Samvirkni og samvinna í þróunar- og umbótastarfi

Policy planning in education is an important and complicated undertaking that demands systematic work and extensive co-operation between actors to ensure successful implementation. In this matter, many consider coherence and collaboration to be the basis for successful educational development efforts that lead to increased achievement in student learning (Hopkins, Stringfield, Harris, Stoll, M Robinson, 2018). The aim of the research discussed in this paper is to gain understanding and knowledge of how this coherence appears in policy work in three municipalities in Iceland and in one school in each of the municipalities. The focus is on how local government policy and methods of implementation might support or hinder sustainable school improvements and how they might appear in school practices on a daily basis. The discussion is based on educational leadership theories that encourage a systemic approach to reform, encompassing all levels of the system and different areas, such as curriculum, teaching methods, leadership, and families. This systematic approach is meant to support the coherence of all entities that influence teaching and learning (Fullan & Quinn, 2016) and enhance teacher leadership and the professional skills of those working towards the same purposes. Coherence is achieved through collaboration and communication between actors at different levels rather than through checklists or strict surveillance (Robinson et al., 2017). Data was collected by interviewing school district leaders in the three municipalities, one school principal from each municipality, and one development team from each school in the respective municipalities. The developmental teams consisted of four to six teachers, leaders, and department heads in the school. Other data included the documents addressing the policies of districts and schools. The data was analysed by seeking information on the following themes: (1) the making of the policies; e.g., where did it originate from and who participated; (2) the methods by which the policies were implemented in schools; and (3) how the policies actually influenced classroom practices. The results revealed that coherence in policy and school development was more apparent in one of the municipalities than in the other two. There, an approach emphasizing a professional learning community was used to decide on policy issues and methods of implementation. This approach was openly discussed by interviewed participants. The principal practised instructional leadership, teachers were included in decision making, and communication between schools and school district leaders was based on professional discussion and mutual trust to a greater extent than in the other two municipalities. There, policy decisions were most often taken by politicians or at the central school office and presented and discussed with teachers and leaders in the schools. The teachers felt overwhelmed by requirements for implementing many different projects and complained about lack of preparation and support. As such, the Robinson, Bendikson, Mcnaughton, Wilson, & Zhu (2017) findings about the importance of communication in order to enhance coherence were supported. It should be noted that the findings only apply to the three municipalities and schools at the time when data was collected and therefore cannot be generalized to other municipalities nor to the relevant municipalities where circumstances may have changed. The municipalities differ in size, position, political focus, and history; therefore, they should not be compared. The intention was to learn about how the process of implementation from policy making to day-to-day schoolwork is achieved as well as whether and how a municipality’s policy is reflected in the work and attitudes of teachers. The results should be beneficial for school authorities, school districts, and schools and further encourage a collaborative approach in educational development.