When I reflect on the leadership in failing schools, I realized that leadership has been based primarily on hierarchical management. Such approaches have led to the creation of rigid systems that depend on rules and procedures and encourage smoldering fires that require constant cure and aid. Hierarchical management does not encourage the analysis of or a focus on the underlying organizational problems. The shared leadership model, in contrast, requires orchestrating a process whereby the competing points of view of the staff coalesce into a cohesive vision. The school leader would model this behavior by embracing a holistic view of the school environment and shaping the internal structures and processes while keeping the bigger picture in mind.
Overseeing the totality of school functions requires leadership, not solely management. Understanding how management and leadership differ is an important concept in providing the kind of vision that is needed to restructure today's schools. Although management provides consistency, leadership, control, and efficiency, leadership is the catalyst for stimulating purpose, passion, and imagination. Management is fundamental to an authoritarian-driven hierarchical structure that seeks to maintain fragmentation in organizational structures. In contrast, leadership offers a opportunity to re-evaluate and restructure a system that is nonoperational, dysfunctional, or poorly operating by building bridges and alliances with colleagues and major stakeholders
Currently schools are not structured in ways that invite easy adaptation to student needs. As we begin to think about tailoring instructional strategies and interventions to fit diverse student needs, the paradigm that governs school organization will need to move towards hierarchically structured team roles and away from hierarchically structured compartmentalized roles. School administrators will be needed to encourage staff to embrace change rather than endure, or resist it. The changing paradigm in school organization is one that views students, teachers, and principals in distinctly different roles than they have traditionally held. We propose that the vision of leadership and school organization shift to one in which the student is viewed as client and customer rather than a product, the teacher is seen as an innovator and initiator rather than the production unit and the principal is viewed as an organizational leader rather than the production manager. Principals who can bring about effective instruction, foster a quality of leadership that encourages flexibility, open lines of communication, and invite negotiation among school staff hold the greatest potential for promoting successful student outcomes.
The new leader should be an instructional specialist. Assessment and instruction must be a seamless web that promotes teacher/student collaboration, active learning, critical thinking skills and multidisciplinary understanding (Khattri, Kane and Reeve, 1995). To do this, the leader must first acknowledge the fact that different students learn in different ways. The next step is to prepare differently. This means that activities are varied to address the "seven intelligences" as outlined by Howard Gardner in his 1983 book "Frames of Mind" and explored further by Thomas Armstrong (1994). The seven intelligences are:
1. Linguistic.2. Logical-mathematical.3. Spatial.4. Bodily-kinesthetic.5. Musical.6. Interpersonal.7. Intrapersonal.
Randy Schenkat (1993) suggests six task themes must underlie the Total Quality Management process in schools. The task themes are: 1. the nature of the problem; 2. the motivation for the task; 3. time frames to accomplish tasks; 4. the nature of solutions; 5. the human capacities used to accomplish the tasks; and 6. the assessment of the results or program evaluation.
References
Butterfield, K. D., Treviño, L. K. & Weaver, G. R. (2000). Moral awareness in business
organizations: Influences of issue-related and social context factors. Human
Relations, 53, 981-1018.
Feldhusen, J. E, & Pleiss, M. K. (1994). Leadership: A synthesis of social skills,
creativity, and histrionic ability? Roeper Review, 16, 292-293. Hensel, N. H. (1991). Social leadership skills in young children. Roeper Review, 14,
4-6.(restructuring,vision) KW" name=K2Query> KW " name=EnglishQuery>(VISION,RESTRUCTURING)" name=FulltextHighlightQuery>
Fred M. Newmann et. al., Successful School Restructuring: A Report to the public and
Educators (Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools, 1995).
Goleman, D. Working with emotional intelligence. New York:
John Henry Cardinal Newman, Knowledge Viewed in Relation to Learning, Idea of a
University, lectures originally given in 1852 (London: Longmans, Green, and Co.,
(1912).WBN: 9619703462013
Karnes, F. A., & Bean, S. M. (1996). Leadership and the gifted. Focus on Exceptional
Children, 29(1), 1-12.
Kelly, G.A., Constructs The psychology of Personal. New York: Norton, 1955.
Lindsey, R.B., Robins, K.N., Terrell, R.D. (1999). Cultural proficiency: A Manual for
school leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Michael G. Fullan, Reculturning Schools, Phi Delta Kappan (February 1996: X). Mary
Kennedy, Policy Issues in Teaching Education, Phi Delta Kappan (May 1991:
661-666).
Peters, T. J., Liberation Management: Necessary Disorganization for the Nanosecond
Nineties. New York:Knopf, 1992.
Schein, Edgar H., Career Dynamics. Addison Wesley, Reading, Classic on
career management and career anchors. MA, 1978.
Wilber, K., Integral Psychology. Boston: Shambhala, 2000.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Strategies for Managing Change Effectively
This is helpful particularly for leaders that have been assigned to a new school or environment. Managing change effectively requires moving the organization from its current state to a future desired state at minimal cost to the organization. Bateman and Zeithaml identified three steps for managers to follow in implementing organizational change:
Diagnose the current state of the organization. This involves identifying problems the company faces, assigning a level of importance to each one, and assessing the kinds of changes needed to solve the problems.
Design the desired future state of the organization. This involves picturing the ideal situation for the company after the change is implemented, conveying this vision clearly to everyone involved in the change effort, and designing a means of transition to the new state. An important part of the transition should be maintaining some sort of stability; some things—such as the company's over-all mission or key personnel—should re-main constant in the midst of turmoil to help reduce people's anxiety.
Implement the change. This involves managing the transition effectively. It might be helpful to draw up a plan, allocate resources, and appoint a key person to take charge of the change process. The company's leaders should try to generate enthusiasm for the change by sharing their goals and vision and acting as role models. In some cases, it may be useful to try for small victories first in order to pave the way for later successes.
"Successfully changing an enterprise requires wisdom, prescience, energy, persistence, communication, education, training, resources, patience, timing, and the right incentives, " John S. McCallum wrote in the Ivey Business Journal. "Successfully leading and managing change is and will continue to be a front-burner responsibility for executives. Prospects are grim for enterprises that either cannot or will not change. Indeed, no industry member is quite so welcome as the one that steadfastly refuses to keep up."
FURTHER READING:
Adebanjo, Dotun. "Corporate Restructuring: Managing the Change Problem from Within." Leadership and Organization Development Journal. September 1996.
Austin, Mary Ruth. "Managing Change." Manage. August 1997.
Bateman, Thomas S., and Carl P. Zeithaml. Management: Function and Strategy. Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1990.
Dove, Rick. "The Principles of Change." Automotive Manufacturing and Production. March 1997.
Hurst, David K. "When It Comes to Real Change, Too Much Objectivity May Be Fatal to the Process." Strategy and Leader-ship. March-April 1997.
Maurer, Rick. "Transforming Resistance." HR Focus. October 1997.
McCallum, John S. "The Face Behind Change." Ivey Business Quarterly. Winter 1997.
Recardo, Ronald J. "Overcoming Resistance to Change." National Productivity Review. Spring 1995.
Schwartz, Andrew E. "Eight Guidelines for Managing Change." Supervisory Management. July 1994.
Trahant, Bill, W. Warner Burke, and Richard Koonce. "Twelve Principles of Organizational Transformation." Management Review. September 1997.
Wallington, Patricia M. "Making Change." CIO. April 1, 2000.
Diagnose the current state of the organization. This involves identifying problems the company faces, assigning a level of importance to each one, and assessing the kinds of changes needed to solve the problems.
Design the desired future state of the organization. This involves picturing the ideal situation for the company after the change is implemented, conveying this vision clearly to everyone involved in the change effort, and designing a means of transition to the new state. An important part of the transition should be maintaining some sort of stability; some things—such as the company's over-all mission or key personnel—should re-main constant in the midst of turmoil to help reduce people's anxiety.
Implement the change. This involves managing the transition effectively. It might be helpful to draw up a plan, allocate resources, and appoint a key person to take charge of the change process. The company's leaders should try to generate enthusiasm for the change by sharing their goals and vision and acting as role models. In some cases, it may be useful to try for small victories first in order to pave the way for later successes.
"Successfully changing an enterprise requires wisdom, prescience, energy, persistence, communication, education, training, resources, patience, timing, and the right incentives, " John S. McCallum wrote in the Ivey Business Journal. "Successfully leading and managing change is and will continue to be a front-burner responsibility for executives. Prospects are grim for enterprises that either cannot or will not change. Indeed, no industry member is quite so welcome as the one that steadfastly refuses to keep up."
FURTHER READING:
Adebanjo, Dotun. "Corporate Restructuring: Managing the Change Problem from Within." Leadership and Organization Development Journal. September 1996.
Austin, Mary Ruth. "Managing Change." Manage. August 1997.
Bateman, Thomas S., and Carl P. Zeithaml. Management: Function and Strategy. Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1990.
Dove, Rick. "The Principles of Change." Automotive Manufacturing and Production. March 1997.
Hurst, David K. "When It Comes to Real Change, Too Much Objectivity May Be Fatal to the Process." Strategy and Leader-ship. March-April 1997.
Maurer, Rick. "Transforming Resistance." HR Focus. October 1997.
McCallum, John S. "The Face Behind Change." Ivey Business Quarterly. Winter 1997.
Recardo, Ronald J. "Overcoming Resistance to Change." National Productivity Review. Spring 1995.
Schwartz, Andrew E. "Eight Guidelines for Managing Change." Supervisory Management. July 1994.
Trahant, Bill, W. Warner Burke, and Richard Koonce. "Twelve Principles of Organizational Transformation." Management Review. September 1997.
Wallington, Patricia M. "Making Change." CIO. April 1, 2000.
RESISTANCE TO CHANGE
As a new principal in a school where staff members were loyal to the previous principal, this was a challenging one. A manager trying to implement a change, no matter how small, should expect to encounter some resistance from within the organization. Resistance to change is a normal reaction from people who have become accustomed to a certain way of doing things. Of course, certain situations or tactics can increase resistance. "Individuals, groups, and organizations must be motivated to change. But if people perceive no performance gap or if they consider the gap un-important, they will not have this motivation. Moreover, they will resist changes that others try to introduce, " Bateman and Zeithaml explained.
The authors outlined a number of common reasons that people tend to resist change. These include: inertia, or the tendency of people to become comfortable with the status quo; timing, as when change efforts are introduced at a time when workers are busy or have a bad relationship with management; surprise, because people's reflex is to resist when they must deal with a sudden, radical change; or peer pressure, which may cause a group to resist due to anti-management feelings even if individual members do not oppose the change. Resistance can also grow out of people's perceptions of how the change will affect them personally. They may resist because they fear that they will lose their jobs or their status, because they do not understand the purpose of the change, or simply because they have a different perspective on the change than management.
Fortunately, Bateman and Zeithaml noted, there are a number of steps managers can take to help overcome resistance to change. One proven method is education and communication. Employees can be informed about both the nature of the change and the logic behind it before it takes place through reports, memos, group presentations, or individual discussions. Another important component of overcoming resistance is inviting employee participation and involvement in both the design and implementation phases of the change effort. "People who are involved in decisions understand them better and are more committed to them, " Bateman and Zeithaml explained. Another possible approach to managing resistance to change is through facilitation and support. Managers should be sure to provide employees with the resources they need to make the change, be supportive of their efforts, listen to their problems with empathy, and accept that their performance level may drop initially.
Some companies manage to overcome resistance to change through negotiation and rewards. They offer employees concrete incentives to ensure their cooperation. Other companies resort to manipulation, or using subtle tactics such as giving a resistance leader a prominent position in the change effort. A final option is coercion, which involves punishing people who resist or using force to ensure their cooperation. Although this method can be useful when speed is of the essence, it can have lingering negative effects on the company. Of course, no method is appropriate to every situation, and a number of different methods may be combined as needed. As Bateman and Zeithaml stated, "Effective change managers are familiar with the various approaches and capable of flexibly applying them according to the situation."
FURTHER READING:
Adebanjo, Dotun. "Corporate Restructuring: Managing the Change Problem from Within." Leadership and Organization Development Journal. September 1996.
Austin, Mary Ruth. "Managing Change." Manage. August 1997.
Bateman, Thomas S., and Carl P. Zeithaml. Management: Function and Strategy. Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1990.
Dove, Rick. "The Principles of Change." Automotive Manufacturing and Production. March 1997.
Hurst, David K. "When It Comes to Real Change, Too Much Objectivity May Be Fatal to the Process." Strategy and Leader-ship. March-April 1997.
Maurer, Rick. "Transforming Resistance." HR Focus. October 1997.
McCallum, John S. "The Face Behind Change." Ivey Business Quarterly. Winter 1997.
Recardo, Ronald J. "Overcoming Resistance to Change." National Productivity Review. Spring 1995.
Schwartz, Andrew E. "Eight Guidelines for Managing Change." Supervisory Management. July 1994.
Trahant, Bill, W. Warner Burke, and Richard Koonce. "Twelve Principles of Organizational Transformation." Management Review. September 1997.
Wallington, Patricia M. "Making Change." CIO. April 1, 2000.
The authors outlined a number of common reasons that people tend to resist change. These include: inertia, or the tendency of people to become comfortable with the status quo; timing, as when change efforts are introduced at a time when workers are busy or have a bad relationship with management; surprise, because people's reflex is to resist when they must deal with a sudden, radical change; or peer pressure, which may cause a group to resist due to anti-management feelings even if individual members do not oppose the change. Resistance can also grow out of people's perceptions of how the change will affect them personally. They may resist because they fear that they will lose their jobs or their status, because they do not understand the purpose of the change, or simply because they have a different perspective on the change than management.
Fortunately, Bateman and Zeithaml noted, there are a number of steps managers can take to help overcome resistance to change. One proven method is education and communication. Employees can be informed about both the nature of the change and the logic behind it before it takes place through reports, memos, group presentations, or individual discussions. Another important component of overcoming resistance is inviting employee participation and involvement in both the design and implementation phases of the change effort. "People who are involved in decisions understand them better and are more committed to them, " Bateman and Zeithaml explained. Another possible approach to managing resistance to change is through facilitation and support. Managers should be sure to provide employees with the resources they need to make the change, be supportive of their efforts, listen to their problems with empathy, and accept that their performance level may drop initially.
Some companies manage to overcome resistance to change through negotiation and rewards. They offer employees concrete incentives to ensure their cooperation. Other companies resort to manipulation, or using subtle tactics such as giving a resistance leader a prominent position in the change effort. A final option is coercion, which involves punishing people who resist or using force to ensure their cooperation. Although this method can be useful when speed is of the essence, it can have lingering negative effects on the company. Of course, no method is appropriate to every situation, and a number of different methods may be combined as needed. As Bateman and Zeithaml stated, "Effective change managers are familiar with the various approaches and capable of flexibly applying them according to the situation."
FURTHER READING:
Adebanjo, Dotun. "Corporate Restructuring: Managing the Change Problem from Within." Leadership and Organization Development Journal. September 1996.
Austin, Mary Ruth. "Managing Change." Manage. August 1997.
Bateman, Thomas S., and Carl P. Zeithaml. Management: Function and Strategy. Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1990.
Dove, Rick. "The Principles of Change." Automotive Manufacturing and Production. March 1997.
Hurst, David K. "When It Comes to Real Change, Too Much Objectivity May Be Fatal to the Process." Strategy and Leader-ship. March-April 1997.
Maurer, Rick. "Transforming Resistance." HR Focus. October 1997.
McCallum, John S. "The Face Behind Change." Ivey Business Quarterly. Winter 1997.
Recardo, Ronald J. "Overcoming Resistance to Change." National Productivity Review. Spring 1995.
Schwartz, Andrew E. "Eight Guidelines for Managing Change." Supervisory Management. July 1994.
Trahant, Bill, W. Warner Burke, and Richard Koonce. "Twelve Principles of Organizational Transformation." Management Review. September 1997.
Wallington, Patricia M. "Making Change." CIO. April 1, 2000.
Education and Ethics
I am moved to post this article due to the overwhelming unethical behaviors in the of education. More recently, Butterfield, Trevino, and Weaver (2000) defined moral awareness as “a person's recognition that his or her potential decision or action could affect the interests, welfare, or expectations of the self or others in a fashion that may conflict with one or more ethical standards” (p. 982). Determining whether a decision “conflicts with one or more ethical standards” requires an analysis of how the decision compares against standards of moral behavior, a process that threatens to confound the constructs of moral awareness and moral judgment. Instead, what is required is merely an acknowledgment that such comparisons are appropriate; that moral standards are relevant to the issue's contents; and that the individual can justifiably apply the vocabularies, frameworks, and tools of moral analysis to the situation. Lindsey, Robins, & Terrell (1999) found that ethical decision-making on behalf of students of color is enhanced when leaders achieve cultural proficiency. Culturally proficient leadership is defined as leadership which goes beyond the esteeming of culture to take every opportunity to increase formally and informally the awareness level and knowledge base of self and others about culture and about the dynamics of difference. Such leaders are able to identify issues of class, caste, culture, gender, and ability which are barriers to the implementation of change initiatives to improve educational opportunities for all children.
My conclusion is that no matter how hard we strive to be objective, a value derived from the rational scientific approach, in our empowerment efforts, this is simply not possible. In many respect, modern physics has clearly demonstrated that the old-styled approach of neutrality of the observer is a fiction there is no such thing as being neutral. Whether we like it or not, we affect the world by virtue of our personal histories and preferences, and also the cultural paradigm we were raised in. We see, hear and respond to the world according to what we are capable of seeing, hearing and responding to. For example, a medically-trained professional would tend to view an emotional imbalance as the result of a chemical imbalance, and thus the solution would focus upon restoring that chemical imbalance. However, a psychologist would view the chemical imbalance as the result of an emotional imbalance, and seek to address the emotional issue. In the same way, a government would view small-scale farmers as having the potential to form the back-bone of a viable export economy. However, that same small-scale farmer may view his (or her) activities as purely focused upon supplying his or her family with food. Therefore, these two agents (government and the farmer) may view agricultural development very differently, and may express completely different needs and priorities. The importance of this issue should not be under-estimated, as it represents a fundamental bridge that psychosocial sciences need to cross in order to be on a par with modern physics and related sciences. Therefore there is no such thing as objectivity. It is a physical and psychosocial impossibility. Some argue that we should at a minimum try to be objective, even though it is impossible. From my point of view, the upholding of the ethic of neutrality is not only impossible, it is also counter-productive.
Therefore, the level of unethical behavior in business is no different now than it has been in the past, it is just that we now have methods of detecting the unethical activity. If we want to create a proactive methodology of reducing ethical risks, we must revisit our present ways of doing business and incorporate better strategies for supporting what is best for our business culture. We can start by revamping our communication process and aligning the appropriate consequence systems. As leaders this is impossible to be completely unethical due to the rigorous demands of our employers.
References
Butterfield, K. D., Treviño, L. K. & Weaver, G. R. (2000). Moral awareness in business organizations: Influences of issue-related and social context factors. Human
Relations, 53, 981-1018.
Lindsey, R.B., Robins, K.N., Terrell, R.D. (1999). Cultural proficiency: A Manual for school leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
My conclusion is that no matter how hard we strive to be objective, a value derived from the rational scientific approach, in our empowerment efforts, this is simply not possible. In many respect, modern physics has clearly demonstrated that the old-styled approach of neutrality of the observer is a fiction there is no such thing as being neutral. Whether we like it or not, we affect the world by virtue of our personal histories and preferences, and also the cultural paradigm we were raised in. We see, hear and respond to the world according to what we are capable of seeing, hearing and responding to. For example, a medically-trained professional would tend to view an emotional imbalance as the result of a chemical imbalance, and thus the solution would focus upon restoring that chemical imbalance. However, a psychologist would view the chemical imbalance as the result of an emotional imbalance, and seek to address the emotional issue. In the same way, a government would view small-scale farmers as having the potential to form the back-bone of a viable export economy. However, that same small-scale farmer may view his (or her) activities as purely focused upon supplying his or her family with food. Therefore, these two agents (government and the farmer) may view agricultural development very differently, and may express completely different needs and priorities. The importance of this issue should not be under-estimated, as it represents a fundamental bridge that psychosocial sciences need to cross in order to be on a par with modern physics and related sciences. Therefore there is no such thing as objectivity. It is a physical and psychosocial impossibility. Some argue that we should at a minimum try to be objective, even though it is impossible. From my point of view, the upholding of the ethic of neutrality is not only impossible, it is also counter-productive.
Therefore, the level of unethical behavior in business is no different now than it has been in the past, it is just that we now have methods of detecting the unethical activity. If we want to create a proactive methodology of reducing ethical risks, we must revisit our present ways of doing business and incorporate better strategies for supporting what is best for our business culture. We can start by revamping our communication process and aligning the appropriate consequence systems. As leaders this is impossible to be completely unethical due to the rigorous demands of our employers.
References
Butterfield, K. D., Treviño, L. K. & Weaver, G. R. (2000). Moral awareness in business organizations: Influences of issue-related and social context factors. Human
Relations, 53, 981-1018.
Lindsey, R.B., Robins, K.N., Terrell, R.D. (1999). Cultural proficiency: A Manual for school leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
No Child Left Behind and AYP
Under NCLB, Annual Yearly Performance for high schools is determined based on each school’s progress toward meeting the state proficiency level for all students in English, mathematics, and high school graduation rate. Schools are held accountable for the achievement of students of different races and ethnic groups, students with disabilities, students with limited English proficiency and low-income students. Schools must also have an average over two years of 95% of their students participating in State tests. Schools that do not meet their annual targets in any one of these areas for two consecutive years are identified as Schools in Need of Improvement. This designation means the New York City Department of Education must implement a plan to address academic achievement in these schools and ensure that students make adequate yearly progress towards meeting State standards.
While some schools on the list have educational programs that have produced good results for many students, they have not improved achievement sufficiently for other students. In other cases, not enough students participated in state-required tests.
The State Education Department identifies the following five categories of SINI schools, according to the number of years that the school has not made AYP:
(A) Title I School in Need of Improvement – Year 1
(B) Title I School in Need of Improvement – Year 2
(C) Title I Corrective Action School – Year 1
(D) Title I Corrective Action School – Year 2 (Planning for Restructuring)
(E) Title I School in Restructuring
The NYC Department of Education is committed to improving student achievement in these schools, and every effort is being made to provide the highest quality instructional program to best meet the needs of every student. Through the Children First initiative, we are taking programs that have been successful in improving teaching and learning and are expanding them to every public school in New York City. Additional fiscal resources have been provided to SINI schools to support whole school improvement efforts and the implementation of targeted interventions to improve student achievement in identified areas.
We are confident that the proven, research-based interventions and exciting new programs that have been introduced citywide and at the school level will make this school year a successful experience for your child. There are many strategies citywide which may include:
A longer school day with an early morning start;
More classroom time devoted to English and math;
Focused academic interventions for struggling students, including specialized support for English language learners and students with disabilities;
Innovative programs to accelerate student learning for students ready for that challenge;
Expanded availability of Advanced Placement (AP) courses, Career and Technical Education (CTE), and theme-based programs;
Continued recruitment of highly-qualified and certified teachers to staff our classrooms;
Extended professional development opportunities for all teachers, with a focus on new strategies to help struggling students;
Strategies to increase daily attendance; and Expanded parental involvement programs
While some schools on the list have educational programs that have produced good results for many students, they have not improved achievement sufficiently for other students. In other cases, not enough students participated in state-required tests.
The State Education Department identifies the following five categories of SINI schools, according to the number of years that the school has not made AYP:
(A) Title I School in Need of Improvement – Year 1
(B) Title I School in Need of Improvement – Year 2
(C) Title I Corrective Action School – Year 1
(D) Title I Corrective Action School – Year 2 (Planning for Restructuring)
(E) Title I School in Restructuring
The NYC Department of Education is committed to improving student achievement in these schools, and every effort is being made to provide the highest quality instructional program to best meet the needs of every student. Through the Children First initiative, we are taking programs that have been successful in improving teaching and learning and are expanding them to every public school in New York City. Additional fiscal resources have been provided to SINI schools to support whole school improvement efforts and the implementation of targeted interventions to improve student achievement in identified areas.
We are confident that the proven, research-based interventions and exciting new programs that have been introduced citywide and at the school level will make this school year a successful experience for your child. There are many strategies citywide which may include:
A longer school day with an early morning start;
More classroom time devoted to English and math;
Focused academic interventions for struggling students, including specialized support for English language learners and students with disabilities;
Innovative programs to accelerate student learning for students ready for that challenge;
Expanded availability of Advanced Placement (AP) courses, Career and Technical Education (CTE), and theme-based programs;
Continued recruitment of highly-qualified and certified teachers to staff our classrooms;
Extended professional development opportunities for all teachers, with a focus on new strategies to help struggling students;
Strategies to increase daily attendance; and Expanded parental involvement programs
Setting Goals
After completing my quality review I realized that goal setting is an important entity in successful school. Therefore it is very important that educators know that a goal is a statement of a desired future an
organization wishes to achieve. It describes what the organization is trying accomplish. Goals may be (making broad statements of where the
organization wishes to be at some future point) or tactical (defining specific short-term results for units within the organization). Goals serve as an internal source of motivation and commitment and provide a
guide to action as well as a means of measuring performance (Barton, 2000). Defining organizational goals helps to conceptualize and articulate the future direction of the organization, thus allowing those
responsible for setting that direction to develop a common nderstanding of where the organization is heading. Goals provide a way of assuring that an organization will get where it wants to go.
Setting Goals
How goals are set is as important as the goal itself. Thus it is important that goals meet specific criteria that can be used to easily assess them. One way of doing this is to use the acronym “SMART” as a way of evaluating the goal. An internet search for “SMART” goals yielded some 6.7 million hits. One of those hits, Measure-X.com said that “the
origin of the acronym is lost, and the specific traits are not universally agreed upon, [but] SMART goals still provide a great framework to improve your goal setting and help you create more effective goals.” A
further search of the first forty websites found that most used the following words to define a “SMART” goal:
Developing SMART Goals for Your Organization 2
• Specific
• Measurable
• Attainable
• Relevant
• Time-bound
Specific
A goal is specific when it provides a description of what is to be accomplished. A specific goal is a focused goal. It will state exactly what the organization intends to accomplish. While the description needs to be specific and focused, it also needs to be easily understood by those involved in its achievement. It should be written so that it can be easily and clearly communicated. A specific goal will make it easier for those writing objectives and action plans to address the following questions:
• Who is to be involved?
• What is to be accomplished?
• Where is it to be done?
• When is it to be done?
Measurable
A goal is measurable if it is quantifiable.
Measurement is accomplished by first obtaining or establishing base-line data. It will also have a target toward which progress can be measured, as well as benchmarks to measure progress along the way. A
measurable goal will answer questions such as:
• How much?
• How many?
• How will you know when it is accomplished?
Attainable
There should be a realistic chance that a goal can be accomplished. This does not mean or imply that goals should be easy. On the contrary, a goal should be challenging. It should be set by or in concert with
the person responsible for its achievement. The organization's leadership, and where appropriate its stakeholders, should agree that the goal is important and that appropriate time and resources will be
focused on its accomplishment. An attainable goal should also allow for flexibility. A goal that can no longer be achieved should be altered or abandoned.
Relevant
Goals should be appropriate to and consistent with the mission and vision of the organization. Each goal adopted by the organization should be one that moves the organization toward the achievement of its
vision. Relevant goals will not conflict with other organizational goals. As noted earlier, goals are set by or in concert with the person responsible for achievement. It is important that all short-term goals be relevant (e.g., consistent) with the longer-term and broader goals of the organization.
Time-bound
Finally a goal must be bound by time. That is, it
must have a starting and ending point. It should also
have some intermediate points at which progress can
be assessed. Limiting the time in which a goal must
be accomplished helps to focus effort toward its
achievement.
References
Barton, R.B. 2000. Chapter 7, Organizational
Goal Setting and Planning. Murray State University,
Murray, KY.
http://campus.murraystate.edu/academic/faculty/
rb.barton/40mgmt07.ppt#256,1,chapter7.
Davis, Jeffery H. N/D. Chapter 1, Managing and
Achieving Organization Goals. American
Management Association, New York, NY.
http://www.flexstudy.com/catalog/
index.cfm?location=sch&coursenum=95086.
Measure-X. S.M.A.R.T. Goals. N.D. E-mail
Newsletter #27, Phoenix, AZ.
http://www.measure-x.com/newsletter/27.html.
organization wishes to achieve. It describes what the organization is trying accomplish. Goals may be (making broad statements of where the
organization wishes to be at some future point) or tactical (defining specific short-term results for units within the organization). Goals serve as an internal source of motivation and commitment and provide a
guide to action as well as a means of measuring performance (Barton, 2000). Defining organizational goals helps to conceptualize and articulate the future direction of the organization, thus allowing those
responsible for setting that direction to develop a common nderstanding of where the organization is heading. Goals provide a way of assuring that an organization will get where it wants to go.
Setting Goals
How goals are set is as important as the goal itself. Thus it is important that goals meet specific criteria that can be used to easily assess them. One way of doing this is to use the acronym “SMART” as a way of evaluating the goal. An internet search for “SMART” goals yielded some 6.7 million hits. One of those hits, Measure-X.com said that “the
origin of the acronym is lost, and the specific traits are not universally agreed upon, [but] SMART goals still provide a great framework to improve your goal setting and help you create more effective goals.” A
further search of the first forty websites found that most used the following words to define a “SMART” goal:
Developing SMART Goals for Your Organization 2
• Specific
• Measurable
• Attainable
• Relevant
• Time-bound
Specific
A goal is specific when it provides a description of what is to be accomplished. A specific goal is a focused goal. It will state exactly what the organization intends to accomplish. While the description needs to be specific and focused, it also needs to be easily understood by those involved in its achievement. It should be written so that it can be easily and clearly communicated. A specific goal will make it easier for those writing objectives and action plans to address the following questions:
• Who is to be involved?
• What is to be accomplished?
• Where is it to be done?
• When is it to be done?
Measurable
A goal is measurable if it is quantifiable.
Measurement is accomplished by first obtaining or establishing base-line data. It will also have a target toward which progress can be measured, as well as benchmarks to measure progress along the way. A
measurable goal will answer questions such as:
• How much?
• How many?
• How will you know when it is accomplished?
Attainable
There should be a realistic chance that a goal can be accomplished. This does not mean or imply that goals should be easy. On the contrary, a goal should be challenging. It should be set by or in concert with
the person responsible for its achievement. The organization's leadership, and where appropriate its stakeholders, should agree that the goal is important and that appropriate time and resources will be
focused on its accomplishment. An attainable goal should also allow for flexibility. A goal that can no longer be achieved should be altered or abandoned.
Relevant
Goals should be appropriate to and consistent with the mission and vision of the organization. Each goal adopted by the organization should be one that moves the organization toward the achievement of its
vision. Relevant goals will not conflict with other organizational goals. As noted earlier, goals are set by or in concert with the person responsible for achievement. It is important that all short-term goals be relevant (e.g., consistent) with the longer-term and broader goals of the organization.
Time-bound
Finally a goal must be bound by time. That is, it
must have a starting and ending point. It should also
have some intermediate points at which progress can
be assessed. Limiting the time in which a goal must
be accomplished helps to focus effort toward its
achievement.
References
Barton, R.B. 2000. Chapter 7, Organizational
Goal Setting and Planning. Murray State University,
Murray, KY.
http://campus.murraystate.edu/academic/faculty/
rb.barton/40mgmt07.ppt#256,1,chapter7.
Davis, Jeffery H. N/D. Chapter 1, Managing and
Achieving Organization Goals. American
Management Association, New York, NY.
http://www.flexstudy.com/catalog/
index.cfm?location=sch&coursenum=95086.
Measure-X. S.M.A.R.T. Goals. N.D. E-mail
Newsletter #27, Phoenix, AZ.
http://www.measure-x.com/newsletter/27.html.
Cooperative Learning
I was reflecting on what goes on in the classroom on a daily basis and realized that teachers need to implement new strategies in teaching and focus on cooperative methods. Cooperative learning methods are defined by (Cohen, 1994, p.30) as students working together in a group small enough for everyone to be able to participate on a collective task that has been clearly assigned and students are expected to carry out their task without direct and immediate supervision by the teacher. Olsen and Kagan (1992) define cooperative learning as the following:
Cooperative learning is a group learning activity organized so that learning is dependent on the socially structured exchange of information between learner and in groups and in which each learner is held accountable for his own learning and is motivated to increase the learning of others.(p.8)
Science education, in particular, has traditionally used group work for practical activities and project-based learning. One of the recommendations for practice that has emerged from constructivist research is that small-group discussion should be used in science lessons as a means of helping students explore their ideas and move towards more scientific ideas and explanations. Impetus for the inclusion of small-group discussion in science lessons has come from the development of ideas about social constructivism (Driver et al., 1994, p. 1). These authors, for example, report a study of the social construction of knowledge with a group of 13 year olds, who were invited to develop a model to explain the properties of ice, water and steam following activities relating to change of state. The effect of the discussion in groups was a significant success. Students brought together their knowledge that particles are in constant motion, and that this motion increases with temperature. The idea of the force between particles being present all the time was used to explain the apparent “making and breaking” of bonds. It showed that pupils can bring ideas and past experience together to take their thinking ahead, if motivated and given the opportunity.
Barbosa (1996) found the following:
The influence of social interaction on the classroom learning of science, focusing specifically on the conservation of mass in chemical change. Her study involved 200 students aged 11-15 years. The results revealed that social groups outperformed the control groups, in relation to higher quality of understanding of the subject content. This suggests the potential for cooperative groups to promote learning of abstract content and that the very process of group work can deliver much more than the sum of the individual parts (p. 939)
Johnson & Johnson, (1985) found that “cooperative learning experiences promote higher achievement than do competitive and individualistic learning experiences” (p. 250). Simmoneaux (2001) believes that “collaborative classroom discourse encourages students’ participation in science” (p.903).
References
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: conditions for productive small
groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1-35.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson R. T. (1985). Classroom conflict: controversy versus debate in learning groups. American Educational Research, 22(2), 237-256.
Olsen, W. B.et. al. 1992. About cooperative learning. In Cooperative
language learning: A teacher’s resource book, ed. C. Kessler. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice Hall. pp. 1-150
Simmoneaux, L. (2001). Role-play or debate to promote students at argumentation and
justification on an issue in animal trance Genesis. International Journal of Science Education,23(9), 903-928
Cooperative learning is a group learning activity organized so that learning is dependent on the socially structured exchange of information between learner and in groups and in which each learner is held accountable for his own learning and is motivated to increase the learning of others.(p.8)
Science education, in particular, has traditionally used group work for practical activities and project-based learning. One of the recommendations for practice that has emerged from constructivist research is that small-group discussion should be used in science lessons as a means of helping students explore their ideas and move towards more scientific ideas and explanations. Impetus for the inclusion of small-group discussion in science lessons has come from the development of ideas about social constructivism (Driver et al., 1994, p. 1). These authors, for example, report a study of the social construction of knowledge with a group of 13 year olds, who were invited to develop a model to explain the properties of ice, water and steam following activities relating to change of state. The effect of the discussion in groups was a significant success. Students brought together their knowledge that particles are in constant motion, and that this motion increases with temperature. The idea of the force between particles being present all the time was used to explain the apparent “making and breaking” of bonds. It showed that pupils can bring ideas and past experience together to take their thinking ahead, if motivated and given the opportunity.
Barbosa (1996) found the following:
The influence of social interaction on the classroom learning of science, focusing specifically on the conservation of mass in chemical change. Her study involved 200 students aged 11-15 years. The results revealed that social groups outperformed the control groups, in relation to higher quality of understanding of the subject content. This suggests the potential for cooperative groups to promote learning of abstract content and that the very process of group work can deliver much more than the sum of the individual parts (p. 939)
Johnson & Johnson, (1985) found that “cooperative learning experiences promote higher achievement than do competitive and individualistic learning experiences” (p. 250). Simmoneaux (2001) believes that “collaborative classroom discourse encourages students’ participation in science” (p.903).
References
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: conditions for productive small
groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1-35.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson R. T. (1985). Classroom conflict: controversy versus debate in learning groups. American Educational Research, 22(2), 237-256.
Olsen, W. B.et. al. 1992. About cooperative learning. In Cooperative
language learning: A teacher’s resource book, ed. C. Kessler. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice Hall. pp. 1-150
Simmoneaux, L. (2001). Role-play or debate to promote students at argumentation and
justification on an issue in animal trance Genesis. International Journal of Science Education,23(9), 903-928
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)