Symposium on:
Using knowledge for Improvement: the new role of school leaders
Submitted under Subtheme 4:
Future Thinking: Imagining Education, Learning and Transformation in
21st Century Schooling
ABSTRACT
The role of better information and data about school performance has been a persistent theme
in the school reform literature in many countries. However, information and data should be
translated into ‘useable knowledge’ within the school in order to create real change in
classrooms that will benefit all students. The overarching theme of this set of papers is the
role that school leaders, both principals and administrators of the board, take in helping others
to develop working knowledge that leads to sustainable change. We wish to discuss our
findings with our colleagues and also to come up with a richer picture of what could be done
in practice.
The first paper presentation (Karen Seashore and Moosung Lee) evolves around the questions
“How does the culture of a school, as reflected in organized patterns of teacher beliefs and
behaviors, contribute to organizational learning?” and “How does a school’s context affect
both internal culture and organizational learning?” In the second presentation (Naomi Mertens
and Daniel van Amersfoort), the focus is on the school board administrators’ behaviour:
“What actions do school administrators undertake to facilitate knowledge sharing and
knowledge creation amongst teachers?” In the third presentation (Lisette Uiterwijk), the focus
will be on the relation between inquiry-based working by all actors in the school: school
leaders and teachers. “What is the relation between inquiry-based working by school leaders
and teachers on the one hand and student achievements and students´ inquiry habit of mind on
the other hand?”
SUMMARY
OBJECTIVES OF THE SYMPOSIUM/ CONNECTION TO THE THEME
The role of better information and data about school performance has been a persistent theme
in the school reform literature in many countries. However, information and data should be
translated into ‘useable knowledge’ within the school in order to create real change in
classrooms that will benefit all students. The overarching theme of this set of papers is the
role that school leaders, both principals and administrators of the board, take in helping others
to develop working knowledge that leads to sustainable change. We wish to discuss our
findings with our colleagues and also to come up with a richer picture of what could be done
in practice.
ORGANISATION AND PERSPECTIVES
The symposium will be a paper based discussion: At first, the three papers will be briefly
presented. The discussant, based on his extensive international experience, will summarise the
main themes across the papers and pose 3-4 questions for the audience to discuss. The
participants will be invited to share their own thoughts and experiences, and the paper
presenters will join them. The discussant will wrap up the session by articulating issues that
future ICSEI conferences should attend to.
The first paper presentation (Karen Seashore and Moosung Lee) evolves around the questions
“How does the culture of a school, as reflected in organized patterns of teacher beliefs and
behaviors, contribute to organizational learning?” and “How does a school’s context affect
both internal culture and organizational learning?” In the second presentation (Naomi Mertens
and Daniel van Amersfoort), the focus is on the school board administrators’ behaviour:
“What actions do school administrators undertake to facilitate knowledge sharing and
knowledge creation amongst teachers?” In the third presentation (Lisette Uiterwijk), the focus
will be on the relation between inquiry-based working by all actors in the school: school
leaders and teachers. “What is the relation between inquiry-based working by school leaders
and teachers on the one hand and student achievements and students´ inquiry habit of mind on
the other hand?”
Paper 1: Fostering organisational learning: exploring school cultures and contexts
Authors: Karen Seashore Louis (University of Minnesota – Twin Cities) and Moosung Lee
(University of Hong Kong)
Aim
This paper investigates how key elements of school culture that have been shown in the
empirical literature to be associated with positive student outcomes are associated with
organizational learning, which we define as the capacity to use and act on new information.
Additionally, this paper aims to identify important school contexts, particularly district
influence, that shape organizational learning at the school level. This focus is central to the
increasing emphasis on how intermediary governing units (districts, educational management
organizations, municipalities, etc.) can foster improvement. The focus on organizational
learning, we argue, is critical to understanding how school cultures can lead to adaptive rather
than “stuck” behavior. In sum, this paper addresses two questions:

How does the culture of a school, as reflected in organized patterns of teacher beliefs
and behaviors, contribute to organizational learning?

How does a school’s context affect both internal culture and organizational learning?
Significance/ conceptual framework
Our conceptual framework draws upon multiple studies of school culture conducted over the
last few decades, which suggest a few aspects that are considered by multiple authors to be
critical for school improvement and/or student achievement in various countries (van Houtte
& Van Maele, 2011):

Academic press (Hoy, Tarter, & Hoy, 2006; Kahne, Sporte, Torre, & Easton, 2008;
Lee & Smith, 1999; Mosenthal, Lipson, Torncello, Russ, & Mekkelsen, 2004; Van
Houtte & Van Maele, 2011);

Student support (Heck & Hallinger, 2009; Huberman & Miles, 1984; Newmann,
Smith, Allensworth, & Bryk, 2001; Langer, 2000)

Trust and respect (Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Hoy, Tartar, & Witkoskie, 1992;
Tschannen- Moran & Hoy, 1997)

Professonal community (Lomos, Hofman, & Bosker, 2011; Marks, Louis, & Printy,
2002; Bolam, McMahon, Stoll, Thomas, & Wallace, 2005)
Methods
To this end, we analyzed survey data, collected as part of a larger study, including 3,579
teachers and 117 principals who were a randomly selected sample from nine states in the U.S.
Using multilevel analysis (Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002), we found that school cultural
components such as academic press and student support promote organizational learning
(Table 1). We also found that the role of teacher professional community in molding
organizational learning is critical. Specifically, three constructs representing different
dimensions of teacher professional community (i.e., shared responsibility, reflective
dialogues, and deprivatized practices) were more significant predictors of organizational
learning than academic press and student support. Moreover, we identified that district
governance contexts as broader school contexts play a key role in shaping organizational
learning. Finally, building level, another school context, had a moderating effect on the
relationship between reflective dialogue and organizational learning. Implications of these
results are discussed in terms of research and policy.
Key Findings
The results indicate that both general cultural variables and those that more specifically reflect
the practices that strengthen teacher collaboration are important predictors of whether schools
are likely to seek out and incorporate new ideas on a regular basis. This strengthens the
growing arguments that suggest that specific collaborative practices, when they are embedded
in the on-going behaviour of teachers, will affect classroom and school innovativeness. We
know, from analyses (not presented here) that organizational learning is also associated with
student achievement, as is professional community. The paper will reflect on how we can
shape organizational learning, with a particular focus on teacher professional community, as
part of a larger research-based effort to improve student outcomes. The paper will also
contribute to illuminating how we can pursue “sustainable school effectiveness,” the theme of
the 27th ICSEI Conference, as research (Stoll & Louis, 2007) has documented both teacher
professional community and organizational learning (i.e., professional learning community)
are key pillars of sustaining school improvement and effectiveness.
Paper 2 Leading professional growth: the role of school administrators in facilitating
knowledge creation
Authors: Naomi Mertens, APS National Centre for School Improvement, and Daniel van
Amersfoort, Open Universiteit of The Netherlands,
Aim: Recent research on teacher learning has focused on ways to promote knowledge sharing
and knowledge creation amongst teachers (Lieberman & Wood, 2002; Stoll, Bolam,
Mcmahon, Wallace, & Thomas, 2006), and on the role of leadership in facilitating that
process (Earl & Katz, 2007; Harris, 2010). However, these studies do not take into account
the role of school administrators as drivers for teacher learning. This paper examines school
administrator views on teacher learning, and aims to structure the actions they undertake to
promote teacher learning within their organizations.
School administrators in The Netherlands are fulltime, paid professionals in charge of school
organizations, or school boards, that consist of five to thirty highly autonomous schools. They
are responsible for educational quality as well as for personnel issues, such as professional
development (PO-Raad, 2012). It is, however, unclear how these school administrators fulfil
their roles as drivers for teacher learning. In this study we aimed to answer two main
questions:
1) How do school administrators perceive teacher learning?
2) What actions do school administrators undertake to facilitate knowledge sharing and
knowledge creation amongst teachers?
Methods: For the purpose of our study, we extensively interviewed 28 school administrators
in primary education. We conducted semi-structured interviews that addressed their views on
learning in organizations, their role in promoting teacher learning, the actions they performed
to promote teacher learning, the information and inspiration that had led to those actions, and
the effects they expected their actions to have. A coding scheme was extracted from the data
and analyzed using QSR Nvivo 9-software.
Key Findings: Preliminary analysis indicates that school administrators often strive to create
an organizational culture in which people are self-reliable and free to learn from each other.
Forty different types of actions were identified, which school administrators expected to
impact on teachers’ commitment to the organization, their professional development and their
effective teaching behaviours. However, there seemed to be a discrepancy between their view
on teacher learning and the actions they undertook. Further research may explore this
discrepancy as well as the actual impact of school administrator actions on teacher learning.
Significance: Creating a working environment that facilitates teacher learning involves all
layers of the organization (Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 2005). This study adds to existing
research by explicitly focusing on the role of school administrators. In addition, the
perspective in this paper aligns with this year’s ICSEI themes: it’s through these new ideas
about intervening in the learning culture of the school board, that new types of governance
and leadership can be developed for the upcoming century.
Paper 3: Inquiry based leading and learning in primary education
Authors: Lisette Uiterwijk-Luijk, Marnix Academie/ Penta Nova Academy; Meta Krüger,
Marnix Academie/ PentaNova Academy; Monique Volman, University of Amsterdam
Aim: Aim of this research is to gain insight in inquiry-based leadership in primary education
in The Netherlands: to expand knowledge about the way school boards, school leaders and
teachers influence each other in inquiry-based working and its effect on the results on
numeracy and literacy and students´ inquiry habit of mind. The main research questions are:
1. What is the relation between inquiry-based working by school boards, school leaders and
teachers in primary schools in The Netherlands?
2. What is the relation between inquiry-based working by teachers on the one hand and
student achievements and students´ inquiry habit of mind on the other hand?
3. Which contextual and psychological factors influence inquiry-based working by school
boards, school leaders and teachers?
4. What are success factors in inquiry-based working by school boards, school leaders and
teachers?
Methods:
This research consists of a survey to answer questions 1 to 3 and a nested multiple case study
to answer question 4. This paper relates to the quantitative study.
At the time of writing this proposal statistical analysis is being performed. Descriptive
statistics are used to investigate to what extent respondents work inquiry-based and to what
extent students possess an inquiry habit of mind. Finally the relation between the degree of
inquiry-based working of the respondent groups is tested using Multi-Level Analysis, as is the
relation between the degree of inquiry-based working of teachers and the inquiry habit of
mind and learning outcomes of students.
Expected outcomes/results
Inquiry-based working is becoming increasingly important in education (Schildkamp, Ehren
& Lai, 2012), because of the increasing accountability demands and because of continuing
international attention for data-based decision making (Ledoux, Blok, Boogaard & Krüger,
2009). Recent studies show that inquiry-based working can lead to school improvement, but
that more empirical research is needed to confirm these results (Schildkamp et al, 2012).
This research provides insight into inquiry-based leadership and inquiry-based working in
primary schools and it provides knowledge on how school boards, school leaders and teachers
interact in the field of inquiry-based leadership and inquiry-based working and what their
impact is on the inquiry habit of mind and the learning outcomes of students in primary
education.
Significance:
Schools collect a variety of data, but they generally appear not to use these data effectively
(Krüger, 2010; Ledoux et al 2009). According to Earl and Katz (2006) a mind shift is needed
amongst school leaders and teachers from making decisions based on tacit knowledge to
evidence-based knowledge. Systematic analysis of existing data in the school is needed, as is
application of the results of these analyses to improve teaching, curriculum and school
outcomes, and evaluation of the intended improvements (Schildkamp & Kuiper, 2010).
In this process the school leader plays a crucial role (Levin & Datnow, 2012). Earl and Katz
(2006) distinguish three competencies a data-driven school leader should be able to:
• develop an inquiry habit of mind;
• become data literate; and
• create a culture of inquiry.
School boards can influence data-driven decision making in schools (Leithwood, 2010; Levin
& Datnow, 2012), but in practice they appear only to have a limited stimulating role (Van Eck
& Boogaart, 2007).
Aarsen and Van de Valk (2008) indicate that an inquiry habit of mind motivates students to be
curious and critical and to acquire knowledge and research skills. It is unclear what the
relationship is between inquiry-based working of school boards, school leaders and teachers,
and their impact on the inquiry habit of mind and learning outcomes of students.