'Leading Small Primary Schools' (LSPS) is a development programme provided by the National College for School Leadership (NCSL) specifically for head teachers of small primary schools in England. 'The demands on those who lead (small primary schools), and the skills required to lead effectively, are different from those in larger schools and warrant particular attention and support,' states the introduction to the Participant Handbook. 'Learning-centred' leadership is promoted.

Although the term is not employed, the programme follows an action research (AR) cycle, albeit it an informal and loosely defined one. The programme uses the 'Six Steps to Learning' or 'Learning Spiral' (i.e. repeated 'Doing; Describing; Reflecting; Reconsidering; Reconstructing; Revising'). The principal activity of LSPS is a visitation programme to participants' schools, with post-observation discussions under the guidance of a head teacher facilitator. Continuing dialogue is encouraged using the 'Talk2Learn' online discussion forum. In addition participants are expected to maintain a Personal Learning Journal, to encourage review of 'leadership strengths' and 'professional development needs', to make learning explicit and 'lift things out of the unconscious'.

External link to details of NCSL 'Leading Small Primary Schools' programme.

Stage One

Introductory Seminar (23/09/05)

Outline: Introductions; Purpose of programme; Explanation of 'Learning Visit: Visiting Learning' component; Introduction to LSPS online community (Talk2Learn, T2L).

The clear, explicit modelling of a co-constructionist method was apparent in the structured discussions of this session. Participants were required, in turn, to reflect back colleagues' statements with coaching-type questions. The articulation of answers to the initial prompts, and subsequent questions from colleagues, would, we were assured, help to bring priorities to the forefront thereby clarifying them. My experience was that this was so.

Personal Learning Journal

Participants receive a journal. Each is organised in three sections ('Stage One'; 'Stages Two, Three and Four' and 'Stage Five') and contains prompts. The prompts for Stage One are:

• What am I as a leader hoping to gain from the programme?
• What do I hope the school will gain from the programme?
• What differences do I hope the programme will make to teaching and learning?
• What will I bring to the programme?

In advance of Stage Two, I wrote: 'The first question is the hardest, so, perversely, I'll tackle the questions in reverse order…' (Italicised text here and below is quoted from my journal.)

Q. What will I bring to the programme?
'A. Nearly six years of experience as a small school head with 2 inspections etc, etc.…
An analytical approach…
Quite a bit of perseverance, with a tendency to cave in at times, e.g. faced with significant disappointment… or apparent powerlessness… but resilience enough to pick myself up, using Covey- ('Seven Habits…') and Tice- ('Investment in Excellence') type tricks, backed up, I fondly imagine, with something more substantial, i.e. Heidegger's 'interpretive circle' and Rorty's 'hope in place of knowledge' pragmatism.
A hankering after strategic clarity, comparable to that experienced during the school's building project.
The hope of integrating this project with my MA and the Vibrant Schools project…
The experience of knowing progress has been made and believing that the promise of further growth exists, only to have that hope thwarted by significant and largely unavoidable changes: 'One step forward and two steps back'…
An (almost-)convinced belief in the usefulness of an AR approach to generate knowledge, and a begrudging acceptance, in the absence of anything more substantial, of the legitimacy of small-scale practitioner research projects.'

Q. What differences do I hope the programme will make to teaching and learning?
'A. Initial response of 'not much' begs the question 'Why bother?'…
But my substantive point is that sought-for improvements in teaching and learning are independent of this project. And always will be. Of any such project. However… such a programme amounts to an enforced dose of self-reflection plus an external viewpoint, which is both motivating and potentially a useful tool for helping effect whatever improvements are current at the time. So the question becomes: 'How do I use this project to address current needs?''

A list follows: some identified needs are 'learning-centred' ('Raise measurable standards in maths in Year X') and some 'institutional' ('Improve self-evaluation practices'), though the difference is not clear-cut in every case.

Then I ask: 'What particular, extra resources does involvement in the programme promise to supply?', which I start to answer with: 'From the first session? Nothing. Unless the idea of AR-type knowledge generation is something useful in itself.' And I continue: 'Since this overlaps fully with the AR-Vibrant Schools methodology I would be foolish not to explicitly exploit the 'Do; Describe; Reflect…' cycle to support that too.' But I realise that I've strayed into answering the next question.

Q. What do I hope the school will gain from the programme?
'A. …I hope we'll gain a tool to help raise attainment and effect all the plans (listed). Not to lay the burden of another initiative… but rather to find methods (not content) that will serve our existing purposes.'

I recognise the challenge of bringing it about that everyone chooses to engage: to 'turn it from a 'I have to…' to 'I want to…' I continue: 'The Learning Visits seem an extra I haven't considered. I/We haven't had an external view like this since inspection (Feb. 2003).' Assuming that the focus is on me as leader, and acknowleding that it is only I who will witness the partner schools involved in shared observations I realise that 'The school and its teaching and learning will gain whatever I gain unless I block its transmission.' Which reinforces the importance of effective professional dialogues (a theme highlighted in articles by Geoff Southworth contained in the Participant Handbook).

Q. What am I as a leader hoping to gain from the programme?
'A. Skill at making reliable judgements on the hoof…
Improved appreciation of 'learning as a social activity' and familiarity with some of the co-constructionist literature…
The chance to generate, or explicate, my own 'craft' knowledge more clearly, and in particular:
Insight into how I have, in fact, led recently (some examples of recent school issues follow)…
Understanding of how I do, and how I could, influence for the better, i.e. work through others.'
And finally:
'Knowledge of how and when to use this approach again.'

Online community

Previous experience of T2L led me to entertain low expectations of the programme's online community: at the time of writing these have been realised.

Top