Expanding Our Understanding of Social Change A Report From the Definition Task Force of the HLC Special Emphasis Project Darragh Callahan, Elizabeth Wilson, Ian Birdsall, Brooke Estabrook-Fishinghawk, Gary Carson, Stephanie Ford, Karen Ouzts, Iris Yob Academic Offices 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 900 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Phone: 1-612-338-7224 or 1-800-WALDENU (1-800925-3368) Fax: 1-612-338-5092 Administrative Offices 650 S. Exeter Street Baltimore, MD 21202 Phone: 1-866-4WALDEN (1-866-4925336) Fax: 1-410-843-8104 Walden University is accredited by The Higher Learning Commission and a member of the North Central Association, www.ncahlc.org. Walden University practices a policy of nondiscrimination in admission to, access to, and employment in its programs and activities. Walden does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, age, religion or creed, marital status, disability, national or ethnic origin, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, or other legally protected status. Walden is committed to providing barrier-free access to its educational services and makes appropriate and reasonable accommodations when necessary. Students requesting accommodations per the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) must contact the Office of Disability Services at disability@waldenu.edu. © 2012 Walden University, LLC Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 2 Social change is defined broadly in terms of process and product to indicate that all kinds of social change activity are welcomed and encouraged at Walden. As faculty members, students, and alumni have indicated, even small acts can have large consequences, and many of these consequences are unpredictable. The charge given to the Definition Task Force was to expand the university’s definition of social change to provide more guidance for teaching, learning, and assessing the social change mission at Walden. To that end, the Task Force offers the following considerations. To bring about long-term solutions and promote lasting effects through the process of social change, the following features may need to be considered as appropriate to the context and purposes of each program. The features are grouped under the headings Knowledge, Skills, and Attitudes, to encourage a holistic approach to preparing learners for social change. The groupings, however, are defined by soft boundaries because each feature belongs primarily to one group but may share some of the qualities of the other groups. A. Knowledge 1. Scholarship The scholar-practitioner model is particularly suited to social change because knowledge applied to real-life situations is a scholar-practitioner’s goal. In the scholarly role, the scholar-practitioner engages in active learning, critical reflection, and inquiry into reallife dilemmas and possibilities. Careful study and research can reveal the causes and correlates of social problems and suggest solutions and opportunities for promoting growth. 2. Systems thinking Many of the issues addressed by social change are complex because there may be multiple causes and manifestations of the issue that require different responses at many levels. Systemic thinking is a technique for developing insights into challenging situations and complex subjects. It usually begins with analysis, which makes sense of a system by breaking it apart to see how the parts work together and influence each other. This may be followed by synthesis that aims to develop a set of responses that address the situation in a comprehensive way. In the Walden community, finding systemic solutions to challenging issues might be undertaken by multidisciplinary collaborations in which scholar-practitioners from a number of colleges work together to examine issues and propose multipronged responses. Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 3 3. Reflection Those working toward positive social change can enhance their effectiveness by reflecting on the experience. Reflection can be extrospective, that is, looking outward to review the short- and long-term outcomes of a project and its implications for the individuals, institutions, and communities with and for whom one is working. It can also be introspective, that is, looking inward to examine what has been learned from the process, including new insights into one’s motives, skills, knowledge, actions, and reactions. Self-reflection allows for the contemplation of one’s professional and personal development. Group reflection affords all stakeholders in a social change project (scholar-practitioners, community partners, policy-makers, and beneficiaries) an opportunity to process the experience and learn from each other. Reflection employs critical-thinking and analytical skills. It can be carried forward by questioning and selfinquiry and may depend on a willingness to see things from another’s perspective. While reflection needs to be honest, it should also be caring and supportive, examining strengths as well as weaknesses and successes as along with disappointments. While reflection may look to the past, its purpose is forward-looking—to make future social change activities more effective. B. Skills 4. Practice In the practitioner role, the scholar-practitioner engages in the application of knowledge. Learning-by-doing, or experiential learning, has a long history of support and success in education because it can infuse and sometimes lead to deconstructing or constructing theoretical understandings within the realities of practical life in the student’s personal growth, profession, or community. By using recursive loops between scholarship and practice, both intellectual growth and better practice can occur—each informing the other. Not merely knowing about theories but actually testing theories in the context of everyday life is the foundation of a scholar-practitioner’s educational process and contribution to social change. 5. Collaboration Given the complexity of many of the issues addressed in social change efforts, responsive action may be needed from many different sources. In these situations, the Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 4 social change agent may want to build working relationships with other entities including community leaders, service agencies, neighborhood coalitions, businesses, religious congregations, and other local institutions. Apart from these types of civic engagement, collaboration with scholars and practitioners in an array of professional fields may bring a variety of perspectives, research, and applied knowledge. Partnerships can unite the skills, knowledge, and energies needed to make a difference. The ability to build a team, combined with leadership, project management, conflict resolution, and communication skills, may be essential. A significant partner in social change enterprises is the primary beneficiary; this person has a personal knowledge and experience that can be invaluable in both analyzing a situation and proposing responses. The primary beneficiary may be one individual or someone representing the perspectives of a group of beneficiaries. Working collaboratively with primary beneficiaries can be mutually educative and rewarding. 6. Advocacy Advocacy is a matter of raising consciousness or being the “voice” for someone, some group, or something that may or may not otherwise have a voice that can be heard. It may involve political engagement, but it may also be a matter of supporting others as they negotiate directly with the services and opportunities they need. In light of social change, advocacy more widely aims to influence not only political but also economic and social systems and institutions to protect and promote the dignity, health, safety, and rights of people. Advocacy for an issue often takes the form of education that aims to bring about a new understanding and awareness. Advocacy may also need to encompass mentoring activities to build confidence and self-reliance in those whose welfare is being promoted. 7. Civic engagement Social change efforts can be supported and reflected in laws by policy-makers. Being aware of the channels for communicating with civic leaders and knowing how to effectively use those channels are often important when working for social change. All institutions and groups—not just government entities—have their own politics, that is, a prevailing mind-set, an internal structure, and channels of influence and power. Being able to incorporate and negotiate these politics in support of social change requires finesse and sensitivity. Understanding this before engaging with others can be helpful, whether these others are legislators, local agencies and institutions, professional associations, neighborhoods, ad hoc teams, or professional colleagues. Power Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 5 relationships also exist between those working for social change and those who are the primary beneficiaries. Mutual collaboration and power-sharing between the parties involved can empower all toward more lasting social change. C. Attitudes 8. Humane ethics While a number of emotional effects may prompt one to engage in social change, including empathy, sympathy, guilt, a feeling of satisfaction, and so on, one’s ethical code can inform and direct one’s motivated engagement in social change. Humane ethics is a system of moral principles that guide human conduct with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions. While personal codes of ethics may differ, an underlying, common code of a humane ethic is characterized by tenderness, compassion, sympathy for people and animals, especially for the suffering or distressed, and concern for the health of the environment in which we live. Analyzing Social Change Figure 1 below shows each of the features—scholarship, systemic thinking, reflection, practice, collaboration, advocacy, civic engagement, and humane ethics—on an axis ranging from 0 to 5. Each social change activity or project could be mapped onto the axes to show the extent to which it incorporates each feature. Joining the points along each axis produces a web for each activity, an example of which is shown in red. It is important to note that this tool is not intended to be an instrument to assess a particular social change activity. Some projects and activities will be appropriately strong in one or more areas but not necessarily in all. Rather, its purpose is to serve as a tool to analyze social change activities that occur at Walden. It may reveal areas where an activity might be enhanced, and importantly, it may reveal where the program for preparing students for social change might be strengthened. Further, all kinds of social change activities are encouraged, given the range of interests, commitments, and opportunities for engagement among students, faculty members, and staff. Most, if not all, kinds of activity can be represented as a web. The purpose of the web analysis is ultimately to provide a tool to enlarge our vision of the range and features of social change that seeks long-term solutions and promotes lasting effects. Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 6 Figure 1. Web map showing each of the features. Below are some examples of web maps of social change activities based on reports by students, faculty members, and alumni in a recent research study: Perspectives on Social Change. Pseudonyms have been used throughout. Example No. 1. Bookcase Builders Tom is a Rotarian and undertakes a number of service projects in the community with other Rotarians. One such activity involves building bookcases. Some members of the club also volunteer with Habitat for Humanity, which provides housing for needy families. Another member has connections with the local school district and knew of a recent drive to improve the level of literacy in the community. Putting these together, the club decided to build bookcases for the Habitat for Humanity homes and, through the support of another club member who manages a bookstore, give each family a gift certificate to buy books for the children to put in the bookcase. This activity would certainly rate relatively high on Collaboration for the networking among Rotarians, the local chapter of Habitat for Humanity, the school district, and the local book store. It also represents a Humane Ethic in that it shows the responsiveness of this club to the need for these children to read Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 7 well for their future success in life. As a practice, this need is supported by implicit knowledge about the importance of motivating children and providing them with opportunities to read. so there should be a showing on the Practitioner axis. Figure 2 below shows how this project might be mapped. Figure 2. Web map of the bookcase builders project. If Tom and his fellow club members want to pursue this project further they might ask whether they may seek other possible partners for this endeavor, such as the reading tutors, the bookstore salespeople, the parents, and even the children themselves. Others brought into the program may contribute more Systemic Thinking to address the problem of illiteracy. The club members may also consider follow-up activities using other features like Advocacy with a particular focus on mentoring, Civic Engagement, or some Scholarly study of or research on the effectiveness of the project. Example No. 2. Basket-Weavers as Story-Tellers Arsi’s research took her to a remote and needy area of Jamaica, where many of the village women help support their families through weaving baskets for sale in the tourist areas. Using a qualitative approach, Arsi listened to and recorded the women’s stories of their lives in abject poverty, analyzed them for common themes, and presented her findings as her dissertation. The information in this dissertation could be invaluable to service agencies and others willing to work with these women to improve their lives. Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 8 The project is high on the Scholar axis, especially because it is research into a real-life problem that needs informed solutions. It further exhibits significant Collaboration in that she established personal relationships with the women so that they could tell her their stories. It is also strong in the Humane Ethics dimension because it deals with real human need. Writing a dissertation also demands Reflection, particularly because it requires some discussion of the meaning of the findings and their possible implications. The dissertation ultimately enters the public domain and, as such, is a permanent voice for the women whose stories it shares (Advocacy). Figure 3 below illustrates this example. Figure 3. Web map of the basket-weavers as story-tellers project. Arsi successfully graduated in 2011. If she wanted to continue with the project, she might share her findings with policy-makers (Civic Engagement) and service providers, such as business people, educators, and healthcare workers (Systemic Thinking). If she could disseminate her work through publications and presentations, she would not only deepen her own understanding (Reflection) but more directly provide valuable information to service agencies and others to apply in working with and for these women (Practitioner). Example No. 3. The Monthly Giver Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 9 Many faculty members, students, and staff members sign up to make monthly donations to agencies, such as United Way, through automatic payroll deductions. Given their busy schedules and commitments, they look at this as making some kind of contribution to “the development of individuals, institutions, and societies.” Does such an activity count as social change? Figure 4 below is an attempt to map this activity. One of the benefits of the mapping tool is that it is inclusive of a wide range of possible engagements in social change. The monthly giver, like many others, is guided by a Humane Ethic and wants to act out of compassion and care for the distressed and needy. She also understands that the organization she is donating to is carefully managed, well informed, and handles donations responsibly, and she wants to do something practical to support it (Practitioner). She also knows that her donation, because it is combined with the donations of many others, can amount to a significant sum to support large-scale projects in the community (Collaboration). Figure 4. Web map of the monthly giver. Example No. 4. Global Day of Service Participant Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 10 During the annual Global Day of Service, Justin organized a small group of his co-workers to clean up the road entrance to the town. This meant gaining permission from the town clerk, recruiting willing workers, arranging for safety training, and equipping them with safety vests, gloves, and garbage bags. Justin works full-time and is undertaking his studies part-time. He is also the father of three, and his wife works full-time so he has a heavy load of responsibilities. He does not have a lot of spare time, but he has committed the time to organize and prepare for this 1-day volunteer clean-up event. Justin’s efforts are guided by an ethic of care for the environment (Humane Ethics) and are one means through which he can apply his studies on the importance of protecting the eco-system in a practical way (Practitioner). Partnering with the town clerk was mandatory in this case, but the Collaboration was important for the safety of his team, and his recruiting efforts among his co-workers was an extension of the Collaboration. In some senses, he served as an Advocate for the environment. The day following this activity, he posted some thoughts on what the experience meant to him and his co-workers in a class discussion forum (Reflection). Figure 5. Web map of a Global Day of Service participant’s activity. Example No. 5. Nurses for Women Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 11 Claire is a member of a nurse’s organization working for an urban community offering uncompensated services to more than 200,000 clients a year. One of her projects has involved hiring a number of nurses who are certified to perform sexual assault examinations; this expedites forensic examinations in pre-hospital agencies, such as emergency medical services and fire departments. As a result, law enforcement can work with the victims of domestic violence, abuse, or sexual assault on the spot and spare them the added trauma of going to an emergency room. The program has seen a record number of perpetrators put behind bars—but the work does not stop there. The organization helps the young women get back on their feet in a number of ways, including connecting them with “Suits for Success” so they are dressed suitably for job interviews, teaching them interview skills, getting them enrolled in school programs, and helping them with grants and jobs, so that they can put what happened to them as victims behind them. Claire has multiplied her individual efforts with an eye toward lasting change in a number of ways. She and her co-volunteers apply a systemic approach to addressing the needs of the victims of sexual abuse: helping them gain the confidence, skills, opportunities, financial support, and even the clothing to be successful in the job market so they can build success in their lives (Systemic Thinking). She has increased her personal effectiveness by connecting with other trained and certified nurses and with fire departments and emergency medical services (Collaboration). She seems to have been moved to action by a Humane Ethic and has found a way to use her skills and knowledge to help others (Practitioner). Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 12 Figure 6. Web map of the nurses for women project. This is only a small sample of social change projects, but if it is representative, it is possible to discern some trends in social change activity at Walden. For instance, in the aggregate, Humane Ethics and Collaboration are strong features but Civic Engagement and Systemic Thinking are not. Such findings may be useful in determining whether all of the identified features should be supported and, if so, how they can be supported in the curriculum and through guidance offered by university leadership and students’ mentors. Expanding Our Understanding (July 2012) Page 13 The top and bottom of leadership and change Successful large-scale reform efforts — one in Northern England, another in Canada — bolster the approach of “leading from the middle.” By Andy Hargreaves and Mel Ainscow For 15 years and more, in the U.S., England, parts of Canada, and elsewhere, reforms to improve educational equity and achievement have come in large-scale measures — designed and delivered in detail by big government across whole systems. Such top-down reforms promised a sharp focus on improving literacy and mathematics achievement and boosting high school graduation. 42 Kappan November 2015 Image: Thinkstock/iStock Comments? Like PDK at www. facebook.com/pdkintl What can the U.S. learn from england and canada? 3Top-down reforms have a long history of failure. A middle-driven approach of coordinated change, collective responsibility, and delegating resources and authority to school districts can yield positive results. Training, coaching, and other professional development supports accompanied some top-down strategies. Others, like the No Child Left Behind law, proved excessively demanding, requiring progress for all categories of students every year and imposing punitive consequences when schools and districts fell short. But punitive or supportive, all top-down reforms have an Achilles heel: Their focus on micromanaging two or three measurable priorities only works for systems pursuing traditional and comparatively narrow achievement goals. A digital age of complex skills, cultural diversity, and high-speed change calls for more challenging educational goals and more sophisticated and flexible change strategies. Thus, reformers are advocating greater autonomy for schools and teachers, increased freedom for local curriculum design, and more independent and personalized access to technology. But the history of bottom-up innovation and individual school autonomy is not impressive. In the 1960s and ’70s, innovative ideas often didn’t spread beyond a few isolated classrooms and schools, and, when they did, their implementation often was fatally flawed (Gross, Giacquinta, & Bernstein, 1971). There is no reason to believe that efforts to spread the success of a few innovative, high-tech schools will fare any better today. andy haRgReaVes (andrew.hargreaves@bc.edu) is the Brennan Chair in Education in the Lynch School of Education at Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Mass. He is co-author of Uplifting Leadership (Wiley, 2014). mel ainscoW is a professor of education at the University of Manchester, United Kingdom, and author of Toward self-improving school systems: Lessons from a city challenge (Routledge, 2015). V97 N3 kappanmagazine.org 43 In an age of innovation and diversity, top-down strategies are inappropriate, while bottom-up strategies seem unable to achieve improvement on any significant scale. So what should we do instead? One possibility is shifting attention toward districts, which can support schools and teachers in innovating and improving together. Leading in the middle In North America and Northern Europe, school districts have historically been the linchpin of local democracy (Katz, 1987; Bryk et al., 1998). California Gov. Jerry Brown has recognized this by returning education spending control back to the state’s over 900 local districts, placing maximum control at the most local level of competent authority (Torlakson, 2015). Districts can provide a valuable focus for school improvement, be a means for efficient and effective use of research evidence and data analysis across schools, support schools in responding coherently to multiple external reform demands, and be champions for families and students, making sure everybody gets a fair deal. Strong districts are powerful forces for positive educational change (Leithwood, 2013). Strong and steadily improving districts like Boston Public Schools and Long Beach Public Schools have received widespread acclaim for systemwide gains (Barber, Chijioke, & Mourshed, 2011). In England, some of the most dramatic turnarounds have been in urban districts, like the London boroughs of Hackney and Tower Hamlets, which went from the lowest performers in the country to scoring above the national average on all key indicators (Hargreaves, Boyle, & Harris, 2014; Hargreaves & Shirley, 2009). So some reformers argue that the middle level needs a stronger role in order to implement changes from the top and to move around ideas and strategies percolating up (Schleicher, 2015). This amounts to a kind of leadership in the middle — a healthy sort of middle-stage spread. Weaknesses of the middle Leading in the middle is promising, but it’s not enough. Not all local school systems or districts are strong. Some districts do well; others fare badly. Districts vary in their resources and capacities for change, like networking and seeking other ideas. Districts can be self-serving, politically toxic, glacially slow at driving improvement, and, as in the Atlanta cheating scandal, just plain corrupt. In the U.S. and England especially, there are unacceptable variations in school district quality. Differences in demographics, poverty, funding, and capacity to attract and develop effective leadership means very high-performing and very low-performing districts sometimes coexist side-by-side (Noguera, 44 Kappan November 2015 Large-scale success cannot be achieved if districts continue to act independently of one another. 2014; Sutton Trust, 2015). This has created a conundrum of district-driven improvement: Although all high-performing nations are characterized by strong local control, not all nations with strong local control are high performing. One response to this conundrum is to say that school districts aren’t worth saving and either deliver reforms in detail from the top or institute marketbased, individual alternatives like charter schools, free schools, and academies that are insulated from district control. Another response is to use central funding formulas to compensate for bad variation and inequities. However, the strings attached to this funding often heap more grant writing and accountability requirements on already overstretched highpoverty districts. Leading from the middle A third way to reduce bad variation among school districts is to promote collaboration among them so they share resources, ideas, and expertise and exercise collective responsibility for student success. In this leading from the middle approach, districts don’t just mediate and manage other people’s reforms individually; they become the collective drivers of change and improvement together. When districts lead from the middle together, they: • Respond to local needs and diversities; • Take collective responsibility for all students’ and each other’s success; • Exercise initiative rather than implementing other people’s initiatives; • Integrate their own efforts with broad system priorities; and • Establish transparency of participation and results. These components of leading from the middle are evident in two systemwide reforms in which we have been closely involved — the Greater Manchester Challenge (GMC) in England, and district-driven improvements in Ontario, Canada. Greater Manchester Challenge The United Kingdom government initiated the GMC in the 2007-08 school year by bringing together 10 school districts (known in the UK as local authorities) to improve standards over three years. Co-author and professor of education Mel Ainscow was appointed chief adviser to this approximately $80 million (U.S.) project. “There are lots of good things going on in schools in Greater Manchester,” Ainscow said upon his appointment. “The task now is to spread the best practice to all schools.” But how would this be done? Ainscow’s group devised several principles for the effort: • Leaders of successful schools would work with weaker schools to improve their leadership teams; • Schools with similar student populations would be clustered to share best practices; and • Local problems would be met with local solutions. Getting schools to collaborate was not a new idea in England. What was different, though, was that while previous school-to-school networks and partnerships had tended to bypass local authorities, 10 of them would be driving improvement together (see Ainscow, 2015 for a full account of the GMC). Multiple strategies brought this simple principle to life. Schools cooperated across authority boundaries. Recently turned-around schools became key in helping other schools. Hub schools that demonstrated excellence in particular areas provided extensive training and development for teachers in other schools and local authorities. Schools at different stages of development organized in “families.” A Jewish school assisted a predominantly Muslim partner. A Catholic school prayed for a good inspection result for its secular counterpart. School officials found hidden capacity and capitalized on it; they shared knowledge and overcame old rivalries for the higher purpose of improving the whole area. The Manchester area had suffered from historic problems of unemployment and deprivation for four decades, but by 2011, GMC schools were above the national average on all standardized test measures. Secondary schools in the most disadvantaged communities improved at three times the rate of the national average. By working together, principals (known in Eng- land as head teachers) changed the cultures of the schools. Instead of blaming parents in poor families for not being interested in their children’s learning, schools came to appreciate the stresses facing families and then responded with local flexibility and intensive support. They began to focus on delivering better, more interesting teaching and learning through strategies like cooperative learning and Japanese lesson study. There was a lot of pressure on teachers and schools to work hard to improve results, but there also was more emphasis on caring for the adults in the schools as well as the children so that the schools became happy and professionally fulfilling places to work. None of this was easy. Local authorities are political entities as well as providers of services. Internal conflicts and external turf wars were often exacerbated by national policies that promote interschool competition. A steering committee involving national government and local representatives got locked into conflicts over the budget. A committee of leaders of the 10 authorities became fractious Punitive or supportive, all versions of top-down reform have an Achilles heel. whenever it was presented with disturbing data or with concerns about lack of progress. While six of the authorities were willing to change roles and responsibilities, two others accommodated the new language of shared responsibility for improvement without making any real changes in practice. But over time, with persistence of effort, relationships improved, some personnel changed, ideas and strategies started to be shared between schools as well as within them, and the authorities even began to commit to some joint delivery of services. The strategies adopted in Manchester (and now in Wales) define the essence of leading from the middle. But this term didn’t arise in the UK. It first emerged in a systemwide project with 10 school districts that the other co-author of this article (Andy Hargreaves) carried out with his colleague Henry Braun in Ontario, Canada. Ontario district-led reforms Ontario has undertaken one of the world’s bestknown, large-scale educational reforms. The most V97 N3 kappanmagazine.org 45 In the leading from the middle approach, districts don’t just mediate and manage other people’s reforms individually; they become the collective drivers of change and improvement together. publicized parts of the reform, involving more than 5,000 schools, have been the focus on raising expectations and narrowing the achievement gap in tested literacy and mathematics and on increasing the rates of high school completion. The design and implementation of this reform — by a “guiding coalition” of political and professional forces — was complemented by strong support to enable districts to be successful in achieving the desired results (Campbell et al., 2015). The province’s 72 school districts and their system leaders led a less well-known part of the reform agenda. In 2005, the government gave the districts an initial investment of $25 million (Canadian) to design and implement a strategy to improve learning and achievement for students with special educational needs that would also benefit all students. One system leader described this change as “leading from the middle.” After four years of this reform, the literacy achievement gap between students with special needs and other students had narrowed in reading and especially in writing. A survey of the reform indicated the changes brought greater collaboration among staff, more joint planning, and broader acceptance of collective responsibility for all students (Hargreaves & Braun, 2012). Teachers reported increased use of differentiated instruction, more analysis and discussion of data to pinpoint needed interventions, greater cooperation between special education resource teachers and classroom teachers in relation to all students who struggled rather than only those with official identifications, and more use of assistive technologies for students with learning disabilities. Intensive site visits in all 10 districts corroborated these results and also revealed greater collaboration between curriculum and special education departments within districts that sometimes amounted to total integration. In general, educators reported a large movement from a culture of “my students” to “our students.” District leaders drove this strategy. They took a counterintuitive approach of providing identical funding to all 72 districts, regardless of their size. In a province where many districts were quite small and 46 Kappan November 2015 where even small amounts of extra resources could therefore make a great difference, this built a critical mass of district support. Larger districts eventually were persuaded to participate with their smaller counterparts by appealing to their historic symbolic status and the contribution they could make to the collective good of the province’s students. Responsibility for planning and implementation came under a core team of six key staff — retired district leaders and superintendents of curriculum or special education — who jointly developed project goals, designed an implementation strategy, and monitored participation and results. They did this by constantly connecting with and circulating among the districts, making necessary changes and refinements as they amassed evidence of what was working and what was not. Like the GMC, district leaders did not believe that one-size-fits-all strategies were appropriate in a province where one in four schoolchildren were born outside of Canada, leading to several different strategies: • In a district with high numbers of children from immigrant families, the project focused on early literacy initiatives like a summer headstart program for students new to the region and a “snuggle up and read” program involving parents or other family members. • In a district serving a large student population of Old Order German-origin Mennonites whose community is characterized by mutual aid, commitment to collective self-sufficiency, and wearing traditional dress, children tended to leave school early to work on the farms, or, in the case of girls, to get married and have children. Standard efforts to enforce school attendance and improve high school completion would prompt families to move to other parts of their rural network throughout North America. So school leaders engaged with their culture, for example, by using the community’s agricultural products for children’s lunches, meeting parents on street corners, carrying home their shopping, and building relationships to shift perceptions about the value of formal education. • A remote rural district serving just 24 schools across an area the size of France had struggled with how to raise expectations for the 40% of children from aboriginal families (known in Canada as First Nations communities). Some educators believed that children from these communities could not learn, could barely speak, and mainly needed an emotionally safe and caring environment. The district’s response was to coach teachers to use more specific, differentiated, and culturally appropriate teaching strategies, and to examine examples of student work among colleagues to demonstrate possibilities for student and teacher success. Like the GMC, the Ontario special education project also stressed collective cross-district responsibility for all students’ success. All 72 districts were involved. Collective responsibility began with teachers across grade levels and with special education and regular classroom assignments taking responsibility for struggling students and their progress together. The districts exercised collective responsibility, too, in how they shared strategies transparently at annual retreats where they presented their practices and results, in how they communicated with the steering committee, and in how they were connected by their team of mentors and monitors who were ensuring that intentions were being converted into action. These mentors and monitors did not have hierarchical supervisory authority over the districts and their leaders. Instead, these respected peers acted as a “third-party” force responsible for improvement, system learning, and, where needed, to challenge existing practice. Ontario’s special education reform was not only implemented by district leaders and special education superintendents; it was devised and driven by them. At the very beginning the executive director of the Council of Ontario Directors of Education (CODE) and a small group of his associates who acted on behalf of the 72 district leaders pointed out to the Ministry of Education that it already had allocated significant resources to other groups such as the teachers’ unions. CODE therefore requested resources and authority of its own to lead improvements in special education. Though some feared the district leaders and their organization might diverge from Ministry of Education policy, these leaders sought ways to integrate their own efforts with central government directions. The ministry itself took a clear role in steering (but not micromanaging) this district-driven change. It stated that the CODE special education project must address issues of underachievement and the need to narrow the achievement gap and that the project should be consistent with the guiding philosophy of a 2005 provincial report called Education for All (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2005). Ontario’s special education reform created a change design that improved education for all students across the system. It drove change from the middle instead of ordering it from the top. And instead of expecting districts to adopt uniform responses to a centralized reform strategy, the reform generated and galvanized local creativity and energy in order to respond flexibly to local needs and circumstances. A Jewish school assisted a predominantly Muslim partner. A Catholic school prayed for a good inspection result for its secular counterpart. Building on its improvements in literacy and high school graduation and the success of its reforms, Ontario is moving further forward to pursue broader, bolder goals that include achievement and equity in 21st-century skills, arts, sciences, and citizenship. It also is pursuing greater well-being in mental, emotional, and physical health (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2014). The Boston College team is now working with the 10 districts to lead from the middle, for the province, in relation to increasing students’ and teachers’ engagement, promoting their well-being and building positive, diverse identities among them. Conclusion In recent years, in too many countries, school districts have been driven to distraction and to near destruction by top-down changes that have undermined or bypassed their authority and also the communities they serve. There is clear evidence that districts can and should be a big part of a better future for children, if they’re willing to embrace changes in their thinking and practice. Large-scale success cannot be achieved if districts continue to act independently of one another. Leading from the middle, not just in the middle, can use V97 N3 kappanmagazine.org 47 Bryk, A.S., Sebring, P.B., Kerbow, D., Rollow, S., & Easton, J.Q. (1998). Charting Chicago school reform: Democratic localism as a lever for change. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Leading in the middle is a promising direction, but it’s not enough. the power of local solutions to diverse problems in an environment where schools work with schools and districts work with districts as they exercise collective initiative and responsibility for all students’ success. This kind of leadership needn’t be confined to districts and can encompass networks and other kinds of partnerships as well (Rincon-Gallardo & Fullan, in press). But collective responsibility is not just something districts should ask others to undertake. It is something that districts now have to take on themselves.  K References Ainscow, M. (2015) Towards self-improving school systems: Lessons from a city challenge. London, UK: Routledge. Barber, M., Chijioke, C., & Mourshed, M. (2011). How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better. Chicago, IL: McKinsey & Company. Campbell, C., Osmond-Johnson, P., Lieberman, A., & Sohn, J. (2015). International teacher policy study: Ontario case report. Toronto, ON: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto. http://bit.ly/1WueyUR Gross, N., Giacquinta, J.B., & Bernstein, M. (1971). Implementing organizational innovations: A sociological analysis of planned educational change. New York, NY: Basic Books. Hargreaves, A., Boyle, A., & Harris, A. (2014). Uplifting leadership: How teams and communities raise performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Hargreaves, A. & Braun, H. (2012). Leading for all: Final report of the review of the development of essential for some, good for all: Ontario’s strategy for special education reform devised by the Council of Directors of Education. Toronto, Ontario: Council of Directors of Education. Hargreaves, A. & Shirley, D. (2009). The fourth way: The inspiring future for educational change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Katz, M. (1987) Reconstructing American education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Leithwood, K. (2013). Strong districts & their leadership. Toronto, Ontario: Ontario Institute of Education Leadership. Noguera, P. (2014, June 18). In defense of teacher tenure: A few ineffective educators are not the primary reason many schools are struggling. The Wall Street Journal. www. wsj.com/articles/pedro-noguera-in-defense-of-teachertenure-1403134951 Ontario Ministry of Education. (2005). Education for all. http:// bit.ly/1ihpaYA Ontario Ministry of Education. (2014). Achieving excellence: A renewed vision for education in Ontario. http://bit.ly/1ihoYsk Rincon-Gallardo, S. & Fullan, M. (in press). Essential features of effective collaboration: The social physics of educational change. Journal of Professional Capital and Community. Schleicher, A. (2015, March 30). Implementing highly effective teacher policy and practice: The 2015 International Summit on the Teaching Profession. www.slideshare.net/OECDEDU/ implementing-highly-effective-teacher-policy-and-practice2015-international-summit-of-the-teaching-profession Sutton Trust Education Data Lab. (2015). Missing talent. Research brief. London, UK: Sutton Trust. http://bit. ly/1EQWT5k “As you can see boys and girls, the alphabet comes in ‘caps lock on’ and ‘caps lock off.’” 48 Kappan November 2015 Torlakson, T. (2015) A blueprint for great schools: Version 2.0. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education. Copyright of Phi Delta Kappan is the property of Sage Publications, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. RWRCOEL Diversity Proficiencies 1. Awareness of Self: The candidate demonstrates self-awareness of social identities, cultural influences, biases, and prejudices that influence professional practice. 2. Understanding the Learner: The candidate demonstrates awareness of students’ prior learning, culture, family, and community values to improve teaching and learning. 3. Learning Environment: The candidate creates a learning environment that affirms individual differences, supports the diverse learning needs of all students, and makes learning experiences meaningful and culturally relevant. 4. Planning, Instruction, and Assessment: The candidate designs, delivers, and/or facilitates instruction and assessments that meet the diverse learning needs of all students. © 2016 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 1 of 3 5. Professional Practice: The candidate works collaboratively with others to create equitable and inclusive professional practices that lead to positive social change. Diversity Proficiencies and Indicators 1. Awareness of Self: The candidate demonstrates self-awareness of social identities, cultural influences, biases, and prejudices that influence his/her professional practice. a. The candidate demonstrates awareness of the impact that culture, gender, language abilities, and socio-economic status have on one’s ability to be an effective educator. b. The candidate articulates potential biases (e.g., prejudices and stereotypes) based on his/her own experiences and societal inequalities. c. The candidate articulates the impact that societal inequalities may have on his/her relationships with students, colleagues, and families. 2. Understanding the Learner: The candidate demonstrates awareness of students’ prior learning, culture, family, and community values to improve teaching and learning. a. The candidate demonstrates an understanding of students' families, cultures, and communities and uses this information as a basis for connecting instruction to students' experiences. b. The candidate demonstrates an understanding of how students learn and develop and provides a variety of learning opportunities adapted to the needs of diverse learners that support intellectual, social, and personal development. 3. Learning Environment: The candidate creates a learning environment that affirms individual differences, supports the diverse learning needs of all students, and makes learning experiences meaningful and culturally relevant. a. The candidate creates learning experiences that make the content meaningful and culturally relevant for all students. b. The candidate creates a learning environment where students learn about, understand, respect, and value individual differences. © 2016 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 2 of 3 c. The candidate uses verbal and nonverbal communication skills that demonstrate respect for and responsiveness to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives of students and their families. d. The candidate creates a positive learning environment that upholds the belief that all students can learn. 4. Planning, Instruction, and Assessment: The candidate designs, delivers, and/or facilitates instruction and assessments that meet the diverse learning needs of all students. a. The candidate develops instructional content that is adapted to individual needs and supports, including the use of technology, to support students’ intellectual, social, emotional, and personal development. b. The candidate incorporates cultural diversity, students’ prior learning experiences, and the community context in instructional planning to improve teaching and student learning. c. The candidate considers performance data to select and use teaching strategies that are sensitive to the diverse learning needs of all students. d. The candidate designs instruction and selects assessments appropriate to individual and group needs to minimize bias. 5. Professional Practice: The candidate works collaboratively with others to create equitable and inclusive practices that lead to positive social change. a. The candidate demonstrates effective reflection strategies to meet the diverse learning needs of all students. b. The candidate collaborates with colleagues, families, and community members in intercultural contexts to meet the diverse learning needs of all students. c. The candidate advocates for positive social change by working collaboratively with others for equity in educational practices. d. The candidate interprets and shares student assessment data with families using a culturally sensitive approach. © 2016 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 3 of 3 RWRCOEL Professional Dispositions Professional Conduct 1. Ethical and Legal Conduct: The candidate demonstrates professionalism as outlined by legal and ethical guidelines within the profession. a. Demonstrates professional behavior as described in Walden’s Code of Conduct b. Demonstrates ethical behavior as described by professional codes of ethics 2. Professional Obligations: The candidate meets professional obligations in a responsible manner. a. Maintains a strong record of attendance and punctuality, communicating in advance the need for any absence or delay in meeting performance expectations b. Prepares for professional obligations and meets expected deadlines © 2016 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 1 of 3 3. Professional Appearance and Demeanor: The candidate demonstrates professional appearance and behaviors in the educational setting. a. Maintains appropriate appearance through professional dress and grooming b. Approaches teaching and learning tasks with initiative, confidence, and energy c. Exhibits composure and self-control d. Demonstrates flexibility in adapting to changing circumstances and student needs Professional Qualities 4. Professional Development/Growth: The candidate engages in ongoing professional development and growth to improve professional practice. a. Engages in continuous learning through participation in professional development opportunities b. Applies new ideas to professional practice based on existing data, reflection, and intellectual curiosity c. Engages in ongoing critical reflection of personal performance to improve professional practice 5. Advocacy: The candidate advocates for fairness, equity, and social change in the learning environment. a. Displays empathy, fairness, persistence, problem-solving skills, and appropriate risk-taking actions on behalf of others b. Advocates for the social, emotional, physical, educational, behavioral, and basic needs of others c. Promotes positive social change to enhance educational opportunities and promote student learning 6. Equity: The candidate demonstrates culturally responsive practices to create an inclusive learning environment that is respectful of diverse cultures, values, and beliefs of others. a. Displays equitable treatment of others i. Sets high expectations for all learners © 2016 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 2 of 3 ii. Treats others with respect and dignity iii. Recognizes individual differences in teaching and learning b. Engages in culturally responsive practices in interactions with students, families, colleagues, and communities c. Creates learning environments that are inclusive; free of bias and discrimination and respectful of diverse cultures, values, and beliefs d. Engages families and other stakeholders in planning for individual success Collaboration 7. Collaboration: The candidate works in collaboration with others to improve student learning and advance the profession. a. Builds partnerships and fosters relationships with stakeholders to improve student learning and advance the profession b. Collaborates with students, families, colleagues, and the community to promote positive social change c. Uses technology to enhance collaboration, strengthen partnerships, and foster relationships with others to improve teaching and learning Communication 8. Communication: The candidate uses effective verbal, nonverbal, and technological communication techniques to foster active inquiry, improve collaboration, and create positive interactions in the learning environment. a. Actively and thoughtfully listens to others b. Adjusts communication to meet the needs of individual learners and changing circumstances c. Asks probing, thoughtful questions to elicit meaningful responses d. Conveys ideas in multiple ways using a professional tone e. Acknowledges and respects ideas and/or feelings of others; makes others feel welcome, valued, and appreciated in their communications f. Utilizes technological tools to facilitate communication to improve student learning and relationships with others © 2016 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 3 of 3 Technology Proficiencies The technology proficiencies listed below describe the Riley College of Education’s expectations for candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions with respect to the use of digital tools and resources for facilitating learning and communication. The proficiencies are grounded in the SAMR (Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, Redefinition) Model. The SAMR Model provides a framework for integrating technology into the learning environment. The development and performance of tasks aligned to the technology proficiencies should incorporate the principles of the SAMR Model and consider the integration of technology into assignments or activities with increasing levels of impact on teaching and learning, from enhancement to transformation. Enhancement Substitution Transformation Augmentation Modification Redefinition Design of Learning Experiences and the Environment: Candidates design learning experiences and foster learning environments that integrate various technologies. Facilitation of Learning and Assessment: Candidates use technology to facilitate learning for a diverse population of students, colleagues, and other stakeholders. Communication and Collaboration: Candidates use digital media tools in communicating and working collaboratively with students, families, colleagues, and community stakeholders to improve and/or enhance student learning. Professional: As lifelong learners, candidates improve their technology proficiency through collaboration, leadership, ethical practice, and additional professional development opportunities. © 2015 Laureate Education, Inc. 1 1. Design of Learning Experiences and the Environment: Candidates design learning experiences and foster learning environments that integrate various technologies. a. The candidate demonstrates how to evaluate technology and media resources for quality, accuracy, and effectiveness to support the processes of content and skill development. b. The candidate demonstrates fluency using effective technologies to plan, coordinate, organize, manage, and/ or supervise effective learning opportunities for all students. c. The candidate demonstrates use of online research databases and research-based practices in education to improve student learning, engagement, and outcomes. 2. Facilitation of Learning and Assessment: Candidates use technology to facilitate learning for a diverse population of students, colleagues, and other stakeholders. a. The candidate engages all students in exploring real-world issues and solving authentic problems using digital tools and resources to improve and/or enhance student learning. b. The candidate meets the diverse needs of all students by providing equitable access to digital tools and resources. c. The candidate uses appropriate technologies for assessment (administering assessments, monitoring student progress, presenting assessment results, and evaluating teachers and programs) to improve and/or enhance student learning. d. The candidate models and promotes diversity, cultural understanding, and global awareness by assisting students in the use of digital-age communication and collaboration tools. 3. Communication and Collaboration: Candidates use digital media tools in communicating and working collaboratively with students, families, colleagues, and community stakeholders to improve and/or enhance student learning. a. The candidate communicates relevant information and ideas effectively to students, parents, and colleagues using a variety of digital age media and formats to improve and/or enhance student learning. b. The candidate evaluates a variety of professional communication tools to improve collaboration with all stakeholders. 4. Professional: As lifelong learners, candidates improve their technology proficiency through collaboration, leadership, ethical practice, and additional professional development opportunities. a. The candidate takes a leadership role in developing a shared vision of technology infusion by collaborating with colleagues to promote effective educational practices. b. The candidate demonstrates a commitment to continuous professional development by reflecting on current professional research, legal issues, and ethical expectations to model effective technology decision making and to enhance student learning. c. The candidate advocates and practices safe, legal, and responsible use of technology and digital-age communication tools. © 2015 Laureate Education, Inc. 2 
Purchase answer to see full attachment