Building Schools for Tomorrow: Future-Focused Leadership with Dr Jason McGrath

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Drew (00:00):
Welcome back to Professional Learning's, the New
South Wales PPA EducationalLeadership Podcast.
It's great to have your company.
This podcast aligns to thevalues of the New South Wales
Primary Principals Association,that is, the values of principal
wellbeing, principals as leadlearners, as well as supporting
principals to lead schooloperations.

(00:23):
If you enjoy this podcast,don't forget to subscribe for
further updates.
Now let's get into today'slatest episode.
Our guest today is Dr JasonMcGrath, who is an educational
consultant recently back fromthe OECD in Paris.
What would it look like andwhat should Australian

(00:46):
principals take away from thatkind of radical thought
experiment?

Dr Jason McGrath (00:50):
Yeah, it's interesting because I also asked
what should remain andobviously the people who I
involved, across the world, theexperts, they struggled to
answer that question what shouldbe left, but eventually I was
able to extract within somereasons why the system should
stay.

Drew (01:06):
Jason, fantastic to have you on the podcast today.

Thanks, Drew.
It's great to be connecting withcolleagues from New South Wales
after a few years away in Paris.

Drew (01:17):
Yeah, absolutely, and I'm sure we'll dive into that in our
discussion today.
Let's jump right in, becauseyour research is filled with the
kind of questions that keepwell, it keeps many leaders
awake at night.
Jason, you've authored asignificant pieces such as
Global Lessons, systematicConnections and Constructing the

(01:38):
Scenarios for the Future ofTeaching in Flanders.
Beyond the Tit titles, the bigquestion is this are our current
education systems built for thefuture, or are we still
designing schools for a worldthat no longer exists?
And what's your sense from allthe global research you've done
so far?

Yeah.
So my sense is the door isopening due to the teacher
shortage and policymakerswanting to create positive
change, but at the same time,there's many who are still
focused on the short term andthat provides a risk because it
limits bolder decision makingtowards a vibrant future.
When you know where you want tohead in the long term, you can

(02:22):
make short term decisions forthe future in really bold and
positive ways.
There are some examples.
So we work with four systemsFlanders, austria, wales and
Malta who have engaged in afuture of teaching study, and
their approach is, rather thanseeking the bandaid, they've
wanted to come up with along-term plan.

(02:43):
So in Wales, for example, whenthe publication came out,
they're now looking at a 20-yearworkforce strategy and they're
using the 20-year frame toreally look at new ways of
operating and taking their timeto think through other ways of
redesigning what the schoolworkforce can look at.
So they're not rushed, they'relooking at longer-term solutions

(03:06):
, they're working withcolleagues, they're consulting
and they're thinking about wherethey should go.
Malta and Finland are twocountries that have been looking
ahead.
Finland has an interestingmodel it's been using for many
years, but it is led by theuniversities, who was funded by
the government to bringstakeholders together.
Molsa also has a new model, butit's a very interesting model

(03:30):
with the director of Foresightand they've created this idea
called the Hub, which bringstogether stakeholders to test
out ideas in what they call aForesight sandpit.
So we're testing out ideaswithout making any decisions so
they can think about theimplications before they
actually make decisions.
And the hub is a reallyinteresting model because it's

(03:53):
being used to look at verytraditional parts of the of the
system.
So curriculum and other areasis now being filtered through
the foresight Sam Pitt to makesure that new ideas are being
thought about rather than thetraditional approaches.

Drew (04:11):
Yeah, it's interesting to hear those different
perspectives.
Is there any leading model,like we always think in
Australia that Finland is theleading leading model.
Is there any particular modelthat you're seeing is actually
making traction and I heard goback to the wales 20 year

(04:34):
workforce which I heard and it'sgreat that there's long-term
thinking around that, but I'mhearing cynics saying well, how
that could be.
There's urgency now.
Why can't we?
We need to solve this workforceissue now.
What's their thinking regardingthat?

Yeah.
So this is when I say 20 years,it's not that they're going to
enact a plan in 20 years.
What the difference is isthey're looking at where do they
want to be in 20 years andtherefore, what short-term
decisions do they want to make?
But years, and therefore whatshort-term decisions do they
want to make, but also whatlong-term decisions should they
be thinking about?
So most systems think onlyabout the short-term.

(05:14):
What do we have to do now?
And sometimes those ideas can bepoorly implemented.
For example, one system had ateacher shortage, had a lot of
part-time teachers, decided topay part-time teachers more,
which was a great idea, exceptif you're a full-time teacher.
So so the idea of the, the longterm, is not to say we don't do

(05:36):
short term, but we actuallymake sure we vision where we
want it want to be.
And it deals with this, um,this paradox that we have, that
people are over change.
They feel overwhelmed by change.
So we have this idea of thetwo-path planning process or in
the research it's called policyambidexterity where we separate
short-term and long-term and byseparating those two we can be

(05:59):
clear on what we're focusing on.
So we can have a conversationabout the longer term which
doesn't put pressure on theshort term so people don't feel
as overwhelmed.
But it also opens up newstrategies for long-term
planning, because long-termplanning is different.
You can look what a school'salready doing, you can look at
research, you can do pilots,those kinds of ideas.

(06:20):
So by introducing the long-term, you're not saying we're not
making short-term decisions, butwhat you are saying is, when
you're clear on where you wantto go in the future, you will be
clearer on making bolderdecisions in the short-term and,
more importantly, you won'tmake short-term decisions that
actually prevent you getting tothe long-term vision you want to
achieve.

Drew (06:39):
Yeah.
Well if we look long-term, willschools still have a place to
play in society?
If we do look long-term, haveyou looked at that research as
well?

So, before I go to the OECD, there are four
scenarios that were developed inthe traditional form.
The work that we focused on wasusing a different form, called
preferred scenarios.
One of those four scenariosdeveloped by the OECD would say
that schools are limited ordon't exist as much, but this is

(07:12):
done on a format that says itmay not be possible.
It's not probable more sorather than less so because as
we become more linked across theworld, globally, through
technology, we need to be moreconnected locally with people.

(07:33):
But also some of the areas likethe environment, we're now
looking at place-based solutionsand that means bringing people
together to solve the bigtogether.
So for me, it's both we lookmore globally, but we should be
also looking more locally.
Interestingly, I think we don'tlook enough globally because we

(07:57):
don't have connections beyondour system boundaries.
On down system boundaries wedon't even have you know.
So teachers are connecting withother teachers in other states,
for example, or New Zealand, oracross the world.
So I would say we're probablylimited in more of the
international space.

Drew (08:15):
Why do you think that is at the moment, that is a current
trend that we're seeing as well.
I don't think it's a deliberateshutting of borders mindset but

(08:41):
is it just time?

No, it's more about we can do virtual visits
to NASA, we can do virtualvisits to a whole lot of places,
but it's a half a day thing orit's a couple of hours.
What if we had, you know, kidswho are very passionate about
some of these areas working withother kids who are passionate
about these areas for a term?
What if their classroom becamethat?

(09:02):
What if the classroom becamethe local library for a term, or
another area that's availablein the local area?
So it's about thinking aboutdifferent ways we can reconceive
what the classroom looks liketo make that possible.
So we certainly have thetechnology to do it.
It's the other space and it'salso how do we create space?

(09:24):
So a teacher might, for example, be embedded in a project where
there's only 10 students, youknow, working with 10 students
from another country or threeother countries.
How does that?
How might that work?
So it requires a bit ofresourcing in that sense.

Drew (09:42):
A different thinking as well, or different paradigm
thinking about that possibility.
As you said, we've got all ofthe technology to be able to
connect, do the collaboration.
It's just allowing thosebarriers system barriers to
enable that to happen, so tospeak.

That's right and you know the curriculum.
So a curriculum in New SouthWales is different to curriculum
in other areas.
So we've got to say but inreality we're still looking at
similar ideas.
So it's, how do we foster thosekind of opportunities,
particularly for the high end tostart with?
Perhaps you know as part of theHPGE stuff, perhaps you know as

(10:26):
part of the HPGE stuff, youknow how can we really let kids
go beyond the boundaries of thecurriculum and at the same time,
how do we replicate that forstudents who perhaps aren't
motivated at the school?
Imagine if we could again bringpeople into the school and work
with a small group of kidsembedded in a project that
ignites their passion.
So there's ways to do it.
But it does mean looking at howdo we and work with a small

(10:46):
group of kids embedded in aproject that ignites their
passions.
So there's ways to do it.
But it does mean looking at howdo we unpack the system a
little bit and provide thoseopportunities.

Drew (10:53):
Yeah, and if we go to your article, what If Compulsory
Schooling Was a 21st CenturyInvention?
You asked an even biggerquestion If we invented school
today from scratch, what wouldit look like and what should
Australian principals take awayfrom that kind of radical
thought experiment?

Yeah, it's interesting because I also asked
what should remain, andobviously the people who I
involved across the world, theexperts they struggled to answer
that question what should beleft but eventually I was able
to extract with them somereasons why the system should
stay.
So my motivation for that was Iwas a principal at the time and

(11:34):
I was really curious andchallenged by Sir Ken Robinson's
big narrative that schoolshadn't changed since the
Industrial Revolution, becauseme and everyone around me were
change fatigued and it's like,well, how does that work?
I was also curious aboutdifferent ideas for schooling,
like Yong Zhao and others wereadvocating, and my question was

(11:57):
what does this mean for kids whoaren't passionate about
schooling or who struggle withschooling?
Because it's all well and goodto come up with great ideas for
kids who love school.
I did get an answer after myPhD and that sort of sent me on
a path as a principal to be moreinnovative.

(12:19):
The short answer came to do withflipping the way we do things,
and that is that we unleash thebrilliance and I use Mark
Strong's term of brilliancethere in students first, and
then we scaffold as necessary,and I take the idea from
Singapore of the bambooscaffolding rather than what I
call the concrete scaffoldingsometimes that we use, so the

(12:41):
bamboo scaffolding is this ideathat scaffolding is supposed to
be temporary and it's supposedto be dispensable.
So you use the scaffold, thenyou're supposed to take it away
so that you see that the kidscan do this by themselves.
And I think sometimes we focusmore on building really rigid
scaffolding and not the otherway around.
So the answer I came up withunleash first, if kids can

(13:03):
already do this stuff, take themto that next level, but then
really focus on the kids whoneed the scaffolding.
Give it to them, but also makesure that that scaffolding was
removed for them as well.
And what I meant for myleadership as a principal was
that not only one innovation,but more of an open mindset to
inquire as a team.
So we became a yes, and cultureStaff very quickly learned that

(13:28):
if they came up with an ideaand they had some thinking
around it, I would try to makeit work and we would connect
people and make it work.
Sometimes those ideas camethrough, incidentally, and
sometimes people became moreconfident and they proposed
these ideas more boldly.
But the expertise within theteam was far greater than I had,

(13:51):
you know, even with my PhD oranything like that, we built our
ideas using bamboo scaffoldingas well.
We didn't know where we weregoing to go with an idea.
We just knew that it wasvaluable enough to start it and
we saw where it went.
That it was valuable enough tostart it and we saw where it
went.
So my advice in terms ofinnovating or transforming is
you need to create a lightstructure around it and be

(14:12):
confident enough in theexpertise around to go forward
with it.

Drew (14:19):
And one of the reasons I really love your work, jason, is
because it doesn't just existon paper.
It's connected to our biggerglobal efforts in the OECD, like
TALIS, the Education 2030Project and the Digital
Education Outlook.
For our listeners who might beleading schools, say, in remote
New South Wales or even busymetropolitan settings, I want to

(14:42):
ask how do these massive globalstudies actually connect to the
work of principals in realschools?
Because sometimes you go, oh,that's great, but how does that
have an impact and what shouldleaders here be watching for as
these projects unfold?

Yes, so in all of my roles I connect practice,
policy and research.
That's one of the things Iground my work in in my
leadership, and so when I wentto the OECD, I brought with me
my practitioner expertise.
I guess one of the proudestparts of that was the work that
we the project we worked on wasshowing how to contextualize

(15:21):
international evidence in localcontexts.
So we developed a framework ofambition loops that were based
in international research butalso grounded in local context.
So we actually ran a seminarwith researchers in each country
that we worked with and thatmade the research base even

(15:45):
better.
The other way we translated itwas we developed these teacher
personas.
We developed a set of about sixteacher personas in each
country and what it did was itshowed that not all teachers are
the same.
I mean, we only had six, itwasn't representative of all
teachers, but it showed thatthere are different types of
teachers.
So we developed teacherspersonas working in the

(16:08):
countryside or in a city.
We developed experiencedteachers and we also developed a
future teacher.
And what that did forpolicymakers was it brought
alive the idea that we need tothink about how a policy context
, how a policy choice decision,influences different people and

(16:30):
we went as far as to say to themthese personas should be
hanging up in your boardroom.
When you're making decisions,you should be thinking about
these people, because some ofthese people are a lot further
away where the decision-makingis happening.
So in the city you know thecapital city there's people in
the rural side.
So what are the issues for therural teacher?
Now, again, they'reevidence-based, but they're not

(16:52):
representative of all teachers.
But they give this sense thatwe have to think more broadly,
and the same is true for aprincipal.
When you make decisions, ifyou're sitting in your principal
office making decisions withwhoever, there's a chance that
you're missing a whole lot ofother people who aren't
represented.
You know, younger teachers maynot be represented, or older
teachers, and it makesdecision-making more complicated

(17:14):
but also more sophisticated.
So that's really somethingthat's important.
At a global level.
We should be learning from eachother, being a principal and
going to these other countriesand meeting other principals.
They have the same issues as us.
They're trying to work throughhow to make the best for their

(17:37):
school and also how to influencepolicymaking.
So things are very similar.
But on the other hand, there'salso lessons we can learn In New
South Wales, for example, we'vegot a more open curriculum,
We've created more space, but Iknow several countries that have
done similar things thathaven't fully realized the

(17:57):
benefits of this because theyhaven't worked out how to make
use of that extra space andbuild the capacity through
professional learning so we canlearn from each other.
In terms of the specific work,the TALIS survey will be very
exciting when it comes out atthe end of the year.
That's a survey of teachers andschool leaders around the OECD

(18:19):
and their views on many topics,so I'm really excited to hear
what comes out of that.
We use the TALIS 218 in ourresearch.
Education 230, or 2040 now, hasmoved from a framework for
students to a framework forteachers, so that's new and
interesting to have a look at.
It's important to understandhow the OECD works.

(18:43):
As well as having thesecretariat where I worked and
we're doing our research.
A whole lot is bringingtogether information that
countries provide us andcountries are part of project
meetings.
Australia has a delegation inParis that represents Australian
views, represents Australianviews, and so these ideas are

(19:08):
being put together, reflectiveof what school systems think on
different topics.
So I think it's reallyimportant to be open to new
ideas and to realise that we canlearn from each other and we
should talk to.
Even just talking to each other, we learn from each other to
learn from each other and weshould talk to.

Drew (19:31):
Even just talking to each other, we learn from each other.
So how can we actually createthat forum that's?
I mean, that's obviously OECDcan create those forums, but how
can we, as educational leaders,connect more globally?

So obviously through the research is one
connect more globally.
So obviously through theresearch is one.
Um, the OECD has, uh also haswebinars and and things that um
you can can engage in differentprojects, um, but I think it's a
mindset for us.
It comes down to creating spaceto think, uh, more long term.
What I mentioned before, umhaving the chance to reflect.

(20:03):
When you're, when we'reconstantly thinking about the
day-to-day struggles, we don'tgive ourselves time to do other
things.
So it's really about maybeprofessional associations to
think about ways of doing it.
For example, let's take a topiclike well, any topic.
Really, what if we got everyprofessional association to

(20:28):
nominate three or four people toinvestigate this, share what's
happening in different statesand then present that back to
someone?
I mean, we do it well at alocal level, but it'd be
interesting to see how we canconnect.
It is interesting, working inthe OECD, to see that you know a
lot of the experts.
They're just people.

(20:49):
You can email them.
You know if any piece ofresearch has their email address
on it, you can connect that waytoo.
So there are ways, but again,it comes down to a desire and it
is more challenging in thisside of the world time
difference.
You know, I know when we have.

(21:09):
When we were in Paris you knowwe had people from New Zealand
who had to be in midnight.
You know the midnight whenthey're involved in
international work.
So there are opportunities thatI think we have to value it
before we find the way.
Finding the ways is easy.
It's just finding the time andthe commitment to wanting to do

(21:32):
it.

Drew (21:33):
Yeah, and some of those very practical ideas.
But in theory and practicalityis interesting to see If we move
to the big thing that's runningthrough your work.
It's the new professionalismand, I think, one of the most
important ideas in educationtoday.
Here's the big question Are weready to let go of the old idea

(21:59):
of teachers as isolated expertsand embrace a future where
professionalism meetscollaboration, evidence and
constant reinvention?
And for our principals they'resaying what does this new
professionalism really look likein practice?

Yeah.
So this was one of the mostinteresting pieces for me,
because I hadn't really exploredthis before I went to Paris
With, coming back, I obviouslyhave learned this and then we've
applied it.
So I now argue that we've gotthe debate wrong.
We've been trying to compareteacher professionalism to
doctors in the 1950s, anddoctors in the 1950s don't exist

(22:38):
anymore.
This form of professionalism iscalled protective
professionalism and you become aprofessional because you have a
body of knowledge that only youknow about and therefore that
gives you status, but they don'texist anymore.
So doctors are more regulated.
Doctors involve patients a lotmore in decision-making.
One of my own daughters went tothe doctor just last week.

(22:59):
She said I've got a plan, sheknew what she wanted from the
doctor and she went there andcame out with that advice being
followed.
So the doctor worked with thepatient, and so we have to start
thinking more carefully aboutwhat is the new form of
professionalism.
So for us, having gone all theway back to the Hippocratic Oath

(23:20):
, we then came across this workby Merpo Noordgaard, who's a
Dutch expert in this area, andhe coined the phrase connective
professionalism expert in thisarea, and he coined the phrase
connective professionalism andwhat he argues and we we took up
this idea is that you defineprofessionalism in every way.
You act with the partner you'reworking with.

(23:42):
So and this is called work forteachers we work with people all
the time.
That is that's why we areprofessionals.
We work, work with students andwe work with families.
So we're actually in a reallygood place in this type of
definition.
So we talked with expertsacross the OECD about this and
they said our partners arestudents and families, not one

(24:05):
or the other, and so each timewe engage with parents and with
teachers, that's how we, ourstudents, that's how we
demonstrate our professionalism,and some of the work shows that
making a school welcome.
Yes, the principal can be atthe front gate and do all those
nice things, but it's actuallyhow the teachers interact with
the families that makes theschool welcoming.

(24:27):
So it changes your wholemindset.
When we looked at these conceptsof professionalism, we found
there are actually three areaswhere teachers as a profession
are actually probably moreadvanced than some other
professions collaboration,professional learning, engaging
with research.
We'd all like to do better inthose areas, but we actually

(24:47):
have the bones and thecommitment to want to advance
those areas and we found threeareas that we should be focusing
on more.
So career specialisation havingvisible career specialist
tracks is something.
More autonomy in most systemsnot all systems and increasing

(25:08):
the status of teaching acrossthe profession, across the
society.
But with connectingprofessionalism there's a sort
of another side of it.
It means moving away from theold ideas of just having
authority because you're ateacher.
So we have to start looking atthe concept of how do we develop
professional authority, bothfor individuals but also

(25:29):
collectively, and so someresearch from Switzerland and
other places talks about we needto focus on our curriculum and
pedagogical expertise.
That's how we demonstrate ourstatus as teachers and experts
and professionals.
But also our relationalexpertise, which generally is a
strength and also introspection.

(25:51):
So the capacity for us toreflect on how we make a
difference, how we impact onthose students and those
families.
Do we understand how ouractions actually impact on those
?
So this is a different way ofconceptualising what
professionalism means.
So connective professionalismfor us more relational.
It demonstrates teachers as aprofession, but it opens a door

(26:16):
for new ways of thinking abouthow we look at it.

Drew (26:19):
So if a principal wants to build their culture of this new
professionalism, where do theystart?
Even if their staff feeloverwhelmed or stretched, or
always?
This is just another change.
Fatigue what is this?
What's one practical thingleaders can do now or tomorrow.

Yeah, so we have a provocation that we would
put a policymaker, but it's thesame for principals as well,
and that is so.
Most education policy is aboutteacher quality or it's about
teacher supply, and we saidwe're going to remove those two
and we're going to look at ourwork through the work of
teachers as professionals.
So if we look at makingdecisions through the lens of

(27:00):
teachers as professionals, whatare the implications for each
decision that you make?
And that's where we went andthat's where I think principals
need to can think about and atleast the more bolder, at least
to be more bolder, more open.
And this is really importantbecause we want young people to

(27:22):
choose the profession ofteaching and talented young
professionals won't chooseteaching unless they can see
that there's scope for them tobe treated as professionals, to
have space to be a professionaland to contribute.
I mentioned the work when I wasa school leader.
I didn't realize the expertisethat was in my staff until I

(27:45):
started hearing them talk aboutthings Math teachers explaining
what's needed to get great mathsresults.
I knew generally how we try toget high in performance and that
, but these people haveexpertise that I don't have, and

(28:05):
if we tap into that and wesupport it and empower it.
They then start talking to eachother and a whole lot of stuff
happens you don't even knowabout until someone says you
know the number of times asprincipal you hear someone say,
oh, what a fantastic thing youdid.
And you say, oh, actually Ididn't do it.

(28:26):
Oh, I didn't even know about it.
You know I had.
Yeah, so you know, and that'sthe culture you want.
That's the culture you wantwhere people feel empowered
professionally to makeprofessional decisions and to go
forth.
You know, and I compare it toyou know, when I was a
headteacher many years ago, Iwas in school in the morning and

(28:52):
a really, really experiencedteacher came to me and said
Jason, jason, there's a trolleyof paper that someone's brought
to the school and we have tosign for, and there's no
administrators to sign for it.
And I just say it's okay, wecan do it.
You know?
Yeah, but as a metaphor, it'salways stuck with me as a

(29:14):
metaphor why doesn't that personfeel professionally empowered
to be able to sign for that?
And sometimes it's a culturalthing that we need to really
explore.
So for me, if we make decisionsas teachers, as professionals,
how does that change ourthinking and it does take you
out into ways that you mightwant to say, oh, I feel a bit

(29:35):
uncomfortable about this andobviously then you've got to
manage that uncomfortable space,but it takes us forward.

Drew (29:43):
And it's thinking about well, what is defining what is
actually professionalismactually is.
What is that, as you went backto?
We're not the doctor surgery,as you said in the 1950s mindset
, the fountain of all knowledge.
It's moving into the space ofobviously well-trained expertise

(30:06):
in whatever key learning areais, or in primary, across all
those key learning areas.
How can we be?
How?
What does professionalismactually look and sound and feel
like in a, in a modernaustralian school context?

exactly and and it's a great example with
the klas the variety out there.
There's so many teachers withpassions and experience in those
different areas.
Let's unleash that yeah,absolutely.

Drew (30:38):
And now, listening to you, jason, I can't help thinking
about our recent discussion thatwe have with live penny.
Live talk about our upperprimary and how many.
So how many kids have a narrow,and you talked about careers.
Briefly, that were, she said,aspirations were really shaped

(30:58):
by their postcodes, their familyexpectations, their limited
role models.
She also said question here ishow do we help students and
teachers see themselves asauthors of their own story and
not passengers in someone else'sscript?
And, from your OEC perspective,how can principals practically

(31:23):
foster that kind of agency, bothin staff and in students?

Yeah, so for staff, I'd go back to the
teachers as professional winsand what I've mentioned.
For staff, I'd go back to theteachers as professional wins
and what I've mentioned.
But for students, we developeda set of ambition statements I
mentioned that had actions fordifferent partners to be
involved in and we looked atfamilies as well and we had the
opportunity to work withEmeritus Professor Debbie Pusher
from Canada, who developed thispedagogy of walking alongside

(31:48):
families.
It's quite exciting and some ofher work is actually based from
research in Australia, fromCanada, who developed this
pedagogy of walking alongsidefamilies.
It's quite exciting and some ofher work is actually based from
research in Australia.
So this idea that we have tore-look at families is the first
step and families is atwo-edged sword because families
have a lot to offer.

(32:08):
But we also know that familiesis a big stressor at the moment.
So we have to re-look atdeveloping the way we work with
families.
We have to really you know,with technology now and a whole
lot of other things, we have toreally think about how that
works successfully.
But a third of teachers in thelast TELUS survey working with

(32:30):
parents was a stressor.

Drew (32:32):
We also know that for the research we did yeah, well, I
was going to say what do youthink that is?
Is that because are parentsexpecting more from their
teachers in that professionalismway, or do you think it's
society is a part of that, or isthere further research to that

(32:53):
answer?

So one of the pieces is teachers don't get
trained in it, so it's limitedin professional, in university
training and you can imaginewell, I've often pondered that
young teachers come out and theparents are older than them and
so we never develop, I guess,the positive habits early on.

(33:15):
I think the technology meansthat teachers are more
accessible to parents and oftenit's a negative experience or we
expect a negative experience.
If you talk to any teacherwho's really good at it, who
loves this stuff, it's the otherway around.
They love talking to parentsand they get energised by it

(33:36):
because they're on the frontfoot and they know they've got
to do it.
There's experts in our schoolswho can guide other people, so
it's not everybody.
But I think sometimes we feeland then it's not really
protocols in terms of in allschools about how do we say
that's enough, it needs to go tothe next level and we don't
necessarily have developedexplicit rules about good ways

(34:01):
of working.
So you know what time should wefinish?
Should we expect not tocommunicate?
You know time of the day andthose sort of things, really
simple things that can create aculture, because it's explicit
and I think it's just that wedon't have enough explicit rules
.
So I think we probably need tothink about that.
And we also don't know aboutDebbie Push's work.

(34:24):
She says you've got to open upto more parents being involved.
So you know, we invite parentsinto a meeting, we run the
agenda.
She says well, why don't wehave a, you know, a meeting
where parents who we know tellnew teachers about the local

(34:44):
culture, share some food andshare some things?
So when we flip it the otherway, it actually saves time,
it's more beneficial.
So it's really a way ofthinking about it differently.

Drew (35:00):
Yeah, yeah, and I've recently had a podcast with
Lilla Milakovic, who's a formersecondary principal, and she
explained exactly that, how shetransformed the culture of her
context through that exercise ofreally getting to know her
community and even inviting them.
This was radical practice, asyou can imagine, 25 years ago,

(35:27):
of inviting parents in andactually doing a staff
development day where they ranthe staff development day, and
it totally changed from there on.
It changed to complete thedynamic of the of the school,
because the teachers andeducators could understand this,
this the context in which theirstudents are living in, but

(35:50):
also the expertise as well, thatactually brought the community
closer.
She said through that exercise,and that stuck with me in terms
of that, what you just saidthere and I'm thinking I haven't
seen, or that's still notcommon practice.

Yeah.
So Doobie and Pushy tells areally great story where a
kindergarten classroom wereasked to bring in a game from
home and one of the African kidsbrought in a it's Mon Cala,
which is one of our familyfavorites, but brought in this
game and it's certain littlemarbles and then they go in
holes and you play around butthe kid wasn't able to explain

(36:31):
it.
So this kindergarten teacherrings home and eventually dad
comes along and explains thisgame and they're all fascinated
by this game.
But then one kid puts his handup and says this is like an egg
carton.
And they said, yes, it is, andthey all ended up making their
own Moncala set with egg cartons.

(36:51):
It was a brilliant example ofwhere you know that openness
it's an openness to, it's amindset as well.
So that's certainly one thing.
The other thing about, in termsof going back to your original
question around agency, this isan area where I think policy is
leading the way more thanpractice.
Both the OECD but also UNESCOare really developing policy

(37:16):
around or policy advice around,empowering children.
So child empowerment and thisis something that we again need
to go out into thatuncomfortable zone and work with
a bit more.
But there's an interestingexample from PISA, where there's

(37:36):
a negative correlation betweenknowledge of science and
believing that you can make adifference for climate change.
So the smarter you are withscience, the less optimistic you
are about being able to doanything about climate change,
which is a real concern.
Optimistic you are about beingable to do anything about
climate change, which is a realconcern.

(37:58):
So this came up this has come upin a ministerial meeting where
education ministers from aroundthe OECD came together and were
talking around this idea and itgot to the point where people
were arguing that we need toempower students, young people,
and give them agency, becausethis is about democracy.
If people don't feel part ofbeing able to change

(38:20):
institutions, publicinstitutions, then they're going
to be in a very divided world.
Already it's hard for people tosee that these public
institutions are there for them.
On the other hand, if we canshow young people that they can
make decisions about their ownlearning, then that's a way of

(38:41):
showing the public institutionsactually support their lives and
it supports democracy.
Ireland have taken this up.
Democracy.
Ireland have taken this up andnext year, which is in September
next year when they come backthey've just developed a new
senior course aroundsustainability, but what's

(39:03):
interesting about it is, as wellas learning the science, they
have to actually develop a groupproject, locally place-based
solution around sustainability.
So it's teaching people thatyou can't do it by yourself.
You can do something and youcan start in your local

(39:25):
environment, and so this is anexample where taking this child
empowerment can lead through allthe way to curriculum and
change the way we think aboutdoing schooling.

Drew (39:40):
And when's that?

In 2026, you said Well, their school year
starts in sort of August,september, so it will start then
, but they've already done thepreparation work and it picks up
all of these ideas that were atthis ministerial meeting around
equity and these are stuff thatwe need to know, the science
that we also need to build, thecollective action.

(40:03):
That's why it's a group project, so they're not asking people
to come up with an individualproject.
They say come up with a group.
And it's also a place-basedsolution.
So work in your localenvironment, come up with
something that you feel you'remaking change or empowering
these people to be not onlygreat students but citizens of

(40:24):
their own society.

Drew (40:27):
Yeah, Are you optimistic with what you're seeing globally
like in terms of whereeducation is going?

Well, it's funny because when you look
globally, you see people goingcrossways.
So some people are going fromyou know.
Some people have veryautonomous professions and
they're trying to become morecollaborative.
Some have more collaborativeprofessions more collaborative,
some have more collaborativeprofessions.
So in some ways, you see justpeople just choosing a

(40:59):
particular policy space.
It's not actually where they go, it's how they do it and it's
the ones who take the time toactually listen to the educators
and build good policy.
Because one of the things wehave seen from PISA is there are
schools who are improving bothoutcomes and equity, but

(41:21):
Australia is not one of those.
Australia hasn't really moved.
So there are countries who aredoing it and interestingly, some
of those countries, likeIreland, had a teacher as an
education minister and builtreally innovative but
progressive, supportive of theprofessional policies, but also
supportive of young people andsupportive of families.

(41:44):
So it can be done, but it ishard to change.
But it's really about just acommitment to wanting to make a
change, which is why we go toschool every day.
Right, we believe, we have tobelieve.
So, yeah, Absolutely yeah.

Drew (42:01):
it's interesting to hear where you see because you see
that global perspective andwhere Australia sits at the
moment.
So obviously further work to doin that space moment.
So obviously further work to doin that space.
So let's switch and talk aboutsomething that every school
leader is thinking or needsright now as a way to think
beyond the next staff meeting orthe next budget cycle, as we do

(42:24):
across the nation.
Your OECD project on Flanders Iwanted to discuss.
Constructing future scenarios,for teaching is one of the most
fascinating examples of that.
And the big question, jason, ishow do we lead schools today
while planning for the worldsthat might look completely
different tomorrow?
And from that, what did youlearn from working alongside

(42:50):
educators to build possiblefutures, and how might leaders
here in New South Wales trysimilar approaches?

Yeah, so it's an interesting one, because when
I did my PhD which was when Iwas a principal and I was really
only doing it for fun peoplesaid that well, it's not really
going to get you anywhere.
But the people who areinterested in the future's work
are in the international publicservice.
So it's been really good to notonly do it theoretically but
also then to apply it in atleast four systems.

(43:19):
So we've got two choices wecan't predict the future, but we
can wait for it and react, orwe can try and anticipate it,
develop what we think are ourpreferred futures and make
decisions towards that.
They're our choices, and thesystems that I've worked with
are the ones who did the latter.
As school leaders, we draw onhindsight, we look to the past,

(43:44):
we mostly spend our time oninsight, which is evaluations
and the like.
More and more, we need to focuson the future, because the
future is different to the pastand so we need to start thinking
about it.
It was interesting that wedeveloped these ambition
statements about what differentactors need to do, could do, and

(44:04):
we surveyed each.
We surveyed teachers, schoolleaders, other stakeholders on
two scales.
How important do you think thisstatement is and what level of
change is required.
Is it a strength, is itshort-term improvement or does
it need long-term change?
And there was one really simplestatement that was rated very

(44:26):
important by all systems butrequired long-term change.
And I was surprised that itrequired long-term change.
But this is a statement.
What if we create space tothink collectively about the
future?
What if we simply created spaceto think about that at
different levels?

(44:48):
And an interesting exampleactually happened in Flanders,
one of the first stakeholdermeetings we had.
So we had principals, we hadteachers, we had people from the
wellbeing sector, we had allsorts of people and the
conversation started.
We were talking about thefuture, not the present.

(45:08):
But it started off by sayingteachers, saying we don't have
enough support for wellbeing.
But what was interesting wasacross the table were those
wellbeing people.
So we couldn't have that sortof typical discussion.
They had to go beyond that andthey used the ambition
statements and the otherprocesses we had.

(45:28):
But they came up with the mostfantastic scenario at the end of
the day, and it was what ifschools are clearly placed
within a web of partnersproviding everything that
children need to develop?
What if schools were part of abigger web to give everything to

(45:49):
the students that we need, andthe caveat was it's not for
teachers to design this.
Teachers do their bit, theymake their relationships, and a
bit of learning that came fromme, which is so simple, but came
from this conversation, wasthey had all these little
circles, concentric circles,different partners, and what

(46:11):
became clear was what weactually need to do is focusing
on the first circle first.
The ones that interface withteachers every day is the ones
we need to see what the issue is.
Then we can move our way up.
So just having this conversationabout the future and going from
just what the problem is towhat we see as possibilities

(46:33):
opens up this whole other ideas.
They wanted one of the ambitionloops.
They wanted government agenciesto be talking to each other
health, education, socialwelfare at the ministerial level
, they need to be talking toeach other, and Wales, for
example, has picked that up.
They're initiating aconversation where ministers and

(46:57):
their senior advisors aretalking to each other to come up
with some ways of workingtogether.
Use the same language, whateverit is.
So this is an example of how itis, but we need to allow
ourselves to create space tothink about the future, because
what it does is adds optimismand opportunities and it
increases agency.

(47:18):
It's that simple, so it'sactually just about talking more
to each other.

Drew (47:26):
Yeah, it makes complete sense.

Yeah, it makes complete sense, it's the actual
reality, of putting that timeto make sure it can happen,
putting that construct around,that to ensure those thoughts go
into actual actions.
And what does that look andsound and feel like?
And then reporting upon thoseactions to see if there's any
traction from that.
That's right and so that's whywe came up.
So through our processes we didsome preparation work, like the
survey, but then we do a weekin the country we develop these
four to six preferred scenariosfor the future of teaching.
But the last day we actuallyworked with the lead
policymakers to look at, to test, stress test these.

(48:14):
We also stress test thescenarios with the personas that
I mentioned earlier.
So what does this look like fordifferent types of teachers?
What would they need more of?
What does it mean for them?
And it wasn't that it was badif something was negative for a
particular persona, but it wasimportant learning to understand
that no one's well.

(48:36):
Very few of these scenarioswould actually be positive for
all people.
We had a great example in onecountry where we had two
principal leaders, a very formalcountry like in Austria, where
everything's regulated.
We asked the people to look athow the two principal personas

(48:58):
we developed would respond tothis and they ripped the paper
in half and said well, one wouldbe over this extreme and one
would be on this extreme, whichis important learning as well.
But it's about making it morecomplicated but then more
sophisticated.
So decision-making is moresophisticated, and the same is
true at a school level.
It's about going beyond yourbias, understanding what other

(49:21):
ideas are around and then how tomove between it and as you have
those conversations, the futureis going to keep changing, but
you can draw back on thoseconversations.
That's the argument we have.

Drew (49:35):
So if you bring it back to the local level, principal
wants to dip their toe intoscenario thinking with their
staff.
What's a simple way to reallystart without feeling so
overwhelmed?
Or this is just like how canthey construct that conversation

(49:56):
?

Yeah, so an interesting piece that I just
read recently actually was asix-word future scenario heading
.
This was actually done by aschool practitioner who's doing
some research as well.
So imagine if you asked allstakeholders or all teachers or
do it at executive level,whatever you prefer to come up
with a six-word future scenarioheading about what their

(50:19):
preferred future would be.
And then you ask them to groupthose similar ideas.
What comes of it?
Because then that starts theconversation and then maybe you
take away and you research someof those.
Another idea that I've used soeach of the publications that's

(50:39):
flanders, wales and austria eachof the preferred scenarios has
a one page, a blue page.
It's open access so you canaccess it through the OECD
website.
It's open access and there's aone page summary.
So I've worked with educatorsand I've given them a set of
scenarios and asked them to saywhich one do they like.

(51:01):
But then the next bit is to sayin three words, why do you like
it?
And I've formed a very simpleword cloud.
So that could be a startingpoint and it might lead to you
know, groups writing their ownscenario headings and then doing
a bit of research about it andthen thinking about what does it
mean for the short and longterm?
So there's lots of simple waysto start, but I know a number of

(51:23):
school leaders who I shared theblue pages with have done that
with their staff as well, andalso the personas.
Looking at the personas,there's also a one-page summary
of each of those, if people areinterested.

Drew (51:36):
And what's the feedback been like from those exercises
that principals have reportedback to you?

Yeah, it's the empowerment part and the value
of the conversation, becauseyou're having a conversation
without you're not saying we'regoing to do this or we're going
to do that.
It comes back to what I wassaying before about the hub and
molten, the foresight sandpit.
It's a chance to play withideas without looking at any
consequences.
You can look at theconsequences without sort of

(52:05):
saying I'm going to do thisanyway.
It's a chance just to think,reflect, to see where the
conversation goes and theprinciples who have used it.
That's what comes out of it.
It starts a conversation.
Somebody comes back and saysthat conversation we had you
know I've been thinking aboutthat and it's a shared
conversation, so you can alwaysgo back to a shared conversation
and sort of keep it developing.

(52:28):
So we did it with policymakers.
We asked them before onemeeting.
We said what are you currentlyfocusing on?
And they basically listed allthe doom and gloom.
You know teacher shortages,ageing, profession, blah, blah,
blah.
And so what would you hope tobe thinking doing in 10 years'
time?
And the words they chose weredifferent.

(52:49):
You know it was more aboutempowering and opportunities.
Doing in 10 years' time, andthe words they chose were
different.
It was more about empoweringand opportunities, and so it's a
mindset change apart fromanything else which is
empowering, and then gives yousort of hope and optimism to
then feel, okay, I'm going tolook beyond the solution to this
problem.
I'm going to look to where Iwant to go and then how do I go
forward.

Drew (53:10):
And it can really change, as you said, the mindset, which
has a knock-on effect towellbeing as well without and
thinking beyond in the trenches,so to speak, or issues.
It's thinking beyond that space.
And I guess that leads me tothe next part of one of our most

(53:31):
powerful pieces of research inthe New South Wales PPA has been
the recent work of AnneMcIntyre and her path.
Research showed that whenprincipals lead professional
learning, it doesn't justimprove practice in one school,
it creates system-wide change.
One school that createssystem-wide change.
And here's the question for you, jason how do we move from

(53:52):
individual leadershipdevelopment to leadership that
genuinely transforms wholesystems?
And you've read Anne's work andyou know from the global
context.
How does her research alignwith what you're seeing globally
?

Yeah.
So Anne's words are fantastic.
It is saying we do have to moveto that collective approach.
You can't do it alone, and soit really is as simple as
recognising that.
But what does that mean inpractice At a school level?
One of the things we identifiedwas there are great teachers

(54:29):
out there who are passionate,have a lot of experience to
share, who don't want to get upin front of 200 people and share
something at a conference, butwho would be prepared to go to
the school next door and sharetheir expertise.
So that's the starting pointhow do we share expertise across
the local schools?
We share expertise across thelocal schools For these people,

(54:52):
who are the typical people whowould want to be nominated to do
this sort of work.
It's just the people who arereally good in the classroom but
who, if you tap them on theshoulder quietly, would say,
okay, I'll do that and wouldfeel valued by it.
And this comes back to thesepersonas, these different types
of people, also at a local level.
I mentioned this sort ofexample of principals.

(55:13):
But what if you've got a groupof teachers from different
schools and you ask them to goand examine a topic, whatever
the topic is, by going to eachof the schools and seeing what
each school is doing.
Each school could present, oryou could go to some classrooms
or whatever you like.
They could do some research aswell.
But most importantly, they haveto share that information and

(55:35):
learning back.
What if they shared back to thegroup of principals or more
what they found and what theirrecommendations are those kind
of ideas?
At a system level we need tolook at how we take the bottom
up policy making or policy fromthe middle, and the Leopold in

(56:00):
Flanders is the knowledge brokerorganization.
In there They've got this greatmodel where they bring schools
together with the researchers.
So the Leopold exposes them tothe evidence together with the
researchers.
So the lead client exposes themto the evidence, as does the
researchers.
They build their innovationwith the evidence.
It's evaluated, at the sametime ongoing, so they're making
good decisions as they gothrough.

(56:21):
And then they have to have acommunication strategy.
That communication strategy istwofold.
What's your generalcommunication?
But the other one is, which isreally interesting is that the
Leopards know that the sameschools go for the innovation
grants all the time.
So to get one of theseinnovation grants, you've

(56:43):
actually got to bring on aschool that hasn't had one
before, so directly involved inbuilding up the system.
They call it countering theMatthew effect, and then they've
got to share it.
So you have this and you havethis.
They're influencingpolicymaking through that
bottom-up practice.

(57:04):
So it's not just bottom-uppractice, it's curating it.
Education International talksabout micro-innovations that
schools are already innovating.
We've just got to capture it,curate it and see what it means
for policy.
And so this is a great way ofdoing it.
But there are other ways, likelighthouse projects and other
types of models, to do it.

(57:24):
But from a school level it's assimple as identifying those
people who are excellentpractitioners, who don't want
the glory, and just saying youknow, would you go and share
that with this group in thisschool?
It's a bit like I forget thename of the person, but the

(57:45):
research into excellent HSCteachers.
But the research into excellentHSC teachers.
And they found that what wascommon about excellent HSC
teachers is they didn't knowthere were excellent HSC
teachers.

Drew (58:01):
It's one of those things where we need to sort of think
about it.
It's great to have thatthinking and people go.
That sounds obvious.
I want to do that.
My issue at the moment is it'stime's it's time.
Where do I fit in the time todo that?
Sounds good in theory again,and a great theory approach.
How are there any solutions tothat?

(58:23):
That time question?

yeah, time and space is the critical resource
that people want, but I supposethat requires leadership from
different levels to provide thatspace.
Evangelica Demaruti developedthis jobs demand resource idea,

(58:53):
the theory, and she did itpartly with work in schools and
she's an organizationalpsychologist, so she's not a
teacher.
But what she identifies is thateveryone in their job wants
more demands.
In some parts of their jobsthey actually want more
opportunities and in othersparts of their work they want
more resources, they want moresupport.

(59:14):
So it's a question of how youcan create those opportunities
or provide support.
In this case, we're talkingopportunities.
So what I'm saying is providingthese opportunities may, in
fact, make people feel betterabout their work, increase their
job satisfaction, even thoughit might actually be more of it.
Now, obviously, we want tocreate more time and space.

(59:34):
That's a given, and when youtoe into it and you start giving
time or space, you findsomething.
Then you see the benefits of itand it empowers people.
But in all of these questionsit always comes back to time and
space.

Drew (59:53):
And I guess the thinking is is the RFF time and I know
that I'm probably going into acontroversial space but is
marking and paperwork as anexample could be a good use of
time?
Paperwork of good as an examplecould be a good use of time, or
is it an opportunity to, as yousaid, explore beyond your

(01:00:20):
context, learn from others andreally have that knowledge that
can really empower you as ateacher or a leader to improve
student learning outcomes?
That's the question.

Dr Jason McGrath (01:00:30):
Yeah, and I think the answer is actually
there is no one answer.
Just like we talked about theteacher personas, we actually
looked at teachers' jobsatisfaction over their career
path and we need to think aboutteachers at different parts of
their career and we can see,through the TALIS data,
different periods wheredifferent groups of people were

(01:00:52):
less satisfied or more satisfied.
So you could take, for exampleand it comes down to individual
personality as well, but youcould take, for example, a
teacher who has a young familywhere every minute of their time
is precious, has a young familywhere every minute of their
time is precious, so they mightneed that RFF time to do that

(01:01:16):
basic stuff, to tick off theboxes, so they're not feeling
burdened by they haven't donethis, whatever it is.
On the other hand, there may beand that's a generalization Not
all people with young familiesare in that situation, but then
you might find another group offamilies who a group of teachers
who actually want more space.
So we found, for example,working in Austria they have a
lot of small schools, smallprimary schools and some

(01:01:40):
teachers who actually had hadtheir family experienced
teachers actually wanted moreopportunities, actually wanted
more opportunities.
So they were at a point intheir career where they were
very experienced teachers butthey actually wanted to engage
with a bit more professionalexcitement.
But the system, it wasn'tidentifying those people.
They didn't actually have aspace to say you know what, if I

(01:02:02):
had tapped you on the shoulder,you'd say yes, because I've got
more space in my life and Ireally want to learn how to do
blah blah.
Or I've got this passion thatI've developed after 20 years of
teaching and I want to reallygo and explore it and I want to
give it back.
I want to give back to thesystem.
So it's about seeing thingsdifferently and it's about again
teachers as professionals areat different phases in their

(01:02:22):
career and therefore havedifferent needs.
The question then becomes what'score?
What do we have to demand foreverybody and what can we create
space?
You know we talked earlierabout families.
Some teachers are really greatat connecting with families.
How do we give them more spaceto connect with families?
Some people are good communitybuilders.
Some are great at theircurriculum.

(01:02:43):
How do we build that up?
We have this other provocationwhich we borrowed, stole from a
different piece.
If you use the, we say footballin Europe, but in Australia we
say soccer, are we staffingschools as a team of midfielders

(01:03:04):
?
Everyone's got to be the same.
We don't allow space for theforwards and the backs, and the
wingers and the different.
Do we spend enough space?
Do we enough to allow people toshow their passions through?

Drew (01:03:17):
Yeah and that interestingly, no plug intended,
but it's aligning with some ofour work in our association.
One of our work of Liz Wiseman,whose work is about finding the
genius in others.
Her work is on multipliers andfinding the genius in others is

(01:03:38):
what I've heard you're saying.
If you can find the geniuses inothers, you don't have the
midfield team.
You actually have a team ofsuperstars working together and
becoming this all-star team,which would be fantastic,
Exactly.

And also that's what we want to attract
young talented professionalsinto teaching If they see that
the top end of the youngprofessionals are going to want
to be part of it.

Drew (01:04:05):
Yeah.
Now, if we go back to theresearch, if, if we can, the
exciting opportunities we haveas an association is to build on
the work of ann mcintyrethrough new research funded by
the principal australia researchfoundation.
And here's some questions.
I want your honest feedback ofwhere we we think we should be

(01:04:26):
going.
If we could research anythingright now to help our principals
lead better, what should we beexploring and what emerging
topics do you think hold the keyfor the next decade of
leadership?

Yeah, so it's really school leaders are the
key to transforming theeducation system, but they're
already at their limits.
It's really school leaders arethe key to transforming the
education system, but they'realready at their limits.
So how do we redefine the role?
So we started this project.
It was new professionalism andthe future of teaching, so we
focused on teachers as opposedto school leaders.

(01:05:03):
We tried to separate becauseother work was happening around
school leaders.
But as we worked our waythrough it, more and more we had
to come back to this idea ofthe role of school leaders,
because school leaders are thekey to transforming the system,
and so it's up and down.
The work in the school needs tobe done by the school leaders,

(01:05:27):
but also the learning thathappens needs to be done shared
with the system itself.
So AI, for example the onlyexperts with experience in using
AI in classrooms are currentprincipals and teachers, so we
have to draw on those if webelieve that their expertise
should be valued.
So we need to think about howthis works.

(01:05:50):
As I mentioned earlier, thereare different profiles of
principals as well, so we can'tnecessarily set up one profile.
We have to allow fordifferences.
Some people are really good atdifferent aspects of the work.
So we have to think about it asa collaborative project anyway.

(01:06:10):
So how can leadership be morecollaborative a role?
It needs to be a collaborativerole.
How can it connect with otherschool leaders?
How does it connect withresearchers, policymakers and
the broader societal sector inthe local community?
These are questions that weneed to think about.
These are questions that weneed to think about.

(01:06:32):
How does learning, innovation atthe school and the cross school
get curated and shared with thesystem?
So how does it influence thesystem?
So, for example, in Irelandthey had this great project
called the Beacons Model, whichstands for bringing education
alive for communities.
Policymakers work at a townlevel so not in one school, but
a series of schools to exploreideas with school leaders and

(01:06:55):
students and families and thecommunity.
They develop actions that aregoing to be followed up and
looked at again, but then thelearning from that is fed back
into the system, because they'vegot system leaders there and
it's called policy from themiddle.
So they're developing theirpolicy from learning from what
they're finding in the Beaconsmodel.

(01:07:15):
So it's a great example whereworking together supports
different aspects for schools,towns and then for the system.

Drew (01:07:28):
Well, aspects for schools, towns and then for the system.
So food for thought, really, interms of where to go.
There's those topics thatyou've and it's just a matter of
it probably makes it morecomplex.
It's really understanding whatare we trying to research and
what is the impact we're tryingto see through this research.

So it's breaking it down into short and
long term.
So if we believe that the roleshould be more collaborative and
if we believe that theprincipal role is part of the
transformation process, we justneed to say that's our long-term
goals and then we need to startto say well, what's already
happening?
Give me some examples of what'salready happening.

(01:08:13):
How do we build on those models?
Let's do some research.
What are other countries doing?
Some countries do itdifferently, but let's learn
from these different countries.
So there's short-term decisionsthat can be made, but this is a
long-term question.
Term decisions that can be made, but this is a long term
question.
How do we like a great exampleyou guys are doing with, you
know, commissioning research tolook at this aspect?

(01:08:35):
And one of the things we didwhen we did research seminars in
every country is we encouragedthem to include practitioner
researchers, people who aredoing postgraduate research, who
are in schools.
We should value that and seethat because they bring a

(01:08:58):
certain expertise.
But it's a long-term good thingand, as I said to you before,
as simple as talking more aboutit and let's see what emerges.
Trials a few things, pilot afew ideas, build a lighthouse
approach.

Drew (01:09:13):
Yeah, yeah, really good examples, Jason.
Now let's, we're close towrapping up.
We've got a few more questions.
We've got three quick questionsfor you, rapid fire.
Are you ready?
If you had to sum up the futureof teaching in one phrase, what

(01:09:33):
would it be?

So the late eminence Professor Coulahan said
there's a three-letter word weneed to hear more about in
schools and in education, andthat word is joy.

Drew (01:09:44):
Nice, yeah, yeah, lovely.

Which education system or country is
inspiring you right now?
And there's only a very fewEstonian-speaking people in the
world, so therefore they're notable to get the big software
companies.
They're not interested.
So what their government does,it's a highly technological

(01:10:22):
society anyway, but what theirgovernment does is they broker
between schools and developersof technology.
So it starts with what doschools want, what do teachers
and school leaders need?
Then they work with localcompanies to develop local
solutions.
So I think that's a reallygreat example of what we need to

(01:10:46):
be doing in the future.

Drew (01:10:48):
Ah, that's interesting to hear because that's somewhat in
Western society.
Not the same way.
It's more the technology isinforming education of which
direction we're going andeveryone follows accordingly.
Yeah, interesting.

I was just going to say.
There's another example in theNetherlands the Nolai Institute,
where they're doing exactly thesame thing where the
universities.
The Nolai Institute, wherethey're doing exactly the same
thing where the universities,the institute, which is funded
by the government, actuallystarts with teacher problems and
then they bring in thescientists to work out what it
means, and then they bring inthe development companies.

(01:11:22):
So it's a great example andthey're going way beyond the
idea of just looking at AIprompts and things like that.
So Inga Molinar's work in NOLAis another great example of it.

Drew (01:11:33):
Wow, I love how you can just draw upon that.
It's fantastic.
Third question a must-read ormust-watch resource for our
listeners.

Yeah.
So I would recommend the lasttwo webinars from our project,
the OECD New Professionalism andthe Future Teaching Project,
not because of the projectitself, but what's interesting
about these webinars is that itbrings together experts like
Linda Daly-Hammond, ingaMulliner, who I mentioned, with
teachers and school leaders onthe same panel, and it's

(01:12:06):
actually the teachers and schoolleaders who are very inspiring
because they're talking aboutwork that they've done over a
decade, and it's one of thethings we say in the future's
work is that the future isalready here.
It's just not spread evenly,and so listening to those
teachers and school leaders whohave initiated change and

(01:12:27):
transformation is quiteinspiring.

Drew (01:12:30):
Yeah, wow, and we'll obviously put off all of that in
our show notes as well for ourlisteners.
Jason, thank you so much forbeing with us today.
It's been a fantastic exploringreally the time, as you said,
the time to actually explore thebig questions, which is a
privilege for us as listeners toreally ponder and think about

(01:12:52):
those big questions.
So again, thank you for thework you do and leading with
OECD and representing Australia,the small pocket of education,
but representing Australia'sperspective as well.
Thank you again for your time.
Thanks, drew.
Thank you.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Medal of Honor: Stories of Courage

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Building Schools for Tomorrow: Future-Focused Leadership with Dr Jason McGrath