Advertisement

Journal of Educational Change

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 323–344 | Cite as

The challenge of continuation: Schools’ continuation of the Respect program

  • Sigrun K. Ertesvåg
  • Pål Roland
  • Grete Sørensen Vaaland
  • Svein Størksen
  • Jarmund Veland
Article
First Online:

Abstract

The Respect program is a whole school approach to prevent and reduce problem behavior. The purpose of this study was to investigate which conditions in schools helped them to continue the program successfully after the end of the 1-year implementation period. The study also looked at the actual continuation after the program end. Especially, we looked at which strategies and structures promoted change beyond the implementation phase. The project groups at four Norwegian schools implementing the program were interviewed at the end of the implementation period and again 2½ years later. The main findings suggest that involvement in the Respect program enables schools to implement change. However, it is challenging for the schools to continue the work afterwards. The one school that successfully continued the work after the program was characterized by strong and supportive leadership, leadership at many levels, they made plans and saw them through, renewed activities and new members of staff were introduced to and included in the work according to the program principles. These elements were more or less lacking at the other three schools, at least after the active program period. A main finding is that a 1-year program period is not long enough for most schools to implement and continue an extensive whole school program like Respect.

Keywords

Change process Continuation Innovation Problem behavior Sustainable change 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to all the members of the project groups who let us draw from their experience of implementing and continuing the program at their schools. Also, we are most grateful to Associate Professor Unni Vere Midthassel for her insightful comments on this article.

References

  1. Angelides, P. (2004). Generation division in Cyprus education? Different attitudes to education from younger and older teachers. Educational Review, 56(1), 65–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  4. Barbour, R. S., & Kitzinger, J. (1999). Developing focus group research: Politics theory and practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Baumrind, D. (1991). Parenting styles and adolescent development. In J. Brooks-Gunn, R. Lerner, & A. C. Peterson (Eds.), The encyclopedia of adolescence (pp. 746–758). New York: Garland.Google Scholar
  6. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Bush, T., & Glover, D. (2003). School leadership: Concepts and evidence. Nottingham: NCSL.Google Scholar
  9. Castro, F. G., Barrera, M., Jr., & Martinez, C. R., Jr. (2004). The cultural adaptation of prevention interventions: Resolving tensions between fidelity and fit. Prevention Science, 5(1), 41–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Datnow, A. (2005). The sustainability of comprehensive school reform models in changing district and state contexts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 121–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Datnow, A., & Stringfield, S. (2000). Working together for reliable school reform. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 5(1&2), 183–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. de Jong, R., Houtveen, T., & Westerhof, K. J. (2002). Effective Dutch school improvement projects. Educational Research and Evaluation, 8(4), 411–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dodge, K. A., & Coie, J. D. (1987). Social-information-processing factors in reactive and proactive aggression in children’s peer groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1146–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elias, M., Zins, J. E., Graczyk, P. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2003). Implementation, sustainability, and scaling up of social emotional and academic innovations in public schools. School Psychology Review, 32(3), 303–319.Google Scholar
  15. Ertesvåg, S. K., & Vaaland, G. S. (2007). Prevention and reduction of behavioural problems in school: An evaluation of the Respect-program. Educational Psychology, 27(6), 713–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Foster, R., & St. Hilaire, B. (2004). The who, how, why, and what of leadership in secondary school improvement: Lessons learned in England. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 50(4), 354–369.Google Scholar
  17. Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed.). New York: Teacher College Press.Google Scholar
  18. Fullan, M. (2002). The role of leadership in the promotion of knowledge. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3/4), 409–419.Google Scholar
  19. Fullan, M. (2005a). Turnaround leadership. Educational Forum, 69(2), 174–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fullan, M. (2005b). Leadership and sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  21. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York: Teacher College Press.Google Scholar
  22. Gingiss, P. L. (1992). Enhancing programme implementation and maintenance through a multiphase approach to peer-based staff development. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 39(1), 3–35.Google Scholar
  23. Green, L. W., & Kreuter, M. W. (1999). Health promotion planning: An educational and ecological approach (3rd ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.Google Scholar
  24. Greenberg, M. T. (2004). Current and future challenges in school-based prevention: The researcher perspective. Prevention Science, 5(1), 5–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Greenberg, M. T., Domitrovich, C. E., Graczyk, P. A., & Zins, J. E. (2005). The study of implementation in school-based preventive interventions: Theory, research, and practice. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Centre for Mental Health Services.Google Scholar
  26. Hajnal, V., Walker, K., & Sackney, L. (1998). Leadership, organizational learning, and selected factors relating to institutionalization of school improvement initiatives. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, XLIV(1), 70–89.Google Scholar
  27. Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers’ work and culture in the postmodern age. London: Casell.Google Scholar
  28. Hargreaves, A. (2005). Educational change takes ages: Life, career and generational factors in teachers’ emotional responses to educational change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 967–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2006). Sustainable Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  30. Hargreaves, A., & Goodson, I. (2006). Educational change over time? The sustainability and nonsustainability of three decades of secondary school change and continuity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 3–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hopkins, D., Harris, A., & Jackson, D. (1997). Understanding the school’s capacity for development: Growth states and strategies. School Leadership & Management, 17(3), 401–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hopkins, D., & Reynolds, D. (2001). The past, present and future of school improvement: Towards the third age. British Educational Research Journal, 27(4), 459–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Huberman, M., & Miles, M. B. (1984). Innovation up close: How school improvement works. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  34. Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. Larsen, T. (2005). Evaluating principals’ and teachers’ implementation of second step. Doctoral thesis. University of Bergen, Bergen.Google Scholar
  36. McLaughlin, M. W., & Marsh, D. D. (1990). Staff development and school change. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), Schools as collaborative cultures: Creating the future now (pp. 213–232). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  37. Midthassel, U. V. (2004). Teacher involvement in school development activity and its relationships to attitudes and subjective norms among teachers: A study of Norwegian elementary and junior high school teachers. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(3), 435–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Midthassel, U. V., & Bru, E. (2001). Predictors and gains of teacher involvement in an improvement project on classroom management. Experiences from a Norwegian project in two compulsory schools. Educational Psychology, 21(3), 229–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Midthassel, U. V., & Ertesvåg, S. K. (2008). Schools implementing zero—the process of implementing an anti-bullying program in six Norwegian compulsory schools. Journal of Educational Change, 9(2), 153–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Munthe, E. (2001). Professional uncertainty/certainty: How (uncertain) are teachers, what are they (un)certain about and how is (un)certainty related to age, experience gender, qualifications and school type? European Journal of Teacher Education, 24(3), 355–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. O’ Moore, A. M., & Minton, S. J. (2002). Tackling violence in schools: A broad approach. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://www.gold.ac.uk/connect/evaluationnorway.html
  42. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  43. Pellerin, L. A. (2005). Applying Baumrind’s parenting typology to high schools: Towards a middle-range theory of authoritative socialization. Social Science Research, 34, 283–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Reynolds, D. (1998). “World class” school improvement: An analysis of the implications of resent international school effectiveness and school improvement research for improvement practice. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International handbook of educational change (pp. 1275–1285). London: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  45. Reynolds, F., & Teddlie, C. (2000). Linking school effectiveness to school improvement. In C. Teddlie & F. Reynolds (Eds.), The international handbook of school effectiveness research (pp. 206–231). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  46. Roland, E. (1999). School influences on bullying. Stavanger: Rebell Forlag.Google Scholar
  47. Roland, E., Bjørnsen, G., & Mandt, G. (2003). Taking back adult control. In P. K. Smith (Ed.), Violence in schools: The response in Europe (pp. 200–215). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Roland, E., & Idsøe, T. (2001). Aggression and bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 27, 446–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sim, J. (1998). Collecting and analysing qualitative data: Issues raised by the focus group. Methodological issues in nursing research, 28(2), 345–352.Google Scholar
  50. Smylie, M. A., Conley, S., & Marks, H. M. (2002). Exploring new approaches to teacher leadership for school improvement. In J. Murphy (Ed.), The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century (pp. 162–188). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  51. Sobeck, J. L., Abbey, A., & Agius, E. (2006). Lessons learned from implementing school-based substance abuse prevention curriculum. Children & Schools, 28(2), 77–85.Google Scholar
  52. Stoll, L., MacBeath, J., Smith, I., & Robertson, P. (2001). The change equation: Capacity for improvement. In J. MacBeath & P. Mortimore (Eds.), Improving school effectiveness (pp. 169–190). Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Teddlie, C., & Reynolds, D. (2001). Countering the critics: Responses to recent criticisms of school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12, 41–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tremblay, R. E., Hartup, W. W., & Archer, J. (2005). Developmental origins of aggression. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  55. Williams, R. O. (1996). Professional development schools: Facing the challenge of institutionalization. Contemporary Education, 67(4), 171–179.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sigrun K. Ertesvåg
    • 1
  • Pål Roland
    • 1
  • Grete Sørensen Vaaland
    • 1
  • Svein Størksen
    • 1
  • Jarmund Veland
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Behavioural ResearchUniversity of StavangerStavangerNorway

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options