The term schoolwide pedagogy was once rarely heard and yet has now become a part of most discussions around school improvement. But what does it really mean and why is the presence of a schoolwide pedagogical framework important? Some would say that in their school the adoption of an authoritative approach such as Habits of Mind, Bloom’s Taxonomies or the Productive Pedagogies is a schoolwide pedagogical framework. To some extent they are, but what is often lacking is the intellectual and social capacity that is built through collective professional sharing and articulation of strongly held beliefs about contextually relevant teaching and learning practices. Without this sense of ownership, teacher adoption ends up being sporadic at best with some teachers paying only lip service to imposed quality frameworks. In schools that have engaged with the processes of the Innovative Designs for Enhancing Achievements in Schools (IDEAS) project, personal pedagogical principles and authoritative pedagogical principles are contextualized by the school community as a whole. The story from one school is used to demonstrate the enduring strength of commitment when a school creates its own SWP.
AbawiL. (2012). Ah-ha! A CCLUE: Identifying the essence and significance of a contextually specific meaning system in three Australian schools engaged in on-going school improvement. PhD thesis, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba.
2.
AndrewsD.CrowtherF. (2003). 3-dimensional pedagogy – The image of 21st century teacher professionalism. In CrowtherF. (Ed.), Teachers as leaders in a knowledge society (pp. 95–113). Deakin West, ACT: Australian College of Educators.
3.
AndrewsD.LewisM. (2005). Building capacity: Teachers thinking and working together to create new futures. Paper presented at the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement Conference, Barcelona.
4.
AndrewsD.LewisM. (2007). Transforming practice from within: The power of the professional learning community. In StollL.Seashore LouisK. (Eds.), Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas (pp. 132–147). New York: McGraw Hill Open University Press.
5.
BrykA. S.SchneiderB. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
6.
ConwayJ. M. (2008). Collective intelligence in schools: An exploration of teacher engagement in the making of significant new meaning. PhD thesis, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba.
7.
CrowtherF. (2011). From school improvement to sustained success: The parallel leadership pathway. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
8.
CrowtherF.AbawiL.AndrewsD.ConwayJ. M.DawsonM.LewisM.PetersenS. (2010). Building and sustaining capacity in your school – The COSMIC C-B model. ACEL Monograph Series (Vol. 47). Penrith, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Leaders (ACEL).
9.
CrowtherF.AndrewsD. (2003). Australian Research Council SPIRT Research Project in IDEAS Schools. University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba.
10.
CrowtherF.AndrewsD.ConwayJ. M. (2013). Schoolwide pedagogy: Vibrant new meaning for teachers and principals. Cheltenham, Vic., Australia: Hawker Brownlow Education.
11.
CrowtherF.AndrewsD.DawsonM.LewisM. (2002). Innovative designs for enhancing achievements in schools: Facilitation folder. University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba.
12.
CrowtherF.AndrewsD.MorganA.O’NeillS. (2012). Hitting the bullseye of school improvement: The IDEAS Project at work in a successful school system. Leading & Managing, 18(2), 1–33.
FullanM. (2001). The New Meaning of Educational Change (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
15.
FullanM. (2007). Change the terms for teacher learning. National Staff Development Council, 28(3), 35–36.
16.
GlasserW. (1998). The quality school. New York: HarperCollins.
17.
GolemanD. (2005). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Dell.
18.
GolemanD. (2006). Social intelligence. New York: Bantam Dell.
19.
HadfieldM. (2003). Building capacity versus growing schools. In HarrisA.DayC.HadfieldM.HopkinsD.HargreavesA.ChapmanC. (Eds.), Effective leadership for school improvement (pp. 107–120). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
20.
HattieJ. (2003). Teachers Make a Difference: What is the research evidence?Paper presented at the Australian Council of Educational Research Annual Conference on Building Teacher Quality, Melbourne. Retrieved from: http://research.acer.edu.au/research_conference_2003/4
HillP.CrevolaC. (1999). Key features of whole-school design approach to literacy teaching in schools. Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, 4(3), 5–11.
HopkinsD.JacksonD. (2003). Building the capacity for leading and learning. In HarrisA.DayC.HadfieldM.HopkinsD.HargreavesA.ChapmanC. (Eds.), Effective leadership for school improvement (pp. 84–104). New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
LeachJ.MoonB. (2008). The power of pedagogy. London: SAGE.
27.
LewisM. (2003). The dynamics, implications and effects of knowledge creation in professional learning communities: Three case studies. PhD thesis University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba.
28.
LimerickD.CunningtonB.CrowtherF. (2002). Managing the new organisation: Collaboration and sustainability in the post-corporate world (2nd ed.). St Leonards, NSW: Allen and Unwin.
29.
LouisK. S. (2007). Trust and improvement in schools. Journal of Educational Change, 8(1), 1–24.
MitchellC.SackneyL. (2007). Extending the learning community: A broader perspective embedded in policy. In StollL.Seashore LouisK.(Eds.), Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas (pp. 30–44). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
32.
MorganG. (1980). Paradigms, metaphors and puzzle solving in organizational theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 605–622.
33.
NewmannF. M.WehlageG. (1995). Successful school restructuring: A report to the public and educators. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison Press.
34.
NewmannF. M.KingB.YoungsP. (2000). Professional development to build organizational capacity in low achieving schools: Promising strategies and future challenges. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison Press.
35.
OwenR. G. (2004). Organizational behaviour in education (8th ed.). New York: Pearson.
SengeP. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. New York: Currency Doubleday.
38.
SinhaJ. B. (2008). Culture and organizational behavior. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
39.
SpillaneJ. P. (2005). Primary school leadership practice: How the subject matters. School Leadership and Management, 25(4), 383–397.
40.
StollL.Seashore LouisK. (2007). Professional learning communities: Elaborating new approaches. In StollL.LouisSeashore K. (Eds.), Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth, and dilemmas (pp. 1–14). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
