The climate of the school is its spiritual essence and the tone for this is set hy the Headteacher. There are many dimensions, but perhaps the most basic is the level of constructive interest shown by the Head. In two of the schools this was almost negligible, while in a third, influence was exerted in an excessively peremptory fashion that created a quite unconstructive tension and led merely to grudging
acquiescence. Encouragement was not forthcoming except at Diplow where, significantly, implementation was observed at a much higher level. More generally, however, the teachers were not being given the inspiration that they needed to overcome the troubles which, sooner or later, they had to face.
The problem lay in the way innovation was viewed. It was not seen as something concerning the school as a whole but rather as being the exclusive property of the individual teacher and the department that he was a member of. This is partly true of course, but there is a school dimension as well. The most vivid illustration came at Lowick. Mr. Cook’s perceptions of GYSL were, in almost all respects, accurate and he knew that various class and group activities were recommended. Some he rejected out of hand, but others were attempted, with less than happy consequences. Part of the trouble, he felt, lay in the lack of class unity which has been caused by the unremitting diet of individual work provided elsewhere. In other words, practices in the school as a whole affect possibilities for introducing a new programme in any constituent part. Communication about the curriculum is needed throughout the school, therefore, so that some form of overall policy can be developed. Problems can then also be identified, new approaches worked out and skills built up among the staff generally. Leadership for this must come from the Headteacher, but again it was totally absent.
In fact, as Chapter 5 has revealed, communication networks within the schools were very poorly developed. Each department was working in isolation, and even within some, members rarely helped one another.
Only at Diplow, where the Department comprised two full-time geographers, who had rooms next to one another, was there frequent consultation and the sharing of resources and ideas. Elsewhere, the problems varied. At Hayslope neither Mr. Shackleton nor his colleagues seemed to value communi cation highly, while at Lowick and Milby, in line with the comments of Lorti^ discussed in Chapter 1, there were either shortages of time or the • physical separation of teachers. Could neither of these have been over
come? The fact that they were not (the Headteacher’s responsibility) and that communications remained impoverished was a major constraint. Given the difficulties and strains of any innovation, let alone one so broad-ranging as GYSL, teachers need all the help that they can get. The school itself ought to provide the first tier of a support structure that extends outwards to local groups and perhaps beyond.
6:2:4 Material support provided by the School
The second dimension of the school’s management task in innovation is the physical support that it offers to teachers. This is a material cost, and again its purpose is to relieve the tensions that teachers face so that they can work as effectively as possible. Such physical support is particularly important in a resource-based programme like GYSL, where demands almost inevitably exceed those that had existed in previous
syllabuses. Once more it is the task of Senior Staff; they must distri bute the school’s resources in such a way that the innovation can thrive and their ability to do so depends on their understanding of the Project’s demands.
At one level the schools did this by purchasing Project kits (about £150 for a complete set at the time of initial publication) out of general funds. Elsewhere, however, there were deficiencies, which varied in
intensity and covered a range of areas. Firstly, there were the purely physical aspects - rooms that were cramped, without proper blackout
facilities, blackboards which could not be written on, power points which were not functioning, and a shortage of audio-visual aids. These are
obvious illustrations of Cohen’s remarks which were mentioned in Chapter 1. Secondly, there was the level of background support, particularly from the school office. This was extremely limited at Lowick and it meant that the teachers had to spend in duplication and typing much of the free time which should have been devoted to the development and evaluation
of courses and materials. Such a situation is unsatisfactory because it
prevents the teacher from performing adequately one of his main roles. Finally, an issue which all schools must face and resolve, there was the conflict between teaching and pastoral responsibilities at Milby. There may be very good reasons why one person should have both, but in such a case he must be given enough time to carry out each effectively. This plainly was not the case at Milby. Mr. Scott’s heavy pastoral commitments prevented him from performing his teaching role as he would have wished. Quite apart from the interruptions during lessons, he did not have sufficient time for preparation so that he had to rely on other people’s ideas and less demanding approaches. This would be serious enough in a traditional teaching situation but where there are attempts to innovate, which were made moreover partly at the instigation of the Headteacher, it must and does have very damaging effects. In addition, the teacher’s attempt to overcome these effects may well have resulted in him not doing his pastoral job properly either, although there is no evidence either way on this. Headteachers must give earnest consideration to the possibly excessive burdens which they impose on their teachers when they give them pastoral and teaching duties, and this marks yet
another way in which they have an important bearing on the ease with which curriculum development may take place.
These problems represent brakes, as it were, on innovation, and through them, the schools, far from smoothing the path of progress, were making it more hazardous and burdensome. In addition to the trials, centred around lack of time and confidence with new approaches, and uncertainty about pupil reactions, which change naturally brings in its wake, there were the further drawbacks of imperfect practical conditions in the schools. However, an important consideration arises at this point. Schools themselves do not have all the facilities that they want and they cannot provide what is not there. If a school has 50 classrooms and 51 teachers, someone must be peripatetic. Equally, no organizational tricks can turn a small dingy classroom with rickety furniture into one that is airy, spacious and newly equipped. Schools must work within the limitations that are imposed on them, and those in inner city areas have special problems. Headteachers are aware of these, and, for example, at Lowick, it was hoped to improve the support which the office gave to all teachers.
Whether such improvement can be made will depend largely on financial considerations and the school’s ability to obtain extra ancillary staff. This raises the final broad variable - external conditions. A multitude
of these exist hut the amount of finance made available to education is among the most important. There is never enough to do all that the schools would like and in a period of economic stringency such as the present, when
spending is everywhere being tightened, matters are considerably worsened. The current situation vividly bears witness to Dalin’s (1978) statement that the educational system only just manages to maintain itself and has little energy left for moving forward. This can be illustrated by
examining once more the problems of time. It has been mentioned that there are few people with the necessary time to act as effective local co-ordinators and that for teachers too innovation imposes time pressures. Ideally, schools need to provide generous time allowances, partly so that their teachers can prepare for the new programme and partly so that they can do other work which will allow them to attend local meetings held at the end of the school day. However, if teachers are to spend fewer hours in their classrooms and more in development work then extra staff will be required. This is a heavy financial burden, which is of course quite unrealistic at present. There
seems no obvious way out of this impasse, and it highlights the need for schools to create mechanisms which permit the most effective use of the time that is available. Such mechanisms manifestly do not exist, at least not according to the evidence revealed in this research.
6:3: Synthesis of the Variables into a Model
The information provided by the observations and interview notes has been used as a basis for identifying some of the main influences in curriculum development. These are not complete, of course, and neither are they
conclusively proven, but given the limitations of the research this could not be otherwise. Nonetheless, a range of features are present, and most of them neatly parallel the ideas that were described in Chapter 1. So far, they have been discussed individually although some linkages have already been drawn. Figure 4 summarizes the variables that have been isolated, and attempts to show how they are related to one another and how they impinge on teacher implementation. It is hoped, however, that teacher implementa tion would not be seen as an end-product towards which all the variables lead as a fixed conclusion. Rather it is a process which is in a constant state of flux, although for some teachers it has almost become a rigid structure out of which further development is at best slow and uncertain. In many senses it is an over-simplified diagram, but together with the analysis on which it was based, it does have some practical and theoretical implications.
6:3:1* Contact Provided by the Local Groups
The first of these implications concerns the local groups and the contact which they provide between teachers on the one hand and the Project
TEACHER
UNDERSTANDING