Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Congruentie in onderliggende opvattingen van schoolcultuur en actieonderzoek Een casestudie Hans van Huijgevoort H.vanHuijgevoort@fontys.nl Welcome Let me first introduce myself and give some information of the institute I work for. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Opleidingscentrum Speciale Onderwijszorg Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Opleidingscentrum Speciale Onderwijszorg Van Voortgezette opleidingen naar Masters Gericht op speciale onderwijszorg Sterke relatie tussen theoretische concepten en praktijk Interactieve professionaliteit en kennisontwikkeling: reflectief-onderzoekende houding Opleiding als platform The Centre is a department of Fontys University. We offer courses in the field of special & inclusive education. Since the Bolonga declaration these courses have to fit in the system of bachelor- master. So now we are transforming our courses to Masters. Masters Special Educational needs. An important question in this transformation is how to combine an academic orientation (as is asked by the Masters level) with the need to safeguard the proximity to practice (as is the main focus now in the present courses. This proximity to practice is highly valued in the field, and therefore is felt essential in the new Master’s course. Our students are mainly teachers (bachelor) who work in the field, paying with special attention to special needs in regular schools or working in schools for special eduaction Who often have a great deal of experience who were not always taking the course to qualify for a future job but to bring their professional skills up to a higher level for use in their current job; To develop further our courses we have reformulated our vision of professionalism. Related to the complexity of questions in the field, professionals should: Should be able to act on the basis of self-generated knowledge and understanding (rather than acting on the basis of isolated rules and procedures); evaluate their actions systematically and experiment with alternative methods of working (rather than “doing what has always been done” or “declaring the well-trodden paths sacred”); cooperate with pupils, colleagues and other stakeholders (rather than “as the expert, always knowing what is good for others”); share insights gained in this way with others (rather than thinking that “there is nothing of interest to say about their work”); and enter into the professional and public debate to justify their own actions, and to raise the issue of the position of vulnerable pupils in the education system and in society (rather than thinking that their contribution “is irrelevant”). It demands professionals with an inquiring attitude. This vision is formulated as interactive professionalism and interactive knowledge-construction For the course it means that more attention has to be given to the development this ‘inquiry attitude’, by emphasising research, especially action research. So we are now implementing Action Research as a strategy for professional development in the Master’s course. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Action Research principes Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Action Research principes Onderzoek in de eigen praktijk en de werksituatie Analyseren en reflecteren op systematisch verzamelde informatie In dialoog met anderen binnen en buiten de school Met leerlingen en andere participanten als belangrijke informatiebron According to Ponte Action Research is characterised by four principles. Using these principles teachers can perform activities by witch they reflect on their practice, understand it and can find ways to improve it. In this principles some values are included: Action research is research by teachers themselves (possible in co-operation with academics); they engage in self-directed, inquiry based activities Teachers are the owners of the research and research questions With the research the teachers can improve their work by building a powerful relation between different kinds of knowledge, theoretical concepts and practice and communication with other workers in the field In carrying out the research they can empower themselves, realising that they can highly influence their own work situation and that what they are doing is of great value In AR teachers are focused on technical, practical and emancipatory problems: asking questions about efficiency, meaning and contribution of their work to a just and democratic society In AR they engage in a social process of construction of meaning For better understanding of the research I formulated some questions. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Action Research beloften /doelen Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Action Research beloften /doelen Link leggen tussen theorie en praktijk Bijdrage leveren aan praktijkgerichte kennisbasis Empowerment van leraren en de professie als geheel Transformatie van de praktijk Verantwoording van activiteiten In AR we see a relation between theory and practice: action research could bridge the gap. A knowledge base that has its foundation in praxis. Research carried out by teachers may lead to strengthening of autonomy and better decision making AR may lead to transformation, improvement that goes further than the search for efficiency, at least when it is based on critical reflection: asking questions why do we things the way we do it and for what purpose. AR lead to more justification of activities and offers a base for negotiation (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Relevantie van de casestudie Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Relevantie van de casestudie Als AR gezien wordt als professionaliseringsstrategie in de opleiding: Is deze strategie toepasbaar voor elke student in elke werksituatie / school? In adopting the idea of action research as a strategy for professional development in the course some assumptions are made. Assumptions made: In AR our students gain in professionalism by reflection and development of their ways of working in the school. AR, especially educational AR, is seen as a way to develop and construct knowledge on a subject, combining theory and practice AR is contextualised: carried out in their own school. Focussing on research as a strategy for professional development leads to the question of the possibility of doing this research in their own schools. In the literature it is stated that the contribution AR can make to the professional development of the teacher depends on the political and cultural context in with the AR takes place. Also can be stated the it depends on the conceptual principles on which educators and teachers base their view on what good action research is. (Ponte, Ax & Beijaard) Given some characteristics of AR ( especially the accent on dialogue, systematic gathering of information from participants, also students!, reflective action, making results public) I have focused on characteristics of the school that can be described as the school culture. It’s not the way things are organised that counts, but the way people perceive there work, work together on subjects, share values etc. Coming from the literature on culture and change I have special interest in underlying values and beliefs. This interest comes from the idea that congruency, possible match or mismatch on this level may lead to more of less appreciation of the research findings and sustainability of the change as a result of the research. For the course it seems relevant to pay attention to the conditions in the work situation. They may limit or facilitate the research. Having more insight and better understanding of possible relationship between school culture and research can help us and our students in learning to deal with this conditions. To get more insight in this relation I could benefit from a school development project in which our department was participating. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Hoofdvraag Wat is de mogelijke relatie tussen: action research Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Hoofdvraag Wat is de mogelijke relatie tussen: action research schoolcultuur Is deze relatie terug te voeren op onderliggende opvattingen? (congruentie) Heeft deze congruentie invloed op de waardering en duurzaamheid van professionele ontwikkeling Schools differ in their goals but also in the progression and implementation of the innovation. To search for a relation between school culture and the research I have focussed on UNDERLYING concepts an values (mental mindset). An interesting question is to what extent this connection is perceived and experienced by participants (actors) in the same school. A secondary question is: If there is a specific relation: does it effect the appreciation of the project and the resulting school development? In what way does this supposed connection affect the appreciation en feeling of success? If it does, the connection might be important in gaining sustainable results. This presentation is limited to the first question: the relationship between school culture an research approach. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Relevantie van onderliggende Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Relevantie van onderliggende Artefacts Zichtbare structuren en processen Espoused values Strategieën, doelen, filosofieën The focus on underlying concepts, values and assumptions comes from the idea that they influence actual behaviour in a direct way, but often without knowledge of the members of the person. These mental mindset are unspoken, taken for granted and often embedded in the personal history or professional biography. Schein, on the subject of culture, made a distinction in three layers: artefacts: visible organisational structures and processes (for instance the way co-ordination in organised, frequency of meetings, formal shape of collaboration) This is what we see, hear of feel when walking in a school. (doors are closed or open, the way people are dressed etc.) espoused values: strategies, goals, philosophies (those things that are said to be important, formulated in vision and mission statements and policy documents). Things the people say to belief in! Espoused values are expressed by asking Why are the doors open or closed? What makes it important for you? basic assumptions: taken for granted, perceptions, thought and feelings (shared experiences, subjective theories, shared work values). These are the result of a shared process of learning leading to a situation of ‘taken for granted’. No one knows exactly how this common knowledge is formed, it’s hard to make it conscious and out of discussion. One example I found in the Flemish school on the notion of ‘discipline’. This is an important value in the school, even in all schools. The respondent could only say that this is a common notion and it always has been. In the school development this notion sets a limit on the idea of participation of pupils, which was expressed as an espoused value. Her we see that the value of participation is embedded in what basically is a hierarchical relation between teachers and pupil. This relation is not under discussion: it’s the way Flemish school work: teachers know it, students know it, parents know it. This hierarchical relation is very important and also seems to exist between the principle and the teachers and even between the steering group and the teachers. In an analogous way we can think about layers that influence the way research is carried out, the goals are set and the the innovation is implemented. Basic assumptions Onbewuste, voor waar aangenomen veronderstellingen (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Research context Project Schoolontwikkeling : Algemeen doel: Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Research context Project Schoolontwikkeling : 4 Nederlandse scholen 4 Vlaamse scholen Algemeen doel: Leerlingenzorg voor alle leerlingen Action research als ontwikkelstrategie OSO participates in a project on witch Dutch and Belgium schools work together in a project. They are secondary schools, mostly professional education. Pupils are 12 to 17 years old. These schools work together in the implementation of programmes on of special educational. The project is set up to deal with problems as dyslexia, behavioural problems, motivational problems etc. The aim is to give the teachers more tools and make them more capable of handling these problems in their own class. Specialists on educational needs are seen as facilitators. The no longer focus on en work with the pupils themselves, but help the teachers. The idea of the innovation is captured in the word ‘co-ordination’ with implies the way additional help is organised, who has certain responsibilities, as well as the way teachers and specialists work together. I will use the term ‘co-ordination SEN’ to refer to the content of the innovation. Doing research was an important part of the project, mend to support the development, justify it and make results more transparent. AR should be a part of this research and to be used as a strategy school development and professional development. So this gave me a good opportunity to study the relation between school culture and action research. (at least it could have, as we will see further on). In the project the participating schools have formulated there own developmental goals. These goals are different according to their needs and actual situation. So each school has it’s own innovation progress en development. In the study I have chosen two schools for further investigation: one Dutch en one Flemish school, similar in population of pupils and both professional education. The project was led by a project group. Every school had a steering group to lead to project in the school. The Dutch school was supported by an external consultant, a employee of our department. For the Flemish schools this was not possible. The members of the steering group were employees of the school who got a special assignment. Members of the steering groups met on special meetings for consultants and on so called platform days for exchange of experiences, supportive workshops and so on. Also publications are used to inform each other and learn from each other. Respondents in my study are members of this steering groups. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Onderzoeksvragen In hoeverre komt het binnen scholen uitgevoerde onderzoek overeen met principes van actieonderzoek en wat zijn hierin onderliggende opvattingen Hoe wordt de schoolcultuur getypeerd en wat zijn hierin de onderliggende opvattingen Welke relatie zien we tussen het uitgevoerde onderzoek en cultuurkenmerken van de school. The main question can be divided in three sub questions: What are the main characteristics of the research in the project? AR is a general concept, in which research can vary in actual form. What type of research can be found in the schools? To what extent do they meet criteria for action research? Can we speak of AR if some criteria are not met? What relation can we see between the research and characteristics of the school? To what extent is the research influenced by shared values and beliefs? Actual choices in the research may be based on characteristics in the school, school culture, the shared values and beliefs. These questions comes from the hypothesis that identifiable aspects of the school culture (as shared beliefs and values) can match or mismatch types of research, especially action research. This match or mismatch could make the research approach more or less suitable and effective. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Onderzoeksmethode Document analyse Vragenlijst Interview Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Onderzoeksmethode Document analyse Rapporten en artikelen Vragenlijst Interview Analysing reports and evaluations may give insight on what was actually done in the innovation project: what activities and interventions were made to meet the goal. In these documents I searched for statements that reflect values and beliefs, at least at the level of espoused values. These reports gave me an idea of the school development, at least what was done and the results. In the reports I found an emphasis on models and procedures that were developed and implemented to manage questions about special education. Other reports were on the steps made in the process of development. However these reports appeared to be very descriptive. I found little justification of actions and choices. Neither did I find reports of research. Research was mentioned as an activity but unclear was the contribution of the research on the choices that were made or the knowledge that was build. Reports are made by the consultants and members of the steering group (a colleague in OSO). These reports are published in two books. Besides this document analysis I interviewed the participants and they completed the questionnaire. In the interview I focussed on values and concepts that may underlay their choices in the project. I used an semi-structured interview to provoke the private story of the participant: the way he sees the culture, AR approach, innovation and especially what makes the project important, why are certain choices made, what was meant and how they perceive the results. It was semi-structured in the way that I used the frame of the questionnaire. I asked about the school in general, leadership and so on. Participants are: members of a steering group - management - co-ordinator - teacher(s) Consultant The study is not yet completed. I’m in the phase of data analysis. What I can tell about the results is a general impression mainly based on the questionnaire and most striking remarks in the interview. I intend to give back the results to the participants for further exploration of the data and interpretation. So I still have to do a member check on the data and findings. From the analysis of the documents I got curious about the research in the project. What was the contribution of research and what kind of research was actually done? Was is really action research as was meant by the project? (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Action research In hoeverre komt het binnen scholen uitgevoerde onderzoek overeen met principes van actieonderzoek en wat zijn hierin onderliggende opvattingen (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Type onderzoek Wie heeft het onderzoek uitgevoerd? Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Type onderzoek Wie heeft het onderzoek uitgevoerd? Wie is eigenaar van het onderzoek? Welke onderzoeksvraag is geformuleerd? Wat was het doel van het onderzoek? Welke rol hebben participanten gespeeld? Welke onderzoeksmethode is gebruikt? To value the kind of research that actually took place in the schools I formulated some questions. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Gevonden onderzoek Uitvoering door leden van een stuurgroep Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Gevonden onderzoek Uitvoering door leden van een stuurgroep Gericht op implementatie, effecten van interventies Gericht op planning van interventies Docenten als informatiebron, beperkt betrokken bij data-analyse en reflectie The research was carried out by members of the steering group. There was no report of research done by the teachers themselves. The steering group consisted of members of the school who had a special assignment in the project. Goals were set by this group as well as procedures that should be followed. The research was focussed on the effects of interventions and activities of the steering group to make the school develop and optimize the approach of pupils with special educational need. They used the research for better planning and adjustment. Teachers were mainly used as a source of information, using questionnaires and interviews. The Flemish school reports active participation of the teachers in data analysis and formulating consequences. As a global statement on the research I can say that some –methodological- characteristics are present. The research process was cyclical and reflective, at least for the members of the steering group. They used systematic data gathering and used the information to reflect on the process and plan further steps. The reflection seems to be limited to the question as: do you know the procedures, do you know when you can make use of experts etc. Some characteristics of action research seems to be missing in this formulations: The main profit of the research is the cyclical controlled planning and reflection on the effects of the activities. It seems that the research did not, or did not yet, contribute to questioning the stated goals or assumptions that underlie the choice of the interventions and goals. (the research seems to have led to first order learning, instrumental without questioning principles). The research was not carried out by the teachers themselves, the were not the owner of the research There is no expression of a specific research or knowledge question. The research is not described as a way to gain insight or better understanding of the situation. The focus is on improvement as implementation of an innovation formulated by the steering group and the projet group. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Action Research Referentiekader Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Action Research Referentiekader Proces Kennis Plannen Doen Waar-nemen Reflecte-ren Technisch Praktisch Strategisch In this characterisation of the research we see: A cyclical process of improvement. The research is participative in the reflection and planning, not in the definition of goals. (limited participation) Focussed on merely technical knowledge: how to best get the intended results, are we effective, how do we adjust our action to the teachers Some criteria for action research are not met. AR is used as a method for implementation. So we can say that in general no action research was done. Both schools carried out research, but the did this from another perspective. In this characterisation of the research some criteria for action research are not met. So we can say that in general no action research was done. Both schools carried out research, but the did this from another perspective. The main violation of the central values of action research is that the research was not carried out by de teachers themselves but by (external) consultants. Question is: can we speak of action research. Or must we speak, like Kemmis did, of inadequate form of AR. It’s sure that the research has contributed to school development. It is doubtful whether it has realised some of the promises: Did the research lead to transformation? Did the teachers really gain in autonomy? Did it contribute to the knowledge base? Perhaps it did on a procedural level. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Formulering van respondenten Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Formulering van respondenten AR is eigenlijk hetzelfde als de Deming cirkel AR is persoonlijke reflectie AR is delen van ervaring Reflectie leidt tot actie en verbetering AR is kwaliteit verbeteren door reflectie Why did the steering group the kind of research that they did? We can find three lines of interpretation in favour of the research: Conceptualisation of AR. Respondent mentioned some characteristics of AR. Addressing to the cyclical character, the role of reflection and participation. They articulate the contribution of AR to improvement, related to quality management. Shared value: the principles of participation and support (by the steering group in the project) Biographical founded experiences: - From my experience: from the moment that you have to do it yourself, you can’t sustain - In the profit sector I learned: You can’t reach your goals without participation - I learned what you can achieve working in a team Limiting beliefs: These notions seem to limit the research to questions of efficiency and control Notions (beliefs) about change: - people need structure, they need a framework and clear arrangements - everybody needs to know what we stand for, accept the vision: then you can start to work efficiently you need a framework, clear line before you start and get an ‘oil slick’. Ownership: - We (steering group) are going to make this a success. You can’t work against your own conviction: develop from what you already can do (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Formulering van respondenten Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Formulering van respondenten Methode om problemen op te lossen Manier om verandering te implementeren Bottom-up methode voor verandering Methode voor planmatig handelen Gericht op realiseren van een specifiek doel Basis voor reflectie en actie Besides the evaluative research that the steering group did on the process, the Dutch school tried to make a group of teachers do action research as a strategy for professional development. They have formulated some interesting views on Action research. These formulations express a certain opinion on the research and I think reflect some beliefs about research and the function of research in school development. They also reflect assumptions about school development and change. Six of these formulations come from the Dutch school, the last is a central notion in the Flemish school. The formulation comes from what I call an external point of view. As members of the steering group the respondents have a specific goal and responsibility. The are aimed at realising special education in their schools: forms and programmes to be able to give special attention to students that need special educational treatment. The research done is focussed on the realisation of this program, coming from the participation in the project. In the project the schools have formulated there own goals. Both schools, Flemish and Dutch, have formulated goals that should lead to better co- ordination of the activities in relation to special educational needs. From the point of view of the members of the steering group, teachers should behave different. Teachers ought to be more sensitive to educational needs and diversity in their classes, they should better plan their activities and treatment, they should be able to notice the need for further attention by specialists in the school. To realise this the group set up a program of interventions. Coming from this goal and the role of the steering group it seems natural to express the function of action research the way they did. At the same time these expressions are reflecting a relationship between the steering group and the teachers. The steering group is the thinking and development group The teachers have to change and carry out the programs. It is the steering group who has set the goals and planned the actions. Their vision on change seems to be the vision of planned change. In this way of thinking action research is a method or intervention to make teachers do what the steering group, as policy makers, find important . This is certainly the case in the Dutch school. The steering group tried to make some of the teachers do action research and that did not work. I guess it didn’t work because the main principle: ar is research is research by teachers on questions that they find important, was violated. Making teachers do action research didn't work in one particular group. The first reason comes from my view that using this strategy as an intervention for implementation is an expression of a power relation that does not correspond with the principle of action research. A second reason is directly related to the research question. The group was new as a group, there was no common knowledge build nor was their a base of shared values. The group was in a first step of becoming a team, lacking openness and base for collaboration. From the theoretical frame it is understandable that the group did not accept the idea. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Action Research Values/Beliefs Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Action Research Values/Beliefs He saw action research as a way to strengthen democratic principles in the unsettled years after World War II, and this connection of action research with equality and justice has continued as the methodology has developed (Lewin). The Tavistock researchers were motivated by their belief that their investigations should not only generate new knowledge, but should also lead to improvement in working conditions Equal attention must be paid to providing a high quality and satisfying work environment for employees (Mumford) Group decision making is essential for authentic commitment to social action (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Schoolkenmerken Hoe wordt de schoolcultuur getypeerd en wat zijn hierin de onderliggende opvattingen ? (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Cultuur typen flexibiliteit Familie Adhocratie Intern gericht Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Cultuur typen flexibiliteit Familie Adhocratie Intern gericht Extern gericht Hierarchie Markt I try to combine these notions on culture with a typology in terms of culture profiles, coming from the work of Kim Cameron and Robert Quinn. Quinn analysed effectiveness of organisations and described four ways of thinking. This model (competing values) is used by Cameron and Quinn for diagnosing and stimulating change in organisational culture. The model is based on two axes that form a continuum. One axis is about flexibility and stability. Organisations may strive to stability (like bureaucratic, governmental organisations who have to deliver stable and trustworthy products). Organisation may also be very dynamic and flexible to be able to respond to changes in the field (like IT-companies). Organisations can at the same time have an internal or external focus. The combination leads to four quadrants which express a emphasis in the focus of the organisation. Applied to culture this results in a specific profile. They may be characterised as: Hierarchy: : the focus is internal and the aim is stability and control: Important are: rules, routines, responsibilities. (related to the intern process model in management) Market: the focus is external and the aim is efficiency and effectiveness in meeting the goals or results. (the way expectations or goals are fulfilled) (related to the rational goal model in management) Clan: focus is internal and on flexibility: cohesion, value of members of the organisation, training and support. ( a worker may feel grounded ) (human relations model) Adhocratie : focus is external and on flexibility. Goals are: grow, innovation, adaptation. A number of small units, loosely connected and flexible (open system model) I’ll give further explanation on a working sheet later on, where I have described school characteristics in this model. stabiliteit (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Cultuurprofiel Dominant kenmerk Leiderschap van de organisatie Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Cultuurprofiel Dominant kenmerk Leiderschap van de organisatie Medewerkers Bindmiddel Strategische acenten Succescriteria Culture, in the work of Cameron, can be assessed by an questionnaire consisting of six questions on six aspects of culture. The answers of the respondents lead to a profile that can be analysed and discussed in a group. One way of looking at the profile is: Can we speak of a profile: do scores on these aspects go in the same direction for one person? When there are more respondents do the profiles match with each other? In the study I used the same aspects to look at the project and the school as an environment of the project. (So we can speak of a general culture that may have influenced the choices in the project, especially in relation to research). Like in the questionnaire on school culture I asked in relation to action research: What’s the dominant characteristic of AR? What kind of leadership do we see in the project? Etc. To get the idea, lets do some work and see if this questions helps you to look at your own research project. I made a selection of statements. The questionnaire I used in my study is more comprehensive. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Vlaamse school 1 2 3 2 1 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Famile Adhocratie Markt Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Vlaamse school Famile Adhocratie Markt Hierarchie Dominant 1 2 3 Leiderschap 2 1 3 Medewerkers 1 2 3 1 Bindmiddel 2 3 Strategie Succescriteria There’s some agreement with the second respondent on the dominant characteristic of the school. They differ in their opinion of leadership. Notion that this third person is a member of school management, being vice-principle. It’s interesting to see these differences, even after three years working together in the project. In the interviews some values are formulated: Participation / collaboration / respect: in school development Top-down strategy doesn't work, you have to find your own solutions, don’t bring in solutions from outside! In the process every person in the school is important to meet quality standards In the project teachers develops at their own pace and they need to be supported (members of the steering group) The interview confirm the picture of the school as a family culture. I have characterised the research in this school as highly evaluative research, focussed on effects, used as a base for reflection (by the members of the steering group) and aimed at improvement of planning and support in the development of the school. This choice of research seems to be influenced by a strong emphasis on quality management. In the central opinion of research as phrased by the third respondent research is done because: measuring is knowing. We always measure the effect of our innovation. Although some conditions, coming from the theoretical framework, are present the school did not, or not yet, use action research. I think that the choice to focus on evaluative research is both influenced by the notion of quality research and by the position of the steering group in the project. Both fit in the picture hierarchy and control, as is the notion of discipline. Eventually the research is done to keep control over the process. Apart from this overlapping picture there appear some remarkable differences between the respondents: The dominant characteristic of research The kind of leadership in the project The perception of leadership in the school The perception of leadership and the way employees work The general description of the school and the project The research in the project seems to be highly influenced by the ideas about leadership (probably in relation to the notion of quality measurement) . Although some conditions, as we see in the values, for further participation of teachers in research are (theoretically) present. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Nederlandse school Famile Adhocratie Markt Hierarchie Dominant 1 2 3 5 6 2 3 6 4 Leiderschap 1 2 5 Medewerkers 2 3 4 6 1 4 5 Bindmiddel 1 2 3 4 5 6 2 6 Strategie 2 3 4 5 6 Succescriteria 6 1 There’s some agreement with the second respondent on the dominant characteristic of the school. They differ in their opinion of leadership. Notion that this third person is a member of school management, being vice-principle. It’s interesting to see these differences, even after three years working together in the project. In the interviews some values are formulated: Participation / collaboration / respect: in school development Top-down strategy doesn't work, you have to find your own solutions, don’t bring in solutions from outside! In the process every person in the school is important to meet quality standards In the project teachers develops at their own pace and they need to be supported (members of the steering group) The interview confirm the picture of the school as a family culture. I have characterised the research in this school as highly evaluative research, focussed on effects, used as a base for reflection (by the members of the steering group) and aimed at improvement of planning and support in the development of the school. This choice of research seems to be influenced by a strong emphasis on quality management. In the central opinion of research as phrased by the third respondent research is done because: measuring is knowing. We always measure the effect of our innovation. Although some conditions, coming from the theoretical framework, are present the school did not, or not yet, use action research. I think that the choice to focus on evaluative research is both influenced by the notion of quality research and by the position of the steering group in the project. Both fit in the picture hierarchy and control, as is the notion of discipline. Eventually the research is done to keep control over the process. Apart from this overlapping picture there appear some remarkable differences between the respondents: The dominant characteristic of research The kind of leadership in the project The perception of leadership in the school The perception of leadership and the way employees work The general description of the school and the project The research in the project seems to be highly influenced by the ideas about leadership (probably in relation to the notion of quality measurement) . Although some conditions, as we see in the values, for further participation of teachers in research are (theoretically) present. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Samenhang Welke relatie zien we tussen het uitgevoerde onderzoek en cultuurkenmerken van de school. Opvattingen met betrekking tot actieonderzoek De aard van samenwerking binnen de scholen Rol en taakopvatting van de stuurgroep Why did the steering group the kind of research that they did? We can find three lines of interpretation in favour of the research: Conceptualisation of AR. Respondent mentioned some characteristics of AR. Addressing to the cyclical character, the role of reflection and participation. They articulate the contribution of AR to improvement, related to quality management. Shared value: the principles of participation and support (by the steering group in the project) Biographical founded experiences: - From my experience: from the moment that you have to do it yourself, you can’t sustain - In the profit sector I learned: You can’t reach your goals without participation - I learned what you can achieve working in a team Limiting beliefs: These notions seem to limit the research to questions of efficiency and control Notions (beliefs) about change: - people need structure, they need a framework and clear arrangements - everybody needs to know what we stand for, accept the vision: then you can start to work efficiently you need a framework, clear line before you start and get an ‘oil slick’. Ownership: - We (steering group) are going to make this a success. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Dialoog Mogelijke consequenties voor opleiding: Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Dialoog Mogelijke consequenties voor opleiding: Mogelijke consequenties voor leergroep: Question on the results: Is their any alignment on these statements? Do they correspond in one column? What does this mean for you? Can you explain it? When your project seems to fit in column 1: Is the organisation mainly focused on flexibility and internal standards? (Type: family) Etc. (c) H. van Huijgevoort

Congruentie / VELON 2007 6-11-2006 Summary We see different conceptions of Action Research. Many see it as a method to solve problems There is little involvement of employees. The research is done by members of the steering groups In school culture we see differences between the respondents of the same school These differences can be found even after three years working in the project The differences seem to be influenced by the working experience of the participants that has led to values and beliefs, unconscious and hard to discuss The study is highly reflective. I asked the respondent to look back at the project (three years), especially the role of action research in the project and the contribution of this research to the results. It’s interesting to see that after these three years opinions differ in such a great way. In general there is a development, mostly formulated by a member of the Dutch school, that in those three years his opinion on how schools develop has changed. Starting from a notion of well planned implementation, in time and activities, this school now emphasizes the concerns of the teachers. Development now is a more democratic process as expressed in a notion as: co-creation. To realise this development groups are formed that work on specific topics. The Flemish school has formulated that in the next period the emphasis goes to the students. The students will be involved in the development, after this period where the focus was on the teachers. Seeing the diversity of opinions abut the school, the beliefs and values the respondents express in the questionnaire and interviews, I still wonder what would happen if these differences were well discussed in the group. Although I can’t be conclusive at this moment my opinion is that that in making our beliefs and values, our mindset, more public the effectiveness of school development can be improved. Based on this research I hope to be able to contribute to this discussion. Thank you for your attention. (c) H. van Huijgevoort