Curriculum Leadership Institute

Pathways to School Improvement

implementation

Systematic Implementation to Achieve a Systemic Vision

by

In current school accreditation models, the existence of a systems approach is valued and evidence of that approach is necessary for a favorable review.  Accreditation teams are looking for indications of examining the whole system as well as documentation on taking care of the details.  One accreditation team’s review of a school district stated that “The district has a strong understanding of the big picture but does not seem to have a method of reaching their desired outcomes.”

Identifying the big picture is an example of systems thinking.  Systems thinking is a frequently used term within education circles, as well as industry discussions, but many participants in those discussions are not aware that there are two critical aspects of that view – systemic vision and systematic implementation.  Vision and implementation are partners in the entire change process. Each can be defined as follows: Systemic change (vision) is “change that pervades all parts of a system, taking into account the interrelationships and interdependencies among those parts.” Systematic change (implementation) is defined as “to be methodical in procedure or plan, or marked by thoroughness and regularity.”

Attention to one aspect of systems thinking without attention to the other can lead a district to a false expectation of success.

Systemic change (vision) demands that all subsystems and constituent parts be considered for potential impacts by proposed change.  Then, all members (the working parts) of the systems and subsystems must be involved in the discussions and thoroughly briefed as to the rationale of the change and the new reality in which the system as a whole is expected to operate.  Without the input of the interrelated and interdependent parts of the larger system, there is little chance of successful transition.  The working parts of a system each have a specific role in the success of the system.  Without the opportunity to study the change and to evaluate and communicate the potential impact of the change, the parts of the system may work at less than peak efficiency and result in the appearance of conflict with change.  In a school district, a permanent, representative group of the separate systems or subsystems is necessary to continuously review and monitor success or determine need for change.

Systematic change (implementation) is critical to prevent breakdowns within the system.  The concept of systematic change implies planning for timelines for the subsystems and parts to implement their necessary steps.  Once the systemic view is clearly defined, the systematic changes must be planned for implementation and maintenance.  Too often, continuous attention to the health or needs of each aspect is not planned and falls by the wayside.  With a group of representative stakeholders to maintain systemic view, the systematic needs become a regular detail to be considered and discussed.

A systems approach to decision making provides a basis for continued health of a school district.  Both aspects of the systems approach demand attention.  The number of “moving parts” within a district demands a systemic vision and a systematic approach to implementing the vision.  The “big picture” is important to see, but without the details of the “picture” the meaning is often lost or unclear.

The Excitement and Challenge of Beginning a New School Year

by

A year ago at this important time of the school year, we published an E-Hint including checklists for starting the school year with immediate curriculum, instruction, and assessment needs at the forefront.  This E-Hint is still relevant for kick-starting these efforts for the new year: Checklists to Begin the School Year.

Reviewing the status of ongoing initiatives and planning for the current year should become routine.  In the years following the development of curriculum documents, the implementation of curriculum, and the writing of assessments, there are often other initiatives that must come into play to further improve student learning.  While we at Curriculum Leadership Institute (CLI), caution school districts about starting too many initiatives at once, there is a time and place where outside support for improving instructional strategies, improving the implementation of a new resource, using data analysis strategies to effectively critique our efforts, or other needs must be addressed.

With the beginning of a new school year on the horizon, evaluate decisions about when to start new initiatives, who will be affected by the change, and the intended result.  While examining time-allocation for any new initiative, planners should consider the impact on the staff.  Administrators must be very careful to ensure a plan that does not overload any particular staff member, or group of staff members, to the point of limiting their effectiveness in the classroom.  Teachers will continue to have all of the responsibilities of everyday management of the classroom. When the district starts something new, it necessarily impacts and potentially increases the amount of time needed for managing the classroom. Whether the new initiative requires study time, learning a new instructional strategy, finding better methods of accomplishing the same teacher tasks, learning new software programs, or implementing a new schoolwide effort, teachers must continue to do all that they have been doing in addition to anything new. Providing time for teachers to learn, discuss, and evaluate effectiveness of new strategies is critical to ensure fidelity to the effort.  When that time is provided, it makes all the difference.  The new initiative needs to be added to the checklist of the ongoing tasks, in detail, so that the potential impact on staff members is clear to all involved.

A visual display, such as a spreadsheet that can be color coded or sorted by various attributes such as teachers, time of year, related efforts, etc., helps planners “see” when the same teachers are impacted repeatedly in a short time span.  Visuals help call attention to “pink flag cases” where instruction may be so significantly impacted that the benefit of the work or training time becomes questionable.  In order to make the visual display most helpful, include the type of training, the teachers impacted, other efforts that are closely related to each training or work session, and the recommended time of the school year for the training.  Then, with planning and discussion, the dates can be scheduled to the best advantage of all staff and the potential negative effects of doing too much at any one given time are greatly reduced.  The resulting professional development calendar is designed including these dates, bene-fitting both the staff involved and student learning.

For the best start possible, it is important that ALL initiatives are evaluated in terms of time required and impact on the school or district as a whole. Adjustments to schedules and assignments are made to maximize the many necessary efforts needed, allowing teachers to grow in their ability to assist student learning, while managing all of those efforts and responsibilities that do not change with a new year.

download_pdf_sm

Transformational Change with the CLI Model

by

download_pdf_smAs an educator, you are often called upon to lead change efforts within your district.  Even if you have not implemented the CLI Model, you know that all educators can be change agents and you have most likely already determined that in education, change is sometimes the only constant as you attempt to find new ways to reach students, manage buildings, and serve communities.

The research on how to make change in organizations is abundant.  There are many “types” of change by definition; but, for simplicity, we have narrowed it down to the two basic types:  first-order and second-order.

First-order change is typically less traumatic in terms of individual reaction and is sometimes referred to as developmental change.  It may mean simple adjustments to what you are already doing while still staying on the same path.  It is simply improving upon what you already have.  First-order change is reversible, meaning if it doesn’t work out of the gate you can stop doing it, which also makes it reactionary change.  These types of changes do not necessarily require new learning to take place and staff members are usually open to trying them because of these factors.  However, there is danger when districts start and stop changes frequently—staff may think “this, too, will pass,” and they will not fully commit to making the change work.  This can also lead to teacher confusion about which “thing” they should really be doing.

On the other hand, second-order change requires shifting to a new way of seeing things.  This type of change is typically referred to as transformational change and is viewed as more radical.  It is fundamentally different than what you have done in the past and it is irreversible, meaning once you start down the path, you can never return to what you have done previously.  New learning is required and some staff members may be hesitant to support the change because there is no “safety net” as with a first-order change. During a second-order change, it is vitally important for the district’s top leaders to be on board and supportive of both the change itself and the staff they work with.  For example, in a school district that has only one of four administrators on board, the change will be very difficult to realize.  Transformational change is difficult even when all leaders are on board; so taking the time to build capacity and educate leaders on the benefits and possible challenges of the change is an important initial step.transformational change arrow

Although the adoption of a detailed school improvement process like the CLI Model is most likely a transformational change for a significant portion of a professional staff, keep in mind that a first-order change to one person may be a second-order change to another.  Knowing your staff is key to understanding what the reaction to either type of change may be and preparing for success of change.  If an educator’s fundamental beliefs are not challenged (first-order change), they may show more cooperation and less resistance than educators who must adapt to new ideas about teaching practices and their roles in the classroom.  Deep philosophical changes (second-order) can produce resistance initially; however, with a safe, structured process in place that includes good communication, teachers and administrators eventually align their beliefs and practices to the reform effort, or they move on.  In terms of resistance within groups of people, research from renowned education author and scholar, Everett Rogers, shows that:

8% will be innovators.
17% will be leaders.
29% will be early adopters.
29% will be late adopters.
17% will be resisters.

In other words, it isn’t natural for 100% of your staff to be on board with a second-order change immediately.  Although some will jump on board as leaders and early adopters and see the value of a change such as using the CLI Model, in many cases, much legwork must be done in order to lead the majority of your people to believe in it.  The key is providing ongoing two-way communication opportunities, appropriate staff development, and an empathetic ear coupled with a firm belief in moving forward with the change.