Why we need to change the narrative of school improvement to stop change for change’s sake, with Nathan Burns.
For many leaders, the question that they so often get asked is, “So, what are you going to be implementing?” We have a narrative in education around consistently introducing new ideas and trying out the latest research-backed approach. In reality though, this is the wrong way of looking at things. Perhaps instead, we should be asking “So, what are you going to be de-implementing”?
Over the last couple of decades, the Government has moved towards more regular announcements (even of policies which aren’t new) to meet the 24-hour news cycle. This one change in politics has led to significant bad policy, but I’d argue it isn’t all too dissimilar in education, either.
With multiple social media platforms having ‘edu-spheres’ and more research being available at the touch of our fingertips than ever before, standing still is perceived as ‘moving backwards’. If you aren’t adopting the latest practices, you’re treated as if you’re regressing and your learners won’t be doing as well.
Changing the narrative of school improvement
In the push to stay ahead, leaders are determined to introduce these new ideas, looking at ways that they can squeeze in a new teaching and learning approach or initiative to support improved behaviour or attendance. Though this is admirable, there is a big gap in the planning process – the importance of de-implementation.
Consistently, schools are tight for time and staff are over-worked. New demands from Ofsted and central Government are drifting through all of the time, in areas such as attendance and curriculum, for example.
Over the last decade, dozens of new initiatives, teaching and learning approaches, policies, and so much more, will have been introduced into your setting. Regardless of your phase and context, this is true everywhere.
But of all of these new approaches, what is actually working? Do all of these previously implemented approaches, introduced with the best will in the world and often with a whole raft of research papers supporting their importance, actually bring any benefit to staff and, crucially, your students?
It is important that we change the narrative on school improvement. Sometimes, doing something new is important but, often, the most helpful thing is to evaluate what is always happening and to determine which approaches need to go, which need to stay and be refined, and which need to be spread across more years, subject areas or staff.
The reflective leader is the leader that we should be championing – one who is as hot on determining which practices need to go, as they are with which practices to introduce. And, as a sector, we need to be championing this, too. If we consider the NPQs that so many leaders now undertake, significant portions of time are given to implementing change (for example, using the EEF model for sustaining and embedding change). Though this is crucial, similar time is not perhaps given to evaluating a context and then determining that, actually, doing nothing or removing some approaches is the best way forward.
I often find this when marking NPQ papers, too. Candidate after candidate discusses the evidence for change, new policies and radical approaches. And then, every once in a while, there comes along a set of responses which emphasises careful and considerate change – with thoughts of workload, previous implementation, the importance of removing some approaches and improving others, rather than diving straight into new policies. These responses feel far more realistic and considerate of what it truly means to lead in any educational setting.
Identifying where you might need to de-implement
For any reader who is responsible for leading change, this means you are also responsible for evaluating changes that have occurred. All changes do, at some point, need an evaluation before we move on.
Here are some of the key questions which you may want to reflect upon:
- What changes have recently been introduced?
- Which approaches are working, and what evidence do you have for that?
- Of the approaches which are working (and are evidenced), do they need to: remain (e.g. interventions), expand (e.g. across departments and phases), be replaced by superior approaches (unlikely, but possible)?
- Which approaches are not currently working but are worth sustaining with perhaps some changes? And, of course, what are those changes?
- Which approaches are not currently working and need to be removed?
- Of those removed approaches, do any need to be replaced? Or should we leave it open for potential future capacity or removing teacher overwhelm?
These questions, with subsequent discussions and fact finding, are a crucial part of the exploring phase of planning and monitoring for effective change. Any aspiring or current leaders need to build this clear routine into any change that they are trying to lead. Also, crucially, we need to place importance on reviewing change and recognise that, sometimes, doing nothing rather than constantly doing ‘something’ is the best way of leading.
Author
Nathan Burns is the UK’s leading metacognition expert. He supports schools and organisations nationwide. A former Head of Maths and author of three books, he now delivers high-quality metacognition PD and maths training, sharing insights online as 'Mr Metacognition.'
