Lyderi laikas (Time for Leaders): Lithuanias response to changing leadership and learning in their schools.

Authors: Egle Pranckuniene, Marina Vildziuniene, Professor Sonia Blandford and Dr Coleen Jackson Organisations: Centre for School Improvement, Vilnius, Lithuania; University of Warwick and Chichester University, England

Abstract This paper examines how Lithuania has approached policy change to the leadership of their schools. In doing so, the hope is to capture the enthusiasm that existed right after the regain of independence. The Time for Leaders Project is intended to develop leadership competencies and form a support infrastructure for educational leadership. By doing this it will empower the education community and every individual within it in systemic change that will improve schools. Now approaching the end of the first phase of the project the paper outlines the synergy between leadership development, consultancy and school models.

Lyderi laikas (Time for Leaders): Lithuanias response to changing leadership and learning in their schools.

Introduction This purpose of this paper is to explore how Lithuania has approached developing educational leadership and the synergy between leadership development, consultancy and school models. Following the gaining of independence the Lithuanian Ministry for Education and Culture commissioned reports on the state of education and leadership of schools (e.g. OECD, 1998). By 2006, some changes had taken place and this was reported in a British Council report (2006), but in the main, the findings of the original report had not occurred. Therefore in 2010 the Centre for School Improvement in Vilnius submitted a proposal for funding to develop a project called Lyderi laikas (Time for Leaders) to ensure that Leaders were prepared for their role in Lithuanian Schools. Lyderi laikas (Time for Leaders) is an ambitious project and demonstrates educational policy making at its best, from bottom up. Shifting Leadership practice across a country is complex and through the Centre for School Improvement, this project has been given momentum and focus. This paper addresses the project from the perspective of two of the foreign experts within the team in partnership with two Lithuanian Project Directors and therefore only focuses on areas related to their project involvement. The paper begins with the context of Lithuania before describing the Project. As the teams have worked on developments, it has been critical to consider the underpinning theoretical perspectives. The project is moving towards the end of phase 1 and the outcomes are described prior to the challenges the project still needs to overcome as it moves into the implementation phase. 1. The Context of Lithuania Situated in the Baltic region the population of Lithuania is 3,057,682 (as at Nov 2010). There are around 1400 general education schools, 500 000 students and 45 000 teachers. The country is experiencing a demographic crisis because of emigration and reduction of birth rates. In the recent 20 years after gaining the independence from Soviet Union the Lithuanian system of education went through major reforms in curriculum, testing of students achievement and decentralisation of governance. Education is presented by the government as one of the major priorities for the further development of the country, e.g. 31 % of the EU structural support in 2007-2013 will be used for the development of education, innovation and knowledge economy. The Continuing Professional Development (CPD) of teachers is well developed and the general quality of teachers is high 98 % have BA or MA degree and most of them are actively involved in CPD. In recent years, the reforms of education were mainly related to
2

curriculum and developing classroom practice but there were very few efforts to support leadership initiatives and changes of management structures at school, municipality and national level, especially in relation to the quality of learning. Lithuania is divided into municipalities; responsible for the management of the majority of schools in Lithuania with the level of school autonomy is quite low. One of the biggest challenges is accountability: schools and teachers are evaluated not by the results of students learning but by compliance to the standardised procedures. It was a right time to make changes and the project Time for Leaders was developed in this context. 2. Intentions of the project The Centre for School Improvement in Lithuania was successful in submitting plans to set up Time for Leaders using financial support from the European Union (EU) Structural find. This is an ambitious and highly integrated leadership project aimed at making a systematic impact on education in Lithuania. The intentions were to: Undertake a systematic approach to educational leadership; Understand that educational leaders are reasoning and active creators of learning communities Promote sustainable educational leadership as the development of an in depth universal learning Research the field of management and educational leadership in Lithuania Explore the state of the art ideas on educational Leadership. Involve both educational and academic as well as business communities and experts from different fields and countries; Stimulate discussions and public consultations with all stakeholders; Motivate and inspire the education community. Using the experience of the Centre for School Improvement, Lithuania, the Project involves 72 Lithuanian and foreign experts with a diversity of experience from educational establishments at all levels, organisational management, HR management institutions, developers of training programmes, researchers, IT specialists, lawyers and economists. Those involved in the project were placed in five areas (consulting, virtual environment, models of school governance, development of managerial competencies and a longitudinal study on the expression of leadership) and each area was further broken down into specific research groups, which have become the project teams. The first phase of the project began in September 2009 and is due for completion by June 2011. The theoretical framework whilst centred on leadership embraces policy change, transformation, schooling, leading learning, notions of performance, professional development programme design and models of support.

The modes of enquiry have involved an international expert team working with research teams involving university lecturers, head teachers, consultants, government officials; focus groups with practitioners; The sources of data have been taken from: Conference activities with research teams Notes from meetings with individual research teams Reports following international visits Outcomes and outputs by research teams Interview notes from individual researchers Feedback from public consultations with the different interest groups Case studies and stories of successful practises in leadership development.

The work of project teams is very public: public consultations have been organised to present the direction of thinking of every working group. The new ideas are being tested with policy makers, teachers, teacher trainers and other interest groups in the process of their development. The open and public mode of project implementation helps to nurture support and encouragement of the educational community to the ideas of leadership development in the schools. Project teams are being supported by a group of international experts who are usually questioning processes and practices rather than providing ready-made answers. This way of working has helped to ensure ownership of the project ideas and sustain the enthusiasm and self-confidence of Lithuanian experts and participants in the Project groups. 3. Leadership development underpinning theoretical perspectives The project teams have been working in different areas, such as consulting, school leadership models, virtual environment, development of leadership competences, and longitudinal research. They have used the same conceptual base, established at the start of the project, which is a concept of Leadership for Learning. Pupil learning is the pivotal point for leaders in education, followed by all other forms of learning (of teachers, managers, consultants, parents, etc.) aimed at providing a stronger background for pupil learning (Blandford 2009, Knapp, 2006). At the start and during the project the teams have come together in a conference where members of the foreign expert team have been asked to speak. Each conference has addressed specific theoretical perspectives to ensure they all underpin their work with the same conceptual base. This section addresses some of the perspectives that have been explored in relation to the work on developing leadership programmes and consultancy. The areas covered are moral purpose; leadership learning; qualities of leaders; effective schools; power, people and politics; systems leadership and theoretical frameworks.

Finally, the section draws together what became the key issues for the teams that formed the approach to the project. In addition to Leadership for Learning, another important concept for the project is around Sustainable Leadership (Fink and Hargreaves, 2006). We understand it as the creation of powerful and equal conditions for learners, professionals, and the entire system in which leaders persistently and publicly focus their and the attention of others on teaching and learning by making learning the basis of their work. A third strand of education leadership thinking to influence the project is System Leadership (David Hargreaves, 2007). There are many meanings to System Leadership, each relevant for consideration by schools, municipalities and policy makers in Lithuania:

- Partnering another school (facing difficulties) - Leading a school in challenging circumstances - Acting as a civic leader brokering networks/partnerships, e.g. David Hopkins (2007) on system leader roles - Working as a change agent e.g. consultant leader. - Setting direction [for your school] - Developing people [in your school] - Developing the organisation [of your school]

Essentially, Time to Lead is a project that engages communities of learners in considering the best practice underpinned by values. Michael Fullan (2007) offers guidance in this area:

This entails: raising the bar and closing the gap of learning treating people with respect altering the environment for the better

As David Hopkins (2007) states, system leaders: measure success by raising the bar and narrowing the gap are committed to improving teaching and learning develop schools as learning communities strive for equity and improvement
5

 realise that classroom, school and system impact on one another and seek to engage with it in a meaningful way. Power, people and politics During one of the project group meetings, we discussed how everyone in the educational system has a role to play in what happens in the learning base. How leaders behave at whatever level they may be should influence how pupils and students are taught. As far as leaders are concerned, it is important to understand that changes on national and municipal levels must contribute to better learning. A simple concept but if we are, for example, shifting from a didactic model of teaching to independent learning where facilitated learning experiences are important then we need to work with participants on the formal and informal programmes in a more facilitative way to enable co-construction of knowledge. In turn, those designing and delivering the programmes also need to work in a different way. So whether you are a politician in government or an independent consultant; school leader or teacher there is a responsibility to consider how you work with others, how you view learning and so on. Fig 1. represents this diagrammatically.
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND POLICIES
EXTERNAL

MUNICIPALITIES

CHANGING BEHAVIOURS

THOSE WORKING WITH FACILTATORS AND CONSULTANTS FACILITATORS OF LEADERSHIP LEARNING INTERNAL INFLUENCES SCHOOL LEADERS SCHOOL LEADERSHIP TEAMS MIDDLE LEADERSHIP TEAMS TEACHERS PUPILS AND STUDENTS IN THE CLASSROOM

CHANGING LEARNING

Fig 1. Levels of influence on classroom practice

 Project approach key issues for the teams From the outset, there has been a set of common objectives for each of the contributing teams to effectively address the central issue, which resonates with the theory on effective teams (Everard, et al. 2004). The central team have ensured that the contributions of each member have been of the highest possible quality. This has enables the teams to improve their effectiveness and impact during the first phase of the project (Northouse (2004).

4. Outcomes and outputs from phase 1 of the project Overall the project has seen numerous outcomes and outputs from Phase 1 in relation to this paper those outcomes include: Competency framework for school leaders; outlines for formal and informal professional development programmes for school leaders; instruments for the longitudinal study, model of consultancy support and arrangements for networks. Competency framework During the initial stages of the project, it became more and more important to have clarity about the role of leadership in Lithuanian schools both as seen externally and internally. To establish a clear competency based framework for leaders and consultants could then led on to develop the professional development programme required and the kind of support leaders might need. Tensions existed between current practice and intended practice, one where there was a relentless focus on learning; where leadership was devolved and so on to ensure all the underpinning theoretical perspectives were present. One of the project groups researched into what this meant for various stakeholders prior to developing the framework that would in turn determine the formal and informal programmes.

Formal and informal programmes There has been consideration of the key elements in both formal and informal programmes. Using current Masters programmes as a stimulus, the teams have considered the needs of the Masters Programme to support/coach teachers to: Analyse the needs of the class/ individual Identify the strategies associated with each of the achievement, access and aspiration (3As) (Blandford, 2009) which are needed to change the behaviours in order to generate the desired outcomes and impact Determine the specific goal according to the changes needed

 Base the strategies and progress tracking on the 3As - access (barriers), aspirations (steps/ skills) (motivation/mindset), achievement (hard/soft strategies) Frame the story with the 3As Analyse each element of the 3As: access, achievement, aspiration Determine the change in behaviour needed.

Consultancy component The Consultancy component is directed towards the development of a model for consultative support for schools, as well as training programmes for consultants. The model of consultancy is based on the perception of leadership for learning. The ability to learn as a critical factor for all leaders in education: teachers, principals, consultants, etc.; Leaders are learning practically, by and from practise and consulting is considered the most practical learning. Mentoring and coaching provide exclusive conditions for the training of education leaders. Openness, self-confidence, and dialogue are both premises and consequences of such training and expression. The first activity of the component was to examine the field and context of educational consultancy in Lithuania and internationally. The research data illustrated that there is large workforce (around 2000) of so-called official educational consultants but they do not consult, rather than transfer official information or new trends of educational policies. That means that creating system of consultancy to promote school improvement and leadership for learning we need to neutralise the negative image of consultant, to create reliable system of selection, training, certification and recertification of consultants, as well as develop an open information system on consultancy access. The virtual environment (VE) working group started by defining an image of the education leader a user of the virtual environment. There are many different environments and WebPages for educators, so it is very important that leadership VE would not replace or copy existing tools but rather provide educational leaders with the services they do not receive elsewhere. The structure of VE is based on leadership roles and activities, such as consultancy, learning about leadership, bank of new ideas and searching for support implementing them, databases of documents and other tools, necessary for everyday duties of educational leaders and sharing of experience and networking. The school leadership model component-working group is developing the following structural elements at three levels (Table 1 Establishment of partnership networks. Documentation and dissemination of positive examples. Amendment of legal regulations, especially those related to enhancement of schools autonomy, principles of financing, positionbased teachers salary, secondment opportunities, recruitment, selection and professional support for educational leaders. Municipal government is encouraged to provide the base for schools to solve common problems and develop a culture of cooperation, rather than that of untamed competition. It is recommended to change the mechanisms of recruitment, selection and placement of school principles. It should be based on competencies but not political reasons. The municipalities should encourage and value schools and individuals for experience sharing and openness.
8

National level

Local (municipal) level

School level

Acknowledgement and the right to be a formal or non-formal leader. Highly qualified formal leaders have time for mentoring, consulting, etc. Nonformal leaders feel supported and push towards formal leadership. Therefore, leaders are grown from inside. Schools must have a real long-term strategy. The potential of school self-governance should be used and further developed.

Table 1. School Leadership models

To strengthen leadership for learning, cultural changes are required in all levels of education. Attention should be paid to the following values essential for the implementation of the planned changes: o o o o Respect (for an individual, profession, and agreements) Trust Help Empowerment (responsibility and accountability).

Longitudinal research This group developed instruments for the regular measurement of the leadership expression and conditions at the levels of individual (student, parent, teacher and leader), school, school founder (municipality) and the state. The instruments of the longitudinal research are based on the understanding of leadership as a process alongside the position that a person may formally hold in an organisation (Hugan, Curphy, 1999). The result of leadership manifestation is successful learning or high quality learning. Another important aspect of leadership for learning highlighted by the longitudinal research group is the relationship between leadership and a learning organisation: Leadership in a learning organisation becomes a mass phenomenon; The role of the leader is not uniform. Different people can be leaders in a learning organisation this is determined by the nature of the problem, circumstances, personal competence, etc. (Senge, 1994). The leader in a learning organisation influences others not by his/her person, but by creating the environment, situation, or field, which influences other members of the organisation (Simonaitien, Leonaviien, and virdauskas, 2004). Systemic thinking provides a learning organisation with the conceptual basis and provides the opportunity for the understanding of how people perceive themselves and the surrounding world, the expanding of their field of vision, and training them to be open to ideas. Currently the Longitudinal Study Group has developed questionnaires and other instruments, which are being tested with the groups of teachers, leaders, and policy makers.

5. Continued challenges At this stage the Time for Leaders project is coming towards the end of the first phase and the overall project is still underway. At this stage, some of the major findings include: Links between leadership learning (content and processes) and the impact on student and pupil learning. Through the complexity, there is a potential to integrate innovations in the field of curriculum, teaching and learning and school environment. How we view school effectiveness needs to go beyond performance tables and an alternative view will be given to the notion of effective school which would be based on the concept of leadership for learning. We all have a level of influence in what happens in the classroom and other learning spaces. Leadership changes at national, municipal and institutional level should support changes of teaching and learning and teachers behaviour at the classroom. The authors assert that this study is important for politicians and practitioners alike in terms of seeing how one country has approached changing policy that will impact on school leaders, their development and support and subsequent intended change in learning for students and pupils. Throughout this year, we have discovered some salient points about policy change. The first stage of the project was meant to create the conceptual bases for the implementation. At the next stage, we strive to increase the critical mass of leaders in education. The leader is any member of the educational community who is ready to take the initiative and responsibility for students learning. Around 5000 educators will be involved in different activities of the project. We are planning to promote the idea of leadership for learning in all level of education and we understand it as united efforts of all levels for the sake of students learning. We want to develop and disseminate new forms of cooperation, public debate, consensus building by regular leadership forums, public consultations and other forms.

We also plan to establish a new for Lithuania partnership model, involving state, business and non-governmental sector and creating School Aid Fund; Conceptual models developed at the first stage will be implemented at 10 municipalities and 50- 100 schools. These municipalities and schools will be encouraged to develop unique leadership development models directed towards the improvement of students learning efficiently using local potential and getting consultancy and training support. Individual and organisational growth will be documented in written and audio-visual formats, especially individual experiences, success stories and practices in order to give lively and inspiring examples for other schools and educators. We will be piloting selection and training
10

programmes for consultants, involving them to practise consulting skills at pilot schools and municipalities; in finally, leadership competencies of app. 300 leaders from national, regional and school level will be increased by involving them to MA and non-formal leadership studies and programs. All the activities will be implemented at the national, regional and school level simultaneously to ensure sharing, to promote trust and mutual understanding and the principle of subsidiarity. Our plan is very ambitious but we believe that the consolidation of our international team and support of educational community will help us to achieve significant changes in leadership development in Lithuania.

Authors details: Egle Pranckuniene Director, Centre for School Improvement, Vilnius, Lithuania, egle@mtc.lt. Egle is the Director of the non-governmental Centre for School Improvement, Lithuania. Egles experience is in leading and managing complex educational projects, such as Time for Leaders in Lithuania and internationally. Marina Vildziuniene Programme Director, Centre for School Improvement, Vilnius, Lithuania, marina@mtc.lt . Marina Vildziuniene, is the Program Director of nongovernmental Centre for School Improvement, Lithuania. Marinas experience is in the professional development of teachers and educational consultants in Lithuania and internationally.

Professor Sonia Blandford Professor of Educational Leadership and Innovation, University of Warwick, S.Blandford@Warwick.ac.uk. Professor Sonia Blandford is the National Director-Achievement for All, Founding Executive Director and Adviser-Teach First and visiting professor at the universities of, Brunel and Institute of Education (London) and honorary senior research fellow at Oxford University. Sonias international publications focus on professional development and educational leadership.

Dr Coleen Jackson, Visiting Fellow, Chichester University and Independent Education Consultant crjsol@aol.com. Dr Coleen Jackson is a Visiting Fellow at Chichester University and an independent education consultant. Coleen works with governments and private providers in the UK and internationally on leadership consultancy; developing and facilitating leadership programmes.

11

References Blandford (2009), Teach First Masters Programme, London: Teach First Bloom, S. (ed.) (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, the classification of educational goals Handbook I: Cognitive Domain New York: McKay British Council (2006) National Leadership and school improvement scoping exercise. Report for the British Council Vilnius Lithuania. Everard, K.B., Morris, G and Wilson, I. (2004) Effective School Management, 4th Edition, London: Paul Chapman Publishing Fink D. and Hargreaves A., (2006) Sustainable Leadership, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership and sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press. Hargreaves, D. (2007), The True Meaning of System. Leadership, London: Sage. Hopkins, D. (2007) Every School a Great School Milton Keynes: Open University Press/McGraw Hill Hopkins, D. and Rob Higham (2007), System leadership: mapping the landscape School Leadership and Management, Vol. 27, No. 2, April 2007, pp. 147_166 Hogan, R., G. J. Curphy, et al. (1994). What We Know About Leadership. American Psychologist 49(6): 493-504. Michael S. Knapp, Michael A. Copland, Margaret L. Plecki, and Bradley S. Portin (2006), Leading, Learning, and Leadership Support, A Research Report in collaboration with The Wallace Foundation Leithwood, Kenneth A. (1992) The Move Toward Transformational Leadership, Educational Leadership, 49, 5 (February 1992): 8-12. EJ 439 275. OECD (1998), Review of National Policies for Education, Lithuania: Examinations Report Ministry of Culture and Education (1992) General Concept of Education in Lithuania, Lithuania: Leidybos Centras Peter G. Northouse (2004), Leadership: Theory and Practice. 4th Edition, London: Sage Pranckuniene, E. (2009), Time for Leaders, Lithuania: Project Conference Presentation. Senge, P. M. (1990) The Fifth Discipline. The art and practice of the learning organization, London: Random House. Simonaitien, B. Leonaviien, R., virdauskas, D. (2004): Manifestation of Leader's Communicative and Educational Abilities as a Premise for Learning Organisation Development in NEWSLETTER Social Science in Eastern Europe, June 2005
12

Wiggins and McTighe, (2005), Understanding by Design. 2nd Edition, USA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. The website of the project Time for Leaders: www. lyderiulaikas.smm.lt The website of the Centre for School Improvement, Lithuania: www.mtc.lt

We would be delighted to hear from colleagues who wish to know more about the project or use the information in this paper in their work. Please do not cite from this paper unless you have prior permission from the authors, which can be obtained from Dr Coleen Jackson.

13