The Coalition Government's 'Green Paper' (DfE 2011) proposes a systemic overhaul of services for pupils with special educational needs in England, with increased parental choice of provision and 'sharper accountability' (p. 67) in schools. Deadlines for various stages of this reform have not been met, and its final nature remains uncertain. This paper reveals SENCOs' insights into their changing role in this turbulent policy context. This is achieved through the thematic analysis of 227 responses to an 'open-ended' question in the national Special Educational Needs Coordinator (SENCO) Survey 2012. Findings from this sample indicate that SENCOs predict that schools in England will become more inclusive, with greater shared responsibility for achievement for all, and SENCOs' increased involvement in staff training and other whole school capacity-building activities. Respondents predict a greater partnership with parents, for whom they will provide advice and links to other services. They foresee their reduced involvement in direct teaching and an intensification of their work in other ways, especially in terms of paperwork associated with pupil tracking and other accountability measures. These changes are anticipated against a backdrop of resource cuts, requiring SENCOs to show increasing self-reliance and imagination.

This article considers the nature of professional development, how it occurs in individuals, and how educational leaders and managers can facilitate professional development for the purpose of school improvement. Social theories of learning provide compelling explanations of the conditions through which professional development occurs in and among individuals within a community of practice. Research into professional learning communities suggests ways forward for educational leaders and managers to foster environments in which individual and organisational learning is optimised through collaboration and shared leadership.

In Ethiopia, as elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), there are efforts to broaden local stakeholder participation in structures and processes of school leadership. Despite advocacy from the World Bank, amongst others, research in SSA questions the extent to which such reforms reflect genuine democratisation. This study applies theories of power to the participation of local stakeholders (management, teachers, students and parents) based on ethnographic fieldwork conducted at a government primary school in Tigray. The study finds that management agendas dominate consultative and decision-making forums; however, these spaces also enable students and others to share their views on conduct within the school community, which serves an important accountability function.

Against a backdrop of historic inequities between Northern and Southern scholars, the UK's Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) calls for "meaningful and equitable" research partnerships between UK-based academics and partners in the Global South. This paper draws on qualitative data from three workshops in the Ethiopia, Rwanda and the UK to interrogate GCRF funding criteria from the perspectives of African-based research partners. The GCRF criteria are considered with respect to African partners' experiences of, and aspirations from, such international research partnerships in order to enrich and extend ongoing debates about power relations in development research. The study finds that GCRF criteria do address many of the familiar historic concerns of African partners, while also identifying ways in which this and similar funding schemes may unintentionally reproduce structural inequities within the South. In highlighting these less visible equity concerns, the paper draws lessons for funders, academics and others concerned with establishing genuinely equitable research partnerships.

This article explores equity with respect to South-North partnerships in the context of education research involving scholars based in sub-Saharan Africa. Drawing on large-scale bibliometric analysis of over 1,000 publications published in English between 2010 and 2018, it finds that participation in such partnerships favours a relatively small number of countries in sub-Saharan Africa. These collaborations appear to be reproducing gender imbalances in authorship. Complemented by interviews with 31 researchers based in the region, it further identifies examples of asymmetrical relationships alongside more positive partnerships and practices. Scholars based in sub-Saharan Africa were more likely to view partnerships initiated by researchers based in the region as equitable.