowing the concepts and principles that secondary-schoolstudents are supposed to know about particular topics in the school science curriculum’ (p. 521);• the psychological dimension which concerns how concepts ‘can be developed out of the interest,experience, and prior knowledge of students; and which entails the use of examples, questions,and models that are within the realm of students’ experience and knowledge’ (p. 522); and• the sociocultural dimension which ‘concerns how the subject matter of a school science subjectrelates to, and interacts with, society, culture, and technology’ (p. 525).Comprehensive and clear understandings of these dimensions will play an important role in theconstruction of engaging and intellectually challenging programs of learning, or what Hameyer (2007, p.411) calls ‘transforming domain knowledge’. As such they are central to the role of the curriculum leader.However, the Australian Curriculum is not restricted to learning from disciplines. It also recognises that‘21st century learning does not fit neatly into a curriculum solely organised by learning areas or subjectsthat reflect the disciplines’ (ACARA 2010, p. 18). Consequently, the approach to knowledge required ofcurriculum leaders goes beyond the disciplinary perspective, which is likely to be a major challenge in acurriculum context traditionally dominated by disciplinary structures. Equally, primary schools may wellbe challenged by curriculum change organised around specific subjects rather than broader learningareas, with the increased complexity of planning that is likely to result.Significant attention has been given recently to the need for curriculum and teaching to be evidenceinformed.While the use of classroom assessment for learning is a basic professional competence forteachers, the role of curriculum leader extends beyond this to take an overall perspective of assessmentacross the school and to integrate this information with data from other sources, especially largescaletesting. Leadership in the development and use of school assessment data to inform curriculuminnovation and improvement has been addressed in a number of recent research studies and guidesfor practice (Alliance for Excellent Education 2010; Boyle and Charles 2010; Brookhart 2011; NationalComprehensive Center for Teacher Quality 2010.While large-scale testing is controversial by virtue of the high stakes accountability often attached toit, there remains potential in such data to improve learning if the necessary interpretation, planningand application abilities are applied to it, a role for leadership (Dougherty 2008; Hamilton et al. 2009;Ikemoto and Marsh 2007; Knapp, Copland and Swinnerton2007). The use of data goes beyond theassessment of classroom learning. For instance, Sanders (2008) illustrates the use of data to informlinks between schools and their communities. There is also an important role for curriculum leaders toevaluate and apply the findings of educational research (General Teaching Council for England 2006;Levin 2010).29 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

The curriculum leader will also need expertise in guiding professional learning. The earlier discussion onPL is relevant here, but for curriculum leaders within the school, additional considerations arise. The UKDepartment of Education and Skills (2005, p. 1) identifies aspects of this role as follows:• creating time for PL• encouraging people to take responsibility for their own professional learning• becoming a professional learning community• setting up teaching and learning groups• coaching and mentoring• using video to encourage reflective practice• developing subject knowledge• classroom research as PL• supporting teachers at different stages in their careers• making the best use of leading professionals• evaluating the impact of PL• linking PL with performance management(Department for Education and Skills, 2005).Curriculum leaders need to master the range of components listed in Table 3 and elaborated throughoutthis review. However, at the heart of their role is expertise in curriculum work itself, which this sectionhas sought to unpack. A summary of what is involved here is presented in Table 4, which combines thecore elements of curriculum work with a planning and evaluation process to construct a matrix throughwhich the nature of curriculum leadership could be mapped.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 30

Table 4: Elements and processes of curriculum leadershipCore elementsTranslate goals for student learningSet rigorous outcome standardsDevelop quality teachingDevelop and align student assessment and feedbackEnsure effective and innovative use of resourcesUse data to evaluate curriculum and teachingPromote and contribute to a professional learning cultureConnect to external communitiesEnsure performance accountabilityPromote equity and inclusivenessKey processesPlan Implement Support Advocate Communicate Monitor Evaluate31 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Curriculum leadership and social justiceCurriculum change is routinely closely connected to a social and political context. Indeed, curriculumchange itself is most often prompted by policy decisions at the political or administrative level. Thesedecisions establish priorities and challenges, both perennial and periodic, for curriculum leadership.A central concern of educational policy is the obligation to ensure fair educational opportunities andoutcomes for all students — the challenge of social justice.Essential to the moral dimension of educational policy and practice, and especially to curriculumchange, are considerations of social justice (Fitzgerald 2009; Gunter, 2006), and a substantial literatureconfirms the importance of leadership in the creation of socially just educational outcomes.Muijs et al. (2010, p.142) point out that social justice implies a number of leadership tasks beyond thestandard notion of the effective school, including:• Enabling the school to respond to students from diverse backgrounds;• Connecting school culture to students’ home and community cultures;• Promoting the overall personal and social development of students and enhancing their life skillsand life chances, as well as promoting their academic development;• Reconciling the social inclusion agenda with the standards agenda;• Managing complex relationships with communities, community agencies, and employers.Much of the focus of leadership for social justice is on the beliefs and values of leaders and theircolleagues, confirming the general literature on leading change. Brown (2006) notes the particularchallenges in achieving this, which arise from the tendency among some leaders to see their role aslargely technical, a tendency which Jean-Marie, Normore and Brooks (2009) also note, linking it tothe origins of educational leadership in an administrative tradition. Brown (2006) suggests a range ofstrategies for preparing leaders for leadership for social justice, as do McKenzie et al. (2008).Hynds (2010) reports a study of resistance to social justice initiatives from teachers and the community,and the need for leaders to be prepared to deal with resistance. This is not straightforward, as Koseand Lim (2010) demonstrate in their study of the impact of professional learning programs on teachers’beliefs about social justice and education. While results indicated positive changes in beliefs to a morejust orientation, negative results also occurred, leading the authors to recommend a more concertedapproach to professional learning of this kind. Similarly, Lumby (2006) found ambivalence amongleaders in their understandings of and commitment to social justice. These studies identify a clear needfor leadership development in this area.Capper (2006) proposes a framework which relates three dimensions of social justice leadership (criticalconsciousness, knowledge and practical skills) to the three basic elements of the teaching processof curriculum, pedagogy and assessment, and elaborates on the implications of this framework forleadership development. Raffo and Gunter (2008) suggest that different approaches to leadership forsocial justice can be represented as three forms of narrative (instrumental, biographical and critical)which reflect the values, rationales and strategies involved in the approaches.Research has also identified strategies at the school level which promise progress in achieving sociallyjust outcomes. Muijs et al. (2010) identify a range of strategies which schools used to address thesetasks, and their particular implications for leadership. Theoharis (2007, 2010 ), Shields (2010) andNiesche and Keddie (2011) report case studies of schools and leaders which illustrate a range ofstrategies used to develop whole school approaches to socially just schooling, while Ross and Berger(2009) derive from a review of research a range of recommendations for leadership practice.Of special significance in the Australian context is the need for leadership to address the situation ofIndigenous students. While much of value can be drawn from the general leadership research, andstudies on leadership for social justice in particular, there remains a range of considerations of distinctrelevance to Indigenous education, and a significant literature which has addressed them.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 32

The education of Indigenous students must respond to the research on culturally responsive schooling(Castagno and Brayboy 2008; D’Arbon et al. 2009; Frawley et al. 2010), and take a broad approach toeducation and its links with community development in general. Of particular importance is the need forleaders and teachers to develop cross-cultural competence and the capacities that comprise it (Gorringeand Spillman 2008). More general recommendations for leadership for Indigenous student outcomeshave also been recommended (Mulford 2011), including by Indigenous school leaders themselves(Hughes, Matthews and Khan 2007).Other students have special needs as a result of a range of factors which affect learning, and schoolleaders play a significant role in ensuring an inclusive approach to curriculum and teaching (Ainscow2005; Bays and Crockett 2007; York-Barr et al. 2005). Consideration of students with special needsmust be a high priority of curriculum leaders, and is an important component of professional learning forsuch a role.RecommendationsProfessional learning for leading curriculum change should:1. Provide teachers with the capacities for teacher leadership identified in this review, including thoselisted in Table 3.2. Provide the specific understandings and skills for curriculum leadership identified in this review,including clarifying curriculum goals, promoting deep subject learning, and ensuring the use of dataand research to support curriculum planning.3. Enable teachers to provide leadership for equity and social justice.33 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Conclusion and recommendationsThe scope of this review, like the aspirations of the project which prompted it, is challenging in itsbreadth. Each of the areas of research, policy and practice addressed in the review represents a largeand ongoing array of literature. The emphasis here has been on those studies of most relevance to theaims of the AITSL Professional Learning Flagship Program.The review has identified many implications from the research for the development of a successfulprofessional learning program. The key recommendations are listed below.1 Curriculum change: Implications for leadershipProfessional learning for leading curriculum change should:1. Enable participants to identify key factors influencing curriculum change in their professionalcontexts, and strategies for addressing them, including such factors as clarifying goals, promotingsupportive organisational structures and management processes, engaging school teams, culturesand beliefs, building collective capacity through learning and reflection, and trust and collegiality.2. Appreciate the complexity of institutional processes and the relevance of systems thinking toensure a comprehensive approach to innovation.2 Research on professional learningProfessional learning for leading curriculum change should:1. Be informed by the features and strategies for successful professional learning identified in thisreview.2. Enable participants to identify the conditions and needs for professional learning which are mostrelevant to their professional contexts, and strategies for acquiring them.3. Use the potential of online professional learning to engage curriculum leaders in professionalcommunities to maximise access to ideas, practices and resources for curriculum change,unrestricted by location.4. Respond to teachers’ preferences for professional learning, including linking to practice,challenging thinking and engaging with colleagues.5. Develop the required capacities and support for teachers’ engagement in professional learningcommunities characterised by the features of effective PLCs identified in this report.3 The processes of leadershipProfessional learning for leading curriculum change should:1. Provide teachers with the capacities for teacher leadership identified in this review, including thoselisted in Table 3.2. Provide the specific understandings and skills for curriculum leadership identified in this review,including clarifying curriculum goals, promoting deep subject learning, and ensuring the use of dataand research to support curriculum planning.3. Enable teachers to provide leadership for equity and social justice.The search for relevance and immediate application is an important requirement of the review. However,while there is considerable agreement in the research about the most promising practices and directionsfor professional learning for leading curriculum change, it is important to acknowledge that researchcan only be a guide to what is worth addressing in any particular context. While a professional learningprogram can ensure that it follows best evidence and practice, impact is still dependent on the featuresof each particular context. In other words, the success of a program to develop leaders rests on thework of the participants themselves. Acknowledging this, and working to assist participants in their owncontexts, is possibly the most important advice the research can offer.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 34

ReferencesAinscow, M. (2005). Developing inclusive education systems: What are the levers for change? Journalof Educational Change, 6, 109-124.Alliance for Excellent Education (2010). Policy Brief: Principles for a Comprehensive AssessmentSystem. Washington DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.Anderson, L. (2004). Increasing teacher effectiveness (Second Edition ed.). Paris: UNESCOInternational Institute for Educational Planning.Anderson, R. D. (1996). Study of Curriculum Reform. Volume I: Findings and Conclusions. Studies ofEducational Reform. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 397535)Anthes, K. (2005). Leader Standards. ECS Highlights. Denver: Education Commission of the States.Archer, M. (1988). Culture and agency: The place of culture in social theory. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.Archer, M. (1995). Realist social theory: The morphogenetic approach. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.Archer, M. (2000). Being human: The problem of agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2010). The Shape of theAustralian Curriculum. Version 2.0. Sydney: ACARA.Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., and Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current Theories, Research, andFuture Directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 421-449.Bain, A. (2007). The Self-organizing School: Next Generation Comprehensive School Reforms. Lanham,MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Baines, E., Blatchford, P., and Chowne, A. (2007). Improving the effectiveness of collaborative groupwork in primary schools: effects on science attainment. British Educational Research Journal, 33(5), 663- 680.Barab, S. A., MaKinster, J. G., and Scheckler, R. (2003). Designing System Dualities: Characterizinga Web-Supported Professional Development Community. The Information Society: An InternationalJournal, 19(3), 237 - 256.Bays, D. A., & Crockett, J. B. (2007). Investigating instructional leadership for special education.Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, 15(3), 143 - 161.Beavers, A. (2009). Teachers as learners: Implications of adult education for professional development.Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 6(7), 25-30.Bennett, N., Newton, W., Wise, C., Woods, P., and Economou, A. (2003). The Role and Purpose ofMiddle Leaders in Schools: Summary Report. Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.Bennett, N., Wise, C., and Woods, P. (2003). Distributed Leadership. Nottingham: National College forSchool Leadership.Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Stoll, L., Thomas, S., and Wallace, M. (2005). Creating and SustainingEffective Professional Learning Communities. Bristol: Department for Education and Skills.Boyle, W. F., and Charles, M. (2010).Leading learning through Assessment for Learning? SchoolLeadership and Management: Formerly School Organisation, 30(3), 285 - 300.Brewster, C., and Railsback, J. (2003). Building Trusting Relationships for School Improvement:Implications for principals and teachers. Portland: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.35 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Bridges, E. (1977). The nature of leadership. In L. Cunningham, W. Hack and R. Nystrand (eds.),Educational Administration: The developing decades. Berkeley: McCutchan.Brown, K. (2006).Leadership for Social Justice and Equity: Evaluating a Transformative Framework andAndragogy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(5), 700-745.Brundrett, M., and Rhodes, C. (2010). Leadership for Quality and Accountability in Education. FlorenceKY: Routledge.Bryk, A., and Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York:Russell Sage Foundation.Bubb, S., and Earley, P. (2008). From self-evaluation to school improvement: the importance of effectivestaff development. Reading: CfBT Education Trust.Burchill, M., Higgins, D., Ramsamy, L., and Taylor, S. (2006). Working’ together: Indigenousperspectives on community development. Family Matters, 75, 50-59.Bush, T. (2003). Theories of educational leadership and management. London: Sage Publications.Busher, H., and Harris, A. (1999). Leadership of School Subject Areas: Tensions and dimensions ofmanaging in the middle. School Leadership and Management: Formerly School Organisation, 19(3), 305- 317.Capper, C., Theoharis, G. and Sebastian, J. (2006). Toward a framework for preparing leaders for socialjustice. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(3), 209-224.Carroll, T., Fulton, K., and Doerr, H. (2010). Team Up for 21st Century Teaching and Learning: Whatresearch and practice reveal about professional learning. Condensed excerpts. Washington DC:National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.Castagno, A. and Brayboy, B. (2008).Culturally Responsive Schooling for Indigenous Youth: A Review ofthe Literature. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 941–993.Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession (2009). Teacher Leaderships Skills Framework.Tacoma.Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (1998). Making the Curriculum Work. Paris:Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Cohen, D. K., and Ball, D. L. (1990). Relations between policy and practice: A commentary. EducationalEvaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 331-338.Colbert, J., Brown, R., Choi, S., and Thomas, S. (2008). An Investigation of the Impacts of Teacher-Driven Professional Development on Pedagogy and Student Learning. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35,135-154.Cordingley, P., Bell, M., Thomason, S., and Firth, A. (2005). The impact of collaborative continuingprofessional development (CPD) on classroom teaching and learning. Review: How do collaborative andsustained CPD and sustained but not collaborative CPD affect teaching and learning? . London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.Cosner, S. (2009). Building organizational capacity through trust. Educational Administration Quarterly,45(2), 248-291.Crowther, F., Hann, L. and McMaster, J. (2001). Parallel leadership: A new strategy for successful schoolreform, The Practising Administrator, 23(4), 12-14.Crowther, F., Kaagan, S., Ferguson, M. and Hann, L.(2002). Developing Teacher Leaders: How teacherleadership enhances school success. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.Cuban, L. (1998). How schools change reforms: Redefining reform success and failure. TeachersCollege Record, 99(3), 453–477.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 36

Daly, A. J. (2009). Rigid Response in an Age of Accountability. Educational Administration Quarterly,45(2), 168-216.Danielson, C. (2006). Teacher Leadership that Strengthens Professional Practice. Alexandria VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.D’Arbon, T., Fasoli, L., Frawley, J., and Ober, R. (2009). Linking Worlds: Strengthening the leadershipcapacity of Indigenous educational leaders in remote education settings. Strathfield NSW: Centre forCreative and Authentic Leadership, Australian Catholic University and Batchelor Institute of IndigenousTertiary Education.Dougherty, C. (2008). The Power of Longitudinal Data: Measuring student academic growth. Austin:Data Quality Campaign/ National Center for Educational Achievement.Davies, B. (2010). Developing a Strategic Leadership Perspective. In B. Davies and M. Brundrett (eds.),Developing Successful Leadership. Studies in Educational Leadership Volume 11. Dordrecht: SpringerScience+Business Media.Dawidowicz, P. (2010). Systems Thinking, Decision Making: What Is Known and What Needs toBe Learned. Paper presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Educational ResearchAssociation. Denver.Day, C., and Gu, Q. (2007). Variations in the conditions for teachers’ professional learning anddevelopment: sustaining commitment and effectiveness over a career. Oxford Review of Education,33(4), 423 - 443.Dede, C. (2003). A Call to Action for the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future:Enabling Distributed-Learning Communities for Educators Via Emerging Technologies. Washington DC:National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.Deng, Z. (2007). Knowing the subject matter of a secondary-school science subject. Journal ofCurriculum Studies, 39(5), 503 - 535.Denning, S. (2010). A leader’s guide to radical management of continuous innovation. Strategy andLeadership, 38(4), 11-16.Department for Education and Skills (2005). Leading and coordinating CPD in secondary schools.London: Department of Education and Skills.Doecke, B., Parr, G., North, C., Gale, T., Long, M., Mitchell, J., et al. (2008). National Mapping ofTeacher Professional Learning Project. Melbourne: Monash University.Dyehouse (2009). A comparison of linear and systems thinking approaches for program evaluation.Evaluation and Program Planning, 32(3), 187-196.Elliott, J. (1994). The teacher’s role in curriculum development: An unresolved issue in English attemptsat curriculum reform. Curriculum Studies 2(2): 43-69.Ellsworth, J.B. (2000). Surviving change: A survey of educational change models. Syracuse: ERICClearinghouse on Information and Technology. (ED 443 417).Feist, C. (2008). Positions and dispositions: locating leaders within New Zealand secondary schoolfaculties. Journal of Educational Leadership, Policy and Practice, 23(2), 60-73.Fielding, M., Bragg, S., Cunningham, I., Gillinson, S., and Robinson, C. (2005). Factors Influencing theTransfer of Good Practice (No. RR615): University of Sussex and Demos.Fitzgerald, T. (2009).Just leading? Social justice and socially just outcomes. Management in Education,23(4), 155-160.Forsyth, P. (2008). The empirical consequences of school trust. In W. Hoy and M. DiPaola (eds.),Improving schools: Studies in leadership and culture. Charlotte NC: Information Age Publishing.37 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Frawley, J., Fasoli, L., D’Arbon, T., and Ober, R. (2010). The Linking Worlds Research Project:Identifying intercultural educational leadership capabilities. Leading and Managing, 16(1), 1-15.Fullan, M. (2006). Change theory: A force for school improvement. Seminar Series Paper No. 157.Melbourne: Centre for Strategic Education.Fulton, K., Doerr, H., and Britton, T. (2010). STEM Teachers in Professional Learning Communities: AKnowledge Synthesis. Washington DC: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.Gabriel, J. (2005). How to Thrive as a Teacher Leader. Alexandria VA: Association for Supervision andCurriculum Development.Garet, M., Cronen, M., Kurki, A., Ludwig, M., Jones, W., Uekawa, K., et al. (2008). The Impact of TwoProfessional Development Interventions on Early Reading Instruction and Achievement. WashingtonDC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences,U.S. Department of Education.Georgia Leadership Institute for School Improvement (2011). The 8 Roles of School Leaders: DistrictlevelAssessment. District-level Leader Skills to Leverage School Performance. Athens, GA: GeorgiaLeadership Institute for School Improvement.General Teaching Council for England (2006). Using research in your school and your teaching:Research-engaged professional practice. Birmingham: General Teaching Council for England.Giles, C., and Hargreaves, A. (2006). The sustainability of innovative schools as learning organizationsand professional learning communities during standardized reform. Educational AdministrationQuarterly, 42(1), 124-156.Goddard, R., and Miller, R. (2010). The Conceptualization, Measurement, and Effects of SchoolLeadership: Introduction to the Special Issue. The Elementary School Journal, 111(2), 219-225.Goddard, Y., Goddard, R., and Tschannen-Moran, M. (2007). A Theoretical and Empirical Investigationof Teacher Collaboration for School Improvement and Student Achievement in Public ElementarySchools. Teachers College Record, 109(4), 877-896.Goldring, E., Porter, A., Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N., and Cravens, X. (2009). Assessing Learning-CenteredLeadership: Connections to Research, Professional Standards, and Current Practices. Leadership andPolicy in Schools, 8(1), 1 - 36.Good, T., Clark, S., and Clark, D. (1997). Reform efforts in American schools: Will faddism continue toimpede meaningful change? In Biddle, B., Good, T., and Goodson, I. (eds.) International Handbook ofTeachers and Teaching, pp 1387–1427. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Gorringe, S., and Spillman, D. (2008). Creating Stronger Smarter Learning Communities: The roleof Culturally Competent Leadership. Paper presented at the World Indigenous Peoples Conference:Education. Retrieved 15/5/11 fromGraham, P. (2007). Improving Teacher Effectiveness through Structured Collaboration: A Case Study ofa Professional Learning Community. Research in Middle Level Education, 31(1). Retrieved 16/5/11 fromhttp://www.nmsa.org/Publications/RMLEOnline/Articles/Vol31No1/tabid/1508/Default.aspxGronn, P. (2008). The future of distributed leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 141-158.Gruenert, S. (2005). Correlations of Collaborative School Cultures with Student Achievement. NASSPBulletin, 89(645), 43-55.Gunter, H. (2005). Leading Teachers. London: Continuum.Gunter, H. (2006) Educational Leadership and the Challenge of Diversity. Educational ManagementAdministration and Leadership. 34(2), 257-268.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 38

Hall, R. (1997). Knowledge Use and the Dynamics of Managing Curriculum Change. ScienceCommunication, 18(4), 342-361.Hallinger, P. (2007). Research on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership:Retrospect and prospect. Paper presented at the 2007 conference of the Australian Council forEducational Research, The Leadership Challenge – Improving learning in schools. Melbourne.Hallinger, P., and Heck, R. (2010). Collaborative leadership and school improvement: understanding theimpact on school capacity and student learning. School Leadership and Management: Formerly SchoolOrganisation, 30(2), 95 - 110.Hallinger, P., and Heck, R. H. (2010). Leadership for Learning: Does Collaborative Leadership Make aDifference in School Improvement? Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 38(6),654-678.Hameyer, U. (2007). Transforming domain knowledge: a systemic view at the school curriculum.Curriculum Journal, 18(4), 411 - 427.Hamilton, L., Halverson, R., Jackson, S., Mandinach, E., Supovitz, J., and Wayman, J. (2009). Usingstudent achievement data to support instructional decision making. Washington DC: National Centerfor Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department ofEducation.Hannay, L. M., and Ross, J. A. (1999). Department Heads as Middle Managers? Questioning the BlackBox. School Leadership and Management: Formerly School Organisation, 19(3), 345 - 358.Hargreaves, A., and Goodson, I. (2006). Educational Change Over Time? The Sustainability andNonsustainability of Three Decades of Secondary School Change and Continuity. EducationalAdministration Quarterly, 42(1), 3-41.Harris, A. (2007). Distributed leadership: conceptual confusion and empirical reticence. InternationalJournal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 10(3), 315 - 325.Harris, A. (2008). Distributed school leadership: Developing tomorrow’s leaders. Abingdon: Routledge.Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., and Hopkins, D. (2007). Distributed leadership andorganizational change: Reviewing the evidence. Journal of Educational Change, 8(4), 337-347.Harrison, C., and Killion, J. (2007). Ten Roles for Teacher Leaders, Educational Leadership. 65(1), 74-77.House, E. (1981) Three perspectives on innovation. In R. Lehming and M. Kane (eds.) ImprovingSchools: Using what we know. Beverley Hills: Sage.Hoy, W. K., Gage, C. Q., and Tarter, C. J. (2006). School Mindfulness and Faculty Trust: NecessaryConditions for Each Other? Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(2), 236-255.Hoy, W., and Tschannen-Moran, M. (2003). The conceptualization and measurement of faculty trustin schools: The Omnibus T-Scale. In W. Hoy and C. Miskel (eds.), Studies in leading and organizingschools. Greenwich CT: Information Age.Hughes, P., Matthews, S. and Khan, G. (2007) Leaders acting to improve outcomes for Indigenousstudents. Paper presented at the 2007 conference of the Australian Council for Educational Research,The Leadership Challenge –Improving learning in schools. Melbourne.Hynds, A. (2010) Unpacking resistance to change within-school reform programmes with a social justiceorientation. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 13(4), 377-392.Ikemoto, G. S., and Marsh, J. A. (2007). Cutting Through the ‘Data-Driven’ Mantra: DifferentConceptions of Data-Driven Decision Making. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study ofEducation, 106(1), 105-131.39 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Jean-Marie, G., Normore, A. and Brooks, J. (2009). Leadership for Social Justice: Preparing 21stCentury School Leaders for a New Social Order. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 4(1),2-31.Johnson, C. C. (2007). Technical, political and cultural barriers to science education reform. InternationalJournal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 10(2), 171 - 190.Knapp, M. S., Copland, M. A., and Swinnerton, J. A. (2007). Chapter 4 Understanding the Promise andDynamics of Data-Informed Leadership. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education,106(1), 74-104.Kochan, F., and Reed, C. (2005). Collaborative Leadership, Community Building, and Democracy inPublic Education. In F. English (ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Educational Leadership: Advances intheory, research and practice (pp. 68-84). London: Sage Publications.Kose, B. and Lim, E. (2010). Transformative professional development: relationship to teachers’ beliefs,expertise and teaching. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 13(4), 393-419.Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.Leithwood, K., and Mascall, B. (2008). Collective Leadership Effects on Student Achievement.Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 529-561.Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., and Mascall, B. (2002). A framework for research on large-scale reform.Journal of Educational Change 3, 7–33.Leithwood, K., Pattern, S., and Jantzi, D. (2010). Testing a Conception of How School LeadershipInfluences Student Learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 671-706.Levin, B. (2010). Leadership for evidence-informed education. School Leadership and Management:Formerly School Organisation, 30(4), 303 - 315.Lewis, M., & Andrews, D. (2009). Parallel leadership: Changing landscapes for principals. In N.Cranston & L. Ehrich (eds.) Australian School Leadership Today. Bowen Hills: Australian AcademicPress.Lloyd, M. and Mayer, D. (2010). Review of the AITSL Draft Standards for Professional LearningPrograms. Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. Brisbane.Loucks-Horsley, S. (1996). The Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM): A model for change inindividuals Retrieved 22/3/2011, 2011, from http://www.nas.edu/rise/backg4a.htmLouis, K., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K., Anderson, S., Michlin, M., Mascall, B., et al. (2010). Learningfrom Leadership: Investigating the Links to Improved Student Learning. Final Report of Research to theWallace Foundation. Minneapolis: Wallace Foundation.Lumby, J. (2006). Conceptualizing Diversity and Leadership: Evidence from 10 Cases. EducationalManagement Administration and Leadership, 34(2), 151-165.Mayrowetz, D. (2008). Making Sense of Distributed Leadership: Exploring the Multiple Usages of theConcept in the Field. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(3), 424-435.McCulloch, G. (1998). Curriculum reform, educational change and school improvement. In A.Hargreaves (ed.) International Handbook of Educational Change. Dordrecht, Kluwer: 1203-1215.McDonald, D. (2003). Curriculum change and the post-modern world: Is the school curriculum-reformmovement an anachronism? Journal of Curriculum Studies. 35(2), 139-149.McKenzie, K. B., Christman, D. E., Hernandez, F., Fierro, E., Capper, C. A., Dantley, M., et al. (2008).From the Field: A Proposal for Educating Leaders for Social Justice. Educational AdministrationQuarterly, 44(1), 111-138.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 40

Meirink, J., Meijer, P., Verloop, N., and Bergen, T. (2009). How do teachers learn in the workplace? Anexamination of teacher learning activities. European Journal of Teacher Education, 32(3), 209-224.Mitchell, L., and Cubey, P. (2003). Characteristics of professional development linked to enhancedpedagogy and children’s learning in early childhood settings: Best Evidence Synthesis. Wellington: NewZealand Ministry of Education.Moreno, J. (2006). The dynamics of curriculum design and development: Scenarios for curriculumevolution. In A. Benavot, C. Braslavsky and N. Truong. School Knowledge in Comparative and HistoricalPerspective: Changing curricula in primary and secondary education. Hong Kong: ComparativeEducation Research Centre: 195-209.Muijs, D., and Harris, A. (2006). Teacher led school improvement: Teacher leadership in the UK.Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(8), 961-972.Muijs, D., Ainscow, M., Dyson, A., Raffo, C., Goldrick, S., Kerr, K., Lennie, C. and Miles, S. (2010).Leading under pressure: leadership for social inclusion. School Leadership and Management, 30(2),143-157.Mulford, B. (2011). Teacher and school leader quality and sustainability. Canberra: Australian Institute ofHealth and Welfare and Australian Institute of Family Studies.Muller, J. (2000). Reclaiming Knowledge: Social theory, curriculum and education policy. London:Routledge Falmer.National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality (2010). Linking Assessment and Instruction:Teacher Preparation and Professional Development. Washington DC: National Comprehensive Centerfor Teacher Quality.National Research Council (2007). Enhancing Professional Development for Teachers: Potential Uses ofInformation Technology. Report of a Workshop: Committee on Enhancing Professional Development forTeachers, National Academies Teacher Advisory Council. Center for Education, Division of Behavioraland Social Sciences and EducationNewmann, F. M., Smith, B., Allensworth, E., and Bryk, A. S. (2001). Instructional Program Coherence:What It Is and Why It Should Guide School Improvement Policy. Educational Evaluation and PolicyAnalysis, 23(1), 297-321.Niesche, R. and Keddie, A. (2011) Foregrounding issues of equity and diversity in educationalleadership. School Leadership and Management, 31(1), 65-77.O’Dwyer, L., Masters, J., Dash, S., De Kramer, R., Humez, A., and Russell, M. (2010). e-Learning forEducators: Effects of On-Line Professional Development on Teachers and their Students: Findings fromFour Randomized Trials. Chesnut Hill, MA: Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative, LynchSchool of Education.Opfer, V., Pedder, D., and Lavicza, Z. (2008). Survey Report: Schools and continuing professionaldevelopment(CPD) in England – State of the Nation research project (T34718) A report for the Trainingand Development Agency for Schools. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Owston, R. (2007). Contextual factors that sustain innovative pedagogical practice using technology: aninternational study. Journal of Educational Change, 8, 61-77.Phelps, P. H. (2008). Helping Teachers Become Leaders. The Clearing House, 81(3), 119.Pounder, J. S. (2006). Transformational Classroom Leadership. Educational ManagementAdministration and Leadership, 34(4), 533-545.Preedy, M., Glatter, R., & Wise, C. (eds.) (2003). Strategic Leadership and Educational Improvement.London: Paul Chapman Publishing.Priestley, M. (2011). Schools, teachers, and curriculum change: A balancing act? Journal of EducationalChange, 12, 1-23.41 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Printy, S. M. (2008). Leadership for Teacher Learning: A Community of Practice Perspective.Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(2), 187-226.Raffo, C. and Gunter, H. (2008) Leading schools to promote social inclusion: developing a conceptualframework for analysing research, policy and practice’. Journal of Education Policy, 23(4), 397-414.Ravitch, D. (2004). Recycling reforms. Education Next. Winter, 34–40.Robinson, V. (2010). From Instructional Leadership to Leadership Capabilities: Empirical Findings andMethodological Challenges. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 9(1), 1 - 26.Roehrig, G., Kruse, R., and Kern, A. (2007). Teacher and School Characteristics and Their Influence onCurriculum Implementation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 883-907.Rosenmund, M. (2006). The current discourse on curriculum change: A comparative analysis ofnational reports on education. In A. Benavot, C. Braslavsky and N. Truong (eds.) School Knowledge inComparative and Historical Perspective: Changing curricula in primary and secondary education. HongKong: Comparative Education Research Centre, 173-194.Ross, J. and Berger, M. (2009).Equity and leadership: research-based strategies for school leaders.School Leadership and Management, 29, 5, 463-476.Sanders, M. G. (2008). Using Diverse Data to Develop and Sustain School, Family and CommunityPartnerships. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 36(4), 530-545.Sarros, J. (2008). Contemporary perspectives on leadership: Focus and meaning for ambiguous times.Prahran Vic.: Tilde University Press.Scheerens, J. (2010). Teachers’ Professional Development: Europe in international comparison.Luxembourg: European Union.Scribner, S., and Bradley-Levine, J. (2010). The Meaning(s) of Teacher Leadership in an Urban HighSchool Reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(4), 491-522.Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. London:Century Business.Shank, M. (2006). Teacher storytelling: A means for creating and learning within a collaborative space.Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 711-721.Shapiro, J., & Stefkovich, A. (2011). Ethical Leadership and Decision Making in Education: Applyingtheoretical perspectives to complex dilemmas. New York: Routledge.Shields, C. (2010) Transformative Leadership: Working for Equity in Diverse Contexts. EducationalAdministration Quarterly, 46(4), 558-589.Sims, S. and Sims, R. (2004). Managing School System Change: Charting a course for renewal.Greenwich CO: Information Age Publishing.Smith, L. (2008). Schools That Change: Evidence-based improvement and effective change leadership.Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.Starratt, R. (2010). Developing ethical leadership. In B. Davies and M. Brundrett (eds.), DevelopingSuccessful Leadership. Studies in Educational Leadership Volume 11.Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., and Thomas, S. (2006). Professional LearningCommunities: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), 221-258.Teacher Leadership Exploratory Consortium (2010). Model Teacher Leader Standards. Carrboro NC:Center for Teaching Quality.Theoharis, G. (2007). Social Justice Educational Leaders and Resistance: Toward a Theory of SocialJustice Leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 221-258.Theoharis, G. (2010).Disrupting Injustice: Principals Narrate the Strategies They Use to Improve TheirSchools and Advance Social Justice. Teachers College Record, 112(1), 331-373.Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 42

Thorpe, R., and Gold, J. (2010). Leadership and management development: The current state.In J. Gold, R. Thorpe and A. Mumford (eds.), Gower Handbook of Leadership and ManagementDevelopment. Farnham: Gower Publishing.Thrupp, M., and Willmott, R. (2003). Education management in managerialist times: beyond the texturalapologists. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Timperley, H. (2008). A distributed perspective on leadership and enhancing valued outcomes forstudents. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(6), 821-833.Trotman, D. (2009). Networking for educational change: concepts, impediments and opportunities forprimary school professional learning communities. Professional Development in Education, 35(3), 341-356.Tschannen-Moran, M. (2009). Fostering Teacher Professionalism in Schools: The role of leadershiporientation and trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 217-247.University of Cambridge, Eastern Leadership Centre, MacBeath, J., Oduro, G., and Waterhouse,J. (2004). Distributed Leadership in Action: Full Report. Nottingham: National College for SchoolLeadership.Vescio, V., Ross, D., and Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learningcommunities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 80-91.Ward, L., and Parr, J. (2006). Authority, Volunteerism, and Sustainability: Creating and Sustaining anOnline Community through Teacher Leadership. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 5(2), 109 - 129.Watson, L. (2005). Quality Teaching and School Leadership: A scan of research findings. Final Report.Canberra: Lifelong Learning Network, University of Canberra.Webster-Wright, Ann (2009). Reframing professional development through understanding authenticprofessional learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2): 702-739.Weston, M., and Bain, A. (2009). Engaging with change: a model for adopting and evaluating schoolbasedinnovation. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(2), 156-175.Woodbury, S., and Gess-Newsome, J. (2002). Overcoming the Paradox of Change without Difference: AModel of Change in the Arena of Fundamental School Reform. Educational Policy, 16(5), 763-782.Woods, P. A., and Gronn, P. (2009). Nurturing Democracy: The Contribution of Distributed Leadershipto a Democratic Organizational Landscape. Educational Management Administration and Leadership,37(4), 430-451.Woods, P. A., Bennett, N., Harvey, J. A., and Wise, C. (2004). Variabilities and Dualities in DistributedLeadership: Findings from a Systematic Literature Review. Educational Management Administration andLeadership, 32(4), 439-457.Wynne, S. (2009). GACE Educational Leadership 173, 174 Teacher Certification Test Prep Study Guide.Cambridge MA: XAMOnline.Yammarino, F., Dionne, S., Chun, J., and Dansereau, F. (2005). Leadership and levels of analysis: Astate-of-the-science review. Leadership Quarterly, 16, 879-919.York-Barr, J., and Duke, K. (2004). What Do We Know About Teacher Leadership? Findings From TwoDecades of Scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 255-316.York-Barr, J., Sommerness, J., Duke, K., & Ghere, G. (2005). Special educators in inclusive educationprogrammes: reframing their work as teacher leadership. International Journal of Inclusive Education,9(2), 193 - 215.Zembylas, M. and H. Barker (2007). Teachers’ spaces for coping with change in the context of a reformeffort. Journal of Educational Change, 8(3): 235-256.43 Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review

Professional Learning Flagship Program: Leading Curriculum Change: Literature Review 44

aitsl.edu.auFurther informationTelephone: +61 3 9944 1230Email: professionallearning@aitsl.edu.auMelbourne | Brisbane | CanberraAITSL is funded by the Australian Government