Curriculum leadership: a critical contributor to school and system improvement

Introduction

The idea of the teacher as a leader is far from new. There is a wealth of evidence underlying the pivotal importance of leadership at the classroom level, illuminating how teachers actively contribute to school and system change (Campbell 2015). Recently, in their book Flip the System Australia; What Matters Most in Education, the authors offer a powerful set of arguments for teachers to be advocates and catalysts for improvement at the system level (Netolicky, Andrews, and Paterson 2018). They propose that the system needs to be ‘turned inside out’ so that teachers have more influence to lead meaningful change that will positively impact on the young people they teach.

There is empirical evidence that would support this position and reinforces how teachers are leaders within and beyond their classroom. A recent review of the literature on teacher leadership (Dong, Harris, and Ng 2019) revealed that this area of empirical enquiry remains buoyant, extensive and international. It seems that there is great interest in how teachers lead in their classrooms and outside their classrooms. There is a growing narrative about the outcomes and impact of teacher leadership but still much more work to be done to strengthen this section of the knowledge base. Much of this literature tends to focus on processes, behaviours and practices of teacher leadership with the descriptive often outweighing the evaluative or empirical.

The focus on leadership at the classroom level is also reflected in the vast literature on instructional leadership e.g. Hallinger et al. (2015). The work of researchers largely but not exclusively from the USA, has consolidated both the nature and outcomes of instructional leadership practices in schools. The work of Robinson (2010) further reinforces the primacy of instructional leadership practice and its potential benefits to student learning outcomes.

The work on pedagogical leadership is also prominent in the field of education with many researchers looking at aspects of pedagogical leadership in various settings and countries e.g. Martinez and Tadeu (2018) and Waniganayake, Heikka, and Halttunen (2018). This body of work explores the nature of pedagogical interactions, practices and enactments offering both rich descriptions of practice and grounded empirical studies.

All this sounds both positive and encouraging. It seems that the international discourse on teacher leadership is alive, well and thriving. Yet, there is a missing component. There is a ‘Cinderella’ form of leadership that is less prominent and less visible within the international evidence base. A quick search on various research databases reveals that the contemporary literature on ‘curriculum leadership’ is less well developed than the other variants highlighted above. Now it could be the case, of course, that discussions about curriculum leadership naturally fall under teacher leadership, instructional leadership and pedagogical leadership more generally. Plus of course, curriculum change is dynamic and therefore studies would naturally follow the peaks and troughs of large-scale and small-scale curriculum change in different contexts and countries (e.g. Glatthorn et al. 2018) Law et al. 2016).

It is interesting, however, that this type of curriculum-focused leadership practice, enacted by teachers, is not more prominent, particularly when many countries like Hong Kong,¹ Singapore² and Wales³ are addressing their educational shortfalls through major curriculum change. Within these policy contexts, it is assumed that teachers would be playing a pivotal role in the design, delivery, evaluation and refinement of any new curriculum but how far are teachers playing an active role as curriculum leaders remains a moot point.

The next section of this article invites an expert view from an academic who is currently engaged in a major curriculum reform process at the system level. This commentary is not about the reform process itself, as this is widely documented, but these are some personal reflections on what curriculum leadership actually means in practice.

Curriculum leadership in Wales

Currently, there is unprecedented system level change in Wales. A new co-constructed national curriculum framework (for ages 3–16) will be published in January 2020⁴ and there is ongoing consultation about the future of qualifications and assessment. In addition, there have been substantial changes to initial teacher education as well as significant investment in professional learning. Most recently, the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2018⁵ results highlighted some performance improvements in Welsh education. While the results offer some encouragement, it is recognised and accepted that further improvements remain necessary placing extra expectations on those leading at all levels in the system.

Most importantly curriculum reform in Wales has brought new opportunities for teachers to engage with system level change (Donaldson 2015). There is a strong emphasis on the central role of teachers as curriculum-makers and shapers underlining the co-constructed nature of the new curriculum.⁶ Typically, teacher involvement in curriculum-making has tended to be restricted to activity at the meso-level through engagement with district and regional agencies or micro-level school-based curriculum development. The systematic and large-scale involvement by teachers as relatively autonomous leaders of macro-level curriculum making (i.e. the formation of national policy) has been far less prevalent (Priestley and Biesta 2013).

Within Wales this systematic approach to curriculum leadership is firmly in place. The curriculum ‘pioneers’ i.e. teachers who have been directly involved in the co-construction process – reinforces the importance and centrality of teachers’ professional agency and curriculum leadership. Throughout the various stages of curriculum design, teachers have worked collaboratively and creatively to envisage quite different trajectories for practice than were in place previously (Crick and Priestley 2019). In addition, the co-construction of the new curriculum has generated different types of curriculum leadership, including subject/disciplinary leadership, pedagogic leadership, as well as wider system/structural leadership.

Curriculum leadership: why it matters

This single example of the engagement of teachers in large-scale curriculum reform highlights both the potential and the power of teacher leadership in action. Instead of teachers simply being the passive recipients of change, they are actively leading the change process and jointly responsible for the delivery of a major system-level change. This is not to suggest that the process of co-constructing a new national curriculum is free of challenges or tensions or critics, in fact the reverse is true. Engaging teachers in curriculum reform at scale is a major task and some would argue, a significant risk.

Whatever the outcomes of this reform process, it serves to underline the importance of curriculum leadership, not as a sub-set or variant of teacher leadership but as a distinctive form of teacher agency. Curriculum leadership requires rigorous consideration of content, progression, assessment and pedagogy, the essence of teaching. This is very reason why curriculum leadership matters and why it deserves far greater research attention and prominence in school and system improvement discourse.

Looking ahead to 2020, it is unlikely that education systems around the world will become less complex or demanding. The pressures placed upon those who work in schools looks set to remain. A great deal is asked of the teaching profession, a great deal is expected, and a great deal is delivered. Teachers enact and fulfil many leadership roles in their careers and at some time will engage in curriculum leadership. The contribution that this form of leadership makes to classroom, school and system improvement should not be overlooked or underestimated (Fullan and Gallagher 2020).

ORCID

Alma Harris http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5554-3470

Michelle Jones http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7098-8814

Tom Crick http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5196-9389

Notes

1 https://www.edb.gov.hk/en/curriculum-development/renewl/index.html.

2 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228631880_Preschool_Curriculum_and_Policy_Changes_in_Singapore.

3 https://gov.wales/curriculum-wales-2022.

4 https://gov.wales/curriculum-wales-2022.

5 https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/pisa-2018-results.htm.

6 https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2018-03/succesful-futures-a-summary-of-professor-graham-donaldsons-report.pdf.