Audit methodology
The methodology for the audit used both quantitative and qualitative techniques to enable a comparison across projects as well as the explanatory advantage of qualitative detail. This analysis relies solely on the final written project reports available from the ALTC website.
A numerical coding was attached to each of the ASERT action items, ranging from -2 (an action item never occurred) to +2 (an action item always occurred). A five point Likkert scale was used for allocation purposes between these two extremes (never, rarely, sometimes, very often, always). If no evidence was available as to whether an action occurred or not, it was identified as ‘n/a’.
The scores for each action item were then averaged across the four dimensions for each criterion and against the four criteria for each dimension in order to try to identify
To what degree the project demonstrated that:
- people were involved
- processes were supportive
- professional development was provided
- resources were available.
To what degree the project demonstrated that there was:
- a context of trust
- a culture of respect
- an environment of change which recognised contribution at all levels
- an environment that valued relationships through collaboration.
An average score for the whole matrix was then calculated to present an indicator of the overall alignment of the project against the ASERT dimensions, values, criteria and action items. An average of +2 indicates that the project is aligned with the dimensions, values, criteria and action items identified as contributing to a distributed leadership approach to building leadership capacity in learning and teaching. An average of -2 indicates that the project was not aligned with the dimensions, values, criteria and action items identified as contributing to a distributed leadership approach to learning and teaching.
