You are on page 1of 75

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

External Evaluation of the Strategic Leaders Development Programme 2011-2012

NATIONAL CPD TEAM

Report
by

Daniel Murphy

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Daniel Murphy The evaluation was undertaken by Daniel Murphy, former founder Director of the Centre for Educational Leadership of the University of Edinburgh, retired Headteacher (Lornshill Academy, McLaren H.S. and Crieff H.S.) and now part-time Senior Teaching Fellow at the University of Edinburgh and freelance educationist. He is the author (with Jim OBrien and Janer Draper) of School Leadership (Dunedin, Edinburgh 2nd edition (2008) and Professional School Leadership: Dealing with Dilemmas(Dunedin, Edinburgh 2007, 2nd edition due 2013).

Daniel Murphy

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Introductory Note This external evaluation was commissioned by the Steering Group of the Strategic Leaders Development Programme (SLDP): Bruce Robertson (Association of Directors of Education Scotland ADES), John Christie (Virtual Staff College Scotland VSCS) and Margaret Alcorn (National CPD Team, Education Scotland). The report is published and distributed with the authority of the Steering Group.

External Evaluators Note: All information of relevance and value is contained in the report. However I have to begin with a note of thanks to all the SLDP participants and supporters who gave willingly of their time to share the insights and stories on which this evaluation is based. I hope it fairly reflects their hard work, insights and enthusiasm to learn more and to improve their professional practice, and, in so doing, to do a better job for those they serve, those they work with and through this pilot to contribute to improving practice within their local authority and nationally. A particular note of thanks goes to the Programme Co-ordinator, Dan McGinty, who assisted freely and willingly, well beyond the call of duty, to correct errors of fact within the report. The report has been prepared to an unusually tight timescale. Any remaining errors are entirely my responsibility, while the opinions expressed herein are entirely my own. Alongside the report, but not included within it, I have made a number of recommendations to the Programme Steering Group for their consideration. My right to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. The publication or any sections therein, may be used for educational purposes, in which case, relevant acknowledgements should be given. Any enquiries concerning the programme can be directed to Bruce Robertson: brucerobertsoned@aol.com. Any enquiries in connection with the report can be directed to Daniel Murphy: danny.murphy101@btinternet.com.

Daniel Murphy

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Contents
1. 2. 3. 4. Executive Summary............................................................................................................................ 5 Context: Educational Leadership Development in Scotland.............................................................. 7 The Strategic Leadership Development Programme genesis, rationale and outline ..................... 8 Evaluation Data: ............................................................................................................................... 13 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 5. 6. Level 1 Reaction .................................................................................................................... 13 Level 2 Learning..................................................................................................................... 24 Level 3 Behaviour .................................................................................................................. 29 Level 4 Results ....................................................................................................................... 31 Implications and Next Steps .................................................................................................... 34

Discussion and Analysis.................................................................................................................... 40 Contextual Note on Educational Leadership Development............................................................. 46

Appendices:.............................................................................................................................................. 51 Appendix 1 Evaluation Methods ......................................................................................................... 51 Appendix 2 Programme Rationale ...................................................................................................... 53 Appendix 3 Local Authorities who took part in the project and the issue which their team worked on ......................................................................................................................................................... 55 Appendix 4 Reporting Forms Used in the Programme ....................................................................... 56 Appendix 5 Sample Semi-Structured Interview Schedules ................................................................. 59 Appendix 6 Survey Results (February and June 2012) ........................................................................ 61 Appendix 7 Website hits by date and category ................................................................................ 73 Appendix 8 Bibliography ..................................................................................................................... 74

Daniel Murphy

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

1. Executive Summary
Herewith a brief summary of each of the following sections of the report. 2. The context of educational leadership development in Scotland: The section provides a brief context-setting introduction to the SLDP. In Section 6, there is a more detailed, but still selective, tour of recent educational leadership development in Scotland.

3. The Strategic Leaders Development Programme (SLDP) This section outlines the origin, rationale and story of the SLDP- briefly what it aimed to do and what happened.

4. Evaluation Data Data are presented in five major sections. The first four sections synthesise evaluation data at each of four levels: reaction (how satisfying, acceptable was the programme?), learning (what was learned?), behaviour (has any of what was learned changed practice?) and results (has changed behaviour led to better outcomes for the service?). The final section considers the implications of the SLDP pilot for leadership development in Scotland, in the light of the data collected. The SLDP is seen as a very important programme, engaging some high performing headteachers and local authority officers in valuable development experiences which moved them on professionally while tackling an important issue in their authoritys strategic policy. The evaluation identifies some aspects of the model which worked very well (such as the 3600 experience, some elements of the coaching which was offered or the team learning model). Other aspects (such as the design of the online learning community) would need some tweaking if the programme was rerun. In the concluding part of this section, 4.5 Implications and Next Steps (p34 ), the evaluation provides useful information to inform any future programmes which build on this model. A summary of methods used in the evaluation is included as Appendix 1.

5. Discussion and Analysis It is clear from the responses by participants and sponsors that the SLDP has been a successful professional development programme, impacting positively, in intended and unintended ways, on individual professional development, service delivery and capacity development within participant local authorities. The evidence demonstrates that it has realised much of its aspiration to deliver on the recommendations of Teaching Scotlands Future (TSF) (Donaldson 2011), particularly 1, 48 and 49, while contributing understanding and models of practice which can contribute more widely to the implementation of TSF. This section of the report answers six key questions, using the data already presented. The answers to these questions address important issues in the implementation of Teaching Scotlands Future (TSF). The questions and summary answers are listed below. Fuller details can be found from page 40 on.

Daniel Murphy

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

1. 2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Should there be a second run of the SLDP? It is argued that this would be a useful next step, both to build on the successes of the SLDP and to address issues which arose. What were the major successes of the learning model (and its relationship to TSF recommendations 33 and 49)? There were many aspects of the learning model that helped participants to learn about leadership in general, and improvements in their own leadership in particular. This proved to be a flexible programme which generated high levels of participant ownership, both of their own individual development targets and of the strategic work-based challenge which they took forward. Can these successes be used in other programmes / learning environments in the continuum of teacher development (TSF recommendations 3 and 48)? Individual elements of the programme could be used sequentially, as well as concurrently. Some are suitable for all levels of leadership development, beyond the strategic. What has been learned about the difficulties of implementing TSF recommendation 50: a virtual college of school leadership should be developed to improve leadership capacity at all levels within Scottish education. There are no rights and wrongs, but lessons from this programme can assist with the design of any future virtual college of school leadership. What kinds of infrastructure of governance, funding and accountability is required to scaffold effective partnerships? (TSF recommendations 3 and 15)? The pilot provided further insight into this issue. It provided interesting evidence of the need for balance between national agency and context-sensitive implementation at local level. It also highlighted the value of partnerships which can increase the capacity of individual local authorities to offer high quality programmes. Where should the outcomes of SLDP sit within national and/or local pathways for leadership development? SLDP demonstrates the need for a national leadership pathway which addresses all the levels of continuing leadership development to which Teaching Scotlands Future refers. The elements of the SLDP process (individual learning (based around 360 assessment and follow-up coaching), work-based team learning with hard outcomes, online learning, access to research and related literature, networks of practice beyond the workplace and beyond the local authority) all have the potential to play a valuable role, concurrently or in sequence, as TSF is implemented across Scotland in the coming years.

6.

The Context of Educational Leadership Development This section elaborates on Section 2, situating the Strategic Leadership Development Programme (SLDP) within a broader international leadership perspective. In common with other educational systems, Scotland has come to see high quality school leadership as a major contributing factor in improving learning, but, despite much recent investment, continues to encounter enduring problems in addressing obdurate problems of social inequality.

Daniel Murphy

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

2. Context: Educational Leadership Development in Scotland1


Over the past 20-30 years the study and practice of school leadership has become an important academic, professional and educational policy concern. In Scotland, responses at national level included: the development of the Standard for Headship in the 1990s (Scottish Office Education and Industry Dept 1998); programmes leading to the Scottish Qualification for Headship from 2000 onwards (Scottish Executive 2003); the identification of pathways in leadership development CPD for Educational Leaders (Scottish Executive Education Department 2003); recognition of the importance of collegiality in educational leadership models (Teachers Agreement Communication Team 2004 ) the development of Flexible Routes to Headship as one outcome of the national programme of Ambitious Excellent Schools (Scottish Executive Education Dept 2004); leadership summer schools, run by the national CPD team, bringing high quality international expertise to Scotland varied developments within local authorities to develop leadership at all levels of the teaching profession.

Despite considerable investment in the teaching profession and leadership development, and the relatively high standard of school education, social inequality in educational access and outcomes remained a key challenge for Scotland (OECD 2007). As part of the continuing focus on improvement, in 2009, the Scottish Government invited Graham Donaldson to review teacher development. The outcome of that review was a landmark report, Teaching Scotlands Future (TSF) (Donaldson 2011). Donaldsons report confirms the value of leadership development for Scottish education. The report makes a number of significant recommendations on future actions to secure and improve leadership development within the teaching profession. The Scottish Government accepted all the recommendations of TSF and invited a National Partnership Group (NPG), representing key educational stakeholders, to consider how these should be implemented. At this time, three individuals, each with a slightly different overview of the Scottish scene2, believing that there was an opportunity to get up and do something based around the recommendations of TSF, approached the Scottish Government and secured funding for a pilot programme which would feed into the work of the NPG and subsequent policy discussions, a programme which would experiment with different models of leadership development, building on previous good practice. As one of the steering group put it in interview: we wanted to try a few things and see what takes off..

This short summary of the context is filled out in the longer contextual note which can be found at the end of the report in Section 6. 2 Bruce Robertson (Association of Directors of Education in Scotland hereinafter ADES), Margaret Alcorn (National Continuous Professional Development (hereinafter CPD) Team within Education Scotland) and John Christie (Virtual Staff College Scotland hereinafter VSCS)

Daniel Murphy

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

3. The Strategic Leadership Development Programme genesis, rationale and outline


The Strategic Leadership Development Programme (hereinafter SLDP) took shape following discussions among some key individuals about the need to generate some pilot experiences, based around the recommendations of the Teaching Scotlands Future (Donaldson 2011) , which could feed into the work of the National Partnership Group (hereinafter NPG): a programme that would ..fill the vacuum until the NPG reported.. (Interviewee 12)3 Bruce Robertson, Margaret Alcorn and John Christie established an initial rationale (Appendix 1) for the programme in the late summer of 2011 and secured funding from the Scottish Government to run a pilot programme in session 2011-12. The design was intentionally sufficiently loose that it allowed both creative and context-specific responses, with an intention to build on experiences of leadership development within previous programmes, such as Flexible Routes to Headship (FRH), Collaboration for Outcomes in the Public Service (COPS) and Learning Rounds and Learning Communities. This design was complex, with a range of inputs and a range of intended outputs, further developed once the co-ordinator was in post. Anticipated outputs were built around the TSF recommendations. They included: The personal and professional development of participants, with a focus on leadership capacities (experienced HTs and education officers); A collateral benefit of improved internal and external partnership through high quality joint working experiences; Improved strategic thinking and planning relative to wicked issues (Grint 2008) identified within authorities; Pilot and evaluation of a sustainable, low-cost capacity building development model; A response to significant recommendations of TSF: 48: improved development opportunities for experienced headteachers 49: helping high performing headteachers to contribute to system-level leadership 50: a virtual college of school leadership to improve leadership capacity at all levels; A contribution to delivering on other recommendations of TSF (particularly 1 strengthen the quality of educational leadership, 3 closer working amongst schools, authorities, universities and national organisations, 15 strengthened models of partnership and shared responsibility for key areas of teacher education and 33 a shift from set-piece events to local team based approaches which centre around self-evaluation and professional collaboration, and achieve an appropriate blend of tailored individual development and school improvement). Inputs were to include: a personal assessment and feedback using the Hay Group Emotional and Social Competence Inventory (ESCI) (Goleman, Boyatzis & Hay Group Inc. ) for each participant, leading to a personal learning plan; the selection of small teams, crossing sector or professional boundaries and mixing experienced and capable serving headteachers with local authority officers;

All quotations are taken directly from interviews or questionnaires responses. Numbers have been allocated randomly to interviewees and to respondents, where necessary, to preserve anonymity.

Daniel Murphy

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

the identification of a wicked issue within the authority, which the team were to address. The issue had to have sufficient importance that the findings of the team would influence future authority policy and practice in the area involved. support to both individuals and to teams, from within the authority, through a Sponsor, who would be a senior officer, through the provision of some form of coaching support and through a national project co-ordinator, who would implement and facilitate the programme; the development of an online community (with ongoing support from RM Education), where information could be shared, where participants could access research material and where individuals and teams could meet and communicate: this was based on the GLOW CPD model, later modified slightly; cross-authority networking and joint working; an initial residential launch event (December) and another residential event at the end of the programme (May) to share success and learning, and assist with programme evaluation; a notional 10 days work-time allowance to support each participant (to include 4 days participation in the two book end residential conferences); administrative support from ADES and the VSCS.

Monitoring and evaluation were to take place: in relation to the personal/professional development of individuals, through self assessment. In addition, coaching support and normal review processes offered opportunities to review and assess development; within local authorities, sponsors would monitor and assess progress, using their own systems; the steering group would receive regular reports from the project co-ordinator as the programme progressed; an external evaluator would be appointed to gather information and report on the programme Roles: three roles were identified: after its completion.
Participants: a mix of headteachers and local authority officers in practice, this included Quality Improvement Officers, Service Managers and officers with a different professional background (e.g. social work, psychology or community learning); Sponsors: senior staff within the authority (head of service or director) who would support and monitor the work of the participant team; Coaches: A loose definition of coaching was used in the programme. There were two broad offers of coaching support. Type 1: experienced local authority coaches from outwith the authority, offering coaching support to authority teams, often asked to work in teams of two; Type 2: experienced facilitators / coaches offering specific types of support (two types of action learning set or 1:1 coaching).

A programme co-ordinator with considerable professional credibility and national experience, Dan McGinty, was appointed in late October 2011 and the Steering Group then stepped back to allow the programme to move forward. Dan McGintys leadership and facilitative style became a very important positive element in the development of the programme, filling in many of the blanks. His role was commented on warmly by many of those interviewed. Around the same time, local authorities were approached and invited to express interest in the programme. Around two thirds of the 32 Scottish authorities showed initial interest and following subsequent discussions, 12 of these authorities joined the pilot. Nomination of individuals to the programme took place around November 2012. Authorities varied in how they selected individuals. In some cases, an open offer was made across the authority to relevant personnel. Those selected were thus volunteers. In

Daniel Murphy

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

The ESCI The ESCI is a well established commercial product, based on wide-ranging research. o It uses 360 feedback to put a mirror up to the participant, analysing his or her emotional competence, using categories derived from the research. The participant can see how their score compares with scores in the extensive Hay database and receives personal feedback, from a trained accredited facilitator, on areas where they may need to do some work, given what others have said about their emotional intelligence and competence. It provides a starting point from which individuals can plan how they want to improve and develop the emotional aspects of their work, both inside themselves and also in their emotional awareness and responsiveness to others.

most cases, individuals were approached and asked to take part. Whether selected from volunteers or handpicked, the overwhelming majority of those participants were individuals who were already performing at a high level: at the top of their game (Interviewee 2). The enthusiastic response of so many local authorities suggested that the programme was both relevant and timely. The external evaluator was appointed in late January 2012. The first residential event, attended by sponsors and participants, was held early in December 2011. Participants and sponsors were introduced to the programme and to each other. A useful session with Graham Donaldson placed the programme in the context of TSF. The final residential event took place in late May 2012, when successes were shared and participants reflected on and reviewed the pilot experience. The ESCI process for every participant began in December and was completed by the beginning of February. Though unclear at the start, different forms of coaching support were developed as the programme progressed (as is the nature of a developmental pilot). An induction day for coaches was held in late January 2012 and coaches were matched to particular local authorities, making contact thereafter. A further offer of support to individuals was made early in March 2012. This offered Coaching (type 1): coaching the team: three options: a faceEach local authority was invited to nominate two to-face action learning experienced coaches who could offer coaching set experience; an support to the team of another authority. online action learning Coaches were then matched to authority teams set experience (the by the programme co-ordinator. Experience of Shetland model); 1:1 this model varied considerably. Some worked online coaching. A effectively as a pair, helping each other to clarify their roles and approaches, while in some cases, number of individuals one of the two played a much fuller role. Where took up this offer. initial engagement was face-to-face, subsequent Experiences of coaching online meetings (through GLOWmeet for example) were thus quite varied.
worked well. Where the initial engagement was online, this was generally less successful. Issues included: timing (in some cases the authority team was well underway before the coach was able to make contact); geography (some of the pairings militated against face-to-face meetings); willingness (some teams did not see a role for an external coach, whereas others derived great benefit from an experienced and supportive peer asking the right critical questions). In several cases, the coach felt that they gained considerably from the experience. The relationships formed between the coach and the members of the team are a vital aspect of the model.

Throughout the programme, participants, coaches and sponsors made varying use of the online learning community site. An early decision to construct this as a closed site, open only to members of the programme, led to one local authority sponsor withdrawing from this aspect. There was a considerable amount of online activity (see Appendix 6 below for figures), particularly around the launch of the programme (December) and February, when activity was well underway in

Daniel Murphy

10

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

most authorities. The online aspect of the programme was seen as an important element by all involved. The loose construction of the pilot programme led to some uncertainty and confusion initially, with some participants, coaches and sponsors unclear as to their role and responsibilities. However some others welcomed this as it provided them with a degree of Online action learning set (the freedom to construct the model.
Shetland model) (peer coaching):

This model was introduced to the team by one of the Shetland participants. The model has the same structure as the face-toface action learning set, but much speeded up, with an online triad taking twenty minutes to explore each of 3 issues (one each participant) in each session of around one hour. Each session starts with a timed presentation of the issue facing one participant (this could be a problem (or a positive experience appreciative enquiry approach). This is followed up by clarifying questions from the peers, further response from the presenter and finally supportive questions / advice for the presenter to take away and act on. The presenter then feeds back to the peer coaches by tweet (choosing three of the questions/pieces of advice to respond to in a tweet 140 characters) before the next meeting. In the SLDP these online sessions were facilitated by an online coach/facilitator. The coach played a vital role in creating an atmosphere of trusting relationships, within which participants felt able to share and to receive positive criticism and comment.

All the time theres a tight - loose dilemma if you put a straitjacket on me as a sponsor, I would step back. (Interviewee 2) From the point of view of a pilot experience, this diversity has led to varied outcomes. Where individuals or teams seemed to require it, the co-ordinator prompted and facilitated new levels of engagement. Some sponsors have kept in close touch with the team, in one case attending almost all meetings. Others have handed over the support role to one of the team and been happy to receive reports from time to time. Some coaches (type 1) were able to engage quickly and successfully with their nominated authority team. Other type 1 coaches found that their nominated authority did not wish to have that kind of support. In some cases, a blend of face-toFace-to-face action learning set (peer face and online coaching): communication The model used in the programme involved worked well, an experienced facilitator creating an particularly where atmosphere of trust and confidentiality. The the first encounter session is timed and structured. In each had been face-tomeeting, a different member of the group of face. In others, four presents an issue, the peer coaches the coaching question and clarify the issue with the relationship only presenter. After this, s/he has to remain really developed completely silent while the peer coaches in the face-to-face discuss the issue. The presenter then feeds back on what s/he took from that discussion situation, with the and this leads to the identification of some online aspect agreed action points, on which the being described as presenter reports at the start of the next information meeting. sharing, not coaching. Some participants made regular use of the online learning community facilities; others had only a very limited engagement. Further discussion of this variety in experience will feature in later sections of the report.

Daniel Murphy

11

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

All teams were asked to submit a written report of progress and of outcomes by May 15th. 11/12 reported on progress and 7/12 on outcomes. Teams also reported in person to their peers in a wellreceived reporting session at the concluding residential conference later in May. Although the programme ended formally at the May event, many of those interviewed reported that the work of their team will continue into the new session. Some also reported on their determination to build on the learning by planned further activities, arising, for example, from the ESCI or from productive one to one learning relationships created through the programme. The high return rate of questionnaires (48/64) and the participation of interviewees (25 agreed to be interviewed out of 26 approached) testify to the ongoing enthusiasm of those involved.

Daniel Murphy

12

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

4. Evaluation Data:
The evaluation was framed using Kirpatricks four levels: 1. Reaction did you enjoy the experience? 2. Learning what did you learn? 3. Behaviour did what you learn improve what you do? 4. Results is what you now do having a positive effect on your results? These frames are used below in reporting the data. A more detailed account of the evaluation methods can be found below in Appendix 1.

4.1

Level 1 Reaction

Definition of terms: In reporting on questionnaire responses, % refers to the % answering the specific question in the June questionnaire, unless otherwise indicated. The following terms are used: A few Several A substantial number Most All but a few <20% 20-34% 35-49% 50-80% >80%

Level 1 of the Kirkpatrick scale is concerned with participants feelings about the programme communication, organisation, support, quality of events, satisfaction, enjoyment. Data was collected primarily through the baseline and final questionnaires (copies included in Appendix 5), through witness accounts of the programme events and activities, through observation of online activity and from personal interviews. Respondents and interviewees had a lot to say about the key learning experiences of the programme (see pp11ff above): the ESCI and subsequent personal development planning; team learning; work-based learning on a wicked issue; four types of support [national co-ordination, coaching (broadly conceived to include all the forms of coaching offered), sponsorship and issues of timing]; online learning; cross authority networking and joint working. Inevitably, there is an overlap between these reactions and their perceptions about their own learning (Level 2). Each of these experiences is now considered in turn: 1.

Participant only headteachers and local authority officer participants Respondent all those who completed the questionnaire

the ESCI and subsequent personal development planning:

100% of participants were either satisfied or very satisfied with their experience of the ESCI tool and the formal feedback session, with 84% similarly reporting on the use and value of the subsequent personal learning plan. One of those involved in giving feedback felt that these were people so wrapped up in giving to others, that they had not stopped to look at themselves, and when they did it had opened their eyes to their own influence and impact on others. Three particular key themes of relevance more widely within the group were identified by one of those providing feedback: participants needed to believe what people were telling them about themselves no false modesty - and be confident in their practice as a result;

Daniel Murphy

13

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

many in the group could usefully pay attention to their skills in delegation and distributing leadership; they needed to practise trusting others to do good work and to develop their leadership skills; many faced issues in work-life balance.

Interview accounts suggested that this had been a particularly positive experience for many of the participants, affirming their work, generating confidence, identifying areas in their leadership style that needed attention and continuing, even after the programme had ended, to feed into their thinking about their professional challenges for the future, as these quotes from questionnaire responses demonstrate:
having our own individual ESCI gave me should a good grounding for where I am and where I need to go and I feel that this has helped me to be a better team member. This balance of individual and team development for me has been so significant; The ECSI process was extremely beneficial and should be open to all head teachers; I gained immensely from the ESCI. It gave me more professional confidence.

98% of respondents considered the ESCI (or equivalent) to be either a vital or a desirable element of a future programme, with 71% of participants seeing it as vital. Some concerns were expressed about the financial cost of the Hay Group ESCI (particularly if the model is to be extended across Scotland), alongside a recognition of its quality. 2. team learning:

All but 2 of the participants had a satisfactory or very satisfactory experience of this aspect, with 78% reporting very satisfactory relationships with the learning group and a further 16% reporting these as satisfactory. 95% of respondents considering it to be either a vital or desirable aspect of a future programme: As a sponsor I have been able to build a working bond with the team I put together for SLDP
(questionnaire response);

We wanted there to be elements of benefit to ourselves, to our establishments and to an element of sustainability (Interviewee 8); Its what you say to children: the more you put it into it, the more youll get out of it. Its just like the classroom (Interviewee 8).

Several elements contributed to this very positive response. The size of the team was important in a small team there is no hiding place. Teams varied in size from 2 to 4, with the majority 3 in number. In one authority, it was decided to go for an even balance of school and centre based staff 2+2. The learning process involved a number of elements characteristic of co-operative learning. This is discussed below in Section 5.2 Learning. 98% of respondents saw the mixing of senior local authority officers and headteachers in team composition as either vital or desirable. Among participants, more than 70% considered this a vital aspect of any future programme. 3. work-based learning on a wicked issue:

The value of work-based professional learning in education is a well-established feature of Scottish leadership development, successfully introduced through the Scottish Qualification for Headship. Unsurprisingly, this proved to be another strong and positive aspect of the programme, as experienced by participants and valued by sponsors. 88% were satisfied or very satisfied that the

Daniel Murphy

14

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

programme involved them with real work problems, while 87% of participants reported similarly on their involvement in identifying the wicked issue which they tackled, suggesting a strong degree of ownership of the task. 97% of participants and sponsors were satisfied or very satisfied that the significance of their chosen issue for their local authority, while 84% reported similarly in relation to progress made in tackling the issue. 65% of respondents considered a high stakes strategic workbased task to be a vital programme requirement, while a further 30% considered it desirable. In most interviews, it was clear that this element had been a very attractive one for participant headteachers:

It has moved me above the operational (Interviewee 4);


I feel that the project will be of benefit to the council and that the approach of collaborative working of this kind can be replicated and used in other contexts (questionnaire response); As a Sponsor I watched the local authority team bond, question, grapple and come up with a manageable issue to focus on. The group have made very good progress with the issue and are keen to continue despite the programme being 'complete'. They are fully involved in the learning and want to see longer term outcome (questionnaire response).

Education officers also valued teamwork with their headteacher colleagues: It was nice to work directly with people from schools.. a bit more face to face .. this will carry through into other areas (Interviewee 13). Teams adopted a variety of approaches to tackling their particular issue, in part reflecting the different strengths and backgrounds of team members and in part reflecting the different character of the issues chosen. Issues chosen can be found in Appendix 2. One team met on a regular fortnightly basis, taking tasks away and bringing these back to the table until they had developed an agreed plan which they implemented together. In another case, there was already a local authority plan, which needed some testing. The team task was for the two headteachers involved to test this out in their own very different school settings. In a third case, the team undertook agreed varied research activities, feeding the outcomes back in policy discussions which took place through a mixture of faceto-face and GLOWmeet sessions. A fourth authority focused on a general issue (the underperformance of children through deprivation) but researched its particular character in one cluster of schools. This variety was seen as a real strength, suiting local need and resources. Participants and sponsors reported very positively on the sessions at the final conference, where they had been able to learn about the different issues which other teams had taken forward, and the different approaches that had been adopted. In the baseline questionnaire, 3 individuals reported strong concern with the use of the term wicked issue, acknowledging its origin in academic research but questioning its use in an educational context: In education we are about working together to support learning and improve outcomes for learners the term wicked issue does not convey this. We should keep it simple by focusing on areas for improvement. (questionnaire response ) 4. four types of support national co-ordination, coaching (broadly conceived to include all the forms of coaching offered), local sponsorship and issues of timing: In general, the variety of support on offer can be construed as a menu, in that participants varied in their perceptions of the value of the different elements available to them, but also drew on these supports in different ways. The support provided by the online learning community is reported on separately in section 5 below.

Daniel Murphy

15

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

National co-ordination: 95% of respondents considered national leadership and co-ordination to be either vital (49%) or desirable (46%). In interviews, a number of sponsors and participants offered the view that they could run something similar locally, but there would be a wider range of supports and opportunities, as well as enhanced status, if there was national co-ordination. A further 84% also saw a vital or desirable role in programme leadership for local authorities. For some, the balance of leadership between the two was an important issue; there was unease about a future programme becoming too centrally controlled. However, 79% of respondents (including all participant headteacher respondents) considered it either vital or desirable that local authorities should give an account nationally of what had been done within their authority as part of any future programme. The ideal programme would be one which was co-ordinated nationally, but allowed room for local factors to determine its exact character. There is a need for national co-ordination that helps authorities to link together national contact challenges thinking and practice, not necessarily this programme, but some national challenge is important (Interviewee 1) In keeping with this balance of local and national ownership, 88% considered it to be either vital or desirable that local authorities made funding commitments to take the successes of the programme forward. Members of the steering group were in no doubt that recruiting the right person to act as co-ordinator had contributed greatly to the successes of the programme. Throughout the interviews, it was clear that this had been an important role for many participants. The co-ordinator had the professional credibility, experience and interpersonal skills to set the right tone for the programme and to smooth out the bumps and gaps which inevitably accompany a complex national programme, being run for the first time as a pilot. His constant monitoring of what was happening, and consequent prompting and fine tuning, reduced some of the potential barriers to participation and both challenged and supported those involved. Once Dan McGinty was in place the leadership of the programme improved (questionnaire response). Some interviewees expressed a strong view that the independence of the co-ordinator contributed to the success of the programme. Had he been a representative of a national agency, such as Education Scotland, he might have been seen as having an agenda to impose. There was a fear that this might change the character of the relationship between participants and co-ordinator and perhaps might have inhibited trusting communication. The administration of the programme was hosted through the Virtual Staff College, whose personnel had considerable expertise in budgetary and communication procedures, while also having important knowledge about event organisation in Scottish (venues, costs etc.). 67% of respondents considered national administration and communication to be a vital aspect of any future programme, while a further 31% considered this to be desirable. By the end of the programme, 5% of respondents were dissatisfied with their experience of the national organisation of the programme (down from 11% in February) and none expressed dissatisfaction with local authority aspects of organisation There was strong endorsement for the national character of the programme in other responses. Only 5% did not consider it either vital or desirable that there should be access to the programme across the whole country. Moreover the national events were seen as important in a number of ways: to communicate key messages, to develop relationships and networks, to stimulate enthusiasm and interest and to raise participants eyes beyond their local context and their day-to-day challenges. Daniel Murphy 16

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Only three participant respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the initial launch event and only one with the final conference, as opposed the many positive statements made in interview. The final event in particular helped participants to celebrate what they had done, to reflect on leadership learning through the programme, to learn from their peers and to lift their heads up beyond their own authority experience. All coach respondents except one were satisfied with the national event which launched their involvement. A number of the coaches interviewed felt there had been value in sharing understandings with other coaches from other authorities. 86% of respondents considered it to be vital or desirable that a pool of coaches be developed and made available nationally, where 79% thought this vital or desirable within each local authority. From a national point of view we need to have a bank of trained and experienced coaches at different levels across the country. That would be a very important national resource for leadership development (Interviewee 12). This links to the second of the three aspects of support, in which perceptions of the value of the varieties of coaching offered in the programme are reported. Coaching (broadly conceived to include all the forms of coaching offered): The definition of coaching adopted in the programme was loose and inclusive, in keeping with the open character of programme design. The varieties of coaching offered (outlined above) also developed as the programme progressed, in keeping with its pilot nature. Coaches assigned to authorities did not have their national briefing session until late January. The further offer of varieties of individual coaching support to follow up the ESCI feedback was not made on the website until February and not taken up thereafter until there were further targeted e.mails to individuals in early March. This contributed to what participants and coaches alike reported as a degree of confusion in relation to the role of coaches. Despite this, 89% of respondents were of the view that some form of coaching support to participants was either vital or desirable. After ESCI, to get to the next level you need support around you (Interviewee 11). Type 1 coaching: The late identification of coaches probably also contributed, in some cases, to the lack of engagement of some authority teams with the assigned coaches, as they had already set course and embarked on their project journey. Experiences of engagement also varied, as those involved worked out what their relationship might be. In one case, initial contacts through GLOWmeet were limited in character, with no pre-existing personal relationships. Only at a subsequent face-to-face meeting did the relationship take off. In another case, where the coach had pre-existing knowledge and relationships with participants, initial GLOWmeets were more successful. In another case, the initial meeting had been face-to-face and this led to a successful blend of later contact by GLOWmeet, by telephone, by e.mail and in person. In the most successful cases, the coach was able to assist the team to clarify their thinking and sort through their options to make the best decisions going forward. In more than one case, the relationship between the coach and individuals within the team developed separately, so that individual coaching contacts (for example, through the telephone) supplemented work that had been done with the team. This varied experience is reflected in these responses: The coaching from experienced HTs from a different authority worked well through Glow. Their input helped us to clearly define our 'wicked issue' and provided good feedback on the work that we were undertaking (questionnaire response); Daniel Murphy 17

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

I felt that the Coaches came on board too late and they should have been in place from the very start of the project. This would have possibly allowed a better understanding of the Role of the Coach from both the participants point of view and the coaches. I think that if the Coaches had been paired up with their SLDP Authority at this early stage it would have been easier to make contact and build up a relationship (questionnaire response); As a coach I was dissatisfied. The parameters within which the coaching role would be relevant were never clear and there seemed no interest in the authority group I was working with to be coached (questionnaire response).

Online 1:1 coaching: the programme recruited an experienced coach, with national standing, to test online 1:1 coaching. The coach followed a conventional coaching approach, clarifying and inviting the participant to develop and choose options for action, summarising and reflecting back what the candidate had said, but through online contact, rather than face to face. This had mixed results, although in this case the questionnaire responses cannot be trusted as participants not involved in the 1:1 coaching, perhaps misreading the instruction, completed this section of the questionnaire...As someone accredited by the Hay Group to provide feedback on the ESCI, the coach had given feedback to some of those later involved in the online coaching. The coach reported that, where there had been previous contact, this model had worked extremely well, to the mutual satisfaction of both parties. It is not clear how much of that success can be attributed to the coachs knowledge of the individual through the ESCI and how much (as with Type 1 coach) to the first encounter being face-to-face. Face-to-face action learning set (peer coaching): The facilitator of this peer coaching model brought experience both as a participant and as facilitator in other settings. The facilitators skill in creating a safe trusting environment was a vital component of this model. The fact that the set comprised individuals from different local authorities who had no knowledge of each others context or of the people involved in the issues raised (though often facing similar problems), was also seen as a very helpful factor. Once again, questionnaire responses on this item are unreliable. However interviewees who experienced this approach were very positive about its power and its value, so much so that they have requested to continue beyond the programme.
The Action Learning Set (face to face) enabled you to discuss in structured and focussed way a leadership related issue with colleagues from other or similar disciplines. This was a real challenge and support activity. Evidence based question format with immediate recommendations on potential improvement strategies was excellent and all within a 1-1.5 hour slot. Excellent opportunity to learn from other's experiences and for you to share yours (questionnaire response).

0nline action learning set (the Shetland model): As with the face-to-face model, questionnaire responses were unreliable in conveying the views of those who took part. However interview responses made clear the potential of this approach, as a powerful and positive support: simple, direct and quick. The facilitators ability to create a trusting safe environment in each o f the groups was again seen as vital, while the fact that individuals involved were from very different contexts was also seen has a helpful contributing factor: On-line coaching (Shetland) & peer contact: Very useful structure to enable effective professional dialogue to take place (questionnaire response). The experience of the coaches: Coaches who were interviewed were involved in the variety of coaching activities offered. They were all positive about their experience of the programme, despite some of the issues caused by the uneven start to the coaching process. They enjoyed having Daniel Murphy 18

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

the opportunity to meet with and learn from colleagues in other local authorities, their problems and successes. They also learned through having the opportunity to practise their coaching skills in a new and different environment. In some cases, relationships were formed which have carried on beyond the programme, leading, for example to exchanges of ideas and learning visits to each others schools. In some cases, coaches became familiar with GLOW for the first time and will use it for other purposes in the future. Some coaches undoubtedly felt underused or even rebuffed. One local authority, for example, offered two of their best, most experienced trained coaches but they were not used by the matched authority team. Future clarity about how coaches might be used, and the role of choice in constructing the programme, would avoid such difficulties. Overall, the development of coaching capacity was seen as important, going forward: There is a growing awareness in local authorities of the importance of coaching and there is an opportunity to develop coaching further based on the lessons learned (Interviewee 14). Another role which some respondents felt could be better clarified was that of the sponsor: The role of sponsor was not clear at the outset and so left me feeling a bit like catching up all the time (questionnaire response). Local sponsorship: There was considerable variety in the way in which sponsors supported their participants. In one case, for example, the sponsor constantly prompted and supported the group, playing a quasi-coaching role as well as feeding the outcomes of their work into the senior team at the local authority. In another case, the sponsor had little direct ongoing involvement, delegating much of the work to the local authority officer in the participant team, but nonetheless still interfacing between the project and the authoritys senior team and facilitating and giving permission for the programme. In this case, the team at first waited some time for the sponsor to take the lead. This delayed their initial progress. It seemed that sponsors were some of the busiest people in their local authority and some found little time to engage actively with the development. One sponsor spoke of the importance of the sponsor giving clear permission: creating a safe space within which the participants could feel they were allowed to get on with this piece of work. Factors which had an influence on how different sponsors played their role included: whether the sponsor had initiated the local authoritys involvement in the programme; the sponsors ongoing interest in, engagement with or responsibility for continuous professional development; the other priorities on the sponsors desk; the extent to which the sponsor passed operational responsibility for the programme to a member of the participant team. Despite this variety, 79% of participants reported themselves to be either satisfied or very satisfied with their relationship with their sponsor. One of the supports offered by the sponsor role was accountability. The sponsor was the named individual who had to provide an account of progress made by the end of the programme in May. The sponsor was the individual within the authority to whom participants had to report on their work and through whom they gained access to strategic decision-making within the local authority. These were seen as important functions, with only one of the respondents not seeing the internal reporting as either vital or desirable. The sponsor role was also seen as important in securing the balance of local and national elements, ensuring that the local elements of the programme did not become swept up into a one size fits all national model. Time allowances: the programme suggested a notional time allocation for participants of 10 days. This would include 4 days at national residential meetings, working team meeting time, time to visit

Daniel Murphy

19

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

other authorities, time to read and respond to research, time to complete the ESCI process, time to participate in the online learning community. Work-life balance emerged as a significant feature of feedback to many participants in the ESCI process. However, most participant respondents did not feel satisfied that the programme had assisted them to address these issues, despite the time allowance. In interview, the impression was given of a group of people, already well used to a working environment where there was too much to do in the working day, and who although skilled in creating the space and time for their real priorities, might also feel guilt or uncertainty about areas that inevitably had to be neglected, or about burdens they might be placing onto colleagues a link to the related theme of delegation or distribution of leadership, which came through from the ESCI returns. In this connection the sense of permission provided by the sponsor could be very important. For some participants, reflection and action in this area was one of the most significant aspects of their learning about their own leadership -what it had been and what it might be. Interviewees and some respondents also offered comment on the time allowed for the programme. One individual wanted more guidance: The programme should be run again. It is very worthwhile for individuals but also there should be tighter timetabling, with deadlines set along the way (Interviewee 17). Another believed a short 6 month window had focused minds and ensured effective teamwork. However most of those who commented felt that the time allowed was too short for the team to complete their task. Moreover there was a strong feeling that evaluation of the key outcomes of their work on the wicked issue required a much lengthier timescale. In some cases, interviewees suggested a recall event one year on, where further sharing and learning could take place. Such an event would also permit a fuller evaluation of the impact of the programme on the quality of the service provided by the local authorities involved. 5. online learning:

There was no doubting the enthusiasm of participants for online learning. All but 3 respondents considered that an online element would be required in any future programme. Almost all respondents believed that blended learning, including an online element, would be vital of desirable. The online aspect of the programme undoubtedly assisted the learning of many participants in a variety of ways. In keeping with the pilot character of the programme, there were also lessons to learn about the design of online learning programmes. These included: a variety of local connectivity issues; knowledge of GLOW; systems issues; participant learning about how to get the most out of online learning. All those involved had much to say about their experience of online learning. Some of those involved expressed frustration: The Glow group coaching sessions were impossible to organise! Glow didn't work properly when I finally tried! (questionnaire response). Only 48% of respondent participants expressed themselves to be either very satisfied or satisfied with the support provided to their learning by the use of online facilities. This was paralleled by the figure of 44% of respondent sponsors who were satisfied or very satisfied. Various aspects contributed to this low figure. 49% of respondents were neither very satisfied nor satisfied with access to GLOW. Factors involved were often sorted with the support of the RM team, although many issues to do with connectivity or sound / visual setup could have been sorted locally, using existing

Daniel Murphy

20

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

GLOW expertise within authorities. In some cases, the firewalls around local authority offices caused further problems. The RM team certainly provided worthwhile support: Glow was a facility we had in our school/authority but because of connection difficulties it received a lot of bad press and is not regularly used. The Project forced me to become more familiar with Glow and having the Glow Page set up in a user friendly way allowed me to experiment more with Glow. The support received from the RM Support Team was excellent. The time spent learning about Glow Meets was invaluable and I felt the benefit when the first Glow Meet took place. I have since set up a Glow Meet with my fellow coach where we could link up outwith the SLDP site but were also able to set up Glow Meets for our SLDP group (questionnaire respondent). One interviewee expressed surprise at the lack of previous engagement with GLOW among senior staff within local authorities, given how widely it is used at all levels in the education system, including within classrooms. One facilitator with considerable online cpd experience expressed surprise and frustration that participants did not make their learning visible. (Interviewee 20) However not all participating staff had an education background and, as a result, one interviewee felt undervalued on occasion by the national programme, in the assumptions which appeared to them to be made: that everyone involved had a school background; what kinds of knowledge they therefore possessed; what kind of access they might have to GLOW. 55% of respondents did not express satisfaction with the structure of the GLOW site, being either neutral or dissatisfied, some finding it clunky. Several interviewees expressed the view that online should only be used for the things that could not be done in other ways, where there was an added value. Because of the bitty nature of the initial postings, some participants did not revisit. As one interviewee reported, the website was filed under h for hassle. This was not just a response from participants who were not computer literate regular users of social media reported this kind of frustration. On the other hand, some programme members who had not used GLOW before, and found themselves having to do so as part of the programme, felt that they would now use GLOW more often for other purposes, now that they had progressed through the initial familiarity stage. However, despite these concerns, there were some considerable successes in the SLDP learning community environment. Several interviewees reported making successful use of the leadership library. Moreover as the statistics (Appendix 6) show, the programme featured as one of the most visited GLOW sites, with particular peaks in December and February. GLOWmeet also was used increasingly well. Overall the picture was one of some participants taking ownership of the parts of the online learning community that they felt worked for them, a growing appreciaton of the value of GLOW for some, and some largely opting out. Even where for those who saw aspects of this online model as problematic, online learning was seen as a necessary element in the mix of any national programme: Glow had not been easy. Having said that, we need to persevere with technological solutions.. As Senior Managers we are not adopting technology as we should. If this group of handpicked leaders are struggling to engage in this way, we need to work with them to build confidence and extend the possibilities of how learning can take place (questionnaire response). Only three respondents considered that it was not required in any future programme, while 68% saw a blended learning model, including online learning as a vital aspect of future programmes and a further 30% saw this blend as desirable. The figures strongly endorse TSF recommendations 33 and 50. Daniel Murphy 21

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Lessons were also learned through the programme. The initial model was built to an off the shelf template, used in previous online cpd programmes. The co-ordinator and the RM support team contributed to improving amendments as the programme progressed. The I intend.. and I share.. messages posted as a result of sessions at the final conference demonstrated that participants would communicate and share online, given a suitable structure and purpose. Once participants became comfortable with it, the GLOWmeet aspect became increasingly important as the programme progressed, being used for online coaching, for national meetings supported by the co-ordinator, and for local meetings within authorities, where travel or time was a problem. Altogether the conference rooms were watched again 650 times. Several of the interviewees spoke positively about their use of social networking opportunities (blogging, Linked In, specialist online networks for leadership, educational twitter feeds) and wanted this kind of activity to feature in future design. The site, whatever some saw as its flaws, provided a home for the learning community - a place to enquire, engage, be informed, to meet, to communicate, to recognise the national character of the programme. The questionnaire invited respondents to agree or disagree that the learning community website should be open or closed (only accessed by members of the community). Only a few believed that the site should be open, although several had no strong view on the issue. Most preferred the protection of a closed site. 6. cross authority networking and joint working:

The programme aimed to develop both networking and joint working across authorities, going some way to meeting TSF recommendations 3 and 15. Cross authority networking was certainly realised in a number of ways working groups made contact with other working groups working in similar areas, in some cases visiting, in others exchanging information in the virtual environment. Some individual contacts, made through coaching links, or at residential events, also developed and, in some cases, are being continued beyond the programme. Participants interviewed found the contact with colleagues in other authorities, whether working in the same general area or not, stimulating and valuable. In addition, as noted above, the cross-authority character of both face-to-face and online peer coaching depended on cross-authority groupings. The most successful cross-authority activity was simply sharing. This worked best where it was small-scale, owned by the participants and based around good professional relationships. The talent you need is already in place and often the best way to release it is for them to see what other people are doing (Interviewee 23) However some aspects of cross authority working did not take off. The majority of postings made by authority teams and individuals within the my community part of the site, while helpfully informative, did not stimulate further online sharing across the community. One participant posted specific invitations to other participants in other authorities to respond and start a dialogue without success. Moreover, although individuals and teams were interested in and stimulated by some of what they saw going on in other authorities, it was clear that the work being undertaken was specific to their authority. There was no scaffolding within the programme to develop or support joint working at a more formal level. When push comes to shove it seems it definitely is the work of your own authority that takes priority. As Interviewee 20 rather trenchantly put it: What is done in a local authority stays in a local authority.

Daniel Murphy

22

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

There was also some evidence that authorities and participants recognise the broader agenda within local authorities set out in the Christie Commission Report (Campbell 2011): The future will be about the development of leadership across authorities more and more joined up services. The Christie Commission will be as important as TSF. We should avoid reinforcing a silo mentality in education (Interviewee 7). I am reluctant to have a programme that is just school-based. The strategy for leadership must run across the whole service (Interviewee 25) Some of the issues chosen, and the teams put together to address them, naturally improved and developed joint working across different parts of the service. Finally, both in February and in June, respondents were asked their views on accreditation. There was no noticeable enthusiasm for accreditation on the part of participants. In the June questionnaire, they invited to express satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) with the absence of formal assessment / accreditation 90% of participant respondents were either very satisfied, satisfied or neutral, with only 3 individuals expressing dissatisfaction. In interviews, several offered the view that they were past the stage in their career where certificates or degrees mattered. They just wanted to do the job better. However one suggested that a Certificate in Strategic Leadership would be an attractive option SLDP could be a practice-based module within the curriculum of such a certificate. The final question in the reaction section of the questionnaire invited respondents to indicate their overall judgement on the programme. 7/15 headteachers who answered this question were very satisfied and a further 5/15 satisfied, with the remaining three neutral. The parallel figures for participant local authority officers were 1/15, 10/15 and 4/15. 2 coaches and 2 sponsors were neutral, the remainder being either satisfied or very satisfied. Two coaches were the only two who were dissatisfied.

Daniel Murphy

23

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

4.2

Level 2 Learning

One of the key aims of the SLDP was to provide opportunities for participants to learn more about leadership. Some aspects of this have already featured in the report on the reactions of individuals to the programme (Level 1). Level 2 also relies to a considerable extent on self-report through questionnaire and interview. There was no examination, testing learning! Level 3 considers the relationship of learning to professional practice (behaviour). Inevitably there is some overlap between these levels. Data for this Level was assembled from the questionnaire returns (a separate section was devoted to Level 2, although other parts of questionnaire returns are also relevant), from the Report on Outcomes (Appendix 3) submitted by most authorities and other documentary material, and from individual interview responses, where interviewees were asked to comment directly on this area. Level 2 goes beyond the what and how of individual learning. One of the ambitions of the programme was to develop capacity through system learning at local and national levels. Each of these areas is now considered in turn. Individual learning: There can be no doubt that individuals learned a great deal through their participation in the programme. This learning is reported on strongly in the interviews in the questionnaire returns and in some of the online learning community posts, and was also a strong feature of the observations made at the concluding conference. Individuals reported on how much they had learned about themselves, principally through the ESCI and the reflection it gave rise to, sometimes supported through coaching, or through further discussion with colleagues within the SLDP team or in their normal work settings:
my participation in the Emotional Intelligence Inventory gave a fascinating insight into how others see me and such valuable and well-delivered and useful feedback (questionnaire response);

the SLDP has encouraged me to be more open about difficult issues and not to think that I have to solve them myself (Interviewee 19).

Individuals were reported as learning from and with others in their work team: Their heads are up. These hts are much more astute about the GIRFEC model and they feel they are no longer alone. The spotlight is being shone on the most vulnerable. (Interviewee 2). Individuals learned from reading and research and from the stimulating presentations posted in the leadership library section of the online community and at conference events and wanted more: One of the things that has been highlighted by the programme is that we need an online repository of good materials (Interviewee 12). There was also learning from the work-based task this could be learning about the task, learning about leadership (and the practices of leadership) through taking forward the task and/or learning through team leadership practice. The learning process involved a number of elements characteristic of co-operative learning (Johnson 1994). This powerful pedagogical system has gained wide currency in Scottish schools within the past decade. Although no participants reported using co-operative learning concepts to reflect on the collegial team aspect of their learning, it offers a powerful frame for analysing that learning. The five elements were all present in much of the work of these teams of 3 or 4: interdependence: the task undertaken was very much seen as a group responsibility, with different members taking on different roles (e.g in one authority, the secondary headteacher Daniel Murphy 24

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

in the group surveyed secondary colleagues, the primary headteacher, primary colleagues; in another authority, members undertook different readings in the area and reported these back to the group). Face-to-face interaction: participants very much valued initial face-to-face contact, some meeting for the first time at the first national residential, even though they worked within the same authority. However, participants also made increasing use of the GLOWmeet feature of the learning community website to supplement their face-to-face meetings, particularly where journey times would have made frequent meeting difficult. Individual and group accountability: this was a strong feature of the groups. Members felt individually accountable to each other, and collectively as a group within their authority, for the quality of the work they produced. This may partly be to do with the size of the group. In larger working groups, typical of local government work, some members may feel less involved or hide. Interpersonal skills: the ESCI provided pertinent and timely feedback to all participants on their interpersonal abilities. This was an important feature of effective group working. Group processing: many participants reported positively on how they had learned from their colleagues and from the promptings and questioning of their coaches and/or sponsors: agreeing the concepts, refining the issue to be tackled and the best approaches, interrogating their research data.

Questionnaire respondents were also asked to rank, in order, the learning experiences which, in their view, had led to the greatest learning benefit (in February they were asked to rank according to learning need/usefulness). Full June responses can be found in Appendix 5. However, the ranking of the items related to coaching (11th, 12th, 14th, 15th) should be discounted as not all respondents experienced these kinds of coaching. In these rankings, research, ICT and the cross authority and national aspects emerge as less important for individual learning than the ESCI, the development of individual leadership skills and the growth of understanding and practice related to teamwork on the wicked issue. This was not what had been anticipated in the February questionnaire, when cross authority learning activities were ranked higher than in June and the ESCI ranked only 6th (as opposed to 1st in June). The learning derived from the ESCI seems to have grown in importance over time, while participants learned less from cross authority activity than they had expected. For some, there was a tension in the learning model between achieving the task and learning about leadership. More than one coach reported that team meetings and discussions would have centred almost exclusively on the task, if the coach had not introduced some prompting questions about the leadership learning which was taking place. Moreover, the ESCI and subsequent learning and practice arose from and fed back into the normal work settings of participants, rather than the teamwork set up by SLDP. One interviewee reported that the team did not share their ESCI feedback or subsequent personal planning. In some cases, where leadership was the issue being addressed, there was a happy coincidence between the task and the learning, focusing, in that setting, only on the task. Balancing the relationship between task completion and learning was clearly an important feature of the programme. There was selective use of online learning: The power of online is what you cant do anywhere else. If its just doing what you do on paper, theres no added value (Interviewee 3). There were also unpredicted individual aspects of learning. For example, one headteacher reported that he wanted now to develop his own coaching skills, as a result of his experience of being coached. Others reported that they wanted now to use a coaching approach within their work teams. Every

Daniel Murphy

25

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

one of the headteachers interviewed had learned tips, ideas and information which they wanted to use in their schools. This accidental learning is a natural consequence of putting enthusiastic professionals into contact with each other. It is clear from the reports above that all but a few of those candidates who engaged with an aspect of coaching learned from the experience. One of the coaches interviewed was concerned with the loose use of the term coaching. Dont call it coaching if its not (Interviewee 18). For this coach, group coaching online was better described as an exchange of information. Coaching In the action learning sets focused more on issues arising from the day job, rather than those related to the SLDP task. What emerges overall is a complex picture in which participants who engaged with some aspect of the coaching offered used it for different purposes and benefitted in different ways. Several headteachers reported that they had learned a lot from becoming more closely involved with the internal operations of the local authority, its corporate processes, the challenges facing their colleagues at the centre. Similarly local authority officers reported on the benefits of learning about the operation of schools. Another substantial by-product of the programme was the learning of coaches, all of whom, to varying degrees, reported on what they had learned as a result of their engagement with the programme. To a lesser extent, some sponsors also reported on their learning. One interviewee offered the view that this type of learning was much more relevant than Masters degree learning. For him, it was important that there were staff in schools who had undertaken Masters degrees, but this action-focused learning had a direct impact. A programme like this which focuses on a difficult issue in a particular school may have a stronger impact on outcomes for young people than work for a Masters degree. There's a balance between high level theory and the personal gain in that learning and the impact that comes from a 'wicked issue' approach. A programme like this could really liberate some of the leadership potential that is in authorities. (Interviewee 5). In sum, the learning model offered a great many learning opportunities to individuals and a great deal of learning took place. It was a learning model which one coach described as transferable to staff at all levels of education, from Director to newly qualified teacher. However these were individuals who wanted to learn and took advantage of many of the opportunities offered. As one interviewee put it, this was a model for adaptable enthusiasts (Interviewee 17). Evaluating the impact on individuals was seen as problematic. It was as much about cultural and attitudinal change as specific skills. One way of evaluating impact on individuals is to assess whether or not behaviour has changed. This will be considered in the next section, Level 3. However before getting to that, it is important to consider the issues of system learning and capacity at local authority and national level.

Learning and capacity building at local authority level: There are several ways in which the programme contributed to system learning and capacity at local authority level. Internal networking; Both headteacher and local authority officer participants spoke of how valuable it had been for them to learn from and with colleagues in other parts of the service, and in some cases outwith education altogether. For some of the headteachers, whose entire working lives had been inside schools, this

Daniel Murphy

26

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

was a refreshing new insight into the service, understanding better the corporate dimension and the political pressures involved. While this contributed to the task in hand, this perspective on the service, or on the challenges of life in school, would not be lost. One of the sponsors also spoke positively about how close contact with the SLDP group had helped the sponsor to see the service differently, a perspective which can be difficult for someone in a senior position in a hierarchical organisation, habituated into a particular view of the workplace. One participant spoke about the importance of the quality of relationships which were developed: Ive learned to trust other colleagues, and by trusting other colleagues to improve my leadership... (Interviewee 19). Improving the quality of decision making Participants also explained that how good working relationships across the service(s) improved the quality of problem identification and decision making and allowed them to get at the issues involved more quickly. For one participant, the investigation of research evidence and good practice elsewhere was a key feature of the task process. This was a powerful new feature, going beyond how the task might have been approached in a more conventional working group model. In some cases, the intended outcomes of the work assigned to the team would build capacity for future tasks: e.g the development of a leadership framework across the education service; e.g. the development of new methods to reach out to parents whose opinions or experiences had not normally included at school or authority level. In best cases, this process allowed school-based participants to link their work more effectively to the strategic processes of the local authority and local authority officers to gain new insight into the problems of implementation at school level. However one interviewee expressed a concern that the team, moving ahead in their understanding of an issue, might have left their authority colleagues behind. Internal briefings of senior staff, presentations at headteacher meetings and other forms of dissemination within the authority were all seen as important ways of harnessing the benefits and helping the organisation, as well as its individuals, to learn. Leadership learning In terms of system learning about leadership, the programme was seen to have put TSF on the map, giving concrete and valuable experience in what might be an important part of the future of leadership development within education. It was also seen to have an important potential role in growing future senior leaders: The programme is building capacity in the system through growing these leaders (Interviewee 7). In the questionnaire, respondents were asked to rank in order six possible benefits of the programme to their local authority. One of these, enhance collective strategic leadership capacity through a working partnership of headteachers and local authority staff was ranked clearly as the most important benefit. In the February returns, enhance collective strategic leadership capacity through networking with other local authorities ranked second, but by June was only ranked fifth. The full set of results for this question (12) can be found in Appendix 5. However in this case, and in relation to questions 10 and 14, caution should be exercised in drawing any conclusions. It should be borne in mind that respondents were ranking items in terms of benefits delivered. Comment was made that this was not easy as all are important. Reasons for ranking being given were not provided and might

Daniel Murphy

27

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

be various the low ranking of ICT related benefits might be, for example, because respondents believe relevant ICT is being, or has been, effectively developed, whether this programme was in place or not.

Learning and capacity building at national level: The programme also aimed to contribute at national level. The questionnaire, as with possible or actual benefits locally, invited respondents to rank several potential or actual benefits of the programme nationally. Respondents gave a strong endorsement of the impact which the programme had had in relation to TSF recommendations 48 (the ongoing development of experienced and capable headteachers) and 49 (trialling a scheme which would allow high-performing-headteachers to contribute to system-level leadership). Once again, as with the rating of impact at local level, items concerned with closer working across organisations and authorities were either ranked lower than in February or ranked in the bottom half of benefits delivered. Respondents and interviewees had more to say about the actual impact of the programme on their own local area than nationally. System learning at national level was harder to observe and therefore they spoke of this more in the future tense, in the later section 5.5 below (Implications and Next Steps). The full set of results for this question (14) can be found in Appendix 5.

Daniel Murphy

28

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

4.3

Level 3 Behaviour

The link from learning to behaviour is a vital part of a professional development programme. SLDP was about more than learning. It was about using that learning to improve the service given to the public. It was about individuals, and the organisations they worked in, learning to behave in ways which deliver a better service. One interviewee talked about a golden thread, linking the ESCI to behavioural change to better outcomes for service users. In the statements headed I intend..., posted at the final conference, many participants linked their own learning, often generated by the ESCI, to improvements in their practice. Some coaches and some sponsors testified to behavioural changes which they had observed e.g in one case, a participant had described to the coach how they spun out their own learning about coaching into a local authority network which they organised. Although many interviewees felt that it was more difficult to evaluate fully impact at Levels 3 and 4 in the shorter term, there was a deal of anecdotal evidence of participants changing their behaviour in significant ways. Participant interviewees gave numerous examples of how they had changed their behaviour as a result of the programme. Examples included: realising that others could and should be trusted to do the work without constant micromanagement and consequently distributing leadership with positive effects; using the Shetland peer coaching model online in a different setting; increased confidence in decision making relative to underperforming staff; increased assertiveness with other professionals (who discharged some children from their caseload whenever parents had not attended meetings) ensuring that they put the child first; removing limiting job titles and replacing them with leadership roles; increased assertiveness in pushing joint working with other professionals under GIRFEC4 : this led to changes in language which led to better attendance at meetings (from it would be good if we could meet up.., to I am calling a meeting and request your attendance.. (Interviewee 26); rethinking the Professional Review process as a 360 + coaching process rather than top-down review; modelling a new way of working between centre and schools; changing the mindset Now I question pretty much everything that happens I interrogate where does it fit into our vision? Is it going to help improve outcomes for children? (Interviewee 8) In addition, all the headteachers interviewed had found some way to put things which they had learned from the programme into practice in their school, whether this was to do with their own style (arising from ESCI feedback) or to do with leadership development of others, or to do with the wicked issue. While it might be argued that individuals are not the most reliable witnesses of their own behavioural change, these were useful testimonies of the impact of the programme on their actions However this may well be an uneven outcome at this stage. One coach observed of the presentations made at the final conference: it was obvious that some [of the local authority groups] had only scratched the surface.. (Interviewee 22). These narratives of changed behaviour refer to individual
4

GIRFEC Getting It Right for Every Child: see http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/People/YoungPeople/gettingitright.

Daniel Murphy

29

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

behaviour. Changed practices and behaviours within the local authority are more difficult to capture at this stage. Some information on these aspects was provided by questionnaire responses 16-19, but too much weight should not be put on the answers. These questions were designed to stimulate reflection on possible or actual behavioural change as well as contributing to future potential evaluation of impact, as much as they were designed to capture evidence of behavioural changes. Respondents were first invited to report on changes in certain leadership behaviours, individual or collaborative, which they, or an informed observer, had noticed (question 16). The improvement most observed was ... in collaborative leadership with colleagues within the local authority, with 31% reporting some change, and a further 48% reporting significant development in this area. Most respondents also reported on some change or significant development in their use of greater knowledge and understanding of leadership challenges to inform their leadership practice and in developing a strong and supportive coaching ethos within your work area/team. Most respondents reported on the other potential areas of behavioural change listed that they were either only possible or else there had been no noticeable change. In question 18, the focus was on evidencing change. Respondents were asked to comment on whether they had used certain methods of evidencing change in leadership behaviours and how useful these methods were (question 18). As with question 16, this question was designed to generate some reflection on possible or actual behavioural change as well as contributing to future potential evaluation of impact. In this case the focus was on evidencing change. Most respondents reported that they had used self observation as evidence of change. A substantial number had collected evidence of behaviour change and received feedback from peers / work team or through coaching. Several had received feedback from the other members of the learning group and only a few had used their line managers observations within the Professional Review process. There was evidence within some authorities of events held and events planned as direct outcomes of SLDP. These might be to do with the wicked issue e.g. dissemination events, or briefings for senior staff. In some cases, authorities are not waiting for another SLDP, but are taking the model and intending to implement some aspects in next years leadership development programme, to support and develop serving headteachers. It would be reasonable to conclude that there have been many early signs, thus far, of the impact of the programme on the behaviour both of the individuals and of the organisations involved. In a complex programme of this sort, with many potential context and project specific outcomes over different timescales, it would be difficult to pull together a robust evaluation of behavioural change without a significantly greater resource being applied to the evaluation over a longer time period. However many good intentions of change can succumb to the pressure of old habits and a contextual culture. Participants interviewed were aware of this and wanted to keep the support networks going, to keep some contact with those who had grown and developed with them. Some have called for a recall day one year on, recognising that implementation of changes and improvements in relation to the issues tackled would take much longer then the life of the programme. Such a recall might also provide a degree of external motivation to continue trying to improve their leadership behaviours. Even if behaviours were changed, and tasks completed, this would not necessarily lead to improved outcomes for the public. This requires us to examine impact at Level 4 results.

Daniel Murphy

30

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

4.4

Level 4 Results

The third area of impact of the programme, after Level 2 (learning) and Level 3 (behaviour) is Level 4 results, for example in terms of service delivery. Within certain spheres of activity such as productivity in production or sales successes, it may be relatively easy to measure this impact. In an educational programme, with multiple complex inputs of which SLDP is only one, and multiple complex outputs, it is much more difficult to link post-programme impact directly and causally to the programme. Moreover impact is likely to be both diffuse and long term in character. Uneven evidence of possible results (or intended results) could be found in participant interviews, in the local authority reports on outcomes (Appendix 3) and in the questionnaire responses. Some of the behaviour changes mentioned in interviews and listed above contained potential results for young people (for example, the case of therapy service managers, working in an area of deprivation, who changed their rules of engagement when parents did not attend an appointment as a result of more confident assertive behaviour by the headteacher). Local authority officers involved in the programme gave information about changes in approaches within the authority which would have effects on staff outwith the programme (for example through planned implementation of a leadership framework developed through the programme). The I intend... statements created at the final residential programme demonstrated high levels of commitment to acting on learning to improve everyday planning and practice. This was also evident in questionnaire returns where participants were invited to complete a sentence which began As a (participant, coach, sponsor) I aim to build on this experience in sustainable way by . A flavour of the responses can be gained from the following selection of responses to that prompt: Coach: evaluating the model and ensuring that the most successful parts of the approach is included in the authority's leadership development programme; Participants: building in time every day for reflection on my leadership e.g. playing back a video of the day, and also allocating myself time for CPD to regularly review my approach to leadership; reflecting on the ESCI and what came out of it. As a result of the programme I am a lot clearer about what might be done to develop a model of shared leadership in my school, which in turn should promote greater opportunities for pupils in CfE. ensuring that the key outcomes for our project are on local authority plans, cluster plans and school plans for next year as well as focusing on how I evaluate my own leadership progress using the ideas delineated earlier in this questionnaire - own observations, continue with an ESCI. building on the confidence that I have gained in my ability to collaborate effectively within my local authority group and in doing so help influence local authority policy further in the future. having a greater focus on coaching and capacity building within my own establishment. Sponsor continuing to support the participants in their learning and on how, where and to whom we report. I will make sure that I am the voice of their work, along with theirs. I would encourage the LA to participate in a similar programme in future continuing to work on our wicked issue with my local authority colleagues. I will take a role in a strategy group and plan to move our wicked issue forward to make a significant and lasting difference.

Daniel Murphy

31

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Interviewees reported on actions which have already had results, for example: a local authority where a substantial number of Depute Heads had been motivated by a leadership network for DHTs to consider preparing for headship; a local authority where many more parents than before had participated in consultation about the service; a local authority where staff are evaluating their work jointly across sectors and services who work with the same families/children; Evidence of impact on service quality is, at this stage, diffuse, context specific, anecdotal and uneven. In order to stimulate reflection about evaluation and to give proper place to this most important of the potential outcomes of the programme, the questionnaire addressed this Level. Respondents were invited to indicate whether they judged certain potential impacts to be already in evidence, not yet in evidence or not relevant. This was designed to give an early indication of the kinds of impact respondents thought likely and relevant. They were further asked to indicate the relative importance they attached to these potential impacts as indicators of the success of the programme. This question aimed to give an indication of the areas where participants would like to see the greatest impact. Results of the programme could be of two broad types: 1. the results of the improved leadership of the participants across the whole range of their normal leadership work 2. The results of the work of the team in addressing the wicked issue. Possible results were suggested under four broad headings which straddled both these possible types: results for young people/school pupils; results for capacity building/collaboration; results of improved leadership behaviours for other staff colleagues; results in the satisfaction levels of clients. These were then further subdivided into specific result areas: 1. Results for young people/school pupils: improvements in pupils development of the four capacities higher levels of pupil attainment higher levels of pupil achievement higher levels of pupil attendance greater variety and relevance in learning choices for pupils, based on more successful partnerships reduction in the number of disciplinary incidents improving partnerships to deliver more appropriate and supportive pathways for progression. 2. Results for capacity building/collaboration: stronger collaborations and networks of support improved leadership behaviours in other staff who work alongside the participant increased levels of participation in leadership development within the school / system 3. Results of improved leadership behaviours for other staff colleagues: improvements in the capacity of the participant to influence, support and challenge those working in schools improvements in teaching staff performance improvements in support staff performance briefings to other staff outwith the programme on the content/product of the work done (the wicked issue)

Daniel Murphy

32

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

briefings to other staff outwith the programme on the process of team/leadership development improvements in my leadership skills / my development of leadership in others. 4. Results in the satisfaction levels of cllents: reduction in the number of complaints higher levels of satisfaction with school/authority priorities for change and improvement among relevant staff, parents and pupils. The responses given to these questions cannot be said to determine whether or not the programme has impacted on the results of the services involved stronger evaluative evidence would be required than the mixture of self report, evidence of actions taken and witness testimony available in this evaluation. Some of the views given in relation to the achievement of these possible results are obviously specific to the local context. Valid evaluation of these outcomes would require locally specific evaluation methods within a longer timescale. Although they cannot provide valid or reliable information about impact, the responses are interesting in terms of participant perception of the potential impact of the programme. 1. Results for young people: by and large, all participants considered the results for young people to be important, with the final area listed (improving partnerships to deliver more appropriate and supportive pathways for progression) attracting the highest number of very important responses. Most (or in some cases almost all) respondents did not consider these results to be currently evident, but there was a direct line from the programme to these results: This wasnt an add-on. It was directly contributing to what we saw as an area of improvement in our improvement plan and also influencing the plan for next year (Interviewee 26). Results for capacity building / collaboration: this was not the case with results for capacity building / collaboration. Almost all the respondents considered the results listed to be important or very important, but most also considered that two of these possible results (stronger collaborations and networks of support and increased levels of participation in leadership development within the school / system) were already in evidence. Results of improved leadership behaviours for other staff colleagues: in relation to this third main area), almost all respondents considered all the possible results listed to be important or very important. Most of those responding considered that there was already evidence of results in three cases (improvements in the capacity of the participant to influence, support and challenge those working in schools, briefings to other staff outwith the programme on the content/product of the work done (the wicked issue) and improvements in my leadership skills / my development of leadership in others). A substantial number also saw evidence of briefings to other staff outwith the programme on the process of team/leadership development. Results in the satisfaction levels of clients: In relation to the final area of possible results, while almost all saw higher levels of satisfaction among stakeholders as important or very important, there was a substantial number who saw reduction in the number of complaints as either only a little important or not important at all. 10% or less thought there was any current evidence of impact in either of these potential results.

2.

3.

4.

There may, of course, be many other potential results of the SLDP, perhaps specific to local context or to the chosen issue, not listed or considered here. Although the evaluation of these has to be a feature of local evaluation of impact, this report demonstrates the wide potential range of such results and their importance in evaluating the impact of the programme.

Daniel Murphy

33

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

4.5

Implications and Next Steps

All those interviewed were very aware of the pilot character of SLDP and had some useful and interesting things to say about what might or should happen next, both locally and nationally as a result of the programme. Next steps identified in relation to the wicked issues or in relation to individual participants professional development targets arising, for example, from the ESCI, are therefore briefly revisited below. However the principal concern of this section is the implication of the SLDP for next steps in leadership development policy and practice more widely. The questionnaire asked respondents to comment on the importance of some features of programme design. Issues of sustainability, resourcing, dissemination and next steps also featured significantly in many interviews and in the local authority reports on outcomes. There was considerable discussion about the implications of the pilot for national policy in leadership development, both informally and at a panel session in the final conference, following which some participants shared their thinking on a national leadership framework for Scotland online. The questionnaire also invited open-ended responses to the following future-regarding statements: Complete this sentence: Participants: 'In my own personal development, I aim to build on this experience in sustainable way by ... Coaches: 'In my coaching role, I aim to build on this experience in sustainable way by .. Sponsors: 'As a local authority officer, I aim to build on this programme in a sustainable way by.. Complete this sentence: 'I would like my authority to build on this experience in sustainable way by .. Complete this sentence: 'National agencies should build on this experience in sustainable way by.. This report draws on all these sources of information and summarises responses under the following headings: dissemination; programme design; resourcing and sustainability; capacity building; implications for local authorities; implications for national policy; next steps. Dissemination: In several authorities, there was already evidence of dissemination related to both leadership development and/or the issue which was being tackled through the programme. Reporting was taking place through regular network and team meetings of headteachers, local authority officers and senior leadership teams. Some interviewees also wanted to see the programme reported on more widely, for example to non-participating authorities and Universities and others interested in developing CPD practice in Scotland. Those involved felt that they had participated, in whatever role, in a programme of significance which needed a wider airing the pilot had led to valuable learning and useful insights. This report, whencirculated, will contribute to that. Programme design: To capture some of the learning about the structure and process of the pilot, Question 29 invited respondents to say whether they considered aspects of the programme (not an exclusive list) to be vital, desirable or not required, if the successes of the programme are to be taken forward. The following elements were considered vital by most questionnaire respondents: ensuring participants are accountable through normal reporting within their local authority; evaluation of gains made in personal learning; Daniel Murphy 34

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

evaluation of gains made in capacity building; evaluation of gains made in service delivery; funding commitments from local authorities; effective national administration and communication; face-to-face, work-based and online activity all required blended learning; high stakes strategic work-based programme requirement; team-based development activities; teams which include both headteachers and local authority staff; programme must fit into a more coherent map of leadership development pathways nationally; ESCI or equivalent to set up personal learning planning.

The following elements were considered to be either vital or desirable by all but a few respondents: the programme should be run across a number of authorities and cannot be done within one authority; leadership and co-ordination of the programme by an agent or agency operating at national level; leadership and co-ordination of the programme by local authorities; accountability of local authorities through reporting nationally; access nationally for individuals who wish to participate in the programme; coaches to support participants; time and development of a pool of coaches available nationally; programme to last at least one academic session; suitable ICT infrastructure (e.g. GLOW) to host the learning community. Issues relevant to programme design have arisen at all stages of this evaluation. They also are central to sustainability, capacity and to local and national leadership development programmes and frameworks. Resourcing and Sustainability: A grant from the Scottish Government funded the programme, and financial management was provided by the Virtual Staff College (Scotland). The cost, per participant, from this budget was approximately 1600. This included the substantial costs of two residential events, the commercial cost of the ESCI (around 400 per participant), the pro-rata salary costs of the co-ordinator, the external evaluator and some centrally provided coaching services. However the programme also received considerable resourcing support in kind: all travelling expenses were borne by local authorities within their normal budgets; the time given by the Steering Group and the time allocated to participants, coaches, and sponsors, was taken from their normal work commitments; RM (ICT support provided as part of their on-going partnership with ADES) and Virtual Staff College Scotland (admin and communication support) included their support within existing contract arrangements with no additional charge; the site was hosted and supported within GLOW with no additional charging. The programme addressed a relatively small number of the potential target group of experienced capable headteachers and senior local authority officers: an average of only 3 participants from each of 12 of the 32 local authorities. At a time when it is proving difficult to protect money for CPD within hard-pressed local authority budgets, it is important that due consideration is given to cost as well as

Daniel Murphy

35

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

capacity in considering sustainability. On the other hand, relative to some other leadership development programmes, this could be considered to deliver considerable added value for the money invested. Half of those responding felt that it was vital that local authorities made funding commitments to take the successes of the programme forward. In discussion, some potential areas of saving were suggested: the programme could be run in three or four regional groupings, with one day conferences, reducing residential costs; individuals might be willing to part-fund their participation, particularly, one suggested, if this could be done from pay before taxation; it might be possible to save on the ESCI experience, though there was a concern not to sacrifice quality, as this had been such an important part of the programme; elements of the programme might be split up, allowing it to be run over a longer time period, with individuals benefitting from the different elements over a period of years, thus allowing more people to access the programme longer term, and creating a bigger network of participants. The motivation and interest to develop the programme came from a small group of individuals who led the project. For any programme deriving from the pilot to be sustainable, it will need systems of support, beyond the enthusiasm of individuals. Reports were submitted by 11/12 authorities, confirming that they had written further development of their wicked issue into future improvement plans in some way or another, demonstrating another aspect of the sustainable impact of the programme its direct link to service improvement. Capacity building: The experience of the pilot has highlighted important factors in building system capacity to development the strategic leadership of headteachers and others. Some of these are: Capacity at national level to support a complex programme: sophisticated professional programmes of this type require highly skilled facilitation. Many in the programme offered comment on the value of the co-ordinators input: prompting, communicating, facilitating, supporting and sometimes requiring participation and reports; tidy administration, web authoring and hosting and financial management arrangements also require to be in place; Online learning communities have to work for people with many busy operational responsibilities. They also require facilitation and ongoing support; Several headteachers wanted online access to a repository of research findings and concepts (such as the leadership library or the resources created under the earlier Heads Together initiative (Granville 2006)) which will challenge their thinking, thus maintaining a level of support and challenge after the formal programme is ended; Both local and national elements of the programme were required. Several interviewees offered their own version of the need for balance between centre and local, between tight clear direction of the programme and the freedom to be creative and nimble in responding to different contexts and needs. Ownership, governance and funding therefore need to develop capacity to support this; partnerships build capacity but require scaffolding; Some local authorities have greater capacity than others. This clearly influenced some thinking about issues such as the desirability of a national pool of trained coaches. Some

Daniel Murphy

36

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

authorities considered that they had the motivation and capacity to run a similar programme on their own, others do not; Developing the capacity of individuals and teams through a programme like this can increase local capacity to develop others; The programme provided a model for increasing leadership capacity through intra-authority team working, crossing the borders between parts of the service.

SLDP developed the capacity of individuals and the authorities in which they worked. However organisational and partnership capacity are also required if a model of this type is to succeed. Implications for local authorities: Those involved with the programme had much to say on this topic, both with regard to potential future actions of their own local authority and the role of local authorities in general. In some local authorities, a leadership framework is already in place, or is currently under development (sometimes through SLDP work). Others are awaiting national advice on this. There was much agreement with TSF that serving capable headteachers were a group neglected in current provision and that teambased learning alongside senior local authority staff had been beneficial. This kind of leadership development opportunity should feature, alongside headeacher preparation and headteacher induction in local authority leadership development frameworks, whatever national guidance is provided. The following comments give a flavour of the views offered in the questionnaire as to what local authorities should do: ...continuing to invest in it and by pushing to have the programme established on a longer term basis nationally; ... developing pools of coaches from within the authority to support HTs as well as keeping the SLDP priorities high on evaluation visits to schools next session; ... expanding the programme to allow a greater number of HTs/LA officers to participate; ... completing the task, trialling the agreed outcomes and ensuring there is further LA development of the leadership pathways available for all teachers; ...empowering participants to share their views, experiences and outcomes of the SLDP to help shape future leadership development activities. Implications for national policy: All but a few of those involved in the programme saw some form of national leadership of the programme as vital or desirable, and recognised the value of national funding support, but there were reservations. Several interviewees were anxious about the possible harmful effects of too much national direction. Concern was expressed that we need some form of national co-ordination, but Education Scotland is in too much of an education silo (Interviewee 7). Another interviewee (23) was worried about the role of HMI in Education Scotland it could really stifle creativity in a programme like this. One interviewee (24) commented that the co-ordinator was seen as independent, but had he been attached to a particular national agency, he might have been viewed differently, people might have been less open. For some, it was a question of balance. One respondent summed this up in saying that national agencies should respond to the programme by ... embracing some of its 'growth' model as opposed to tightening and securing every aspect of it. I appreciate there is always a tension between loose - tight, but if a programme is devised for leaders who are already successful, it must have flexibility, adaptability and permission to follow the learners. Modules and accreditation must avoid closing down choice and organic growth. A programme such as SLDP could be seen as

Daniel Murphy

37

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

something worthwhile because participants see the difference in their day to day lives, not because they have another certificate to put on their wall. One or two respondents offered the view that Virtual Staff College had the capacity and neutrality to host the programme, and the advantage that almost all local authorities are already subscribers. Bringing headteachers into the VSC network would also help to fulfil the recommendations of TSF. Some interviewees were clear that strong national leadership was required in particular key areas. National leadership should: provide strong leadership to coordinate and support national recommendations a virtual national leadership college and act as the agent or facilitator of the programme. Other areas mentioned as requiring a strong national lead included: the development and provision of a high quality affordable educational 3600 assessment and feedback available across the country; the co-ordination of a national bank of coaches, that authorities could invest in and draw from; a framework of credit towards optional certification ( though the February questionnaire on this issue showed that there is no consensus on who might award such a certificate). More than one also mentioned the example of the initial SQH programme in which the Scottish Government set up the system requiring collaboration across local authorities and Universities, which allowed but did not directly deliver the programme. A substantial number of interviewees and respondents wanted a second run of the programme, to build on the successes and iron out some of the problems and establish best practice by: ... building on this experience in a sustainable way by continuing the programme into a second cohort. The expertise of the first group should be used to build leadership capacity for the future; ... rolling the programme out to other councils and clarifying the future involvement of all authorities; ... continuing to offer this opportunity; ... continuing to support its evolution and committing to ensuring that it is a success. It has the potential to do something remarkable in Scotland that fills a vacuum in leadership development. I also think that it will help develop a greater degree of coordination of leadership development for everyone in the system. (all questionnaire responses). Many were anxious that the National Partnership Group, due to report to the Cabinet Secretary in the near future, took due account of the work of the SLDP pilot in their advice on the implementation of the recommendations of TSF. Finally, one interviewee delivered a killer quote on the negative effects of too careful an approach: I want to urge a word of caution against caution if we want to be the top of the world (Interviewee 22) Did SLDP achieve its ambitions? The programme rationale (Appendix 1) laid out the following outcomes for participants and for local authorities: By the end of our programme, we expect participants to:

Daniel Murphy

38

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

1. complete the emotional intelligence inventory and develop your leadership style in the light of its findings 2. contribute to the developing structure of the programme 3. complete a piece of learning in a learning set which informs strategic thinking in your local authority 4. demonstrate a commitment to promote effective online learning 5. develop strategies to collaborate successfully with local authority colleagues 6. share your outcomes with programme colleagues 7. make your findings available nationally 8. participate in the awards ceremony which will conclude the programme. By the end of the programme, we expect participating local authorities to: 9. share the outcomes of the programme locally 10. use the research to influence policy 11. be prepared to share the learning model with other interested local authorities. By the conclusion of the programme, considering the presentations made at the final conference and the celebration of success that took place there (as opposed to an awards ceremony), participants could fairly be said to have achieved almost all the expected outcomes. Of the 8 listed, 7/8 were completed by all participants and the 8th (number five) by all but a few. Local authorities also have clearly met expectations thus far. There is ample evidence that 9 and 10 have been and are being achieved. Number 11 may be a desirable next step. Next steps: Many interesting and valuable lessons have been learned across the SLDP programme and for those who took part and their authorities, this will carry on. As Interviewee 12 succinctly put it: There is a legacy at an individual level, an authority level and a national level It is clear that there can and should be next steps, if public service is to benefit from the insights, expertise and capacity building of the SLDP. It is less clear what these next steps should be. At one end of the spectrum is a view that local authorities can effectively take or leave national involvement and will progress with a local programme based around their own priorities, capacity and resourcing. At the other end, there is a view that individual authorities may struggle to replicate the opportunity and status of a nationally organised programme, creating a postcode lottery of opportunity, and that national leadership is therefore required. Another view is that the programme does not need to run again in its present form it has fulfilled its aim of experimenting with new approaches to developing strategic leadership. In this view, national and local policy and practice should harness and use what has been learned as the next generation of leadership development programmes are developed, but not necessarily by replicating the specific mix of this intensive programme. And what of the remaining 20 local authorities in Scotland. How are they to benefit from these experiences? The discussion and recommendations of the next two sections are designed to address the question of next steps.

Daniel Murphy

39

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

5. Discussion and Analysis


It is clear from these responses by participants and sponsors that the SLDP has been a successful professional development programme, impacting in intended and unintended ways on service delivery and capacity development within participant local authorities. The evidence thus far demonstrates that it has realised much of its aspiration to deliver on TSF recommendations 1, 48 and 49, while contributing understanding and models of practice which can contribute more widely to the implementation of TSF. The difficulties experienced in some areas, a natural part of any pilot, are generally of a type that could be addressed in a second run (e.g. timing, explanation of programme content, matching of coaches). How can or should the experiences of the pilot connect beyond its participants to the wider environment of policy and practice in Scotland? This section of the evaluation considers this question through a number of subsidiary questions. There may be other relevant issues, but this discussion is limited to these six, which emerge as particularly important themes from the evaluation and which relate closely to the recommendations of TSF: 1. Should there be a second run of the SLDP? 2. What were the major successes of the learning model (and its relationship to TSF recommendations 33 and 49)? 3. Can these successes be used in other programmes / learning environments in the continuum of teacher development (TSF recommendations 3 and 48)? 4. What has been learned about the difficulties of implementing TSF recommendation 50: a virtual college of school leadership should be developed to improve leadership capacity at all levels within Scottish education. 5. What kinds of infrastructure of governance, funding and accountability is required to scaffold effective partnerships? (TSF recommendations 3 and 15)? 6. Where should the outcomes of SLDP sit within national and/or local pathways for leadership development? These are now considered in turn, with recommendations for consideration in relation to each of the six areas: 1. Should there be a second run of the SLDP? Several participants and sponsors suggested a rerun of the programme. A second run would be readily able to build on the successes and address some of the difficulties which affected aspects of the first run: initial online engagement could be improved by redesign and respecification of expectations in relation to online participation, based on the feedback and online successes of the first round. A second run might well develop a strong model of the contribution online learning can make to the blend. The first run also made clear that although online engagement is often more successful where there has been previous face-to-face contact, it is possible to create a trusting online space where people can engage successfully in, for example, peer coaching; roles would be clearer from the start, not be greater definition, but by clearer specification of the balance of national framing / local ownership which contributed to the programmes success. The first pilot showed that support roles can be played in very different ways in more than one authority, the effective sponsor for all but accountability purposes was a Daniel Murphy 40

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

participant; in another authority, the sponsor and coach were the same person. An acknowledgement of this flexibility in design and role would free local authorities to develop their own systems of support to suit their local strengths and needs ; early identification of the coaching menu: the first run showed that all four of the different coaching elements offered could make a significant contribution. This can be developed into a menu, from which participants can select the supports most appropriate to their needs. One of the collateral benefits of the first run was the extent to which the coaches felt they had been developed by the experience: if coaching is a valuable development experience for the coach, it can be incorporated into the leadership development framework; timing issues can be addressed in a second run, which can stretch the window for the work undertaken; team composition: many of the teams in the first round tackled leadership development as their issue. However those who tackled issues such as inclusion or reaching out to the hardly reached found a different dynamic in their multidisciplinary teams. The relative merits of different teams for capacity building and process modelling can be explored in the light of the first round; If other authorities were brought in alongside some of those who participated in the first run, this would also develop capacity and extend the knowledge base of the approaches taken, while allowing some of the expertise and system knowledge developed in the first round to feed into the second phase; terminology: in passing, it is worth restating that some participants were uncomfortable with the term wicked issue. If it causes offence, it should be dropped. There are many equally acceptable alternatives, such as thorny or difficult issue, which capture the sense of a concern which cannot be easily addressed. It may be that there are other programmes, aiming at TSF 48 and 49, lined up and ready to go. In that case a decision might have to be made as to whether a different model should be tried . There is no monopoly on what kinds of development might address these recommendations. However, in the absence of a convincing alternative, and given the success of the first programme, it would be sensible for the Scottish Government, as a contribution to the implementation of TSF, to fund an extension to a wider group of authorities, refining the processes and taking account of the feedback from year one.

2. What were the major successes of the learning model (and its relationship to TSF recommendations 33 and 49)? In line with best practice research on professional development, TSF recommended (33) that the balance of cpd activities should continue to shift from set-piece events to more local, team-based approaches which centre around self evaluation and professional collaboration, and achieve an appropriate blend of tailored individual development and school improvement. Recommendation 49 stated: a scheme for national leaders of education should be developed to enable experienced, highperforming headteachers to contribute to system-level leadership of education in Scotland. SLDP delivers on both these recommendation in a number of ways: The team character of the programme, and the associated collaborative activity, was a signal success. Team members learned with and from each other about the issue they had taken on. The small size of the teams facilitated all of the powerful learning activities of cooperative learning, as teams grappled with the issue. Working in a small team encouraged responsibility and ownership. Headteachers enjoyed and learned from the challenges of

Daniel Murphy

41

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

system-level work, while local authority officers involved learned from the situational understanding of the headteachers in their team; A strong motivating factor was the character of the issue in working on it, team members felt they were going to make a real difference to the quality of the service. Ownership was also a powerful motivator. Teams were involved in investigating the issues and devising strategies to address them, not simply implementing someone elses approach; While there was a clear strand of individual development that came from a different place from the rest of the programme (the ESCI and subsequent feedback and personal planning), individuals mixed and matched the different elements across the programme as a whole. The questionnaire returns demonstrate high levels of self-evaluation, arising from the ESCI but also from an evident desire to improve knowledge, understanding and skills; This was a motivated group or participants. Self management of the menu of opportunities offered in the programme might not be so tight with a less motivated group; There was a considerable element of flexibility and local ownership built into programme design. While the expected outcomes for the participant (and authority) were specified at a level of generality, there were many different ways to deliver these; Another clear outcome was to confirm that local authorities can benefit from engaging headteachers in system-level leadership. This model increases leadership capacity at system level.

SLDP demonstrated the importance of recommendations 33 and 49. High performing professionals want to put ideas into action, not just to learn about possibilities. The practical character of the programme, local flexibility and ownership, the small team working method and the balance of individual and peer learning all these features were important components of the mix. These kinds of elements should feature as part of the set of opportunities available to senior school leaders. However, it is worth noting the comments of one respondent: Accepting we were participating in a programme that was evolving it is fair to say too much was crammed in when the main focus was on taking forward our improvement agenda. With other activities being added it took away from taking the improvement agenda forward and the opportunity to engage more fully with link authorities The programme aimed at personal development, team development, capacity development, strategic policy development, cross authority working and online learning, as part of the pilot menu. With so many features, it was inevitable that some aspects would fall off the table. Not all the elements of the menu need to be offered at the same time this is further explored in the discussion of question 3 which follows.

3. Can these successes be used in other programmes / learning environments in the continuum of teacher development (TSF recommendations 3 and 48)? This programme modelled a process by which distributing leadership (in this case to a small working team) can develop leadership in the team members. Within schools and local authorities, this model can be used at different levels. However there were specific elements of this programme which contributed to its success and which might not be present in other cases: the participants were already high performing senior staff with high work motivation and many existing self-management and task-management skills; the learning element of the programme needed strong reinforcement, as the task focus was very powerful. The motivation of the participants, their current skills and

Daniel Murphy

42

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

capacities and the blend of activities offered are all important factors in considering transfer of this model to other stage of teacher development. The model consisted of a number of elements. Their combination in relation to motivated senior leaders could be said to have worked in this first run. However they would not need to be integrated in any future programmes along the pathways of leadership development Two elements can serve as examples: TSF (p80) refers to work demonstrating the power of coaching to help headteachers to shape their own development. An ESCI or equivalent 3600 experience, followed by a period of peer or individual coaching could operate independently of other aspects of the programme. It could also be strong developmental at other stages of leadership development. A group task with a learning focus, shaped by co-operative learning principles, could work on its own as a powerful development experience at a number of levels, if set to stretch the participants beyond their normal practice. Such individual elements of the programme could, with appropriate changes, transfer to the other stages and other areas of teacher development, or be implemented in sequence, rather than concurrently, in supporting senior leaders.

4. What has been learned about the difficulties of implementing TSF recommendation 50?: TSF recommendation 50 states that a virtual college of school leadership should be developed to improve leadership capacity at all levels within Scottish education. This is a complex area, with many technical and professional aspects. The SLDP experience can make a helpful contribution to online aspects of leadrership development. The SLDP established a learning-focussed online community for experienced Scottish headteachers5 and senior local authority officers. This aspect experienced both successes and failures, growing and changing character as the programme progressed. It also confirmed the relevance to leadership development of recommendation 40 (online cpd should be part of the blended, tailored approach to cpd for all teachers). This evaluation has not explored the issues in sufficient depth to offer more detailed comment or recommendations in this area. Nonetheless the varied successes and levels of participation highlighted in this report suggest that the lessons from this programme, and the insights of its members, should feature in any virtual college planning and design. Programme design and delivery did not require a specific physical location.

5. What kinds of infrastructure of governance, funding and accountability is required to scaffold effective partnerships? (TSF recommendations 3 and 15)? Recommendation 3 calls for much better alignment across and much closer working amongst schools, authorities, universities and national organisations. Recommendation 15 takes this further: new and strengthened models of partnership among universities, local authorities, schools and individual teachers need to be developed. These partnerships should be based on jointly agreed principles and involve shared responsibility for key areas of teacher education.

As opposed to Heads Together, for example, where networking was a more significant feature than focussed professional learning.

Daniel Murphy

43

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

One of the disappointments of the programme, for the steering group, was the lack of formal joint working across authorities. Many of the participating authorities identified an aspect of leadership framework development as their issue, yet despite this common ground there was limited uneven evidence of exchanges of information and ideas, at team and individual level. At least part of the explanation lies in the complexity of the programme and the timescales involved, as noted in the respondent comment quoted above, within the discussion of question 3. The programme operated at a variety of levels individual, local team interfacing with other intra-authority teams (such as headteacher networks), with individual development priorities as well as team tasks in a tight timescale, alongside busy day jobs. In these circumstances, it would have been surprising if any of the teams involved had addressed the political and organisational complexity associated with jointworking, particularly in the absence of a holding framework of rules of engagement. On the other hand, the outside authority dimension had important positive consequences for the programme. The national character of the programme gave it status. The sponsors accountability (to deliver a closing account of the conduct of the programme) to a body outwith the authority meant that it could not slip off the desk. Moreover the joint-funding arrangements, whereby the authority committed staff time (including lending coaches to other authorities) and the national programme provided cash funding for the elements where this was required, worked well to increase the quality and range of the programme beyond what could have been offered by either a national agency or a local authority on its own. On a straightforward level, participants and coaches also reported that they learned a great deal and found great professional stimulation in their contacts with other colleagues, through informal discussions and presentations at the conferences, through visits, GLOWmeets and 1:1 exchanges, through the online community, through the feeling of being part of a bigger system and seeing the connections and challenges of different working environments. Finally, it was clear that although some authorities felt they had the capacity to run an SLDP-type programme internally, some do not. Working together, all authorities were able to deliver a stronger set of development opportunities. SLDP has shown that local authority partnerships, working within a framework set nationally, have the potential to deliver effective leadership development challenges for high performing senior staff and headteachers. If an accreditation option was considered desirable, Universities or other accrediting bodies could be invited to join such partnerships. If all Scotland were involved, it might be possible to form 3 or 4 area partnerships. Local partnerships might also be able to reduce the cost of necessary face-to-face conference events. The experience of SLDP suggests that such partnerships are unlikely to occur without some prompting or structure. The SQH model, referred in the evaluation, is a helpful one: national government provided seed funding, which authorities could only access if they formed partnerships. This combination of carrot and stick, with national agency setting out the framework and broad principles, and local authorities taking ownership and arranging delivery, secured effective partnerships to develop and run the programme (at least in the early years). This kind of scaffolding should be developed to support inter-authority partnerships. Joint governance and accountability arrangements (and associated funding), leading to interdependent ownership across national and local authorities, will ensure appropriate priority and consequent action. The question of which national agency (Scottish Government, Education Scotland, VSCS , a new virtual leadership college or who?) should act as the national broker is beyond this evaluation! However given the context of the Christie Commission, and parallel developments in public service leadership in other professions, the national pathways for educational leadership development should ensure that some interprofessional activity is part of the leadership development menu.

Daniel Murphy

44

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

6. Where should the outcomes of SLDP sit within national and/or local pathways for leadership development? This evaluation took place as the National Partnership Group (NPG) was completing its work. There was little cross membership from the SLDP to the NPG, though some reporting of the SLDP to the NPG did take place, while there was a very useful panel session with NPG members at the final conference. TSF recommendation 48 envisages a leadership pathway, which should not stop at headship, but should include ways in which experienced headteachers can continue to develop and refresh their skills and competences. The NPG has been working on that pathway. SLDP, meantime, has contributed to our understanding of the menu that might be on offer for serving experienced headteachers and senior local authority officers. SLDP is also actively contributing to developing policy and practice within local authorities. Five of the 12 local authorities participating in the first round of the SLDP chose some aspect of leadership framework development as their issue. The experience of participating in SLDP is already having a significant effect on thinking and practice of leadership development within these authorities. The dissemination of the SLDP experience within all participating authorities (through reporting, for example, at headteacher network meetings or in senior team discussions) will be influencing senior local authority staff perceptions of current best practice in leadership development. These parallel developments should be joined up. A national leadership pathway must harness the SLDP experience and enthusiastic local ownership of leadership development. As with question 5 above, there is balance to be struck across governance, accountability and funding. The complementary roles of national and local agencies can be best be brought into partnership through a model similar to the one recommended here above for senior leadership development. Local authorities could be required to develop local partnerships across the leadership pathway, not just at senior level, with the capacity to deliver a menu of leadership development programmes, within a framework of standards set nationally. Such a model would ensure greater equality and higher quality in the consequent menu of professional development activities than either national or local authorities could provide.

Daniel Murphy

45

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

6. Contextual Note on Educational Leadership Development


This section provides more detailed background on the context of leadership development in Scotland. Over the past 20-30 years, the study and practice of school leadership has become an important academic, professional and educational policy concern. This is reflected in a burgeoning academic literature, with more and more leadership journals and new conceptualisations of leadership, as the leadership superstars, from Fullan in Canada to Cardno in New Zealand, vie for international status and book sales in both the academic league table and the commercial market place. The OECDs interest in this area of professional practice reflects the policy concerns of government members (OECD 2009). The quality of school leadership makes a difference to childrens experience, consequently governments have paid increasing attention to this area of policy. Some governments believed that the introduction of market disciplines into public service would improve quality. The practices of the resultant new managerialism, which swept much of the English speaking world in the 1980s and 1990s were, however, often ineffective in improving the educational experience of many school pupils, particularly those already facing social challenges in their young lives (Gronn 2003). The more it is studied, the more complex school leadership seems to be. School leaders in many systems ride a wave of new policy imperatives, changing expectations and changing social norms, while grappling with new understandings of the ethical and political complexity of a job which involves negotiating, building trusting relationships, developing common understandings and constantly striving to improve learning. In Scotland, these developments crystallised in the development of the first Standard for Headship (Scottish Office Education and Industry Dept 1998)6. Previous national efforts to improve the quality of school leadership, such as the Management Training for Headteachers modules (Scottish Office Education Dept. 1990) were based around a model which saw the job of the headteacher as that of a middle manager, who, in essence, just needed more training and skills in order to do a better job. These skills, while essential, were insufficient. The Standard for Headship reconceptualised school leadership as a dynamic interaction of professional values, management functions and professional abilities (intellectual and interpersonal) in order to improve teaching and learning. The programme designed to develop in aspirant school leaders the kinds of insights, qualities, skills and understanding required to meet this demanding standard was the Scottish Qualification for Headship (SQH). It benefitted from the research into professional practice of scholars such as Michael Eraut (Eraut 1999) in conceptualising the relationship between thinking and practice. The learning model was workbased, allowing skills to be practised and develop in real school settings, with substantial interaction with a peer learning community to provide some of the supports to learning recommended by Joyce and Showers (Joyce, Showers 2002). It was developed and delivered in partnership by neighbouring local authorities and Universities, working within a national framework, and balancing intellectual challenges (through engagement with research and best practice models internationally) with developing professional practice in school leadership (through leading a successful school improvement project). An early evaluation concluded that, despite some clunky aspects in its design (Menter et al. 2003):
6

The Standard for Headship was revised in 2005 and this revised version is the one in current use (The Scottish Executive 2005).

Daniel Murphy

46

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

The overall findings of this study are extremely positive and confirm the significance of the programme (p84) As the new millennium progressed, the newly devolved Scottish Government built on these new understandings of leadership development. The SQH, like its English counterpart the National Professional Qualification for Headship (NPQH), had addressed what had been identified as the most urgent area of need in the Labour Party manifesto of 1997. The Teachers Agreement of 2001 (Scottish Executive 2001) recognised the importance of high quality professional development for all teachers: this included leadership development. A framework for developing leadership at all levels. CPD for Educational Leaders (Scottish Executive Education Dept. 2003) was published nationally and many local authorities based their programmes of leadership development around this. The Scottish Executive began to put significant sums of money into teachers development, from the induction phase to headteacher preparation. Under the political leadership of an enthusiastic educationist, Peter Peacock, a quest for excellence became the driving force, best represented in two foundational documents: A Curriculum for Excellence (Scottish Executive Education Dept. 2004), arising from a wide-ranging National Debate on the character of Scottish Education, and Ambitious Excellent Schools (Scottish Executive Education Dept. 2004), setting out a national programme of school improvement. Ambitious Excellent Schools took seriously the need to develop excellent leadership and the agenda for action promised to: establish a leadership academy, by the end of 2005, to give access to world class thinking on school leadership and to allow the sharing of experience of school leaders enhance leadership development opportunities for senior school and local authority staff through programmes such as Columba 1400, beginning in mid-2005 establish a mentoring and coaching programme of peer support for headteachers, senior managers and those with the potential and ambition to take on these roles, beginning in mid2005 (p12) It further planned to: revise the Standard for Headship in 2005 to ensure it continues to reflect shared leadership priorities in education establish new routes to achieve the Standard for Headship, during 2006, to provide choice and alternatives to the Scottish Qualification for Headship recommend new and more rigorous procedures for selecting headteachers to take effect from the end of 2005 (p13) The underpinning philosophy was to develop and liberate the professionalism of key people: The people best placed to make judgements about the learning needs of individual young people are those who work with them most closely. Within a framework of clear national standards and local authority support, teachers and other professionals in schools must have the freedom to exercise their professional judgement to deliver excellent learning and teaching. We will act to give them that freedom. (p14)

Daniel Murphy

47

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

This was a long way from the training offered in 1990. Although not all of the planned programme was followed through7, there was a clear vision of how the public service of education could be improved through developing our teachers and leaders. This view was summarised in the Scottish Government contribution to the OECD review of Improving School Leadership: (Scottish Executive 2007) There is a growing consensus within Scotland about the methods and approaches which contribute to effective educational leadership development. The broad programme aims to promote, support and further develop approaches which contribute to a general strengthening of leadership development such as: collaborative networks which focus on the development of practice, problem solving and shared learning; coaching and mentoring opportunities; opportunities to step back, review, reflect and develop personal leadership practice and learn from practice in other educational systems and in other organisational contexts; formal programmes and frameworks designed to support progression and career development for education professionals; research projects which contribute new learning; seminars, master classes, conference and speaker programmes which provide access to thought leadership and leading practice. (p xi) Despite these developments, all was not rosy in the world of school leadership: recruitment and retention of headteachers continued to be problematic. A major research study to investigate this issue in Scotland, was funded by the Scottish Government and the subsequent report The Recruitment and Retention of Headteachers in Scotland (Macbeath et al. 2009), shone a light into both the excitement and satisfaction, but also some of the less satisfying aspects of the job: While the majority of heads expressed degrees of concern about the loneliness of the job, for others (25 per cent) this was not a concern. The distinguishing factors for this group appear to be sources of collegial support, the satisfaction that comes from productive teamwork and shared leadership as well as confidence in personal abilities. (p6) The research found that the main factor influencing satisfaction with headship was the level of autonomy experienced. Importantly, school and personal demographics, and personal qualifications appear to play no part in headteachers satisfaction with autonomy, which is primarily determined by the interplay of conditions within the control of headteachers, local authorities, and the Scottish Government. Heads experience of autonomy varied with 20 per cent of surveyed heads stating that they experienced considerable autonomy, 45 per cent some autonomy and 33 per cent very little autonomy. Five statistically significant variables predicted satisfaction with autonomy: degree of autonomy; level of support and benefits received; sufficiency of support received; general level of concern about their role; satisfaction with professional development opportunities and support. (p6) Six issues arising out of the research evidence were identified for further consideration: expectations of leaders; promotion of Headteacher autonomy; support for Headteachers; impact of inspections on heads; disincentives to headship; promoting headship routes (p8).

For example the leadership academy never materialised. Many in the Scottish policy community were hesitant about committing a large resource to a place. Scottish budgets could not match the impressive state of the art bricks and mortar of the English National School Leadership College, opened in Nottingham in 2001.

Daniel Murphy

48

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

The tragic death of a much-loved primary headteacher in the Scottish Borders illustrated all too clearly how, despite the many satisfactions and incentives of headship, there were still many tensions and problems in the Scottish system (The Scotsman 2010). Around the same time, the OECD reported into issues of quality and equity in Scottish education (OECD 2007). They found that the Scottish system, while it had many good qualities, continued to struggle with some contemporary challenges. Significant investment had taken place, but Scotland still struggled to address longstanding problems of social inequality. The report reaffirmed the importance of leadership: Scottish schools face a future of rising expectations and a past of inherited inequalities. The kind of citizen that schools are expected to form in the future must be seen against the kind of society within which schools must work. Society sets up high expectations about the well-educated man or woman of the futurefor example, through a Curriculum for Excellencewhile creating environments of very unequal distance from which to pursue the ideal. It is left to schools to resolve the conflict between expectations and reality, between the future and the past. The deeper the conflict, the greater the demand on those qualities of human enterprise, ingenuity, vision and courage that we call leadership. (p27) While leadership at the level of the school continued to be seen as important, there was also increasing recognition of the importance of system leadership, also expressed well by the OECD (Pont, Nusch & Hopkins 2008). As a result, there is a need to redefine and broaden school leaders roles and responsibilities. This means changing the way school leadership is developed and supported. It implies improving incentives to make headship in particular more attractive for existing heads and for those who will be taking up school leadership positions in the future. And it implies strengthening training and development approaches to help leaders face these new roles. One of school leaders new roles is increasingly to work with other schools and other school leaders, collaborating and developing relationships of interdependence and trust. System leaders, as they are being called, care about and work for the success of other schools as well as their own. Crucially they are willing to shoulder system leadership roles because they believe that in order to change the larger system you have to engage with it in a meaningful way. (p9) Over the previous ten years, in addition to in-house corporate programmes, often offered by Human Resources teams, local authority officers in Scotland have had access to the modular leadership and development programmes of the Virtual Staff College. Many local authority education officers have recent experience of working in schools, and in some cases experience of school leadership training programmes. However development paths of school leaders and local authority officers often diverge at later, more senior, stages in their careers. It was in the this context that the Scottish Government asked Graham Donaldson, in November 2009, to conduct a thoroughgoing review into every aspect of teacher development, from selection for training through to successful headship. The outcome of this review was a landmark report, Teaching Scotlands Future (TSF) (Donaldson 2011) which emphasised the importance for the profession of leadership development. Following its publication, the Cabinet Secretary announced that the

Daniel Murphy

49

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Government accepted all 50 recommendations and a National Partnership Group (NPG) was set up, representing sectors and agencies with an interest in teacher development, to make recommendations to the Cabinet Secretary on changes in policy and practice which would put these recommendations into practice. The NPG was due to complete its work in June 2012. Their report will play a significant role in determining future professional learning and leadership development for Scotlands teachers. That next stage is eagerly awaited by the many parties interested in educational leadership development. Moreover, other public services (police, fire, health, local government services) have also been developing leadership concepts and programmes. One of the growing challenges of public service has been to look across services, to get out of your professional silo. The Christie Commission (Campbell 2011) and the Scottish Government Initiative, Collaboration for Outcomes in Public Service (see for example (McGuire 2010)) give some voice to this challenge. Perhaps education services did not have a monopoly on leadership, nor even a monopoly on knowledge and skill in education!! (NHS Scotland). It was in these circumstances that the Strategic Leadership Development Programme (SLDP) was born. Three individuals, each with a slightly different overview of the Scottish scene8, believing that there was an opportunity to get up and do something based around the recommendations of TSF, approached the Scottish Government and secured funding for a pilot programme which would feed into the work of the NPG and subsequent policy discussions, a programme which would experiment with different models of leadership development, building on previous good practice. As one of the steering group put it in interview: we wanted to try a few things and see what takes off.. This report aims to describe what took off and to stimulate discussion on the implications of the pilot for future policy and practice.

Bruce Robertson (Association of Directors of Education in Scotland hereinafter ADES), Margaret Alcorn (National Continuous Professional Development (hereinafter CPD) Team within Education Scotland) and John Christie (Virtual Staff College Scotland hereinafter VSCS)

Daniel Murphy

50

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Appendices:
Appendix 1 Evaluation Methods
I was appointed external evaluator in late January 2012. I adopted a multi-method approach to gathering project data, fitting methods to the timescale and resources available. This included two online surveys (baseline and final), 26 semi-structured interviews, analysis of documentary evidence (project papers, local authority reports on progress and associated working papers), observation and analysis of the website content and usage and scrutiny of conference materials and presentations. The structure of the external evaluation was based on the widely used model outlined by Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (Kirkpatrick, Kirkpatrick 2006). This analyses the impact of training or professional development experiences into four levels: 1. Reaction (satisfaction / enjoyment / participation / quality of experience) did you enjoy the experience? 2. Learning (knowledge, understanding and skills gained / values and attitudes explored) what did you learn? 3. Behaviour (use of relevant skills and knowledge in practice, changes in behaviour in this case, leadership behaviour) did what you learn improve what you do? 4. Results (impact on outcomes at organisational / system level) is what you now do having a positive effect on your results i.e. benefits for those you work with and those you work for? These are not tight precise levels. In the reports provided below, aspects of the programme work across all levels. Surveys, interviews and documentary evidence contributed to all four levels. Questions were based around the aims outlined in the Programme Rationale. Responses were analysed using these categories and data collected is presented in the following section under these four headings. In addition, views were sought, in survey, interview and documentary reports, on next steps. This involved consideration of issues such as: sustainability; dissemination; cost; programme design; the relationship between local and national leadership of teachers professional development. Appropriate ethical standards were applied to the collection and use of evaluation data. These were shared with all participants. The first (baseline) survey was conducted in February 2012 (39/64 respondents, of whom 7/12 sponsors, 11/169 coaches, 11/18 participant headteachers and 10/18 participant education officers). It fulfilled a formative function, as a short report fed into the programme and supported its further development. The second (final) survey was conducted in June 2012 (53 responses out of which 48 were included10 /64 respondents, of which returns came from 10/12 sponsors, 7/16 coaches, 6/18 participant headteachers and 15/18 participant education officers). The high participant and sponsor return rate for the second survey demonstrated their interest in and commitment to the project. The drop-off in coach responses may reflect the varying experiences of coaching. A copy of the June survey and the responses can be found in Appendix 5. In addition, a further 25 individuals took part in semi-structured interviews (sample schedule in Appendix 4) in June 2012: this included all of the
9

Coach appointment, engagement and disengagement was over a period of time which include the survey, so it is difficult to be accurate about exact numbers. 10 4 did not complete substantive questions and one entry was a repeat entry by the same person.

Daniel Murphy

51

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

steering group, the national co-ordinator, a number of coaches and sponsors and ten participants. 12 of the interviews were conducted in three case study local authorities, where all participants and sponsors were interviewed individually. The term case study is possibly misleading as these are not written up as case studies: a key element of the evaluation was guaranteed anonymity for participants. Anonymity was seen as vital to ensure that interviewees and respondents did not have to take account of personal or political factors which might inhibit their response. However the fact that all those involved within these three authorities were interviewed provided a more rounded, validated picture of what was achieved. The comparative analysis of survey responses, interview records and documentary evidence provided useful validating triangulation, supporting the account provided in the next section. Documents studied included: programme documents the programme rationale, the bid for funding to the Scottish Government; conference papers and proceedings; online and offline communications from the co-ordinator to participants, sponsors and coaches; local authority reports of progress and reports on outcomes (blank copies of the relevant forms can be found in Appendix 3) and online materials on the learning community website (personal and local authority learning intentions, tasks and targets and shared documents). In addition, the evaluator took part in and observed some online and some face-to-face programme activity, recording this in field notes.

Daniel Murphy

52

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Appendix 2 Programme Rationale


Strategic leadership development programme: rationale

The Strategic Leadership Development Programme (SDLP) is a collaborative project led by ADES, the Virtual Staff College Scotland, and the National CPD Team. It has been funded by Scottish Government as part of the response to recommendations in the Donaldson report. It is designed to build leadership capacity within schools, learning communities and local authorities and to enable participants to contribute to leadership nationally. The programme offers you as senior officers the opportunity to develop your knowledge, skills and experience in a format that can be adopted, replicated and sustained by local authorities following the pilot phase. It addresses recommendations 48, 49 and 50 of Teaching Scotlands Future and makes a significant contribution to recommendations 1, 3, 15, 33 and 50. Running from November 2011 until June 2012, it will involve the participation of around thirty head teachers and strategic leaders from twelve Scottish local authorities. Each of these local authorities is providing a sponsor from their senior management team. Coaches will be provided for you as participants to help you to complete the programme successfully. The programme will be externally evaluated. Expectations of participants Participants are expected to: listen to a briefing from your local authority leaders highlighting key themes for improvement complete and learn from an emotional intelligence inventory contribute to a learning community with programme colleagues identify, plan and carry out a piece of learning within a learning set which will lead to an improvement in the learning experience of children and young people in Scotland participate in two residential events, one in December 2011 and one in May/June 2012 and any further meetings recommended by participants engage in relevant educational research contribute fully to the online community associated with the programme make arrangements for the outcomes of your learning to be made available locally and, as appropriate, nationally.

Learning model The programme is being undertaken at a very busy time in an academic session which presents a range of unique challenges. We appreciate that this will need to be carefully managed so that it does not impair the service we provide to the children, young people and families in our care. A notional ten days has been allocated by your local authority for your work to be carried out. The learning model includes: personal reflection

Daniel Murphy

53

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

briefings locally and nationally contributions from professionally recognised speakers in response to the needs of participants online learning : eportfolio, webconferencing, online posts action learning sets focused visits to other learning establishments intra-authority and inter-authority collaboration sharing of conclusions locally and nationally

Programme coordination The team coordinating the programme consists of Dan McGinty (programme leader), John Christie (Virtual Staff College), Margaret Alcorn (National CPD Team) and Bruce Robertson (ADES). Programme outcomes By the end of our programme, we expect participants to: complete the emotional intelligence inventory and develop your leadership style in the light of its findings contribute to the developing structure of the programme complete a piece of learning in a learning set which informs strategic thinking in your local authority demonstrate a commitment to promote effective online learning develop strategies to collaborate successfully with local authority colleagues share your outcomes with programme colleagues make your findings available nationally participate in the awards ceremony which will conclude the programme.

By the end of the programme, we expect participating local authorities to: share the outcomes of the programme locally use the research to influence policy be prepared to share the learning model with other interested local authorities

Daniel Murphy

54

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Appendix 3 Local Authorities who took part in the project and the issue which their team worked on
Authority Aberdeen City Aberdeenshire Issue Develop leadership development policy and online framework. Develop a leadership policy framework for Education, Learning and Leisure. Develop an online leadership resource for aspiring and existing leaders at all levels. Explore the relationship between transformational change and transformational leadership in school improvement. Develop learning communities (partner schools) to impact on learning and teaching and pupil outcomes. Find out to engage and involve hardly reached families in nursery and early years settings to improve outcomes for children. Evaluate the outcomes of community campus work through strategic leadership approach. Develop a leadership programme for Childrens Services. Explore how to improve outcomes for children and young people in the Ayr cluster. Making a difference for children and families through more inclusive practice. Develop learning communities across Stirling/Clacks schools based on shared interests and priorities. Develop the capacity of individual schools in line with A teaching profession for the 21st Century.

Argyll and Bute

Dumfries and Galloway

East Lothian

City of Edinburgh

Perth and Kinross

Shetland South Ayrshire

South Lanarkshire

Stirlling and Clackmannanshire West Dunbartonshire

Daniel Murphy

55

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Appendix 4 Reporting Forms Used in the Programme


NATIONAL CPD TEAM

SLDP: Local Authority record of progress


Local Authority Name of sponsor Name of coach Names of participants

Focus/Title of issue being addressed

Summary of issue being addressed

Plan Communication: internal

Daniel Murphy

56

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Communication: with other LAs, networks, partnerships

Evaluation of the process Choose from: initial involvement 6/7 Dec 2011 briefing ESCI LA group activity coaching online activities reporting wider dissemination any other part of the process. In anticipation of the more detailed questionnaire from the external evaluator, comment on two or three aspects from the above which have been valuable and also any which have been more frustrating or unhelpful. Summary of research Note of innovative approaches Summary of online activities Reporting on outcomes and wider dissemination Summary of inclusion in 2012-2013 local authority improvement plan

Daniel Murphy

57

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

LOCAL AUTHORITY REPORT ON OUTCOMES LEARNING BEHAVIOUR / ACTIVITY RESULTS

INDIVIDUAL

AUTHORITY

NATIONAL

Daniel Murphy

58

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Appendix 5 Sample Semi-Structured Interview Schedules


Semi-Structured Interview Schedule (Sponsor): The story: A brief narrative of your involvement in / engagement in the programme why did you want your authority involved? What people did you want to involve and how chosen? meetings, people, events / support for sponsors etc. Level 1 - Reaction: First level response to the programme clarity/organisation/communication (incl. ICT); ups and downs. Engagement with participants? Level 2 - Learning: Perceptions of the learning processes for participants ESCI; coaching; online; events; teamwork. Level 3 Behaviour: Perceptions of changes in leadership behaviours of the participants? How do you know? Evaluation? Level 4 Results: The wicked issue impact of the programme on tackling this? How evaluated? Relationship to EA improvement plan? Impact on your leadership work? Relationship to other aspects of the service schools, childrens services etc.? Relationship to corporate leadership development strategies? Other important results of a new form of leadership development in the work situation impact? How evaluated? Important results at service level Impact of the programme more widely beyond the participants? How evaluated? Capacity? Other: Dissemination? team? local? national? Sustainability? resources (in current climate)? key components? plans? National issues? - framework for leadership? relationship to other leadership development programmes? who would benefit? who should organise and deliver? PDR? accreditation? joined-upness? role of VSCS? GLOW and professional development? National roll-out?

Daniel Murphy

59

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Semi-Structured Interview Schedule (Participant): The story: A brief narrative of your involvement in / engagement in the programme meetings, people, events, reading, tasks etc. Level 1 - Reaction: First level response to the programme clarity/organisation/communication (incl. ICT); ups and downs. How have I evaluated my experience? Level 2 - Learning: Process and product; individual, team and authority learning; capacity development and delivery of the service; ICT; best learning experiences why?; weakest learning experiences why?; challenges and solutions; role of sponsor; role of coach possible different models of coaching reaction; engagement with coaching. Level 3 Behaviour: Perceptions of changes in your leadership behaviours? What? Why? How do you know? Evaluation? Level 4 Results: The wicked issue impact of the programme on tackling this? How evaluated? Relationship to EA improvement plan? Relationship to other aspects of the service schools, childrens services etc.? Relationship to corporate leadership development strategies? Other important results of a new form of leadership development in the work situation impact? How evaluated? Important results at service level Impact of the programme? How evaluated? Other: Dissemination? team? local? national? Sustainability? resources (in current climate)? key components? plans? National issues? - framework for leadership? relationship to other leadership development programmes? who would benefit? who should organise and deliver? PDR? accreditation? joined-upness? role of VSCS? GLOW and professional development? National roll-out?

Daniel Murphy

60

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Appendix 6 Survey Results (February and June 2012)


The February (baseline) survey offered both closed (agreement/disagreement) and open (short comment/essay) opportunities for all programme members to offer their views on their experiences in the programme and on anticipated learning, behavioural changes and results. It also featured one or two issues (such as the closed or open nature of the online learning community or the perceived value of accreditation) on which different views had been expressed. 39 out of a possible 64 replies were received (61%). Inevitably, given how recently the programme has started for some of the teams, there was a strong element of provisionality in these returns. Nonetheless, the results and related brief report were fed back through the learning community site to all members of the programme an contributed to its development. The June questionnaire was based around the February questionnaire. It contained additional questions on next steps, arising from a panel discussion session held at the closing residential. 48 valid returns were received (75% ), with a higher proportion of returns from participants (31/36 in June, 21 in Feb) and sponsors (10/12 in June, 7 in Feb). There was a lower return from coaches (11/16 in Feb, 7 in June). This lower return perhaps reflected the varied experiences of engagement with coaching). The report below gives overall aggregate figures for the June questionnaire. However, it is worth noting the following points with reference to these figures: For participants, the returns suggest, overall, at a 95% confidence level, a confidence interval of 4.62. For coaches and sponsors, and for the group as a whole, confidence intervals are greater. The summary report below gives the aggregate figures for the June questionnaire. Percentages have been calculated for each question by the number of responses to that question, including those who answered not appropriate/not relevant, not according to the number of possible responses or the number of responses of those who considered their answer relevant or appropriate. Although respondents were asked to answer only those questions relevant to their role, and this was further flagged up in role-specific questions, there was some cross-answering of specific questions, reducing the reliability of the overall figures. In some cases, responses to these questions were then discounted from the report; in other cases, where the significance of the issue warranted it, rogue answers were removed and percentages recalculated to allow clear statements to be made about the aggregated views of the relevant group only. Percentages reported in the text above have been recalculated where required by the validity of the statement being made .e.g. 86% of respondents considered it to be..: the 89% is calculated by adding all responses to that question; e.g. 79% of participants reported themselves to be...: only participant responses to the relevant question have been calculated to arrive at this figure of 79%. In such cases, these figures will not appear below, where only aggregate returns are reported. Further detailed analysis, as well a statistical comparison of the February and June returns, was in theory possible for all answers. However this has not been done, as time for analysis was limited. Triangulation with interview responses and documentary and observation evidence provided a degree of reassurance about the conclusions reported in the text of the report. Respondent validation of interview responses was built into the original evaluation design. However time constraints limited this to more limited validation of the quotations used.

Daniel Murphy

61

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Free text answers have been omitted from this appendix.

Summary Report - Jun 30, 2012 Survey: SLDP Final Survey June 2012

1. What is your current role within the programme?

2. How did you come to be involved in this programme?

3. What is your current age?

Daniel Murphy

62

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

4. What is your gender?

5. What is our ethnic group? (categories taken from Scotland's New Ethnicity Classification for 2011 Census) More detailed sub-classifications are available at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/233640/0063967.pdf page 6.

6. Disability

Daniel Murphy

63

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

7. Please tick the answer which most accurately reflects your own feelings at this stage. Not all questions are relevant to all respondents - where a question is aimed at a particular group, this is flagged up in the question. Very Very Not Satisfied NeutralDissatisfied Responses Satisfied Dissatisfied Applicable Organisation of the programme at national level Organisation of the programme within my local authority Arrangements to support me as a participant (e.g time) Arrangements to support me as a sponsor Arrangements to support me as a coach Events held at national level 1: opening conference at Radisson 6/7 Dec. Events held at national level 2: coaches day on 24 Jan 14.9% 7 30.4% 14 14.0% 6 6.9% 2 6.3% 2 15.9% 7 2.9% 1 61.7% 17.0% 29 8 56.5% 10.9% 26 5 37.2% 20.9% 16 9 10.3% 10.3% 3 3 9.4% 3 6.3% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 6.9% 2 6.3% 2 6.8% 3 0.0% 0 2.2% 1 2.3% 1 4.4% 2 4.9% 2 7.0% 3 8.6% 3 13.9% 5 2.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.4% 1 6.4% 3 17.8% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.8% 6 13.3% 6 2.1% 1 2.2% 1 20.9% 9 65.5% 19 71.9% 23 18.2% 8 70.6% 24 15.6% 7 18.2% 8 20.0% 9 24.4% 10 9.3% 4 60.0% 21 66.7% 24 73.5% 25 54.1% 20 23.8% 10 26.2% 11 26.2% 11 0.0% 0 2.2% 1 47 46 43 29 32 44 34 45 44 45 41 43 35 36 34 37 42 42 42 47 45

45.5% 13.6% 20 6 20.6% 7 24.4% 11 40.9% 18 17.8% 8 5.9% 2 2.2% 1 9.1% 4 2.2% 1

Events held at national level 3: final conference at 55.6% Norton House 22/23 May 25 Events held within my local authority Productive working relationships as a participant with my 'learning group' Productive working relationships as a participant with my local authority sponsor Productive working relationships as a participant with colleagues in other local authorities My experience as a participant of coaching support to my local authority team My experience as a participant of 1:1 coaching 'online' model My experience as a participant of the 'Shetland model' of online coaching My experience of as a participant of action learning sets - face to face model The value to my personal development of the Emotional Intelligence Inventory (ESCI 360 tool) Feedback given in the 360 process The use and value of the personal learning plan I developed from the ESCI feedback Access to GLOW The quality and structure of the GLOW site 29.5% 13 55.6% 25 34.1% 14 20.9% 9 8.6% 3 8.3% 3 11.8% 4 16.2% 6 47.6% 20 54.8% 23 38.1% 16 14.9% 7 6.7% 3

24.4% 12.2% 10 5 32.6% 30.2% 14 13 14.3% 5 8.3% 3 5.9% 2 8.6% 3 2.8% 1 5.9% 2

18.9% 10.8% 7 4 26.2% 11 19.0% 8 23.8% 10 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 9.5% 4

36.2% 29.8% 17 14 37.8% 22.2% 17 10

Daniel Murphy

64

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

The support to my learning as a participant provided by access to and use of the online facilities The support to me as a sponsor provided by access to and use of the online facilities The support to me as a coach provided by access to and use of the online facilities

2.2% 1 3.2% 1 5.9% 2

33.3% 24.4% 15 11 3.2% 1 5.9% 2 41.5% 17 51.1% 23 6.5% 2 11.8% 4 7.3% 3 2.2% 1

11.1% 5 9.7% 3 0.0% 0 4.9% 2 4.4% 2 4.5% 2 2.4% 1 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 9.3% 4 8.6% 3 4.4% 2

2.2% 1 6.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0

26.7% 12 71.0% 22 76.5% 26 7.3% 3 4.4% 2 9.1% 4 7.1% 3 7.0% 3 7.1% 3 25.6% 11 30.2% 13 77.1% 27 0.0% 0

45

31 34 41 45 44 42 43 42 43 43

The work based learning aspect of the programme 39.0% ('real work problems') 16 The value given to collaborative as well as individual learning The absence of formal assessment / accreditation Progress in tackling the 'wicked issue' My participation in identifying the 'wicked issue' and related task The significance of the chosen issue for the educational strategy of my local authority Progress as a participant in meeting my priorities for my own development Assistance to me as a participant in addressing work-life balance issues My experience as a coach to an authority team of the coaching model (assignment to a different authority, blended communication, pairing of coaches) My overall judgement on the programme 37.8% 17 18.2% 8 26.2% 11 39.5% 17 73.8% 31 20.9% 9 4.7% 2 2.9% 1 22.2% 10

25.0% 40.9% 11 18 50.0% 14.3% 21 6 41.9% 18 16.7% 7 41.9% 18 9.3% 4 2.4% 1 9.3% 4

23.3% 32.6% 10 14 5.7% 2 5.7% 2

35

48.9% 24.4% 22 11

45

Questions 8 and 9 invited free text responses on 2 particularly positive and 2 less positive aspects of the experience. 10. Your learning needs (only participants should answer this section): Listed below are 15 areas of professional learning targetted by the project. Rank these according to what you consider to have been the most valuable areas for you in terms of your own learning. 1 = the area where you feel you were able to make the most progress / experience the greatest learning benefit and 15 = the area where you feel you were able to make the least progress / experience the least learning benefit. You should not rank any experiences you did not have (e.g. Shetland coaching) Total 1 Score 324 292 275 263 259 226 Overall Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6

Item Using the Emotional Intelligence Inventory (ESCI 360 tool) to plan improvement in the application of my interpersonal skills and abilities Refreshing and developing further my leadership skills Participating within a variety of networks within my local authority Developing my capacity to participate in strategic system leadership in partnership with other local authority colleagues Developing my understanding of leadership Developing a better understanding of the leadership challenges facing colleagues

Daniel Murphy

65

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Item Engaging with and learning from research Using ICT to facilitate my learning Reporting on project outcomes at national level Participating within a variety of networks beyond my local authority Experience of coaching support for my local authority team Experience of coaching support through involvement in a face to face action learning set Participating in focused visits, with a learning intention, to other educational learning establishments Experience of coaching support through the online 'Shetland' model Experience of coaching support through online 1:1 model
1

Total 1 Score 217 199 186 165 157 150 131 75 73

Overall Rank 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Total Respondents: Score is a weighted calculation. Items ranked first are valued higher than the following ranks, the score is the sum of all weighted rank counts.

11. With reference to the previous question, use this space to add any additional area(s) or issues(s) or comment free text amswers.

12. Benefits for the authority (all respondents should answer this question). Listed below are the 6 benefits in leadership development and leadership capacity which the project aimed to deliver for those local authorities taking part. Please place these in order from 1 - 6, where 1 = the area you believe to have been of greatest benefit to your authority and 6 = the area you believe to have been of least benefit. Total 1 Score 192 155 140 139 118 65 Overall Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6

Item Enhance collective strategic leadership capacity through a working partnership of headteachers and local authority staff Improve outcomes for young people through improved strategic leadership practice Trial a model of effective sustainable work based learning for leadership Contribute to strategic policy making by addressing a 'wicked issue' Enhance collective strategic leadership capacity by networking with other local authorities Enhance the capacity of the authority to use ICT to facilitate and support learning
1

Total Respondents: Score is a weighted calculation. Items ranked first are valued higher than the following ranks, the score is the sum of all weighted rank counts.

13. You do not need to answer this question but may chose to do so. With reference to the previous question, use this space to identify another area/issue or add any additional comment (no more than 150 characters) free text answers.

Daniel Murphy

66

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

14. Benefit to Scottish Education (all respondents should answer this question): Listed below are 9 of the benefits in leadership development and capacity which the programme might deliver for Scottish educational system. Please place these in order from 1 - 9, where 1 = the area you consider to have delivered the greatest benefit to the national system and 9 = the area which you believe has been of least benefit or where there has been least progress. Total Overall 1 Score Rank 273 242 1 2

Item Development of a sustainable model which will contribute to the ongoing development of experienced and capable serving headteachers (Donaldson recommendation 48) Trialling of a scheme whereby high-performing headteachers can contribute to system-level leadership (Donaldson recommendation 49) Trialling of forms of professional development which involve 'team based approaches which centre around self evaluation and professional collaboration, and achieve an appropriate blend of tailored individual development and school improvement' (Donaldson recommendation 33) Development of an infrastructure which allows 'closer working across schools, authorities .. and national organisations' (Donaldson recommendation 3) A clear, progressive educational leadership pathway should be developed (Donaldson recommendation 46) Synthesis of some recent effective developments (work-based learning, coaching ethos, learning rounds, virtual learning environments) into a coherent leadership development programme Development of an infrastructure which allows 'new and strengthened models of partnership' which 'involve shared responsibility for key areas of teacher development' (Donaldson recommendation 15) Development of networks for sharing and support across the country Development and trial of elements of a 'virtual' environment to support leadership development (Donaldson recommendation 50)
1

223

207 190 173 172 160 122

4 5 6 7 8 9

Total Respondents: Score is a weighted calculation. Items ranked first are valued higher than the following ranks, the score is the sum of all weighted rank counts.

15. You do not need to answer this question but may chose to do so. With reference to the previous question, use this space to identify another area/issue or add any additional comment (no more than 150 characters). - free text answers. 16. Listed below are changes in the leadership behaviours of participants which might have been noticed by you, your line manager, your peers, your 'reports' or an informed observer such as a 'coach'. You are asked to report on these changes. The first two changes refer to your individual leadership behaviour, the other four to collaborative leadership. No noticeable change Improvements in the application of interpersonal skills in leadership contexts Use of greater knowledge and understanding of leadership challenges to inform leadership practice Developing a strong and supportive coaching ethos within your work area/team Improvements in collaborative leadership with colleagues within the local authority Improvements in collaborative leadership with colleagues across other local authorities More effective participation in virtual networking to support leadership development 31.7% 13 9.5% 4 9.3% 4 9.5% 4 20.0% 8 34.1% 14 Possible change 24.4% 10 28.6% 12 30.2% 13 11.9% 5 37.5% 15 36.6% 15 Some change 34.1% 14 45.2% 19 51.2% 22 31.0% 13 37.5% 15 26.8% 11 Significant development 9.8% 4 16.7% 7 9.3% 4 47.6% 20 5.0% 2 2.4% 1

Responses 41 42 43 42 40 41

Daniel Murphy

67

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

17. You do not need to answer this question but may choose to do so. With reference to the previous question, use this space to identify area(s) of behaviour change or add any additional comment (no more than 100 characters) free text answers. 18. Listed below are some possible ways in which changes in leadership behaviours may have been evidenced / observed / evaluated / recorded. You should identify those which you have used. Not Used only a Used and Most useful / Responses used little relevant relevant Your own observations of yourself Collection of evidence of behaviour change by participant Focused observation of behaviour change by line manager, contributing to participant's Professional Development and Review Focused observation of behaviour change and feedback from your peers / your work team; Focused observation and feedback through coaching Focused observation and feedback of behaviour change from those directly involved in your 'learning group' Repeat Emotional Intelligence Inventory (ESCI 360 tool) or similar 7.9% 3 31.3% 10 54.3% 19 42.4% 14 35.1% 13 43.8% 14 67.6% 23 18.4% 7 21.9% 7 28.6% 10 18.2% 6 27.0% 10 21.9% 7 0.0% 0 57.9% 22 40.6% 13 17.1% 6 36.4% 12 27.0% 10 31.3% 10 11.8% 4 15.8% 6 6.3% 2 0.0% 0 3.0% 1 10.8% 4 3.1% 1 20.6% 7 38 32

35

33 37 32 34

19. You do not need to answer this question but may chose to do so. With reference to previous question, use this space to identify other possible ways to evidence behaviour change or add any additional comment (no more than 100 characters) free text answers. 20. Results for young people / school pupils. For each of the possible results listed below, click on any of the buttons according to your judgement of whether such results are (a) already in evidence (even if to only a limited extent) (b) not yet in evidence (but contained in your planning for next session) or (c) not applicable / relevant in your setting. (a) already in evidence (b) not yet in evidence (but (c) not applicable / (even if to only a contained in your planning relevant in your Responses limited extent) for next session) setting. Improvements in pupils' development of the four capacities Higher levels of pupil attainment Higher levels of pupil achievement Higher levels of pupil attendance Greater variety and relevance in learning choices for pupils, based on more successful partnerships Reduction in the number of disciplinary incidents Improving partnerships to deliver more appropriate and supportive pathways for progression 22.0% 9 10.0% 4 9.5% 4 7.9% 3 0.0% 0 2.8% 1 28.2% 11 46.3% 19 60.0% 24 64.3% 27 42.1% 16 55.3% 21 16.7% 6 51.3% 20 31.7% 13 30.0% 12 26.2% 11 50.0% 19 44.7% 17 80.6% 29 20.5% 8 41 40 42 38

38

36

39

Daniel Murphy

68

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

21. How important, as indicators of the success of this programme, do you consider the possible result areas listed in the question above? Not important at all Improvements in pupils' development of the four capacities Higher levels of pupil attainment Higher levels of pupil achievement Higher levels of pupil attendance Greater variety and relevance in learning choices for pupils, based on more successful partnerships Reduction in the number of disciplinary incidents Improving partnerships to deliver more appropriate and supportive pathways for progression 2.5% 1 5.0% 2 2.6% 1 8.3% 3 7.7% 3 16.2% 6 2.5% 1 Only a little important 7.5% 3 7.5% 3 5.3% 2 11.1% 4 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 7.5% 3 Very Responses important 55.0% 22 52.5% 21 60.5% 23 47.2% 17 64.1% 25 37.8% 14 72.5% 29 40 40 38 36 39 37 40

Important 35.0% 14 35.0% 14 31.6% 12 33.3% 12 28.2% 11 40.5% 15 17.5% 7

22. Results for capacity building / collaboration. For each of the possible results listed below, click on any of the buttons according to your judgement of whether such results are (a) already in evidence (even if to only a limited extent) (b) not yet in evidence (but contained in your planning for next session) or (c) not applicable/ relevant in your setting. (a) already in evidence (b) not yet in evidence (but (even if to only a contained in your planning limited extent) for next session) Stronger collaborations and networks of support Improved leadership behaviours in other staff who work alongside the participant Increased levels of participation in leadership development within the school/system 81.4% 35 30.0% 12 53.7% 22 16.3% 7 57.5% 23 36.6% 15 (c) not applicable/ relevant in your Responses setting. 2.3% 1 12.5% 5 9.8% 4 43

40

41

23. How important, as indicators of the success of this programme, do you consider the possible result areas listed in the question above? Not at all important Stronger collaborations and networks of support Improved leadership behaviours in other staff who work alongside the participant Increased levels of participation in leadership development within the school/system 2.4% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% 1 Only a little important 0.0% 0 2.4% 1 2.4% 1 Very Responses important 69.0% 29 57.1% 24 75.6% 31 42 42 41

Important 28.6% 12 38.1% 16 19.5% 8

Daniel Murphy

69

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

24. Results of improved leadership behaviours for other staff colleagues For each of the possible results listed below, click on any of the buttons according to your judgement of whether such results are (a) already in evidence (even if to only a limited extent) (b) not yet in evidence (but contained in your planning for next session) or (c) not applicable/ relevant in your setting.

(a) already in (b) not yet in evidence (but (c) not applicable/ evidence (even if to contained in your planning relevant in your Responses only a limited extent) for next session) setting. Improvements in the capacity of participant to influence, support and challenge those working in schools Improvements in teaching staff performance Improvements in support staff performance Briefings to other staff outwith the programme on the content / product of the work done ('wicked issue') Briefings to other staff outwith the programme on the process of team/leadership development Improvements in my delegation skills / my development of leadership in others 66.7% 26 17.9% 7 10.8% 4 52.5% 21 32.5% 13 63.2% 24 20.5% 8 56.4% 22 64.9% 24 40.0% 16 62.5% 25 18.4% 7 12.8% 5 25.6% 10 24.3% 9 7.5% 3 5.0% 2 18.4% 7 39

39 37

40

40

38

25. How important, as indicators of the success of this programme, do you consider the possible result areas listed in the question above? Not important Only a little Very Important Responses at all important important Improvements in the capacity of participant to influence, support and challenge those working in schools Improvements in teaching staff performance Improvements in support staff performance Briefings to other staff outwith the programme on the content / product of the work done ('wicked issue') Briefings to other staff outwith the programme on the process of team/leadership development Improvements in my delegation skills / my development of leadership in others 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 4.9% 2 9.8% 4 7.7% 3 22.0% 9 31.7% 13 45.0% 18 56.1% 23 43.9% 18 25.6% 10 78.0% 32 65.9% 27 55.0% 22 39.0% 16 46.3% 19 66.7% 26 41 41 40 41 41 39

26. Results in satisfaction levels of 'clients': For each of the possible results listed below, click on any of the buttons according to your judgement of whether such results are (a) already in evidence (even if to only a limited extent) (b) not yet in evidence (but contained in your planning for next session) or (c) not applicable/ relevant in your setting. (a) already in (b) not yet in evidence (c) not applicable/ evidence (even if to (but contained in your relevant in your Responses only a limited planning for next session) setting extent)

Daniel Murphy

70

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Reduction in the number of complaints Higher levels of satisfaction with school/authority priorities for change and improvement among relevant staff, parents and pupils

12.2% 5 24.4% 10

39.0% 16 61.0% 25

48.8% 20 14.6% 6

41

41

27. How important, as indicators of the success of this programme, do you consider the possible result areas listed in the question above? Not Only a little Very important at Important Responses important important all Reduction in the number of complaints Higher levels of satisfaction with school/authority priorities for change and improvement among relevant staff, parents and pupils 20.5% 8 0.0% 0 20.5% 8 0.0% 0 41.0% 16 40.5% 17 17.9% 7 59.5% 25 39

42

28. Please list below (bullet points) any other ways in which you believe likely and/or important improvements in results might be evidenced free text answers. 29. Arising from discussion within the programme (e.g. at Norton House), the following factors (among others) were identified as important, if the successes of the programme are to be taken forward. Please rate those listed below on the three point scale provided from 'vital' (i.e it will be impossible to build on this programme if this factor is not in place) through 'desirable' (ie. it will be easier/better if this factor is in place, but we can manage without it) to 'not required' (i.e. we can take this forward quite successfully even if this factor is not in place). Not Responses required 9.3% 4 7.0% 3 16.2% 6 2.3% 1 53.5% 23 21.4% 9 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 11.9% 5 43 43 37 43 43 42 43 43 43 42

Vital Desirable Programme should be run across a number of local authorities and cannot be done 44.2% within one authority 19 Leadership and co-ordination of the programme by an agent or agency operating at 48.8% national level 21 Leadership and co-ordination of the programme by local authority(ies) 45.9% 17 46.5% 20 44.2% 19 37.8% 14 30.2% 13 41.9% 18 45.2% 19 44.2% 19 34.9% 15 37.2% 16 38.1% 16

Ensuring participants are accountable through normal reporting within their local 67.4% authority 29 Ensuring participants are accountable through accreditation requirements (e.g. final assessed report to accrediting body) Accountability of local authorities through reporting nationally Evaluation of gains made in personal learning Evaluation of gains made in capacity building Evaluation of gains made in service delivery Funding commitments from participating local authorities 4.7% 2 33.3% 14 53.5% 23 65.1% 28 62.8% 27 50.0% 21

Daniel Murphy

71

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Effective national administration and communication Access nationally for individuals who wish to participate in the programme Face to face, work-based and online activity all required blended learning High stakes strategic work-based task as a programme requirement Team-based development activities Teams which include both headteachers and other senior local authority staff Coaches to support participants Time and development for a 'pool' of coaches within each local authority Time and development for a 'pool' of coaches available nationally Programme to last at least one full academic session Suitable ICT infrastructure (e.g. GLOW) to host the 'learning community' Programme must fit into a more coherent map of leadership development pathways nationally ESCI or equivalent to set up personal learning planning

65.1% 28 40.5% 17 68.2% 30 65.1% 28 55.8% 24 63.6% 28 31.8% 14 26.2% 11 25.6% 11 45.5% 20 46.5% 20 69.0% 29 67.4% 29

32.6% 14 54.8% 23 29.5% 13 30.2% 13 39.5% 17 34.1% 15 56.8% 25 50.0% 21 60.5% 26 50.0% 22 48.8% 21 28.6% 12 30.2% 13

2.3% 1 4.8% 2 2.3% 1 4.7% 2 4.7% 2 2.3% 1 11.4% 5 23.8% 10 14.0% 6 4.5% 2 4.7% 2 2.4% 1 2.3% 1

43 42 44 43 43 44 44 42 43 44 43 42 43

30. A decision was made to keep the GLOW site 'closed' - only accessible to those on the programme. Please select the statement that most closely accords with your view now, in the light of your experience of using the site. 31. Complete this sentence: Participants: 'In my own personal development, I aim to build on this experience in sustainable way by .... Coaches: 'In my coaching role, I aim to build on this experience in sustainable way by .... Sponsors: 'As a local authority officer, I aim to build on this programme in a sustainable way by.... - free text answers. 32. Complete this sentence: 'I would like my authority to build on this experience in sustainable way by .... free text answers 33. Complete this sentence: 'National agencies should build on this experience in sustainable way by ....- free text answers 34. Please use this space to make any additional comments on the evaluation of this project which are not covered above free text answers.

Daniel Murphy

72

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Appendix 7 Website hits by date and category


Glow group hits (with ranking in the list of the 1,746 national groups) April to June 1824 (12th) Mar 1565 (10th) Feb 8427 (4th) Jan 4105 (9th) Dec 6158 (5th) Nov 2394 (16th) Watch again hits: The Donaldson Meeting Room (2560) The Fullan Meeting Room (2962) The Elmore Meeting Room (2964) The Hopkins Meeting Room (2963) SLDP Meet Day 1 6/12/11 SLDP Meet (2560)_12 SLDP D&G Group (2785) SLDP update 060212 SLDP Trial - 20 April 2012 (4626) SLDP Conference - Sponsors Session - 6.12.11 SLDP 7.12.11 - Emotional Intelligence SLDP Meet - 7.12.11 Final Session SLDP 7.12.11 Emotional Intelligence Part 2 SLDP Meet 7.12.11 - Glow Site new front page for sldp community

224 213 93 130 19 14 14 13 11 11 11 7 5 4 3

Daniel Murphy

73

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Appendix 8 Bibliography
Campbell, A. 2011, Financial Scrutiny Unit Briefing: The Commission on the Future Delivery of Public Services (the 'Christie Commission'), The Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh. Donaldson, G. 2011, Teaching Scotland's Future, Scottish Government, Edinburgh. Eraut, M. 1999, "Headteachers' Knowledge, Practice and Mode of Cognition" in Educational management: redefining theory policy and practice., ed. T. Bush, Paul Chapman, London, pp. 114-126. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. & Hay Group Inc. , The Emotional and Social Competence Inventory [Homepage of Hay Group], [Online]. Available: http://www.haygroup.com/leadershipandtalentondemand/ourproducts/item_details.aspx?itemid =58&type=1 [2012, 07/04]. Granville, S. 2006, Evaluation of Heads Together Pilot Project, George Street Research, Edinburgh. Grint, K. 2008, "Wicked Problems and Clumsy Solutions", Clinical Leader, vol. 1, no. 2. Gronn, P. 2003, The New Work of Educational Leaders, Paul Chapman Publishing, London. Johnson, D. 1994, Cooperative Learning in the Classroom, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA. Joyce, B. & Showers, B. 2002, Student Achievement through Staff Development, ASCD, Alexandria, VA. Kirkpatrick, D.L. & Kirkpatrick, J.D. 2006, Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels, 3rd edn, Berrett Koehler, San Francisco. Macbeath, J., Gronn, P., Opfer, D., Lowden, K. & Forde, C. 2009, The Recruitment and Retention of Headteachers in Scotland, Scottish Government Social Research, Edinburgh. McGuire, A. 2010, Briefing Paper 6: Achieving Outcomes through Collaborative Gain, The Scottish Government Centre for Regeneration, Glasgow. Menter, I., Holligan, C., Mthenjwa, V. & Hair, M. 2003, Evaluation of the Scottish Qualification for Headship, University of Paisley, Paisley. NHS Scotland [Homepage of NHS Scotland], [Online]. Available: http://www.mts.scot.nhs.uk/ [2012, 07/04]. OECD 2009, Improving School Leadership: The Toolkit, OECD. OECD 2007, Quality and Equity of Schooling in Scotland, OECD, Paris. Pont, B., Nusch, D. & Hopkins, D. 2008, Improving School Leadership Vol 2: Case Studies on System Leadership, OECD. Scottish Executive 2007, Improving School Leadership Background Report for OECD: Scotland , Scottish Executive. Scottish Executive 2005, The Standard for Headship in Scotland. Scottish Executive 2003, The Scottish Qualification for Headship. Available: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/11/18433/28417 [2012, 07.25]. Scottish Executive 2001, A Teaching Profession for the 21st Century.

Daniel Murphy

74

Strategic Leaders Development Programme

External Evaluation

Scottish Executive Education Dept. 2004, Ambitious Excellent Schools: Our Agenda for Action, Scottish Executive, Edinburgh. Scottish Executive Education Dept. 2004, A Curriculum for Excellence, Scottish Executive Education Dept., Edinburgh. Scottish Executive Education Dept. 2003, Continuing Professional Development for Educational Leaders, Scottish Executive Education Dept., Edinburgh. Scottish Office Education and Industry Dept 1998, The Standard for Headship in Scotland, SQH Development Unit, Stirling. Scottish Office Education Dept. 1990, Management Training for Headteachers, Scottish Office Education Dept., Edinburgh. Teachers Agreement Communication Team 2004, Briefing Paper: School Leadership and Collegiality, Scottish Government / COSLA, Edinburgh. The Scotsman 2010, Sheriff finds headteacher Irene Hogg's suicide linked to school inspection.

Daniel Murphy

75

You might also like