Why Should SDCOE Provide Services for Teacher Leadership?

The Global 21st Century Economy, California and Second Order Change
The findings of national and international studies, such as Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S.
Students Receive a World-Class Education (NGA, 2008) and Programme for International Student
Assessment (PISA, 2006, 2009, 2012), that informed the CCSS initiative have contributed to a dramatic shift
in the definition of of college and career readiness in California. Schools are now aware that they must
prepare students to be globally competitive. According to a report by the National Governors Association,
States are no longer competing with just the states next door but with countries around the world <because
their> students are competing with students in Singapore, Shanghai, and Salzburg (2008). Such a shift has
dramatically increased the expectations that are evident in the Common Core State Standards in
ELA/Literacy and Mathematics, Californias ELD standards, Next Generation Science Standards and
Smarter Balanced Assessments that will be at the heart of Californias Assessment of Student Progress
(CAASP). Given the average (in reading and science) to low (in mathematics) ranking of the United States
when compared to other countries, the adoption of new and significantly more rigorous standards, and the
persistence of the achievement gap, the challenges in meeting the needs of diverse learners in California is
great (OECD, 2012). To prepare all students to be prepared to thrive in a global, knowledge-based
economy, student learning throughout California will need to realize a significant amount of change of what
Marzano would call of the second order or deep change. The adoption of new standards and a new focus
on global competencies has resulted in altering the entire educational system in what we would argue to be
of the second order. The changes to student learning that are required will alter the system in fundamental
ways, offering a dramatic shift in the direction and requiring new ways of thinking and acting (Marzano,
2005).

Distributed Leadership: More Necessity Than Design

There is broad agreement that it is primarily the actions and behaviors of teachers that directly impact
student learning (Dufour, 2011). Similarly, highly skilled instructional leaders indirectly impact student
learning by creating the conditions required for effective teaching and learning (Dufour, 2011, Robinson,
2011). Viviane Robinson explains that there has been a shift away from emphasizing leadership style (e.g.
is the principal a transactional or transformational leader) to leadership practices throughout the school (e.g.
that which makes a difference in student learning); leadership is, by its very nature, not just the purview of
those with formal authority over others. One can also lead from a basis of expertise, ideas, and personality
or character, and, in principle, these sources of influence are open to anyone. This means that leadership is
by its very nature distributed (Robinson, 2011). Rather than limiting her advice to what designated leaders
may do within a school, Robinson argues that improving student learning requires leadership practices at
the teacher and administrative level into the following broad categories (and their effect size) that work
synergistically:

1. Establishing goals and expectations (0.42)

2. Resourcing Strategically (0.31)
3. Ensuring Quality Teaching (0.42)
4. Leading Teacher Learning and Development (0.84)
5. Ensuring an Orderly and Safe Environment (0.27)

The knowledge and skills needed by administrative and teacher leaders to engage confidently in these five
dimensions are described in three broad leadership capabilities: applying relevant knowledge, solving
complex problems, and building relational trust.

SDCOE Jennifer Currie 1

The necessity for distributive leadership can also be found in Marzanos meta analysis of 69 studies of
specific principal behaviors. Marzano, Waters, and McNulty (2005) identified 21 responsibilities of the
school leader. Of those 21 responsibilities, seven have been identified as being necessary to bring about
second order change. They are listed below in rank order:

1. Knowledge of Current Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Practices

2. Optimizer: inspires and leads new and challenging innovations

3. Intellectual Stimulation: Ensures faculty and staff are aware of the most current theories and
practices and makes the discussion of these a regular aspect of the schools culture

4. Change Agent: is willing to challenge and actively challenges the status quo

5. Monitoring/Evaluating: monitors the effectiveness of school practices and their impact on student
learning

6. Flexibility: adapts his or her leadership behavior to the needs of the current situation and is
comfortable with dissent

7. Ideals/Beliefs: communicates and operates from strong ideals and beliefs about schooling

(Marzano, 2005)

The challenges for principals alone to enact all the needed responsibilities for second order change (to say
nothing of the full list of 21) are significant. First, teachers have traditionally worked in isolation, and there
has been no vehicle that allows principals to influence directly what isolated teachers do in the classroom. A
second challenge is that no one person has the knowledge, skills or energy to fulfill twenty-one
responsibilities simultaneously (Dufour, 2011). Therefore, effective principals share leadership
responsibilities with knowledgeable and skilled teacher leaders, particularly for their content and
pedagogical knowledge and their ability to intellectually stimulate and inspire the staff to improve. For
example, effective principals work closely and directly with teams or PLCs as a means for focussed
interaction between principals and teachers (Dufour, 2011). Additionally, principals can provide coherent
structures for coaching that would disrupt teacher isolation by providing a means for teachers to
collaboratively analyze and discuss their teaching for the purpose of improvement.

Additional resource to consider

Teachers are Knowledge Workers

Top performing countries are going well beyond recruitment and initial training to build a 21st century
teaching force. According to a study cited in Benchmarking for Success, these countries are abandoning
the traditional factory model, with teachers at the bottom of the production line receiving orders from on high,
to move toward a professionalized model of teachers as knowledge workers. In this model, teachers are on
a par with other professionals in terms of diagnosing problems and applying evidence-based practices and
strategies to address the diversity in students interests and abilities (NGA, 2008). Jim Knight in
Unmistakable Impact (2011) cites the work of Thomas Devenport (2005) who describes the attributes of
knowledge workers, professional who use their knowledge, skills, strategies, and brainpower to do their
work. These people, who think for a living, enjoy the chance to use their brains to invent an elegant
solution to a thorny problem. Knight includes a precept from Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi: work that is is at an
appropriate level of challenge (not so easy as to be boring, not so challenging as to cause frustration) is a
central part of a meaningful career (Knight, 2011). So while leading knowledge workers can be challenging

SDCOE Jennifer Currie 2

because they often do not like to be told what to do, involving them in participating in problem solving and
dialogue around improving student learning is not only appropriate, but arguable necessary to second order
change. Teacher leaders can be particularly well positioned to facilitate such work, particularly if their peers
regard them as experts in content, pedagogy and team facilitation.

California Schools: Accountable and Increasingly Autonomous

Top performing countries have systems in place that use multiple measures to monitor student performance
and evaluate the performance of a school against a broad set of criteria, including, but not limited to,
student achievement and also examine the school practices that contribute to student results. By focusing
on both student learning and those practices that support the learning,school leaders can more precisely
diagnose the root causes of underperformance and, consequently, better match interventions with specific
needs within the day-to-day workings of the school. Teachers in countries that did well on the PISA dont
have the option of making students repeat the school year or transferring students to schools with lower
performance requirements Even where retention or transfers are technically possible, incentive structures
for teachers and schools encourage teachers to address and solve challenges rather than hand them to
others (NGA, 2008).

Additionally, top performing countriesbalance accountability with greater school autonomy.

A number of studies based on PISA,TIMSS, and PIRLS have found that students perform better in
systems that give schools greater freedom to hire and reward teachers, purchase supplies and
make other school-specific budget allocations, and choose curriculum materials and teaching
methods.1 22 Those studies also show that decentralization works best when it is combined with
various forms of accountability. According to one team of researchers, the positive impact of school
autonomy coupled with choice and accountability amounts to more than one-and-a-half grade-level
equivalents on the PISA assessment (NGA, 2008).
Particularly in San Diego, we see a trend towards decentralization where schools (rather than districts) and
teachers (in concert with principals) are taking on more responsibility in making decisions around which
curriculum and instructional practices will best support their particular students. Regardless of whether or
not there is a designated teacher leader, teacher leadership is relied upon at both the school and district
level in the creation of CCSS-aligned units of instruction and benchmark assessments. It is central to
effective processes of problem solving in analyzing data, monitoring student progress, and implementing
and designing interventions. The growing importance of teacher leadership is further evident by the
increased numbers of teachers on special assignment who have dedicated out-of-class time so that they
may lead on-site (or district sponsored) professional learning, lead teams to select or write curriculum, coach
teachers to improve instruction, or develop school-wide assessments. This move towards decentralization
and increased school autonomy is further supported by Californias Local Control Funding Formula (LCAP).

What Are Teacher Leaders Expected to Know and Do?

Expertise in Instruction, Curriculum and Assessment
As we have learned from the work of City and Elmore (2009), if we are going to improve student learning,
then we need to focus our efforts on making improvements to the instructional core:
There are only three ways to improve student learning at scale. The first is to increase the level of
knowledge and skill that the teacher brings to the instructional process. The second is to increase
the level and complexity of the content that students are asked to learn. The the third is to change
the role of the student in the instructional process (City & Elmore, 2009).
The importance of focusing on student learning is similarly espoused by Robinson (2011): The more
leaders focus their relationships, their work, and their learning on the core business of teaching and learning,
the greater will be their influence on student outcomes (p. 23). Marzano et al.s (2005) work reinforces this

SDCOE Jennifer Currie 3

sentiment that knowledge of current curriculum, instruction and assessment practices is ranked the
number one responsibility necessary to bring about second order change (p. 70).

Curriculum in the 21st Century

Yet what a challenge it is to possess a working knowledge of current best practices in curriculum and
instruction. A working paper from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(Amadio et. al, 2014) reminds us that expectations of teaching and learning have considerably changed in
the 21st Century because societies face intractable questions about the future and the sustainability of
current patterns of production and consumption, including the role that education must play in the
comprehensive training of the citizens of the future (p. 2). As a result, national curriculum standards are
now influenced by international comparisons and models (p. 3) and educational outcomes have gradually
shifted away from content and input to generic and transferable competencies that pupils should have
learnt to develop and apply at the end of general education (p. 2). As the report spotlights:

To mention but a few highlights in contemporary educational policies and curricula, there is now a
demand for education that promote active learning, focuses on the needs and expectations of
learners as the main players in building and regulating their own learning, acknowledges that the
cognitive, ethical and emotional dimensions of learning are interrelated and cannot be arbitrarily
dissociated, is adapted to the diversity of pupils characteristics and learning styles, facilitates
understanding and the application of knowledge rather than its accumulation, and make optimal use
of the potential of information and communication technologies. (p. 3).

International trends for curriculum that communicate an integrated vision for education were reinvigorated in
1996 with the publication of the Delors Report. Since Learning: The Treasure Within, the Report to
UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century chaired by Jacques
Delors, former European Commission President, many countries have build frameworks that adapted
Delors original pillars (Learning to know, do, be, and live together) to include more specific multidisciplinary,
interdisciplinary and disciplinary competencies that are organized around the well-being of the child and
society in addition to lifelong learning practices (Tawil & Cougoureux, 2013). We see evidence of these
types of competencies that describe both generalizable and discipline-specific ways of learning, doing and
being in the Capacities of Literate Individuals (CCSS), Standards for Mathematical Practice (CCSS),
Practices for Science and Engineering (NGSS), Standards for Career Ready Practice (Model Career
Technical Education Standards), the Framework for Post-Secondary Success in Writing (WPA), and the
Partnership for 21st Century Skills Framework (P21).

Expertise in Helping Others

Usually, what formally and informally promotes a teacher to a teacher leader is his or her instructional and
curricular expertise . When in this new role, leaders must shift from having a direct to an indirect impact on
student learning. A newly initiated teacher leader now needs to be able to share his or her expertise in ways
that will bring about change in the knowledge and skill of other teachers. Because bringing about
improvements to student learning is complex and it involves changing the behaviors of living human beings,
we need to recognize - in fact, honor - the complexity of providing support within professional relationships
(Knight, 2011). Jim Knight introduces five factors that are at play in almost all helping relationships that
include change, identity, thinking, status, and motivation. Knights thinking about change was greatly
influenced by the work of James Prochaska (1994) and his colleagues who found that change involves six
stages:

1. Precontemplation, when we are unaware of our need for change

2. Contemplation, when we weigh the advantages and disadvantages of changing to a new way of
doing something
3. Preparation, when we prepare to implement change
4. Action, when we implement a change
SDCOE Jennifer Currie 4
 5. Maintenance, where we sustain our implementation plan
6. Termination, when we are no longer changing because we have completed the change process
(p. 21)
Knight highlights the challenges for instructional coaches in particular in trying to move someone who is in
the precontemplation stage to contemplation because many people are simply unaware that they need to
change It isnt that they cant see the solution. It is that they cant see the problem (p. 21).

If the primary goal is to help teachers see (and address) problems, oftentimes a teacher leaders perceived
status can get in the way of a helping relationship (Knight, 2011). Therefore, they must also know how to
equalibrate the relationship so they are quick to downplay their own status and elevate the teacher by
using a variety of subtle communication strategies to create equality between themselves and their
collaborating teachers (p. 23). In addition to equalizing ones status, teacher leaders must also be able to
recognize that their conversation can potentially threaten a teachers identity by disrupting a sense of who
we are in the world, or to highlight what we hope we are but fear we are not (p. 24). Other understandings
that teacher leaders need to possess are that teachers must be enrolled in the process of thinking through
solutions to complex problems. If teachers are not involved in setting their own goals, then they are not
likely to be motivated to change (p. 25). In other words, teacher leaders need to know how to be
cointentential learning partners. This partnership approach is one that involves equality where decisions are
made not for someone, but together through dialogue, a common purpose and a shared sense of joint
accountability (p. 29-30). In the quest to bring new ideas to life, instructional leaders must know how to
partner with teachers and administrators no matter what their role whether it be a coach, a PLC lead,
department chair or as an influential instructional leader who may not have official duties outside of the
class.

Expertise in Leading Change

In order to actually lead change, teacher leaders must know how to indirectly optimize instruction through
their practices and their own capabilities. Through her best evidence synthesis (BES) of research, Viviane
Robinson (2011) sorted effective leadership practices that she considers to be applicable to teachers and
principals alike into five leadership dimensions and three leadership capabilities:

SDCOE Jennifer Currie 5

 (Robinson)
Leadership dimensions, (establishing goals and expectations, resourcing strategically, ensuring quality
teaching, leading teacher learning and development, and ensuring an orderly and safe environment)
describe WHAT leaders need to do to make a bigger impact on students. Just as important are the
leadership capabilities, (integrating educational knowledge into practice, solving complex problems, and
building relational trust) that describe the HOW; those knowledge, skills and dispositions needed to make
the dimensions work in a particular school context (Robinson, 2011). Effective leaders need to know both
what to do and how to go about doing it (Fullan, Marzano, Robinson).

Expertise in Facilitating Professional Learning

Helen Timperley (2008), Professor of Education at the University of Auckland, synthesized important
research in her publication for the International Academy of Education, Teacher professional learning and
development. She launches her presentation with four important understandings that arise from the
evidence. First, what and how teachers teach strongly influences student learning. Second, teaching is
complex and influenced by teachers knowledge and beliefs about what is important to teach, how students
learn, and how to manage student behaviour and meet external demands. Her third and fourth
understandings are particularly relevant to effective practices in the facilitation of professional learning:

3. It is important to set up conditions that are responsive to the ways in which teachers learn. A recent
overview of the research identified the following as important for encouraging learning: engaging
learners prior conceptions about how the world works; developing deep factual and conceptual
knowledge, organised into frameworks that facilitate retrieval and application; and promoting
metacognitive and self-regulatory processes that help learners define goals and then monitor their
progress towards them.

4. Professional learning is strongly shaped by the context in which the teacher practises. This is
usually the classroom, which, in turn, is strongly influenced by the wider school culture and the

SDCOE Jennifer Currie 6

 community and society in which the school is situated. Teachers daily experiences in their practice
context shape their understandings, and their understandings shape their experiences.

(p. 8)

Professional learning, then must be inquiry driven and situated, specified to the teachers specific teaching
context. Timperley (2011) argues that professional learning must be at the core of school business and
evaluated based upon improvement of student outcomes. Furthermore, professional learning opportunities
should build deep pedagogical content and assessment knowledge focused on what is needed to improve
outcomes for students. Lastly, professional learning environments should be consistent with how people
learn. This includes:

engaging teachers existing theories of practice, providing opportunities to learn with others, allow
sufficient time with multiple opportunities to learn, and promoting self-regulating learning in ways
that support the development of professional agency. (p. 18)

Rather than organizing professional learning practices around teachers sitting and learning from an outside
expert, Timperlys research (2008) stresses that, through the course of professional learning, teachers (and
leaders) should develop self-regulated learning capabilities so that <they can> take control of their own
learning over time (p. 12). Therefore, when facilitating professional learning, teacher leaders need to know
what conditions must be present in order to change actual instruction that include: creating and maintaining
a focus towards a common goal, creating learning structures that are inquiry driven, and promoting
self-regulated learning that is relevant to the teachers current teaching context.

SDCOE Jennifer Currie 7

Works Cited
Amadio, M., Opertti, R. and Tedesco, J. C. (2014, Jan 9). Curriculum in the Twenty-first Century:
Challenges, Tensions and Open Questions. In UNESCO Education Research and Foresight, Paris. [ERF
Working Papers
Series, No. 9].

City, E., Elmore, R., Fiarman, S., & Teitel, L. (2009). Instructional rounds in education: A network approach
to improving teaching and learning. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Education Press.

Dufour, R., & Marzano, R. (2011). Leaders of learning: How district, school, and classroom leaders
improve student achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Hulpia, H., & Devos, G. (2010). How distributed leadership can make a difference in teachers'
organizational commitment: A qualitative study. In Teaching and Teacher Education: An International
Journal of Research and Studies. 26(3), 565-575. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.08.006

Knight, J. (2011). Unmistakable impact: A partnership approach for dramatically improving instruction.
Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.

Marzano, R., & Waters, T. (2005). School leadership that works from research to results. Alexandria, Va.:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, & Achieve., Inc. (2008).
Benchmarking for success: ensuring U.S. students receive a world-class education. Retrieved March 12,
2015, from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/0812BENCHMARKING.pdf

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2012). Program for International Student
Assessment Country Specific Overview for the United States. Retrieved March 12, 2015, from
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/PISA-2012-results-US.pdf.

Robinson, V. (2011). Student-centered leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Robinson, V. (n.d.) The What and How of Student-Centered Leadership: Implications from Research
Evidence [Power Point Slides]. Retrieved March 25, 2015, from
http://www.ks.no/PageFiles/24955/VivianeRobinson.pdf

Timperley, H. (2008). Teacher professional learning and development. Retrieved March 27, 2015, from
http://www.ibe.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/Educational_Practices/EdPractices_18.pdf

Timperley, H. (2011, October). A background paper to inform the development of a national professional
development framework for teachers and school leaders. Retrieved March 27, 2015, from
http://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/default-document-library/background_paper_inform_the_develo
pment_of_national_professional_development_framework_for_teachers_and_school_leaders

Tawil, S., & Cougoureux, M. (2013, January 4). Revisiting Learning: The Treasure Within. Assessing the
Influence of the 1996 Delors Report. Retrieved March 27, 2015, from
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002200/220050e.pdf

SDCOE Jennifer Currie 8