Reforming Schools and Systems to Engage Young Adolescent Learners

  • Jeanne AllenEmail author
  • Glenda McGregor
  • Donna Pendergast
  • Michelle Ronksley-Pavia


Implementation of the Young Adolescent Engagement in Learning (YAEL) Model requires intentional actions and change in classrooms, schools and at systems’ level. Extant literature provides high-level understanding of the major phases of reform and the elements required for reform success. This chapter focuses on one approach to reform that has driven change—the Educational Change Model (ECM)—and how the YAEL Model can be intentionally implemented through adopting this reform approach. The components in the phases of the ECM may be utilised as a guide for the implementation timeline and serve as an audit tool for effective implementation, alongside the components of provision of the YAEL Model. The chapter also discusses some of the key challenges and enablers in school reform for student engagement.


  1. Allen, J. M., McGregor, G., Pendergast, D., & Ronksley-Pavia, M. (2016). Student engagement continuum: Engaging high school students (year 7–10). Brisbane, QLD: Griffith University.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, J. M., Wright, S., Cranston, N., Watson, J., Beswick, K., & Hay, I. (2018). Raising levels of school student engagement and retention in rural, regional and disadvantaged areas: Is it a lost cause? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 22(4), 409–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). (2014). Engagement in Australian schools: Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership discussion paper. Melbourne, VIC: Author.Google Scholar
  4. Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity theory, research, critique (rev ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  5. Bowen, D. H., Buck, S., Deck, C., Mills, J. N., & Shuls, J. V. (2015). Risky business: An analysis of teacher risk preferences. Education Economics, 23(4), 470–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1992). Ecological systems theory. London, UK: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Brunila, K. (2014). The rise of the survival discourse in an era of therapisation and neoliberalism. Educational Inquiry, 5(1), 7–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Connell, R. (2012). Just education. Journal of Education Policy, 27(5), 681–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2001). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  10. Commonwealth of Australia. (2018). Report on government services, 2018. Canberra, ACT: Productivity Commission, Commonwealth of Australia.
  11. Dewey, J. (1902). The educational situation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dinham, S., & Rowe, K. (2007). Teaching and learning in middle schools: A review of the literature. Camberwell, VIC: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  13. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fredricks, J. A., McColskey, W., Meli, J., Mordica, J., Montrosse, B., & Mooney, K. (2011). Measuring student engagement in upper elementary through high school: A description of 21 instruments (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2011–No. 098). Washington, DC: Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southeast.
  15. Garvis, S., Pendergast, D., Twigg, D., Fluckiger, B., & Kanasa, H. (2012). Evaluation of the implementation of the Victorian Early Years Learning and Development Framework: For All Children from Birth to Eight Years. Early childhood professionals’ perceptions of implementation activities and resources 20102012. Melbourne, VIC: Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority.Google Scholar
  16. Gewirtz, S., & Cribb, A. (2009). Understanding education: A sociological perspective. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  17. Gibbs, R., & Poskitt, J. (2010). Student engagement in the middle years of schooling (Years 710): A literature review (Report to the Ministry of Education). New Zealand: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  18. Giroux, H. (2009). Youth in a suspect society: Democracy or disposability? New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  19. Goss, P., Sonnemann, J., & Griffiths, K. (2017). Engaging students: Creating classrooms that improve learning. Carlton, VIC: Grattan Institute.Google Scholar
  20. Grossberg, L. (2001). Why does neo-liberalism hate kids? The war on youth and the culture of politics. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 23(2), 111–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hargreaves, A., & Shirley, D. (2009). The fourth way: The inspiring future for educational change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  22. Harris, A. (2011). Reforming systems: Realizing the fourth way. Journal of Educational Change, 12(2), 159–171.Google Scholar
  23. Hebdige, B. (1988). Hiding in the light. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Lingard, R. L., Ladwig, J., Mills, M. D., Bahr, M. P., Chant, D. C., & Warry, M. (2001). The Queensland School Reform Longitudinal Study. Brisbane, QLD: State of Queensland (Department of Education).Google Scholar
  25. Main, K., & Bryer, F. (2005). Researching the middle years. In D. Pendergast & N. Bahr (Eds.), Teaching middle years: Rethinking curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment (pp. 88–99). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  26. Mourshed, M., Chijioke, C., & Barber, M. (2010). How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better. London, UK: McKinsey & Company.,_2010.pdf.
  27. Newmann, F., & Associates. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  28. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2015). Education policy outlook 2015: Making reforms happen. Paris, France: Author.Google Scholar
  29. Pendergast, D. (2006). Fast-tracking middle schooling reform: A model for sustainability. Australian Journal of Middle Schooling, 6(2), 13–18.Google Scholar
  30. Pendergast, D., Flanagan, R., Land, R., Bahr, N., Mitchell, J., Weir, K., … Smith, J. (2005). Developing lifelong learners in the middle years of schooling. Brisbane, QLD: Queensland Department of Education and the Arts.Google Scholar
  31. Pendergast, D., Main, K., Kanasa, H., Barton, G., Hearfield, S., Geelan, D., … Dowden, T. (2014). An ongoing journey: Evaluation of the Junior Secondary Leading Change Development Program. Brisbane, QLD: Griffith University.Google Scholar
  32. Pendergast, D., Ronksley-Pavia, M., McGregor, G., Allen, J. M., McDonald, N., & Barber, B. (2018). Youth engagement capabilities project. Brisbane, QLD: Queensland Education Leadership Institute and Griffith University. Report prepared for the Queensland Department of Education.Google Scholar
  33. Queensland Government, Department of Education and Training. (2017). Everybody’s business: Reengaging young Queenslanders in education. Brisbane, QLD: Author.Google Scholar
  34. Stevens, R. J. (2004). Why do educational innovations come and go? What do we know? What can we do? Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(4), 389–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeanne Allen
    • 1
    Email author
  • Glenda McGregor
    • 2
  • Donna Pendergast
    • 3
  • Michelle Ronksley-Pavia
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Education and Professional StudiesGriffith UniversityMt Gravatt, BrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.School of Education and Professional StudiesGriffith UniversityMt Gravatt, BrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.School of Education and Professional StudiesGriffith UniversityMt Gravatt, BrisbaneAustralia
  4. 4.School of Education and Professional StudiesGriffith UniversitySouthportAustralia

Personalised recommendations