STUDENT ADVOCACY AND ORGANIZATIONAL TRANSFORMATION IN DISADVANTAGED

VICTORIAN SCHOOLS.

A study of the impact of systematic student advocacy on student engagement, student outcomes and school culture in a group of regional and disadvantaged schools.

The Buckland Foundation Large Grant 2017

IIRIRE

The International Institute for Research on Relationships in Education Incorporated

May 2017

1

G23CONTENTS

Organization Details 3

About the Organization 3

Aims 4

Organizational Structure 4

Proposed Project within Adolescent Education 4

Student Advocacy 8

Teacher Roles 10

Electronic Provision of Curriculum 12

Developing Independent Student Learners 13

Project Based Deep Learning 13

A Theory of Personal and Organizational Change 14

Potential Project Partners 15

Project Methodology 16

Project Activities 17

Evaluation 18

Anticipated Costs 18

Scaling up the Intervention 20

Proposed Budget 20

Appendix 1: The Advocacy Model 23

Appendix 2: The Electronic Tools 25

Appendix 3: Theorizing Personal and organizational Change 31

2

Appendix 4: Researcher Resumés 35

ORGANIZATION DETAILS

Information from the Australian Business Register: Incorporated under the Associations Incorporation Reform Act 2012.  

Registration number: A0094570Z

Organization ABN: Ormond College Melbourne has agreed to house and act as the Project Manager and provide the financial umbrella for Tax deductibility.

Postal Address: C/- Dr Rufus Black, Master, Ormond College, College Crescent. Melbourne. Vic 3000

Web Address: www.iirire.org.au

Contact for Head of Organization.

Head of Organization Dr Rufus Black, Master Ormond College

Position Held: Chairman of Board,

Phone Details: 61 9344 1100

Email Address: rufusblack@ormond.unimelb.edu.au

Contact for Application: Dr. Bernie Neville

Position Held: CEO, Project Manager Ormond College

Contact email: nevillebh@westnet.com.au

Contact Number: 61 449 596 572

ABOUT THE ORGANIZATIONThe IIRIRE is a not for profit organization established to conduct research into the impact of interpersonal relationships on learning and student wellbeing at all levels of education.

It is a coalition of researchers from different university, school and consulting backgrounds specifically focused on explicating relationship processes in education generally and schools in particular with a view to improving this vital aspect of learning. The Institute members are particularly interested to understand why some students are badly served by the education systems

3

in which they find themselves. This is the case even though the administrators and teachers within these institutions may have the best intentions with regard to the achievement and wellbeing of their students.

AIMSTo influence the culture and practice of schools and other educational institutions through research and training which focuses on the impact of the relationship between teachers and students on student wellbeing and achievement. The key focus of the research agenda for the Institute is the quality of relationships between students and school staff and the development of models and processes which may improve these relationships and the consequent achievement and wellbeing of students.Since the quality of teacher-student relationships is an aspect of the culture of an educational institution, it cannot be adequately investigated without attention being paid to the structures and dynamics of the school community, e.g. the role of the principal, the nature of teacher-parent, teacher-teacher and student-student interaction, and shared assumptions regarding the purpose of schooling. The research agenda of the Institute embraces a focus on the interaction of all of these elements and their impact on process and outcomes.Human beings have three basic psychological needs that education aims to support: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. These needs are argued to foster the most volitional and high quality forms of motivation and engagement for activities, including enhanced performance, persistence, and creativity, and the non-fulfilment of these needs in schools is associated with disengagement. Many students are disengaged from their schooling and resist attempts by school staff to engage them. This has long term consequences in that young people who do not successfully complete their schooling are more likely than average to experience unemployment, drug dependence, incarceration and mental health problems. Furthermore, it may be argued that young people who are disengaged from their schooling and from society are vulnerable to anti-social radicalization and behaviour.The Institute aims to address the problem of disengagement and its consequences through research on interpersonal relationships in education. Through action research it aims to test the thinking which has emerged from previous research with a view to creating a scalable model to have system wide impact.

Organizational StructureChair: Dr. Rufus BlackSecretary/Treasurer: Dr.Tricia McCannDirectors: Dr. Andrea Gallant

Dr. Kirsten HutchisonMr. Howard KellyProf. Philip Riley Dr. Brendan SchmidtDr Greg Powell.

4

CEO: Dr Bernie Neville, Project Manager, Ormond College.

Institute directors act as project managers for specific projects.

Consultants and casual research assistants are employed as required and as funding allows.

Dr Barbara Hunter will act as project manager for the current project.

Members of the board will manage particular elements of the project

School Engagement: Dr Rufus Black

Student Advocacy: Dr Brendan Schmidt

Organisational Transformation: Dr Bernie Neville

Professional development of principals: Dr Philip Riley,

Professional development of teacher-advocates: Dr Tricia McCann

Supervision of research assistants: Dr Andrea Gallant, Dr Kirsten Hutchison.

Electronic provision and electronic tools: Dr Greg Powell.

Developing Independent Learners & Curriculum Design: Mr. Howard Kelly

Deep Learning: Dr Brendan Schmidt.

Brief researcher resumés are detailed in Appendix 4.

PROPOSED PROJECT WITHIN ADOLESCENT EDUCATIONAim: To research the impact of a specific intervention facilitating teacher and student self-awareness and better student-teacher relationships (Systematic Student Advocacy)on student engagement, student outcomes, school culture, teacher satisfaction, and student and staff wellbeing.

The project will target a small group of disadvantaged and/or regional high schools.

The need for research in this area

Only 77% of students in Victoria complete year 12, and other states have an even lower percentage. In view of the strong evidence that non-completion of high school is associated with multiple social and psychological problems, there is urgent need to address school retention rates. Non-completion of high school is associated with disengagement from schooling. The annual Victorian Attitudes to School Survey provides evidence that disengagement from schooling is widespread, prompting the Department of Education and Training to require that all schools develop a student engagement policy. Top-down strategies such as this are unlikely to have much impact on student attitudes. 5

Recent research has demonstrated that what happens between teachers and their students has a greater impact on attitudes and behaviour than structural or administrative changes. There has also been substantial data collected on the prevalence of stress in Victorian teachers and principals, a factor that impacts on the quality of interactions between students and teachers and among teachers.

The Advocacy Project (1998-2003)1 conducted by La Trobe University Graduate School of Education and funded by the Victorian Department of Education was designed to address the problem of student engagement and was successful in those schools where it was appropriately implemented. Evaluation of the project in the senior school provided evidence that advocacy made a positive impact on attendance, retention and academic achievement. Evaluation of the project in the middle school provided evidence that it made a positive impact on students’ wellbeing. Anecdotal evidence from these earlier studies suggests also that it makes a positive contribution to teachers’ wellbeing in so far as it affects their level of stress.

Since the 1998-2003 project was completed we have seen increasing research evidence of the impact of relationship with a mature, caring adult on at risk adolescents, and significant research on the mental health and wellbeing of Australian teachers. The mental health of students has also become a matter of deep concern, on the basis of current data on student stress, the impact of bullying and the prevalence of youth suicide.

The following challenges emerged in the 1990s and are still of considerable concern.

● A decline in attendance and retention rates of post-compulsory students. ● An acknowledgement that non-engaged students are at risk of post school

unemployment and associated mental and social problems, including youth suicide.● A decline in teacher morale.● A need to develop a model of education compatible with post-compulsory students’

sense of themselves as young adults.● A need to take advantage of increasing electronic access to curriculum.

The proposed project will build on the findings of the Advocacy Project to address these concerns in disadvantaged and/or regional schools

The Research Model

There are six distinct but inter-related elements in the proposed project, as illustrated in the diagram below.

● Student advocacy.● Organizational culture● Teacher roles.● Electronic provision of content, ● Student development into independent learners. ● Deep learning ● The Research Model: There are six inter-related elements in the proposed project.

1 See Appendix 16

Each of these elements has been independently studied and evaluated in previous research. However, each of them has an impact on all the others. The radical intention of the proposed project is to integrate these elements in a single intervention and evaluate the outcomes of this multi-layered approach.. The implementation of this intervention will require significant organizational change and transformation of the assumptions and attitudes that teachers bring to their task. The proposed study will be informed by recent research and theory relating to various aspects of adolescence. Cultural change will be a key focus of the project along with teacher and principal wellbeing and the development of new teacher accountabilities.

7

DEEP LEARNING

DEVELOPING INDEPENDENT

LEARNERS

ELECTRONIC PROVISION OF CURRICULUM

TEACHER ROLES

CULTURAL CHANGE

STUDENT ADVOCACY

SCHOOL ENGAGEMENT

THROUGH RELATIONSHIP

A. STUDENT ADVOCACY

The Advocacy Model.

Components of the Advocacy Model

The diagram above provides an illustration of the connection between the elements of the Advocacy Model. These elements will be explored within the one to one relationship, enabling a focussed learning based relationship to develop.

The Advocacy Model consists of two essential components:

● an ongoing relationship between each student and an appointed advocate/mentor● student and teacher use of electronic self-assessment and goal-setting tools within

the context of the advocate-student relationship

Advocacy is here understood as supporting or espousing students. It is:

● student-centred  —  focused on engagement and learning● purposeful  —  designed to make an impact on students’ learning and wellbeing● positive  — grounded in the understanding that adolescents are seeking to live their

lives meaningfully● systematic not random or impulsive

Each student meets with an allocated member of staff for 20 minutes each fortnight to have a conversation about whatever helps or hinders their engagement in school and to support them in

8

Individuation

Appraisal

Intentionality

Narrative competence

ldialogue

Relationship

Consciousness

Mental model & schemas

Secure base

researching their personal project.

The successful implementation of student advocacy depends on the establishment of non-judgemental relationships between students and advocates, in which students are provided a secure base for reflection on the influences that promote or inhibit their engagement in learning.

Students are assisted in reflecting on their abilities and challenges, and the strategies they need to develop their potential.

The advocate’s role is to be a trusted and non-judgemental listener who assists the learner to focus on their individual potential and their role in the school community.

In this context, the advocate takes on the responsibility of monitoring and supporting the student’s engagement, wellbeing and academic achievement.

The student

● has the satisfaction of being heard without judgement;● has the freedom to talk about whatever is most important at the moment;● knows that s/he is valued and supported;● knows that confidentiality will be respected;● knows that someone in the school is aware of the background to his or her problems

in school engagement and learning.

ReferencesKirsten Hutchison & Tricia McCann. Somebody knows, somebody cares: Re-engaging students

through relationship. Sense Publishers, 2012.Nel Noddings. The challenge to care in schools: an alternative approach to education. Teachers

College Press, 2005John Bowlby. A secure base. Routledge 2005.Kenneth Gergen. Relational Being: Beyond self and community. Oxford University Press, 2009.Jean Knox. Archetype, Attachment, Analysis. Routledge, 2003Philip Riley Attachment theory and the teacher–student relationship: A practical guide for teachers, teacher educators and school leaders. Routledge, 2011.

B. ORGANIZATIONAL TRANSFORMATION

It is proposed that the successful establishment of an advocacy model in the school

● requires and facilitates organizational change within a school;● requires the principal and teachers to embrace transformational leadership;● has a significant impact on school culture.

Research on the ‘fractal’ nature of organizational culture suggests that we are likely find a similar dynamic at all levels of a system. In an Education system where the chief executive’s relationship with administrative personnel is autocratic, we are likely to see a tendency for administrators to mirror this relationship in their dealings with school principals, principals mirroring this tendency in relationships with their staff, teachers with their students and students with each other. Conversely, where there is climate of positive climate and caring relationships between teachers and students we are likely to find this reflected in staff-staff and principal-staff dynamics.

9

We suggest that there will be a positive feedback loop between advocacy and organizational change.  The focus on relationship which is the core element in the advocacy model impacts positively on school culture, administrative structures and teacher behaviour. The hypothesized change in school culture and teacher behaviour supports the enhancement of student – teacher relationships in the advocacy interactions. This impacts positively on school culture, and so on. A similar positive feedback loop is predicted between effective advocacy and student engagement.

Organizational leadership

The establishment of a successful advocacy program requires:

● acknowledgement that education leaders in the early 21 st century operate in the context of a changing society characterized by volatility, complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity;

● acceptance of the need to embrace organizational change;● the revision of school timetables to allow a number of teachers to incorporate

advocacy interviews into their schedule and job description;● the provision of adequate internet access to allow optimum use of digital resources;● the scheduling of classes to allow substantial time for students to engage in

individual and group research activity with internet support;● the ability to factor in student and teacher wellbeing when addressing teacher

accountability and assessing whether the school is meeting its goals.

References

Tim Dalmau & Bernie Neville. Olympus Inc: Intervening for cultural change in organizations. Karnac Books, 2010

Ralph Stacey. The tools and techniques of leadership and management: Meeting the challenge of complexity. Routledge, 2012

Carolyn M. Shields. Transformative leadership in education: Equitable change in an uncertain and complex world. Routledge 2013.

Tony Wagner, Robert Kegan et al. Change leadership: A practical guide to transforming our schools. Jossey-Bass, 2013

C. TEACHER ROLES

A major component of organizational change in schools is the transformation of teachers’ roles and expectations. All teachers are not necessarily involved as advocates, but all teachers are affected by the pedagogical assumptions on which the advocacy model is founded:

● that students are individuals with diverse goals and needs;● that to have an enduring impact learning must be personalized;● that a student making anti-social or self-destructive decisions is doing so because it

appears to be the best way of coping with the world as he/she perceives it;● that interpersonal relationships are a critical component of pedagogical activity;● that children and adolescents need a secure base in relationship with a trusted

person before they are able to grow, rather than merely survive.

In a school which adopts the proposed mode of operation a distinction must be made between the role of the classroom teacher and the role of the advocate. Many teachers will have both roles,

10

which are more easily distinguished if advocates are not allocated to students in their classes.

The teacher as pedagogue

● acknowledges the need to address the diverse needs of students rather than provide the same content to all, hence there is less focus on classroom teaching and more on individual coaching;

● acknowledges the fact that teachers are no longer the major custodians of knowledge, hence there is less focus on teacher as expert and more on teacher as guide to content which is sourced elsewhere;

● acknowledges the changing nature of knowledge, hence there is less focus on teaching what is already known and more on learning to learn;

● acknowledges that adolescents no longer perceive teachers to have unquestionable authority over them, hence there is a focus on relationship rather than control;

● acknowledges that the internet is a principal source of content hence there is a focus on supporting students in making the constructive use of it;

● acknowledges the need for student to become independent learners, hence encourages students to become engaged in pursuing knowledge which is relevant to them;

● acknowledges that the quality of relationships between teachers and students has a significant impact on the quality of learning, hence he/she strives to develop positive relationships with all students.

The teacher as advocate

● becomes a reliable and trustworthy support and resource for the student;● is conscientious in meeting with the student regularly;● distinguishes between behaviours appropriate to classroom teaching (e.g.

instruction, control, assessment) and behaviours essential to the advocacy relationship (e.g. non-judgmental listening, long-term goal-setting) ;

● listens to the student, avoiding judgement, criticism, direction and excessive advice;● maintains a primary focus on the student’s learning and whatever inhibits or

enhances it;● believes in the student’s ability to make constructive choices;● learns something of the student’s total school experience and the context in which

the student engages in schooling, and uses this information in the student’s best interests;

● rigorously observes the confidentiality of his/her interactions with students;● does not give up on the students for whom s/he is responsible;● takes responsibility for monitoring and supporting his/her allocated students’

learning across the curriculum.

References

Frank Musgrove & Philip H. Taylor.  Society and the Teacher's Role. Routledge 2014Joanna Swann. Learning, teaching and education research in the 21st century: An evolutionary

11

analysis of the role of teachers. Continuum 2012

D. ELECTRONIC PROVISION OF CURRICULUM

Integral to the original project was the availability of digital curriculum and the capacity to use of a suite of digital tools designed to support student advocacy.

The original Advocacy Project was established on the premises that:

● the pace of technology development was such that schools were about to have high quality internet connections which would enable them to access digital curriculum;

● high quality digital curriculum was about to become available to schools;● the internet connectivity available to schools would be sufficient to support the

utilization of the digital tools designed to support advocacy, both with regard to facilitating student self-reflection and in providing data to the school administration relevant to student engagement.

● Teachers would embrace the new technology to enable their students to become independent researchers/learners and to take advantage of the digital tools.

None of these apparent probabilities eventuated before the discontinuance of the project in 2003. Internet access in public schools remained poor and the use of the digital tools was severely restricted by slowness and unreliability of downloads from the central server.

An ARC-funded study in 2008-2011 explored the efficacy of the suite of digital tools designed in 1998 to support the advocacy relationship and provide data to the schools on student engagement. A conclusion of this study was that the instruments were useful and appropriate in facilitating productive teacher-student interaction and student reflection and goal-setting, but that obsolete software developed in 1998 was restricting their use. Software upgrading was urgently required if they were to be used to their full potential.

A list of the digital tools designed for the 1998-2003 study will be found in appendix 2.

Internet access has substantially improved since 2003. Teachers are more ready to embrace technological developments. Software is available to make the digital tools more attractive, engaging and easier to use. Current technology is better able to support students in developing into independent learners.

The proposed study will examine the impact of:

● the provision of quality internet access;● a focus on individual and group research-based projects;● less classroom time and more independent study time;● the availability of high quality curriculum content; ● support for students as independent learners.

References

Helen Beetham & Rhona Sharpe  (Eds) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Designing for 21st Century Learning.  Routledge 2013.

12

National Research Council. Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. National Academies Press,  2012

E. DEVELOPING INDEPENDENT STUDENT LEARNERS

Improved access to digital curriculum facilitates programs designed to support students in becoming independent, self-directed learners. This provides the opportunity for schools to re-design the ways in which curriculum content is delivered. It allows:

● a move from a ‘sage on the stage’ model of teaching to ‘guide on the side’;● training teachers in the skills required for one-on-one student-centred teaching;● less time given to classroom teaching and more time is given to individual

computer-assisted learning;● Dthe use of the digital goal-setting tools;● the use of digital tools recording students’ learning preferences;● support for students to undertake individual and group research projects aligned

with their personal interests;● the capacity through the digital tools to collect substantial information concerning

the background, needs, goals and capabilities of each student;● the capacity to use this information to monitor and support each student’s learning;● giving each student’s teacher-advocate responsibility for monitoring and supporting

the student’s learning across the curriculum.

ReferencesMaurice Gibbons. The Self-Directed Learning Handbook: Challenging Adolescent Students to

Excel. John Wiley and Sons. 2003.Nancy Joseph.  Metacognition Needed: Teaching Middle and High School Students to Develop

Strategic Learning Skills. Taylor and Francis online 8 Aug 2010.

F. PROJECT BASED DEEP LEARNING

As a means of assisting the development of students as independent learners the project will incorporate the deep learning methodology developed by Professor Kieran Egan of Simon Fraser University, Vancouver.

Students in year 7 adopt a topic which they will focus on as a personal project. They

● set themselves the goal of being the ‘world expert’ on this topic when they finish secondary school;

● devote a substantial part of their school time to researching this topic;● have a sense of what it means and how it feels to understand consequential topics;● report on progress and difficulties to their teacher-advocate in their regular

meetings;● report to their classmates on their project at the end of each semester;● make a final report to the school community, including parents, at the end of year

12;● receive credit for this work as part of their final assessment.

13

This innovation has been researched extensively, in North America. Similar ‘deep learning’ approaches have been developed and researched elsewhere (Finland, the Netherlands, New Zealand). What this project adds is the opportunity for students to reflect on their experience of learning within an advocacy relationship.

References

Kieran. Egan. Learning in depth: an innovation that can transform learning. University of Chicago Press, 2010.

Terri Zolob.   Student Engagement: Experiencing the Joy of Learning through Learning in Depth. Unpublished Masters thesis. Vancouver Island University, 2014.

Michael Fullan & Maria Langworthy A Rich Seam: How New Pedagogies Find Deep Learning. Pearson 2014

A THEORY OF PERSONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGEThe theory of change which provides a framework for this innovative intervention is drawn from person-centred theory, complexity theory and the theory of immunity to change.

Carl Rogers2 rejected the mechanistic psychological theories that were fashionable for most of his career and worked within an ‘organic’ metaphor. A person or an organization is not a closed system, shut in its own capsule. Rather it is open, embedded in a larger system, in a mass of complex relationships with other elements in that larger system. There is evidence from many quarters that it makes at least as much sense to imagine that larger system (with all its human and nonhuman elements) as a living organism, as it does to imagine it as a machine. Personal and organizational change, in Rogerian theory, is governed by a drive to become the whole of what one ‘naturally’ is. Whatever the espoused purposes and strategies of an organization, it experiences collectively and in its individual members, an unfolding process which, if not inhibited, can bring the organization to live out all of its potential. We suggest, not only that the members of the organization are individually motivated (unconsciously at least) by this universal evolutionary process towards ever greater degrees of complexity, freedom and selfhood, but that the process operates also at the collective level. Rogers and other client-centred therapists have demonstrated that their theory works at the individual and organizational level. If we trust the clients’ ability to solve their own problems when they are free to do so, if we can provide an environment in which it is safe for them to explore the discomfort they feel in thinking and behaving the way they do, their innate ‘actualizing tendency’ will provide the energy for change.

In the context of this project we do not assume that we are dealing with dysfunctional organizations, principals or teachers. We assume rather that we are dealing with organizations which are struggling to do their best within a dysfunctional system.

In the current project the research team must avoid imagining that the desirable outcome is

2 See Carl Rogers. A way of being. Houghton Mifflin, 1980

14

establishing new roles and procedures which can be set in concrete. Rather, the aim must be to support schools in finding ways to respond flexibly to a 21st century environment of complexity, volatility, ambiguity and uncertainty. 3

POTENTIAL PROJECT PARTNERS.It is envisaged that the CEO will form a consulting/ conference group with partners to provide a spring board for their involvement and monitoring of progress.

Victorian Education Ministry: Will be a necessary partner to be fully engaged as the schools it is envisaged will be public schools, but this does not exclude the inclusion of Independent and Catholic system schools

Universities: Australian and International. Initially Australian Catholic University, Deakin University, La Trobe University, Victoria University,

Personnel from these Universities are already on the Board of Directors

Australian Education Union: Is a necessary partner as they will need to monitor the change in role for teachers, and the development of a teacher accountability model.

School partners: Three Victorian state schools selected from disadvantaged and regional schools including School Councils, Principals, Teachers and Student Representatives

Buckland Foundation: Executive Officer or Board member(s) as they desire.

Vic Health: To be approached as they are primarily involved in the promotion of adolescent well being

Evaluation Group: Representatives of the evaluation team will need to be involved to monitor progress.

PROJECT METHODOLOGYThe methodology adopted in this research project will be cooperative action research.

The principles underlying this approach are:

● The main objective of the research is to develop best practice.● The people in the school communities are not objects of the research but fellow

3 For further discussion see Appendix 315

researchers.

The three schools will be treated as separate longitudinal case studies, and will be asked to commit to the project for eight years. A mixed methods design will be utilized to ensure a richness of analysis of the processes, outcomes and impact of the intervention.

Information on process and outcome will be gathered regularly by observation, interviews and the digital questionnaires, analysed and provided in summary to relevant school staff.

● The veracity/credibility of this information will be discussed in reflective groups in each school and the report is amended if new information becomes available.

● In these groups the research team and the school-based participants will reflect on the effectiveness of the intervention at the end of each year and the intervention will be modified if this appears appropriate with the aim of achieving a sustainable best practice.

● Where possible existing data sets will be utilized to reduce the administrative load on schools and avoid unnecessary duplication.

● An interim report will be written each year and presented to the school-based participants for discussion.

● Both process and outcome will be observed and recorded.● Quantitative data will be collected from school records and the digital tools and

subjected to both inferential and descriptive statistical analysis.● Quantified outcomes will be compared with ACARA data for like schools.● A comprehensive evaluation of the whole program will be conducted in year 8 and

a final report will be written and published.

References

Bob Dick and Tim Dalmau. Values in action: applying the ideas of Argyris and Schon. Interchange, 2005

John Heron. Co-operative Inquiry: Research into the Human. Sage, 1996Peter Reason. Human inquiry in action: Developments in new paradigm research. Sage, 1988.Denzin, Norman K & Lincoln, Yvonna S., eds.   Handbook of qualitative research, second

edition.  Sage, 2000

Project Activities

The project consists of four key phases and will be completed over a period of eight years.Phase1 (year1)

● Engagement with the school and school community. ● Preliminary professional development for principals and teachers● Development of appropriate school structures.● Development with teachers of a new teacher accountability framework focusing on

16

teacher personal and professional development and student-teacher interaction.● Developing school parent and wider community understanding of the Project.● Adapting curriculum development and provision to take full advantage of current

and developing technologies and theory and to free teacher time to enable a focus on the quality of teacher-student interaction.

● Upgrading of the instruments on the digital data-base to facilitate productive student-teacher interaction.

● Teacher training in basic counselling skills, utilising the person-centred approach developed by Carl Rogers.

● Establishing baseline data on factors at which the intervention is directed (e.g. truancy, bullying, principal wellbeing)

● Report on process and outcomes.

Phase 2 (Year 2)

● Establishment and implementation of an advocacy structure and processes within schools involving one to one student-teacher interaction;

● Initial establishment of the advocacy structure at year 7.● Reflective process in discussion with principals, teachers and parents to assess

impact and possible modification of the intervention;● Collection and analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data;● Report on process and outcomes.

Phase 3 (Year 3 and Year 4)

● Implementation of the structure at year 7 and continuance of advocacy for students in later years through to year 12.

● Monitoring teachers’ personal and professional development;● Monitoring principals’ personal and professional development;● Reflective process in discussion with principals, teachers and parents to assess

impact and possible modification of the intervention;● Collection and analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data;● Report on process and outcomes.

Phase 4 (Years 5,6,7,8)

● Focussing on the later years of the project and the needs of senior students● Developing appropriate questionnaires● Implementation across several additional schools.

EVALUATION

The final evaluation of the project will be carried out by an external agency. It will assess the impact of the intervention on the following outcomes.

● Student academic achievement● Student attitudes to school● Student wellbeing● Student attendance and retention● Prevalence of bullying

17

● Teacher wellbeing● Teacher satisfaction● Teacher attitudes● Principal wellbeing● Community satisfaction● Changes to school culture● The teacher accountability model● Comparison with like-schools data. The current Victorian schools accountability

data (ACARA) provides the baseline for comparison.

ANTICIPATED COSTSThe following costs are based on:

● Participation of three partner schools● The ability of principals and staff in the three schools to participate in combined

professional development sessions● Student populations of not more than 300 in each school, and a total of no more

than 200 year 7 students in year 1.● Allocation of an average of 10 students to each teacher advocate● The employment of casual research assistants to interview principals, teachers,

students and parents in each school.● The employment of consultants for workshops in transformational change

Costs within Phase 1.

● Professional development for principals● Introducing advocacy● Organizational change

Professional development for teacher-advocates● The advocacy model● Basic counselling skills● Research on adolescence. ● Independent learning

Meetings with principals and staff to develop strategies for structural change and curriculum delivery

Financial support for employment of supervisory staff.Re-development of the digital tools and data base.

Costs within Phase 2.

The project will adopt a ‘train the trainer’ model. Professional development for the initiation of new teacher-advocates after year 1 will be largely conducted within schools by experienced teacher-advocates, supplemented by input from the research team.

● Teacher-advocate professional development● Counselling skills● Using the digital tools

Principal professional development

18

● organizational and cultural changeProfessional development for administrative staff

● Using the digital data baseMeetings with principals and staff to enhance strategies for structural

change and curriculum delivery.Employment of teaching assistants or appropriate parent volunteers to

supervise students engaged in computer-assisted learning.Ongoing collection of qualitative and quantitative data to enable regular

reporting and publication.

Costs within Phase 3.

The project will continue to support the train the trainer model with input from the research team as required from years 3-8. .

● Teacher-advocate professional development● Counselling skills● Using the digital tools

Principal professional development ● Organizational and cultural change

Professional development for administrative staff● Using the digital data base

Meetings with principals and staff to enhance strategies for structural change and curriculum delivery

Employment of teaching assistants or appropriate parent volunteers to supervise  students engaged in computer-assisted learning.

Ongoing collection of qualitative and quantitative data to enable regular reporting and publication.

Costs within Phase 4.

Final Report by PriceWaterhouseCoopers

Potential Project Income

Professional development sessions will be made available to interested principals and staff from schools not involved in the project, as a way of promoting the wider expansion of the intervention. Participants will be charged a small fee to cover the costs of providing the sessions where relevant (e.g. where room hire is required)

SCALING UP THE INTERVENTION

In research cited in The Journal of Educational Reform, Milbrey and Mitra discuss the issues surrounding sustaining theory-based educational changes which demand some change in the role of the teacher and classroom practice. Sustaining is described by the authors as deepening reforms in ways that allow a flexible response to changes in student, curricular and school contexts. In particular the authors list five requirements for sustaining change: adequate resources, reformers’ learning, knowledge of the first principles of the reform and the support of a community of practice, the principal and the district.

19

Moreover, rather than merely replicating structures, extending theory-based reform to new sites requires building compatibility between the normative base of the reform with that of the classrooms, schools and regions in which they are being tested as well as the capacity of the classroom, school and region to see it through.

Expansion of the proposed intervention will demand a degree of flexibility. It will need to be modified where constrained by the architecture and resources of the school. However, the key components, the regular one-on-one interactions between a student and his/her advocate and the accessibility of digital curriculum will need to be maintained. Expansion of the model will be facilitated by opening some of the professional development sessions to principals and staff from schools not included in the project. Schools which wish to adopt the model will be supported by professional development but will not be part of the research project.

It will be essential to develop a cooperative relationship with the AEU from the beginning as the project involves negotiating changes in teacher roles and responsibilities.

Expansion will also be aided by promoting the model in conventional and social media. From our experience of the previous advocacy projects we are confident that teachers will endorse the model on the grounds both of student achievement and wellbeing and their own experience that engagement in this innovation makes their own work more satisfying and less stressful.

PROPOSED BUDGET

 

  Rate Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3                  Project DirectorAdmin assistanceAdministration

(2) $124,698(3)$44,121

8,9078,82420,500

8,9078,82417,200

8,9078,82415,780

Project Manager (4)$99,424 28,500 28,500 28,500Consultants        Change Management (4)$99,424 14,913 12,428   9,424Advocacy $99,424 14,913 12,428   9,424Curriculum/Technology $99,424 14,913   9,942   5,000Teacher/Principal Support $99,424 14,913 12,428   9,424Evaluation $99,424 14,913 12,428 12,428Train the Trainer $99,424 14,913 12,428   9,424Sub-total   156,209 135,51

3117,135

         Staff Travel/Accommodation(5a)   10,000 10,000 10,000I/national, I/state Travel (5)   10,000 10,000 10,000Regional Travel/Accomm(6)   15,000 15,000 15,000Sub-total   35,000 35,000 35,000         

20

Curriculum/Technology        Student Achievement Index Dev. & Maintenance

(1)125,000 (one off cost)

5,000 (1a)

5,000 5,000

Curriculum Materials (7)   10,000 10,000 10,000Web Presence (8)   10,000 10,000 10,000Sub-total 125,000 25,000 25,000 25,000         Delivery Costs        Conference Venue hire & Food (9) 15,000 7500 7500Guest Lecturers (10-)   5,000 5,000 5,000Teacher release   18,000 10,000 10,000Sub-total   38,000 22,500 22,500  125,000 125,000                      Total   379,209 218,01

3199,635

         Total Phase 123 796,857               

(1)_Electronic database: For content see Appendix 2

Current estimate is $125,000 to cover the cost of development from the start as the current database is totally outdated. It is intended that the actual cost be ascertained before the final grant is calculated.

The Database is:

A web based database containing a number of questionnaires which are used to engage the learners and provide material for discussion with the Advocate as the questionnaires all refer to parts of the learners profile as a learner. The Database provides a situation where every student is able to create their own file and the file looks like it belongs to the school and the student is able to make some changes to make the file their file.

The data collected by the school is able to be analysed by the researchers and the school.

● The backend Research component is vital so that student data can be collected and students de identified.

● Levels of administration are provided so that Project CEO and researchers are provided access to all the data. School Principal and school systems administrator is provided full access to their school’s data. Advocates can see all their students and students can only see their own file.

● Ease of use is essential if students are going to use the database. Students today are able to access a plethora of social media sites so the database needs to be well designed.

● Cross the apple/PC divide● Useable on range of devices● Store 15,000 students and at least 20 schools for scalability.● Expandable● 30 questionnaires

21

● Immediate feedback response to student questionnaire.● Each school to be segmented● Data entry by each school to be easy● Web based technology

(1a) This is to provide for additions to the database.

(2) Salary Base is the Principal Class 3 Range 1 salary of $124,698 per annum. It is estimated that the CEO will spend one half day per week on task. $8907

(3) Based on Educational Support Staff Rate 2-2. $44,121. It is estimated that one day per week=$8824, to support the CEO and support an office function.

(4) Based on Leading Teacher . Based on One per week for 6 months and one day per fortnight for six months= $14,913. Other amounts are calculated on one day per fortnight.

(5)a) This travel is for car travel to sites. We are expecting to travel to regional areas.

(5) Travel budget is an estimate for interstate consultants and for International support for example, Deep Learning expertise.

(6) This budget is an estimate to cover potential regional journeys depending on the schools selected.

(7) This budget is a to assist schools to purchase a small amount of materials to extend curriculum options.. it is expected that the auspicing organisation for the school will provide the major funds for curriculum extension.

(8) The database is web based so it needs to be maintained by an organisation with the necessary servers and security systems to maintain the student information.

(9) It is expected that an annual conference will be held to provide feedback to partners (AEU, Vic Education etc…), and an occasion for other schools to find out about the project as well as a forum for researchers to provide details of their findings as well as evaluators to provide feedback.

(10) Guest lecturers will be used to provide perspectives not available from the consultants.

(11) Some provision for teacher release is always welcomed by schools as to undertake this project, teachers will need to be released from classroom commitments. It is anticipated that school budgets and Vic Ed will support this element of the project.

APPENDIX 1The Advocacy Model.

Between 1998 and 2001 the Victorian Department of Education funded The Advocacy Project. It was conducted by the Graduate School of Education at La Trobe University in association with the Department’s Science and Technology Centre at Geelong. A subsequent study focusing on the impact of the associated electronic data base was conducted in 2008-2011.

The Advocacy Model consists of two essential elements

22

● an ongoing relationship between each student and an appointed advocate/mentor● student and teacher use of  electronic self-assessment and goal-setting tools within

the context of the advocate-student relationship

The project commenced with three schools in 1999. Following perceived success, twelve schools adopted the program in 2000 and the program was extended to include middle school students. Following a finding of the Committee of Enquiry into Post-Compulsory Education (2001) recommending Advocacy as an approach to the establishment of a ‘managed individual pathways’ model, 160 schools adopted the program. However, as the funding was now tied to MIPS, and Advocacy demanded greater commitment and resources than available alternatives for MIPS, only a minority of schools have been able to maintain an Advocacy program.

The Outcomes of the Advocacy Project

The program was thoroughly evaluated quantitatively and qualitatively 1999, 2000 and 2001/2.

Students involved in the program were shown to be significantly more likely attend school regularly, to remain at school and to gain significantly better academic results than the control group. In a study of year 11 students using a control group for comparison, students in the experimental group passed two more VCE subjects, on average, than students in the control group and attended school an average of 12 days more frequently in a semester.

There was a substantial improvement in students' attitudes to schooling, study strategies and goal-setting ability. In survey of 335 randomly selected students involved in the program in 1999-2000, 92% said that advocacy had given them personal support, 84% claimed that it had given them confidence and an increased ability to set goals and 74% said that it had raised their marks.

● There was evidence of the impact of the program on teachers’ sense of their role and the beginnings of a re-definition of teacher identity.

● There was evidence of increased wellbeing in middle school students with advocates

● There was evidence that the model only works when it is properly applied and school structures are adapted to include it. When advocates and students did not meet at least once every three weeks advocates declared advocacy to be pointless and unsatisfying and the students found it unhelpful.

While the impact on teacher stress was not researched there was anecdotal evidence that teachers in schools with a successful advocacy program were less stressed and found classroom management less difficult. Teachers who undertook the advocacy role reported that they found their own classroom teaching more satisfying.

Though student psychological and social wellbeing was not an explicit focus in the initial project, which was proposed and funded within a learning management framework, it soon became apparent that student wellbeing was a major factor in attempts to deal with the above challenges. Accordingly, funding was sought and obtained from VicHealth for a study of the impact of the advocacy program on student wellbeing in the middle school. This is reported in Connecting through the Middle Years (Deakin University 2003)

While the project was not directed specifically at disadvantaged students, some schools implementing the program allocated advocates to selected ‘problem’ students and reported that participation in advocacy made their management easier.

23

The published report on the 2008-2011 study4 contains case studies of disadvantaged students demonstrating the importance of providing the opportunity to develop a relationship with a caring teacher.

4 Kirsten Hutchison & Tricia McCann. Somebody knows, somebody cares: Re-engaging students through relationship. Sense Publishers, 2012.

24

APPENDIX 2Questionnaire Description Results

About Me

Good and Bad Things about Misbehaviour & Getting along Better in Class

This questionnaire is broken into three sections: 1) Why misbehaving is good 2) Why misbehaving is bad & 3) What students feel they may or may not be prepared to do to stay out of trouble in class.

Results are displayed for each of the three sections and displayed according to the scale of the answers given. Additional information appears at the bottom of the results page - viewable only for Advocates and not students - this information can support discussion around the students' misbehaviour from the perspective of Attention, Power, Revenge & Withdrawal.

How I Cope with Problems

This questionnaire looks at how students cope with things that worry them by asking a series of questions from the position of "When something bothers me, I……".

Along with listing all question responses grouped in answer sets the results also graph the answers based on the percentage of which the student Deals with, Shares or Avoids their concerns.

Interests and Skills This is a general questionnaire that invites students to share about their personal interests and skills around topics such as music, games and sport.

Results are verbatim - question & answer style providing information to feed a discussion between student and advocate.

Reasons for getting into trouble in class

This questionnaire looks at the reasons a student may get into trouble in class by asking a series of questions from the position of "I get into trouble because……"

Results are presented via statements around the students' behaviour towards their Physical Environment, Learning, Wellbeing, Passivity, the Student-Teacher interaction and their Teacher's Student relationship.

Responsibility This questionnaire looks at students' sense of responsibility towards teachers, students and members of their community. It also looks at whether students support others to behave responsibly.

Results are displayed via a graph and short statements in relation to responsibility of Self, Others and Community.

Wellbeing This questionnaire asks students to reflect on how they experience

The results provide a summary of the answers presented via short

25

their school and family life. statements on General Wellbeing and Connectedness to Teachers, Friends and Learning.

What helps me cope with concerns

This questionnaire looks at three different ways of coping and whether students find these helpful. These questions replicate those in the questionnaire 'How I Cope with Problems' looking specifically at how helpful the three coping styles are.

Along with listing all question responses grouped in answer sets the results also graph the answers based on how helpful it is for the students to Deal with, Share or Avoid their concerns.

When I don't come to school

This questionnaire asks students direct questions about their reasons for not coming to school.

Results are verbatim - question & answer style providing information to feed discussion.

What have you done?

This questionnaire enables students to document the skills they have already gained through paid or unpaid work and other activities

Results are collated for insertion in the student’s resumé.

Resumé This is a template enabling students to enter and edit information which will support a job application

Data from relevant questionnaires is automatically inserted and may be edited by the student.

About Me in my Classroom

Good Teachers' Classroom Management

This questionnaire allows students to show which classroom management techniques they prefer. This can also assist teachers to reflect on their teaching styles to better meet student needs.

Results are graphed in six segments being; Punishment, Recognition, Discussion, Aggression, Hints & Classroom involvement. A short statement is provided that speaks to the student's preferences for each classroom management style.

Reactions to Discipline

This questionnaire measures how students react to teachers' classroom discipline techniques. This may assist teachers to reflect on how their disciplinary techniques impact students and hence their ability to learn.

Results are graphed in 3 segments being: Fear, Justification & Disruption. A short statement is provided that speaks to the student's response for each segment.

Subject Related Attitudes

This questionnaire looks at student's attitudes to their most and least preferred subjects. They

Results are graphed based on Misbehaviour, Teacher Popularity & Attitude towards the student most

26

are asked to comment on the subjects themselves, their teachers and their levels of misbehaviour in these classes.

and least preferred subjects. [Note: the format of this results page is currently being developed]

Teachers' Classroom Management - General

This questionnaire asks students to share their experience of their teacher's classroom management techniques. This questionnaire differs from 'Good Teachers' Classroom Management' as it asks of their real classroom experience rather than what they would prefer.

Results are graphed in six segments being; Punishment, Recognition, Discussion, Aggression, Hints & Classroom involvement. A short statement is provided that speaks to the student's experience of each classroom management style.

Teachers' Classroom Management – Individual teachers

This questionnaire asks students to share their experience of their teacher's classroom management techniques for a particular subject.

Results are graphed in nine segments being; Punishment, Recognition, Discussion, Aggression, Hints & Classroom involvement as well as Teacher Emphasises Rules, Rights & Responsibilities and Communal Responsibility.

When I get sent out of class

This questionnaire asks students to share about their experience of being sent out of class. This may assist schools to assess teachers' rationale for throwing a student out of class and the impact this has on themselves, students and the class.

Results for this questionnaire presented in a report using short statements of the student's experience of being sent out of class.

About My Learning

About My Schoolwork

This questionnaire will be useful for students to reflect on their view of themselves as a learner, their ability to set goals and long term plans, their ability to reflect on their own progress and to take others into consideration when they are planning their learning. Each scenario has a real and ideal setting.

Results for this survey are displayed in a graph based on four elements of meta-cognition: Personal Narrative Ability, Intentionality - ability to set goals and long term plans , Reflection - ability to self-reflect and make healthy judgements about personal progress, Individuation - ability to take responsibility for own work and consider others.

Good Learning Skills

This questionnaire is subject based. The student first chooses the subject that they will be

Results for each subject are displayed in graph form for each of the seven Learning Skills along with a summary

27

reflecting on and are then guided through a series of questions that look at seven important learning skills being: Seeking Assistance, Checking Your Own Progress, Planning, Thinking Ahead, Reflecting, Linking & Finding Evidence.

of the skills the student is good at and those that require practice. Clicking on each of the Learning Skills will give a suggestion of how these skills may be practiced and improved.

Homework Survey The homework survey helps students understand their relationship to their homework and what helps and hinders their ability to complete their homework.

Results are shown verbatim; question and answer in order to support dialogue and conversation.

Responsibility for Learning: How much is given

This questionnaire explores how often students get the chance to decide what they will learn in class and how they will go about learning it. This questionnaire is useful for students to get a broader understanding of how they can be more in charge of how they learn.

Results are displayed in graph form under the four categories of Controlling Learning, Monitoring Own Progress, Leadership & Co-operative Learning. These results can then feed discussions around what students need to enable them to take more responsibility for their learning in areas that score low.

Responsibility for Learning: How successful

This questionnaire explores how well a student thinks they do when they get the chance to be in charge of their learning. This questionnaire can be useful to assist students in how they can become a better learner.

Results are displayed in graph form under the four categories of Controlling Learning, Monitoring Own Progress, Leadership & Co-operative Learning. These results can then feed discussions around how students deal with having more responsibility for their learning.

Student Preference Questionnaire

These questions help students to identify their 'personal learning style'. In doing so students can begin to see how their preferences impact how they learn from the perspective of what they find difficult and what they find easy in a learning environment.

The results are shown in graph form and rate thirteen different learning styles being: Auditory, Visual, Kinaesthetic, Social, Independent, Introverted, Extroverted, Intuitive, Practical, Thinking, Feeling, Opening, Closing. Each style contains a link providing further information on the meaning of the style and what it may mean for students to have a low or high score in this area.

Technology Student Belief

This questionnaire asks the student to reflect on their beliefs

Results of this questionnaire are graphed according to student's

28

Scale around their technology skill levels.This questionnaire is useful for discovering student ICT competency levels from beginners to advance users of technology.

beliefs around their Beginning level skills, their Advanced level skills and specifically their Internet skills.

What I think about my subjects

This questionnaire asks students to reflect on which subjects they are feeling inspired and/or challenged by and why.

Results are displayed in question and answer style as answered by the student and can facilitate discussions around identifying strengths as well as support that may be needed to move through subjects identified as challenging.

Reading & Writing Survey

These questions are designed to help students to reflect on the types of reading and writing that they enjoy and/or find difficult. They may see that they have strengths in some areas of reading and writing but want to improve in other areas.

Answers are verbatim; question and answer statements to generate conversation.

About My School

School Culture Questionnaire - My Actual School

This questionnaire and the one below (My Ideal School) both look at particular patterns of behaviour, attitudes and values that may be dominant in school culture. This particular questionnaire asks students to answer questions about the actual experience of school as it is right now.

Results for this questionnaire are graphed based on sixteen dimensions. Greek gods are used to represent each dimension archetypally, each having their own attitudes and behaviours. Pop-up windows are provided for further details of each dimension.

School Culture Questionnaire - My Ideal School

This questionnaire and the one above (My Actual School) both look at particular patterns of behaviour, attitudes and values that may be dominant in school culture. This particular questionnaire asks students to answer questions about how their school would have to be to satisfy their needs.

Results for this questionnaire are graphed based on sixteen dimensions. Greek gods are used to represent each dimension archetypally, each having their own attitudes and behaviours. Pop-up windows are provided for further details of each dimension.

29

30

APPENDIX 3Theorizing Personal and Organizational Change

The theory of change which provides a framework for this innovation is drawn from person-centred theory (Rogers, Dalmau and Neville), complexity theory (Stacey, Wheatley, Shields), and the theory of immunity to change  (Laskow).

Carl Rogers introduced the term ‘congruence’ into our ways of talking about therapy and personal growth. It is a term that can readily be applied to organizations. In the personal context Rogers described congruence as being a state ‘when my experiencing of this moment is present in my awareness and when what is present in my awareness is present in my communication’. For Rogers, congruence was the core quality of a psychologically healthy person. It is an awareness of incongruence – a sense (however vague or fuzzy) that the way I am at the moment does not match the way I can be or the way I want to be – which is the starting point of therapy. If I can explore this point of discomfort courageously I will become more congruent – more aware of who I am and what I am experiencing, and more able to communicate this to others. I will be no longer lying to myself, no longer shutting my experience of myself and my world out of my awareness. On the other hand, I may avoid self-reflection and stick rigidly to my sense of who I am and how I behave. This process of change in individual is mirrored in the process of change in an organization or group. And it is what Rogers terms the ‘actualizing tendency’ that provides the energy.

Rogers rejected the mechanistic psychological theories that were fashionable for most of his career and worked within an ‘organic’ metaphor. Growth is the central image within his psychology. Growth is not random. It has direction. The specific seed has a tendency to become a specific tree. It may depend on environmental conditions to germinate and flourish, but its direction and purpose comes from within. All sorts of environmental factors will encourage, inhibit or distort a plant or person’s growth, and it may never reach its potential, but the tendency remains the same. Rogers was certainly not alone in basing a psychological theory on such a proposition, and the acknowledgement of a drive in living matter to perfect itself is increasingly common in biological and ecological thinking as the industrial age’s infatuation with machines weakens in a postmodern world. Rogers’ unique contribution was to turn this philosophical position into a particular mode of practice for therapists, educators and agents of organizational change.

A person or an organization is not a closed system, shut in its own capsule. Rather it is open, embedded in a larger system, in a mass of complex relationships with other elements in that larger system. There is evidence from many quarters that it makes at least as much sense to imagine that larger system (with all its human and nonhuman elements) as a living organism, as it does to imagine it as a machine.One characteristic of organisms is their purposiveness. Embryos have a tendency to become adult organisms, and sometimes overcome all sorts of difficulties to do so. Human beings have a tendency to grow up. Immature organizations have a tendency to become mature organizations. When we stop growing we start to die, and death is intimately connected with the beginnings of new life. The universe is in the process of ‘becoming’, and so is every human and every organization. We believe it makes little sense to talk of organizations as living organisms without acknowledging that every organism is a living whole that cannot be reduced to, or explained in terms of, its simple elements, and that it has its particular being and discrete identity only through its relationship to the whole organic process of which it is a part. And it makes even less sense to 31

talk about an organization as an organism while making interventions designed to fix it as if it were machine.

Personal and organizational change, in Rogerian theory, is governed by a drive to become the whole of what one ‘naturally’ is. Whatever the espoused purposes and strategies of an organization, it experiences collectively and in its individual members, an unfolding process which, if not inhibited, can bring the organization to live out all of its potential. We should think of growth, not as something that people undertake and achieve, but as universal process in which people exist. We should think of growth as shaping the individual rather than of the individual as determining and controlling the nature of his or her growth. We should likewise think of growth in an organization as shaping the organization rather than of the organization as determining and controlling the nature of its growth. In extending this notion to organizations we are suggesting, not only that the members of the organization are individually motivated (unconsciously at least) by this universal evolutionary process towards ever greater degrees of complexity, freedom and selfhood, but that the process operates also at the collective level.Put simplistically, this sounds an unrealistically romantic idea. Our experience of organizations does not always provide much evidence of a drive towards wholeness. If anything, organizations are even more ‘neurotic’ than individuals – more rigid, more deluded, less ‘together’, less creative, less in touch with their own experiencing, less able to utilise all of their potential, more prone to irrational and impulsive behaviour. This in no way falsifies the theory, any more than the evidence of pathological and self-destructive behaviour in individuals falsifies the theory that every individual experiences a drive towards self-realization. Theories are merely tools for getting a handle on reality. Good theories are beautiful and useful as well as ‘true’. What really interests us here is whether the theory works.  

Intervening for Personal and Organizational Transformation

Rogers and other client-centred therapists have demonstrated that their theory works at the individual level. If we trust the clients’ ability to solve their own problems if they are free to do so, if we avoid thinking that we know more about them than they know about themselves, if we try to see the world the way they see it, accept that their behaviour is the best they can manage in the world as they experience it, accept and prize them as a human beings (even if we find their behaviour repugnant), be as congruent, empathic, non-judgmental and transparent in our interactions as we can manage – in other words if we can provide an environment in which it is safe for them to explore the discomfort they feel in thinking and behaving the way they do, their innate ‘actualizing tendency’ will provide the energy for change.

The theory works at the organizational level also. In this kind of intervention, the change agent abandons the role of ‘fixer’ and tunes in to the organization’s subjective experience of itself. She focuses on the point of incongruence where the organization is ‘vulnerable to anxiety’, facilitating the organization’s exploration of the ways (conscious and unconscious) it experiences the world and trusting the organization’s ability to become what it is capable of becoming. She approaches the organization the way a client-centred therapist approaches the client – with empathy, respect and congruence, understanding that the organization’s evolutionary drive to become fully itself will provide the energy for change. In a Rogerian framework, pathology in an individual organization comes from the inhibition or repression of the organism’s drive to become fully itself.. Transformation is not something an individual or organization does. It is most certainly not something that a change agent does to an individual or organization. Rather, it is something that

32

happens to a person or an organization, as a seed transforms into a plant or an egg transforms into an insect or animal when the time and conditions are right and it is free to do so. The change agent working in the ways outlined above is not trying to turn the organization into something else, but to put the organization in touch with its own transformational energy while helping it become aware of what, at some level, it already ‘knows’ about itself and its context.In the context of this project we do not assume that we are dealing with dysfunctional organizations, principals or teachers. We assume rather that we are dealing with organizations which are struggling to do their best within a dysfunctional system. The structure of school education in Victoria are still shaped by 19th and 20th century assumptions about the purpose of schools and the roles of teachers. That there is a level of dissonance between these structures and the emerging needs and expectations of the broader culture in the 21st century is demonstrated in the levels of stress in principals, teachers and students and the recurring attempts by the education system to find a magic solution to a real or imagined problem – generally by importing an apparently successful reform from overseas.

It is not our intention to argue that there is no virtue in imagining an organization as machine and intervening to fix its malfunctioning. Like the metaphor of the organism that grows or decays, we must remember that this is a way of imagining organizations, not a way of stating a fact about them. It is sometimes useful to study the way an organization operates and calculate that if particular change is made, in systems or in personnel, the organization will operate much more efficiently and achieve its stated goals.  There are a couple of problems with this. In the first place, the strategy can only be used at the surface level of the organization. Structures and procedures can be observed and assessed. If they are not working they can be modified or replaced. Perspectives, values and assumptions are not so easily changed. Making changes at the surface level may be desirable but it cannot be counted on to make any immediate impact on the deeper levels of the organization’s culture.

In the second place, the strategy is based on the outdated assumption that equilibrium is the natural state of an organization. Transformation involves ‘unfreezing’ a stable system, undergoing a process of change and ‘refreezing’ it as a new stable system which is more to our liking. The limitations of the return-to-equilibrium approach are becoming very apparent in the postmodern, liminal consciousness that characterises the current situation. For organizations that are experiencing problems existing in such a context, equilibrium is no longer an appropriate goal. Rather, equilibrium is the problem. For an organization trying to survive and flourish in a world where the ground is constantly shifting, equilibrium represents inflexibility and stuckness. We might add that the sense of equilibrium is often inauthentic. It is fantasy constructed only by denying and distorting the complexities of the organization’s experience of its world.

For half a century organizational development theory has worked from the assumption that equilibrium is the natural state of an organization. This equilibrium may be disturbed from time to time by a period of turbulence, but the organization hopefully returns to equilibrium after this experience. In a machine-like, steady state universe it was appropriate to expect to find machine-like, steady state organizations. In a dynamic, alive, evolving universe, we expect to find dynamic, alive, evolving organizations. Jeffrey Goldstein5 has set out a number of assumptions that might guide the change process in the kind of universe that science is discovering and non-linear mathematics is attempting to describe:

● Instead of resisting change, organizations and work groups tend towards change and

5 Jeffrey Goldstein, The unshackled organization. Productivity Press, 1994. 33

development. ● Instead of hierarchically imposing change, the potential for change is unleashed and

activated. ● Instead of ‘unfreezing’ and ‘freezing’ a spontaneous reorganization emerges representing a

more effective way to accomplish the organization’s objectives. ● Instead of large changes requiring large efforts, small-scale efforts can facilitate large

changes. ● Instead of emphasising planning, change is an evolving strategy, utilizing chance and

random events. ● Instead of only focusing on what is internal to the organization, the self-organization

approach includes the paradoxical work of firming up and traversing the boundaries between a work group or organization and its environment.

● Instead of relying only on a rational and cognitive perspective, change needs to incorporate elements of play and what may even appear absurd.

● Instead of consensus-seeking as a means towards participation, non-consensus-seeking can lead to spontaneous participatory structures.

These assumptions are compatible with the cooperative action research approach adopted in the current project.  While the proposed intervention has anticipated outcomes, and there is a substantial theoretical and empirical basis for expecting that the prioritizing of relationship will be effective in dealing with the challenges the intervention is addressing, the research team must avoid imagining that the desirable outcome is establishing new roles and procedures which can be set in concrete. Rather, the aim must be to support schools in finding ways to respond flexibly to a 21st century environment of complexity, volatility, ambiguity and uncertainty.

They are compatible with the research approach also in suggesting that attempts at organizational transformation must target all levels of the organization. Transformation involves letting go of taken for granted  structures, introducing a new dynamic in teacher-student relationships, creating a new narrative which defines the identity of the school, exploring principals’ and teachers’ discomfort with the taken for granted way of doing things within the school and the larger system, exploring principals’ and teachers’ personal discomfort at the demands of their current roles, bringing to the surface the deep assumptions which are shared or not shared in the school community, engaging with the larger system, the parents and the local community.

34

APPENDIX 4

RESEARCHER RESUMÉS

35

Dr Rufus BlackEmail: rufus.black@ormond.unimelb.edu.au

Qualifications:1996 Doctor of Philosophy in Theology (Christian Ethics) University of Oxford 1994 Master of Philosophy in Theology (Christian Ethics)1992 Graduate Diploma in Theology .University of Melbourne:1991 Bachelor of Laws (Hons)1989 Bachelor of Arts in Politics and Economics

Current Positions: Master of Ormond College, the University of Melbourne (2009-)President, Museums Board of Victoria (2016-)Deputy Chancellor, Victoria University (2011-)Associate Professor at the University of Melbourne (2010-)Founding Chair of the Board, Teach for Australia (2009-)Director, Corrs Chambers Westgarth (2010-)Director, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute (2013-) Chair of the Board’s Human Research Ethics Committee

since 2000 and a member of that Committee since 1997.Advisory Board Member, McDonald Centre for Theology and Public Life, The University of Oxford.

Previous Positions:2000-2009: McKinsey and Company. Partner and roles as

● Head of the Asia-Pacific Organisation Design Practice● Head of the Asia-Pacific Mindsets and Capabilities (Change Management) Practice● Co-Head, Australian Public Sector Practice

1997-1998 Sanderson Fellow and Lecturer in Ethics, The United Faculty of Theology 1994-1996 Tutor, Oxford University

Research/Consulting Consulting post McKinsey and CompanyAdvisor and Facilitator, Australian Hospitals and Health Care Reform Commission (2009)Author of The Black Review into Accountability and Governance in the Department of Defence (2010). Consulting work for the National Security Advisor of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (2010). Lead Reviewer, with Rob Cornell, of the Prime Minister’s Independent Review of the Australian Intelligence Community (2011). Strategic Advisor to the Secretary of Education, Victoria (2012-2014). Member, Higher Education Reform Implementation Committee (‘Dewar Committee’) (2014)

Selected publications ‘Ethics and the Products of Science’, in Raymond E. Spier (ed), Science and Technology Ethics (London,

2002: Routledge)Christian Moral Realism: Natural, Narrative, Virtue and the Gospel Oxford University Press,2001(With Nigel Biggar) and contributor of two chapters, Revival of Natural Law. Ashgate,2000(With Hayden Ramsey) ‘The Ethics of Gambling’, International Gambling Studies, 3 (2003), 199-215‘The Ethics of Using Embryonic Stem Cells’, Pacifica, 16 (2003), 89-100‘Review of Altruism and Christian Ethics by Colin Grant’, Studies in Christian Ethics, (2002)‘Theology and the Private, the Personal and the Public’, Interface, 3/1 (March 2000), 107-113.‘From Suicide to Surfing: Generation X and Visions of a Fulfilled Life’, The Way, 2000(With Sabine Alkire) ‘A Practical Reasoning Theory of Development Ethics: Furthering the Capabilities

Approach’, Journal of International Development, 9 (1997), 263-279

36

Dr Barbara HunterEmail: barbarahunter@hunterfive.com

QualificationsBachelor of Arts (Honours in Criminology). The University of Melbourne. Doctor of Philosophy (PhD). The University of Melbourne.

Previous Positions2001-2002. Fieldwork Placement Coordinator. Dept. of Criminology. University of Melbourne2002. Course coordinator and lecturer. Dept. of Criminology. University of Melbourne.2004 Senior Policy Officer, Research and Development Branch, Office of Learning and Teaching.

Victorian Department of Education and Training2005-2008 Senior Research Officer, Capacity Development. Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services Board 2009-2015. Strategic Lead & Senior Research Fellow. Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre, Fitzroy 2010-2015 Adjunct Senior Lecturer, Monash University2014-2015 Lead & Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Alcohol Policy Research 2015 Business Development Advisor2015-2016. AOD Policy Advisor to Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre and Ambulance Victoria 2016. Senior Research Assistant, HUSS, Social Inquiry. Latrobe University

Selected Publications and Technical Reports Musical Form and Social Deviance, in R. White (Ed.) Australian Youth Subcultures - On the Margins and in the

Mainstream. Hobart: Australian Clearing House For Youth Studies. 1999. (With Lubman, D. I. ) Substance misuse: Management in the older population. Australian Family Physician, 39(10),

738-41. 2010.Older people and alcohol and other drugs, Prevention Research Quarterly (August), Australian Drug Foundation.

August 2011.(With MacLean, S. and Berends, L.) Using Realist Synthesis to develop an evidence base from an identified data set

on enablers and barriers for alcohol and drug program implementation. The Qualitative Report, (17)1, 131-142. 2012

(With MacLean S. Berends L. Roberts B. Mugavin J. ) Factors that enable and hinder the implementation of projects in the alcohol and other drug field. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Public Health. 36(1):61-8, 2012 (With Best, D., White, E., Cameron, J., Guthrie, A., Hall, K.& Lubman, D. I). A Model for Predicting Clinician Satisfaction with Clinical Supervision. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 32(1), 67-78. 2014.

(With Mugavin, J., Flood, M., Frei, M. and Lubman, D.) Revised Victorian Prison Opioid Substitution Treatment Program Clinical and Operational Policy and Procedure Manual, Victoria: Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre. 2014.

(With Best, D., Hall, K., Guthrie, A., Abbatangelo, M. & Lubman, D.) Development and implementation of a structured intervention for alcohol use disorders for telephone helpline services. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 33(1) 2015

(With Savic, M., Barker, S.F., & Lubman, D.I.): ‘Holy shit, didn’t realise my drinking was high risk’: an analysis of the way risk is enacted through an online alcohol and drug screening intervention, Health, Risk & Society Published online 22 January 2016

Berends L. MacLean S. Hunter B. Mugavin J. and Carswell S. (2011) Implementing alcohol and other drug interventions effectively: How does location matter? Australian Journal of Rural Health. 19(4):211-7

Hunter, B; Lubman, DI; and Barratt, M. (2011) Alcohol and drug misuse in the elderly Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry. Vol.45(4), pp. 343

Technical reports (44)(With Barker, F., Gao, C., Manning, V., Best, D. & Lubman, D Demand Modelling Fitzroy, : Turning Point Alcohol

and Drug Centre. 2015

37

Mr. Howard Kelly

Email: hrkelly2@bigpond.comBa

Qualifications B ED University of Melbourne Public Service Medal 1992.

Previous Positions

Principal 1983-1996Chair of Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Board 1989-1993 (introduction of the VCE)

Chair of the Victorian Board of studies, 1993-1996 ( Introduction of the Statewide curriculum framework)

General Manager. Department of Education 1997-2003, including multimedia reform and Director  of the Ministerial Review into Post Compulsory Education 

Independent consultant

Projects include: Several school reorganisation projects.

Director of a Masters degree in School Leadership at the University of Melbourne 

Engaged to oversee the stakeholder engagement on the reopening of closed TAFE campuses at Lilydale  and Greensborough

Adviser on the Tech school initiative to the Victorian Department of Education

Adviser to Melbourne Polytechnic 

38

Dr Tricia McCannEmail- p.mccann@latrobe.edu.au

 Qualifications 1984 -Bachelor of Arts, La Trobe University1986-Graduate Diploma in Education, La Trobe University1998-Masters of Education La Trobe University2009- PhD in Education La Trobe University

Present PositionAdjunct Lecturer in Education, Faculty of Education, La Trobe University Previous positions2001-2016 Lecturer in Education, La Trobe University

Membership of professional bodiesChair of World Association for Person-Centred and Experiential Psychotherapies and Counselling-2014-2018 Secretary of World Association for Person-Centred and Experiential Psychotherapies and Counselling .2012-2014  Research/Consultancy2009 -2011. A Chief investigator of ARC grant entitled ‘Engaging adolescents in

schooling: a longitudinal study of student use of electronic self-assessment tools within advocacy models of student support.’

1998-2011` Professional Development in schools participating in the Advocacy Project.

Selected PublicationsEnchanting through fairytales. In P. Heywood, T. McCann, B. Neville & P. Willis

(Eds). Towards Re-Enchantment: Education, Imagination and the getting of wisdom. Post Pressed Publishers. 2005

(With Lewis, R) Teaching ‘at risk’ students: Meeting their needs. International Handbook of Research on Teachers and Teaching, p.875-885. L.J Saha, A.G. Dworkin (eds) Springer Science and Business Media. 2009

(With Hutchison K Eds) Somebody knows, somebody cares: reengaging students through relationship. Sense Publishers. 2015 

(With Neville, B.). Person-centered teacher advocates as culture brokers. The Person-Centered Journal, Vol 20 (1-2), 2013, pp.19-39.

Adolescent experience: ‘in over our heads’. In P. Heywood, T. McCann, B. Neville & P. Willis (Eds). Towards Re-Enchantment: Education, Imagination and the getting of wisdom. Post Pressed Publishers. 2005.

 McCann, Tricia, 2001.  Rogers revisited: An approach to the listening relationship within the advocacy project. In S. Gunn and A. Begg (Eds) Mind, Body and Society: emerging understandings of knowing and learning. University of Melbourne Press

 McCann, Tricia, 2000. Interaction with a grey cat: a personal journey towards an idea. In P. Willis, R. Smith & E. Collins (Eds) Being, Seeking, Telling: expressive approaches to qualitative adult education research. Post Pressed Publishers

39

Dr Bernie NevilleEmail: nevillebh@westnet.com.au

Qualifications:1963 BA (Adelaide) 1970 MA in Classics (Adelaide) Thesis: The religious policy of Domitian1975 PhD in Education (La Trobe) Thesis: Group climate, interpersonal functioning and learning

Current Positions: Honorary Professor. Swinburne University of TechnologySenior research fellow. Ormond College, University of Melbourne

Previous Positions:2011- 2015. Professor of Holistic Counselling. Phoenix Institute of Australia2009-2011. Adjunct Professor of Education. Faculty of Education, La Trobe University1995 – 2008. Associate Professor of Education. 1994 – 2001 Head of School. Graduate School of Education. La Trobe University.

Research/Consulting 1982 – 2000. A longitudinal study of the culture of neighbourhood houses in Victoria.1994 Development of the Dalmau-Neville Archetypology Indicator as an electronic instrument for the study

of organizational culture.1998. The Artemis project . An archetypal analysis of the safety culture on nine BHP sites. (Conducted as

part of a consultancy for BHP by Dalmau Associates)1999 -2003 The Advocacy Project (Victorian Department of Education)2006 -7 Expert teacher in residence partnership project [Primary Science] (Curriculum Corporation:

ASISTM grant:)2008-2012. Engaging adolescents in schooling: a longitudinal study of student use of electronic self-

assessment tools within Advocacy models of student support. (ARC Linkage grant)Selected publicationsEducating Psyche: Emotion, Imagination and the Unconscious in Learning Third expanded edition. David

Lovell Publishing, 2014Olympus Inc: Intervening for Cultural Change in Organizations. Greensborough: Flat Chat Press, 2008.

UK edition, Karnac Books, 2011.Qualitative Research In Adult Education, (with P. Willis and M. Edwards, Eds), Brisbane, Post Pressed

Publishing, 1994. Qualitative Research Practice in Adult Education (with P. Willis, Ed.) Melbourne, David Lovell Publishing

1996 One of the teachers smiles at me. International Journal of Holistic Education. Vol 1. 2011. p. 32-54.The Enchanted loom. In M. Newberry, A. Gallant & P. Riley (Eds). Emotion and School: Understanding

how the hidden curriculum influences relationships, leadership, teaching and learning. Emerald, 2013Backgrounding advocacy: research informing advocacy models. In K. Hutchison & T. McCann (Eds),

Somebody knows, somebody cares: Reengaging students through relationship. Boston: Sense Publishers, 2015.

The heart of advocacy: implications for schooling. In K. Hutchison & T. McCann (Eds), Somebody knows, somebody cares: Reengaging students through relationship. Boston: Sense Publishers, 2015.

(With B. Schmidt) Developing reflective function: the advocacy model as a way of developing a sense of meaning in young people. Journal of Student Wellbeing., Vol. 5(1), 2011. pp. 38–57.

(With Patricia McCann )Person-centered teacher advocates as culture brokers. The Person-Centered Journal, Vol 20 (1-2), 2013, pp.19-39

40

GREG POWELLEmail: g.powell@latrobe.edu.au

QUALIFICATIONSDiploma of Teaching-Primary (Coburg Teachers' College) B.A. (Deakin) B.Ed. (La Trobe) Graduate Diploma Educational Administration (Phillip Institute-RMIT) Graduate Certificate in Computing (Griffith & Queensland)M.Sc. (Curtin) Ph.D (Melbourne) Current PositionLecturer. La Trobe University. (ICT and Design Technologies)

 Previous positionsLecturer. Australian Catholic University

 Research/Consulting

 2015-2016 Google Research Project 2016-2017. STEM Research Pilot. Beliefs, Understandings and Intentions of Preservice. Primary STEM

Education and Robotics. 2011-2012. TTF Coordinator for (Bundoora) in the Teaching Teachers for the Future Project.2010-2011. Improving Pre-Service Workforce Education in Victoria through a Partnership Model 2007-2012. Engaging adolescents in schooling: A longitudinal study of student use of electronic self-

assessment tools within advocacy models of student support. ARC Linkage Project 2006 Report for the Victorian Curriculum Corporation (Round 4: Australian School Innovation in

Science, Technology and Mathematics (ASISTM) Selected Publications

Blogging as a Form of Web 2.0 Technologies for Reflective Practice. In A. Marcus-Quinn & T.Hourgan (Eds)Handbook on Digital Learning for K-12 Schools. Springer 2014Training Pre-Service Teachers in the Use of Challenge-Based Learning and Sandbox

Experiences as Practical Applications of Digital Technology for Authentic Learning in the Twenty-First Century Classroom. In A. Marcus-Quinn & T.Hourgan (Eds)Handbook on Digital Learning for K-12 Schools. Springer 2014In Search of Relevant Learning Spaces In T.Fitzgerald. Advancing Knowledge in Higher Education: Universities in Turbulent Times. . IGI Global. 2014

(With A. Chase) ICT Achievers Program: Victorian Department of Education and Training (DE&T): Journal of ICT in Education 25 (2). Melbourne. 2002.

Adobe Photoshop Elements Review (2CD Training Set) CLASSROOM Scholastic , 22(3). 2002(With S. Brennan. B. Carmichael & S. Liddle) Ergonomic Study of Primary Aged Students Using

DataDesk Little Fingers keyboards and ittiBitty Mouses in two Primary Schools . (Report for DE&T and Divisible by Zero: 2001

Powell, G. (2001-2002). Report on Quality Teacher Program-PD Bank: Victorian Department of Education and Training (DE&T)

Dr Philip RileyEmail: Philip.Riley@acu.edu.au41

Qualifications:B.Ed. (Prim.) University of Melbourne, 1988B.A. (Honours) (Psychology) Deakin University, 2002Ph.D. La Trobe University, 2008

Current Position:A/Professor of Educational Leadership (Institute for Positive Psychology and Education, ACU)

Previous Positions:2007 – 2014 Monash University: Senior Lecturer/Lecturer; Faculty Research Group Leader:2004 – 2006 Convenor: Graduate Diploma in Education (Primary) La Trobe University1987- 2004 Preshil - The Margaret Lyttle Memorial School. Classroom teacher

Research/ConsultingProgram Director: The Australian, Irish & New Zealand Principal Health and Wellbeing Surveys;Program Designer/Director: Mentoring for 1st Time Principals, Mentoring Matters-TrainingMentors for Victorian Government School Leaders, Preventing and Managing Extreme and

Challenging Behaviour – Professional Learning for Specialist Schools;Professional Learning Program: Intervention, Research and Evaluation;School Reviewer, Department of Education and Early Childhood Development

Selected publicationsAttachment theory and the teacher–student relationship: A practical guide forteachers, teacher educators and school leaders. London: Routledge. 2011 (With Gallant,A.) (in press). Early career teacher attrition in Australia: Inconvenient truths aboutnew public management Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice. (With Beausaert, S., Froehlich, D. E., Devos, C Effects of support on stress and burnout in school

principals. Educational Research, 2016, 58(4), 347-365.(With Maxwell, A) Emotional demands, emotional labour and occupational outcomes in school principals:

Modelling the relationships. Educational Management Administration and Leadership. 2016, 45(3), 484-502.

(With Gallant, A),. Early career teacher attrition: New thoughts on an intractableproblem. Teacher Development, 2015. 18(4), 562-580.Riley, P. (2013). Attachment theory, teacher motivation & pastoral care: A challenge for teachers and

academics. Pastoral Care in Education, 2014. 31(2), 112-129.(With Langan-Fox, J.) Bullying, stress and health in school principals and medical professionals:

Experiences at the ‘front-line’. In R. Burke, C. L. Cooper & S. Fox (Eds.), Humanfrailties: Wrong turns on the drive to success. London: Gower. 2013.(With Gallant, A) The emotional labour of the aspirant leader. In M. Newberry, A.Gallant & P. Riley

(Eds.), Emotion in schools: Understanding the hidden curriculum that influences teaching, learning and social relationships. Emerald Group. 2013.

(With Romi, S., Lewis, R., Roache, J.) The impact of teachers’ aggressive management techniques on students’ attitudes to schoolwork and teachersin Australia, China, and Israel. Journal of Educational Research, 104(4)., (2011

Dr Brendan SchmidtEmail: woodlands@tassie.net.au

Qualifications:

42

Bachelor of Commerce - Melbourne UniversityDiploma of Education - Melbourne UniversityMajor study program:- 10/12 Subjects for Master Education, Counseling and Guidance, Georgia Southern University, Georgia, USAPhD La Trobe University. (Thesis: Knowing & Transforming: Guiding adolescent learners towards epistemological transformation)

Current Position Retired. Ex Dept. Education &Training, Victoria.

Previous Positions:1986- 88 Acting Principal, Lorne P-12 School

1989-91 Principal, Altona North Technical School (7–12)

1992-99 Principal, Matthew Flinders Girls Secondary College.

1995-99 Director of Geelong Science and Technology Centre

1999-2002 Designer and Manager of the Advocacy Project

2000-2002 Senior Project Officer with “The Ministerial Review for Post-Compulsory Education and Training in Victoria” (The Kirby Review)

Senior Project Manager , Student Welfare and Later Years Branch of The Learning Teaching and Innovations Branch of DE&T.

Research/Consulting

Manager of the Advocacy Project. This involved issues concerning legal, commercial, professional, information technology, copyright, intellectual property and most of all implications for learners in the teaching and learning process.

Selected publicationsWith B. Neville. Student engagement : the advocacy program. Teacher Learning Network v.8 n.3 p.26-29,

Spring 2001. With B.Neville. Developing reflective function: the advocacy model as a way of developing a sense of

meaning in young people. Journal of Student Wellbeing., Vol. 5(1), 2011. pp. 38–57.With T. McCann. Principles and outcomes of the advocacy project. In K. Hutchison & T. McCann (Eds),

Somebody knows, somebody cares: Reengaging students through relationship. Boston: Sense Publishers, 2015.

43