Option A is authority-based management that essentially ignores the four people-focused principles defined at the beginning of this article. Option B is the brain-based or staff-focused or what is often called site-based management option.
The schoolwide results of the two options are no different than what occurs in the classroom with students. For a student example, I once taught in a junior high school where teachers instituted a performance objective program in which students could propose some of their own performance objectives beyond those defined by the teacher in each course. The results were amazingly positive; students regularly proposed exciting and relevant and very challenging objectives. They worked much harder than they had when only teacher proposed objectives were allowed. In one algebra class, a small group of talented students even proposed that they finish their algebra work quickly each period and then spend some time in the corridor working together to complete a geometry program with sporadic help from the teacher. This group succeeded in completing both the algebra and the geometry program in that class. One student in physical education proposed that he “pedal a bicycle for five miles with no appreciable change in metabolic rate.” After some clarification and lots of personal training, he succeeded at that difficult objective. Without listing dozens of other student accomplishments, I simply report that carefully approving many student proposed objectives and choices led to much higher achievement levels by students who were very dedicated to their special interests and choices.
I also had the good fortune of becoming an administrator in a Massachusetts high school where I was able to allow teacher teams or task forces to make decisions on and direct implementation of all major improvement projects. For example, after a staff meeting review of information on portfolio programs being tried in Michigan (more on this later), a group of teachers volunteered to research the topic and possibly make recommendations for our school. What this task force and eventually all teachers in the school accomplished in instituting a now required student portfolio program went far beyond anything that I or any other administrator could have either defined or directed. Of course, the teachers were most enthusiastic about their objectives and their choices in this and many other areas. Any school can create the structure and conditions for such teacher enthusiasm and achievement.
Conditions and Structure. Certain conditions do encourage and allow brain-based or site-based school management. Three very important conditions are:
- Staff knowledge about and endorsement of total quality management (TQM) principles. See Topic #17. - - Teacher leaders and administrators need to understand and sell the concepts of continuous improvement, teaming, and management with data to everyone in a school, including students.
- A teacher job description requiring that each teacher participate on an improvement task force beyond his or her department or grade level group. - - Such a requirement follows naturally from total quality management principles. If it is necessary to negotiate this requirement, most teacher associations readily perceive and appreciate how it gives the teachers much more say in how a school is operated. If there is a debate on the issue, school district negotiators should be clear that bargaining is a two-way street and that a requirement like this is both reasonable and a benefit to teachers.
- Administrative policies clearly support and coordinate important use of teacher task forces. - - Here are actual examples of policies that have worked:
- A task force and initial mission may be proposed by the principal or by one or more teachers.
- The principal or school director must approve formation of a task force. This allows coordination, avoiding redundancy, and avoidance of going in too many directions at once. (A limit of eight task forces per 100 teachers might be reasonable.)
- A task force can be relatively permanent (such as a Curriculum/Assessment group) or relatively temporary (such as a group initiating a portfolio system). Once a temporary project is completed, follow-up responsibility might be assigned to a permanent group. For example, portfolio follow-up might be done by a sub-group of the curriculum/assessment task force.
- Each teacher volunteers for his or her desired task force except in some cases assignments are made by department chairpersons or the principal if a department is required to have a member on a primary task force for which no one has volunteered.
- Chairpersons of task forces might initially be appointed by the principal or director but, after that, can be elected annually for the next year by task force members.
- Chairpersons of task forces receive an annual salary differential of $1,000 for their extra leadership and coordination duties.
- Near the end of a school year, a task force defines its mission and objectives for the next school year unless the principal directs or allows disbanding a group.
- During a year of its operations, a task force gives status reports to the principal or director.
- Each task force is supported with access to a budget for travel (conferences, visits to other schools, books, training materials, etc.) Those who attend conferences and make visits share follow-up reports with the appropriate staff members. Remember the earlier example of our Massachusetts school addressing portfolios by considering examples from Michigan. In the world of quality management, this is called benchmarking - - using models and standards that have been defined as successful, in this case in Department of Education encouraged experimentation in Michigan.
- Some student released time (perhaps one day per month) is given to allow task force meetings and related staff training sessions beyond those held after school or outside the regular school year. If a task force is pursuing a major time-consuming project, summer work time is budgeted for those involved.
- Task forces are given both decision-making authority and coordinated access to the staff.
- Task force chairpersons attend coordination meetings with department chairpersons and administrators. Members of a task force may be assigned to a district coordination function or group that operates across two or more schools.
- Finally a task force may eventually be abolished or combined with one or more other groups with the approval of the principal or the director of the school.
Examples of task forces. The structures or task forces or teams that should be used in a school or any other organization are dictated by the special situations that exist for that school or organization. How are students doing in critical areas like reading, mathematics, state or other tests, achievement of career-technical certifications, college admissions, job placement, courtesy and helpfulness to others? Have important recommendations been made by any evaluation group? Have parents, students, employers, or other customers made important suggestions? Have staff members defined areas in which they would like improvement and help? Have visits, conferences, or reports stimulated interest in techniques, practices, or technology that might improve service to and/or achievement by students? Do comparisons indicate that there is a need for more efficiency or a change in funding in one or more areas?
In addressing such questions as the above, here are some examples of actual task forces and their missions:
- Curriculum/Assessment Task Force - - This was a primary and permanent task force. Every major department in the school was required to have a representative on this group. Some basic mission descriptions were:
- Define and train (or arrange training of) teachers in a system of schoolwide focus and annual improvement efforts (based on data) on student achievement of standards tested by the state. For example, all teachers in all subjects were trained to teach and require specific writing standards defined by the English Department.
- Define and train (or arrange training of) teachers in use and continuous improvement of the school’s system of teaching techniques (See Topic #2 on brain-friendly teaching.) A temporary Accelerated Learning Task Force introduced this techniques system and then in a later year became a sub-committee of the Curriculum/Assessment Task Force.
- Grow and annually improve use of the school’s portfolio system, providing annual help to students and teachers.
- Ensure proper orientation and special mentoring help for all new teachers in the above systems.
- Reading Task Force - - Some mission descriptions were:
- Discover and recommend effective learning style options to which students needing help to reach high school level proficiency in reading can be assigned.
- Help departments implement and coordinate reading options approved by the administration.
- Ensure annual evaluation of reading progress and options using analyzed data.
- Direct appropriate staff training and improvement projects in reading. For example, all teachers in all subjects were given training in teaching reading skills in content areas.
This Reading Task Force helped the school use a powerful mix of teaching reading skills in all subjects, using different reading programs in English classes, using two different computer-assisted remedial programs; one on auditory discrimination, one with learning style options for anyone reading below the sixth grade skill level on entering grade nine. Results were excellent. For example, the learning style based computer-assisted lab raised average grade level gains annually so that assigned students were eventually gaining an average of four grade levels per school year.
- Other Task Forces - - Some of the other task forces used included:
- An E-Learning Task Force charged with increasing use of computer-assisted learning.
- A Multi-Cultural Task Force that promoted appreciation and respect across ethnic boundaries.
- A Total Quality Management (TQM) Task Force that helped coordinate department and task force and administrative operations.
Closing Comments. Be aware that all of the described task force operations took place in an environment dedicated to a philosophy of total quality management (TQM). All staff members and all students were given training in and evaluated on use of the profound management points described in TQM in Education, Topic #17, on this web site. When everyone in a school understands the power of the philosophy of continuous improvement and the necessity for using models (systems) and teaming and data to achieve the improvement, a staff is prepared to pursue the four fundamental principles of brain-based management described at the start of this article. Without a full understanding and acceptance of TQM philosophy, a staff is not as ready to pursue the principles of brain-based school management. When staff members are supported in pursuing brain-based management, everyone can become a partner in the pursuit of quality.
|
