Recently my colleague Andy Hargreaves and I wrote:

Ultimately, only three things matter about educational reform. Does it have depth: does it improve important rather than superficial aspects of students' learning and development? Does it have length or duration: can it be sustained over long periods of time instead of fizzling out after the first flush of innovation? Does it have breadth: can the reform be extended beyond a few schools, networks or showcase initiatives to transform education across entire systems or nations? Successful school reform is a Picasso, not a Rembrandt. It approaches change not in one or two dimensions, but, like a cubist painter, views it from all three. (Hargreaves & Fink 2000, p.30)

To focus workshop participants on two of the dimensions, generalizability - does the change have breadth - and sustainability - does the innovation have staying power - I ask participants to chose a current innovation in which they are involved, and complete the two attached questionnaires. The items are gleaned from the current literature on the generalizability ('scaling up) and sustainability of change. The scoring system is quite unsophisticated, but provides a way for participants to compare and contrast their views, and ultimately to engage in a critical dialogue about the changes in which they are involved. After each participant has completed the instruments, I ask them to count up the number of 4's and 5's, and then plot their scores on the following matrix. I have identified four very general states:

The Promised Land - the innovation or change has been generalized across the district, state etc. and is will be sustained over time in individual schools within the district or state,

Islands in the Stream are isolated pockets of excellence in which the innovation (s) has/have been institutionalized and sustained over time ( at least 5 years),

Atlantis describes widespread change that is of questionable depth and doubtful staying power. Like Atlantis and many past innovations (open concept schools, behavioral objectives etc.) an innovation flourishes widely for a realtively short period of time and then swept away to be become an historical footnote.

The Dead Sea refers to an innovation(s) that is/are neither generalized or sustained, although remnants may still exist in some inert form.

Participants can then talk about the potential of their changes in their context. The purpose of doing the exercise is to initiate a context-based discussion of the issues involved in at least two dimensions of educational change and to promote a more critical and in depth inquiry into the topics.

Hargreaves, A. and Fink, D. (2000) "The Three Dimensions of Education Reform", Educational Leadership, 57 (7), 30-34.

Can change be generalised to the larger system?	Not at all	Mostly rhetoric	Hit & Miss	Almost there	Definitely
1. The change has a clear focus on teaching and learning	1	2	3	4	5
2. The change goes beyond cognitive structures and attends to the the 'deep' social and emotional aspects of learning	1	2	3	4	5
3. The change is accompanied by rigorous but fair accountability procedures that are aligned with the change effort.	1	2	3	4	5
4. The focus of the change is clear, unequivocal and consistent	1	2	3	4	5
5. The change is supported by co-ordinated targeted but flexible staff development	1	2	3	4	5
6. The change process is based on co-ordinated and balanced sharing of authority between system's agencies and the schools	1	2	3	4	5
7. The change(s) is supported by sufficient, dedicated funds that will continue for at least five years	1	2	3	4	5
8. The change(s) is built around the establishment of collegial relationships among professional at all levels	1	2	3	4	5
9. The change process will continue to receive political support for at least five years.	1	2	3	4	5
10. The process focuses on a system or network of schools rather than one school at a time	1	2	3	4	5
11. The larger system actively supports local capacity building	1	2	3	4	5
12. Professional development supports the leadership function of principals and other formal leaders to support changes	1	2	3	4	5
13. The change process respects and supports the unique contexts of each site	1	2	3	4	5
14. The change not only allows but encourages adaptation at the local level	1	2	3	4	5
15. Policy initiators create a positive encouraging supportive ethos for teachers and principals to pursue the change initiative	1	2	3	4	5
16. Policy implementers have the resources - time, space, expertise - to carry out the change requirements	1	2	3	4	5
17. Teachers and principals are given an opportunity to address the intent of the change and to offer constructive criticism of the content and process of change	1	2	3	4	5
18. Parents, pupils and community members have meaningful and collaborative roles in the change	1	2	3	4	5
19. Central authority support for the recruitment, selection, training and if necessary dismissal of staff	1	2	3	4	5
20. Agencies of the central authority operate in a co-operative way and communicate a shared sense of direction	1	2	3	4	5

Can your school sustain change over time?	Not at all	Rarely	At times	Usually	Definitely
1. Student achievement is at or above the level one would expect based on our student intake.	1	2	3	4	5
2. Student attendance is satisfactory.	1	2	3	4	5
3. Student discipline in our school is dealt with satisfactorily.	1	2	3	4	5
4. Our school staff/faculty regularly reviews data on student Achievement and progress in order to help make decisions about teaching and curriculum.	1	2	3	4	5
5. Our school regularly reviews disaggregated data (race, gender etc.) on student achievement progress in order to help make decisions about teaching and curriculum.	1	2	3	4	5
6. Our school has a plan to replace our school's formal and informal leaders when necessary.	1	2	3	4	5
7. Our school's change agenda would continue if the school's principal (head) resigned tomorrow.	1	2	3	4	5
8. Decision-making patterns in our school are clear and widely supported.	1	2	3	4	5
9. All individuals and groups within the staff have a fair chance to influence school decisions.	1	2	3	4	5
10. We have agreed upon ways on staff/faculty to address conflicts.	1	2	3	4	5
11. Staff members feel empowered to make important decisions about teaching and learning within our school.	1	2	3	4	5
12. Our school has broad support in the community for its change agenda.	1	2	3	4	5
13. All our school's staff members share responsibility for maintaining a positive relationship between the school, and its community.	1	2	3	4	5
14. Teachers are enthusiastic and supportive of changes within our school.	1	2	3	4	5
15. Our school has a well-developed, well-supported school development plan	1	2	3	4	5
16. Policies from the Government and District/LEA will not impede our school's change agenda.	1	2	3	4	5
17. Resources to sustain our changes are guaranteed.	1	2	3	4	5
18. Our school's staff members review our structures (use of time, space, roles and responsibilities) regularly to see if they still make sense.	1	2	3	4	5
19. Our student enrolment is fairly stable.	1	2	3	4	5
20. We have proven ways to recruit new teachers to our school.	1	2	3	4	5
21. Our school's staff is balanced in terms of gender, ethnicity and experience.	1	2	3	4	5
22. Our school has an effective way to induct new staff into our school's culture.	1	2	3	4	5
23. Our school's staff members work and learn together.	1	2	3	4	5
24. Our school's staff members celebrate and have fun together.	1	2	3	4	5
25. Our school's staff members feel supported by those above us.	1	2	3	4	5
26. Our school's staff members feel appreciated for our efforts.	1	2	3	4	5
27. The annual staff turnover in our school is very low.	1	2	3	4	5
28. Our school has a very good idea of our context (demographics, history, policy context).	1	2	3	4	5
29. Our school has routines and procedures for its daily operation that we trust.	1	2	3	4	5
30. Our staff members have a shared sense of purpose for teaching, learning and caring for our students	1	2	3	4	5

Prepared by:
Dr. Dean Fink,
International Centre for Educational Change,
OISE/University of Toronto