This document has been formatted for printing from your browser from the Web site of the Illinois Association of School Boards.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE -- This document is © copyrighted by the Illinois Association of School Boards. IASB hereby grants to school districts and other Internet users the right to download, print and reproduce this document provided that (a) the Illinois Association of School Boards is noted as publisher and copyright holder of the document and (b) any reproductions of this document are disseminated without charge and not used for any commercial purpose.

Illinois School Board Journal
March/April 2002

Journey to reform begins with sharing

by Linda Dawson

Linda Dawson is IASB director of editorial services and Journal editor.

Editor's Note: This is the first in a series that will follow the progress of school reform in Illinois. A meeting last fall in Peoria brought together representatives of like-sized school districts along the I-74 corridor, including teams from Springfield, Rockford and Decatur. While these districts are, for the most part, larger in size and configuration, the challenges they face in moving to "site-based" decision-making offer insights for districts of all sizes because of their shared mission: increased student achievement.

The Power Point presentation ended, followed by a slightly awkward pause before those gathered around the conference table on the third floor of the Keil Building in Decatur burst into applause. The applause was to recognize a job well done by members of the site council at Michael Baum Elementary School. But then the steering committee for the Decatur Partnership Council began to ask questions.

Could you work the mission statement into the Power Point visuals instead of making it just part of the narrative? Have you chosen your model from the New American Schools offerings? Have you surveyed your parents? Why, when your test scores are well above state and district-wide averages, are you embarking on a program of school reform?

The answers to these and other questions would help the Baum site council be better prepared for a presentation at the Decatur school board later in the month. Baum represents the 20th school out of 21 in the Decatur system asking for approval of its shared decision-making plan. The school board granted its first five shared decision-making approvals -- Brush College, Durfee, Harris and Stevenson elementary schools plus Thomas Jefferson Middle School -- in June 1998.

With leadership from DPC and its steering committee, as well as a supportive board and administration, District 61 is well on its way to site-based school reform. The first five years in their continuum is like a road map to an ultimate goal of higher student achievement, representatives say. But the trip has not been easy, especially with financial difficulties the district has faced in the past few years.

Any district embarking on school reform should not expect the journey to be easy, according to W. Patrick Dolan, author of Restructuring Our Schools: A Primer on Systemic Change. And even with cooperation and the best of intentions at the outset, sustaining a reform movement is difficult just because of the nature of the education system.

Dolan, who met with representatives of at least 15 districts in Peoria last fall to discuss education reform, compares the structure of America's schools to the command/demand model that governs military operations, as well as most businesses.

The model, which originated with the Ancient Romans, works well in all sizes of organizations. A leader (or leaders) at the top of a structural pyramid determines strategy, which is interpreted by a middle layer of managers or tacticians. Implementation is left to the actual soldiers or workers, who may or may not have any idea what the overall strategy is. They just know they have been assigned a job and must get it done.

In education, working on Dolan's model, the school board, administration and teachers' unions are the three-headed top of the pyramid. They delegate authority for interpretation to the building principals, who turn the actual implementation of curriculum over to teachers. It's the military model at its finest.

But is this military model the best way to get things done? Larry Weber, founder of Weber Shandwick International, an advertising and marketing conglomerate, "is tired of military metaphors" and "doesn't think that giving orders is the best way to run a business," according to Paul C. Judge, a senior editor at Fast Company. Weber's business advice also could apply to education.

Weber believes "a new generation of leaders is succeeding in business because they have ditched the military management style personified by a group that he calls 'the generals,'" Judge says. "Instead, Weber sees a new model of leadership: the provocateur. Where generals are rigid and closed, provocateurs are flexible and open. Where generals favor command and control, provocateurs operate through sense and response. Where generals view a company as a pyramid with one person at the top, provocateurs see it as a circle with the customer at its center."

The "one person" in Weber's pyramid correlates with Dolan's triumvirate at the top of the education model: school board, administration and union. While some don't like the image of a student as a "customer," students and their achievement should be at the heart of reform models.

And consider the other similarities. Weber describes customers as "nomads who are looking for places to camp out." The same could be said of parents looking for better education options through charter schools, vouchers and home schooling. But, Weber adds, "The more engaging, useful or attractive provocateurs can make their communities, the better their chances are of attracting and keeping customers." Thus, if "communities" (schools) can make themselves more engaging and attractive, they will have a better chance "attracting and keeping customers" (students).

How will that happen? Weber says provocateurs (reformers) believe the CEO's (school board, administration and union) primary job is "to engage in deep, constant dialogue" with its constituencies to benefit the "customers" (students). This public engagement is also advocated in Dolan's model.

But the nature of the military model is to command, not engage. This command relationship creates detachment between the power at the top and those who carry out the mission at the bottom of the pyramid. The top of the pyramid is used to talking and being listened to by those underneath, creating a downward flow of information and direction. Education reform calls for information to flow in the opposite direction, from the bottom to the top, and demands that those working most closely with the student "customers," the teachers, be allowed to have more of a say in the way things are run.

Weber describes the problem of detachment this way: "Generals usually have a hard time overcoming their aloofness and getting out on the street to see what's really happening. ... Provocateurs work from the ground up and know what's happening on the streets of their communities. If you're too far from your customers, you can mistake what your community wants and needs."

This listening is at the heart of connecting with the community, one of six basic governance principals developed by the Illinois Association of School Boards. When a board solicits and understands the community's educational aspirations and desires, it can be more responsive to those needs and work as an instrument for change.

Unfortunately, any force for change usually meets strong resistance, and this top-down, military power structure is particularly resistant and unyielding, according to Dolan. In fact, when pushed by outside forces, it works even harder to perpetuate itself.

So what will it take to give impetus to change as well as keep it moving?

In the January 2002 edition of Fast Company magazine, Seth Godin's "Survival is not enough" offers a thought provoking piece on change in the business world. His premise? If businesses want to succeed in these turbulent times, they need to do more than embrace change. They need to learn how to evolve. The same advice can apply to school districts.

"It is our fear of changing a winning strategy and our reliance on command-and-control tactics that make us miserable -- not change," Godin writes. "Change doesn't have to be the enemy."

As in Dolan's model to restructure schools and the W. Edwards Deming model of business reform, Godin also maintains that individual organisms drive evolution, not some top-down, command-driven militaristic plan.

"If you look at genetic evolution the wrong way, it seems like nothing but noise: billions of organisms, with no one in charge, all reproducing as fast as they can and competing for one niche," Godin writes. "But at the closest level, evolution makes perfect sense. Two organisms compete, and the one that wins passes on its genes. At the most remote level, it makes sense again. Over millions of years, this apparently senseless turbulence has produced the human eye, the elk, the skunk and Apollo 11. It's only in those in-between views that evolution appears to be unorganized and teetering on the edge of disaster.

"It's in the middle -- at the desk of the harried middle manager who desires control and has none -- that it appears to be a total disaster. And so far, most change efforts have focused on the middle, because that is where bulk meets power. ... The people who need to do the embracing have to change the most."

Godin advocates what he calls "zooming." Zooming involves constantly training people to make small changes in an effort to embrace changes that will inevitably come.

However, even small changes -- changes that can be made by individuals -- look like large obstacles if a culture isn't created to recognize and support the changes. That's why Dolan advocates making changes within the existing structural framework instead of dismantling the structure and starting from scratch.

No need to throw out school boards and administrators. They're still a necessary part of the equation. What changes is the ability to listen to the sites and respond, not with directives on how to get things done, but how to find what will work the best and how to get there.

In Decatur, even though the district is committed to change, issues are cropping up that show how the movement of power to the sites is pushing at the system in place. At a recent partnership steering committee meeting, the district's Language Arts Task Force posed a specific problem. If the task force recommends changes in the current curriculum, what's to keep individual schools from asking for waivers in order to use materials more aligned with their chosen site model? And if several different programs are allowed, how can the district maintain any curriculum continuity for its mobile student base, as well as for teachers in the district? Plus, will the sites be required to notify the task force that they will not be using the designated curriculum well before the materials are ordered? Or, might the district order new materials and then find itself with an overstock that's not being used?

These problems are to be expected, according to Dolan. In fact, this is a good sign. This means change is taking place. Now the flow of information needs to increase, not from the top down, as is usually the case with curriculum impositions from the board and administration, but from the bottom up. This means teachers and principals need to be honest about what is working in their schools and what isn't. Such information is not always easy to come by, for at least two reasons:

First, the existing testing structure pits school against school, even within a district, to be better than its neighbor. Dolan illustrates this point with a story about a company that had multiple factories, most of which had a similar production problem. The individual factory managers were brought together for a corporate meeting to brainstorm and fix the problem.

One manager was fairly quiet throughout most of the proceedings, Dolan said. When finally questioned, the manager admitted that his factory had solved the problem more than six months before. But he had not shared the information with his other managers, because merit raises and bonuses in the company were based on production figures. If he told everyone else, he wouldn't look better than the rest when evaluation time rolled around.

"If you're being evaluated against seven other equals, why would you share the information that sets you apart and makes you better?" Dolan asked. The same is true in school districts. Why share information between schools, when the object is to score higher on achievement tests?

Second, the top-down hierarchy also does not like to hear bad news. "Bearers of bad news fare badly," according to Deming. "To keep his job, anyone may present to his boss only good news."

But sharing only good news is not what will make the reform movement and site-based decision-making successful.

"Unsolicited, negative data is hard to move," Dolan says. "It's perceived as insubordination." He compares this situation to an 8-year-old asking questions at a family meeting after Dad has just laid down the law.

"Now, does everybody understand?" A small hand shoots up as the older children in the family try to shush the youngster. "Don't ask," the other children say. "We'll all be in trouble."

Schools must be willing to share what doesn't work as well as what does, Dolan says, without fear of retribution or a reining in of their decision-making authority. Even though they don't get it right the first time, that doesn't mean they can't alter what they're doing and chart a better course.

In Decatur, that sharing process is just beginning. The steering committee recently set up site teams to visit each school in the district to discuss how their plans are working ... or not working. In the cover letter that went to each school, the committee admitted that it has not done a good enough job of listening, whether to information about successes, challenges, concerns or suggestions. The team visits, with just three or four people assigned to each team, are designed to rectify that lack of listening without intimidation.

Shared information also is at the root of the assessment tests mandated now as a result of passage of President George W. Bush's education bill. The data created from these tests should point to where improvements need to be made. But if school reform is to succeed, it must follow then that teachers -- those on the frontline to make the difference -- will need to embrace and make the most changes ... not because they're told to but because they see the need and can contribute to changing the process.

The board of Springfield School District 186 used the same theory when it made a $1 million commitment to a computer system with classroom access to track student data for attendance and grades.

"If we're serious about running data-driven schools, it won't work until it hits the teacher's desk," said Bob Hill, District 186 superintendent, during the meeting in Peoria. His teachers told him they were willing to put in the time to use the system because they don't want to be held accountable if they have no input.

When it comes down to it, teachers become the key, driving the vehicle along the highway in the journey toward increased student achievement, with students as front-seat passengers. The board and administration become the back-seat drivers: offering consultation and support when needed, but allowing the driver to find the right route.

But in order to drive, teachers first must be empowered by the district to get behind the wheel. And according to Dolan, it's not just enough to just give permission. There must be a deep buy-in at the top of the district's power structure to succeed.

And if permission is given to change and then rescinded, he said, the district will find "a group of very angry, very bruised people and a very dysfunctional school."

With all this said, the journey to school reform takes on the features of a family trip:

• You know the destination: improved student achievement.
• You may travel multiple routes to get there: school reform models.
• You look for good food and gas prices: best practices.
• You keep track of how many miles you drive: test data.
• And, when you arrive, the children are the ones who benefit most.

"Communities at Work: A Guidebook of Strategic Interventions for Community Change," available in PDF or as a Microsoft Word document at http://www.publiceducation.org/interventions/.

Restructuring Our Schools: A Primer on Systemic Change by W. Patrick Dolan, Systems & Organizations, Kansas City, Kansas. 1994

References

Deming, W. Edwards. The New Economics. Online information: http://www.deming.org/theman/teachings.html (accessed January 8, 2002)

Dolan, W. Patrick. Restructuring Our Schools: A Primer on Systemic Change. Systems & Organizations, Kansas City, Kansas. 1994

Godin, Seth. "Survival is not enough," Fast Company, January 2002

Judge, Paul C. "Provocation 101," Fast Company, January 2002