View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Principal Leadership and Proximal Processes in Creating STEM Ecosystems: An Australian Case Study

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Principal Leadership and Proximal Processes in Creating STEM Ecosystems: An Australian Case Study
Language: English
Authors: Garry Falloon, Michael Stevenson, Vesife Hatisaru, Derek Hurrell, Marie Boden
Source: Leadership and Policy in Schools. 2024 23(2):180-202.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 23
Publication Date: 2024
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Secondary Education
Descriptors: STEM Education, Ecology, Secondary School Students, Females, Principals, Instructional Leadership, Foreign Countries, Interaction, Teacher Attitudes, Student Attitudes, Administrator Attitudes, Educational Environment, Sustainability, Single Sex Schools
Geographic Terms: Australia
DOI: 10.1080/15700763.2022.2094810
ISSN: 1570-0763
1744-5043
Abstract: Improving learning through interdisciplinary STEM has come to the forefront of educational discourse, as schools attempt to attract more students to STEM study. However, little is known about how successful STEM curricula are established and sustained. This study details the establishment and sustaining of an exemplary STEM learning ecosystem in a girls' comprehensive secondary college. Results highlight exemplary STEM ecosystems demand multidimensional principal leadership, that over time, can develop effective generative proximal processes and levels of relational trust needed to implement the disruptive reforms associated with establishing interdisciplinary STEM curricula. Findings identify principals' ongoing engagement in the environment and dispositional and developmental assets are critical to successful school change supporting STEM innovation.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2024
Accession Number: EJ1426601
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGM_qWkKWNPWi-SJ9Xq0rgTAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDKh1V6HNb39ljqkmAQIBEICBmh4vhF9Fq-VjgpubxHzmD1LoAGbs9Yfrn0IcAqNO9xA0AOvSwu3n-8Qe1MI-l7N6bX2kSdgYZwfstwcUhrDzmSIMqCX3uYEr882qMMVnUQ34G40nrTTJqI4SCUB7hKUCwvz4lu5bMk3vrItBqCDoTutWOrqG8ZtfD8WnN4Wsb6ArW6A-bXBc02kMsmsYEQF6KYPU6zhgJZag3s0=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0177520638;o8o01apr.24;2024May30.07:58;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0177520638-1">Principal Leadership and Proximal Processes in Creating STEM Ecosystems: An Australian Case Study </title> <sbt id="AN0177520638-2">Introduction</sbt> <p>Improving learning through interdisciplinary STEM has come to the forefront of educational discourse, as schools attempt to attract more students to STEM study. However, little is known about how successful STEM curricula are established and sustained. This study details the establishment and sustaining of an exemplary STEM learning ecosystem in a girls' comprehensive secondary college. Results highlight exemplary STEM ecosystems demand multidimensional principal leadership, that over time, can develop effective generative proximal processes and levels of relational trust needed to implement the disruptive reforms associated with establishing interdisciplinary STEM curricula. Findings identify principals' ongoing engagement in the environment and dispositional and developmental assets are critical to successful school change supporting STEM innovation.</p> <p>The Principals as STEM Leaders (PASL) project is an Australian government-funded principal professional learning and research initiative, with the stated goal of "identify(ing) the leadership and teaching practices in STEM that are currently working well, with the aim of rolling these practices out more broadly in our classrooms" (Birmingham, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref1">3</reflink>], p. 2). Part of building the evidence base informing the design of PASL was the development of in-depth case studies of schools identified as exhibiting exemplary approaches to STEM education, to learn how such programmes were established and sustained. This article reports findings from one of these studies, and provides unique and detailed insights into the complex processes and roles of key individuals, that contributed to the college's identification by education system authorities as a high-performing STEM ecosystem. This work is significant, as while other studies detail and describe particular STEM initiatives or innovations, these are often presented as one-off or "showcase" examples (e.g., Bicer & Capraro, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>]; Kitchen et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref3">21</reflink>]). Generally, few details are available about how these align with foundational understandings of the purposes and valued outcomes from STEM held by principals, teachers, and students; or how they represent STEM programmes founded on principles of inclusion and equity. This knowledge is important, as understanding the interaction between key individuals – and their resultant actions and outcomes, is critical to establishing inclusive and enduring STEM environments in any educational context, thereby potentially helping to address the challenges detailed earlier.</p> <p>This study is an in depth exploration of how such an environment can, over time and through developing effective <emph>proximal processes</emph>, be established in a non-specialized girls' college. Bronfenbrenner and Morris's ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref4">6</reflink>]) concept of the <emph>proximal processes</emph> between individuals and their environment being the most influential factor affecting development, served as the theoretical reference for the study. It also applied Jolly et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref5">19</reflink>]) Engagement, Capacity, and Continuity (ECC) Trilogy framework (see Figure 1) as an analysis tool, to evaluate data from multiple sources to understand how the beliefs, behaviors, and actions of individuals played out, in building the college's STEM ecosystem.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. The ECC trilogy model (from Jolly et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref6">19</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-3">Research Aim and Questions</hd> <p>Data were collected and analyzed responding to these questions:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> How did proximal processes between individuals contribute to establishing and sustaining the STEM ecosystem in this college?</item> <p></p> <item> What outcomes did these result in that promoted engagement, capacity-building, and continuity within the ecosystem?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0177520638-4">Background</hd> <p>Since the early 1990s, the acronym STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) has become commonplace in discourse associated with teaching and learning in the individual STEM subjects, and collectively using interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary approaches (English, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref7">12</reflink>]; Falloon et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref8">14</reflink>]). Arguments for improving STEM in schools have been linked to economic outcomes through addressing the STEM workforce "pipeline challenge" (Van der Hurk et al., [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref9">32</reflink>]), building knowledge and skills needed to solve ill-structured or wicked current and future problems, and promoting personal competencies such as initiative, communication, collaboration, leadership, and critical and creative thinking (e.g., Yoon et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref10">36</reflink>]). Indeed, in Australia the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training, and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) as early as 2008, alerted that to remain globally competitive, the Australian education system must promote skills such as teamwork, social communication, transdisciplinary problem solving and digital and information literacy, integral to the core curriculum. These skills are well-recognized and documented outcomes from interdisciplinary STEM, and are often associated with so-called <emph>21<sups>st</sups> Century competencies</emph> (e.g., Stehle & Peters-Burton, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref11">28</reflink>]). However, building school environments capable of sustaining high quality, interdisciplinary STEM learning for all students is a challenging process, usually requiring significant policy, systemic, ideological, and cultural change (Stigler & Hiebert, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref12">29</reflink>]). According to Kier and Blanchard ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref13">20</reflink>]), they must also engage students and consider their "cultural assets" (p. 173) such as the norms, values, dispositions, and interests they bring to the environment, if they are to be meaningful contributors to shaping it.</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-5">STEM Learning Ecosystems</hd> <p>The merit of establishing schools as comprehensive learning ecosystems is well established theoretically and empirically (e.g., Erdogan & Stuessy, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref14">13</reflink>]; Hannon et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref15">16</reflink>]). Given the increasing importance of STEM for achieving future economic, social and personal goals, research attention is turning to how these can be established in a way that effectively engages the talents, resources, and collective efficacy within schools and their local communities. Furthermore, much attention is being paid to the importance of leadership in this process. This particularly focuses on the role of the principal as both an advocate for, and <emph>broker</emph> of STEM learning (Allen et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref16">1</reflink>]), and in leading the formation of a school climate to create a <emph>STEM culture</emph> exemplified by high expectations of staff and students, and inclusive, relevant, and engaging STEM curriculum. According to Marshall ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref17">24</reflink>]), engaged and visionary leadership is essential for establishing STEM ecosystems that "ignite and nurture inquiry, innovation and ethical leadership by fostering self-directed inquiry and research, problem-based learning and experimentation ... (and building) knowledge structures and ways of constructing and verifying knowledge within each STEM domain, through student-directed and mentor-supported investigation" (p. 52).</p> <p>Erdogan and Stuessy ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref18">13</reflink>]) build on Marshall's work, through a theoretical analysis of how individuals and activities within ecosystems interact, and contribute to creating environments that optimize STEM learning for all students. They identify specific qualities of STEM ecosystems that are critical to their success. These focus on students, who, according to Erdogan and Stuessy ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref19">13</reflink>]), the ecosystem must support by fostering curiosity, creativity, and risk taking, as well as investigative skills including the capacity to "pose questions, make observations, collect data, interpret data (and) test conclusions" (p. 86). Teachers are important subject-matter-experts in STEM ecosystems, and fundamental to designing curriculum and enacting appropriate pedagogies that will engage students, supporting quality knowledge and skill development. Furthermore, interactions between school and community leaders – including principals and teachers, are central to forming "a unique school culture around meaningful (STEM) goals and shared values" (Erdogan & Stuessy, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref20">13</reflink>], p. 87). In this respect, Erdogan and Stuessy ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref21">13</reflink>]) emphasize the effectiveness of distributed approaches to leadership of STEM, commenting that teachers should be given as many opportunities as possible to engage in decision-making and assume responsibility for STEM initiatives. They also point out that principals, teachers, and community participants have an important function to serve as role models, mentors, and advocates for STEM. In their ecosystem model, those engaged in STEM curriculum may reside both within and external to the school, as authentic programmes can involve collaborations with STEM-related business, industry, or community groups.</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-6">Proximal Processes</hd> <p>In this study, Bronfenbrenner and Morris's ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref22">6</reflink>]) notion of the <emph>proximal processes</emph> generated between people as being central to development, was valuable for identifying the interactions, dispositions, and developmental assets of individuals, that contributed to building and sustaining this college's STEM ecosystem. The reciprocal nature of interaction between individuals and others in their environment was noted by Bronfenbrenner ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref23">4</reflink>]), in his discussion of the influence of environment on developmental processes. He argued that outcomes resulted more from "complex reciprocal interaction between an active, evolving biopsychological human organism and the persons, objects, and symbols in its immediate external environment" (p. 620) than originally posited contextual and societal factors. He termed these interactions <emph>proximal processes</emph>, which are "not limited to interpersonal interactions, (but) can also involve interactions with objects and symbols" (Bronfenbrenner, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref24">5</reflink>], p. 6). According to Bronfenbrenner and Morris ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref25">6</reflink>]), for beneficial proximal processes to occur a person must engage in an activity, the activity must take place on a regular basis over an extended period of time and become increasingly complex, and they must involve reciprocal interaction with people, objects, and/or symbols.</p> <p>Depending on the dispositions of individuals, proximal processes can be generative or disruptive in nature – that is, they can contribute to or inhibit development. Individuals with a tendency to persist and engage in increasingly complex activities over extended periods, and/or who hold high levels of self-efficacy or metacognitive-reflective capacities (for example), are likely to sustain generative proximal processes. Conversely, those who display dispositions such as inattentiveness, disinterest, or disengagement, are more likely to disrupt or inhibit proximal processes (Marynowski et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref26">25</reflink>]). Generative proximal processes are also supported by what Marynowski et al. ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref27">25</reflink>]) term <emph>developmental assets</emph> that "take the form of ability, knowledge, skill and experience, that as they evolve over most of the life course, extend the domains in which proximal processes can do their constructive work" (p. 124).</p> <p>Recent studies have adapted Bronfenbrenner's concept of proximal processes to help understand developments in educational settings, including the nature and impact of school assessment policy change (e.g., Marynowski et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref28">25</reflink>]) the dynamics of classroom environments and their effects on students (e.g., Wallace & Chhuon, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref29">33</reflink>]) and high-school dropout rates (Dupéré et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref30">11</reflink>]). Examining the proximal processes between principals, teachers, students, and often parents can help build understanding of how schools evolve as learning environments, and how different individuals can facilitate or inhibit development initiatives.</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-7">Analysis Framework</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0177520638-8">The Engagement, Capacity, and Continuity (ECC) Trilogy Framework</hd> <p>Jolly et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref31">19</reflink>]) ECC Trilogy framework was used to analyze data from this study. It was selected as it was specifically developed from a comprehensive review of research designed to promote student success in STEM. Studies adopting the framework to help determine "the interconnected factors which are essential to the persistence of students in the STEM disciplines" (Stukes et al., [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref32">30</reflink>], p. 1) have been undertaken with university computer science students (e.g., Stukes et al., [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref33">30</reflink>]); in high schools to understand reasons for declining student engagement in STEM study (e.g., Moonesar & Mourtada, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref34">26</reflink>]); to explore gender differences in interest and perceived STEM capacity in middle and high-school students (e.g., Weber, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref35">34</reflink>]) and to improve the engagement of students from underrepresented backgrounds in STEM-related fields (e.g., Carleton College, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref36">8</reflink>]). The ECC Trilogy framework was judged as a suitable "lens" through which to analyze data in this study, as determined by its successful application in similar STEM engagement studies at high school level, and its inherent flexibility to accommodate and "unpack" the interaction between diverse factors impacting upon students' choices and attitudes toward STEM participation.</p> <p>The ECC Trilogy framework records three elements comprising principles and attributes considered essential for students' success in STEM: <emph>Engagement, Capacity</emph>, and <emph>Continuity. Engagement</emph> is defined as "having an orientation to the sciences and/or quantitative disciplines that includes such qualities as awareness, interest and motivation" (Jolly et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref37">19</reflink>], p. 5) combined with "an individual's beliefs or confidence in their ability to successfully pursue studies in a discipline" (Campbell & Jolly, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref38">7</reflink>], p. 1). Indicators of <emph>Engagement</emph> include having positive attitudes toward STEM disciplines and careers, valuing the utility of STEM, seeing oneself as a STEM professional, and voluntarily participating in formal and informal STEM activities or projects. <emph>Capacity</emph> relates to knowledge-building, and is identified as "possessing the acquired knowledge and skills needed to advance to increasingly rigorous content in the sciences and quantitative disciplines" (Jolly et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref39">19</reflink>], p. 6). Notably, this recognizes learning in both formal and informal environments, and comprises more than can be evaluated using traditional school assessments methods. <emph>Continuity</emph> refers to resources, systems, and processes available within the institution that support students' STEM learning. These comprise "not just opportunities, resources and guidance; it is the structure surrounding the individual, which does or does not provide that person with what is needed for continued or increased Engagement and for improved Capacity" (Campbell & Jolly, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref40">7</reflink>], p. 1). Jolly et al. ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref41">19</reflink>]) identify attributes including high quality, rigorous, varied, and flexible STEM courses and extra-curricula learning opportunities, qualified and experienced STEM teachers, and well-developed networks that facilitate access to community, business, and industry partners, as important indicators under this element.</p> <p>The ECC Trilogy framework provided guidance to identify the outcomes of individuals' proximal processes that helped establish and sustain its STEM ecosystem, and justify its identification as an exemplary environment. The efficacy of the framework for helping identify and understand establishment processes and outcomes in STEM ecosystems, has been comprehensively detailed in other studies (e.g., Hatisaru, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref42">17</reflink>]; Stukes et al., [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref43">30</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-9">Research Design</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0177520638-10">School Profile</hd> <p>The case study school was a comprehensive Girls' College, located in the western suburbs of an Australian city. The college has a role of 1100, with 83% of its students having a language background other than English, and who generally come from families in the middle-lower socio-economic bands*.[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref44">1</reflink>] This reflects the school's catchment demographic, with the majority of students belonging to families of recent immigrants, many of whom are unfamiliar with STEM study or career options being available to girls. The college was identified through education system level recommendation, as appropriate for profiling as a high performing STEM school. The college has a strong reputation for its commitment to equity and opportunity for students, exceptional leadership, innovative STEM curriculum, and high standards and expectations. This is illustrated by an improved university participation rate which was 30% when the principal arrived in 2006, and by 2019, had reached 93%. Data collected by the principal indicated a substantial number of girls entered science and engineering university undergraduate courses, with several subsequently pursuing related careers or postgraduate study (principal, personal communication). The profile and performance of this college identified it as an ideal candidate for this study.</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-11">Data Collection</hd> <p>Focus group and interview data were collected from the principal, teachers, and students, supported by observations of six classes involved in STEM lessons. The number and duration of transcribed interviews, the general focuses of the interview questions, and a short description of discussion points are recorded in Table 1. Questions for the semi-structured interviews were generated by the PASL project leadership team in consultation with the authors, to ensure alignment was maintained with overall project data requirements. Questions focused on STEM-related reforms and programmes – particularly school culture, environment, system and facilities/resource initiatives, classroom STEM curriculum, pedagogy, assessment and reporting, and STEM equity provisions.</p> <p>TABLE 1. Summary of data sources and duration, question/observation focuses and participants.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Data source</td><td>Participant/s</td><td>Interview duration & participant details</td><td>Question/ observation focus</td><td>Description of discussion points</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Interview</td><td>Principal</td><td>1 x 83 mins</td><td>The school</td><td>History Issues Current and past reforms/initiatives Vision for STEM in the school Broader understandings of STEM, and its relevance to students' futures</td></tr><tr><td>Classroom STEM practice</td><td>Curriculum and pedagogy (current and desired, staff capability and knowledge, professional learning, staff selection) Assessment (types of, pedagogy, standards, tensions associated with) STEM engagement and student opportunities/equity</td></tr><tr><td>School and community</td><td>Building a "STEM culture" Leadership of, and responsibility for STEM Expectations and standards associated with STEM Parents, community and STEM</td></tr><tr><td>Reporting</td><td>What, how and to whom outcomes from STEM learning are reported</td></tr><tr><td>System level</td><td>Education department supports/resources Influence of state syllabi and curriculum</td></tr><tr><td>Focus groups</td><td>STEM teachers (principal identified as teaching STEM classes – either modular, interdisciplinary or subject-based)</td><td>2 groups Group 1: 4 year 10–12 teachers, 1 × 75 mins; Group 2: 4 year 7–9 teachers, 1 × 67 mins</td><td>Pedagogy</td><td>Purpose/rationale for STEM Planning/resourcing Ways of teaching, and changes to pedagogy Student role/input to programmes</td></tr><tr><td>Curriculum</td><td>Discipline content knowledge requirements Design (e.g., subject vs inter/multidisciplinary)</td></tr><tr><td>Assessment</td><td>What is assessed How it is assessed How STEM learning is recorded and reported (and to whom)</td></tr><tr><td>Opportunities</td><td>Equity and learning differentiation</td></tr><tr><td>Leadership of STEM</td><td>How and who? Leadership decision-making Autonomy/responsibility/accountability</td></tr><tr><td>Focus groups</td><td>Students</td><td>2 groups Group 1: 5 year 10–12 students, 1 × 45 mins; Group 2: 8 year 7–9 students, 1 × 51 mins)</td><td>STEM learning experiences</td><td>Positive and negative aspects Attitudes to STEM How STEM is organized and taught What and how they are studying in STEM Skills and knowledge learnt Future careers or aspirations</td></tr><tr><td>Observations</td><td>Teachers/ students</td><td>6 principal-selected classrooms illustrating regular STEM curriculum</td><td>STEM lesson attributes</td><td>What is being taught, and how? Balance of skills/content Student activities Teacher/student roles and actions Lesson planning, progression and assessment</td></tr><tr><td>Pedagogy</td><td>Linked with students' experiences Relevant and authentic curricula Balance of student/teacher focused Learning organization (whole class, groups etc.)</td></tr><tr><td>Materials/ resources</td><td>Type/s How and when used? Contribution to lesson</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Interviewed teachers, students, and observed classes were selected by the principal using these criteria:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> they were currently involved in teaching or studying interdisciplinary (project/modular) or subject-based STEM;</item> <p></p> <item> they represented teachers and students working at different class levels;</item> <p></p> <item> student groups comprised students of different achievement levels;</item> <p></p> <item> student groups comprised students most likely to provide useful data (i.e., discussive, confident);</item> <p></p> <item> observed classrooms illustrated lessons reflective of regular STEM curriculum.</item> </ulist> <p>The two focus groups comprised students from years 10–12 (n = 5) and years 7–9 (n = 8), while the two teacher groups were also drawn from those class levels (n = 4, at each level). Interview duration ranged from 45 minutes (year 7–8 student focus group) to 83 minutes (principal). All interviews were verbatim transcribed for NVivo (QSR, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref45">27</reflink>]) analysis. Classroom or outdoor STEM lesson observations varied in duration, ranging between 30 and 40 minutes each.</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-12">Data Coding</hd> <p>To begin, ECC Trilogy framework elements and definitions were used as first-order themes, and all transcribed data were manually reviewed by the second author to determine tags suitable for identifying excerpts aligned with these. The framework definitions were:</p> <p> <emph>Engagement</emph>: What draws learners to study STEM? This comprises a mix of both academic and social components, including students' learning behaviors and relationship with teachers and fellow students.</p> <p> <emph>Capacity</emph>: What fundamental knowledge and skills are needed to further advance in STEM? This refers to knowledge and skills needed to progress STEM study and work.</p> <p> <emph>Continuity</emph>: What resources, systems, processes, and environment attributes sustain and advance learning in STEM? This element includes formal and informal resources, systems, and conditions (e.g., course availability and access, teacher knowledge, physical equipment and infrastructure, college climate and culture), and access to these both in school and out of school hours. This element applies equally to students and teachers.</p> <p>Once the initial review was completed, the first and second authors together evaluated alignment between data and the draft tags. During this phase, it was decided to add a fourth theme to the coding framework (Leadership), reflecting the influence of principal-initiated processes on every aspect of the college's STEM ecosystem. While data for Leadership has been coded separately to enable identification and discussion of these processes, as discussed later, the principal's interaction and subsequent influence interwove across other themes, in many ways acting as the "glue" that held them together.</p> <p>Using Crabtree and Miller's ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref46">10</reflink>]) <emph>deductive a-priori template of codes</emph> method, codes, descriptions, and identifying keywords/strings were formed into a template that was used to code the interview transcripts, using NVivo 12 (QSR, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref47">27</reflink>]). To begin, data tags originating from first-order analysis to identify general themes based on the ECC Trilogy elements, were manually reviewed and supplemented by the addition of synonyms. This generated more specific keywords and strings that were used for second-order coding. The second order codes provided far more nuanced and detailed information, that "unpacked" in greater depth unique attributes of the ecosystem, and the influence of the proximal processes of individuals within it (Table 2). Accuracy of second-order coding was enhanced by features in NVivo (QSR, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref48">27</reflink>]), such as the ability to capture surrounding contextual information that enabled more accurate assessment of the relevance of data to the codes. Finalized keywords and Boolean operators which formed different combinations of keywords into search strings were then used to code all data. At the same time, numerical information was captured that recorded the number of coded references, giving a tentative indication of the prevalence of data associated with each second-order code. These results were manually cleaned to exclude data which contained a predominance of dialog unrelated to the code. However, where it was considered beneficial to accurate reporting, data were filtered to remove surrounding dialog whilst maintaining the kernel of the excerpt.</p> <p>TABLE 2. Themes, codes, sample search strings and data excerpts.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Trilogy framework Elements (themes)</td><td>First order theme</td><td>Second order code</td><td>Sample keywords/strings</td><td>No. coded refs</td><td>Sample data and source (P = principal; T = teachers; S = students)</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Engagement <italic>(what draws learners to the subject)</italic></td><td>1. Practical and relevant</td><td>a. Curriculum linked to "real-world" contexts and futures b. Knowledge and skills relevant beyond STEM c. STEM learning applicable to other curriculum d. STEM is relevant to the world of work</td><td>"hands-on"; "do it"; "not ... theory based"; "practical"; "practically" "later life"; "outside world"; "exposure"; "experiences" "applied in ... other areas"; "any field"; "can help with anything" "careers"; "advisor"; "job"; "future"; "wants to become"</td><td>25 4 13 19</td><td><italic>...last year I did the solar car challenge ... and that just made me more aware of how far technology can go ... (S)</italic><italic>Year 7 will have foundational things where they can use their raspberry pies to build a weather station ... collect data for Geography (T)</italic>. <italic>... so it's our decision on what we want to do and whether we want to take that further after we graduate and go to university (S)</italic>. <italic>... we try and get the students more exposure to the outside world. So meeting people in industry, meeting people at the university level (T)</italic>. <italic>A lot of the skills you develop in STEM can be applied in many other areas, for example, my business management ... (S)</italic>. <italic>... there's a strong awareness ... they'll say, "look, I'm not going to be a scientist, but I really do value what I've studied in this (STEM)"(T)</italic>. <italic>... we've actually got to encourage the students into the best course for what they want to do. They're becoming more discerning (P)</italic>. <italic>My careers adviser has a Google classroom ... she's constantly posting ... this is a new program at this university ... check out this new course, and they all have to do with STEM (S).</italic></td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. Parents and community (P&C)</td><td>a. P&C engagement with school STEM</td><td>"parents"; "families"</td><td>11</td><td><italic>From a visual design perspective ... they see the whole visual design (in STEM), they can get a "real" job. (T)</italic><italic>(Parents) either say it's too hard ... they don't want their child to feel uncomfortable, and there is a certain discomfort in learning STEM (P).</italic></td></tr><tr><td /><td>3. STEM opportunities</td><td>a. Curriculum and extracurricular STEM opportunities. b. Inclusion/equity c. Gender specific</td><td>"opportunities"; "competitions"; "events"; "day"; "extracurricular activities"; "club/s"; "programs" "you're always welcome"; "come and join"; "open to everyone"; "everyone can learn"; "opportunities they deserve" "females"; "women"; "girls"; "gender theory"; "young ladies"</td><td>61 23 5</td><td><italic>... it's the (STEM) opportunities ... they're encouraged ... but not forced upon us (S)</italic>. <italic>... the (STEM) opportunities ... just open your eyes to the enormity of careers ... lots of degrees (you can do) (S)</italic>. <italic>It's the STEM opportunities, they're open to everyone (T)</italic>. <italic>The message is everyone can learn and learn really well ... we all just do it differently (P)</italic>. <italic>I open my STEM up to everybody ... even though my focus is gifted education, I open it up to everyone who could benefit (T)</italic>. <italic>Coming from some of the backgrounds they do ... preference has been given to their older brothers ... (in the eyes of family) these girls just go and get married (P)</italic>. <italic>... the fact that we're females and there's a big push for women in engineering ... we're all encouraged (S).</italic></td></tr><tr><td /><td>4. Enjoyment and motivation</td><td>a. Attitude to learning in STEM b. Consideration of student learning preferences</td><td>"Amazing"; "fun"; "enjoy/ed"; "really loved" "we want to study"; "electives"; "surveys"; "subject selection"</td><td>19 12</td><td><italic>I think when you love and enjoy something ... (teaching STEM) is almost not work (T)</italic>. <italic>... it was eye-opening. You learned about how challenging it can be but how much you can enjoy it at the same time (S)</italic>. <italic>Being an elective, we've had a really good uptake of Year 9 and 10 students (into STEM) (T)</italic>. <italic>I remember we did lots of STEM projects in Year 9 ... lots of hands-on stuff ... we'd learn something and then we'd build something right after (S).</italic></td></tr><tr><td><bold>Capacity</bold><italic>(fundamental knowledge and skills necessary to advance in STEM)</italic></td><td>5. Measures of STEM learning success</td><td>a. Academic results (external measures) b. Assessment (internal)</td><td>"raised them"; "results"; "success"; "ATAR"; "PISA"; "NAPLAN"; "university medal"; "graduate" "exam"; "tasks"; "assessment"; "policy"; "feedback"</td><td>19 6</td><td><italic>When I came in 2006 results were good, but we were graduating about 30% to uni. We're now around 90 to 95% ... (P)</italic><italic>We started with our weakest students and raised the standard for them. What's happened now is there's been a shift ... everything's gone up (T)</italic>. <italic>... it's the problem-solving ... we've got open tasks ... we're encouraging more of that assessment across the school (T)</italic><italic>We're assessing for an exam, but that exam is morphing into something else ... we don't know what it's going to look like (P).</italic></td></tr><tr><td /><td>6. Students' STEM skills</td><td>a. Collaboration/ teamwork b. Critical thinking c. Design thinking d. Problem-solving e. Resilience f. Attitude to failure g. Self-efficacy</td><td>"teamwork"; "work together"; "collaborate"; "as a team" "critical thinking"; "critically"; "analyse"; "think outside the box" "design"; "building"; "visual"; "empathy"; "STEAM"; "projects"; "aesthetic"; "make" "problem solving"; "solution/s"; "solve/d" "failing forward"; "trial and error"; "fail"; "mistakes"; "resilience"; "perseverance"; "stick at it"; "bounce back"; "determined" "not being perfect"; "not the end of the world" "; "keep going"; "try again"; "learn from mistakes" "self-esteem"; "potential"; "can do"; "positive"; "capable"; "belief"; "agency"</td><td>23 11 10 20 33 13 14</td><td><italic>I'm an individual worker ... but I've realized that I need to work with people. The (STEM) projects have been good for that (S)</italic>. <italic>We did the Lego robotics car ... how much we changed, and how much we understand how to take each other's ideas and make it one (S)</italic>. <italic>[I ask students] how can you take your learning from that subject and apply it ... be critical? How can you apply that to all of your subjects? (T)</italic>. <italic>For me, (STEM is) quite industry based as well, and that's come from my area of expertise. I was a designer before becoming a teacher ... there's a lot of design in STEM (T)</italic>. <italic>... it's like graphic design ... but that still incorporates a lot of STEM ... like building websites and stuff ... it's all design (S)</italic>. <italic>It's problem solving ... you look at something and you think it's going to be straightforward ... you look at it, and you uncover so many layers ... it's calculated decisions every time- it's not like trial and error (S)</italic>. <italic>STEM's about how to solve a problem ... it's not rote learning (T)</italic>. <italic>... for our kids in 21st century, that's an important message about resilience. They have to be resilient (P)</italic>. <italic>The (STEM) problems you come across are challenging, but it just makes you more resilient ... it really pushes you to keep going ... makes you dedicated (S)</italic>. <italic>... not being perfect is actually ok ... because it means we're learning ... we're failing forward (P)</italic>. <italic>That's what learning is ... if you can't learn from your mistakes, you're not learning (T)</italic>. <italic>... we understand if they (teachers) believe we can do it ... that pushes us to want to do it (S)</italic>. <italic>No matter who you are they (teachers) always see your potential (S).</italic></td></tr><tr><td /><td>7. Students' foundations to STEM</td><td>a. Literacy b. Numeracy c. STEM discipline knowledge d. Thinking</td><td>"literacy"; "communication"; "argument"; "paragraphs"; "basics"; "non-English speaking background" "numeracy"; "EMU"; "math" "Science"; "Technology"; "Engineering"; "Maths"; "Physics"; "ICT" "metacognition"; "metacognitive"; "more aware"</td><td>11 18 41 5</td><td><italic>Learning formal educational English, both written and oral, is critical to the learning process (P)</italic>. <italic>She (principal) had three agendas ... she made that very clear – literacy, numeracy and technology (T)</italic>. <italic>(The principal) made it policy that every math teacher is actually a trained EMU (Extending Mathematical Understanding) teacher (T)</italic>. <italic>... it's about the numeracy across the school ... going back to the foundations. You need these in STEM (T)</italic>. <italic>(Principal) had the vision that we should start iSTEM, based on the Maitland course (interdisciplinary)</italic><italic>... subdividing beats ... fractions. I teach musicians how the mathematics part of it works in music (T)</italic>. <italic>Our aim has always been moving students to metacognition in terms of the ways they think ... their ability to critically apply concepts (P).</italic></td></tr><tr><td>Continuity <italic>(school supports sustaining & advancing STEM)</italic></td><td>8. School climate and culture 9. Professional supports for STEM</td><td>a. High expectations of teachers and students b. Confidence in teachers c. Relationships and teacher knowledge of students d. School ethos e. STEM pedagogies a. Professional learning b. Resources and infrastructure</td><td>"push"; "encouraging"; "agenda"; "need to"; "have/had to" "confidence"; "effective"; "good teachers"; "capacity"; "empowering people" "feedback"; "surveys"; "can still learn from them"; "get to know you"; "understand you"; "type of person you are" "culture"; "cultural"; "love of learning"; "learning culture" "strategies"; "no one way of teaching"; "multiplicity of styles" "professional learning"; "professional development"; "PL"; "PD"; "training"; "in-house"; "conference" "resources"; "the budget"; "equipment"; "resourcing"; "funding"; "material"</td><td>56 61 26 9 6 26 27</td><td><italic>I just realize now that we are encouraged and we are ... we get so many opportunities (S)</italic>. <italic>Encouragement from every single teacher here – they're always encouraging you to take that that extra initiative and find out what you really enjoy (S)</italic>. <italic>You never really understand how much the teachers here do for you ... you kind of take a step back and really look at it ... it's like they're always there to provide that extra support (S)</italic>. <italic>I commended her (the principal) once on her leadership and, she said, "no, I just employ very well" (T)</italic>. <italic>I value feedback. We collect lots of feedback from students. What do you learn ... what do you want that will enhance your learning, promote your learning? (T)</italic>. <italic>They get to know you, they understand you ... they say, look I know you and what you're doing right now is really good, or they'll say, "I think we need to try and do a little bit more" (S)</italic>. <italic>I've been trying to push the whole idea of learning culture (around STEM) ... (P)</italic>. <italic>The interest in STEM is just the way that it can really foster a love of learning (T)</italic>. <italic>There's no silver bullet solutions to education. I don't see silver bullet solutions. We have to be adaptive. There's no one way of doing things (P)</italic>. <italic>(You need) really good strategies which you know and can adapt to any subject (T)</italic>. <italic>I was a designer prior to becoming a teacher. A lot of other teachers don't have that software experience ... so their PD is coming through me (T)</italic>. <italic>We shifted a lot of our professional development in-house and that's really important ... to look at our own needs and to do it ourselves. Mostly we have the expertise (T)</italic>. <italic>We're not a wealthy school ... we don't have huge material resources, but everything we've had has been plowed back into the kids ... resources and environment (P)</italic>. <italic>(Principal) resources us, really well. I think that's the most important thing (T).</italic></td></tr><tr><td>Other: Leadership</td><td>10. Approach</td><td>a. Distributed b. Modeling and mentoring c. Compatibility (with school's STEM objectives) d. Stability e. Innovative/flexible f. Visionary g. Networked h. Sustainable i. Responsible</td><td>"distributed"; "your job"; "building blocks"; "the structures"; "flat leadership" "modelling"; "showing"; "demonstrating"; "scaffolding"; "sharing"; "mentoring" "quick fix"; "look at me"; "everything is deficit" "stable"; "long-term"; "the whole time"; "long time" "flexible"; "flexibility"; "new ways of doing things"; "adaptable"; "adaptive" "vision"; "agenda"; "this process"; "mission statement" "industry"; "partnerships"; "academic ties"; "networks" "success/ful/ly"; "you get there"; "sustain"; "maintain"; "continue"; "further"; "enhance"; "sustain" "my plan"; "goals"; "ownership"; "responsibilities"; "make sure"</td><td>13 3 5 12 6 7 8 6 11</td><td><italic>My leadership approach is probably distributed ... if you like, it's an "heir and a spare" mentality ... (P)</italic>. <italic>The advantage is using our strengths ... autonomy is very important ... empowering people to achieve the outcomes (T)</italic><italic>(My experiences) have taught me the importance at times of things like modeling and coaching and mentoring people. I want the students to see that even someone in their 60s can actually still learn, and can learn from them (P)</italic>. <italic>Everyone's looking for a quick fix ... let's turn leaders over very, very quickly ... they make a couple of adjustments and move on (P)</italic>. <italic>It's capacity building ... it's getting people's confidence ... that's what works (T)</italic>. <italic>Research says that stable leadership in schools is very important, yet the trend is very much the antithesis of that (P)</italic>. <italic>(Principal) is very good at pushing back on the authorities. She's very good at protecting the staff (T)</italic>. <italic>(Being a principal) has taught me a lot ... to be flexible ... adaptable (P)</italic>. <italic>We're constantly trying to look for new ways of doing things (T)</italic>. <italic>(Principal) made that (her STEM vision and agenda) very clear from the start. (She) has this vision of turning the STEM into STEAM ... she understands this area (T)</italic>. <italic>I have strong academic ties. I visit schools and whatever, and look at how people do things differently (P)</italic>. <italic>We get students exposure to the outside world ... people in industry, universities (T)</italic>. <italic>You need to embed things and get things right. You need to know when it's time to get a new set of filters to come in and look at the school ... see what can happen (P)</italic>. <italic>There are 1,100 kids in this school, relying on the school to get the best education they can. It's an incredible responsibility (P)</italic>. <italic>(Principal is) very good at encouraging responsibility. I've felt supported. She's always said yeah go ahead ... just do it ... don't tell us, just do it (T).</italic></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0177520638-13">Findings</hd> <p>Table 2 contains a summary of first-order themes and second-order codes, and their alignment with ECC Trilogy elements, sample keywords, number of coded references, and sample data and source. Although data are organized by separate codes, during analysis their interlinking nature became apparent, suggesting the proximal processes between individuals affected activities and outcomes across multiple elements. For example, data aligned with <emph>professional supports for STEM</emph> (professional learning, resources, and infrastructure) were coded under the <emph>Continuity</emph> element. However, resources and infrastructure were also central to providing STEM opportunities (Engagement), such as the range of course options and extra-curricula activities available to students. Similarly, while teacher professional learning was central to sustaining and extending the broader STEM programme (Continuity), it also directly influenced other elements including the strong emphasis on students' attitude and skill development (Capacity) and the design of interesting STEM curriculum (Engagement).</p> <p>In another example, data associated with the practical and relevant nature of STEM curriculum (Engagement) were frequently linked with measures of learning success (Capacity) and teaching pedagogies (Continuity). This finding reflects the interdependent and interrelated nature of individuals' proximal processes, as they collaborated over time and across different activities in building the college's STEM ecosystem. However, the most significant and influential of these processes linked to the principal's leadership. Principal leadership drove STEM initiatives that contributed to all ECC Trilogy elements. The generative nature of principal-led proximal processes between individuals, was fundamental to establishing the STEM ecosystem. These processes focused on building collective understanding of the rationale and importance of STEM learning, establishing STEM as a curriculum priority, ensuring teachers had adequate physical spaces, material resources and professional learning opportunities, and <emph>brokering</emph> relationships, partnerships and networks aligned with the college's STEM goals.</p> <p>The number of coded references in data provided a tentative indication of where the college placed emphasis in terms of building its STEM ecosystem and curriculum. In the following summary, the number of coded references (refs = <emph>n</emph>) has been used as an indication of the weighting provided by interviewees. Bracketed references (e.g., 3c) align with illustrative data samples in Table 2, while supporting observations (e.g., ob10S: observation of year 10, teacher S) are denoted accordingly. Teacher and student focus groups and numbers are indicated using the abbreviation FG<emph>n</emph>.</p> <p>First, there was a strong commitment to equity and inclusion reflected in the multiple and diverse STEM learning opportunities made available to all students (refs. 61), irrespective of their year and achievement level (refs. 23, ob11T). Students noted the difference between this policy and the experiences of friends at other schools. As one commented:</p> <p>I have a few friends at other schools and I can see from some of them what they've been choosing ... that they don't have that big focus on STEM, so one of my friends at another school said the only way they can get into a STEM class is if they get the top grades, which I feel (like) ... that is a bit unfair (like) if you want to do science or maths ... why should you not try and get better at it – why not be given the chance? (Student 3, FG1).</p> <p>The strong commitment to equity was represented in proximal processes led by the principal and reflected in the practical actions of teachers, establishing the inclusive foundation upon which STEM curriculum, extra-curricula, resourcing, and professional learning decisions were made. Initially, these processes focused on building staff understanding of students' backgrounds and cultures – recognizing that for many students, STEM learning and careers were not viewed by their families as viable options for girls (3c). These processes also extended to changing parents' perceptions about girls' participation in STEM, which was seen as an ongoing challenge:</p> <p>By and large we find that parents vote in two ways. They'll either say 'it's too hard' ... they don't want their child to, you know, to feel uncomfortable. Some of the parents don't want that, so (I tell them) ... 'go somewhere else, it's your choice' (principal, interview).</p> <p>To raise standards, clear expectations were communicated by the principal that both teachers and students would fully engage in the STEM opportunities the college offered, and in doing so, that they would perform to the highest possible standard (refs. 56). Expectations were well understood by students, who appreciated the extra lengths their teachers went to, to support them to achieve to the best of their potential (8a; 9b). As one commented, "you never really understand how much the teachers here do for you ... you kind of take a step back and really look at it ... it's like they're always there to provide that extra support" (Student 6, FG2). The principal communicated absolute confidence in teaching staff as the professionals in the best position to make decisions that will improve STEM outcomes for students (refs. 61). As she described, "I think secondly of confidence (I have) in their (teachers) ability to come up with and own problems, but also the solutions" (principal, interview). This manifested in a distributed leadership approach to STEM (refs. 13, 10a) where teachers held much autonomy in decision-making, while at the same time displaying commitment to supporting colleagues through internal mentoring and professional learning programmes (refs. 26). This college preferred in-house professional learning, underpinned by the principal's belief that staff often had, or could autonomously acquire, the expertise needed to build collective STEM efficacy. Aligned with this, deliberate employment decisions were made by the principal to ensure there was compatibility with school STEM goals, and if someone was appointed, that they could make a meaningful contribution to the learning of others:</p> <p>We do have to be clear what the vision is ... everyone has to own it. You asked the question about employing staff before ... I hire well ... we employ the best person who is there. But if I don't think there's a person who aligns with what we want and can contribute to the whole I don't employ, and I'm quite prepared to come up with plan B (principal, interview).</p> <p>This resulted in a relatively high number of STEM teaching staff who came from industry or creative industry backgrounds (n = 6). These included two industrial chemists, two engineers, and one each from the graphic arts and music production industries (principal, private communication). Strategic appointments strengthened STEM through accessing industry knowledge beneficial for staff development (refs. 26, 9a), and enhanced curriculum by making it more practical and work relevant for students (refs. 25, 1a). This policy contributed significantly to programme Continuity and student Engagement, and resulted from generative proximal processes between the principal and teachers, through which staffing priorities were identified that would make the greatest contribution to whole-of-school programmes.</p> <p>The proximal processes between the principal and staff also displayed understanding of the complexity of managing change associated with new approaches to STEM, and in relation to effective leadership of schools generally (refs. 12). They signaled the importance of leadership stability – communicating confidence to staff and students that she was "in it for the long haul":</p> <p>... so if anyone's looking for a quick fix (for STEM), you're not going to get it. It's going to take capacity building. Now there's a tendency to turn leaders over very, very quickly ... they go into schools and make a couple of adjustments and say 'look at me ... I'm fantastic', then move on to the next school. I've been here a good long time, because research says that stable leadership in schools is very important ... you need to embed things and get things right (principal, interview).</p> <p>This confidence provided security to staff that the principal would support long-term STEM innovations, and that initiatives would have sufficient time to embed and be fully evaluated. Her lengthy tenure and associated improvement in students' academic results also generated trust-based proximal processes between the school and external authorities that supported more innovative approaches to STEM, without attracting undue attention from compliance and monitoring agencies (10d). They also generated trust between the principal, teachers, and students, which supported continuous improvement in STEM by opening communication channels for information gathering to inform professional discussions and evaluation (refs. 26, 8c).</p> <p>Benefits of leadership continuity and the time-developed proximal processes this generated, extended to Capacity-building, reflecting in the breadth of success measures applied to outcomes of STEM curriculum (ob10R). While high academic performance and standards were rigorously pursued (refs. 19, 5a., 5b), corresponding emphasis was also placed on skills and attitudes developed through STEM, which were seen as the foundations for future learning and personal wellbeing. These included collaboration and teamwork (refs. 23, 6a), problem solving (refs. 20, 8d) and resilience (refs. 33, 8e). Skill and attitude development were embedded in the college's inclusive vision for STEM, and were represented by curriculum that placed equal emphasis on learning from the process of <emph>doing STEM</emph>, alongside academic outcomes. This overt dual emphasis also enhanced Engagement by ensuring STEM learning was relevant and valuable to all students, regardless of whether they were considering specialized STEM study or later careers. As the principal commented, "for our kids in the 21<sups>st</sups> Century, it's an important message about resilience ... they have to be resilient ... it's about the skills and attitudes they develop when they're doing this (interdisciplinary STEM) ... the problems they're solving" (principal, interview). This reflected in the proximal processes between teachers and students which encouraged risk-taking, but at the same time provided support if outcomes were unexpected: "... it's important (students) feel supported when they fail ... but it's not the end of the world ... it really isn't. It's more important they learn from it" (Teacher 4, FG1).</p> <p>Early in the principal's tenure it was recognized that poor student achievement in numeracy and literacy needed to be addressed, before significant progress could be made in furthering STEM (refs. 41, 7a-c; ob9B, ob7D, ob8P). Proximal processes at this time focused on intensive student support and raising expectations and capabilities of staff through professional learning and performance goal setting. STEM discipline and numeracy and literacy capabilities were viewed as both <emph>enablers of</emph> and <emph>outcomes from</emph> STEM curriculum, but prior discipline achievement was not a <emph>prerequisite</emph> to engaging in STEM. Allowing students open entry to STEM courses and extra-curricula programmes was consistent with the college's commitment to equity and inclusion, and evolved from reciprocal interactions between the principal, staff and students. It was apparent students felt empowered by this policy that deviated from policies of other schools (Student 3, FG1). It removed entry barriers to STEM courses that in many other schools students were aware of, were based on discipline achievement measures. As one commented, "it's our decision on what we want to do ... whether we want to take it (STEM study) further ... we're not forced upon. It's up to us to make the effort" (Student 1, FG1).</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-14">Discussion</hd> <p>This study investigated the proximal processes and resultant actions and outcomes underpinning the formation and sustaining of a high-performing, secondary college STEM ecosystem. The first research question focused on understanding the proximal processes or "reciprocal interactions between an individual and environments, incorporating persons objects and symbols" (Griffore & Phenice, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref49">15</reflink>], p. 11), to learn how these contributed to shaping the ecosystem. These processes and outcomes are discussed below with reference to appropriate literature.</p> <p>Marshall ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref50">24</reflink>]) identified unique features of STEM-specialized school ecosystems that differentiate them from more traditional environments. These include their ability to foster curiosity, innovation, and inquiry attitudes and skills through student-focused, project and problem-based learning designs, constructivist-referred pedagogies, and inclusive support and resourcing structures. She described these environments as "mirroring the principles of dynamic living systems" (p. 52), where students learn through personalized experiences that engage community, facilitate discipline knowledge mastery, are designed around authentic curriculum and assessment, and support inter and transdisciplinary thinking. While this college was not a specialized school, it shared many similar attributes. Central to its exemplary performance were the highly effective proximal processes generated between the principal, staff and students, that, over time, built a shared purpose and commitment to STEM and a culture of equitable and inclusive access to STEM learning.</p> <p>First, as data demonstrate, the generative proximal processes initiated and led by the principal over a prolonged period, were fundamental to the success of STEM at this college. Her leadership of STEM was multidimensional, requiring the establishment of generative proximal processes across multiple fronts for multiple purposes, including between teachers, students, parents, and members of the community. These processes were extremely effective for building the relational trust needed to support the different approach to STEM, as reflected in the interdisciplinary reforms being implemented. The foundation of this trust lay in the <emph>developmental assets</emph> of the principal, who, over a lengthy career had built strong and broadly based knowledge of the importance of STEM as a key capability set for <emph>all</emph> students. She demonstrated commitment to this through processes that instilled confidence and trust in teachers as professionals and leaders, whilst herself modeling appropriate dispositions and behaviors and engaging first hand in the design, implementation and resourcing of STEM curriculum. These processes extended to the community, where she nurtured networks engaging universities, businesses and industries to support school and extra-curricula STEM learning. In this respect, her proximal processes <emph>brokered</emph> STEM relationships, which Ching et al. ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref51">9</reflink>]) describe as "practices that connect youth to events, programs, interests, internships, individuals and institutions that support them beyond the window of a specific program or event" (p. 296).</p> <p>Second, and consistent with Bronfenbrenner and Morris's ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref52">6</reflink>]) perspective, it was apparent that generative proximal processes took time to develop, and that they required ongoing engagement by the principal in all STEM activities, which varied in complexity and demand. Time was an important contributor to proximal process development, and it was central to forming relational trust between the principal, teachers and others, that supported the freedom needed to implement reforms. As the principal observed, current trends toward rapid school leadership turnover led to "showcasing," that worked against establishing effective and enduring STEM environments. In terms of proximal process development, this widespread phenomenon would likely be disruptive, and inhibit the relational trust-building essential to effective ecosystem establishment.</p> <p>Third, Bronfenbrenner and Morris ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref53">6</reflink>]) identified the role individuals' dispositions play in determining whether proximal processes are generative or disruptive in nature. According to Marynowski et al. ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref54">25</reflink>]), generative dispositions such as the ability to engage and persist "set proximal processes in motion and sustain their operation" (p. 124), while disruptive dispositions such as apathy, inattentiveness or lack of interest, can inhibit or prevent their development. As illustrated in this example, principal dispositions were a major contributor to the proximal processes that established and drove this ecosystem, and these were associated with her commitment to improving STEM over a lengthy period. The persistent focus on STEM since the principal's arrival in 2006, provided the continuity and surety needed to build essential relationships and a collective vision and purpose for STEM, through generative processes between herself, staff, parents and the community. The importance of this cannot be overstated, and it was a vital element in fostering the trust needed to support reforms. In this study, Bronfenbrenner and Morris's ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref55">6</reflink>]) concepts of <emph>engagement over time</emph> and the <emph>developmental assets</emph> and <emph>personal dispositions</emph> of the principal, were closely interrelated. Working together, they helped establish an environment with the supportive conditions necessary for change.</p> <p>The second research question investigated the nature of outcomes these proximal processes resulted in, that furthered student STEM Engagement, Capacity building and Continuity. Figure 2 graphically illustrates these main outcomes. At the center are students, who both benefit from learning opportunities generated by processes between individuals, but also contribute to these through formal and informal feedback mechanisms such as course review and student forums. Student-focused but leadership-initiated processes were major contributors to shaping STEM curriculum at the college.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 2. Outcomes from proximal processes arranged by ECC trilogy elements.</p> <p>The ring surrounding the core depicts key outcomes resulting from the principal's proximal and relationship-building processes over time, which were instrumental in creating the environment and supports needed to establish and sustain the ecosystem. These outcomes have been labeled <emph>STEM philosophy</emph> (collectively understood purpose and vision for STEM) and <emph>STEM expectations</emph> (standards, dispositions, engagement), reflecting their importance as the foundation upon which the curriculum, pedagogical and environmental principles and focuses recorded in the outer ring, are based. The influence of these on the STEM-focused culture of the college and principles underpinning curriculum and pedagogy is indicated by the double-headed arrows between rings, while the centrality of the principal's proximal processes in leading their creation, is depicted by the single headed arrows in the middle ring. As detailed earlier, cross-overs between ECC Trilogy element principles is signified by the double-headed arrows and merging gradients in the outer ring.</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-15">Summary and Conclusion</hd> <p>Several studies profile schools that offer students engaging learning in STEM (e.g., Allen et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref56">1</reflink>]; Yao, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref57">35</reflink>]). However, relatively little is known about the environments in which these take place – particularly the interaction of individuals and the processes through which environments are established to support exemplary STEM curriculum. While it could be argued that processes such as those detailed in this article are to some extent applicable to any change innovation in schools, transitioning toward interdisciplinary approaches to STEM faces unique challenges, particularly, but not exclusively, in girls' high schools. These include bridging historical school divides between the STEM disciplines to facilitate interdisciplinary, project-based methods that recognize both STEM academic knowledge and skill outcomes, dismantling socio-culturally embedded stereotypes and perceptions parents and some teachers hold limiting girls' participation in STEM study and careers, and building girls' levels of self-efficacy and genuine interest in STEM learning as a worthwhile endeavor. In this school, major challenges existed in the students' homes where parents held quite specific views on female roles in society that generally did not extend to their daughters engaging in advanced STEM study or careers. Principal leadership that projected beyond the school and engaged parents and the wider community to build appreciation of <emph>what is possible</emph> and the <emph>importance and value</emph> of pursuing STEM study and later careers, was instrumental to this school's success. Similar engagement was also necessary within the school, where not all teachers immediately "bought into" the principal's vision and commitment that prioritized raising the girls' achievement and participation in STEM. By the principal's own admission, this resulted in some "collateral damage," where staff whose views did not align with the school's new direction, chose to leave. Interestingly, these staff were replaced by specialist appointments mostly from STEM-related industries or enterprises, reflecting the principal's understanding and desire to recruit the best possible staff aligned with her STEM vision for the school.</p> <p>While considerable knowledge exists regarding effective school leadership generally, research on leadership in the context of STEM appears more limited. Arguably, leading school change toward interdisciplinary STEM can be more complex, given its potentially disruptive effect on conventional subject-based curricula, associated challenges to traditional departmental systems and structures, and the need to engage parents, the wider school community and often businesses and enterprises, in supporting the change process. Such change requires leaders to <emph>broker</emph> relationships between the school and external organizations that may not necessarily share similar priorities or agendas.</p> <p>The results of this study argue that establishing and sustaining effective, inclusive, and equitable STEM curricula and supporting ecosystems requires multidimensional leadership, and particularly an ability by principals to build relational trust through generative proximal processes that establish a climate where risk taking and innovation at all school levels, are encouraged and supported. They also indicate that this takes time to develop, and is supported by the dispositions, knowledge, experience, and active engagement of the principal in all facets of curriculum and ecosystem development. Guiding this engagement must be a strong commitment to, and understanding of the relevance of STEM learning for <emph>all</emph> students' futures – particularly knowledge of how interdisciplinary models can support important lifelong skill and competency development.</p> <p>Consistent with the results of general studies (e.g., Liu, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref58">23</reflink>]), results highlight that leadership continuity and stability play an important role in establishing and sustaining STEM ecosystems, enabling the <emph>developmental assets</emph> of the principal to be fully operationalized over time, to support necessary reforms. This conclusion is particularly relevant in countries such as the US, UK, and Australia, where high principal turnover rates have been shown to negatively impact upon school progress, teacher retention, and student achievement (Heffernan, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref59">18</reflink>]; Levin & Bradley, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref60">22</reflink>]; Superville, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref61">31</reflink>]). Given the challenging nature of reforms needed to implement interdisciplinary STEM and the time it can take to build supportive relationships and partnerships, the current trend of principal "churn" must be addressed, if solidly based and enduring STEM ecosystems are to result.</p> <p>Although it could be fairly argued that the above principles apply to school change generally, these results suggest leading change toward interdisciplinary STEM is considerably more complex, given its fundamental challenge to historical school structures, teachers' traditional ways of working, and, as in this example, culturally-embedded views on the role of females in work and society. Addressing these challenges demands a much more expansive principal role as illustrated in this study, beyond that which may normally be associated with change within an existing curriculum area or school system.</p> <p>Finally, several limitations to the results of this study are acknowledged. While a substantial volume of data were gathered and analyzed, these came from a single case which limits their generalizability. Second, although interview data from different participants were confirmed by multiple classroom observations of STEM lessons, it is difficult to determine with certainty if these represented regular STEM curriculum, or specific examples chosen for the purpose of this study. Third, despite strong consistency across data from the different participant groups, the self-reported nature of this information is recognized. In closing, the need to improve levels of student participation in STEM and raise levels of <emph>STEM literacy</emph> in general populations is well understood, if we are to address pressing social, environmental, and economic concerns. To do this, schools must move beyond STEM curriculum that encourages "showcasing," in favor of programmes reflecting deeper and more enduring understandings of <emph>why</emph> STEM knowledge and skills are important, and <emph>how</emph> they are relevant to the futures of all students. This requires school leaders who are capable, committed, and prepared to "go the distance."</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-16">Authors' Contributions</hd> <p>All authors who have contributed to this manuscript are acknowledged.</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-17">Availability Of Supporting Data</hd> <p>Supporting data are included in the Tables.</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-18">Disclosure Statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <hd id="AN0177520638-19">Research Ethics</hd> <p>The Principals as STEM Leaders project was granted ethics approval from the University of Tasmania Human Ethics Research Committee Network (approval #H0017470).</p> <ref id="AN0177520638-20"> <title> Note </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref16" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> See https://docs.acara.edu.au/resources/20160418_ACARA_ICSEA.pdf.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0177520638-21"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Allen, S., Kastelein, K., Mokros, J., Atkinson, J., & Byrd, S. (2020). STEM guides: Professional brokers in rural STEM ecosystems. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 10 (1), 17 – 35. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2019.1700317</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Bicer, A., & Capraro, R. M. (2019). Mathematics achievement in the secondary high school context of STEM and non-STEM schools. School Science and Mathematics, 119 (2), 61 – 71. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12321</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref1" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Birmingham, S. (2017). New initiatives to enhance STEM leaders in our schools. Australia, Canberra: The Department of Education, Skills and Employment. https://ministers.dese.gov.au/birmingham/new-initiative-enhance-stem-leaders-our-schools</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref23" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective. In P. Moen, G. Elder, & K. Luscher (Eds.), Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development (pp. 619 – 647). American Psychological Association.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref24" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bronfenbrenner, U. (1999). Environments in developmental perspective: Theoretical and operational models. In S. Friedman & T. Wachs (Eds.), Measuring environments across the lifespan: Emerging methods and concepts (pp. 3 – 28). American Psychological Association.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref4" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In R. Lerner & W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 793 – 829). John Wiley & Sons.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref38" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Campbell, P., & Jolly, E. (2014). Ten years of engagement, capacity and continuity: Reflections on a trilogy for student success. Science Museum of Minnesota. http://www/SMM.org</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref36" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Carleton College. (2022). Increasing persistence of all students in STEM. <ulink href="http://serc.carleton.edu/liberalarts/capstones/carleton/persistence.html">http://serc.carleton.edu/liberalarts/capstones/carleton/persistence.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref51" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Ching, D., Santo, R., Hoadley, C., & Peppler, K. (2016). Not just a blip in someone's life: Integrating brokering practices into out-of-school programming as a means of supporting and expanding youth futures. On the Horizon, 24 (3), 296 – 312. https://doi.org/10.1108/OTH-05-2016-0026</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Crabtree, B., & Miller, W. (1999). A template approach to text analysis: Developing and using codebooks. In B. Crabtree & W. Miller (Eds.), Doing qualitative research (pp. 163 – 177). Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dupéré, V., Dion, E., Leventhal, T., Archambault, I., Crosnoe, R., & Janosz, M. (2018). High school dropout in proximal context: The triggering role of stressful life events. Child Development, 89 (2), 107 – 122. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12792</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> English, L. (2016). STEM education: K-12 perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM Education, 3 (3), 2 – 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Erdogan, N., & Stuessy, C. (2015). Modelling successful STEM high schools in the United States: An ecological framework. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3 (1), 77 – 92. https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.85245</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Falloon, G. W., Hatzigianni, M., Bower, M., Forbes, A., & Stevenson, M. (2020). Understanding K-12 STEM education: A framework for developing STEM literacy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29 (3), 369 – 385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09823-x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Griffore, R., & Phenice, L. (2016). Proximal processes and causality in human development. European Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 4 (1), 10 – 16 https://<ulink href="http://www.eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/Proximal-Processes-and-Causality-in-Human-Development.pdf">www.eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/Proximal-Processes-and-Causality-in-Human-Development.pdf</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hannon, V., Thomas, L., Ward, S., & Beresford, T. (2019). Local learning ecosystems: Emerging models. The World Innovation Summit for Education (WISE) Report. https://<ulink href="http://www.wise-qatar.org/2019-wise-research-learning-ecosystems-innovation-unit">www.wise-qatar.org/2019-wise-research-learning-ecosystems-innovation-unit</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hatisaru, V. (2021). Theory-driven determinants of school students' STEM career goals: A preliminary investigation. European Journal of STEM Education, 6 (1), 02. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/9558</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Heffernan, A. (2021). Retaining Australia's school leaders in challenging contexts: The importance of personal relationships in principal turnover decisions. International Journal of Educational Research, 105, 1 – 9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101716</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jolly, E., Campbell, P., & Perlman, L. (2004). Engagement, capacity and continuity: A trilogy for student success. GE Foundation.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kier, M., & Blanchard, M. (2021). Eliciting students' voices through STEM career explorations. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19 (1), 151 – 169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10042-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kitchen, J., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, M. (2018). The impact of college and university-run high school summer programs on students' end of high school career aspirations. Science Education, 102 (3), 529 – 547 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/ 10.1002/sce.21332.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Levin, S., & Bradley, K. (2019). Understanding and addressing principal turnover. National Association of Secondary School Principals' Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/nassp-understanding-addressing-principal-turnover-review-research-report</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Liu, P. (2020). Understanding turnaround leadership research: Continuity and change (2009-2016). Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48 (1), 6 – 24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143218807490</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marshall, S. (2009). Re-Imagining Specialized STEM academies: Igniting and nurturing decidedly different minds, by design. Roeper Review, 32 (1), 48 – 60. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190903386884</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marynowski, R., Mombourquette, C., & Slomp, D. (2019). Using highly effective student assessment practices as the impetus for school change: A bioecological case study. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 18 (1), 117 – 137. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2017.1384497</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moonesar, I., & Mourtada, R. (2015). Persistence in the Abu Dhabi STEM pipeline: Preparing emirati youth for careers in the UAE innovation economy. Technical Report for the Emirates Foundation. The Mohammed Bin Rashid School of Government. Dubai. https://<ulink href="http://www.mbrsg.ae/home/research/education-policy/persistence-in-the-abu-dhabi-stem-pipeline">www.mbrsg.ae/home/research/education-policy/persistence-in-the-abu-dhabi-stem-pipeline</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> QSR International. (2018). Nvivo Qualitative Data Analysis Application (v.12). https://<ulink href="http://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/support-services/nvivo-downloads">www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/support-services/nvivo-downloads</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stehle, S., & Peters-Burton, E. (2019). Developing student 21st century skills in selected exemplary inclusive STEM high schools. International Journal of STEM Education, 6 (39), 2 – 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0192-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stigler, J., & Hiebert, J. (2004). Improving mathematics teaching. Educational Leadership, 61 (5), 12 – 17 https://web.p.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=e3496dbd-4c5b-4e07-9b0b-b3b25b511f85%40redis.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stukes, F., Chen, H., & Tidwell, T. (2018). Applying the engagement, capacity and continuity trilogy for computing undergraduates at Johnson C. Smith University. In J. Payton, G. Thiruvathukal, J. Burge, F. Stukes, Y. Rankin, & E. Dillon (Eds.), Research on Equity and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT) Conference (pp. 1 – 4. IEEE Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Superville, D. (2019, December). Principal turnover is a problem: New data could help districts combat it. Education Week. Maryland, Washington DC: Editorial Projects in Education. https://<ulink href="http://www.edweek.org/leadership/principal-turnover-is-a-problem-new-data-could-help-districts-combat-it/2019/12">www.edweek.org/leadership/principal-turnover-is-a-problem-new-data-could-help-districts-combat-it/2019/12</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> van der Hurk, A., Meelissen, M., & van Langen, A. (2019). Interventions in education to prevent STEM pipeline leakage. International Journal of Science Education, 41 (2), 150 – 164. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1540897</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wallace, T., & Chhuon, V. (2014). Proximal processes in urban classrooms: Engagement and disaffection in urban youth of color. American Educational Research Journal, 51 (5), 937 – 973. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214531324</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weber, K. (2012). Gender differences in interest, perceived personal capacity, and participation in STEM-related activities. Journal of Technology Education, 24 (1), 18 – 33. https://doi.org/10.21061/jte.v24i1.a.2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yao, S. (2019). The influence of access to informal STEM learning experiences on middle school students' self-efficacy and interest in STEM [ Master of Science in Education Thesis ]. University of Kentucky ]. https://doi.org/10.13023/etd.2019.046</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yoon, C., Chin, S., Moala, J., & Choy, B. (2017). Entering into dialogue about the mathematical value of contextual mathematising tasks. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30 (1), 21 – 37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0218-2</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Garry Falloon; Michael Stevenson; Vesife Hatisaru; Derek Hurrell and Marie Boden</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref61"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1426601
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Principal Leadership and Proximal Processes in Creating STEM Ecosystems: An Australian Case Study
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Garry+Falloon%22">Garry Falloon</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Michael+Stevenson%22">Michael Stevenson</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Vesife+Hatisaru%22">Vesife Hatisaru</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Derek+Hurrell%22">Derek Hurrell</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Marie+Boden%22">Marie Boden</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Leadership+and+Policy+in+Schools%22"><i>Leadership and Policy in Schools</i></searchLink>. 2024 23(2):180-202.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 23
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22STEM+Education%22">STEM Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ecology%22">Ecology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Secondary+School+Students%22">Secondary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Females%22">Females</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Principals%22">Principals</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Instructional+Leadership%22">Instructional Leadership</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interaction%22">Interaction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Attitudes%22">Teacher Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Attitudes%22">Student Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Administrator+Attitudes%22">Administrator Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Environment%22">Educational Environment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Sustainability%22">Sustainability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Single+Sex+Schools%22">Single Sex Schools</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Australia%22">Australia</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/15700763.2022.2094810
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1570-0763<br />1744-5043
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Improving learning through interdisciplinary STEM has come to the forefront of educational discourse, as schools attempt to attract more students to STEM study. However, little is known about how successful STEM curricula are established and sustained. This study details the establishment and sustaining of an exemplary STEM learning ecosystem in a girls' comprehensive secondary college. Results highlight exemplary STEM ecosystems demand multidimensional principal leadership, that over time, can develop effective generative proximal processes and levels of relational trust needed to implement the disruptive reforms associated with establishing interdisciplinary STEM curricula. Findings identify principals' ongoing engagement in the environment and dispositional and developmental assets are critical to successful school change supporting STEM innovation.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1426601
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1426601
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/15700763.2022.2094810
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 23
        StartPage: 180
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: STEM Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ecology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Secondary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Females
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Principals
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Instructional Leadership
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interaction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Administrator Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Environment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Sustainability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Single Sex Schools
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Australia
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Principal Leadership and Proximal Processes in Creating STEM Ecosystems: An Australian Case Study
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Garry Falloon
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Michael Stevenson
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Vesife Hatisaru
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Derek Hurrell
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Marie Boden
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1570-0763
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1744-5043
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 23
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Leadership and Policy in Schools
              Type: main
ResultId 1