Home' Teacher : October 2009 Contents 8 TEACHER OCTOBER 2009
workshops for about 4,000 school and school
system leaders from 11 countries, gathering
case studies from scores of schools in differ-
ent national settings. We analysed more than
10,000 responses to key questions that were
posed to participants to secure accounts of
how they went about their work, the chal-
lenges they faced as they sought to transform
their schools, and recommendations for pol-
icy and practice in the years ahead.
A key theme that took shape in the first year
was that we needed to come to terms with
the idea that 'new enterprise logic,' coined
by Shoshana Zuboff and Jim Maxmin in
their 2004 The Support Economy, should
drive reform in both public and private sec-
tors. Zuboff and Maxmin proposed that
the way an organisation should work be
turned on its head so that the starting point
of organisational form and function is the
needs and aspirations of clients, customers
and consumers or, in the case of schools,
students and parents. This contrasts with
the traditional approach where these actors
are seen as the end points in a delivery
chain, and operations from start to finish
are configured accordingly.
Zuboff and Maxmin contend that indi-
viduals are now giving voice to their desire
for 'self-determination,' a phenomenon that
is manifested in several ways in education,
including personalising the learning experi-
ence. As they put it, on page 52 of The Sup-
port Economy, 'parents want their children
to be recognised and treated as individuals.'
They suggest, however, that the 'old enterprise
logic' persists and that its rules are 'woefully
inadequate when it comes to responding to
the realities of life in the new society of indi-
viduals.' Moreover, as they explain on pages
116-117, 'the old organisations have become
sufficiently insulated and self-congratulatory
to ignore the chasm that has formed between
their practices, invented for a mass society,
and the new society it has spawned. We
conclude that the new individuals are being
blamed for the problems of the old organisa-
tions, when the facts suggest the opposite. It
is not the new individuals who have failed the
old organisations, but rather the old organi-
sations that have failed the new individuals.
'When the old clothes no longer fit,' they
suggest, 'make new ones.'
The idea of 'new enterprise logic'
explained what we were learning as we lis-
tened to leaders in schools that had been
transformed. We identified a number of ele-
ments in the new enterprise logic of schools.
1. The student is the most important unit
of organisation -- not the classroom, not the
school and not the school system -- and there
are consequent changes in approaches to
learning and teaching, and the support of
learning and teaching.
2. Schools cannot achieve expectations
for transformation by acting alone or oper-
ating in a line of support from the centre of a
school system to the level of the school, class-
room or student. Horizontal approaches are
more important than vertical approaches,
although the latter will continue to have
an important role to play. The success of a
school depends on its capacity to join net-
works or federations to share knowledge,
address problems and pool resources.
3. Leadership is distributed across
schools in networks and federations as well
as within schools, across programs of learn-
ing and teaching, and the support of learn-
ing and teaching.
4. Networks and federations involve a
range of individuals, agencies, institutions
and organisations across public and private
sectors in educational and non-educational
settings. Leaders and managers in these sec-
tors and settings share a responsibility to
identify and then effectively and efficiently
deploy the kinds of support that are needed
in schools. Synergies don't just happen of
their own accord; they happen when per-
sonnel and other resources are allocated to
energise and sustain them.
5. New approaches to resource alloca-
tion are required under these conditions. A
simple formula allocation to schools based
on the size and nature of the school, with
sub-allocations based on equity considera-
tions, is not sufficient. New allocations take
account of developments in the personalis-
ing of learning and the networking of exper-
tise and support.
We demonstrated how school leaders
whose practice reflected 'new enterprise
logic' were exhilarated by the experience and
that many factors that inhibited their enthu-
siasm were manifestations of 'old enterprise
logic.' Policymakers need to abandon the
latter if they wish to attract and retain the
best people to the profession and to school
leadership. We also made a strong case to
transform the architecture of most schools
around Australia and comparable countries.
Why Not the Best Schools?
The findings in Re-imagining Educational
Leadership and Raising the Stakes sug-
gested that schools which had been trans-
formed or were on their way to doing so
were adept at building strength in four
domains or forms of capital: intellectual
capital, social capital, spiritual capital and
financial capital, as shown in Figure 1.
Intellectual capital refers to the level of
knowledge and skill of those who work in
or for the school. Social capital refers to
the strength of formal and informal part-
nerships and networks involving the school
and all individuals, agencies, organisations
and institutions that have the potential to
support and be supported by the school.
Figure 1: Alignme nt of four kinds of
c apital (Caldwell & Harris, 2008, p.11)
Links Archive September 2009 November 2009 Navigation Previous Page Next Page