Perspectives on Leadership MakingtheCaseforEnhancedSchool LeadershipCapacityinaNetworked EducationSystem LindaDevlin University of Wolverhampton,uk MilanPol Masaryk University, Czech Republic BohumiraLazarová Masaryk University, Czech Republic JanVanhoof University of Antwerp, Belgium KristinVanlommel University of Antwerp, Belgium RuudLelieur University of Antwerp, Belgium WouterSchelfout University of Antwerp, Belgium KristinaMalmberg Uppsala University, Sweden TorbjornHortlund Uppsala University, Sweden Justina Erˇ culj National School for Leadership in Education, Slovenia MatejaBrejc National School for Leadership in Education, Slovenia TracyWallis University of Wolverhampton,uk RachelMorgan-Guthrie University of Wolverhampton,uk EricVerbiest Education Consultant, Belgium ManuelCebrián International University of Andalusia, Spain DanielCebrián University of Malaga, Spain vodenje 3|2019: 43–60 Linda Devlin et al. The aim of the LeLeNeT project is to develop school leadership capacity to ensure that teachers are facilitated to maximise the potential of their professional learning networks (pln). The design of the educational modules for leadership development focuses on the knowledge and skills required to establish professional learning networks and to understand how leaders can support staff in achieving shared goals in an ever-changing environment. Networking can support collective professional learning in schools related to a changing and increasingly diverse communities. The paper offers the theoretical, framework, research basis and underpinning design principles for a leadership programme informing this complex agenda. Keywords: networks, leadership capacity, programme design IntroductionandTheoreticalFramework The Leading Learning by Networking, erasmus+ project (LeLe- Net)hasbeenfundedtodevelopadevelopmentprogrammetoen- hance leadership capacity to maximise the potential of networks. The overall aim of the project is to build and sustain school lead- ership of professional learning networks (pln) for teachers. The aim of the paper is to explore the nature of the capacity required ofleadershipwhentheireducationinstitutionsareworkinginnet- works, internal or external to the institution. In order for this aim to be achieved the working premise, adopted by the project team, oftheconceptofnetworksintheeducationiselaborated.Through the development of a theoretical framework and extensive evid- encecollection,acrossthesixEuropeanpartnercountries,thefol- lowing conceptualisation has been adopted as the working defini- tion for the project (oecd2003, 154): Networks are purposeful social entities characterised by a commitment to quality, rigour, and a focus on outcomes. They are also an effective means of supporting innovation in times of change. In education, networks promote the dis- semination of good practice, enhance the professional de- velopment of teachers, support capacity building in schools, mediate between centralised and decentralised structures, and assist in the process of re-structuring and re-culturing educational organisations and systems. The recognition of networking as a benefit to those individuals directly involved in the collaborations and to the institutions as a 44 Making the Case for Enhanced School Leadership Capacity whole is a persuasive argument for establishing networking prac- tice. What is less well recognised is that to achieve positive out- comes a network must be led by those that accept responsibilities beyond the immediate school environment. The project intentions are based on the idea that the educa- tional context is constantly evolving, and this requires teachers to adapt aspects of their professional practice. Professional Learning Networks can provide conditions to foster the inclusive learning and development of teachers. Sachs (2001) indicates that collab- orationandcollegialityarecornerstonesofdemocraticdiscourses. Consequently, one principle of the programme design is that net- works can help teachers overcome individual difficulties togeth- er, when faced with new expectations. Networks can provide sup- port for individuals in making sense of the changes that they face andinensuringthattheirdecisionsareinformedthroughcritique of the change that they are facing and consideration of the pos- sibleresponses.Theprojectevidenceindicatesthatschoolleaders play an essential role in the implementation and sustainability of networks within their schools and their wider communities. The extension of the leadership roles to address the complex matter of leading and managing network activity across a wide range of external networks is indicated as one potential area for develop- ment.Also,thecapability ofleaders toadapt theirleadershipport- folio to accommodate an inclusive approach to networking that benefits all learners is considered in the paper. The ongoing dia- logue around the inclusive nature of networking and the needs of those that support this form of collaborative learning will in- formthedesign oftheeducational modulesforschoolleadersand theconceptualisationoffuturenetworkingpracticeineducational settings. The concern of the LeLeNet project was to firstly identify the nature of the leadership of networks and then to determine the needs of school leaders. As a basis for the gathering of evidence a theoretical framework wasdeveloped fortheproject (Vanlommel, Schelfhout, and Vanhoof 2018) and agreed as part of the lead- ership needs identification process. In all participating countries Belgium,CzechRepublic,Sweden,Slovenia,Spain,andtheUnited Kingdom headteachers have to take part in formal, pre- or in- service training. Consequently, evidence-based school leadership development is a valued feature of the professional environment. The target group for the needs identification interviews and the questionnaire were school leaders in the compulsory school sys- 45 Linda Devlin et al. table1 Cases Country Total cases Valid and usedcases Unused cases United Kingdom 40 40 0 Slovenia 67 50 17 Sweden 64 50 14 Spain 56 50 6 Belgium 64 50 14 Czech Republic 57 50 7 Total 348 290 58 tem. Five qualitative interviews with leaders were undertaken in each country participating in this aspect of the project. In addi- tion to this case study evidence a questionnaire was developed and distributed to head teachers, with two purposes. Firstly, to get an overview of the extent of teachers’ networking between schools, with a focus on the school leader view of these activities and secondly to identify development needs for school leaders. The 25 interviews were based on pre-agreed interview sched- ule with seven areas of interest: linking networking with teaching and learning; topics for networking; teachers’ motivation for networking; the role of head teacher in networking; the benefits of networking; head teachers’ strategies for supporting and sustaining net- works; limits, challenges and head teachers’ needs. The basis of the definitions adopted in the theoretical frame- work and indicated in the interviews informed the questionnaire design. The coding for the comments utilised in this paper are based on a system indicating country of origin and a number al- located to the respondent e.g. (cz1). Thequestionnaire targeted a wide group of school leaders across the six participant countries, 290 questionnaires form the basis of the findings (table 1). The purpose of the questionnaire was to gain an insight from schoolleaders, engaged in compulsoryschooling, intothecurrent situationofnetworkingbetweenteachersandtoidentifythetrain- ing needs of school leaders. The purpose of the research activity was to ensure that the needs of the participants were met by the programme design. The questionnaire also had some open ques- 46 Making the Case for Enhanced School Leadership Capacity tions where informants developed in depth answers to the ques- tions. These responses and the interview evidence have illumin- ated the design features of the planned programme. TheComplexityoftheSchoolLeaderRoleinNetworkedSchools Apremise of the LeLeNet project was to demonstrate the need for capacity building of school leaders in the area of network lead- ership. The rationale being that if staff in schools are involved in networks then this involvement should be aligned with the stra- tegic direction of the school. Ideally the outcomes of the network engagement should be recognised by the school leaders and util- ised effectively for the benefit of staff and pupils. The evidence gathered indicated thatschoolleaders andstaffareengaging with a variety of networks for a range of purposes. There were a very small number of schools across the sample that reported no net- workactivityofanykind.Respondentsrecognisedthe‘veryeffect- ive cooperation and mutual learning’ (si4). The formal and in- formal activity is very varied and involves individual staff or iden- tified groups, often in planned curriculum projects or leadership development. Consequently, the need for leaders to be aware of the range of activity and to guide and support the practice of their colleagues is evident both from the literature and the evidence gathered by the project team. If the linkages between staff and otherschoolsinternally or externally isnotknownbyschoollead- ers it would not be possible to capture the impact on teaching and learning. This indicates that the monitoring of network links, by school leaders, is an important area of strategic knowledge. If the notion that networking is of value to staff and pupil learning, then engagementandimpactneedstobemonitoredforthepotential to be maximised within the school setting. Participant responses indicated that all or almost all of their teachers are involved in informal collaboration and formal net- works within their own school. Fewer, but still near to 75%, es- timate that self-regulated networking is common in their schools. Theseorganicgroupsofstaffmaybefocusedoninformaldevelop- mentor sharingpractice on aspects of schooling, such asworking with parents or supporting new teachers that are involved in in- duction. The impact of this type of network could be high but if not recognised and nurtured by the leaders there will be no way of harnessing the benefits from these collaborations. Awareness of these groups and their activities is an essential part of a school 47 Linda Devlin et al. table2 ToWhat Extent Are TeachersInvolved in DifferentKinds of Collaboration and Networks? A n s w e r 1234 Informal collaboration within school 4 15 89 178 Informal collaboration between schools 18 119 119 29 Self-regulated networkswithin schools 20 52 129 77 Self-regulated networksbetween schools 59 125 73 13 Formal organised networks within school 16 29 77 159 Formal organised networks between schools 46 87 97 49 Other networkswithin and/or betweenschools 59 33 36 25 notes 1 – not at all, 4 – fully. leadership role, even though the activities might be informal or operational. It may also be a way of motivating teachers and rais- ingthe awareness ofstaff ‘that theyare notalone in theproblems’ (si5)thattheyface.Self-regulated networkswithin schoolsarean area for school leaders to at least foster, if not lead, due to the po- tential contribution to the culture and practice within the school, as well as being a positive feature of shared learning. The role of the school leader in the collaboration and network- ing between schools is considered to be an area for development for many of the respondents. It is difficult for school leadership to facilitatesomeoftheactivitybeyondtheschoolandtocaptureand acknowledge the benefits of the involvement of their staff enga- ging with informal collaboration. There are potential resourcing issues to overcome. The way forward for school leaders is first to acknowledgethenatureofthenetworksandplanforstaffengage- menttoenhancetheirlearningexperienceandthatoftheirpupils. SomeoftheseareinternalnetworksorProfessionalLearningNet- works(pln)operatingundertheroutinepracticeoftheschooland the role of the school leadership. Other collaborative approaches are fostered through wider networks that undoubtedly promote the professional learning of staff but the impact on the learning of pupils is less clear. Given the complexity of activity and vari- ety of individual involvement at the teacher level all stakeholders need to raise their awareness of the essential conditions in which teachers can share and construct knowledge with colleagues and reflect upon their practices. As Poortman and Brown (2018) as- sert,professionallearningnetworkshavethepotential topromote inclusive practice and enable teachers to address challenges of a diverse student population. The evidence generated through the work of the LeLeNet pro- 48 Making the Case for Enhanced School Leadership Capacity ject, over a period of two years, has indicated that, as in the work of Jackson and Timperley (2007), there are characteristics of net- working that enhance collaborative learning. These key charac- teristics, shared values and vision, collective responsibility, re- flective professional inquiry, collaboration and the promotion of group and individual learning, feature in the theoretical frame- workandarerecognisedintheevidencegathered.Networkingin- volves complex and costly involvement of staff in a range of none routinebehaviours.Thesharingofknowledgeandpracticeacross networks by teachers and leaders can impact on pupil learning. However, an essential feature of successful professional engage- ment is that the school leader recognises the benefits but guards againstthepotentialdifficultiesthatstaffmayface.Theleadership of a networking school also determines how well new knowledge andpractice informstaffandfeed thelearning intotheschool set- ting. The notion that in order to ensure positive outcomes from networking leadership capacity must be enhanced through spe- cific guidance on the skills and knowledge of network leadership. On this basis and the evidence relating to the knowledge and un- derstanding of participants there is a sound justification for the leadership programme to include as a core module the enhance- ment of theoretical knowledge related to networks. The recognition that the headteacher should facilitate staff to engage with wider networks in the pursuit of professional learn- ingandschoolimprovementhasemergedfromboththeliterature, earlier studies andthe evidence gathering undertaken by the pro- ject members. It appears that some teachers find great difficulty in the translation of their learning toward change in classroom practice or into new insights for colleagues. The identification of the need to further enhance the roles of school leadership to in- clude support for the transformation of classroom practice based on the learning of teachers isone which requires specialist know- ledge and supportive practice. Research undertaken by Ballet and Kelchtermans(2009)indicatesthatprofessionallearningisclearly influencedbyschoolcultureandpolicy,butthattheenhancement of staff knowledge and skills happens in a rather isolated, separ- ate set of activities from the other school policy domains. In order to maximise the potential of teacher learning through the sharing of practice and the dialogue associated with the learning process these activities should be facilitated by school leadership. Research has shown that professional learning communities (Stoll et al. 2006) and other forms of teacher teams (Vangrieken 49 Linda Devlin et al. et al. 2015) do not arise without leadership support. Successful development of different forms of learning networks will depend on the way head teachers embed collaborative practice in their school policy and school structures (Stoll et al. 2006). Hargreaves (2006) argued that the expected presence of collegiality fostered by networks specifically invokes an institutional base and struc- turalconditions,whichemphasizestheorganizationalcontextand theimportantroleoftheschoolleaderin‘sensemakingandsense giving’ (se1). Shaping this kind of policy cannot be done with- in a traditional top-down hierarchical view of leadership. To be able to reach this goal an inclusive, cooperative leadership is cru- cial to improving the core educational processes which take place in schools as a basis for sustained school development (Hallinger 2003). Networks can operate across traditional structures and beyond the school, especially as many teachers have access to digital net- works as well as those that are in geographic proximity. Some schools reported working within nationwide networks and oth- ers with schools in other countries. In shared leadership models theschoolleader recognisesactivities inaninteractive webofdif- ferentleaders andfollowers indifferent situational circumstances (Hargreaves 2006). Marks and Printy (2003) integrated the differ- ent lines of research on school leadership into an overarching concept called ‘shared instructional leadership.’ Verbiest (2014) indicatesthat‘theschoolleaderontheonehandworkstransform- ationally, stimulating the involvement and development of teach- ers. On the other hand, they co-operate with teachers to optimize thelearningprocess.Itisclearthattheheadteacherdoesnothave to lead all networks in which the staff operate, but rather provide guidance to the teachers that lead the process’ (p. 4). A strong in- dicator for the LeLeNet project is that school leaders indicate a need to be aware of the appropriate leadership models and de- termine appropriate leadership roles to ensure the success of the networks. Consequently, a programme design feature is that ele- mentsof the firstmodule, addressing knowledge and understand- ing of network leadership, is recognized as a foundation for all modules to be developed for the project. Successful network development will depend on institutional conditions at the school and classroom levels. The organization will need to ensure strategic alignment between the organisation andthenetworkactivity.Thiswillinvolve(1)sharedgoalsandvis- ions (2) shared leadership values (3) a culture of inquiry and (4) 50 Making the Case for Enhanced School Leadership Capacity supportive relationships and trust (Vanlommel, Schelfhout, and Vanhoof 2018). Teachers need to be motivated and have a posit- ive attitude to collaboration, internally and externally, given the need for membership of many networks to be voluntary and pos- siblyaccessedinthepersonaltimeofstaff.Headteacherscanhave a positive impact on conditions for the success of an internal net- work,butitismorecomplexforleaderstoaddressallthepotential networking of teachers and associated outcomes. There is recog- nition that they and other school leaders may have to adopt flex- ible, composite andadaptive leadership models in whichtheneed to serve multiple agendas and fulfil a range of leadership to fa- cilitatesuccessfulnetworking.Furthermore,therespondentsnote the need to ‘foster a culture of mutual professional respect’ and a wholeschoolapproachtonetworking.Onthebasisoftheevidence gathered by the project team leadership development in fulfilling the multiplicity of roles required to sustain networks and benefit from networked learning are essential features of the programme design. SchoolLeaderDevelopmentNeeds Mostoftheschoolleadersrespondingtothequestionnaireseemed to appreciate the multiplicity of leadership functions of the net- working agenda in identifying their training requirements. They highlighted many of the areas suggested by the theoretical frame- work as areas of need, particularly building structures, capacity for networking and how to extend and distribute new knowledge within the organization. Given the range of experience of parti- cipants it is not surprising that confidence about their ability to build trust and positive working relationships was not as import- ant as the other areas of development where they described their needs as essential. A particularly interesting aspect of this evid- ence was that further areas for development were not suggested by the majority of the respondents. This may suggest that through the scrutiny of the literature and the case study evidence the pro- jectteamhadcapturedanappropriaterangeofleadershipcapabil- ity required for networking. Consequently, the design of the ques- tionnaire ‘saturated’ the response options for most school leaders. Suggestions for areas of further training in the open answers in- clude how to intermix participation in networks and work with pupils, communication techniques for managers and how to deal with colleagues who ‘only do the minimum.’ However apart from 51 Linda Devlin et al. table3 I need additional training in ... Answer 1234 How to create and enhancea learningculture among staff 21 85 108 72 How to build trust and positive working relationshipswithin school 38 90 92 65 How to build structures for sustainable,personal and interpersonal capacity development 16 76 113 82 How to stimulate and support the quality of individualand group learning processes 10 74 109 93 How to foster collective responsibility for student learning 19 68 99 96 How to develop a sharedvision for working in networks 19 81 103 76 How to extend and distribute new knowledge within the organisation 22 68 119 77 How to work with teachers motivation and committment towards professional learningnetworks 17 57 100 111 Other trainingneeds? Pleasespecify below 25 6 6 13 notes 1 – not at all, 4 – fully. the first area the other aspects are not specifically tied to lead- ership of networking. One respondent suggested a forum where head teachers can share examples from their development work concerning stressful situations. The notion that a problem shared is one that can be lessened permeates the concept of networked learning. Verbiest and Timmerman (2008, 21) argue that the roles of the school leader, in the development of professional learning net- works, can be grouped into three aspects. The role of ‘culture developer’ disseminating and strengthening of values, views and standards in the service of a commonly supported professional learning culture. The role of ‘educator’ fostering the intensity and quality of the individual and collective learning processes of team members,sothatprofoundlearningtakesplaceforall.Theroleof ‘architect’ involved in building structures, processes and systems in schools that enhance personal and interpersonal capacity de- velopment.Thisstructureseemedtobesupportedbytheevidence base of school leader needs and as a result three of the five mod- ules designed for the LeLeNet project are based on these struc- tures and features. It is intended that the modules will be of value to those responsible for networking activities, but they will also reinforce any collaborative, social construction of learning. The rationale for this decision is conceptual, evidence-based, experi- ential and, unavoidably based on the belief system of the project team. The opportunity for school leaders to explore their approach 52 Making the Case for Enhanced School Leadership Capacity and commitment to the creation professional learning communit- ies (Mulford and Silins 2003) is central to the module that ad- dresses the role of the ‘culture developer.’ A school leader’s un- derstanding of the elements of collaborative culture may vary sig- nificantly even though the evidence indicates that supportive re- lationships within the school teams is recognized as an essential condition for networks to flourish. The response to the question- naire indicates a very high level of informal collaboration with- in schools. However, concerns arising in the open comments and some of the case studies refer to staff who are unwilling to in- volve themselves in networking within the school and who do not see external networking as a necessary part of their professional activity. This indicates that there will be variation in the extent of collaborative practices between colleagues and some leaders in- dicate a need to explore this aspect of staff commitment. In order to empower school leaders to evaluate existing collaborative cul- tureintheirschoolsthemodulewilladdresstheevolvingnatureof a learning culture (Fullan 1993) and the steps to be taken toward the inclusion of all staff. An associated area of focus in this module will be the need to create a climate of trust and positive working relationships (Louis and Kruse 1995). Research has shown that learning at any level requires aculture of trustand support (Brykand Schneider 2002). Leaders have a responsibility to create an environment in which teachers trust each other, are not afraid to admit mistakes and ask for help. These positive working relationships tend to exist (Louis and Kruse 1995) where collaborative learning is fostered. Fullan(1993) suggeststhatalearningculturerecognizesdifferent interests of all stakeholders, focuses on people rather than sys- tems and encourages people believe they can change their envir- onment. A culture that is based on these principles makes time for learning, adopts holistic approaches to problems, encourages open communication and is based on teamwork. The interview evidencegatheredthroughtheLeLeNetprojectsupportsthisview and adds the need for a shared sense of purpose as an essential pre-condition of networks, particularly with those beyond the im- mediate school environment. In these settings expectations are agreed and monitored but not micro-managed. Colleagues are trusted to work together to achieve positive outcomes and share learning. The module addressing the role of ‘educator’ in the context of Professional Learning Networks (pln) fosters a paradigm for 53 Linda Devlin et al. schoolimprovementinwhichtherelationshipbetweenstafflearn- ing, teaching and student learning co-exist. The intensity and quality of the individual and collective learning processes of team members is harnessed to assure that profound learning takes place. Head teachers hold an important role as educator, since they will have to focus on learning at all levels (Leithwood and Jantzi 2006; Louis and Kruse 1995) and they will need to be a role model(Stolletal.2006)withinthislearningenvironment.Theno- tion that teachers can learn together, build and exchange know- ledge, have ideas and advise if there is a safe learning culture (Fullan 1992) is one supported by the project evidence base. All case studies reported strong relationships between networks and enhanced approaches to learning and teaching. ‘teachers share experience,theyattendlessonsofotherteacherstofindouthowto work with materials’ (cz1). There was also representation about the validation of the work of teachers by their peers within the school setting and beyond. The opportunity for teachers to ‘get feedback about where they are but also approval of their practice. Critical judgement leads to improvement of their work’ (si1). Theencouragementofteachersbyschoolleaderstoshareideas and try new approaches was evident throughout the interview evidence provided by the twenty-five schools. The fundamental notion that ‘you can develop your practice most effectively if you can learn fromeach other’ (si4)is a centralaspect of the learning togetherphilosophythatunderpinstheprogramme.Thequestion- naire illustrated the range of potential learning areas that can be- nefit from inter or intra school networking. Topics typically indic- ated as a focus of networks related to developing curriculum con- tent, pupil competence or supporting school specialisation (65– 70%). Many organised networks focus on teaching method de- velopment (approximately 75%). In the open answers (6g) the respondents gave examples such as ‘common problems’ being shared, ‘cultural topics,’ ‘ictas a tool for learning,’ ‘assessment’ butalsolessonplanningandaddressingstudentswithspecialedu- cational needs. Networking encourages reflective professional in- quiry and collaboration that are needed for learning and know- ledge creation (Hall and Hord 2006; Louis et al. 2010). Across all areas indicated by school leaders the synergies of collabor- ative action were acknowledged and the notion that colleagues willachievetogether agreatdealmorethaneacheducatorcando alone. Theroleof‘architect’ispossiblytheleastfamiliartotheproject 54 Making the Case for Enhanced School Leadership Capacity table4 To What Extent Are the Organised Networks Involved with the Following Topics? A n s w e r 1234 Curriculumcontent development 22 61 99 98 Teachingmethod development 7 55 119 105 Development of pupil competence 13 66 121 85 To support school specialisation/development/imp. 11 66 128 80 Development of inclusive education 23 101 102 56 Development of school leadership capacity 47 97 76 33 Other focus? Give example below 27 19 14 18 notes 1 – not at all, 4 – fully. respondent groups, although many of them are aware of some of theactivities thatareinvolved in thisrole. Thelanguageofthear- chitectroleisalsolessfamiliarsuchasbuildingstructures,identi- fying and distributing knowledge and sustainable systems that enhance personal and interpersonal capacity development. The modulecontentfocusesonthefacilitationofknowledgeexchange, recognitionofresourcecapacityandinnovationbetweenteachers. Onekeymessageforthearchitectisthattheschoolneedstobeor- ganizedtoallowtimeforstafftomeet,talkandsharethoughtsreg- ularly (Louis and Kruse 1995; Stoll, Fink and Earl 2003). Dialogue is essential to the professional exchange needed for the process of shared learning (Dimmock and Walker 2004). A bottom-up ap- proach to school development, focusing on educational processes for pupils and staff needs to take place to ensure that the needs of learners are addressed. Creating liminal spaces for dialogue, ownershipof agreed agendas throughdelegation of tasks, sharing responsibility and more involvement of teachers in well-defined strategically aligned tasks is a required practice of successful net- works. The creation of opportunity for physical proximity to allow exchange of ideas is important but in the digital age this can be achieved at distance, provided that the resources are there to fa- cilitate online activity. Resources such as time, space and opportunity to cooperate need to be used to create the pre-conditions for shared learning. School structures that encourage different forms of learning com- munities are fostered by appropriate development conditions that form an essential starting point for successful networks. To pro- mote, sustain and extend pln, schools need external support in the forms of partnerships and links into associations and other educational bodies that share the need for interaction. This might 55 Linda Devlin et al. be other schools, local administrative arrangements, leadership schools or government resourcing. The school leader not only needs to construct structures within the school, but actively build bridges with external partners (Leithwood, Jantzi, and Steinbach 1998;Rosenholtz1989).ProfessionalLearningNetworkscomprise links within schools and across schools, which are both import- ant from a learning perspective. Head teachers cannot consider their schools as an island, they need to be responsive to extern- al partners to jointly learn and develop. Consequently, the archi- tect function of the leadership role requires further development formostheadteachersandthoseresponsibleforinclusiveengage- ment with the wider community Teacher willingness to participate in networks and their mo- tivation to cooperate with others from a development perspective is one area that needs to be carefully facilitated by school lead- ers.Onestartingpointforpln’s is that they can emerge from identifying shared needs, without pressure or obligation from ex- ternal policy (Hall and Hord 2006). In this case teacherscan make choices about their areas of interest and focus for development, which facilitates a diverse group of teachers through inclusive learning. Networks consist of a group of people sharing and crit- ically interrogating their practice in an ongoing, reflective, col- laborative, inclusive way (Toole and Louis 2002). This approach encourages teachers to apply new ideas to the problems they share and generate creative responses that are a good match to the needs of the community that they serve. These development- oriented systems are heavily dependent on teachers being self- motivated in their engagement (Sutherland 2004). Consequently, arole oftheschool leaders is tofacilitate inclusive practice where staff are encouraged to work together to achieve a well-defined goal and to gather evidence of the impact on practice. Some teachers are intrinsically motivated to function collabor- atively as part of their philosophy of education and others are less willing to do so. However, in the same way that the headteach- ers need to undertake different roles to lead networks staff can undertake different roles in networks. Not all staff involved have to make the same contribution. They can fulfil different functions in the shared learning process and have an asynchronous benefit to the network. It is as important for school leaders to recognize the diversity of their staff and the skills and experience they bring to a network as it is to recognize the diversity of their pupils and the community that they serve. Collaboration allows some staff in 56 Making the Case for Enhanced School Leadership Capacity complex and challenging circumstances to take the risk of invest- ing in long-term improvements, rather than going for short-term gains Hadfield and Jopling (2006). Understanding how staff can holddifferentrolesinnetworkscancontributetoaninclusivecul- ture, a feature of the final module that permeates the programme asawhole.Theextent towhich thisapproach works,for all levels oflearning,isanimportantfeatureoftheevaluation ofnetworked learning. ConcludingComments The project, to date, indicates that there is a broad, internation- al consensus, based on the literature and the evidence gathered by the partners that networks can promote an inclusive approach to the leadership of learning. The conceptual model proposed is learning-orientated, growth promoting and operates as a collect- ive enterprise (Mitchell and Sackney 2000). The LeLeNet project team identified key characteristics that are essential for building and fostering the culture of networking. Factors such as formality of network structures, strength of connectivity, levels of learning and availability of network facilitation expertise impact on the fo- cus, design and orientation of the planned learning activities. The need for school leaders to recognise the challenges of networking such as teacher motivation and attitudes toward this collaborative wayofworkingwereexploredasafundamentalpartofleadership of connected organisations. The need to develop the leadership capacity to adopt roles that support networking schools is a core purpose of the programme. The evidence gathered on the basis of the theoretical frame- work was supportive of the view that the role of the school leader is a precondition for successful networking in schools. The cre- ation of efficient teacher networks relies on the development of a variety of professional knowledge and skills from both teachers and school leaders and the development of a collaborative learn- ingculture.Thereisapowerfulandpersuasivecasedemonstrated across the three forms of evidence brought together across six countriesthatappearstovalidatetheprogrammedesignproposed for school leaders. However, it is also evident that schools will vary in their enthu- siasm and skepticism of the need for networks and the leadership readiness to adopt the concept. In a time when school networks have become ‘ever more popular’ (sianduk) as the mode of ini- 57 Linda Devlin et al. tiating changes and large-scale reforms there is a strong case for the development of leadership roles that accommodate inclusiv- ity in diverse settings. School leaders must be enabled to promote learningactivitieswithinaninteractivewebofleadersandfollow- ersindifferentsituationalconstellations(Hargreaves2006)ifthey are to effectively serve the needs of their learners and the wider community. Acknowledgments The paper was created by the Erasmus+ project nr. 2017-1-cz01-ka201-035502 Leading Learning by Networking. References Ballet, K., and G. Kelchtermans. 2009. ‘Struggling with Workload: Primary Teachers’ Experience of Intensification.’ Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (8): 1150–1157. Bryk,A.,and B.Schneider. 2002.TrustinSchools.NewYork:RussellSage. Dimmock, C., and A. Walker. 2004. ‘A New Approachto Strategic Leadership: Learning-Centredness, Connectivity and Cultural Context in School Design.’School Leadership and Management 24 (1): 39–56. Fullan, M. 1992. The New Meaning of Educational Change. London: Cassell. Fullan, M. 1993. Change Forces Probing the Depths of Educational Reform. London: Falmer Press. Hadfield, M., and M. Jopling. 2006. The Potential of Collaboratives to Support Schools in Complex and Challenging Circumstances. Nottingham: National College for School Leadership. Hall, G., and S. M. Hord. 2006. ImplementingChange: Patterns, Principles and Potholes. 2nd ed. Boston,ma: Pearson Education. Hallinger, P. 2003. ‘Leading Educational Change: Reflections on the Practice of Instructional and Educational Leadership.’Cambridge Journal of Education 33 (3): 329–351. Hargreaves, A. 2006. ‘Educational Change Over Time? The Sustainability andNon-Sustainability ofThreeDecadesofSecondarySchoolChange and Continuity.’Educational Administration Quarterly 42 (1): 3–41. Jackson, D., and J. Temperley. 2007. ‘From Professional Learning Community to Networked Learning Community.’ In Professional Learning Communities:Divergence, Depth and Dilemmas, edited by L. Stoll and K. S. Louis, 45–62. Berkshire: Open University Press. Leithwood, K., and D. Jantzi. 2006. ‘Transformational School Leadership for Large-Scale Reform: Effects on Students, Teachers, and Their Classroom Practices.’School Effectiveness and School Improvement 17 (2): 201–227. 58 Making the Case for Enhanced School Leadership Capacity Leithwood, K., D. Jantzi, and R. Steinbach. 1995. ‘An Organisational Learning Perspective on School Responses to Central Policy Initiatives.’ School Organisation 15 (3): 229–252. Louis, K. S., and S. D. Kruse. 1995. Professionalism and Community: Perspectives onReforming Urban Schools. Thousand Oaks,ca: Corwin. Louis,K.S.,K.Leithwood,K.L.Wahlstrom,S.E.Anderson,M.Michlin, and B. Mascall. 2010. Learning from Leadership: Investigating the Links to Improved Student Learning. Minneapolis,mn:University of Minnesota. Marks, H. M., and S. M. Printy. 2003. ‘Principal Leadership and School Performance: An Integration of Transformational and Instructional Leadership.’ Educational Administration Quarterly 39 (3): 370–397. Mitchell, C., and L. Sackney. 2000. Profound Improvement:Building Capacity for aLerning Community.Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger. Mulford, B., and H. Silins. 2003. ‘Leadership for Organisational Learning and Improved Student Outcomes: What Do We Know?’ Cambridge Journal of Education 33 (2): 175–195. oecd. (2003). Education at a Glance. Paris:oecd. Poortman, C. L., and C. Brown. 2018. ‘The Importance of Professional Learning Networks.’ In Networks for Learning, edited by C. Brown and C. L. Poortman, 32–34. London: Routledge. Rosenholtz, S. 1989. Teachers’ Workplace: The Social Organization of Schools. New York: Longman. Sachs, J. 2001. ‘Teacher Professional Identity: Competing Discourses, Competing Outcomes.’Journal of Education Policy 16 (2): 149–161. Stoll, L., R. Bolam, A. McMahon, M. Wallace, and S. Thomas. 2006. ‘Professional Learning Communities: A Review of the Literature.’ Journal of Educational Change 7 (4): 221–258. Stoll, L., D. Fink, and L. Earl. 2005. It’s about Learning (and It’sabout Time):What’s in it for Schools? London: Routledge. Sutherland, S. 2004. ‘Creating a Culture of Data Use for Continuous Improvement: A Case Study of an Edison Project School.’The American Journal of Evaluation 25 (3): 277–293. Toole, J. C., and K. S. Louis. 2002. ‘The Role of Professional Learning Communities in International Education.’ In Second International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration, 245–279. Dordecht: Kluwer. Vangrieken, K., F. Dochy, E. Raes, and E. Kyndt. 2015. ‘Teacher Collaboration: A Systematic Review.’ Educational Research Review 15:17–40. Verbiest, E. 2014. Leren Innoveren: Een Inleiding in de Onderwijsinnovatie. Antwerp: Garant. Vanlommel, K., W. Schelfhout, and J. Vanhoof. 2018. Leading Learning by Networking: Theoretical Perspectives on How to Build Professional Learning Networks. Antwerpen: University of Antwerpen. 59 Linda Devlin et al. Verbiest, E., and M. Timmerman. 2008. Naar duurzame schoolontwikkeling:Scholen duurzaam ontwikkelen; Bouwen aan professionele leergemeenschappen. Antwerpen: Garant. LindaDevlin is Head of International Development at the Faculty of Education Health and Wellbeing, University of Wolverhampton, uk. l.devlin@wlv.ac.uk MilanPol is Professor at the Faculty of Arts, Masaryk University, Czech Republic.pol@phil.muni.cz BohumiraLazarová is Associate Professor at Masaryk University, Czech Republic.lazarova@phil.muni.cz JanVanhoof is Professor at the Faculty of Social Science, University of Antwerp, Belgium.jan.vanhoof@uantwerpen.be KristinVanlommel is Post Doctoral Researcher at the Faculty of Social Science, University of Antwerp, Belgium. kristin.vanlommel@uantwerpen.be RuudLelieuris Predoctoral Researcher at the School of Education, University of Antwerp, Belgium. ruud.lelieur@uantwerpen.be WouterSchelfoutis Associate Professor at the University of Antwerp, Belgium. wouter.schelfhout@uantwerpen.be KristinaMalmberg is Senior Lecturer at the Uppsala University, Sweden. kristina.malmberg@rut.uu.se TorbjornHortlund is Lecturer at the Uppsala University, Sweden. torbjorn.hortlund@rut.uu.se JustinaErculj is Assistant Professor at the National School for Leadership in Education, Slovenia. justina.erculj@guest.arnes.si MatejaBrejc is Assistant Professor at the National School for Leadership in Education, Slovenia. mateja.brejc@solazaravnatelje.si TracyWallisis Head of Initial Teacher Training Partnerships at the University of Wolverhampton,uk. t.wallis@wlv.ac.uk RachelMorgan-Guthrie is Head of Primary Education at the University of Wolverhampton,uk. rmorganguthrie@wlv.ac.uk EricVerbiest is Education Consultant, Belgium. e.b.verbiest@gmail.com ManuelCebrián is Vice-Rector of Innovation, Teaching and Digital Transformation at the International University of Andalusia, Spain. mcebrianster@gmail.com DanielCebrián is Assistant Professor at the University of Malaga, Spain. danielcebrianr@gmail.com 60