Secondary school principals in curriculum reform: Victims or accomplices?

Abstract

The Shanghai Municipal Education Commission convened an important conference in early 2010. A major focus of the conference was the apparent failure of the New Curriculum Reform to take root in schools. One of the conclusions presented at the conference was that school principals were responsible for the gap between the intent and effect of the curriculum reform. This article uses data collected from a group of Shanghai secondary school principals to examine the state of the curriculum reform from "the inside." The main purpose of the article is to identify why the principals themselves believe that the reform is not working as intended and indeed whether they are in some way complicit in the slow rate of reform implementation. Principals involved in the study suggest the contradictory messages they receive from government officials about how principals' work should be formally and informally assessed do little to promote meaningful reform implementation. Therefore, it is suggested that one of the main reasons why curriculum reform has so far not been able to bring about deep change at secondary school level is the enduring cultural norms Secondary School Principals in Curriculum Reform 389 which continue to underpin societal expectations and accountability, rather than a lack of curriculum leadership on the part of school principals.

The education of migrant children in Shanghai: The battle for equity

“…Chinese involvement was restricted to Shanghai, which was selected because it is generally regarded as being at the forefront of educational innovation and development in China (Qian and Walker, 2013;Walker et al, 2011). Given its debutant status, Shanghai's results in PISA were quite outstanding.…”

Demystifying the Perspectives of School Principals as Leaders of Curriculum Change: The Case of Indonesia

“…As a leader of education, the principal needs support from policies that are clear and consistent in concept and implementation so that executors in the field can ensure the steps to be taken (A1); for principals it is easier to perfect the preparations of a new curriculum rather than to return to the old curriculum. According to Yukl (2010;346), too many changes in a short time can reduce commitment, as is the case in China where principals have not applied changes in the curriculum according to policies because of the factor of ambiguous government messages (Walker, Haiyan, Shuang, 2011). "Upgrading" the curricular leadership of a principal is indeed important, but what is more important is how the government clarifies the policies given to the principal and can be consistent with them.…”

“…This implicates the reduction of teacher motivation and confidence so that implementations of curricula in Indonesia proceed slowly (D1), let alone the culture of some Indonesian people who feel more comfortable in the comfort zone (B2). Similarly, curriculum reforms also proceed slowly in China because of strong cultural norms as well as the expectations and accountability of the people (Walker, Haiyan, Shuang, 2011).…”

“…Even though the principal is not directly involved in changes in curriculum concepts, he or she however understands every problem present in a school and is the primary initiator in curriculum implementation (Gibson, Ivanchevich, Donnelly, 1985). Research results have showed that the principal becomes a victim when a curriculum reform occur (Walker, et al 2011). The participation of the principal has a major effect on the success of the implementation of curriculum changes, including cases of curriculum changes in Indonesia which to this day has not yet been perfectly implemented.…”

“…On the other hand, the principal was judged to be a barrier in Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) in Cypriots USA because of a lack of confidence, not wanting to challenge the status quo, a lack of involvement, and not being able to respond to standards of national education policies (Beltran, Zachariou & Stevenson, 2013). The principal was also judged as the primary barrier in curriculum implementation in China because the competence of curriculum leadership was considered weak (Walker, Haiyan, Shuang, 2011). The quality of school leadership is the most important factor in achieving high-quality education results (Kaparou & Bush, 2015).…”