The setting-up of multi-site school collaboratives: The benefits of this organizational reform in terms of networking opportunities and their effects

Abstract

This article, which is set within the Maltese education scenario of unfolding decentralization through the setting-up of multi-site school collaboratives (legally termed 'colleges') via a policy mandate, explores a particular aspect of this reform -that of 'networking'. This is examined in terms of the potential for 'networking' that educational leaders have at both school and college levels and the 'effects' of these (non-) opportunities on both the leaders and the network itself. My study is framed within a postmodern paradigm and interpreted through a Foucauldian theoretical framework. Data for this case study are collected via semi-structured, in-depth interviews; participant observation; and documentary analysis; which are then subjected to narrative analysis. The findings reveal a very detached bond within and across levels, with this detachment unfolding simultaneously within both micro and macro strata. This article, besides theoretically addressing a gap in literature regarding the shortcomings of networks and network dynamics, has a particular significance for educational practitioners, policy makers, and all those who have school improvement on their agenda.

Conceptualising Creativity and Innovation in the Role of Primary Sector Headteachers

“…Yet, trust requires the luxury of time rather than a matter of weeks to develop [45] alongside the need for democratic practices [41]. Moreover, Mifsud [46] notes that by fostering trust, networks allow knowledge to flow through the provision of space where individuals can reflect, inquire, and challenge, thus increasing the opportunity for Cr&Inn. Conversely, Sider and Jean-Marie [32] highlight how a lack of trust results in a reluctance to share innovative ideas impedes practice.…”

“…For example, Hameiri et al [53] highlight a decrease in role risk when challenging existing structures for those who have sufficient knowledge. Mifsud [46] (p. 239), suggests that networks distribute risk by providing 'a testbed for new ideas'; and, Lemos and Liberali [37] note risk-taking involves everyone in the collaboration. Once again, we see the importance of the environment and the social arena.…”

Networking in education: From concept to action – An analytical view on the Educational Territories of Priority Intervention (TEIP) in Northern Portugal

“…To summarise, it may be stressed that there is recognition of the potential for networking in the field of school education (Ainscow et al, 2006; Carmichael et al, 2006; Hadfield & Chapman, 2009; Lima, 2010; Mifsud, 2015; Muijs, 2008) as a necessity or strategy for schools with potentially vulnerable pupils, located in contexts of manifest social inequality.…”

Enhancing pre-K-12 student learning outcomes: The need for synergies of policy-makers, school administrators and parents

“…Andrews and Abawi (2017) noted that collaborative partnership helps to promote shared individual strengths, as well as build capacity in areas of challenge. However, how synergy of education stakeholders can be aligned and fostered has been sparsely considered in the literature; consequently, very strong sense of isolationism and individualism is still widespread (Mifsud, 2015;Silva et al, 2017). Exploring this aspect is critical and it cannot be over-stated in remedying the current situation of somehow poor learning outcomes of students.…”

“…It is important because synergy among influential role groups can directly and indirectly result to academic and personal success (Epstein and Sheldon, 2006) and competitiveness can be stimulated and improved by fostering cooperation and interaction at three levels in education: schools, teachers and students (Sahlberg, 2006). According to Mifsud (2015), the main aims of collaboration include the sharing of professional expertise, the enrichment of learning opportunities for students and the breaking down of barriers between the schools and individuals. Masino and Niño-Zarazúa (2016) identified bottom-up and top-down participatory and community management strategies, via decentralisation reforms, and with involvement of communities in the school system management as one of three best drivers to improve education quality and student learning in developing countries.…”