Expert Teams in Instructional Leadership Practices Based on Collaboration and Their Transference to Local Teaching Improvement Networks

Abstract

This article shows the research results of implementing a professional learning model based on instructional leadership practices and structured teacher collaboration. The primary purpose was to promote a collaboration model focused on developing communities of practice, formed by school leaders and teachers, focusing on instructional improvement in 8th grade Math and English. The model consists of a cycle with 4 iterative practices: planning, classroom observation, feedback, and refinement and three guiding principles: deprivatisation, collaboration, focus on learning. The methodological approach was a design-based research model, with school teams (within-school level) and collaboration networks (between schools-level) that included principals and teachers. 22 schools in two districts in Chile, 44 school leaders, 74 teachers, 49 non-participating teachers as a control group, and at least 1,000 students in 40 classes were part of the study sample that participated in the research between 2019 and 2020. Mixed methods were used for data analysis. The research team conducted a five-scale questionnaire and semi-structured interviews with participants and non-participants teachers as the control group. The main progress was the deprivatisation of pedagogical practice and joint decision-making for teaching improvement. The practical implications of the model, adjusted for local characteristics, are that it facilitates professional development at three levels: individual, within school teams, and allows professional exchange between schools. It enabled the enactment of peer collaboration practices, and the role of instructional leadership shared between teachers and the school leadership team members were bolstered.

Keywords

• collaboration
• instructional leadership
• deprivatisation
• professional development

Supporting Institution

Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

Project Number

FONDECYT N°1201710, 2020-2021

Thanks

FON181800158, 2019-2020 Professional research team: Pilar Fuentes, Christian Lazcano, Claudia Llorente

References

1. Anderson, T. & Shattuck,J. (2012). “Design-Based Research: A Decade of Progress in Education Research?” Educational Researcher 41 (1): 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813.
2. Bellibas, M. S., Polatcan, M. & Kilinc A. C. (2022). Linking instructional leadership to teacher practices: The mediating effect of shared practice and agency in learning effectiveness. Educational Management Administration and Leadership 55(5):812-831. DOI: 10.1177/1741143220945706
3. Kilinc A. C., Bellibas, M. S. & Polatcan, M. (2020). Learning-centred leadership and change in teacher practice in Turkey: exploring the mediating effects of collaboration, Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/03055698.2020.1828833
4. Carroll, K., Patrick, S. K., & Goldring, E. (2021). School Factors That Promote Teacher Collaboration: Results from the Tennessee Instructional Partnership Initiative. American Journal of Education, 127(4), 501-530.
5. Chilean Ministry of Education (2017). "Study on the implementation of the School Improvement Networks." Researcher responsible for the project: Luis Ahumada.
6. Coburn, C., Penuel, W. R. & Geil, K. (2013). “Research-Practice Partnerships at the District Level: A New Strategy for Leveraging Research for Educational Improvement.” Berkeley, CA and Boulder, CO: University of California and University of Colorado. January. www.wtgrantfoundation.org.
7. Cravens, X. & Hunter, S. (2021). Assessing the impact of collaborative inquiry on teacher performance and effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement 32(4):1-43. DOI: 10.1080/09243453.2021.1923532
8. Cravens, X., Drake, T., Goldring, E. & Schuermann, P. (2017). Teacher peer excellence groups (TPEGs): Building communities of practice for instructional improvement. Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 55 Issue: 5, pp.526-551, https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-08-2016-0095

9. Cravens, X. & Drake,T. (2021). From Shanghai to Tennessee: Developing instructional leadership through Teacher Peer Excellence Groups. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies 6(30), pp.348-364. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLLS-12-2016-0062
10. Easterday, M. W., Rees Lewis, D. G. & Gerber, E. M. (2018). “The Logic of Design Research.” Learning: Research and Practice 4 (2): 131–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1286367.
11. Flick, U. (2003). “Qualitative Sozialforschung — Stand Der Dinge.” In Soziologische Forschung: Stand Und Perspektiven, 309–21. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-95017-8_19.
12. Fromm, Olbrich & Volante, (2015). Fidelidad de la implementación de prácticas de liderazgo instruccional. Magis Revista Internacional de Investigación en Educación 7(15):117-134. DOI: 10.11144/Javeriana.M7-15.FIPL
13. Goldring, E., Porter, A., Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N. & X. Cravens (2009). “Assessing Learning-Centered Leadership: Connections to Research, Professional Standards, and Current Practices.” Leadership and Policy in Schools 8 (1): 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760802014951.
14. Hallinger, P. & Murphy, J. (1985). “Assessing the Instructional Management Behavior of Principals.” The Elementary School Journal 86 (2): 217–47. https://doi.org/10.1086/461445.
15. Hou, Y., Cui, Y. & Zhang, D. (2019). Impact of instructional leadership on high school student academic achievement in China. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev. 20, 543–558.
16. JUNAEB (2022). Prioridades 2022 con IVE SINAE básica, media y comunal. Retrieved June 13, 2022, from https://www.junaeb.cl/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/IVE-2022.xlsx
17. Kahne, J., O’Brien, J., Brown, A. & Quinn, T. (2001). “Leveraging Social Capital and School Improvement: The Case of a School Network and a Comprehensive Community Initiative in Chicago.” Educational Administration Quarterly 37 (4): 429–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131610121969389.
18. Levine, T. H. & Marcus, A. S. (2010). “How the Structure and Focus of Teachers’ Collaborative Activities Facilitate and Constrain Teacher Learning.” Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (3): 389–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.03.001.
19. Lingard, B., Mills, M. & Hayes, D. (2000). “Teachers, School Reform and Social Justice: Challenging Research and Practice.” The Australian Educational Researcher 27 (3): 101–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03219733.
20. Lochmiller, C. R. & Lester, J. N. (2017). “Conceptualizing Practitioner-Scholarship for Educational Leadership Research and Practice.” Journal of Research on Leadership Education 12 (1): 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775116668525.
21. Louis, K. S., & Marks, H. M. (1998). “Does Professional Community Affect the Classroom? Teachers’ Work and Student Experiences in Restructuring Schools.” American Journal of Education 106 (4): 532–75. https://doi.org/10.1086/444197.
22. MINEDUC. (2016). Law 20,903 “Crea el sistema de desarrollo profesional docente y modifica otras normas”. Retrieved from https://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=1087343.
23. Muijs, D. (2015). “Improving Schools through Collaboration: A Mixed Methods Study of School-to-School Partnerships in the Primary Sector.” Oxford Review of Education 41 (5): 563–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2015.1047824.
24. Müller, M., Volante, P., Grau, V., Preiss, D.D (2014). Desarrollo de Habilidades de Observación en la Formación de Liderazgo Escolar a Través de Videos de Clases. Psykhe, Vol. 23, 2, 1-12.
25. OECD (2014). “TALIS Teacher's Guide 2013: International Study on Teaching and Learning”. OECD, Paris.
26. OECD (2019). “TALIS Teacher's Guide 2018: International Study on Teaching and Learning”. OECD, Paris.
27. OECD (2020), TALIS 2018 Results (Volume II): Teachers and School Leaders as Valued Professionals, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/19cf08df-en.
28. Özdemir, N., Gümüş, S., Kılınç, A. Ç., & Bellibaş, M. Ş. (2022). A systematic review of research on the relationship between school leadership and student achievement: An updated framework and future direction. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 17411432221118662.
29. Papay, J. P., Taylor, E. S., Tyler, J. H., & Laski, M. E. (2020). Learning job skills from colleagues at work: Evidence from a field experiment using teacher performance data. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 12(1), 359–388. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20170709
30. Robinson, V. (2007). School Leadership and Student Outcomes : Identifying What Works and Why. ACEL Monograph Series. http://www.peersupport.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Student-leadership.pdf.
31. Robinson, V., Lloyd, C. A. & Rowe, K. J. (2008). “The Impact of Leadership on Student Outcomes: An Analysis of the Differential Effects of Leadership Types.” Educational Administration Quarterly 44 (5): 635–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08321509.
32. Spillane, J. P., Hopkins, M. & Sweet, T. M. (2015). “Intra- and Interschool Interactions about Instruction: Exploring the Conditions for Social Capital Development.” American Journal of Education 122 (1): 71–110. https://doi.org/10.1086/683292.
33. Şükrü, M., Gümüş, S. & Liu, Y. (2021) Does school leadership matter for teachers’ classroom practice? The influence of instructional leadership and distributed leadership on instructional quality, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 32:3, 387-412, DOI: 10.1080/09243453.2020.1858119
34. Supovitz, J. A., & Christman, J. B. (2003). “Developing Communities of Instructional Practice: Lessons for Cincinnati and Philadelphia.” Policy Briefs, November, 1–9. https://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_policybriefs/28.
35. Volante, P., Müller, M. (2017). 9 claves ELI: Manual de prácticas para equipos de liderazgo instruccional. Santiago: Ediciones UC.
36. Wenger, E., & Trayner-Wenger, B. (2015). “Communities of Practice: A Brief Introduction.” Communities of Practice 15 (5): 1–8. https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/11736.