Sustainability of Sufficiency-Based Schools
753
ious levels (i.e., state, district, reform design team, school, classroom, individual)
to have the same goals and work together. Datnow and Stringfield (2000) identified
factors that are important for the sustainability of school change as (1) the fit of the
“rationale” of the change and that of the local change agents; (2) obtaining political
support; and (3) integrating changes into daily lives at the school. School personnel
viewed the changes and received benefits as having met the school’s original goals. In
schools that had sustained the change program, there was generally a positive acceptance of the program based on a belief that the education change formed a part of a
broader concern with student welfare and improved student outcomes (Harvey and
Hurworth 2006). High quality professional development was continuously provided
at each school (Yonezawa and Stringfield 2000). Benitez et al. (2009) identified a
strong relationship with the Educational District Authority as one of the important
factors for the sustainability of changes in educational institutions.
An educational change will be more sustained if priority is given to the capability
building of teachers. First, allowance needs to be made for the transfer or resignation
of trained staff through continuous professional development (Benitez et al. 2009;
Elias et al. 2003). A strong and resilient teacher culture and a distributed leadership
culture throughout the school will smooth changes in the event of staff replacement. In addition, having secondary change agent teachers as part of the bigger
team, who are accepted by colleagues for support and advice, ensures the longevity
of school change (George et al. 2007; Bambara et al. 2009). Second, continuous
professional development by the principal and teachers should be institutionalized,
and used to build collective knowledge (Hargreaves 2007). Development methods
include coaching, knowledge sharing, extensive orientation for new staff, formal and
informal/buddying with experienced colleagues, and training within the school or the
external network (Goodson et al. 2006; Jacobson 2011; Bezzina 2006). Studies have
reported that professional collaboration can support school personnel in developing, applying, and sustaining new competencies (Brownell et al. 2006), and provide
the emotional support needed for team members to persevere during difficult times
(Bambara et al. 2009). This is particularly so when team members reflect and think
critically about their practice and see the results of their efforts (Gersten et al. 2000;
Brownell et al. 2006). This will create change at the individual level and change
organizational culture (Copland 2003).
The sustainability of school change also depends on the ability of the school to
engage stakeholders across the school community, and the capacity of the principal
to devolve responsibility effectively for the initiative’s implementation across middle
leadership (Harvey and Hurworth 2006). Distributed leadership also implies a need
for rich expertise with approaches to improving teaching and learning among staff.
This demands that all who work with students need to engage in the development
of the necessary professional competencies to consistently deliver on the program’s
promise (Copland 2003). Along with the support of the principal and other key school
leaders, the change team can also be associated with the learning areas relevant to the
program. But they also generally hold positions of responsibility that provide them
with a higher degree of influence.
753
ious levels (i.e., state, district, reform design team, school, classroom, individual)
to have the same goals and work together. Datnow and Stringfield (2000) identified
factors that are important for the sustainability of school change as (1) the fit of the
“rationale” of the change and that of the local change agents; (2) obtaining political
support; and (3) integrating changes into daily lives at the school. School personnel
viewed the changes and received benefits as having met the school’s original goals. In
schools that had sustained the change program, there was generally a positive acceptance of the program based on a belief that the education change formed a part of a
broader concern with student welfare and improved student outcomes (Harvey and
Hurworth 2006). High quality professional development was continuously provided
at each school (Yonezawa and Stringfield 2000). Benitez et al. (2009) identified a
strong relationship with the Educational District Authority as one of the important
factors for the sustainability of changes in educational institutions.
An educational change will be more sustained if priority is given to the capability
building of teachers. First, allowance needs to be made for the transfer or resignation
of trained staff through continuous professional development (Benitez et al. 2009;
Elias et al. 2003). A strong and resilient teacher culture and a distributed leadership
culture throughout the school will smooth changes in the event of staff replacement. In addition, having secondary change agent teachers as part of the bigger
team, who are accepted by colleagues for support and advice, ensures the longevity
of school change (George et al. 2007; Bambara et al. 2009). Second, continuous
professional development by the principal and teachers should be institutionalized,
and used to build collective knowledge (Hargreaves 2007). Development methods
include coaching, knowledge sharing, extensive orientation for new staff, formal and
informal/buddying with experienced colleagues, and training within the school or the
external network (Goodson et al. 2006; Jacobson 2011; Bezzina 2006). Studies have
reported that professional collaboration can support school personnel in developing, applying, and sustaining new competencies (Brownell et al. 2006), and provide
the emotional support needed for team members to persevere during difficult times
(Bambara et al. 2009). This is particularly so when team members reflect and think
critically about their practice and see the results of their efforts (Gersten et al. 2000;
Brownell et al. 2006). This will create change at the individual level and change
organizational culture (Copland 2003).
The sustainability of school change also depends on the ability of the school to
engage stakeholders across the school community, and the capacity of the principal
to devolve responsibility effectively for the initiative’s implementation across middle
leadership (Harvey and Hurworth 2006). Distributed leadership also implies a need
for rich expertise with approaches to improving teaching and learning among staff.
This demands that all who work with students need to engage in the development
of the necessary professional competencies to consistently deliver on the program’s
promise (Copland 2003). Along with the support of the principal and other key school
leaders, the change team can also be associated with the learning areas relevant to the
program. But they also generally hold positions of responsibility that provide them
with a higher degree of influence.