Educational Reform and Breakthrough Leadership in Schools

Introduction: The Case for Educational Reform

The nature of education — its very essence — has not changed significantly over the course of human history. The internal dynamic of direct instruction followed by practice is an essential element of our fabric as human beings; every culture has developed this kind of instruction and has perfected it for its own use. Fullan, Crevola, and Hill do nothing to alter this arrangement. They do not introduce new methodologies that change the core dynamic. Rather, they seek to facilitate the ability of the instructor to create curriculum that fits the needs of students, rather than adhering strictly to district-managed curricular programs. This in itself is not revolutionary, but it does present a well-thought-out challenge to the status quo.

One of the most problematic — and simultaneously most entrenched — aspects of modern education is the centralized control over curriculum taught across entire school districts and state systems. Fullan, Hill, and Crevola's book Breakthrough: A Way Forward takes on the seemingly impossible task of providing a truly viable restructuring of the entire way a school district is managed, curriculum is designed, and instruction is implemented. The problem with this "Breakthrough Method," however, is several-fold: it has never been fully implemented and is therefore theoretical in nature; it requires a complete paradigm shift in educational structure, necessitating change within teacher and administrator education, community expectations, external support systems, and top-level policy; and the only realistic path to implementation would require officials at the absolute top of the educational hierarchy to champion the sweeping reforms it demands.

Fullan et al.'s book is certainly an engaging argument for the empowerment of teachers to employ a genuine "moral purpose" in their work, and for the creation of a system that allows that purpose to drive learning. However, without a massive, sweeping change in the entire educational structure, the ideal system set out in this book cannot realistically be achieved. Unfortunately, this book is probably destined to sit on many shelves as a prop rather than a tool — which is a genuine shame, because the concepts the authors advance are truly innovative and, if their claims hold, potentially transformative.

The Outdated Structure of Modern Education

Fullan, Hill, and Crevola begin with high aspirations: "The old mission was about providing access for all to basic education and access for a relatively small elite to university education… The new mission takes over where the old one left off. It is to get all students to meet high standards of education and provide them with a lifelong education that does not have… built-in obsolescence… but that equips them to be lifelong learners" (Fullan et al., 2006, p. 1).

With this lofty goal in mind, the authors outline — step by step — a restructuring of an educational system they perceive as outmoded and so deeply rooted in the past that "teaching looks much the same from one generation to the next" (p. 41). They compare the evolution of education unfavorably to that of nursing: the medical profession has changed dramatically over the past century, to the point where a nurse trained in the 1950s would barely recognize the profession today. Within education, however, the authors argue that little perceived necessity for change has existed because the essential product — information processing, social integration, and the ability to function in the world — has remained constant. Yet, as they point out, the product has changed; the world is very different from the one in which our current educational paradigm was created.

Our educational system continues to revolve around an agrarian economy. The long summer break between school years is a genuine holdover from a time when children were expected to assist with the harvest. Yet very few children in North America live on farms today, and even fewer would be expected to help operate one. The concept of what it takes to succeed in life has also shifted. Being able to read, perform basic arithmetic, and write is no longer a sufficient minimum for full participation in society. Children today must be technically adept — more comfortable typing than handwriting, capable of changing careers multiple times, and able to weather the economic disruptions those changes bring. They must adapt their skills across occupations and remain flexible in their thinking. None of these demands of modern life are meaningfully addressed within the traditional educational structure, and this is precisely the gap the authors seek to close. As the OECD's education research consistently demonstrates, systems that fail to adapt to these realities fall behind in preparing students for contemporary economies.

The Breakthrough Model: Curriculum and Instruction

The problem for the authors is not convincing their audience that change is necessary. With an institutional structure as entrenched as education — complicated further by unions, contracts, and external political pressures — the real challenge is finding a workable path through a seemingly immovable object. The authors studied educational systems throughout the world, particularly in nations where achievement in mathematics and science has significantly outpaced that of the United States. They found collaborative models in which teachers work together to design curriculum, real-world application is woven into instruction, and teachers are recognized and rewarded not for seniority or credentials alone, but for achievement and skill. Where these structures exist, the authors observe, high levels of academic accomplishment tend to follow.

Rather than simply calling for change, the authors construct a genuine game plan — a complete reform of the educational structures that have shaped how children become citizens, employees, and people. From the student's perspective, education would effectively operate year-round, reinforcing the idea that learning is as central to human life as forming families or contributing to communities. Students would participate in classes designed more like immersive environments, placing subject matter within a context that creates an immediate connection between learning and application. Teachers would be trained to modify their delivery methods to fit the needs of the moment and the relative progress of the class. Administratively, the dictatorial relationship that currently exists would give way to genuine collaboration — administrators would be relegated largely to coordinating roles while teachers would exercise far greater ownership over student progress.

Fullan et al.'s approach calls for "greater specificity without suffering the downside of prescription" (p. 9), meaning that curriculum must teach within proper context and include all necessary detail, without mandating that all children be taught the same subjects in the same manner. The result would be curriculum designed with an inherent awareness of all learning modalities, flexible enough to be taught in any number of different ways. Massive standardized textbooks would give way to a more interactive, multi-branched approach that teachers would actively manage during instruction — much like a boat captain navigating a tricky channel. Curriculum designers would provide lists of resources, guiding questions, outlines, contextual links, and activities; teachers would then take these elements and construct them in a style and manner best suited to their students' needs.

Structurally, the current system is designed to provide educational opportunities only insofar as they do not offend the broad conservative middle of the country — that portion of America where traditional methods of living, including education, resist progress with particular obstinacy. Because textbook publishers want to sell books in volume, they produce only what the widest range of districts will purchase. This means that genuine reform must begin by persuading the most conservative and reluctant school systems first — a formidable starting point.

Conclusion: Revolution in Theory, Not Yet in Practice

The book presents a great idea, a coherent structure, and a potential revolution in the making — but all of its ideals mean relatively little in the face of complex, entrenched opposition to change. What must happen is a top-down transformation of every aspect of the educational structure, and that begins with presidents, governors, and secretaries of education — not with parents and teachers.

Reference

Fullan, M., Hill, P., & Crevola, C. (2006). Breakthrough. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.