Figure 3.1 clearly shows the difference between the two approaches, highlighting how the 'Engage Approach' allows for dialogue to occur where both theories of action are evaluated. This is very important as it shows a respect and trust between the different parties. Where as the 'Bypass Approach' doesn't take into account the teacher's theory of action or assumes everyone has the same desire to improve the current situation.
Chapter 3 also explained how critical it is to understand the beliefs and values that drive the current practice because if this doesn't happen you are more likely to experience objections towards the improvements.
An important aspect of this chapter to me was the importance of evaluating all theories of action - the current practice as well as the proposed practice. This really deepened my understanding of why some 'new' approaches don't succeed - especially ones that are presented in a top down manner, as they can't/ don't always seek to understand the theory of action currently in practice. It is easy to understand however why the bypass model would be the preferred approach , especially when it is implemented at a diocesan or national level (as mentioned in the book) as it is difficult to dig deeper into the theory of action of all stakeholders.
Although now it seems so obvious, the book also highlighted the importance of both parties to agree that the current situation is unsatisfactory and experimenting with an alternative methods is the best way for improvement to occur. Sometimes I feel I forget this aspect of leading change, especially when I feel passionate about the new method or can obviously see the positive impact it may have on student learning.
When reflecting on my own practice it made me realise the importance of not assuming others have the same theory of action as you and to spend time in dialogue with staff to develop an understanding of their theory of action. It also helped me see the importance of having a clear understanding of my own theory of action so it can be articulated with staff and evaluated. It also highlighted how important respect is in our roles. Respect is so important in order for a robust debate to occur around all theories of action so an agreed solution can be found. This is clearly the only way to move from bypass to engagement and ensure improvement of student learning occurs. Hopefully I will continue to develop my skills in this area and deepen my own ability to embed this into my leadership.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI particularly related to the last paragraph in this blog. I found myself thinking about times when change worked and times when change didn't work. I liked the example of the bypass method in relation to the lead teachers and maths and the rationale as to why the one lead teacher was able to make it work. I also strongly agree with the statement above on respect and how it enables robust dialogue to take place. In this way ones Theory of Action is unpacked with each other, which helps then to enable a better understanding of each others beliefs and values. The development of respect sometimes takes time and hopefully strengthens over time when staff can see leaders are willing to adjust their thinking also as a consequence of true listening.
ReplyDeleteLeanda
ReplyDeleteThank you for your blog and I agree with what you have written. This chapter was an extension of chapter two and I agree that when teachers are involved in the theory of action, and have the opportunity to be involved in the conversation around the change, change should be more successful. It is my belief that if teachers have the opportunity to express their concerns about a change and are fully informed of the targeted benefits of such change misconceptions can be minimised and teachers are more likely to be less resistant to the change as they have the opportunity to understand the intended outcome.
Yes fully agree. The dialogue mentioned in the chapter is critical so that engagement can happen. I like the idea of agreed interim evaluation of each theory. Agreeing to trial a change and then discuss and evaluate is much more effective than bypassing all ideas.
ReplyDelete