CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

In the spring of 1999, I designed a new interdisciplinary course in Agribusiness. It was scheduled to run in the fall of the same year with me teaching the science component and a colleague from the business department teaching the business portion of the course. As department heads and teachers, we both had a clear idea of how to proceed with the new course; however, in June 1999, I accepted the position of Secondary Teacher Consultant with my board of education. In this new role, I was still committed to the IDS course but would act as an outside resource person for the teachers actually offering the course. My involvement during the course of this project would offer an incredible learning experience. Not only would I learn about designing and implementing an educational project, but also I would learn about myself and the role of teacher consultant.

According to Ross and Regan (1995), consultants in Ontario fall into two categories: "About half are special education consultants who assist teachers in programming for special need students; the remainder are curriculum consultants who help teachers program with specific subject (specialists) or within a student population (generalists)" (p. 116). My school board favours the generalist approach, and I was employed as Secondary Teacher Consultant responsible for curriculum, assessment, and research at 7 of the 17 secondary schools in our jurisdiction.

In some boards, subject specialists take responsibility for a specific area of instruction; for example, at a meeting in Toronto in February 2001 at the headquarters for Ontario Physical and Health Educators Association (OPHEA) I met a consultant from the Toronto District School Board whose job was to co-ordinate the distribution of resources and curriculum directions to schools. She actually rarely got into schools. This is in contrast to the model used in the Grand Erie District School Board (GEDSB), which encourages an "instructional leader" approach and sees the teacher consultants visiting classes and schools on a regular basis. As noted by Ross and Regan (1995), "most consultants are teachers who are in the role for brief periods (two or three years); they return to the classroom at the end of their terms or seek positions of added responsibility, such as vice-principalship" (pp. 115-116). In the GEDSB, principals are expected to be curriculum leaders, and program support staff, co-ordinators and consultants, are encouraged to move from those support roles to administrative positions in which they will use their experience to become effective curriculum leaders (P. Moffatt, Director of Education, GEDSB, personal comunication, September 8, 2000).

Clearly, it was within my new role to work as an instructional leader. Most literature on educational change examines teachers and administrators as leaders who have two roles. One role is based in the individual's body of knowledge regarding a specific change, and the other builds on different relationships. The teacher consultant, similarly, is expected to exhibit skill in both contexts, coming to a change project with an assumed body of knowledge and an ability to forge relationships among the partners in the project. I believe that a consultant can provide support and knowledge in a given project and have been surprised to find very little literature researching the consultant's role in educational change. While studies like the work of Ross and Regan (1991, 1995) have explored the characteristics of teacher consultants and their relationships with others, there is a gap in the literature with respect to how consultants reflect on and modify their own practice as they work with teachers to implement or refine new programs. My study is intended to address this gap.

Since the literature I reviewed tended to fall into three categories, I have used these as subsections in this review: Organizational Structures and Obstacles, The Creation and Sharing of Knowledge, and Educational Leadership.

Organizational Structures and Obstacles

According to Panaritis (1995), "the ultimate goal of interdisciplinary education is nothing less than to profoundly reconstruct what schools teach (curriculum) and how it gets taught (pedagogy)" (p. 624). To move toward changing both curriculum and pedagogy is a demanding proposition; however, one must be prepared to undertake change of such magnitude as a process. In Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform, Michael Fullan (1993) states, "change is a journey, not a blueprint" (p. 24). On two occasions in April and May of 1999, Ministry of Education and Training (MET) School Implementation Team training for Ontario Secondary Reform highlighted Fullan's work as an introduction to the change process for teachers. By focusing on the philosophy of change, the planners allowed teachers to understand both the climate for change and the machinations required to implement change, especially in an educational context. Emphasizing that "every person is a change agent" (Fullan, p. 10), the MET is clearly taking steps to foster a positive reaction to the new curriculum by empowering teachers to accept and initiate change in their schools. Consultants come from the classroom to work on projects at the system level; as such, they need to develop an understanding of the characteristics of change and change agents. Literature on the topics of change theory and educational change offers consultants a broad base of knowledge about organizational structures and obstacles, but typically does not address the specific role or obligations of consultants in the change process.

Fullan (1993) notes that "implementation means curriculum change" and that to the classroom teacher this "means changes in behaviours and practices, and ultimately new beliefs and understandings" (Preedy, 1989, p. 147). Additionally, he outlines the factors that are related to successful curriculum change, grouping them under the headings of initiation, implementation, and institutionalization (p. 147). Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, Roth, and Smith (1999) is aligned with Fullan's thinking and also discusses a triphasal model: initiating, sustaining, and redesigning and rethinking. Furthermore, Senge identifies challenges in each phase of change; both the phases and the challenges have real implications for educational change agents.

In her article "How Do We Make Lasting Improvements?", Marge Scherer (2000) reinforces the notion that top-down reforms fail to gain momentum despite large financial infusions of money. She notes the importance of a commitment to an ideal, commitment from educators, commitment from leaders, and a commitment from the community.

Fullan (1993) similarly ascribes that both top-down and bottom-up strategies are necessary for successful change and that "the best organizations learn externally as well as internally" with "every person being a change agent" (p. 36).

Much of the literature surrounding educational change talks of collaborative culture of change management. Peter Senge' book The Dance of Change: The Challenges to Sustaining Momentum in Learning Organizations (1999), talks about the difference between "authority-driven vs. learning-driven" models of change and notes that the success of authority driven change efforts "is powerful only so long as it is pushed" (p. 41). "Effective leaders understand intuitively that rather than driving change, they need to participate, being willing to change themselves" (Senge et al., p. 56). In The Power of Partnerships (2002), Riane Eisler refers to such power relationships as "hierarchies of actualization" and says that unlike "hierarchies of domination," hierarchies of actualization see leaders empower rather than disempower others (p. 70). Managers in these situations don't act as "cops or controllers, but as mentors and helpful facilitators" (Eisler, p. 70).

Obviously, the literature presents important information regarding power relationships and change. The educational consultant, however, rarely has the option of real power and is able to exert influence at best. The literature can arm the consultant with excellent background theory about how to manage change but does not specifically address the role of the consultant in the process.

If a consultant has any "power," it is in being perceived as a specialist (Ross & Regan, 1995, p. 116). As such, projects led by consultants could be seen as top-down change. The literature cautions all managers against pure top-down change, and this caution can be extrapolated to the consultant believed by colleagues to be a power broker. Change elicits strong counterforces if hierarchical in nature. Cloke and Goldsmith (2002), in The End of Management and the Rise of Organizational Democracy, describe the consequences to change in hierarchical, bureaucratic, autocratic organizations eliciting emotions of "apathy, cynicism, distrust, and resistance" (p. 260). In contrast, organizations that change through democratic, collaborative, and self-managing processes tend to bring honest, open interconnectivity, and conflicts and resistance dwindle (Cloke & Goldsmith, p. 260).

Recognizing that the consultant can proceed as a collaborator in change projects, it is important to also recognize the interconnectivity of any change project: "All change holistically affects the system in which it occurs, much like a wave, or ripple in a pond" (Cloke & Goldsmith, 2002, p. 269). The metaphor of a change wave magnifies the importance of the change agent in the process. Senge et al. (1999) and Cloke and Goldsmith (2002) both note that change agents need to change in order to effect change: "Change is not exclusive to anyone involved and there is no such thing as neutral observation" (Cloke & Goldsmith, p. 271).

The literature presents convincing and useful information for change agents from business and educational settings. In terms of educational change, classroom teachers tend to be the centre of most change research because the nature of educational change embraces grass-roots movement. The consultant's place in the dance of change is neither clearly explored nor defined.

The Creation and Sharing of Knowledge

In You and Your Action Research Project (1997), McNiff, Lomax, and Whitehead outline the importance of creating and sharing knowledge: "It is through inquiring into our own practice that we are able to create a living form of educational theory that is constituted by the descriptions and explanations that we produce about our own educational development as we answer questions like 'How do I improve what I am doing?'" (p. 11).

Gallego, Hollingworth, and Whitnack (2001) speak to school reforms requiring "relational knowing" (p. 240). They define relational knowing as a "knowledge of curriculum and instruction, knowledge of self and other, and knowledge of critical action" (p. 240). Clearly, relational knowing involves creating one's own knowledge and understanding of his or her practice; sharing individual knowledge broadens system understanding and provides an impetus for effective reform.

Wagner (2002) points out that "organizations often lack the knowledge needed to create the more substantive kinds of change. They have to create it. Leaders alone do not usually have the new knowledge needed to solve entirely new and much more complex problems" (p. 129). Further, he says that educational leaders need to "stop offering simplistic or formulaic solutions" and look to "creating a culture that generates new knowledge to solve new problems" (p. 129).

Creating knowledge depends on new and reflective thought by the practitioner: "The challenge is to think through and then express the patterns and principles that have been operative in one's educational experience" (Pinar, 1975). In the process, the creative curriculum leader as autobiographer will achieve a deeper self-understanding generally" (Brubaker, 1994, p. 35). The autobiography, or reflective journal, can help a curriculum leader, whether teacher, administrator, or consultant, to frame, explore, and understand his or her practice and then share that understanding with colleagues.

The autobiography or reflective journal is an important tool in action research projects. Elliott (1991) believes that action research constitutes a form of creative resistance because it transforms rather than simply preserves the old professional craft culture of teachers (p. 49). If teachers believe that changing their practice will improve the students' experience, they will do so; teachers who see benefits from their changes will continue to resist the status quo in favour of positive transformation. New curriculum projects require new understanding of the role of a teacher in the learning process. Jean McNiff (1995), in Action Research for Professional Development, sees action research as a practical way of looking at our own work in order to check whether it is as we would like it to be. Furthermore, she notes that empirical researchers inquire into other people's lives, while action researchers inquire into their own (p. 5). By examining oneself, one can see weaknesses to renovate and strengths on which to build. Finally, action research mirrors the kind of experiences teachers try to provide for their students. Action research is a reflective practice in which teachers model authentic learning in a holistic context: "Action research integrates teaching and teacher development, curriculum development and evaluation, research and philosophical reflection, into a unified conception of a reflective educational practice" (Elliott, 1991, p. 54).

Reflective practice in various forms is well represented in the literature. While there is considerable attention to self-actualization as well as to top-down mandates of sharing knowledge, a more grass-roots approach to creating and sharing knowledge is not documented. This project addresses self-reflection as well as ways to build knowledge and share it with the partners in a curriculum initiative.

Educational Leadership Strategies

A number of books on influence and consulting address the concept of leadership from a business perspective. Many volumes have been written for the business world, and the gurus of business leadership and consulting are well known and respected in fields outside business as well. Covey (1989), Robbins (1986), Blanchard and Bowles, (1993) among others have created excellent resources regarding leadership, many principles of which might be applied to leadership within the education sector by educational leaders who seek outside reading on the more general topic of leadership.

For example, the authors of Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence present an interesting approach to change and leadership through emotional intelligence. Goleman, Byatzis, and McKee (2002) see change better effected if it is promoted through a learning agenda versus a performance agenda (p. 140). The performance agenda provokes defensiveness because focus is on achieving a measure of success, whereas learning agendas focus on the possibility of change that will eventually lead to better performance (p. 141). Obviously, many business-related books give excellent insights into how to create powerful influence and relationships with others; however, while an educator might be compelled to apply the business theories to educational practice, the literature does not specifically address how education functions like business, and thus, teacher consultants must make the leap on their own.

I have noticed that many educational leaders draw upon business texts to form their own leadership styles and agendas. Collaboration and relationships form the basis for much literature about educational leadership. Craig (1992) observes that collaborative relationships develop when power is shared and voice, conversation, and community are valued in the educational enterprise (p. 25). Similarly, Brubaker explains: "The creative curriculum leader uses his or her talents to help others identify and use their talents" (1994, p. 67). These texts echo the work of Stephen Covey (1989) in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. He identifies the highest level of personal change as interdependence: "As an interdependent person, I have the opportunity to share myself deeply, meaningfully, with others, and I have access to the vast resources and potential of other human beings" (p. 51). Leadership in education, as well as in business, moves to promote interdependence.

Silva, Gimbert, and Nolan (2000) define the components of teacher leadership along with the school-structure and relationship barriers that teacher leaders face (p. 779). The authors present a case study that defines teacher leaders as master teachers leading from within the classroom and "identify the following assertions: teacher leaders model professional growth, teacher leaders help other with change, and teacher leaders challenge the status quo" (p. 779). Similarly, Walsley (1991) defines teacher leadership as "the ability of the teacher leader to engage colleagues in experimentation and then examination of more powerful instructional practices in the service of more engaged student learning" (p. 171).

In addition to resources for principal leadership and teacher leadership, a number of books like School Consultation: Practice and Training (1992) by Conoley and Conoley or Rosenfield's Instructional Consultation (1987) delineate the roles and responsibilities of "instructional consultants," consultants in the psychology services area of education. However, there are few resources that go into the depth of procedures for curriculum consultants acting as educational leaders, and this is evidenced by a study of support staff conducted in 1993 by Mary Hookey for the Federation of Women Teachers' Associations of Ontario (FWTAO), Our Hidden Resources: A Study of Resource Staff. Hookey surveyed 56 coordinators and 171 consultants through a questionnaire and semistructured interviews to provide insights into how support staff perceived their jobs (p. 13). Among the findings were some generalizations about how consultants learn as professionals and facilitate change. Of interest, the study identifies that consultant expertise tends to be "learned on the job with few or sporadic opportunities to learn about work through formal professional preparation or development" (p. 9). The study says "expertise may also develop by combining critical reflection in experience in the role with an exploration of the ideas contained in models of resource work" (p. 9). This research presents observations and conclusions about the learning and development of "women who serve in resource positions of the public elementary school system level in Ontario" (p.12). Likewise, in 1989, Mike Wallace explored the role of consultants in a collegiate approach to curriculum management (Preedy, 1989, p. 185). His work also deals with primary and middle school consultants, and again, the secondary context is not explored.

Perhaps the clearest gap in literature on consultants is that there is very little research on the role within the context of secondary education. Michael Fullan (2000) recognizes that secondary schools adapt differently to change and estimates that an elementary school can change in about 3 years while change in a secondary school takes about 6 years (p. 1). The structure and culture of secondary schools are different from those of elementary schools, and this is why it is important to examine specifically the role of the secondary consultant as an educational leader.

Conclusion

While an educational system is one that has a fairly rigid hierarchical structure--director, superintendents, principals and vice-principals, and teachers--teacher consultants operate to a large degree outside that hierarchy. The consultant is in no way a supervisor, yet he or she is responsible for creating programs and products, managing initiatives, and indeed, facilitating changes within a system. Most of the literature about consulting, whether in the world of business or an educational setting, discusses relationship-building as the cornerstone of successful organizational structures. Most literature recognizes that the development of change-making relationships takes time. In a practical sense for education, time is a luxury: Bound by daily, cycle, and yearly schedules, fiscal calendars, and the actual time teachers spend with students and in completing school-related tasks outside school time, the consultant faces time pressure on all fronts. Most literature recognizes time as a resource, but does not address how to balance fostering relationships and meeting deadlines.

Leadership books often top best seller lists. The business world is rife with models and systems for leadership development. While many of the precepts of leadership in business contexts can apply to education as a service industry, some specific issues of educational leadership must come from educational leaders themselves, because teaching and learning are driven by interpersonal relationships rather than profit margins. Because of their commitment to the interpersonal aspects of business, the works of Covey (1989) and Goleman et al. (2002) appeal to me. Covey especially promotes balance and understanding that all sectors of one's life must be valued to increase quality of life and overall effectiveness, and I feel that these lessons would be well learned by leaders in all fields, including education. Goleman et al. emphasize emotional intelligence, which speaks to understanding one's private, educational, and business selves as well as these aspects of family and colleagues; for teachers, this concept could be expanded to include students and parents.

In a school system, leadership takes place at the hands of all the players in the hierarchy. The roles of principals, superintendents, and other education leaders have expanded during the past decade to include a larger focus on teaching and learning, professional development, data driven decision making, and accountability. With leadership for student learning as the priority, instructional leadership might be described as "anything the leaders do to improve teaching and learning in their schools and districts" (King, 2002, p. 62). In the role of teacher consultant, it is important to find ways to liaise with all partners in education. While experts like Fullan, Hargreaves, and Senge address global and even system leadership for change, literature presenting specific concepts and methods for grass-roots leadership in curriculum projects is lacking.

Consultants come to their roles because they have demonstrated leadership as teachers at the school level. At a system level, they are expected to provide amplified leadership and support classroom teachers to improve student learning. The literature that informed the consultants' classroom practice--literature about teacher improvement, reflective journals, and action research--are a beginning to the consultant's development in the new role, but it is here that the consultant needs to create and share new knowledge. How does a consultant develop a body of expertise in the support role? Certainly, using various methods for reflective practice forms the cornerstone, but literature regarding practitioner research specifically relating to educational consultancy is scarce. The call of the consultant is to create and share knowledge for the teachers within his or her system, but how is the new consultant's own practice informed? My experience as a developing leader demonstrates that reading a wide variety of literature related to education, change, and leadership provides the biggest and best archive for personal and professional growth. I have been able to apply the general concepts of some books to particular aspects of my practice; however, in some ways, I continue to search for education-specific materials regarding change and leadership.