Focused Stakeholder Interviews: Education

Focused stakeholder interviews: education

CONTENTS:

Background and Methodology

Summary

What makes a successful project?

Sense of meaning

Supported by the students themselves

Integration within the school’s activities

Structure within the project

Involving parents

Money as a measure of success

Physical improvement as a measure of success

Responses to the suggested project

Balance of money and meaning

No half measures

Who should be involved?

Similar project ideas

Conclusions

Summaries of interviews

1 Caroline Carter

2 Brenda Sullivan

3 Megan Robinson

4 Sarah Hamill

5 Jane Pratt

6 Ann Beresford

7 Jill Sandeman

8 Martin Bishop

9 Melanie Jay

10 Martin Bentley

11 Neil Dewhurst

12 Elisabeth Webb

13 Paul Cope

Background and Methodology

In February and March 2005, Rosslyn Research conducted 13 telephone interviews with stakeholders in the education system, with the aim of determining attitudes and responses to climate change, and attitudes to possible further programmes aimed to support adaptation or mitigation.

The interviewees were:

The particular focus of the interviews was to determine attitudes to a possible energy-saving programme sponsored by HCC, which would start with an energy audit of the school and would aim to deliver three kinds of result:

• definite, measurable cost-savings
• raised awareness of climate change amongst students
• raised awareness in the wider community, and adoption of energy-saving measures

Overall, interviews covered a wide range of topics:

• nature of the school and respondent’s role
• types of school projects that involve the wider community
• success factors for school projects in general
• dangers and pitfalls to avoid
• most wanted type of project
• projects undertaken, if any, which address climate change – aims, scope, outcomes expected, especially behavioural change
• response to proposed energy audit and energy-saving project –
• who would be involved
• how best to win support for it
• help needed from outside bodies
• possibility of rolling the project out into the wider community

Summary

The proposed plan was extremely well-received. This is seen as an exemplary idea for a school project:

• An energy audit would systematize some of the measures already being undertaken in schools, so it would be easy to integrate into the current way of operating
• It would save money
• It would fit very well into the curriculum, so the time taken to run it and follow it up would not be time lost from regular schooling
• It would have the support of the wider community
• Most important of all, it would have the support of the students, who are the most important stakeholders in any school

Most respondents are also optimistic about the possibility of its having a positive effect amongst parents and the general community.

At the level of detail, there is a wide range of attitudes to the proposed project, with many reservations of many sorts expressed. But it cannot be too strongly emphasized that the basic suggestion has met with great enthusiasm from teachers and governors alike.

The main recommendations that follow from the interviews conducted are that:

• As far as possible, students should actually do the auditing and save the energy themselves
• At inception there should be explicit targets for energy reduction and cost-saving within a prearranged time-period
• The ongoing project should involve actually changing the fabric of the school in a noticeable way, and not just changing behaviour
• The project should be explicitly presented as a response to the challenge of climate change
• HCC should provide expert help with initial auditing (using independent consultants rather than energy company employees), should plan educational materials to accompany the project, and if possible should co-fund any energy-saving improvements to the fabric of the school
• HCC should set up a “Healthy Schools” award scheme for schools on the lines of the “Investors in People” awards

Rolling out the project so that it involved parents auditing their own homes would need to be done with somewhat different emphases in primary and secondary schools. Contact with parents is much closer in primary schools, so there the rollout would happen more directly: parents would have to be involved in the school’s own initial audit. In secondary schools, the students themselves would ideally run much of the project, and any rolling out to homes would have to happen through them.

What makes a successful project?

The schools interviewed manage a huge variety of projects, and of course there are limits to any generalizations that can be made. Nevertheless, certain common themes emerge when respondents talk about what works and what doesn’t. At the most abstract level, one could say that a successful project needs energy and structure: on the one hand people striving to bring it to success, and on the other a clear and publicly-known definition of what this success actually will consist of.

Sense of meaning

Any school is full of potential energy, which constantly needs to be managed if it is going to turn into achievement. Especially with younger children, there is a need for structures which can give their activities meaning and can sustain their initial enthusiasm. Of course a project has to be fun, but also it has to have meaning if it is going to endure. It is absolutely essential for successful projects to involve the whole school and ideally the wider community – because that gives the social context which creates meaning. A successful school project is a collective exercise in building a sense of purposeful selfhood:

“It works best when they can see the benefits of the project to the school and the community”

“It’s their school and they need to have ownership of it, realize that every day matters and know that learning is exciting and we are all learning all the time.”

“Projects that work the best are ones that give the students a sense of place and that they are important part of the community. They help the children to have a feeling of belonging to the community and they do feel more part of the area.”

These are all comments from primary schools; the secondary school respondents also emphasize that the project itself needs to be owned and managed as far as possible by the students themselves:

“It has to be relevant to them”

“They tell us what they want and are interested in”

“The school council which the pupils run would look at this. They are involved with the teachers and non-teaching staff to assess what they want in the school, and this motivates them”

In order for a project to have meaning, it needs an objective context. Students need to see what is being achieved, in concrete, measurable, publicly acknowledged ways. As an absolute minimum, there is a need for recognition within the school:

“They are motivated by rewards, they need to see a purpose to what they are doing and what benefits they will achieve. The fact that we recognize what they do well.”

Supported by the students themselves

Secondary school respondents in particular emphasize that a project has to relate to what young people care about and are prepared to devote time to. Ultimately, it’s for them; and immediately, it needs them because they have the time and energy that are the two most precious resources for any communal activity.

Integration within the school’s activities

Time is precious. If an activity sits starkly outside the recognized curriculum, or if it demands a huge investment of teachers’ time, it is harder to justify. It is invaluable if students’ and teachers’ time expended on a project can be accounted as time spent learning within the confines of the curriculum.

“There are constant demands to increase and change the curriculum so it is easier to link projects to the existing curriculum.”

“It’s important from teachers’ point of view that projects involve educating the children, that they fall within the school curriculum.”

“It’s hard to introduce new approaches to things. It’s hard to embed things into the school as there is a very busy schedule and high standards. Finding time to drive issues is difficult…We have got to prioritise and not to spread ourselves too thinly. If projects fundamentally develop the school it’s easier. If you have a good view of what works and what doesn’t, it’s easier.”

More freedom has been allowed schools in recent years to interpret the curriculum creatively, and thereby more space is opened up for large-scale projects:

“The government has said that we can now drop things and put things we want onto the curriculum if we feel that it would be relevant.”

Structure within the project

Planning is essential from the start. At the strategic level of organization of the project, it’s important to fix timings and responsibilities.

“Basic planning needs to be practically communicated to the people involved, so that they know how and what they need to do. Get the project done in phases which are well planned for so you can see results in each phase of the project”

Most, but by no means all, tie in the need for strategic planning with the need for a single, energetic champion of the project.

Involving parents

There is a distinct divide between primary and secondary schools in the day-to-day level of contact with parents. In primary schools they are often involved in all sorts of activities, and in many cases help to run some of the core functions of the school. Crondall School is a notable example of this, where parents are involved in cooking the school meals, keeping the accounts, and marketing. But at all levels, it is important to have parents involved if a project is to be sustained in the long run. The main way to ensure this is to make sure that their children are motivated in the first place. But parents need to understand for themselves how a project is beneficial to their own children and to the school and community more generally.

Money as a measure of success

Everybody needs to know what success consists of. Objective, public outcomes are essential for the project to sustain enthusiasm. And ideally the outcome should be as public as possible – the audience should include the wider community beyond the school perimeter.

Money is objective and public. That is why successful projects often involve fundraising. Everyone can see what the target is, and how close it is to being reached. It creates a clear, simple story with a beginning, middle and end, and widens the size of the audience that give recognition to the students. Fundraising is one of the classic ways of involving the wider community:

“Our ‘Buy a brick’ campaign was supported by BUPA, local pubs,CSA and the general community. There was £18,000 outlay raised by the local community and 2000 local inhabitants to raise these funds for the building and the furniture.”

“Fundraising goes down well generally, we have a big community that can raise funds for the school.”

Physical improvement as a measure of success

It is tremendously valuable for a project to have a concrete, physical aspect. For one thing, like a pot of money in a fundraising project, a physical improvement is something that everyone can see developing. It is easier for the wider community to have a sense of the overall shape of the project when there is a physical element to it. And often, of course, fundraising is undertaken in aid of a physical improvement to the school:

“We got a great response to this. There was a definite improvement to work for and this motivated the locals.”

“If there is a physical aspect this is more motivating for the parents as they can see it.”

“Absolutely - we have covered the quadrangle and the children have raised £18,000 towards this. We have great fund raisers.”

It also motivates the students, especially boys:

“It can give the children work experience. The children got involved with renovating a classroom. They interviewed the caretaker and determined how to do it properly and decorated under his advice.”

“Motivating boys is difficult, they need to get more stimulus, moretouchy feely things. To see the end product and the physical purpose of things motivates them”

Responses to the suggested project

The central purpose of these interviews was to gauge reactions to a potential HCC project for schools. The programme would involve actual energy saving within the school and linked ‘learning for change’ initiatives. The school would get an initial energy audit, which would provide the basis for a plan to reduce energy consumption. The original energy audit would also provide a baseline for future measurement of energy saving.

With one partial exception – Mr Bishop, who as a finance manager expresses great interest in the energy-saving but doesn’t see any wider educational relevance – the proposal was received very enthusiastically. It is universally regarded by teachers and governors as a very promising idea. Described by some as “wicked”, “brilliant” and “marvellous”, it also gets some detailed and nuanced praise. These comments come from a secondary teacher:

“This is excellent, this will work provided there is good information available to schools. This would appeal to sponsors and there is a huge target audience who could get involved. If it is well planned and delivered this is a project that we could get sponsorship for…

“This could fit into the school as it integrates with inequality, conservation and energy use which are all areas we are looking at in our curriculum at the moment.”

These from a primary teacher:

“I’m all in favour, as we are very conscious of the changes we need to make to the environment. We need to get the children aware and to change their lifestyles to maintain our planet as a sustainable place to live…It would work in a logical manner and we would take it on board comfortably. This would integrate with conserving water and plants and would integrate with our curriculum.”

In short, the suggestion hits the spot. It would be redundant to show how the concept captures every single characteristic of a successful project as outlined above. It’s more useful to consider how best to develop the concept in the light of what teachers and governors had to say about actual projects and this possible new project. There are plenty of interesting recommendations as to how such a concept can best be realized.

Although the suggestion that was put to them is not explicit on the subject, nearly all of the teachers and governors assume that a fundamental part of the project would involve quite major structural improvements to the school – new boilers, new heating systems, new insulation or cladding, etc.

Many of them remark that it would be very worthwhile to tie together physical improvements with teaching about climate change. At the moment, many schools are trying to inculcate ideas about responsible energy use in buildings with uncomfortably hot interiors, or in one case with toilets that flush with hot water! So what the school says is at odds with what the school building shows. This is a very important problem felt by many teachers; any gap of this sort makes them look hypocritical and is bound to weaken the school. One of the strongest points of appeal of this project is that it would enable schools to practise what they preach.

Balance of money and meaning

After commenting on how beneficial the project would be to the school in general terms, respondents then go on to mention money. The money-saving aspect is seen as very attractive, and especially important as a hook to get the project embedded in the school in the first place. But the educational aspect of the project is unquestionably seen as more important.

For such a programme to work effectively, the money-saving and the educational aspects will need to be very carefully integrated. On the one hand, a proper, painstaking and objective audit is vital; in every sense this will be what gets the whole project going, in that it will give a surety of money-saving and will at the same time provide a quantitative structure for the project. On the other hand, this must always be an educational project that is actually owned by the students: