-->
The meeting was attended by 8 representatives of the network:
Philip Woods, Alison Taysum. Khalid Arar,
Miles Bryant, Jami Royal Berry, Kay Fuller, Michael Wilson, Howard Stevenson.
The meeting opened with an update on the progress of the
project. Following the highly successful
network meeting at AERA in Vancouver the project has now clearly developed into
two sub-groups. These are a group
focused on the leadership of high needs schools (currently co-ordinated by
Bruce Barnett) and a group focused on social justice leadership (currently
co-ordinated by Howard Stevenson). At
the meeting in Vancouver there was a recognition that after a necessary but
lengthy period of formulating aims and ideas there was a need for each group to
move towards generating more tangible outputs.
Since the meeting in Vancouver this has very largely been achieved. Most
notably, both groups have submitted proposals to feature at the UCEA Convention
in Denver in November and these proposals have been accepted. This will represent the first time that the
project has begun to generate clear outputs to disseminate and in a form that
invites discussion with our peers.
As well as presenting substantive project material the
Network has also secured a space for scheduled planning meetings at UCEA
(November 2012), AERA (April-May 2013) and Edinburgh (July 2013). Dates and details of these meetings will
follow, but as it stands, we have secured scheduled meetings within the formal
programmes of each of these three conferences. As these fall evenly throughout
the year this is most helpful. We recognise that it is very difficult for
people to attend all of these events, or indeed any of them in some cases! But
this is well understood by us all and we think we have done well so far in
ensuring that everyone is included and major decisions are not taken without
opportunities for all of us to have a say.
That said, keeping in touch is a major challenge given the diversity of
the project. We are constantly reviewing
how we do this and how we use technology to support us. Again, we think we do pretty well – but we
are all learning . . .
The two projects were reported on at the Manchester meeting
(Jami Royal Berry for the high needs schools group and Howard Stevenson for the
social justice leadership group). Each
has chosen quite different ways forward, but as indicated, both are generating
substantive outputs and these will be presented at UCEA in November.
Given the people present in Manchester, and a recognition
that there was something of an imbalance between the two groups, it was decided
to focus our discussions on general issues of concern to the whole
network. This was made easier as both
individual strands have work well underway in preparation for UCEA. Two key issues emerged:
Work for 2013:
there was a strong desire to bring the two groups together in some form,
recognising that they have distinct identities but overlapping concerns. Finding a way to bring the groups together
was considered as a useful way of ensuring the Network retains an overarching
coherence, rather than being a label that covers two separate, and disconnected,
groups. Furthermore, it was felt there
was considerable merit in seeking to link our inputs to BELMAS and UCEA
conferences in 2013.
The proposal therefore is to aim for a Network contribution
(precise format to be agreed) at each of
BELMAS 2013 and UCEA 2013. The specific proposal was that this should be
in the form of a ‘Research Policy Dialogue’ whereby the participation of policy
makers and practitioners should be actively encouraged and Network research
should be presented in a way that highlighted the implications for policy and practice.
Other features of this proposal included:
·
Sessions should be interactive/engaging –
encouraging dialogue and not based on a traditional paper format (but see later
point).
·
The two sessions should be linked, ie the BELMAS
and UCEA inputs should be stand alone (for the practical purpose of audience
engagement) but that we should find ways to connect them – this may be by
having the same sessions at the two conferences, or a session that ‘starts’ at
BELMAS and ‘concludes’ at UCEA. This
obviously needs some working out in practical terms – but we have time to do
that.
·
Linking the sessions and the aim to adopt
innovative formats to encourage dialogue could be assisted by technology. The
suggestion was made for a website in some form – where research papers could be
posted, and where discussions from the two sessions could be encouraged. This
could also help build the links between the two sessions.
If this proposal is agreeable to the wider group then we can
find time at our planning meeting in Denver to begin to work out what this can
look like and how we organise it.
Infrastructure and
support: as the project is becoming more established there was a
recognition that we need to seek to put some elements of the Network on a
firmer footing. The project clearly
benefits considerably from the sponsorship of UCEA and BELMAS. However, the proposal was made that it would
be helpful to look more closely at how the Network can benefit from the support
of the two organisations. It was
suggested that Bruce and Howard seek to identify the types of support necessary
to progress the projects and then construct a formal business case for support
to put to BELMAS and UCEA. It was recognised that support might come in various
forms – back-office support, web support etc.
Howard Stevenson
Bruce Barnett
July 2012
