The art of introducing change in educational administration

Change cannot be decreed. Even when they call for greater autonomy and laudable pedagogical objectives, the changes or reforms proposed to school administrations and teachers generally do not initially offer enough tangible or proven benefits to generate any sustained enthusiasm. So why impose a new reform on the school system?

Why then impose a new reform on the school system? In a well-established bureaucratic organizational culture, it essentially provokes a reaction of withdrawal among employees...

Change? Resist?

In this article published in Éducation et francophonie, "Le leadership distribué : l'épreuve des réformes éducatives" .pdf, we take a practical look at the implementation of the most recent reform in Quebec schools.

"We can't magically move from a bureaucratic culture to a culture of organizational responsibility, since this transition first elicits a reaction of mistrust that does nothing to facilitate a climate of collaboration, exchange and shared responsibility."

... a climate that is essential to a successful transformation.

An analogy can be made with the use of the Internet in the classroom: without questioning the pedagogical relationship between teacher and student, this use remains superficial and without any noticeable effect.

Technologies" are a matter of communication, and their introduction into the administration brings with it a certain number of possibilities for change that are only waiting to materialize, insofar as the relationship between central administrations and schools, and then between school administrators and teachers, is modified.

It would be unthinkable to ask students and teachers to move seamlessly from an undifferentiated, directive pedagogy to a high degree of personalized autonomy in their learning.

"Rather than mobilizing teachers to find pedagogical solutions through collective sharing and collaboration, the implementation strategy seems to have fostered a resistance to change that might be considered legitimate. All this seems more to create a culture of confrontation with management, then perceived as the spokesperson and ambassador of these changes, and hinders the distribution of leadership."

Power and responsibility

Just as students are not fooled by a proposal to "take charge of their learning process" within a framework so rigid that it leaves no room for more than a façade of autonomy, teachers and even administrators do not appreciate a pseudo-autonomy whose controls are so tight and frequent that they do not allow for the exercise of real choices.

"Brassard (2007) reports that, since the reform, principals have more responsibility but also less power. Previous research findings clearly show that managers are disturbed by control measures to the detriment of their work and responsibilities in the field."

"Instead of fostering greater empowerment by granting more autonomy and power to principals, the control measures put in place (accountability) have meant that principals have seen their power amputated and thus found themselves faced with an inability to distribute it."

The whole question of trust in the competence of administrators and teachers is at stake. There is indeed a risk, but wanting to eliminate any risk of underperformance ultimately erases any interest in taking responsibility for change.

Change = insecurity + benefits

What's more, in an environment of comfort and security that is well established, protected and sometimes hard-won, any major change will eventually be perceived as a disruption and will need to demonstrate certain clear advantages, and on the basis of this or these positive elements build and win support in the pursuit of shared objectives.

This work of promoting, demonstrating benefits and winning support is a hallmark of successful change. It doesn't necessarily mean devoting a lot of time to it and doing it all at once, just that it has to be done somehow.

"Distributed leadership does indeed seem to carry a risk; distributing influence does not guarantee that 1) this distribution is wanted, desired or desired by school staff and that 2) this distributed power is mobilized for the same goals."

Cultural change

The distribution of leadership, beyond individual, corporate or partisan interests, is a major cultural change. In a system controlled by a government itself monitored by a media eager to track its slightest deviations, the distribution of leadership implies the actual distribution of powers and responsibilities: the government must also become distributed, otherwise there's no way out: it will want and need to control everything.

To achieve this, we'll have to get a lot of people to agree at all levels. In any case, we'll soon have little choice but to do so, and the sooner the better: when information and knowledge are circulating (the Internet is everywhere), everyone can take on more responsibility, and sometimes will feel they have to...

References

"Distributed leadership: the test of educational reform" .pdf
Emmanuel POIREL and Frédéric YVON - University of Montreal, Quebec, Canada
https://www.erudit.org/fr/revues/ef/2012-v40-n1-ef0137/1010148ar/

Photo : Unknown - Portrait belonging to the Fonds Marie Jaëll