Leading and enacting curricular change in post-primary education

Aims: There is unprecedented system-level change within the post-primary context and the upcoming Senior Cycle Reform is due to be published in 2024 (DES 2022a) with ongoing consultation about the future of qualifications and assessment. This builds on other significant reforms, including the Junior Cycle Reform (DES 2013), School Self-Evaluation (DES 2016), Wellbeing Policy Statement and Framework for Practice (DES 2018) and the Digital Strategy for Schools (2022b). These curricular reforms and procedural changes have brought about new opportunities for teachers to engage with change, and therefore, reinforce the concept of teachers as leaders (Donaldson 2015). This research study seeks to examine the perspectives of post-primary teachers on leading and enacting curricular change with a particular focus on change mechanisms and how they perceive their voice, knowledge and expertise has been incorporated into the change process. Theoretical framework: De Nobile's (2018) Middle Leaders in Schools (MLiS) model was selected as the conceptual framework and it was used throughout the study to guide the reading, research, and presentation of the data under the lens of (i) inputs, (ii) processes, and (iii) outputs. A review of the literature revealed a wealth of information relating to the factors that influence change, factors that impact the enactment of change and factors that influence the outcome of change. Method: A qualitative, narrative inquiry was used in this study, guided by the interpretivist paradigm and subject to convenient, purposive and cluster sampling. Six teachers from a range of post-primary contexts were interviewed, the data was coded and transcripts were analysed thematically (Braun and Clarke 2006). Findings: The key findings to emerge from this study include teachers overwhelmingly support the idea of curricular reform as it increases autonomy, pedagogical practice, student outcomes and collaboration. However, it also revealed several obstacles that effect their ability to lead and enact curricular reform which include lack of effective and targeted continuous professional development, overloaded curricular objectives, teacher burnout and they perceive their voice is not reflected in policy leading to significant disconnect. Conclusion: Recommendations were formulated based on the data and made to policymakers, the Department of Education and Skills and post-primary teachers concerning time management, teacher voice, effective professional development and investment. Further research recommendations include reviewing the implementation of specific curricular initiatives and reforms, exploring students' experience of curricular reform, and evaluating current professional development with a view to ensuring best practice.N