Notes on Contributors

Concepts adapted from structuration theory are employed to analyse how a disjunction has been created and sustained between the form taken by annual development plans for schools and a more flexible approach to planning that appears, from small‐scale research, to be effective at school level. The interest of LEAs and central government in a high degree of external control over school development is interpreted as contradictory to the interest at school level in maintaining a high degree of control over internal development. It is argued that action according to these contradictory interests has not led to conflict because completion of the plan has been kept largely separate from ongoing strategic planning at school level. The concepts employed in this analysis are defined, features of LEA development plans for schools are discussed, research evidence on development planning is summarized, and unintended consequences of development plans as a form of bureaucratic control are suggested.