100370428

Leading Teaching, Improving Learning and Global Education Reform

(EDUE7043B)

Student ID
100370428

MA Education & International Development

School of International Development (DEV)

18 May 2022
2,991 words

1
 100370428

Carol's Leadership of Pedagogical Change

Case Study: Written Assignment

I. Introduction

This assignment discusses the leadership of Carol's guiding pedagogical change in her
educational institution. This study is driven by the question of how effective Carol's leadership is
through the analysis of her approaches while implementing pedagogical changes. Teachers come
to Carol to report what she labels as "problems of practice" or teaching techniques difficulties to
be addressed by her leadership. Based on the case study, Carol uses the "Teaching as Inquiry"
(TAI) model and the "Talk About Change knowledge" (TACK) method as strategies to lead the
pedagogical changes and to communicate throughout the process of inquiry effectively. As a result
of her leadership approaches, teachers feel comfortable discussing their practices and any problems
they may be dealing with. At the same time, they take ownership of the changes needed and work
toward the learning outcomes goals through the inquiry model guided by Carol. However, this
case study highlighted potential drawbacks Carol's leadership did not consider, which may
challenge her while leading pedagogical change. To begin, Carol paid no attention to assessing
teachers' level of knowledge and skills while implementing the TAI model for a specific change.
Consequently, teachers may experience limitations, delays, resistance to change or
misinterpretation of Carol’s suggestions or ideas. In addition, another weakness found in her
approach is the weak way she motivates teachers before and during the changes since it relies only
on positivity, which over time fades. O’Connell (2009) suggests that the ability to develop results
for students further depends on an all-encompassing arrangement that connects, engages, and
considers the students' and teachers' perspectives. With this background, in this assignment, I will
discuss in the first section the meaning of pedagogy and leadership to understand Carol’s position
and what it represents in the structure of the school. The second section will evaluate the process
of the TAI model, whose main purpose is to support with evidence the desitions-making process
for changes in pedagogy through a process of inquiry (Aitken & Sinnema, 2008). In addition, I
will examine the TACK method as a communication tool Carol used alongside the TAI model to
empower and support teachers in making changes more effective. The third section will then point

2
 100370428

out some potential challenges Carol as a leader may face while carrying out her responsibilities,
such as teachers’ motivation, teachers’ professional learning and teachers’ resistance to change,
all of which affect the pedagogical change process in some way. I will detail recommendations for
Carol's leadership to address the challenges in the same section. Therefore, I would argue that
Carol needs to pay close attention and consider the teachers' capacity and skills before
implementing any pedagogical changes since it has been demonstrated that educational leaders
who encourage and participate in professional teacher learning have the greatest impact on the
outcome of the students (Robinson, Hohepa & Lloyds, 2009).

II. Pedagogical Leadership

Before exploring the role of Carol as a Pedagogy Leader, I would first discuss the meaning
of leadership and pedagogy and their significance inside the education system. Mintzberg (2004)
nicely defines leadership as empowering people to make better decisions and achieve greater goals
by making more connections, engagement and less control. Similarly, Michael Fullan (1982)
describes leadership as turning intentions into actions. The role of education leadership has a
worldwide acknowledgement as a key element for school improvement (OECD, 2009). OECD
also found that when essential leadership performances are missing or ineffective at any level
within the school, learners do not appear to be adequately supported by the educators
(Harris,1998). As a result of this evidence, many new leadership initiatives and programmes have
been established by education systems worldwide to build a strong leadership body to support this
task (Barber et al., 2010). On the other hand, pedagogy is defined as the educational approaches
and procedures that facilitate learning. It refers to the interaction process between the educator and
the student and the involvement of the learning environment (Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2002).
Therefore, pedagogy is not just another word for education; it encompasses content, transmission,
learning, goals, and a significant amount of helping, engaging, and caring for others (Hamilton,
1999).
After clarifying these concepts, I will now consider the notion of pedagogical leadership
and how it relates to the functions Carol is expected to develop in this position. Pedagogical
leadership is an approach that goes beyond the teacher-student relationship and leverages parental
and local community involvement such as values, culture, economy, and social realities to

3
 100370428

recognise the needs of the student within the environment to construct knowledge (Male &
Palaiologou, 2015) jointly. As the middle leader within the school, Carol is responsible for
promoting active participation among the teaching staff toward achieving students' outcomes and
school goals. This integration allows teachers to feel confident to correct their shortfalls and
implement the changes needed (Fullan, 2014). The goal of Carol's role is to foster a collaborative
culture that will then improve the teaching and learning process by cultivating trust and effective
relationships in the educational environment. With this background, it is evident that teaching and
learning occur not only in isolation between teacher-students in the classroom but also in a
collaborative process among leaders, teachers, learners, and other community members, all
partners working towards constructing the knowledge (Palaiologou, 2011).

III. How does Carol lead a pedagogical change?

To discuss Carol's implementation of pedagogy changes in her department, I will refer to

the "Teaching as Inquiry (TAI)" model created by Aitken & Sinnema, 2008, implemented in New
Zealand Curriculum (NZC), shown in Figure 1 below. Teaching as inquiry method is promoted in
the revised (NZC) as an important aspect of effective pedagogy (Minister of Education, 2007). As
evidenced by this curriculum, one of the distinguishing features of New Zealand education has
been the promotion of inquiry as fundamental to effective professional teaching practices (ibid.).
To begin unpacking what this is all about and how this looks like on Carol's function, I will cite
Timperley's (2010) definition of inquiry in the school setting as "a process in which those included
examine what is functioning correctly for student learning and accomplishment and why, so it
tends to be changed, and what is not functioning correctly and why, so it can be changed". This
basic idea was developed by a group of researchers who came up with the Teaching as Inquiry
model as a structured process for principals, school leaders and educators to implement during the
teaching-learning experience, professional development and in study hall, whose ultimate purpose
is to improve classroom practices and experiences through a questioning process (Aitken &
Sinnema, 2008).
For instance, Carol, as head of her department, used this model of inquiry to investigate
the pedagogical problems teachers identified during the teaching exercise so that she could help

4
 100370428

them through the path of change based on the inquiry model. Figure 1 depicts the cyclical elements
upon which this model was developed:

Figure 1: The NZC Teaching as Inquiry Model

Source: Ministry, 2007

As presented in Figure 1, the model cycle first begins with the Focusing Inquiry phase,
which identifies where the students are and the outcomes they need to achieve. After that, inquiries
about what students require to learn closely to accomplish the results are needed to be asked by
Carol. The cycle then moves on to the Teaching Inquiry phase: is where the teaching methodology
that will support students to accomplish the results previously discussed is selected. Followed by
inquiries about the effects of current methodologies and whether others might be more successful.
As a result of such findings between students' needs and adequate teaching techniques, the third
phase is where the theory becomes practical, and the new learning experiences are provided for
students in the classroom. Finally, the last phase is the Learning Inquiry: in which learners'
progress is monitored and evaluated closely. After exploring the outcomes acquired, Carol
inquired about the following stages to pursue progress in students' accomplishments and teachers'
practice. It is essential to emphasise that the school leadership is the primary driver of the inquiry
model (Timperley, 2010). Carol's position is, therefore, vital to lead pedagogical changes in the
school structure as her approach purpose is to promote an inquiry culture, as well as support once
the problem is identified during all cycles until the pedagogy change is effectively in place.

5
 100370428

Carol supplemented the Teaching as Inquiry approach with Deidre Le Fevre's method
called "Talk about change knowledge (TACK)" as a leadership tool for her to communicate
changes in the department. Always and in any context, talking about change is a critical role for
leaders, professional developers and teachers engaged in change processes (Timperley, 2010).
Carol, for instance, believes that by communicating explicitly about why the change is being made
and why it is being prioritised over all other changes, teachers, as a result, will be more likely to
take ownership of it and feel empowered to change. Therefore, the TACK method is a systematic
approach that changes the route used before talking about a specific situation, whose primary
function is paving the way for building a trusting environment and having meaningful
conversations about difficult issues necessary for the Teaching as Inquiry method be effective.
This method suggested strategies for talking about changes in the scholarly community: First,
Identifying priorities as the starting point for talking about a change. It is necessary to prioritise
what specific changes to make, as everyone involved must keep it in mind while performing their
duties. Once these priorities are identified, setting directors for change initiatives can easily occur
as everyone is on the same page (Robinson, Lloyd and Rowe, 2008). The second category in the
TACK method is Holding high expectations: It is critical for a chance to be effective to have clear
and realistic expectations of teachers to change and adapt (Good, 1987). Changes can be
challenged; therefore, an inclusive and ongoing communication about expected changes to
classroom practice is a task that leaders must do, as Carol is doing in this case study.

IV. Possible Challenges of a Pedagogical Change

There are undoubtedly variables that influence the effectiveness of a change programme
during its implementation (Fullan, 2007). Therefore, having evaluated Carol's approaches to
leading pedagogical changes in her department, I will present some challenges she might encounter
during her pedagogical leadership and propose recommendations to address them.

Teachers' Professional Learning

Carol's inquiry approach does not consider the teachers' theoretical knowledge and skills
in identifying, implementing or evaluating the pedagogical change. Here, I highlight the
importance of acknowledging the significant difference between teachers knowing why and

6
 100370428

knowing how (Schon, 1983). Therefore, teachers' level of theoretical understanding and expertise
plays a critical role throughout the teaching as an inquiry cycle. To be more precise, a certain level
of knowledge is required to be put into practice in the process of collecting evidence, interpreting
data, and, more importantly, during the application of the insights gained to determine the most
appropriate path forward for the classroom. For instance, once Carol and the teacher establish what
effective methodologies need to be implemented, the inquiry should then turn to a closer look at
what the educator requires professional knowledge and skills to apply those methodologies
(Timperley, 2010). Teachers acquire knowledge the same way that students do, so instruction
should be tailored to their needs and circumstances (ibid.). For that reason, Carol, as the pedagogy
leader, is responsible for closing the gap by improving teachers' professional knowledge, and then
all changes for students and schools will eventually prevail. In the same vein, I recommend Carol's
strategy to include: implementing a routine inquiry activity, such as regular meetings to assess
teacher's capacity, establishing a collaborative learning support structure to boost innovation
capabilities (DuFour, 2007); providing constructive feedback and encouraging its use, creating
useful content for teachers' professional development, and promoting a supportive environment of
continuous learning for long-term change (Elmore, 2007). Finally, Carol's leadership should
communicate that continuous professional learning is required for every teacher's job (Fullan,
2007).

Teacher's Motivation
An individual's motivation is what drives them to engage in certain behaviours and what
makes them want to get involved (Fullan & Quinn, 2016). Therefore, in contrast to unmotivated
people, motivated people are incredibly adaptable and hardworking, especially when changing
(Pink, 2011). Carol stressed her regular practice of motivating teachers by visualising their
"practice difficulties" in a positive light rather than a negative light to tackle what they are doing
badly or need to modify. Teachers, therefore, feel encouraged and motivated to look at the problem
as a challenge instead of an unsolved or unachievable problem. Nevertheless, it can be highlighted
that Carol's motivational practice among teachers has been effective. However, she may be
overlooking the importance of intrinsic motivation as a natural driver for implementing changes.
According to Daniel Pink's research (2011), intrinsic motivation is defined as the drive to execute
something for internal fulfilment rather than external benefits.

7
 100370428

On the contrary, monetary compensation and benefits are what Pink named "baseline
rewards" or extrinsic motivation, which increase performance in the near term, but motivation
fades over time (ibid.). With that in mind, considering Carol's ultimate goal to engage teachers
with the pedagogical change that needs to be done in their practice, I would recommend the
application of Pinks' theory, which invites leaders to generate intrinsic motivation among workers
by fostering the following elements: autonomy which is not completely independent but has the
option of acting with choice over tasks, time, and procedures. The second element is mastery refers
to the creation of opportunities for professional growth through the setup of challenges that keep
employees actively motivated and, last but not least: purpose, which is the sense of meaning
towards something worthwhile, a purpose motive (Pink, 2011). These elements could be achieved
first and foremost if Carol promotes an environment in which teachers are trusted to perform
optimally, challenges them to broaden their knowledge and skills, and continues to communicate
the impact of their actions on the school and student's achievements daily.

Teachers' resistance to change

Among all school elements that affect students' achievement, it is generally acknowledged
that teachers have the greatest influence (Hattie, Biggs & Purdie, 1996). However, teachers can
use their influence to adjust to or preserve the status quo, primarily when there is a conflict between
their values and the change they are being asked to make (Buchanan, 2015). In other terms,
whether and how teachers exercise agency is related to their engagement with the change plan and
their level of understanding of the potential impact of their practices (Stillman and Anderson
2015). It is unavoidable that Carol will face opposition from teachers who disagree with or oppose
her approach to their practical problems. In this sense, her leadership role helps to build a
coherence system whose goal is to provide teachers with a clear understanding of their actions that
align with the school's priorities and to ensure that all support is available for them to achieve those
priorities, as suggested by Fullan (2010). Merriam-Webster defines coherence as the "integration
of different components, relationships, or values," which is the most profound understanding of
the work's purpose and nature. With this in mind, one strategy suggested for developing a coherent
system is first to involve teachers in the decision-making process (Fullan et al., 2015).
Furthermore, a supportive and focused environment with purposeful action and interaction
among teachers, clear directions, transparency, communication, and continuous feedback is

8
 100370428

required. This will ensure coherence in what is communicated and practised in the classroom and
a trusting environment in the entire school. When school professionals trust one another and feel
supported by their leaders, they are more likely to accept changes and feel safe trying out new
methods without resistance (Bryk & Schneider, 2003). However, cultivating such relationships
requires respect for others' opinions and viewpoints despite disagreements and a commitment to
the school community (ibid.). As a result, a suggestion to Carol's leadership is to create a relational
trust climate in day-to-day communication exchanges at all levels, including teachers, students,
and parents, resulting in more meaningful conversations and a reduced sense of resistance to
change.

V. Conclusion

This paper depicts the processes of leading pedagogical changes and the potential
challenges Carol's approaches may face while leading changes. I have discussed the Teaching as
Inquiry tool first implemented in NZC as portrayed in Carol's case study. It has been established
that the closer educational leaders get to the core business of learning and teaching, the more likely
they are to impact students' outcomes positively. As seen in the case study, Carol's role in driving
pedagogical changes is essential in ensuring beneficial changes within the school system.
However, it is important to highlight that not all educational institutions have the necessary
resources and time to afford such a position in their organisational structure. While we
acknowledge this lack of resources within the system, changes are inevitable. As a result,
alternative methods of leading pedagogical changes must be considered, keeping in mind that
improving student learning outcomes cannot be achieved if the same techniques are used
indefinitely (Fullan, 2018).
Carol's failure to consider teachers' levels of knowledge during the inquiry cycle is
highlighted in this paper. It emphasised the importance of leadership to consider that teachers are
not equally skilled and that contextual factors such as their level of knowledge and skills must be
evaluated before implementing a pedagogical change (Elmore, 2004). When teachers lack
adequate content knowledge, the changes expected will be limited, leading to practical difficulties
(Desimone, 2009). Therefore, after analysing the process of an effective change in pedagogical

9
 100370428

practices, I concluded that inclusive leadership must be involved in the teaching process and
support promoting professional learning for teachers' growth.
Finally, using Carol's case study, I concluded that pedagogical changes in the educational
sector require deepening cultural roots and a successful engagement with its changing environment
to last. Furthermore, today’s leadership must demonstrate resilience, patience, and determination
in achieving the school's goals while remaining flexible to context and people, as not all
circumstances and performers are the same.

10
 100370428

VI. References

Aitken, G. and Sinnema, C., 2008. Effective pedagogy in social sciences/Tikanga à iwi: Best
evidence synthesis iteration (BES). Wellington: Ministry of Education.

Bryk, A. and Schneider, B., 2003. Trust in Schools: A Core Resource for School Reform.

[online] Miteacher.org.

Buchanan, R., 2015. Teacher identity and agency in an era of accountability. Teachers and
Teaching, 21(6), pp.700-719.

Desimone, L., 2009. Improving Impact Studies of Teachers’ Professional Development: Toward
Better Conceptualizations and Measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), pp.181-199.

DuFour, R., 2007. Professional Learning Communities: A Bandwagon, an Idea Worth

Considering, or Our Best Hope for High Levels of Learning?. Middle School Journal, 39(1), pp.4-
8.

Elmore, R., 2007. School reform from the inside out. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Education Press.

Fullan, M., 1982. The NEW meaning of educational change.

Fullan, M. (2014). The principal: Three keys for maximising impact. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fullan, M., Rincón-Gallardo, S. and Hargreaves, A., 2015. Professional Capital as Accountability.
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23, p.15.

Fullan, M. and Quinn, J., 2016. Coherence. Hawker Brownlow Education

Fullan, M., 2018. Nuance. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.

Good, T., 1987. Two Decades of Research on Teacher Expectations: Findings and Future
Directions. Journal of Teacher Education, 38(4), pp.32-47.

Hamilton, D., 1999. The pedagogic paradox (or why no didactics in England?). Pedagogy, Culture
& Society, 7(1), pp.135-152.

11
 100370428

Hattie, J., Biggs, J. and Purdie, N., 1996. Effects of Learning Skills Interventions on Student
Learning: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), pp.99-136.

Harris, A. (1998). Improving ineffective departments in secondary schools: Strategies for growth
and development. Education Management and Administration, 26(3), 269-278.

Male, T. and Palaiologou, I. (2015). Pedagogical leadership in the 21st century: Evidence from the
field. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership. 43 (2), 214-231.

Ministry of Education. (2007b). The New Zealand Curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.

Mintzberg, H. (2004) Managers not MBAs. San Fransisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc

O’Connell, P., 2009. Is sustainability of schooling improvement an article of faith, or can it be

deliberately crafted? Unpublished PhD thesis, The University of Auckland.

OECD (2009). Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments: First Results from
TALIS. Paris: OECD. Recuperado de: http://www.oecd.org/TALIS

Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead
Books.

Robinson, V., Hohepa, M., & Lloyd, C. (2009). School Leadership and student outcomes:
Identifying what works and why. Best evidence synthesis iteration. Wellington: Ministry of
Education.

Robinson, V., Lloyd, C. and Rowe, K., 2008. The Impact of Leadership on Student Outcomes: An
Analysis of the Differential Effects of Leadership Types. Educational Administration Quarterly,
44(5), pp.635-674.

Siraj-Blatchford, I., Sylva, K., Muttock, S., Gilden, R. & Bell, D. (2002). Brief No: 356
Researching Effective Pedagogy in the Early Years. Retrieved 17 May 2022 from
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ioe

Source of Teaching Inquiry: The teaching as inquiry cycle was developed by

12
 100370428

Aitken and Sinnema (2008) and presented in Effective Pedagogy in Social Sciences /Tikanga ā
Iwi: Best Evidence Synthesis [BES]

Stillman, J. and Anderson, L., 2015. From accommodation to appropriation: teaching, identity,
and authorship in a tightly coupled policy context. Teachers and Teaching, 21(6), pp.720-744.

Timperley, H., 2010. Weaving evidence, inquiry and standards to build better schools. Wellington,
N.Z: NZCER Press.

13