Zora Rutar Ilc, ph.d. National Education Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia

1. Pilot project “Didactic modernisation in general upper secondary schools” – a case of complex and various support to teachers Zora Rutar Ilc, ph.d. National Education Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia Operacijo delno financira Evropska unija iz Evropskega socialnega sklada ter Ministrstvo za šolstvo in šport. Operacija se izvaja v okviru Operativnega programa razvoja človeških virov v obdobju 2007-2013, razvojne prioritete: Razvoj človeških virov in vseživljenjsko učenje; prednostne usmeritve: Izboljšanje kakovosti in učinkovitosti sistemov izobraževanja in usposabljanja.

2. New teachers’ roles - various kinds of training: • Classical courses, conferences and workshops • Study groups for all subject teachers • Networks of project groups, teachers and schools • Cascade mode courses (teachers as trainers) • School based inservice (SBI) courses • Innovative projects The most effective is the combination - as our case

3. The analysis of the learning and teaching process in secondary high schools (1999 -2003) has shown that there is: - lack of active learning - lack of interdisciplinary learning and project based approaches - too few authentic situations - less independent thinking from first to fourth grade … • How to support teachers and schools to improve their practice in weak areas?

4. The pilot project of Didactic modernisation was designed for: • 1. Didactic support to teachers: implementing more active methods by seminars, workshops, consultations, observations and analyses …– focus on subject teachers and special didactics • 2. Strategic support for schools- by initiating and introducing changes- focus onschool teachers teams and their coordinative role

5. At first: imposed goals and activities for teachers: • At didactic level - to stimulate: • process and problem approach • wider repertoir of teaching and assesment methods and strategies • inter-disciplinary connections, authentic learning situations • new culture of assessment and grading • organisational arrangements, e.g. block schedules, project work • At school level– support for former • Denying their needs and experiences, priorities, goals and strategies … • Lack of clarity in articulating goals and lack of sense

6. Informing about goals, strategies … Strong support from the subject specialists Uniform and prescribed activities Constructivist approach – discussing the need for changes, analysing the initial stage, priorities … Peer support (critical friendship, peer monitoring, reflection …) Individualised paths (dev. plans) and networking The strategy of implementing novelties has gradually been transformed from TOP DOWN to combination with elements of EMPOWERMENT(by the principle of enrichment not replacement):

7. transmitters, coordinators occupied with prescribed tasks: How to stimulate each stage of the project closely observing guidelines? Reports change agents -workshops creating, researching, negotiat., developing- AR: What is quality? Indicators? Where are we? What are our capacities and exp.? What are our priorities/aims What are the strategies? Evaluations, reflections, portfolios cont. – the level of school developmental teams:

8. What has happened? • Schools started to transform into learning and autoregulative communities by: - creating the “innovations friendly environment” (through preparation activities) - systematic approach to development – they manage and direct their development (through implementing innovations by devel. planning and AR)

9. and teachers appeared in new roles: - the members of the school project team became change agents - all the teachers became more development oriented and reflective, they also became the researchers of their own practice

10. Two crucial mechanisms for this: • The establishment of the school developmental team (addit value), which was trained to manage the developmental process • The distributed leadership: headmasters were ready to share their “power”

11. Some strong areas of the project – the combination of top down and bottom up approach • The inclusion of the entire teaching stuff (seminars/act/ev) • Strong subject consultants’ support (consult/monitor/exch) • The establishment of school dev. teams and their role of change agents • Focus on long period of preparation • The introduction of action research and developm. plann. • Emphasis on teachers’ individual personal projects / small groups’ action research plans, school development plans and school evaluations / PF The sense of pariticipation, ownership and responsibility is developed - empowerment

12. The dydactic context of the project remained the same, but it was not implemented top down any more but with the participation of the teachers, who discussed concepts, aims, priorites and strategies and gathered them on the school’s level in the development plan of the school, where the schools inovations’ priorities were defined and operationalised, also on personal level

13. What does individual personal project mean? - teachers select and plan at least 1 innovation (intensive or extensive) each year, - implement it with the support of subject consultant • discuss and analyse it with critical friend(s) • evaluate it • present it as a case in a subject teachers’ group • exchange experiences and ideas • Follow-up year: upgrading – care for sustainability (spiral of change)

14. The same spiral of change on the level of school(s) - Development planning … - Implementing with the support of consultant - Discussing, monitoring, analysing - Evaluating - Presenting and exchanging (network) - Upgrading e.g.: active teaching methods are being upgraded with interdisciplinary approach and authentic learning …

15. Evaluation: Didactic aims were fullfilled successfully, but there were also other effects: • On teachers’ personal level: perception of new chances for their professional development • On the school level: -improvement of the climate because of more pedagogic discussion and common learning - improvement of theculturebecause of more self-evaluation, critical friendship and reflection - more developmental orientation through action research and developmental planning More opennessfor the changes and widening of their repertoire of methods, strategies and even concepts and beahviours

16. Basic Principles in change introduction we have learned (our team was also a learning community!): • Teachers and schools as partners – “change agents” • Not depowerment butempowerment – feeling of importance and responsibility • Individualised approach in relation to schools at simultanous networking • Accept the annoyment which accompanies the changes with empathy, because it is a signal of change processes • Spiral development: breaking the old balance and restablishing on a qualitatively higher level • Interventions should be first oriented towards people and their capacities and than to changes • Long term effects – the change of culture – patience!

17. What questions remained open for the future? • How to stimulate this process in more schools? • How to introduce changes in the context of systemic reform? • How to combine top-down and bottom-up approach?

18. In which manner were these experiences included in the new, widely broadened project: Emphasis on schools as learning communities: • Establishment of school’s developmental project teams • Intensive support to them for the inititation and implementation • Stress on careful initiation before implementation • School’s developmental plans and teachers’ personal projects at the start and portfolios during and at the end as indicators • Subject support from consultants and mentor teachers

19. Steps in the new project (supported with the manual for teams designed by the same steps): • preparation / initiation: discussion about changes, qualitiy(indicators), SWOT, development priorities • “content” preparation - common didactic principles : planning, active role of students, interdisc. approach, new culture of assessment … • development plan • implementation • evaluation, reflections, presentations, exchange of experiences