Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 19



The article entitled Change theory: A force for school improvement was written by
Michael Fullan, in 2006. First of all, it is better to get to know the background of the author itself.
Michael Fullan who was born in 1940 is a Canadian educational researcher and former dean of
the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE). He is noted for his expertise on educational
reform, and has consulted to school districts, teacher groups, research institutes, and governments
(Wikipedia, 2015). Therefore, his model focused on "the human participants taking part in the
change process" (Ellsworth, 2001).
The author was highlighted three aspects which will be a force for school improvement
such as flawed change theories; theories of action with merit and followed by the prospects for
future use of change knowledge. Furthermore, Fullan found that change theory or change
knowledge can be very powerful in informing education reform strategies and good results if the
people involved who have a deep knowledge of the dynamics of how the factors in question
operate to get particular results.
Besides that, he also strongly believes that having a theory in use is not enough, of itself
but the people involved must also push to the next level, to make their theory of action explicit.
Fullans finding was supported by Smith, (2005) by saying that,
Theory and practice are not opposites or separate entities. Practice cannot be
lacking theory. Similarly, it is difficult to conceive of theory that is purely descriptive
and devoid of reference to purposeful action. In other words, practice is soaked in
theory. It is a constant process of theory making, and theory testing. Thus, it is in this
sense that we can begin to talk about practice as praxis which is informed action.
Clearly, it was stated that this article discussed about the what needed for reform to work,
what theories of action is appear and what prospects and barriers for using change knowledge in




To summarize this article, there are three parts to be explained briefly. As mentioned
earlier, the author mainly focused on change theory along with deep knowledge reformation of the
people such as leaders, teachers and students itself to moves into theory of action and achieves the
target results in literacy and numeracy. Therefore, this article highlighted lack of theory in use,
implementation of theories of action to change knowledge and get prepare for the future use of
change knowledge.


The flaw in the change theories was occurred in three particular section such as standardsbased district-wide reform initiatives; professional learning communities; and qualifications
frameworks that focus on the development and retention of quality leaders.
a) Standards-based district-wide reform initiatives
At first, the change theory leads district leaders to identify the world class
standards in literacy and mathematics; a system of assessments; development of
curriculum based on the standards and assessments; a serious investment in ongoing
professional development of school leaders and teachers. It assumes that, by aligning key
components and driving them forward with lots of pressure and support, good things will
happen, on a large scale. And then, if theories of action do not include the harder
questions, they are also bound to fail.
There was a case study from the Cross City Campaign for Urban School Reform
(2005) mainly conducted in Chicago, Milwaukee and Seattle which involved 150 schools
systems had the attention of political leaders at all levels of the system, focused on many
of the right things, such as literacy and numeracy. In addition, all of the systems used
obvious choice strategies, including concentration on assessment for learning data,
invested heavily in professional development, developed new leadership, and focused on
system wide change.



Moreover, schools in Seattle had $35 million in external funds and schools in

Milwaukee had extra resources and flexibility followed by schools in Chicago which had
multimillions. But, there was huge pressure from political leaders, publics and decision
makers to see growing success over five to ten years period of time. Unfortunately, the
result found from Cross City Campaign showed that the three districts schools were
unable to change and improve practice on a large scale. Nevertheless, it has change some
components such as academic standard especially used to change classroom instruction,
assessment and accountability system and professional development.
The author believed that main factor affecting failures to implement standardsbased system-wide reform in Chicago districts were lacks of strategy focus on what needs
to change in instructional practice especially, teachers did not articulate any deep changes
in teaching practice that may have been under way and the instructional goals were more
often articulated in terms of student outcomes or achievement levels. Here, missing again
is the black box of instructional practice in the classroom. Milwaukee districts revealed
that in the experience of schools principals and teachers, the net effect was that policies
and signals were non-specific regarding intended effects on classroom teaching and
learning. Thirdly, in Seattle districts, the report showed that at the school level, finding
teachers who understood the implications of standards for their teaching was difficult
makes the standards were rarely connected to changes in instruction.
b) Professional Learning Communities (PLCs)
PLCs involve developing communities of learners in which teachers and school
leaders work together to improve the learning conditions and results of students in given
schools. The writer found that if teachers are going to help students to develop the skills
and competencies of knowledge-creation, teachers need experience themselves in building
professional knowledge. In critiquing PLCs, Fullan was stated that the theory of action
underpinning PLCs is not deeply enough specified by those adopting PLCs, they will
again fall short of getting results. It is because they are seriously incomplete theories of
action because they do not get close to what happens in classrooms and school cultures.
There are three issues to be worried about the spread of PLCs.



Firstly, the danger and likelihood of superficiality PLCs. Secondly, people make

the mistake of treating PLCs as the latest innovation. Also, PLCs can be miscast as
changing the cultures of individual schools, rather than their deeper meaning. The author
presumed that without a deeper concern for transforming school cultures on a large scale,
the three problems can easily marginalize the value of PLCs as part of the movement to
transform school system cultures. In short, PLCs do not result in changing school culture.
c) Qualifications frameworks that focus on the development and retention of
quality leaders
The theory mentioned by author here is that, if can get the best possible people in
the classroom and in the principalship, the change in systems occurred easily. Similarly,
large urban districts having recognised the key role, leadership roles and professional
development of principals and prepare them for the positions in the district. Even though,
in all these cases the goal is to develop school leaders who can focus on instruction, coach
others and generally lead the transformation of schools can do some good but the change
theories of action have one fatal flaw. This individualistic bias is understandable whereby
to get a high quality principal in every school but nonetheless incomplete. Logically, the
writer said that any strategy of change must simultaneously focus on changing
individuals and the culture or system within which they work. When the leader acuminate
their theory of action it will become easier for them to judge what is a good, bad or
incomplete theories.
In order to apply theories of action with merit, Fullan posits, "seven core assumptions that
underpin our use of change knowledge. Here is a summary of those premises.

Premise 1: A focus on motivation - The first assumption is the backbone of all the
premises. In order for change theory to work the action plan must motivate people. If
people are not motivated then it will be impossible to get results. Moral purpose, capacity,
resources, leadership support and identity and so on are key aspects of motivation.



Premise 2: Capacity building, with a focus on results - Fullan also describes capacity
building as, "any strategy that increases the collective effectiveness of a group to raise the
bar and close the gap of student learning". In a sense he is stating that as educators learn
strategies that help them get results they will be internally motivated to continuing
improving their practice. To build student capacity in learning specifically to get results,
knowledge and competencies; resources and motivation play an important roles. Here, the
author personally believe that, capacity building came first to change theory and follow up
by judgement because capacity building is the most motivational aspects.

Premise 3: Learning in context - The third premise for reform involves providing
educators with opportunities to learn in context. As teachers are building this capacity,
their experiences and learning must be within their own context. The writer identified that
most of the teachers have no opportunity to engage in sustained learning about their
practice in the classroom settings especially being observed by their working colleagues or
other teachers from different schools. The theory of action comes true when the
development of systematic knowledge about and related to, large-scale instructional
improvement requires a change in the prevailing culture in schools. Cultures do not
change by mandate; they change by the specific displacement of existing norms or
modelling the new values and behaviour that being expected. Learning in context do
improve on this ways.

Premise 4: Changing context - Fullan also asserts that theories of action must also have
the ability to change the larger context in which educators work either positively or
negatively. The positive changes are the larger infrastructure must change if success is to
occur which enhances capacity building among schools and district to learn from each
other and being motivating. The negative forces of getting at context concerns are by
proactively addressing the distractors leads to continuous improvement such as doing
collective bargaining conflicts or strikes; addressing managerial issues and held an
unnecessary bureaucracy.



Premise 5: A bias for reflective action - In order for change to happen leaders must be
able to stop and reflect on their action. There are several aspects to be concerns with
reflective action premise. First, shared vision and ownership is more an outcome of a
quality process than it is a precondition because it causes one to act differently in order to
create ownership. Second is, related to behaviour changes to a certain extent before beliefs
whereby do-and-dont change actions that derive from this knowledge. Thirdly, the size
and prettiness of the planning document is inversely related to the amount and quality of
action, and in turn to the impact on student learning. Furthermore, Fullan pinpointed that
need to dig a bit deeper to understand the theory of action underpinning the bias for
reflective action because it is a crucial part. As quoted by Fullan, Dewey states it this way,
"it is not that we learn by doing but that we learn by thinking about what we are doing.
Rationally, the writer concluded that people learn best through doing, reflection, inquiry,
evidence, more doing and so on.

Premise 6: Tri-level engagement - School and community; district; and state are three
essential levels for system reforms that Fullan is referring to in his sixth premise. Fullan is
not advocating that all three levels must be aligned, but that strategies are pursued in
which mutual interaction and influences are promoted across all three levels by fostering
permeable connectivity.

Premise 7: Persistence and flexibility in staying the course - Change is difficult. Fullan
concludes his premises by noting that "a strong resolve is necessary to stay the course"
because there will be bumpy roads. Leaders of change will need to be persistent and
flexible. To change knowledge using these seven premises, the people must understand
their thinking deeply rather than just knowing the concrete aspects. Fullans also found
that when people understand the thinking they automatically get the strategies right and
self-correct as they experience it unfolding but if they dont understand the thinking they
are more likely to use even the best strategies superficially.
By referring to these seven premises, the author alter the theory of action by doing two

surveys which is district-wide reform and state-wide reform as below.




District wide reform

State wide reform

Area: York Region District School with diverse

population (100 language spoken)

Area: Ontario

Sample: 140 elementary schools and 27






elementary schools

secondary schools.

Focus: Literacy and Numeracy

Focus : Literacy Collaborative (LC)

Objective: To influence the entire state

Objective: To shape and reshape district-wide

using change knowledge

continuous improvement.

8 key components: a guiding coalition in

Applied premise: Capacity building

communication; peace and stability and

5 Key components: - articulated vision and

distracters; negotiating targets; capacity

commitment; system-wide comprehensive plan;

building to get targets; financial growth;

using data to inform; building capacity of

positive pressure and connecting to the

leaders and teachers, developing PLCs at all

relation with key complementary sections.

Applied premises: All the seven premises

Results: Most of the schools in York Region

Results: Most of the schools are getting

District increased by a full 5 per cent on the

average in literacy, across its 140 elementary

improve results following a previous

schools. High schools also did well.

period of flat-lined performance.

Weakness: 27 elementary schools and six high

Conclusion: Using theory of action

schools that were still underperforming and

designed an intensive capacity building

change knowledge for school and system


improvement. Change knowledge does

Solution: 33 lower-performing schools were put

in effort to build capacity first in order to get
-Theory of action reflected in York Region
-leaders have taken long term goal.
-people stay of course, persistence but
- people expect result not overnight but steady.






There are three main inhibiting factors were identified for change knowledge in future

such as the use of change knowledge does not represent a quick fix, which is what many
politicians seek. And secondly, not only is the knowledge difficult to grasp, but many leaders must
possess it together for its use to spread and steady. Lastly, it does represent deep cultural change,
which many people resist, tacitly or otherwise. However, there are three strengths that also going
to the increased use of change knowledge.
First, people tried so many years but they are still not getting anywhere. It is because
people know that what is being done does not work. This makes them generally more receptive to
alternative strategies, if they can become clear and promising. Second, change knowledge and its
specific strategic manifestations are indeed becoming more and more clear. How and why it
works is more evident. Using change knowledge, people able to get discernible, valuable results
and within one election period, so to speak. Third is, system thinkers in action who are actively
using and refining the change knowledge. The reason that this is so crucial is built into our seven
premises. The change knowledge is not a disembodied set of facts, but deeply applied
phenomenon in the minds of people. Moreover, for this knowledge to have an effect, it must be
actively shared by people engaged in using the knowledge.
To summarize this article, the writer suggested that route to achieving such a critical mass
is not to wait for it to happen but to be among those promoting its use, even if those around us
seem disinterested or against it. Large-scale successful reform held in a thousand small ways
during the journey.



Every leader is a change leader but we find ourselves stymied by a vexing organizational
complexity and inertia, with our best efforts lacking the results we seek. Let's ask ourselves: Do
we understand how complex organizations change improves reform? Do we have a sound theory
of change that informs our leadership? Can we articulate how our leadership drives change in our
schools and districts?
In this article Michael Fullans provides some sobering results from the field on several
common approaches to educational improvement that lack this understanding and fail. He then
outlines a theory of organizational change for effectively grounding our leadership of school and
district improvement.
In addition, Michael Fullan ideas are supported by Bennett , (2015) as below,
Surveying Fullans writings and line of products, it is next to impossible to
identify where he actually stands on the goals and purpose of school reform. Ten
years ago, he lauded George W. Bushs No Child Left Behind agenda, while
expressing reservations about the too narrow tests, short time lines, little capacity
building, and punitive strategy. Since then, he has been serving on the Advisory
Board of Microsofts Partners in Learning and advocating large-scale system change
that produces real results.
Again Bennett was added that conservative school reformers remain as skeptical as teacher
unionists about Fullans real motives, strategies, and objectives. Michael Fullan Enterprises Inc.
rides the sharp edge of the North American school reform divide. A big feature of our work, he
now says, is to play down accountability in favor of capacity building, and then re-enter
accountability later.
Regarding the flawed in standards-based reform initiatives, Ross, (2007) also gives his reasonable
comments such as below,
The history of school reform illustrates that it is much easier to change
educational policies than it is to change the conditions of teaching and learning in
schools. Despite many reform efforts in this century, the major features of school
remain largely unchanged. The primary reason for the stability of schools in the face
of repeated reform efforts is the failure of reformers to consider the ecology of



schools-that is, the multiple and inter-connected systems of curriculum, pedagogy,

evaluation, as well as the organizational structures, perceived purposes, and
contexts in which schools exist. Standards-based reforms offer simplistic solutions to
a complex problem. These efforts may be "feel-good" exercises that raise the selfesteem of politicians and policy elites, but standards talk does little to lead us beyond
the gimmicks and fads of previous educational reform efforts.
About PLCs, it is more likely, however, that professional learning communities will be
criticized or debated when they are poorly implemented or facilitated, if they become
disorganized and unfocused, if they are perceived as a burdensome or time-consuming obligation,
or when teachers have negative experiences within their groups (Abbott, 2014). Like any schoolimprovement strategy or program, the quality of the design and execution will typically determine
the results achieved. If meetings are poorly facilitated and conversations lapse into complaints
about policies or personalities, or if educators fail to turn group learning into actual changes in
instructional techniques, professional learning communities are less likely to be successful.
In addition, Abbott was identified that administrators and teachers may encounter any
number of some potential challenges when implementing professional learning communities such
as, a lack of support from the superintendent, principal, or other school leaders could lead to an
inadequate investment of time, attention, and resources; inadequate training for group facilitators
could produce ineffective facilitation, disorganized meetings, and an erosion of confidence in the
process; a lack of clear, explicit goals for group work can lead to unfocused conversations,
misspent time, and general confusion about the purpose of the groups; A dysfunctional school
contribute to tensions, conflicts, factions, and other issues that undermine the potential benefits of
professional learning communities and a lack of observable, measurable progress or studentachievement gains can erode support, motivation, and enthusiasm for the process.
When discussing about the qualification frameworks, Fullan stated that schools leaders
given incentives, professional development courses to attract and retain them to the teaching
profession and leadership positions. Cromley, Kerr, Meister and etc. (2005) were found that if
frustrated school administrators in high-need areas abandon their posts, the shortages will
continue. Moreover, when teachers scan the administrative environment and observe poor
working conditions and less pay, these potential candidates will opt out of the administrative
career ladder, thereby exacerbating the shortage of applicants.



Fink and Resnick (2001) also examined school districts' efforts to develop principals into
instructional leaders who could achieve a large-scale turnaround in literacy and numeracy (Fullan,
2007). They described some core strategies for developing the role of the principal as
instructional leader, including five mutually reinforcing sets of strategic activities: nested learning
communities, principal institutes, and leadership for instruction, peer learning, and individual
Some researchers were agreed with ideas of Michael Fullans seven premises. Premise one
that focus on motivation get welcome by some researchers. According to Dixon, (2008), many
psychological theories identify motivation as an important behavioural determinant. Moreover,
students are likely to be intrinsically motivated to change knowledge if they attribute their
educational results to factors under their own control, also known as autonomy or locus of control
and believe they have the skills to be effective agents in reaching their desired goals (Wikipedia,
Fullans highlighted that moral value, resources, leadership support are keys for
motivation. Positively, it was stated in Herzbergs Theory, where there are two groups of factors
affect motivation at work. Intrinsic motivators (relate to Maslows higher needs) such as
achievement and recognition can positively influence motivation, while extrinsic hygiene factors
(relate to Maslows lower needs) such as pay and working conditions can negatively impact
motivation if they are not satisfactory. Motivators improve motivation but do not eliminate
dissatisfaction. Most of the proponents such as Maslow, Herzberg and McClelland believe that
Leaders are motivated when they expect that their actions are likely to achieve a
goal or receive a reward that satisfies their needs. Motivating students and teachers
is about influencing them to move in the direction set by organizational leader, and
creating the conditions where they want to persist in applying effort to achieve
educational goals.(Wikipedia, 2015)
Besides that, Dixon (2009) also described that some theories focus on the cognitive
antecedents of motivation such as knowledge, attitudes and beliefs. The Theory of Reasoned
Action (TRA) suggests that beliefs about the outcomes of the behavior and the value they attach
to these outcomes are also important. In addition, TRA recognizes that subjective norms are also
important motivating factors for behavioral and knowledge changes.



Besides that, Fullans premise three which described about learning in context is also
successfully implemented in most of the schools. And, the results showed that there are an
improvement in students learning and work environment in schools. As evidence, Parchmann,
Broman and etc. (2015) were found that,
At the school level, context-based learning offers insights into the different
fields of application of chemistry to encourage students to be open-minded on their
daily lives but also to think about future careers and on-going learning opportunities
of interest. At the university level, CBL connects the basic topic areas of chemistry to
different study courses, interests, and applications. This approach is of particular
interest in lectures with a variety of different students at the beginning of their
Furthermore, the key to successful cultural change in schools that lies at the heart of this
new learning organization paradigm is concerned with the aspirations and emotions of the human
beings who make up the system. The model of cultural change in schools gave serious
consideration to the impacts of emotions on the cultural change processes of students and teachers.
(Mcleod, 2005).
Fullans also discussed well about his premise four where essentially as groups of teachers
work seemingly autonomously with their colleagues to make positive changes within their
contexts, changes also happen on the macro-level. But, the changes should be deliberately sought
rather than coincidental. As suggested by the Latin contexture, "to weave together, the
interrelatedness and interaction of the school ecology and culture create the context in which
school improvement efforts are undertaken (Dimock, 2007).
As evidence, the research conducted by Parsell and Bligh (2005), showed that the
pressure for changes to the organization, content and delivery of both undergraduate and
postgraduate medical education has greatly increased in the last two decades. The experience of
innovative medical schools, the emergence of learner-centered teaching methods and the
implications of health-care reforms in North America and Britain are major factors influencing
calls for change.
However, Fullans also mentioned that there are some negative aspects which lead toward
change context in schools. His opinion is supported by some researchers. Parents and the voting
public frown on labor conflict and teachers strikes for good reason, not least among them the



disruptions for family and schooling that are caused by even temporary school closings (Hess and
West, 2006). Yet the publics aversion to conflict, combined with the political heft of teacher
unions, can make school boards unduly deferential to union demands. Collective bargaining
agreements also typically restrict the amount of time that teachers may be required to spend
working with students, the number of students a teacher will instruct, and the number of lesson
plans a teacher will prepare.
Moreover, Fullans discussion of Dewey there is an idea that it is not that we learn by
doing but that we learn by thinking about what we are doing,. Reflection is everything and this
is backed up by research. Simply doing something is not enough, we have to think about it and
reflect on our learning. And this is true for teachers and adults as we learn to work in a new and
changed paradigm just as much as it is for students learning new content in a school setting. This
is proven by Stefano, Gino and etc. (2015) on their research entitled Learning by thinking:
Overcoming the Bias for Action through Reflection where their results showed that if individuals
themselves are given the choice to either reflect or practice, they prefer to allocate their time to
gaining more experience with the task to the detriment of their learning.
Furthermore, in Schns Model of Reflection, Schons also describes this as the capacity
of professionals to consciously think about what they are doing while they are doing it (Edwards,
2007). As a pre-requisite for reflection-in-action, he envisaged the competence of teachers and the
artistry (or creativity) in using this competence to be already embedded in skilled practice. This is
necessary to enable the teacher to think on their feet in response to an unusual event and take
appropriate action either from the repertoire of skilled knowledge-in-action or by inventing a
new solution.
On the other hand, as said by Fullan in premise six where tri-level engagement is essential
for system reform was against by Morrison (2013) by arguing that change has to take place on all
levels and have support at all levels: individual, team, school, district, and state which five levels,
not three is. If the district and state dont support change, it doesnt matter how great it is at a
school or team-level, it will be short-lived. However, Fullans said that he offers the concept of
tri-level development as the best strategy y to increase the capacity of the larger system to build
and sustain professional learning communities. In the absence of tri level participation,




professional learning communities on any scale will be impossible to achieve. Professional

learning communities writ large is everyones agenda across the tri-levels (Fullan, 2005).

Other than that, NEZ (2008) also reported that parent, family, and community involvement
means different things to different people. A research-based framework developed by Joyce
Epstein of Johns Hopkins University, describes six types of involvement which lead change in
schools such as parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision making, and
collaborating with the community that offer a broad range of school, family, and community
activities that can engage all parties and help meet student needs. Successful school-parent
community partnerships are not stand-alone projects or add-on programs but are well integrated
with the schools overall mission and goals. For lasting change to happen it has to continue with
applied pressure and support from all levels to keep it going. Flexibility is important because
without it, much measure would seem draconian and break under their own brittleness.
Additionally, when a teacher can best motivate a child to believe she can do anything if
she tries and puts forth her best efforts. Resilience is the ongoing process of building a child's
motivation and drive to excel when met with difficult or challenging circumstances. It is that
intrinsic force which guides a child's thinking and produces a "can do" attitude. Resilience is best
integrated through building positive communities within classrooms to develop students' talents
and interests early. By setting clear goals and expectations for all students, teachers can provide
them with the tools and means to be successful. With the changing facets in education, we must
stay the course and remember teachers have the most important task there is: to flourish and
nurture the next generation. It was clearly described by the author in his premise seven where
persistence and flexibility is necessary to stay in course.

Again the author applied the suggested seven premises into district-wide reform and statewide reform in selected schools in York and Ontario. The result showed that there is a constant
interaction, action research and capacity building through formal monthly sessions and many
many learning in context interactions carried our daily by school and district leaders within and
across schools. Furthermore, most of the schools getting improved results in literacy and
numeracy are following a previous of flat-lined performance. However, there are still 27



elementary schools and six high schools were underperforming. So, here the leaders are careful
not to judge but to practice capacity building in the 33 lower-performing schools. Here, Fullans
theory in action translates into specific and inter-related strategy that gets results.
Even though the seven premises integrated into theory in actions which lead to school
system improvement, Fullan also felt that there are three inhibiting factor for knowledge transfer
in future such as use of change knowledge represent quick fix by politicians, knowledge is
difficult to grasp and deep cultural change resisted by people. According to Daggett, (2014)
successful schools create a culture that supports improvement before they attempt to implement
change. Without a strong cultural foundation, the proposed solution can be mistaken for the
Therefore, to increase the use the change knowledge in future the author suggested three
ways such as makes people more receptive to alternative strategies; specific strategic
manifestation are indeed becoming more and more clear and lastly, have more system thinkers in
action to refining the knowledge. However, Wikipedia (2016) stated that the inhibiting factors to
change knowledge used in future are such as the inability to recognize & articulate "compiled" or
highly intuitive competencies in tacit knowledge idea, geography or distance, limitations of
Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), lack of a shared/super ordinate social
identity, motivational issues, lack of trust, misconceptions and others.
Fullan also suggested that it is better to have more system thinkers in action to use and
refine the knowledge in future. Leadership development should not just be about qualifications
frameworks or about diffuse experiences in networks but they need deliberate, focused learning in
context around significant problems that led by systems thinkers in action who model and mentor
job-embedded learning in expanded contexts (Fullan, 2006).
When discuss about future use of change knowledge, Fullans indirectly reminding about
21 century learning. According to NZCER, (2015)
If schools are to prepare young people for successful lives in the 21st century,
they need to do things differently. It was also a time in which there were big changes
in knowledge in how people see knowledge and how they use it. 21st century schools
need to develop different skills and dispositions from those that were required in the
20th century. A new mindset is required, one that can take account of the new
meaning of knowledge or change knowledge.




The general consensus was that systemic change is difficult if not impossible as every
scenario is different, schools are made up of different student populations within a school region,
and perhaps, while individual educators are changing their classrooms, there is still too much
individual resistance for school cultural change and thus systemic change (Burkholder, 2013).
To conclude in this article Fullan draws on his acclaimed work in bringing about largescale and substantial change in education reform in both public school systems and universities,
as well as engaging in major change initiatives internationally using seven premises to lead theory
in action. In this article, Fullans focused more on school leaders and teachers in order to bring
changes in theory for school continuous improvement especially in literacy and numeracy. He
strongly believes that motivation is the main forces to bring out theories of action with merit.
Most of the ideas proposed by the author were agreed by other researchers and applicable to
improve school system. Therefore, it can be said that change theory is a booster for schools
continuous improvement and achievement.

Abbott, S. (2014). Hidden curriculum: The glossary of education reform. Retrieved on February
15, 2016, from
Ann, J. (2007). Primary trainees reflection in action. Edwards School of Education, University
of Southampton. Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from
Bennett, P. (2015). Ontarios leading school system mirage. Retrieved on February 15, 2016,






Burkholder, L. (2013). Review of Change theory by Michael Fullan. Retrieved on February 15,
2016, from http://lindauoit.weebly.com/uploads/2/6/6/4/26641328/seminarreport.pdf
Dixon, A. (2008). Motivation and confidence. Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from
Dimock, V.B. (2007). Creating a Context for Change. Services for School Improvement, 2(2). .
Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from http://www.sedl.org/change/issues
Fullan, M. (2005). Education Analyst: Society for the Advancement of Excellence in Education.
Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from
Fullan, M. (2006). Change theory: A Force for school improvement. Retrieved on February 15,
2016, from www.oum.edu.my
Fullan, M. (2006). Systems thinkers in action: Moving beyond the standards. Retrieved on
February 15, 2016, from http://www.michaelfullan.ca/media/13396063090.pdf
Fullan, M. (2011). Choosing the wrong drivers for whole system reform. Leading Educational
Thinking and Practice. Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from http://edsource.org/wpcontent/uploads/Fullan-Wrong-Drivers1.pdf
Hess, F. & Martin R. West, M.R. (2006). Strike Phobia: School boards need to drive a harder
bargain. Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from
Lynn M. Cromley, L.M., Kerr,M.M., Meister, D.G., Patterson , D.L. & Woods ,G.J. (2005).
A Qualified Leader for Every Pennsylvania School. The Pennsylvania Education
Policy Fellowship Program. Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from




Martinez, J.G., Torregrosa, E.S., Parchmann, I., Broman, K., Busker, M. & Rudnik , J.
(2015). Context-Based Teaching and Learning on School and University Level.
Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from
Mcleod, R.J. (2005). A model for cultural change in schools: An evaluation of some new learning
organization methodologies. Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from
Minor, D. (2013). Maintaining Resilience in Education. Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from
Morrison, R.L. (2013). Change forces: Educational Development Management. Retrieved on
February 15, 2016, from

NZCER, (2015). Shifting to 21 century learning.

Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from

NEA (2008). Parental involvement towards continous improvement in schools. Retrieved on
February 15, 2016, from
Parsell, G.J.& Bligh, J. (2007). The changing context of undergraduate medical education.
Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from
Pratto, M.M. & Horenstein, L.B. (2010). Book Review: The Six Secrets of Change: What the
Best Leaders Do to Help Their Organizations Survive and Thrive. Florida Journal of
Educational Administration and Policy, 4(1), 147-155. Retrieved on February 15, 2016,
from http://education.ufl.edu/fjeap/files/2011/01/FJEAP_2010-Book_Review.pdf




Ross, E.W. (2007). Grading School Reform: Complex Problem Defies Standards-Based Reform.
Press and Sun-Bulletin Binghamton, NY. Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from

Schrift, R.Y. & Parker, J.R. (2014). Staying the Course: The Option of Doing Nothing and Its
Impact on Post choice Persistence. Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from
Smith, G. (2005). Technology and the problems of change. Retrieved on February 15, 2016, from
Stefano, G.D., Gino, F., Pisano, G.P. & Staats, B.R. (2015). Learning by Thinking: Overcoming
the Bias for Action through Reflection. Harvard Business School. Retrieved on February 15,
2016, from