Deadwood Didn’t Kill Itself

Abstract

In the 1980s, the school improvement literature identified the school as the centre of change and the school effectiveness literature argued that some schools were more effective than others, therefore reform efforts should focus on the school. It would seem in the 1990s that the school has become the centre of blame. Policymakers have ‘cherry-picked’ their way through the two literatures and developed policies based on a conceptual hybrid which seems more interested in identifying failing schools than celebrating success. This paper uses case study research to argue that schools considered ‘deadwood’ didn’t kill themselves—they needed help, usually from outside. By exploring the interrelationship of a school’s contexts, its meaning, leadership, structure, culture and the work and lives of its teachers, this article provides warning signs of the ‘attrition of change’ as well as suggestions for policymakers and change agents.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 25 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.