Abstract
It has long been established that school leadership has most of its effect on school improvement indirectly, by establishing a structure and culture in which teachers can thrive. The articles in this current issue extend this argument further, by examining, in diverse ways, how school practices work on the identity of learners, provide them with self-knowledge and skills, and organise support for the most vulnerable. Even the final article, concerning the support given to new teachers, includes some consideration of how student voice comes into play, as well as open communications with parents and support staff.
A further source of interest lies in the juxtaposition of three papers from Sweden, Denmark and Norway. The issues, approaches and contexts vary, as do the research methods, but all three will provide many readers with considerable insight into the more person-centred culture of many Scandinavian schools.
The first paper describes an intervention aimed at teaching high school students how to manage time. Jeremy Burrus, Teresa Jackson and Richard D. Roberts, assessment experts based in New York, engaged in a short-term controlled experiment set in a highly selective school. It is argued that the choice of sample, that is, students who were already achieving well, created additional challenges for the intervention, namely the need to show an improvement from a high baseline. The training included issues such as meeting deadlines, creating a workspace, and setting goals and priorities. The approach involved developing a reflective stance towards personal habits.
The second paper discusses the phenomenon of ‘learned helplessness’, defined in terms of students developing a sense of general incompetence in their studies. Such students ‘perceive no relationship between their responses in a given situation and the resulting outcome’, and become defeatist, frustrated and depressed about their ability to take on challenges. Luana Sorrenti and colleagues from Messina, Italy, argue that such students generalise from particular failures and assume that they must have ‘low ability’ as a fixed condition. The authors explore ways in which teachers can engender a ‘maladaptive perfectionism’ which merely makes students feel inadequate and unable to exercise control over their own learning, just as harsh and controlling parenting can do.
Jan Grannäs and Anneli Frelin, at the University of Gävle, Sweden, focus on the spaces in which teachers and support workers engage with students and provide personal support. They compare the design of two schools built in the 1910s and 1960s, both serving mixed to low socio-economic status (SES) communities, and look at how staff appropriate common spaces such as corridors, cafeterias and recreation facilities. Following Lefebvre, the article treats of space in social and conceptual terms and not just physically: ‘the interaction that occurs in a physical space creates meaning in that space’.
The article that follows explores the provision of group coaching for at-risk youth from non-Western backgrounds in a socially challenging environment. Knud Ryom, Mie Maar Andersen and Reinhard Stelter, from the University of Copenhagen, Denmark, point to the dangers of marginalisation; these young people are not only less likely to complete upper secondary school but are also frequently associated in popular consciousness with particular religious lifestyles and youth gangs. The emphasis is on the young people reflecting on the values inherent in their aspirations; on making sense of their own way of sensing, thinking and acting; and on allowing narratives to unfold in processes of dialogue and story telling. Through such dialogic exploration of ‘landscapes of identity’, the aim is to build social resilience – the ‘possible development of competences in spite of a troubled life history and a disadvantageous environment’. Life stories are viewed creatively ‘as resources rather than flaws or deficiencies’, and a sense of coherence developed.
Norway also has a well developed structure of upper secondary education, but there is concern that roughly one in three young people do not complete the course in the prescribed time of 3 years. Nina Jentoft, of the University of Agder, explains how this often relates to children who are already seen as vulnerable during primary school, whether because of learning difficulties or behavioural disorders, because of bullying by peers, or as victims of neglect and abuse at home. This research compares the support provided by different local authorities, explores how this affects the ability and readiness of teachers and principals to intervene, and examines the logics behind the support given. The research method consists of seeking teachers’ responses to a set of vignettes representing critical situations and dilemmas.
Finally, in this issue, Evelyn Gordon and Alisa Lowrey, from the University of Southern Mississippi, United States, examine the support needs of novice teachers and the benefits derived from ‘a mentoring web’. Punitive high-stakes accountability structures may be a major reason for the problems of retention and attrition in public education in the United States. Currently, it is estimated that 15 percent of all teachers leave the profession each year, with higher levels of loss among novice teachers. The reasons given include ‘a lack of respect, high demands of personal time outside of the scheduled work, salary, administration (principals), job dissatisfaction, lack of a sound discipline policy, career change, and a low self-efficacy’. Among the issues explored in this article are available and timely advice on classroom management and well-designed induction programmes which meet new teachers’ felt needs. The authors also examine the benefits of enabling feedback from students; it is suggested that young teachers can be more receptive to this and that it helps develop relationships. The importance of strengthening communication with parents and support staff is another key issue.