School-to-School Collaboration: Learning Across International Contexts

Collaboration is viewed as an essential ingredient for education systems and school improvement. Collaborative leadership has both emergent and intentional components (Woods & Roberts, 2018). Collaborative practices can emerge over time as teachers and schools work together, and intentional interventions and decisions can either support this emergence and/or work against it. In this chapter, we discuss the New Zealand case of collaboration between schools. The context is situated in policy reform associated with an incentivized and voluntary programme that groups of schools could participate in. The programme, communities of schools (CoLs), was implemented in 2014 and continues at the time of writing this chapter. We draw on critical commentary of the programme, as well as the small number of research studies available. The experienced way of CoLs is replete with tensions. These are illustrated with the help of Hoods’ (1998) social regulation and cohesion matrix. Rather than locate the New Zealand case in one quadrant of the matrix, we illustrate how multiple aspects of Hoods’ matrix (1998) have been and are currently in play regarding collaboration between schools in New Zealand.

This chapter explores the Scottish government policy drive for school improvement through processes such as distributed leadership, empowerment and cross-school collaboration to school settings. Compared to other nations, this shift towards collaboration has been relatively slow, but reflects the history of Scottish education, one where there is a reduced emphasis on individualist/competitive cultures and instead focuses on social justice and equity. This chapter discusses two programmes of work that were developed to foster school-to-school collaboration in the Scottish education system. In doing so, we comment on the conflict between national priority setting and the translation of this agenda at the local level by different local authorities.

This chapter provides an overview of approaches to collaboration in Ontario and then focuses in particular on the experiences of the Norway–Canada (NORCAN) programme involving nine schools across Alberta and Ontario (Canada) and Norway from 2014 to 2018. NORCAN was established through collaboration by the teachers’ unions in Alberta (Alberta Teachers’ Association), Norway (Utdanningsforbundet), and Ontario (Ontario Teachers’ Federation) and the Ontario Ministry of Education. A central guiding question was co-developed to inform the work of NORCAN: ‘How can an international network of schools and educators committed to mindful leadership help to identify obstacles to students’ mathematics learning and develop strategies for attaining success?’ With funding support, school teams involving school leaders, teachers, and students had opportunities to collaborate at NORCAN-facilitated events, school visits in each jurisdiction, through an online platform, and ongoing communication. The following important features of NORCAN are identified: the development of collaborative structures, processes, relationships, and trust; student voice, agency, and leadership; professional learning and agency; and sharing knowledge and de-privatizing practices. Four lessons for policy and practice are proposed: 1. school-to-school collaboration benefits from adequate resources of time, funding and a support infrastructure; 2. the intentional cultivation of mutually respectful and trusting relationships is essential; 3. bringing together educators and students as co-learners is powerful and beneficial; and 4. mobilizing knowledge and de-privatizing practices needs to be central to the purpose and operation of collaboration.

Since the early 2000s, China has been actively promoting school collaboration to narrow down educational gaps between schools to achieve inclusive and quality education for all. Among the reforms, building education groups has become one of the most widely adopted approaches for school improvement. This chapter aims at visualizing a hybrid model of school collaboration formulated by both hierarchist and egalitarian approaches in the Chengdu City of China. It starts with policy review on the construction of education groups for education improvement in China to interpret how social cohesion and regulation are constructed at policy level to promote school collaboration. Through data collected from education groups in District A of Chengdu, it then provides an analysis of the practice of improving education quality through promoting education groups among public schools in this province. The study reveals top-down policy initiatives, bottom-up school autonomy, and a shared responsibility for constructing quality education for all are key factors which enabled education groups to contribute to school improvement. The research also reveals how a lack of policy coordination and limited shared value and trust within education groups have become barriers to this reform. It concludes by discussing possible solutions for further promoting a sustainable school collaboration based on experiences of some ongoing practices at school level.

Evidence suggests that networking can be beneficial to enhance learning in challenging contexts, when there is a shared purpose, trustful relationships, and the development of meaningful collaborative practices. In Chile, the adoption of collaborative network practices has faced some challenges due to the long history of neoliberal policies characterised by hierarchical and market governance that promotes competition over collaboration among schools. Using Hood’s (1998) cohesion/regulation matrix, the Chilean education system can be characterized as fatalist, where cooperation among peers is mandated solely to meet external requirements to regulate schools’ and practitioners’ practice. However, in recent years, collaborative projects have been implemented that are framed and supported in an egalitarian culture, highlighting the importance and value of collaboration and support among peers to develop effective teaching practice. By analysing three experiences of networking in Chile, we identify two barriers for networking, distrust and isolation, and analyze the ways in which these networks attempted to overcome them to sustain effective collaboration. The first experience describes the implementation of the collaborative inquiry networks (CIN) methodology. This programme was designed to facilitate the development of networked leadership capacities of principals and curriculum coordinators to support teachers’ practices during COVID-19 in one municipality (Pino-Yancovic & Ahumada, 2020). In the second, we report on a group of principals who developed focussed interventions in their network of urban primary public schools to enhance the exchange of knowledge and practices among network participants. The third centres on the development of a model to enhance teacher leadership and professional learning in Initial Teacher Education through collaboration in a university–school partnership. Finally, we present some lessons to be considered in similar social and policy environments to successfully introduce a collaborative networked approach.

In the Netherlands, childcare and primary schools are governed by two different systems of two ministries, and although these institutes are usually located nearby, there always have been low levels of cohesion with respect to institute-to-institute collaboration. However currently, there is a national trend in enhancing interprofessional collaboration (IPC) with the aim of inclusion and equity. This study focuses on getting insight into the differences in intensity of collaboration and how IPC is organized. A two-dimensional Child Centre Integration Model which accounts for the variations in the degree of IPC in child centres and gives insight into IPC at different levels and into conditions for intensifying IPC is presented. That Dutch education and childcare systems do not connect with each other is seen to be an important cause of the failure or complication of IPC. Because the systems do not connect at the macro level, we see struggles in the necessary normative dimension due to status differences (i.e., inequality between employees) and differences in funding and autonomy. Differences between public (education) and private (childcare) institutions also lead to difficulties when it comes to fostering closer collaboration. This chapter ends with key lessons for practice and policy, including the suggestion that one strong ministry for child affairs, including education and childcare, which stimulates an unambitious course at national level, is required. This course can then be translated at regional and local levels.

This chapter aims to explore Polish experiences of school-to-school collaboration (SSC): a mosaic of dynamic interplay between history, culture, politics, economics, and education. Starting with a diagnosis of Poland’s education system as ‘fatalist’ via the lens of the cohesion/regulation matrix, this chapter reveals the complex nature of SSC in this country, which is underpinned by conflicting logics: the decentralized education system, the state’s desire for control over that system’s key mechanisms, and the heavily capitalistic influence of neoliberal pressures. Then, drawing on data from available policy reports and legal acts, as well as the authors’ own research experiences, this chapter offers some insights on promising policy developments and examples of good practices in SSC at national and international levels. Furthermore, this chapter identifies possible barriers that block the full utilization of the potential inherent in collaboration between schools. These include formal/legal barriers (e.g. lack of policies regulating the collaboration between schools, unstable education policy after 1989, and competition between schools) and normative/cultural barriers (e.g. lack of long-standing tradition and experience of cooperation between schools, the bureaucratic school management model, and lack of cooperation skills among the main stakeholders). This chapter concludes with a discussion of some key lessons for policy and practice in tangibly harnessing the potential of SSC as a means of addressing current education challenges in Poland.

Collaborative teaching and learning in Kenya is at relatively immature phase. There is dearth of empirical research undertaken on school-to-school collaboration and its impact and influence on the students’ learning outcomes. The 8:4:4 system of education, which begun in 1985, and which was short of insights into the impact of collaborative, is coming to an end to pave way for 2-6-3-3-3 education curriculum framework which is largely seen as progressive. As such, collaborative teaching and learning across the whole-school system is slowly beginning to evolve – with the learners being expected to learn, un-learn and re-learn collaboratively. The Kenyan education system is highly marketized and when coupled with lack of clear national policy guidelines on inter-school collaboration, it falls short of obligating teachers to initiate or even deepen the few existing collaborative designs within and beyond their schools’ boarders. Given that the challenges facing learning appear to increase exponentially, it appears to be timely to have students and teachers from different schools come together to network and share ideas, knowledge, expertise, resources and best practices – bearing in mind that cultures that work together hold the prospect of long-term impact that is not dependent on a few individuals but the whole team (Hargreaves & O’Connor, 2017).

Northern Ireland is a society divided by political, national and religious identities. Between 1968 and 1998, there was a violent political conflict in which 3,700 people died. Throughout the conflict, many looked to schools to work to improve community relations, even though the school system itself was divided on largely religious grounds. This chapter looks at education interventions in Northern Ireland aimed at promoting conflict transformation, with a particular focus on the shared education work of the 2000s which is based on collaborative networks of schools from the different communities. The collaboration involved in the shared education initiative is based on a participatory approach which emphasises teacher-led innovation and locally tailored school partnerships. This is in contrast to the defining features of the Northern Ireland school system which has always had a hierarchist character, even when education reforms in the 1990s introduced market principles and school competition. This chapter analyzes education policy and practice in light of these frameworks and considers the potential tension between the shared education approach given the prevailing ethos of the Northern Ireland education system. It suggests that the consequences of this potential tension remain unclear.

This chapter argues we should not regard school-to-school collaboration as simply a mechanism for outcome-driven improvement but rather consider the establishment of teacher relationships as the necessary priority when building highly effective collaborative networks. By revisiting the research of Sandra Kruse, Amanda Datnow and Andy Hargreaves, we develop an additional tool to Hood’s matrix of regulation and cohesion in an effort to position collaborative networks in the context of international private fee-paying schools. The tool visualizes the collaborative network development as a relationship continuum in which time is the necessary driver of a network’s success. The 12 Asian private international schools in the case study were given collaborative framework guidance drawn from multiple sources. Subsequently, the enablers and hindrances reported by the collaboration leads highlight the need for trust and teacher agency development to be prioritized by leadership. Finally, on sharing some lessons learned from the case study, we close by arguing the value of collaboration lies in opening the door to allow for agenetic cultures that build reflexive practitioners.

Today, education shows an urgent need for transformation to better respond to the complex and interdependent nature of current learning and social challenges we are facing. This chapter is based on the evidence of schools and district initiatives that claim for systemic change with a strong focus on wider interconnection and collaboration between learners, professionals and organizations.

Networks for Change is a programme launched in 2017 by the Barcelona Education Consortium that intends to create professional networks of schools in the city. The programme seeks a deep change in the whole system: to influence how teachers learn from one another to lead a collective transformation of schools, moving towards inclusive, significant and profound learning of all students. To achieve this, the programme articulates 25 territorial networks of schools, spread over the 10 districts in the city of Barcelona, grouping a total of 283 schools (ages 3–18), 1,700 leadership teams and 10,000 teachers. The network sessions are facilitated by one district leader, existing a team of 13 facilitators in the programme. Each school assigns an internal and volunteering leadership team that is responsible to assist to the network meetings, so as to empower internal change processes in schools.

The present study evaluates the impact of the programme on the development of territorial networks, as well as on the changes emerged in school communities. The instruments used combine a quantitative and qualitative approach including a questionnaire for teams of leaders involved in the programme, a questionnaire for teachers from schools and a focus group with programme facilitators of the 25 networks.

The main results show that the Networks for Change programme is already becoming a response to the widely contrasted need to weave sustainable relationships between teachers from different schools in the system at the same time that it is strengthening the collaborative capacities of educational actors in the city’s neighbourhoods and territories. Likewise, and to take a step further in the development of the programme, it is suggested emphasizing the increase of transversality in the networks as cross-sector collaboration, distributing the leadership of the programme through its actors and establishing direct ways for the impact to schools and their transformation. Right now, the network mainly fulfils a function of generating learning among its participants, although the desired horizon is to extend this learning to the entire ecosystem and at the same time generate systemic change in the neighbourhoods in order to enhance and document real impact on learners.

School networks are of increasing importance in Germany. Despite not being formally anchored in the structure of the school system, school networks are promoted via a wide variety of programmes. These initiatives have varying aims such as the systemic promotion of school development and the identification of key factors for success. Some programmes even provide for accompanying research into the impact of networks on their success. Following the classification of the German school system according to the cohesion/regulation matrix by Chapman, and suggesting an emphasis on ‘egalitarian culture’, this chapter then focuses on the topic of school-to-school collaboration. Doing so, we shall define our understanding of school networks, present a typology of commonly found networks in Germany and provide systemic examples of some of the larger school networks. The review of the national state of research in this field including experience from two of our research and development projects shows desiderata especially concerning processes of school-to-school collaboration. The role of school leadership, which will be expanded upon further, has proven to be a driver of success in school networks.

This chapter explores school-to-school collaboration via Teaching School Alliances (TSAs) in one locality in England, drawing on governance theory (Bevir, 2011) – specifically hierarchy, markets and networks (Tenbensel, 2017). It focusses on three TSAs in detail, describing their individual development as ‘school-led’ networks but also how they interact with each other and with other networks in the context of wider hierarchical and market-driven pressures and opportunities. It compares these examples to the three common TSA trajectories described by Greany and Higham (2018) – exclusive, marketized, and hierarchical – showing how these trajectories overlap and interact in hybrid forms. It concludes by discussing these findings in relation to social regulation and cohesion (Chapman, 2019; Hood, 1991) and to the wider themes in this book. We argue that while collaboration between schools in the English system has been driven at the policy level by an egalitarian narrative, in reality, such activity is enacted within a hierarchical and individualist framework which can be in tension with the professional values and ethics of school leaders. We conclude with recommendations, which include a need to rethink national and local accountability structures in order to encompass a broader range of outcomes; encourage more ambitious levels of experimentation in how the needs of children and families can best be addressed; focus on place-based coherence and collaboration; and, finally, develop the skills and capacity of frontline leaders to shape productive networks.