Leader

Teacher Leadership in the Arab Gulf: Western Expats and Arab Teachers Mentor Each Other Dr. Robin Dada Zayed University, Dubai, UAE Abstract The purpose of this study is to describe teacher leadership, including important attributes of teacher leaders, obstacles, and the interplay of mechanistic systems established in the school and a more organic form of teacher leadership between foreign and local teachers in the UAE engaged in educational reform. This qualitative study uses document analysis to analyze 11 middle level (Grades 6-9) teacher leader weekly reports of their work, successes, and struggles, as well as the field notebook of conversations with principals and teachers of the Academic Program Coordinator for the Middle Schools (the researcher), all of whom were a part of the same systemic school reform program entitled Madares al Ghad. The teacher leaders identified important attributes to be relationship building and the ability to really listen to others, while principals and local teachers stated that the most important attributes of the teacher leaders were being positive, being active, willing to listen to others’ ideas, and someone with strong knowledge and skills in their area of expertise. The most important role perceived by teacher leaders was providing professional development. More difficult roles for the teacher leaders included the scheduling of planning sessions and workshops in the school. Obstacles to the role include random scheduling pattern in use and sporadic connectivity in some schools. The degree of commitment of the principal was wither an asset or a liability. Productive strategies in working with obstacles included the importance of good working relationships with colleagues and principal, sharing of successes, contribution of skills and knowledge. The interplay between the organic nature of teacher leaders and the hierarchical nature of educational agencies and organizations was difficult in the beginning with issues raised over supervision authority, evaluation authority, and authority to require participation. Introduction This research study describes an approach to preparing inservice teachers for professional practice in the 21st century. The traditions of the past of teachers working through textbooks with students according to a schedule no longer provide students with the skills they need in this era. Students must be prepared as users and generators of knowledge, as well as have the capacity to apply knowledge in new situations. Teachers, therefore, have to develop the skills of integrating content in the form of projects-based experiences that focus on problem solving or design. A variety of reform projects have come and gone in the UAE that focus on new curriculum, activities, or methodologies, but none have included a focus on the work of teachers and their role in educational reform prior to the Madares al Ghad reform program. This program includes a strong component of teacher leadership; preparing teachers to lead and support collaborative planning activities, contribute and learn from shared professional development experiences, and develop communities of practice that serve to critique current practice against desired outcomes, develop changes to practice contextualized in the culture and environment of the school, and create powerful integrated curriculum opportunities contextualized in the region and linked internationally to other schools. This study describes the nature of the teacher leader’s role in the UAE, the challenges and obstacles faced in the implementation process, and the strategies teacher leaders used to work through issues and proceed forward in developing teachers’ leadership capacity to develop greater opportunities for student achievement. Background The United Arab Emirates, just under 40 years old, is engaged in KG-12 educational reform to bring its educational programs into alignment with the needs of a resource rich country experiencing the pangs of economic downturn and a fragile environment. The urgency of a highly skilled local workforce committed to preserving the cultural identity of the Gulf while operating competitively in the 21st century requires citizens who possess the knowledge and skills required to operate in the global marketplace and/or knowledge community. When few students of the region were pursuing tertiary education, they were easily accommodated by going to foreign universities for remediation and training. Their successful completion and return brought them elevated roles in business, government, and higher education. As the UAE grew and prospered, this model could not provide for the needs of professional and high skilled employees; imported workforces were required in a variety of the sectors as graduates of grade 12 are under-prepared to fill the blossoming private sector or enter higher education directly. Required remediation continues to limit higher education, research and development, but continues today because of the limited commitment to K-12 reform efforts. If the educational workforce is to be Emiratized by qualified citizens (as is the desire of the country), K-12 educational reform must be of the magnitude to prepare graduates to become fully functioning and contributing members of 21st century society. A variety of reform efforts have been launched and abandoned, their failure often blamed on the inability of teachers to implement new curriculum packages or an innovative practice. The necessary investment in human resources creates anxiety because of the cost required to bring local teachers to a level required to operate 21st century educational programs and that will meet the country’s needs for educated citizens. This paper is a case study of a teacher leadership program that is a component of Madares al Ghad, a systemic educational reform program, in the United Arab Emirates. This component is grounded in the mentoring and collaboration of teachers to plan, provide instruction and learning experiences, and assess with the purpose of elevating the schools repertoire of meaningful and productive educational experiences that increase student learning and development. The current educational system is bureaucratic in organization, encouraging educators to defer to a directive to adjust a particular aspect of teaching and learning. There has been little focus on development of knowledge and skills integrated with current issues and themes, as well as life and career skills, information literacy and management. Instead the focus has been on the rote memorization and recall of very basic information. Higher order thinking, critical analysis of knowledge and skills, and local/global themes are nearly absent from the curriculum. The introduction of a shared leadership component at the teacher level is a purposeful move toward creating organic structures in the organization that encourage interaction and thought drawn from the needs of students and the contextualization of the curriculum in the 21st century UAE culture. Foreign master teachers from English speaking countries were brought to work with the local educators to elaborate English language curriculum and pedagogy, and develop learner-centered school and classroom environments. Some Emirati and bilingual expatriate Arab teachers were part of the early leadership team. Contextualizing Madares al Ghad (Schools of Tomorrow) Educational Reform Program The Madares al Ghad program at its inception was comprised of 50 schools encompassing all levels and all 7 of the Emirates made up of 18 elementary schools, 13 preparatory schools, and 22 secondary schools with some schools operating at two levels. The program was created as a joint effort between the Ministry of Education (K-12) and the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research reform K-12 related to teachers and principals, school environments, policies and planning, and public relations targeting community stakeholders’ support. This study focuses on the role of teacher leaders and their experiences in facilitating teaching and learning, as well as teacher engagement in shaping the focus of instructional programs and ongoing professional development. The foreign teachers who were introduced into the educational system as mentors and team leaders to support local teachers educational development of 21st century teacher skills were met with both resistance and enthusiasm. Implementation of learner-centered educational programs engaging students in experiential and project-based activities requires more complex planning as well as changes to the way teachers perceive work responsibilities and learning. Development of new capacities for leadership and engagement, becomes much more urgent and requires the support of a community of practitioners to ensure that old habits of low expectations, rote memorization, and silo existence are replaced by a variety of strategies that put students into active learning environments and teachers into collaborative and generative work modes to approach, attack, and resolve learning problems. For these things to proceed efficiently, Ministry personnel, principals, and regional education agencies need to know how to support the program through the pangs of change and work together to present a united voice to the field regarding expectations. Teachers and Schools in the UAE Context The needs of individual communities yielded to the needs of an emerging and unified country in the 1970’s and efforts were made then to standardize schooling across the Emirates by the development of prescribed curriculum and assessment frameworks. Until recently, schooling has remained focused on religion, Arabic language, English literacy, computation, the sciences, and civics to serve the needs of citizens of that era. Today, the more globally connected and complex UAE requires citizens with a greater depth of content knowledge and skills and the ability to apply them, career awareness, information and computer technology, stewardship of resources, an understanding of relationships between local and global issues, information literacy and the ability to critically analyze situations, recognize problems, and follow through to a productive resolution to sustain the current development and further the prosperity of the country. In 2008-2009, the Dubai Statistics Center reports that seventy six percent (76%) of the teaching workforce in Kindergarten and primary schools is comprised of Emirati female teachers, but the expatriate workforce makes up approximately 93% of the middle level and secondary boys’ schools and nearly 42% of the workforce in the same levels of girls’ schools. Throughout the region, women more often prepare as teachers if they desire to work in schools and do so by entering a College of Education. They can, however, still enter teaching as a math, science, English, or Arabic teacher if they have a baccalaureate degree, but this avenue is closing. Teachers who complete a teacher preparation program in the UAE develop knowledge and skills about the development of children and adolescents, pedagogy, and assessment. Men rarely prepare as teachers and do not have any of the above courses supporting their content knowledge. Expatriate male teachers are frequently not included in professional development programs that target Emirati teachers. Although the UAE is blessed with some strong and passionate educators who are male and who have good intuition, most male teachers have little or no understanding of development or the pedagogy that supports learning in the content areas. Men often become teachers by default when they are not admitted to courses of study leading to their desired profession and must opt for another field of study that is not linked to a career path other than as a teaching subject. These teachers graduate and register with the Ministry of Education and arrive at the school under-enthused with their career option, unskilled for teaching children, and they struggle to make a living from the limited salary and benefits they earn. These men turn to tutoring after hours or second jobs where they are able to elevate their wages to an amount that will support their families. Much of their preparatory time is devoted to tutoring or a second job. While this practice is not condoned or recommended by the Ministry of Education, it is practiced throughout the region. Without the professional development support to link their subjects to daily life and 21st century themes teachers find motivation of students difficult. One can not assume that students who do poorly in school are not intelligent, for they develop a variety of other talents outside of school and go onto successful government positions. The intellect capacity of many male children is never realized because of the stunted opportunities in their educational programs. The best use of school improvement is investment into long term and sustainable human and learning resources. The development, maintenance, and support of strong male teachers who are committed to students’ development and who are prepared to develop their own capacity to better serve the needs of learners and the country is a source of pride and a resource that will not be used up. The investment must include all teachers who are teaching the country’s children, regardless of their nationality. The commitment to develop teacher leaders and principals prepared to support sustained and continuous development among colleagues in the schools brings with it the promise of sustainable educational development and the positive induction of new teachers to a culture of high expectations for teacher and student achievement. MAG Structure In the initial year of the program, Learning Coordinators (LC) were placed in regions of the UAE and worked with a cluster of schools to provide technical assistance and support the implementation at the school level. These individuals were specialists in the area of language development and teacher preparation and facilitated the implementation of language curriculum and professional development experiences in their cluster of schools. Two types of MAG personnel were employed in schools, the School Level Team Leader (SLTL) and the Teacher Mentor (TM). The TM worked inside of classrooms with local teachers as a team teacher and mentor, as well as having a group of students that they taught full time (6 lessons per week). The part time teaching component provided an opportunity for a demonstration classroom and to gain “street credibility” among the local teachers and principal. Their work in the classrooms of their colleagues included support for experimentation with a variety to teaching techniques and activities, including learning centers, differentiated learning activities, and development of a repertoire of learner-centered teaching methodologies. The SLTL worked with TMs to orchestrate the best and most appropriate professional development experiences for teachers in the school, to identify the best use of scheduled professional development time, and to organize collaborative team planning for instruction and professional discussions. The SLTL also served as a link to the principal and LC and the twos of them typically met weekly with the principal to provide an update on how things were progressing and encouraged the principal to visit classrooms with the SLTL to learn about what teachers were doing and how classroom activities were changing. The MAG program, currently in its third year, has encountered some changes in staffing patterns and roles. Literature Review The literature review draws upon the research related to teacher leader development, the development of teachers who are dedicated to student success and the transformation of teaching into a true profession. The review describes the nature of teachers who emerge as leaders among their colleagues. In addition, it includes the findings of earlier researchers related to obstacles teachers find in functioning as leaders in their local school environments, as well as the early work on the interplay between organic leadership systems in the context of a larger bureaucratic system. Teaming and Leadership Initial perspectives or professional development can take the focus of needing to “fix” something. Conley and Muncey (1999) describe the trend of educational agencies toward deficiency models for school reform based in the belief that teachers are unmotivated to improve their teaching. This phase is followed by the teacher professionalization movement when reformers realize that even the most highly motivated teachers fall short of their goals in poorly organized schools and where their professional judgment is not considered (Labaree, D. 2009, Lieberman, Saxl & Miles 1988). More recently an emphasis on the professionalization of the school organization and management has emerged with two schools of reform, 1) creating change through enhanced teacher roles (Berry & Ginsbert 1990) and 2) enhancing teacher teaming to support change and diminish isolation(Kruse & Louis 1997). The first approach changes roles of individual teachers while the second changes teachers’ roles through new organizational configurations that draw upon “teams” of teachers. The Coalition of Essential Schools recommends engaging in reform that promotes both teacher leadership and teaming as strategies for change. Teachers are encouraged to adopt and use skills, beliefs, and activities that increase the collaboration and draw upon their professional responsibility to participate as leaders in the school (Benitez, M., Davidson, K. & Flaxman, L. 2009). Portin (1999) presents a triadic model of leadership that describes leadership as more complex than the authority of position. The triadic model describes an interplay between transactional leadership (leader-centered, rational decision-making, and focused on efficiency of the organization), transformational leadership (elevate the motives and goals of institutional members), and critical leadership (emancipation of organization members and power that is measured by the capacity of members involved in an interaction). Transactional leaders are often characterized as “benevolent dictators” who engage in heroic and charismatic efforts while the organizational culture is tacit and hidden under the control of the leader. Transformational leaders encourage others to lead in areas where they are ready and prepared to do so. Critical leaders are not established by traditional titles of authority and emerge and follow as the situation unfolds. Teaming and leadership may appear to be at odds with each other unless viewed in the context of Burns and Stalker’s (1961) distinction between “mechanistic” and “organic” organizational systems. Mechanistic systems emphasize a hierarchy of control and authority, as well as the vertical interactions of superiors and subordinates. Organic systems emphasize a network structure of control and authority, including a lateral direction of communication that consists of information and advice rather than instructions and demands. Burns and Stalker (1961) recognized that while organic systems are not hierarchical in the same way as mechanistic systems, they remain stratified. Both teacher leadership and teaming emphasize task variety and professional learning (Kruse & Louis, 1997; Pounder, 1995; Smylie, 1994) as well as changing roles of leader and follower. Identification of Teacher Leaders The MAG Model expanded the influence of experienced and expert teachers, drawing mainly from foreign teachers in the first year and then adding more local teachers in the second year. TMs and SLTLs were identified using the qualities of successful teacher leaders, drawn from the literature of Danielson (2008), which include such characteristics as having : |the ability to collaborate with others |an open mind and respect for others’ views | |the confidence of other educators and persuasiveness. |optimism and enthusiasm | |respect for their own instructional skills |confidence and decisiveness | |an understanding of evidence and information |perseverance | |the ability to recognize the need to focus on those aspects of the |flexibility and willingness to try different approaches | |school’s program that will yield important gains in student learning |expertise in their field | Challenges to teacher leadership A variety of challenges to teacher leadership are rooted in school culture. Obstacles such as autonomy, egalitarianism, and deference to seniority can make the work of teacher leaders difficult. Second stage teachers (Danielson 2008), are often called upon by their principals to take on specialized roles in working with their colleagues, such as instructional coach, lead teacher, mentor teacher, and data analyst because of their experience. Research on these teachers finds that the opportunity to function as a teacher leader is perceived as intriguing (Munger et al, 2009; Donaldson, 2005; Johnson & the Project on the Next Generation of Teachers, 2004). Their experience and success leaves them feeling competent and confident in their work, and they want to share their acquired expertise with others, but often get mired in their own bureaucratic mindsets or the mindsets of others. Becoming a teacher leader promises to reduce the isolation that many teachers feel, vary their responsibilities, and expand their influence, but it can also feel threatening to teachers who don’t understand the difference between teaming and “needing support to do her job.” Many second stage teachers want to have a hand in making decisions about how their school operates; they welcome the opportunity to collaborate with colleagues, learn, grow, and expand their influence. Many principals welcome the opportunity for added input, but struggle with limited understanding of equity and equality. Although these teachers are initially enthusiastic, they encounter unforeseen challenges, such as: 1. Lack of formalization of the role. To benefit from teacher leadership, school administrators need to provide formal support structures and build leadership roles into the structure of the school. The role also requires principal acceptance and inclusion in a level of discussion that is appropriate to input required for decision making. However, these roles need to be flexible so that teachers can move into and out of them. 2. Egalitarianism. The belief that all teachers should be similarly treated in the school organization makes it uncomfortable for teachers to take on roles of mentorship in an official way. The ability to see these roles as fluid helps to make this issue less problematic. 3. Seniority. Colleagues may resist teacher leaders’ work because they see it as an inappropriate intrusion by a teacher who may be perceived as being more expert than the teacher leader, particularly when the teacher leaders are younger than the teachers they are to mentor or team. From these obstacles may grow equally ineffective coping mechanisms on the part of teacher leaders. • Teacher leaders may determine it’s safer to work only with willing teachers. • They may reinforce egalitarianism by insisting that they are in the school to work alongside the teachers and support them, rather than to fully mentor or advise. Burns and Stalker (1961), perhaps well before organizational development scholars were ready to receive their thoughts, noted that the mechanistic and highly bureaucratic organization didn’t always serve more human oriented enterprises that depended upon more frequent and individualistic outputs, as well as the ebb and flow of people into and out of leadership and followership roles. Teacher leadership is experiencing a resurgence of support around the world, particularly associated with educational reform movements. The Study Research Questions This study seeks to determine whether teacher leadership development is a promising strategy in support of UAE inservice teacher professional development. Teachers, principals, school-based, and local MAG personnel in eleven middle schools serve as the informants in this study. Data were collected that addressed the following research questions: 1. Which attributes of teacher leaders are most important in the UAE context' 2. What are the important roles of teacher leaders in the UAE and are some more difficult than others' 3. Do teacher leaders encounter obstacles. If so, what are the obstacles they encounter' 4. Which strategies are the most productive in dealing with obstacles and in addressing the difficulties of roles' 5. What is the interplay between mechanistic and organic organizational characteristics with the introduction of teacher leadership' Methods The informants for this paper are eleven SLTLs who responded weekly during Year 2 of the MAG school reform program about activities conducted in their school, struggles that they experienced, and successes or improvements that were being noted. In addition, data about local teacher and principal perspective were drawn from the field notebook of the researcher who functioned as the Academic Program Coordinator for the program. She worked consistently over two years with the eleven schools. These schools were spread across the UAE and all included Grades 6-9. In these schools, Grades 6 and 7 were a part of the MAG program and Grades 8 and 9 were preparing to become part of the program in the third year. Most staff were Western educators from the United States, Canada, and Australia, with one each being from South Africa, Lebanon and the UAE. All students were regular government school pupils attending school in their neighborhood. The remarks and comments from the SLTL weekly reports were reviewed, coded, and analyzed for frequency of response types to the research questions identified. The field notebook of the researcher was also coded using the same system as the SLTL weekly reports. Data Collection SLTLs submitted a weekly report of activities on a provided template that included day-to-day work accomplished, professional development experiences and professional development experiences provided and/or participated in, identification of breakthroughs or difficulties in mentoring or leadership roles, requests for training/problem solving assistance. TMs used the Daily Planner Template to identify activities they were responsible for daily, along with identifying concerns, successes, notes regarding calls/e-mails to make, and questions that support reflection on the day’s events. Results and Discussion Work of the Teacher Leaders in MAG Middle Schools The work of the teacher leaders in this study was focused on the implementation of the Madares al Ghad school reform program goals which, during the life of this study, consisted of facilitating the creation of print and visually rich learning environments first in English classrooms and then, secondly, Arabic medium classrooms, the use of integrated language experiences in the English classrooms and then in Arabic classrooms, infusion of technology tools to support language learning and teaching, and the general focus on collaborative planning and leading developmentally appropriate learner-centered experiences in middle-level classrooms. The environs of UAE schools are inhabited by several different characters among teachers. The teacher-at-heart is interested in students, wants to do the best possible for the students and encourages students to do their very best as they aim to do the same. This teacher type contacts parents for follow-up, makes time to meet when asked if it has the potential to help student, and is an early engager with innovations to review them for possible implementation. The teacher-by-default is integrated into the work required to get along in the classroom and with the supervision. These teachers tolerate the students, and if need be, they find avenues to intimidate students into desired behavior. They teach as an avenue to a steady salary and the ability to work enough hours in the rest of the day to augment their salary or they may have family and social obligations that are so extensive that their non-teaching time is filled with arrangements and follow-ups. The teacher-by-misplacement sought a teaching position as an outlet, but is quickly disillusioned by the hard work involved, grows to dislike the students, dislikes teaching and the roles required of teachers, and is looking for any other type of position. The teacher may quit in the middle of the year or find reasons to be absent within the specified limits. These teachers are uninterested in planning and see students as incapable. Classrooms are generally outfitted with single desks for students where they keep their books for all classes as they observe their teachers pass through the door approximately every 45 minutes. There were many reasons given for why print rich environments were not possible in the UAE. Explanations ranged from “the children and other teachers tearing things down, the principal didn’t allow things on the wall, there’s not enough space for all of us (subject teachers) to put up a print rich environment and we don’t want the students distracted by either subject so it’s better to put nothing on the wall, only computer generated materials could be put up as student work is messy and things on the wall can be confusing, to the lack of office boys in the school to provide this service.” Teachers who were grounded in language acquisition quickly took to the concept of the print-rich environment with a variety of materials finding their way to the walls and doors of classrooms that supported language learning, particularly when supplies were available. Teachers and students developed connections between word walls, student work, illustrative posters of reading and writing strategies as they grew in an understanding of how to teach reading and writing more effectively. Teachers with less understanding of language development or pedagogy generally took longer to show signs of trying the first innovation (print-rich environment), but responded positively when they could see the impact in other classrooms or visits to other schools. The second innovation that drew from teacher leaders’ efforts was collaborative planning, drawing upon the strengths of all grade-level teachers to identify the materials to be used from adopted materials, supplemental materials and activities that encouraged the integration of language skills. This particular innovation was quite welcome in the company of teachers who were professional teachers at heart and were always looking for good ideas and willing ears for a discussion. For teachers who had adopted the follow-the-pages-required-model, collaboration was met with resistance on the grounds that it was an interference into academic freedom, took too much time, that this would not be accepted, and everyone will be in trouble when someone found out that all pages in the book hadn’t been covered. The third innovation, the infusion of technology tools into teaching and learning was either met with great enthusiasm or dread; English medium teachers received laptops to facilitate their planning and instruction, but these were not made available to Arabic medium teachers. This created a rift between colleagues and left Arabic medium teachers feeling that they were not valued by the Madares al Ghad program. While the teachers-at- heart and –by-default maximized technology and created some more interesting lessons that drew from a variety of sources. Some teachers were so interested in the possibilities that they were engaged as learners to involve students in the whole enterprise. This created missed learning opportunities for students in the classrooms of a few teachers. Other teachers, particularly the teachers-by-misplacement were found to only unpack their computer when they thought someone would observe them. General progress was noticeable across the project, particularly in those schools where consistent connectivity was available. A number of the teachers-by-default with an interest in technology really found their stride with social networking tools by creating learning experiences with students following a series of professional development experiences where they learned to use a variety of strategies and social networking tools. The fourth innovation of focus during the time period of this study was the implementation of developmentally appropriate practices in instruction, behavior management, assessment, procedures and routines, and learning experiences. Some teachers still used corporal punishment, even though it had been forbidden by the Ministry of Education. Many of the boys’ schools had a lack of procedures and routines throughout the school, as well as a lack of expectations for behavior, achievement, and engagement for, both, students and teachers, making the schools chaotic and inefficient. Behavior and classroom management continued as a challenge through the two years of this study, more frequently in boys schools. These innovations will pass in and out of the following discussion of the research questions. 1. Which attributes of teacher leaders are the most important in the UAE context' Teacher Leaders Perspective The foreign teacher leaders (TMs and SLTLs) repeatedly referred to the importance of patience, consistency, and the ability to listen. When foreign teacher leaders talked about patience and consistency they explained this as the need to say things more than one time in different ways and having to hear the frequent reminder that others had tried to change things but the system was unchangeable. They also described these attributes in the context of enjoying people and developing relationships. A quote that best describes the general attitude about potential for change was summed up by an English supervisor from the Ministry of Education: You can’t change the Ministry, the Ministry changes you. One of the social norms of the region is to not disappoint others. It’s best not to say no too directly so as not to disappoint the asker. Foreign teacher leaders would often confuse the use of inshallah (if God wills) to mean yes, particularly when they were new to the region. In fact, this is the meaning that Islamists would ascribe to the phrase is: Yes, absolutely, unless there is some unforeseen intervention by God which keeps me from doing the task. The phrase has been adapted by some to mean something comparable to let’s see or maybe and in time, foreign teachers often grew to understand that the use of this phrase meant no, not likely or I don’t want to. They also confused a lack of response as a sign of agreement in the early days of the project as well, and in time grew to realize the importance of spending time talking with individual teachers. The use of metaphors and idioms were often a source of misunderstanding. Foreign teacher leaders had to think about the language that they wanted to use and consider how it would be interpreted when spoken. In time, both local and foreign educators developed the language they needed, nuances of spoken and unspoken language, body language, and an understanding of each others words and phrases that are best used to express intended meanings. Colleagues developed trust in each other related to intentions and an acceptance for asking each other about meanings intended. Trust followed the development of good collegial relationships between teachers. APC Perspective New teacher leaders transitioning in were encouraged to work on developing relationships with their colleagues and learning about them as people and letting them learn about the teacher leader as well. Teachers, TMs, and SLTLs all had a tendency to misunderstand with a negative spin. When foreign or local teachers didn’t understand a comment, phrase, or action, their assumption was first that the speaker was making fun of them, making it very important that grounded relationships develop early that could bear the confusion of misunderstanding and press towards resolution. Teacher leaders were screened for classroom experience and their ability to manage groups as this was part of the change that had to occur at the classroom and school level. Teachers who had one-two year experiences in language institute assignments were susceptible to failure because of their limited experience and strategy base for managing and maximizing classroom sized groups. Another attribute, particularly in the beginning year, was the importance of staying true to desired outcomes of the program but possessing the ability to recognize alternative routes to the desired end. In schools where there was a willingness to embrace the phrase, in the best interest of the student, as the measure against which all innovation was considered, the teacher leaders found a means to limit unproductive discussion, while encouraging teacher dialogue. Principals and Local Teachers Perspectives Relationships were important to local teachers, and principals as a vehicle to developing a cohesive staff. There was also an importance of having teacher leaders who were well grounded in language acquisition and fluency in teaching skills for students who were ESL/EFL language learners. The TMs had a classroom teaching assignment as part of their workload, making this avenue an important attribute for them. Their class periods taught were open for observation and local colleagues were often invited to observe them at work, particularly when they were using a strategy or method that they were teaching to their colleagues. This role was important also as it provided the opportunity for colleagues to view how the teacher leader was using procedures, routines, and setting expectations of behavior in the classroom. TMs and SLTLs who understood how to manage a classroom and keep several activities going at once were admired; those who couldn’t were dismissed as not credible by their local colleagues, rendering them ineffective. Local teachers and principals cited the need for a positive attitude, “being active, and the willingness to listen to others’ ideas. They appreciated when the teacher leader considered what teachers and principals wanted and explained why specific arrangements were required and the outcomes were desired. 2. What are the important roles of the teacher leader and are some roles more difficult than others' All teacher leaders cited professional development (PD) as their most important role. They had a collective understanding from the beginning that they were a part of Madares al Ghad to share what they knew, and help local teachers to develop learner-centered instruction and assessment skills. Many teacher leaders initially perceived the more formalized workshops that they scheduled as the only PD work. In most schools principals saw PD in the same way. The embedded PD provided in a shoulder-to-shoulder mode was harder to understand by many of the principals who occasionally referred to concerns that SLTLs didn’t have enough work to do or that they didn’t do enough PD. It became important to formalize PD sessions fortnightly and discuss team topics with the local teacher colleagues in the mean time. SLTLs were well served by sharing their weekly report with principals which outlined the specific issues they were working on with each teacher. The more embedded PD was hard to measure, making the reports particularly valuable, and using a variety of strategies provided a comfort level for all. This continues to be part of the ongoing development as the teacher leaders work to better engage in the shoulder-to-shoulder mode where teacher development happens. The second most frequently cited role was that of an encourager to develop teachers confidence in operating active classrooms. For many of the local teachers, their experience with supervision was negative resulting in a long list of things they had done wrong and little recognition of strengths. A strong effort existed in the Madares al Ghad program to identify those things that were working well locally and then work on the aspects of the teachers’ professional needs that were not serving their students well. Positive feedback was an important part and paid off well for the teacher leaders who provided limited, clear, and specific recommendations and the positive reinforcers were much appreciated by teachers. The TMs identified the importance of supporting teachers in trying something new, to be the extra hands and eyes available to allow the teacher to experiment with more complex strategies such as centers, differentiated activities and reading circles. This support helped the teachers learn to relinquish some of the control of the classroom to students who were given clear expectations of outcomes and held accountable. It also allowed the teacher a chance to experiment with a supportive mentor who would jump in and help where needed without recording every shortfall. Teachers were uncomfortable early in the program in trying new strategies when they were afraid of someone noticing that it didn’t go well and frequently cited their experiences with supervisors. Teachers in their ability to manage classrooms with multiple activities. Where teacher leaders were active supporters of the innovation, the local teachers became more comfortable in working together in teaming situations than they had originally thought they would be. Many teachers continue to work on their skills, the development of autonomy in students, and the ability to plan and facilitate multiple centers, starting first with two to three and expanding. The roles that TMs cited most frequently as being difficult was in getting teachers in the grade-level to do collaborative planning. They were frequently expected by the local teachers to locate resources, prepare photocopies or word wall words because they did less of a teaching load with children. Local teachers did not perceive the work they did inside of classrooms with them as work. The issue of egalitarianism was problematic in three of the schools. Some principals actually sabotaged the collaborative planning time by excusing teachers from school to run errands and pay bills, even though school is out, leaving ample errand time in the remainder of the day. Nine schools developed a very stable and organized rhythm to the planning and their efforts were noticeable in the numbers of supplemental books that were prepared to support reading levels, the use of centers in the classrooms, and the collegial support they extended to each other in running more complex and learner-centered activities, as well as the progress made by students in using English. SLTLs more often cited the role of planning and organization as their most difficult role. The issue of schedule irregularities, changes, and failures as their most challenging issues. Traditional practice is to schedule each instructional period for each cohort of students individually, rather than blocking so that days have a similar schedule. This issue is exacerbated by the lack of an effective substitution program. Teachers are not typically expected to prepare lessons for days they will be absent or have a file of materials ready for a substitute. Substitution teachers are drawn from teachers who are not in class at a time when a substitute is needed, consequently, it frustrated the reform process to draw teachers from collaborative planning activities or PD activities to substitute for a class what had no materials to work with. Teachers were drawn from across the school so it was highly likely that the substitute would not be aware of the type of skills students were working with and the teacher who was out may not know the substitute made it easier for teachers to be absent; they did not have to face or “pay back” their colleagues from their same grade level or subject area. In most cases they didn’t know and didn’t ask who had substituted for them during the day. Nearly all of the MAG schools operated with the understanding that the teachers in the program did not substitute for other disciplines and that they substituted for each other. Teachers took greater responsibility in being prepared and in knowing what each other was teaching. 3. Do teacher leaders encounter obstacles and if so, what are they' The schedule was the most frequently persistent obstacle that teacher leaders cited. Because of the randomness of the schedule, it was near impossible to regroup or integrate subjects for meaningful project work. The randomness made it difficult to arrange for different levels of students to work together and was further aggravated by the substitution issue. Classrooms were assigned to groups of students who stayed in the room all day and different teachers came and went. On the surface, this seemed to be acceptable because it was easy to find students, students did not require passing time, students had a place to put their books, and supervision wasn’t required between classes. However, it interfered with teachers developing print-rich environments, classrooms with rich supplies of support materials, leveled readers, and easily available stationery supplies. The reasons offered for a failure to use print-rich environments, even though it is a powerful support to language learning and development of strong patterns of language usage, is because each teacher had too many classrooms to look after and they were only in each one for a short time each week. In the Madares al Ghad schools, the rooms were reassigned to one or two teachers of the same subject and the students moved to the teacher. The teachers were then responsible for creating a learning environment and having the materials at their disposal to use when they were needed. They were also responsible for managing materials, being good stewards of supplies, and seeing that the students kept the room tidy and clean before moving to the net classroom. A few schools resisted the use of the dedicated classrooms, while others used the model throughout the school. Those that resisted cited such issues as the students don’t move quickly, teachers were too pressured by keeping up their classrooms, and supervision was too tiring for teachers. The degree of support by the principal made a difference in the schools. In some cases, the principal embraced the vision of the school reform program and was very supportive of the changes and encouraged staff to work towards bringing about the changes that were in the best interest of the students. They encouraged all teachers in the school to participate by scheduling joint planning time. In two schools, principals were opposed to the changes and really preferred the old system and worked at cross purposes with the teacher leaders. These principals did not want closer ties to link to community and parents, believing that the parents who would come would come only to complain. They did not like the classes to be active or to be moving to different rooms because it required that teachers supervise and teachers don’t like to supervise, and preferred the curriculum that was easily transmitted to students. A few principals wanted the very best for their students and they wanted their teachers to be happy. Therefore, when teachers were asked to meet together or engage in some PD, they would complain to the principals about it cutting into their rest time between lessons. Wanting to keep the teachers happy, these principals would ask the teacher leaders to limit the planning and PD which then negatively impacted the students. Some principal’s lack of assertiveness to take a stand led to frustration by the school reform program and by the staff and students Some schools struggled more with sporadic connectivity which became an obstacle for students and teachers. Two schools cited the inability to manage the utility bills, which varied significantly, and connectivity would disappear prior to holidays, breaks, or as the school year approached exam time. In schools where the principal did not use the Internet in her work or few teachers used it in instruction and learning, the teacher leaders found this to be a an important topic for training. Teachers were generally worried about not being able to count on the resource being available and they did not want to take the chance on being so dependent with a room full of students who might ultimately have nothing to do. This attitude eased in the schools with consistent connectivity over time. Incorporation of IT into classrooms was very difficult where connectivity wasn’t consistent. In the schools where technology became a valued instructional and learning resource and was consistently available, the teachers and students made good use of the classroom computers and laptops that were in the school to support language development, differentiation, planning, infrastructure, and record keeping. A more consistent mechanism for the provision of schools with connectivity is needed for all schools. The obstacles cited by the teacher leaders all linked to principal responsibilities levels of commitment to work with educational reform in the schools. Principals who were well prepared to operate their school to its maximum capacity including giving the time necessary to engage in planning with teachers and community provided much impetus and encouragement for the staff to embrace the change. 4. Which strategies are the most productive in overcoming obstacles and in working with difficult roles' Relationship building held the biggest pay off in problem solving and solution development. So much is negotiated face to face and over a cup of tea that requires spending time with the principal and with teachers to plan and work through the challenges. The teacher leaders who mastered relationship building were able to work more closely and more intensely with their team. Through the recognition of teachers’ improvements and progress, these teachers became more confident and more willing to contribute to the learning team. SLTLs who shared names of teachers with the principal who were doing well made it easier for principals to mention their appreciation of the teachers development and recognize the extra effort to them. The consistent ability to recognize small victories was highly valuable to the teacher leaders in being able to see progress and was appreciated by the principal who was often dealing with complaints from staff due to changes in their commitment to planning and professional development. Beginnings start slowly. SLTLs found that when they could offer something of themselves back to their school that the teachers and principal valued this effort. Some offered free English language lessons to teachers, work on TOEFL and IELTS exams, and specialized workshops in an area that they were interested in for the teachers in their school. Others had expertise in strategic planning and assisted schools with inspections. Principals consistently requested guidelines about the lines of authority and communication between all of the governing authorities dealt with in being a part of the MAG school. It was not clear in the two years of this study and greater communication and transparency would have been helpful in supporting implementation. The teacher leaders had very clear lines of communication and reporting, but they were not always able to understand the complexities and political nature of the relationship between the Educational Zones, Ministry, and newly emerging Councils. With the lines of communication and authority not well defined, the researcher identifies this as having eroded support of the program particularly with principals who struggled with commitment to the change process. TMs and SLTLs, in the beginning, reported feeling overwhelmed with the enormity of what needed doing and they either wore themselves out or found that they had to choose the most urgent or promising issues first. In the second year teacher leaders and schools set goals to target what they perceived as most important or achievable in the time span available and focus on these issues, always with an eye on increasing student success. 5. What is the interplay between mechanistic and organic organizational characteristics with the introduction of teacher leadership' Teacher leadership is a formalized role in the Madares al Ghad schools, but is much more informal in most UAE schools, and is often unnamed. The future of the teacher leadership program is that the TMs and SLTLs will move out of the schools and the local teachers will continue to lead the collaborative planning and PD activities on their own. The tradition has been a hierarchical model with the principal operating as the building manager and supervisors coming into evaluate teachers and manage curriculum in a typically non-collaborative with teachers. The concepts of collaborative planning, shared responsibility in professional development, and professional communities of learners were foreign and mostly uncomfortable in the early days of the reform program. Significant progress in this area has developed over the two years. Having a line supervisor inform subordinates of what to do, or not respond to questions, encouraged the local teachers and principals to wait to be told to make a change, even when they knew that children would benefit from the change. Prior to the MAG program there was a clear understanding of leadership as a mechanistic and hierarchical set of rules and protocols that governed everything. A variety of practices and policies developed overtime that were not in the best interest of student development and achievement in assessment practices, scheduling, employment, curriculum and instruction, and are currently under review. Teacher leaders must honor the positional power of the Principal, his/her local expertise, and knowledge of the community, while working in a culturally appropriate way of support the nature of his/her work with teachers to develop leadership strengths and expertise among local teachers who would take responsibility in the future to lead collaborative planning groups, share expertise through mentoring new colleagues, team with colleagues to introduce new activities and strategies, and to give professional feedback to each other for continuous development. About half of the SLTLs and TMs struggled with their own comfort level in developing a more informal and organic structure to their roles with teachers and professional development. These teacher leaders often expressed frustration with not having “authority” to compel teachers to do what they wanted them to do or would express signs of competitiveness with the people they were mentoring and teaming or with each other. The more effort they applied to try to compel teachers to collaborate, participate, create a learner-centered environment, the greater the resistance grew with the local teachers. During this period we learned some hard lessons about establishing rigid structures too quickly or without the input of their local colleagues as this was perceived as trying to ‘control’ the local teachers and this was the purview of the principal. They also learned to not use phrases like in “in country X, we do . . .” Local teachers and principals bristled at this statement because they new this was not and wasn’t ever going to be country x. They also learned that expectations had to be clear and the person accountable for the outputs identified. The importance of a give and take relationship with local teachers made allowances for planning that allowed flexible ways of accomplishing necessary tasks and committing to collaboration and sharing the development of weekly plans. Allowing leadership roles to shift, particularly in the support of colleague teachers, for all by frequent observation and feedback with a focus on professional improvement, is one example of a more organic approach to leadership that worked very well and created leadership confidence. While there was some mechanistic structure (the teacher leader was responsible for providing the school’s lesson plans on a particular date for feedback from the academic program coordinator), the manner in which these plans were prepared for submission was different by school. Some schools produced them entirely collaboratively, sitting down and writing them as they talked through the learning outcomes, materials and activities, while others did some initial collaborative planning to talk through the generalities of chunks of instruction and then distributing the formatting and elaboration among colleagues, and others had initial discussions as a collaborative group and then took turns in preparing them each week. The hierarchical structure that is prevalent in the current Ministry system makes the concept of teacher leadership still suspect as it could encourage a more formal structure that would add another layer to bureaucracy when meaningful teacher leadership is a give and take operation with a variety of actors over time. There remains a perception that no one will function in these roles without a salary stipend or increased authority. By the end of the second year we were beginning to see some emergence of shared leadership roles between principals and teacher leaders related to curriculum issues and teacher development. It was also noted informally that teacher absenteeism was less in these schools as teachers felt more commitment to each other and the students. Principals and teachers in schools began to participate together in PD sessions and these principals held regular meetings with their staff to discuss issues of interest to the school. Conclusion When comparing the perceptions of important attributes between the teacher leaders’ perspective and the perspectives of colleague teachers and principals it becomes evident that they are not so different. The capacity to build relationships and develop a team spirit, making a commitment to the mission even during difficult times, and a knowledge base that allows the teacher leader to stay focused on the desired outcomes while drawing in local touches is very important. Teacher leaders in the UAE, whether bilingual or monolingual, local or foreign, all struggled with some of the issues of egalitarianism and seniority and principal support that was described in the literature review. Throughout the project, the teachers and principals who were not engaged were not so because they desired to work against the best interest of students. They were people who did not yet understand the urgency of educational reform in the UAE. Patience and respectfulness of others was extremely important in light of age differences that were present for some teacher leaders who were several years younger than the teachers they found themselves mentoring. As the new rounds of hiring and placement came and went the human resource component was better able to match mentors with schools and this became less of an issue in time. Staying focused on the vision and being willing to accept a nonlinear route towards the vision allowed for the flexibility of colleague approaches to problem solving, cultural influences, and a variety of stakeholders to embrace the innovations that are being implemented as part of their professional and parental responsibility. Change is difficult in a system that has found success with connections taking precedence over quality of output. The relationships between teachers and their supervisors or teachers and their principals had a greater impact on the evaluation for teachers and children than the degree of proficiency or achievement. Not wanting to disappoint also played a role in schools where assessment data was frequently adjusted so not to embarrass or pursue uncomfortable issues. Supervisors were evaluated by the number of errors they could find in their charges’ work rather than the impact of their assistance on the teachers’ ability to raise student achievement. When the focus is turned away from inputs and moved to outputs, the nature of work changes in the schools. When everything is measured against increasing student achievement and what is in the best interest of students, decisions about spending of budget, placement of new computers or air conditioners, decisions about when buildings get painted, and how much time is devoted to uninterrupted instructional time take on a whole new meaning. The schools in the Madares al Ghad program were beginning to make that shift of focus and the role of the teacher leaders were a part of the grass roots movement to recast their colleagues eyes in the new direction and focus professional commitments on student success. There was no way around the importance of having knowledge and skills in working with language learners. The interaction of the teacher leaders with students was very closely monitored by colleague teachers and principals and was measured by what they offered teachers and children. Most teachers were interested in learning new methods and working with students in different ways, but were very cautious about not losing control of their classrooms. Control (orderliness) was much easier in this environment, but students were rarely engaged in learning. The chaotic day in the middle schools is unproductive and inefficient. The lack of policy or practice that holds teachers accountable for their attendance makes substitution fall to anonymous faces with no link to the damage felt by students. There is no expectation that students receive instruction when teachers are absent, allowing children to miss significant learning when their teacher is chronically ill, pregnant, or feeling tired. Most schools have elaborate procedures of signing in and out, but there are no consequences meted for being in attendance or not. The randomness of the schedule further supports the dysfunctional travelling teacher syndrome who has no classroom to develop as a learning environment and no way to have materials at hand for regular and opportunistic learning activities and is relegated to using resources that can be carried around the school. Health and safety is frequently set behind for concerns about keeping order. It is not uncommon to find doors chained or barred, or all doors locked except a small exit through another office, to be sure that students did not walk out of the school without permission. The lack of commitment to engagement in supervision of student break time is evident in teachers who have grown to understand that the role of a teacher is to provide a lesson inside of the classroom. These issues were found more often in boys’ schools than girls’, but the meaning to students is that the life inside of the school wasn’t particularly desirable and the students within would prefer to be outside. Attempts to differentiate instruction has been particularly interesting to watch over the two years as teachers struggle with a shift of paradigm from one lesson to all to lessons that met the needs of a variety of students. There was such a pervasive culture of everyone getting the same treatment in the same way that it was difficult to actuate differentiation of any kind, whether for student or teacher. But this is a teacher methodology that builds from understanding developmentally appropriate practice and may have been attempted too early. Interestingly, the teachers had all had a variety of lectures and workshops on differentiation, but dismissed much of it because of their perception that it wasn’t fair for some students to do more questions than other students. There was also an expectation that special education teachers needed to take on this role and that regular classroom teachers didn’t have the time or capacity to engage with this function. They were uncomfortable with differentiated PD as well in the beginning because they thought teachers would feel singled out. Slow progress is being made, but the look at individual needs is still something that will take consistent effort over time. The value of multicultural learning communities is an important message of this study. There were many deeply rooted stereotypes from both sides in the beginning. The focus on relationship building is important at a variety of levels, but ultimately the relationships that develop do so for the increase of student achievement. What seemed to matter to both the foreign local teachers was getting along with others, respecting others, and collaborating together to do what was necessary for the benefit of students and the future of the UAE. For the Western expatriate teachers, there was much to learn about the rhythm of work, productive processes for getting things done, and the nature of time in the UAE context. The value of face-to-face interactions was a particular learning experience in working with Arab colleagues. Arab colleagues learned more about the cultures, dreams, and professional aspirations of the foreign teacher leaders, as well as their rhythm of work. There were even collegial exchanges about religion between the various cultures, all concluding that what’s on television doesn’t always mirror reality. References Benitez, M., Davidson, J., & Flaxman, L. (2009). Small schools, big ideas: The essential guide to successful school transformation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Berry, B., & Ginsberg, R. (1990). Creating lead teachers: From policy to implementation. Phi Delta Kappan, 71(8), 616-621. Burns, T & Stalker, G. (1994). The Management of Innovation. USA: Oxford University Press. Carnegie Corporation. (2007). Teacher quality most important school-based factor in boosting student achievement. Retrieved from www.carnegie.org/sub/news/house_test.html Charner-Laird, M., Kirkpatrick, C., Szczesiul, S., Gordon, P., & Watson, D. (2007). Cultures of Support' Attending to the needs of new teachers to promote growth and sustainability (pp. 31): Harvard Graduate School of Education. Conley, S. & Muncey, D. (1999). Teachers talk about teaming and leadership in their work. Theory into Practice, 38(1), 46. Danielson, C. (2008). The handbook for enhancing professional practice. Virginia: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development. Donaldson, M. L., Kirkpatrick, C. L., Marinell, W. H., Steele, J. L., Szczesiul, S. A., & Johnson, S. M. (2005). "Hot shots" and "Principal's pets": How colleagues influence second-stage teachers’ experience of differentiated roles, American Educational Research Association. Montreal, Canada. Johnson, SM, & The Project on the Next Generation of Teachers, 2004, Finders and keepers: Helping new teachers survive and thrive in our schools, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Johnson, S. & Donaldson, M. (2007) Overcoming the obstacles to leadership. Educational Leadership, 65(1), pp 8-13. Kruse, S.D., Louis, K.S. (1997), "Teachers’ reflective work: school based support structures", Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 33 No.3, pp.261-89. Labaree, D. (2006). Power, knowledge, and te rationalization of teaching: A genealogy of the movement to professionalize teaching. In Hartley, D. & Whitehead, M. (Ed), Teacher education: Major themes in education, Volume IV, Professionalization, social justice, and teacher education (pp 127-163). New York: Routledge. Lieberman, A., Saxl, E., & Miles, M. (1988). Teacher leadership: Ideology and practice. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), Building a Professional Culture in Schools. New York: Teachers College Press. ED 300 877  Munger, M., Johnson, S., Fiarman, S., Papey, & Quzilbash, R. (2009). Shared responsibility for teacher quality: How do principals respond to peer assistance and review' A paper presented at the annual meeting of the American education Research Association, San Diego, April 2009. http://www.gse.harvard.edu/~ngt/new_papers/MSM_AERA_2009.pdf Pounder, D. (1998). Teacher teams: Redesigning work for collaboration. In D. Pounder (Ed.) Restructuring schools for collaboration: Promises and pitfalls (pp. 65-88). Albany: SUNY Press. Smylie, M. (1994). Redesigning teachers work: Connections to the classroom. In Review of Research in Education, 20(1), pp.129-177. UNESCO. (2000). UNESCO EFA Report 2000 Assessments Country Reports: Part III Prospects. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/education/wef/countryreports/united_arab_emirates