Change Management for School Leaders: Strategies for Implementing Change in School Settings
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Change frequently occurs in education, creating an environment where school leaders need to be skilled in the art of change management. To many, such as Crum and Sherman (2008), "Change is . . . an innate component of education . . . and something that principals must contend with as they work with their staff" (p. 575). Alberta Education (2020) outlined criteria required for visionary and instructional leadership, including "enabling positive change and fostering commitment to continuous improvement" (p. 3) with the goal of "[ensuring] every student has access to quality teaching and optimum learning experiences" (p. 4). O'Donnell and White (2005) outlined that the primary responsibility for school leaders "[was] to facilitate effective teaching and learning with the overall mission of enhancing student achievement" (p.56). O'Donnell and White (2005) elaborated students often achieved higher grades and more academic success when the principal delivered instructional leadership. Research demonstrates that school leaders that consider the impact of a change and the reason behind the change while encouraging input from stakeholders and thinking about the well-being of stakeholders most impacted by change seem to establish a more impactful change initiative. Consequently, the process and methodology of change directly impact the well-being of both staff and students in the system. When starting the change process, school leaders, skilled in the art of change management, ask questions such as, "Why is the change necessary; How much change needs to occur; Where should the change occur; [and] Who will participate in the change process" (Frontier & Rickabaugh, 2015, p. 1). The models of change examined in this capstone study include DuFour and DuFour's (2006) Professional Learning Communities at Work, Fullan's (2006) Change Theory, Kotter's (1995) Eight-Step Change Model, Baird and Clark's (2018) Look-Ahead Professional Development Model, and Shannon and Bylsma's (2007) Nine Characteristics of High Performing Schools. Each change model provides a framework that school leaders can use in various settings to initiate change in a more organized, thoughtful, and deliberate manner. An extensive literature review outlines promising models of change and practices when implementing institutional change. To answer questions concerning which change model to choose when implementing change and how to measure its impact, Chapter 2 outlines five different change models and provides information about how leaders measure change to determine its effects. Chapter 3 includes the implications of this capstone study and three recommendations concerning how Principals and senior education administration can approach change in a meaningful, long-lasting manner, with the goals of trust, developing leadership capacity, and creating sustainable change.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».