This past week we conducted focus groups with one of the school districts that participated in our Parent Engagement and Satisfaction Survey in December 2009. The focus groups included over 100 parents from eight different public schools including a mix of elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools. The results of our research – including survey benchmark data and qualitative findings – will be released by the end of March 2010 in our comprehensive K-12 Parent Engagement and Satisfaction Research Report. Here are a few common themes that we heard from parents:
1. Online Student Information is Important
Increasingly, parents are relying on the Internet to access information regarding their child’s school life. Parental use of email as a communication medium with teachers is increasing. In many school districts, parents are able to log into an electronic grade book to access information on their student’s grades, attendance, or – in some cases – scheduled tests and assignments. Parents are leveraging text message alerts to let them know when their student’s grade drops below a specified level, an absence or tardy is recorded, or when a missed assignment is logged into the grade book system by the classroom teacher.
Parents and students alike are increasingly requesting teachers to post course outlines, homework, study resources, and course calendars onto teacher-specific web pages. The use of teacher websites for parents to access information on their child’s courses has become vitally important. Teachers who do not keep their websites up to date are increasingly feeling the pressure from parents and students to do so. Given the ease of use associated with today’s web publishing platforms, the technology barriers for teachers of all ages is much decreased.
These online education resources are leveraged by parents more in secondary schools than in elementary schools. This makes sense when considering that a parent of a high school student may need to keep track of seven teachers and classes. Elementary school parents still use these technologies too. However when dealing with just one classroom teacher (in most cases) for each child, parents of elementary students sometimes find it easier to just talk.
2. Bullying and Discipline
Parents are very sensitive to the safety of their children. The issues that parent refer to in school are threats of physical violence, emotional / status related bullying, or the existence of drug and alcohol. All of these are big issues for parents.
True, the more serious threats to student’s well-being happen in secondary schools. However parents of elementary school students are concerned about bullying and the emotional damage it may cause to their children. Many elementary schools have proactive programs to educate students about bullying. These programs typically teach students how to identify bullying and what to do if the student is bullied. Parents appreciate these programs where they exist. In some schools, there is a lack of a formal character development or anti-bullying program. Oftentimes, these are the schools that need it the most.
High schools and middle schools often have more complex issues related to discipline and safety. Physical violence against students becomes more of a fear for parents in secondary schools. The primary complaint of parents is that the school is not more aggressive about catching and punishing students that cause problems and violate school rules. Parents often will describe school administrators as unwilling to make tough decisions regarding student discipline. Sometimes the criticisms of parents are founded but many times their criticisms are not accurate. High school principals have a difficult job in dealing with discipline. The future of a person often hangs in the balance when principals are considering expulsion or suspension for a student. On the balance, school leaders seem to make good choice. Communicating the wisdom of these choices to parents is not always possible.
3. Lack of Challenging Work
As educators, we know that challenging each individual student to his/her fullest potential is difficult. Differentiating instructional across a large class takes considerable skill and preparation. It is challenging to ensure that all students have work which pushes them as an individual. Teachers and schools work hard in pushing kids. Despite these efforts and according to our focus groups, not all schools do a great job of challenging the individual student.
Elementary schools, middle schools and high schools are equally mentioned with children not having challenging works. Parents with students of various ability levels will comment on this lack of challenging work – depending on the school. In some schools, the high achieving students are forced to do the same work that all other students do without regard for their aptitudes. Parents fear that their gifted children will become bored with school. Likewise parents with average students will – in some schools – comment that the school works too much with struggling or gifted students leaving out the students “in the middle”.
4. Lunch Nutrition
Parents are rightfully concerned about what their children eat. Many parents will comment on the lack of nutritious food options in their child’s school cafeteria. Our researchers have not yet cross-referenced parent comments on the school menu with any nutritional analysis to verify claims. That said, we take it as a positive sign that so many parents are mindful of what their children eat.
5. Homework
School homework is a big issue in some schools. Homework becomes a particularly sensitive issue in high school when students may have seven classes in a day. These high school students are typically involved in extra-curricular activities that also require significant time before or after school. Thus students are pressed for time but oftentimes significant amounts of homework will be due on the same day from multiple classes.
For families that are focused on sending their children to college, homework is often a even bigger issue. These families (and students) recognize the importance of school, recognize the importance of grades, and often have rigorous a course load. In addition, students with college goals typically need to be involved in several extra-curricular activities.
One of the best practices that appears to deal with this most effectively is quite simple. Teachers are required to post the homework for the week on their website by Friday night. This encourages students to take personal responsibility over how to budget their time for homework, school and extra-curricular activities. And what is the worst that can happen? Students do their homework before the course discussion or lecture. We can think of worse things!
Showing posts with label School Culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label School Culture. Show all posts
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Monday, October 26, 2009
Why Are Teachers Afraid of Being Heard? Seven Ways to Address Survey “Response Fear”
“Response Fear” is a sometimes irrational skepticism of survey respondents who fear their loss of confidentiality. We can all imagine a scenario in which a feared boss uses survey data to explore the hearts and minds of his or her team. When conducting surveys with teachers and staff, it is important not to marginalize this fear as it is, in some organizations, a well placed fear. However, it is also one of the biggest factors (along with apathy) that hamper response rates of staff surveys.
We at the National Center for School Leadership are in the midst of our fall research study on School Climate and Culture. We conduct studies of this sort each school year with public school districts throughout the country. An employee survey is typically a significant component of our data gathering. Despite our years of experience in this, I am unfailingly surprised at one piece of input I receive consistently: teachers are, in some cases, very fearful that survey responses lacking confidentiality.
Our experience in conducting surveys with teachers is deep. Given that virtually all school districts who conduct surveys will deal with the distrust of teachers and employees to some extent, we put together the following list as a guide for schools and school districts to follow when soliciting input from teachers and employees.
1. Clearly Explain the Purpose of the Survey. When you ask for time from every teacher and every employee in your districts to take a survey, be sure to take the time to fully explain what you are trying to accomplish. If you are conducting a review of attitudes and beliefs, say that. If you are trying to understand morale, say that and tell staff why you are interested and what you plan to do with the information.
I have found that an explanation regarding your need to improve is helpful. Teachers and other staff like the idea of being problem solvers. People inherently form opinions and ideas about the organizations in which they work. Tapping into this vast pool of thoughts and commentary is, with the proper filter mechanism, and worthwhile pursuit.
2. Reassure Early and Often. The confidentiality of any survey needs to be stressed in every communication regarding the process. The confidentiality message should be succinct, clear and unambiguous. If you are promising confidentiality of all responses, be sure to underscore that point. Be clear about how the data will be used. Assure staff that this is about improving the organization and not sorting out “non-believers”, “bad apples” and the generally disgruntled.
3. Use a Third Party Administrator. We always act as a third party administrator for our members. It is our hope that with our involvement in the process, teachers see that this is not a case of the “fox guarding the hen house”. Primarily districts will use a third-party to administer a study based on the need for expertise and data management. Do not underestimate the important as well of having a neutral third-party act as your data aggregator. Teachers and staff tend to associate more credibility with those types of studies and feel more confident in the confidentiality of their responses.
4. Be Honest. The quickest route to destroying credibility is to be untruthful. If you are collecting information to evaluate schools (by the way, we do not recommend an employee satisfaction survey for this), then be honest and tell your staff that is what you are attempting. If individual responses can be reported, tell them that so they will answer accordingly. Usually schools and school districts spend a significant amount of time ensuring safety and confidentiality of response data. If there are any fears that are rooted in fact, it is best to be upfront with that information.
5. Summarize Data. Response data should always be grouped and never reported for sub-groups containing less than 3 respondents. This ensures that data users cannot apply multiple filters (e.g., Hispanic, Teacher-only, Specific-School, Specific-Grade level, etc.) to narrow response results that can only be for a certain person. Reports for survey data should never show response data unless a minimum number of respondents are included in the sample. In fairness, unless you have 20 to 30 responses in a sample, your sample is not statistically significant. Looking at smaller groups can still be very useful but when you drop below 3 respondents, the data becomes close to meaningless in drawing inferences about the organization.
6. Focus on the Need to Improve. Superintendents and principals who focus of their desire to improve strike a chord with teachers and staff. Again, our natural tendencies to be problem solvers kick in and we want to be part of the process. Be clear about the role that teacher and employee input have in your process and the value you place on their input. There is a wealth of improvement ideas in your schools. Acknowledge this in order to tap into it.
7. Have a Manual Option. People understand that technology can do a lot without our knowledge. I often hear of the fear that the computer system is tracking an individual’s response to a survey. Usually the district administrators will roll their eyes and groan when they hear this fear expressed by teachers, considering it as more unfounded paranoia. But, the truth is that technology can be used to do this. We typically disable the ability to match response data to individuals unless we need to tie response data back to student achievement data. When we do enable the option, we never provide clients with the ability to report at the individual level. But the truth is, the fears of technology stripping us of the confidentiality of our responses are not without justification. Despite our assurances of how we are collecting and using data, this fear can persist. It is always wise to provide a paper hardcopy as a backup for individuals who express their fears of the technology. Sometimes just providing the option provides the necessary assurance that you take confidentiality seriously.
Utilizing these guidelines can help improve response rates by generating trust among your employee group. If you still cannot get over the trust hurdle, you need to acknowledge that you have found, without looking at any response data, a major culture issue within your school or school district: A lack of trust.
Scott Wallace is the Executive Director of the National Center for School Leadership. To learn more about their services and how they work to improve school culture and develop school leaders, visit their website at http://www.ncfsl.org/
We at the National Center for School Leadership are in the midst of our fall research study on School Climate and Culture. We conduct studies of this sort each school year with public school districts throughout the country. An employee survey is typically a significant component of our data gathering. Despite our years of experience in this, I am unfailingly surprised at one piece of input I receive consistently: teachers are, in some cases, very fearful that survey responses lacking confidentiality.
Our experience in conducting surveys with teachers is deep. Given that virtually all school districts who conduct surveys will deal with the distrust of teachers and employees to some extent, we put together the following list as a guide for schools and school districts to follow when soliciting input from teachers and employees.
1. Clearly Explain the Purpose of the Survey. When you ask for time from every teacher and every employee in your districts to take a survey, be sure to take the time to fully explain what you are trying to accomplish. If you are conducting a review of attitudes and beliefs, say that. If you are trying to understand morale, say that and tell staff why you are interested and what you plan to do with the information.
I have found that an explanation regarding your need to improve is helpful. Teachers and other staff like the idea of being problem solvers. People inherently form opinions and ideas about the organizations in which they work. Tapping into this vast pool of thoughts and commentary is, with the proper filter mechanism, and worthwhile pursuit.
2. Reassure Early and Often. The confidentiality of any survey needs to be stressed in every communication regarding the process. The confidentiality message should be succinct, clear and unambiguous. If you are promising confidentiality of all responses, be sure to underscore that point. Be clear about how the data will be used. Assure staff that this is about improving the organization and not sorting out “non-believers”, “bad apples” and the generally disgruntled.
3. Use a Third Party Administrator. We always act as a third party administrator for our members. It is our hope that with our involvement in the process, teachers see that this is not a case of the “fox guarding the hen house”. Primarily districts will use a third-party to administer a study based on the need for expertise and data management. Do not underestimate the important as well of having a neutral third-party act as your data aggregator. Teachers and staff tend to associate more credibility with those types of studies and feel more confident in the confidentiality of their responses.
4. Be Honest. The quickest route to destroying credibility is to be untruthful. If you are collecting information to evaluate schools (by the way, we do not recommend an employee satisfaction survey for this), then be honest and tell your staff that is what you are attempting. If individual responses can be reported, tell them that so they will answer accordingly. Usually schools and school districts spend a significant amount of time ensuring safety and confidentiality of response data. If there are any fears that are rooted in fact, it is best to be upfront with that information.
5. Summarize Data. Response data should always be grouped and never reported for sub-groups containing less than 3 respondents. This ensures that data users cannot apply multiple filters (e.g., Hispanic, Teacher-only, Specific-School, Specific-Grade level, etc.) to narrow response results that can only be for a certain person. Reports for survey data should never show response data unless a minimum number of respondents are included in the sample. In fairness, unless you have 20 to 30 responses in a sample, your sample is not statistically significant. Looking at smaller groups can still be very useful but when you drop below 3 respondents, the data becomes close to meaningless in drawing inferences about the organization.
6. Focus on the Need to Improve. Superintendents and principals who focus of their desire to improve strike a chord with teachers and staff. Again, our natural tendencies to be problem solvers kick in and we want to be part of the process. Be clear about the role that teacher and employee input have in your process and the value you place on their input. There is a wealth of improvement ideas in your schools. Acknowledge this in order to tap into it.
7. Have a Manual Option. People understand that technology can do a lot without our knowledge. I often hear of the fear that the computer system is tracking an individual’s response to a survey. Usually the district administrators will roll their eyes and groan when they hear this fear expressed by teachers, considering it as more unfounded paranoia. But, the truth is that technology can be used to do this. We typically disable the ability to match response data to individuals unless we need to tie response data back to student achievement data. When we do enable the option, we never provide clients with the ability to report at the individual level. But the truth is, the fears of technology stripping us of the confidentiality of our responses are not without justification. Despite our assurances of how we are collecting and using data, this fear can persist. It is always wise to provide a paper hardcopy as a backup for individuals who express their fears of the technology. Sometimes just providing the option provides the necessary assurance that you take confidentiality seriously.
Utilizing these guidelines can help improve response rates by generating trust among your employee group. If you still cannot get over the trust hurdle, you need to acknowledge that you have found, without looking at any response data, a major culture issue within your school or school district: A lack of trust.
Scott Wallace is the Executive Director of the National Center for School Leadership. To learn more about their services and how they work to improve school culture and develop school leaders, visit their website at http://www.ncfsl.org/
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Do we listen to teachers? Five ways to ensure upward communication in your school and school district.
I was speaking with the superintendent of a mid-sized district in the Midwest this week. He is an old friend and we had not had a chance to connect in some time. He was updating me on developments in his districts and we were sharing thoughts on all manner of tangentially related topics.
The conversation turned towards my current research project on School Climate and Culture. He is very familiar with the work we do in this area and has used our services in prior districts. As we discussed the need for and importance of conducting nationally normed school culture studies, he said something rather simple but profound. “We do a pretty good job of talking to teachers but I don’t think we always do a great job of listening,” he said. I assumed at the time that he was speaking about district administrators in general. Not surprisingly, I agree with him.
The lack of two-way communication is prevalent at all levels of education. (In fact, it is prevalent at all levels in many types of organizations not just schools and school districts.) Communication, like water, tends to flow most easily downhill. Yet at the best schools and the best school districts, communication also flows “uphill” nearly as well.
Best practices in communication would fill a book. But with respect to two-way communication, I will attempt to summarize what I’ve seen in a few paragraphs. Here goes:
1. Upward communication takes work. Downstream communication seems to happen naturally in most schools and school districts. It may take some effort but information tends to get dispersed through a variety of means. Yet communication and feedback that moves UP the chain of command does not always happen naturally. Leaders have to be ready to listen and to hear. They need to communicate that willingness to listen to staff. They need to set up structures for staff to be heard. This takes work and requires being intentional about your upward feedback goals.
2. Committees are not enough. Committees are a great way to create formal or in-formal groups to deal with a variety of issues. Oftentimes permanent or ad hoc committees of teachers will work on key issues like discipline, text book adoption, or school improvement. These are great opportunities for teachers to be heard and to exercise their own leadership skills. But they are not enough. The task of committees are limited both by the scope of their charter and the individuals who are assigned. Upward communication should be much broader. It should draw from a wider range of individuals and topics. And, even with a proper structure of committees, school and district leaders must be ready to listen and hear what is said.
3. Create a feedback culture. In some schools, staff members feel a strong sense of empowerment and entitlement to speak their mind. They do so in an appropriate and useful manner. And they benefit from a cultural element that they, very likely, take for granted. Many schools simply do not operate that way. Some school administrators are either unwilling or unable to listen to feedback from teachers. Teachers either feel at-risk for sharing their ideas or feel dismissed when presenting their opinions. The typical results it to drive these idea underground. This is not good. Otherwise good (and sometimes bad) ideas are forced underground and become fodder for the malcontents in the organization. Left unchecked, a principal will have a rapidly “toxifying” culture on his or her hands.
4. Use 360 degree feedback with school leaders. There are fabulous 360 degree feedback tools for school administrators. By using these with principals, assistant principals, department heads, and district administrators, it does a couple of things. First, it provides valuable input to leaders about what their superiors, peers and subordinates think about their leadership style. Second, it sensitizes these leaders to thinking objectively about how their style is being perceived. Done correctly, these types of tools create a better empowered and better educated school leader.
5. Share some decision making – but not all decision making. Despite all of the importance that we place on listening and developing structures to enable faculty members to be heard, the ultimate responsibility for the school lies with the principal. He or she should be prepared to listen and make decisions. Even after carefully weighing input, a principal will still need to make tough decisions. Sometimes those decisions will not be popular. In my experience however, the leaders who take the time to listen and provides the opportunity for all sides to be considered will gain better buy-in from staff regardless of the decision.
Scott Wallace is the Executive Director of the National Center for School Leadership. To learn more about their services and how they work to improve school culture and develop school leaders, visit their website at http://www.ncfsl.org/
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Flawless First Day of School
I took my children to the first day of school yesterday morning. It was a new school for all of us and our proud and excited kindergartner’s first day of school ever. I have to admit that I felt nervous as did my wife and second grader (the kindergartner was too excited to be nervous). We had moved to a new school and knew very little about what to expect. How did drop off occur? How did the little ones get, physically, to the classroom? Where we allowed to go with them? Where did the newly purchased supplies go? Would our second grader have to carry her own backpack, lunch and huge bag of first-day-stuff? The anxiously anticipated first day of school had arrived.
We live in Arizona where we are allowed to send our children, space available, to any school in the state so long as we are able to provide transportation. We moved our children this year to an out-of-district school and we were all feeling the apprehension that comes with a big move like this.
As I waited in the line with the other second graders and their parents, I was reminded of a dialogue I had had regarding the first day of school. Several years ago I had a conversation with a friend of mine about the importance of the first day of school. We were coming up on the beginning of the school year at the time and he had good cause for concern. He was the new superintendent of a large school district of over 160 schools with a total of about 140,000 students.
Historically, his district’s first day was a chaotic swirl of activities and misadventures as everything that could go wrong did. One of the glaring bits of data he received in his first six months was that parents were almost universal in their feedback regarding the first day of school. It was, to be blunt, bad. Buses ran routes at the wrong time. Schools were not well provisioned with the necessary supplies. Classrooms were not set up in advance of students arriving. A surprising number of staff members would actually call in sick for the first day. Staff and volunteers were not in place at many schools to assist with directions and the questions that accompany the first day of school. Schools were reportedly disorganized and there were more “kinks” to work out that there were things that went well. Or so it seemed.
All of us who work in schools (or work with schools) know that opening a school at the beginning of the year can pose some problems. And most schools work hard to be prepared in advance. But this superintendent, based on both prior experience and feedback he had received about his new district, drove home a program he created that explicitly stressed this need. He called it the Flawless First Day of School.
To hear him talk about it, their entire school year would be based on the results of their first day. He discussed, district-wide, his expectations for the first day at length on many occasions. And he reiterated his expectations over and over again to drive these points home. Buses on-time. Teachers on-time and present. Classrooms prepared ahead of time complete with student names posted on desks. All logistics at each school carefully planned, documented, and communicated to the regional assistant superintendent for approval. The list went on.
In fairness I thought it overkill at the time. His held seemingly unending discussions on the topic; the Flawless First Day required loads of extra work for principals and teachers. He was not satisfied with assurances that activities would run efficiently; he wanted to see written plans. He was still relatively new in his role (he had started in January of the prior year) and felt as though he had unlimited influence. I warned him to invest his goodwill wisely and be careful of using it all on this one subject; he had many initiatives to push and he would need to converse his political capital. He would not be deterred.
The results were, of course, not flawless. But it was the best school year beginning in many years for the district. The school administrators and teachers alike were very pleased. Buses did run the correct routes at the correct times. These routes and times were well communicated. Classrooms were decked out and ready to receive students. Teachers had actual lesson plans ready for the first day and were prepared to jump right into the challenging curriculum. Parent nights had be held prior where they received information about what to expect the first day / week / year. Staff and volunteers were carefully briefed and deployed to help direct students and parents to the appropriate place. Central office staff were, largely, deployed to schools to assist.
The superintendent later explained to my why the first day was so important to him. He had a large organization that, over time, became more focused on the internal workings of their jobs than on students and parents. In a huge cultural shift he needed to get the organization focused on caring for students, focus on their learning, on their experience. He used the first day exercise as an important reminder of two things: 1) students are the most important thing to us and are the reason we are here, and 2) by being intentional we can perform tasks exceedingly well. But we have to be diligent in how we go about executing those tasks.
It was an interesting activity to observe for me at the time and I think benefited him well. The first day of school marked a small but significant turning point in the culture of the schools and in their ideas about what was most important. To be sure, shaping and moving the culture of an organization that large is no small task. But influencing culture in a school district is not about one big task. It is about many small tasks and initiatives. It is about communicating a consistent message and consistent expectations regarding how we teach our students and how we operate our schools. This initiative was one small but important step in that direction.
I thought about this experience as I worked through my morning at my children’s new school. There were adults with orange vests at every turn to help. We ask one of the orange vests where second graders were supposed to go. She told us. Another explained the daily drop off procedure that made more sense with her pointing rather than referring to the map on the website. There were signs posted everywhere.
My kindergartner’s class was well prepared. Parents were welcomed (encouraged) to stay for the entire first day. My daughter’s name was on a desk which she quickly found. The teacher began a well prepared introduction to the class for the kids. As if on queue, she finished and the (new) principal came on the loudspeaker for the days announcements. We all did the pledge of allegiance. And the principal ended her announcement with the simple statement “Welcome again to the first day of school. We have no substitutes in the building.”
Scott Wallace is the Executive Director of the National Center for School Leadership. To learn more about their services and how they can help you improve school leadership and assess school culture, visit their website at http://www.ncfsl.org
We live in Arizona where we are allowed to send our children, space available, to any school in the state so long as we are able to provide transportation. We moved our children this year to an out-of-district school and we were all feeling the apprehension that comes with a big move like this.
As I waited in the line with the other second graders and their parents, I was reminded of a dialogue I had had regarding the first day of school. Several years ago I had a conversation with a friend of mine about the importance of the first day of school. We were coming up on the beginning of the school year at the time and he had good cause for concern. He was the new superintendent of a large school district of over 160 schools with a total of about 140,000 students.
Historically, his district’s first day was a chaotic swirl of activities and misadventures as everything that could go wrong did. One of the glaring bits of data he received in his first six months was that parents were almost universal in their feedback regarding the first day of school. It was, to be blunt, bad. Buses ran routes at the wrong time. Schools were not well provisioned with the necessary supplies. Classrooms were not set up in advance of students arriving. A surprising number of staff members would actually call in sick for the first day. Staff and volunteers were not in place at many schools to assist with directions and the questions that accompany the first day of school. Schools were reportedly disorganized and there were more “kinks” to work out that there were things that went well. Or so it seemed.
All of us who work in schools (or work with schools) know that opening a school at the beginning of the year can pose some problems. And most schools work hard to be prepared in advance. But this superintendent, based on both prior experience and feedback he had received about his new district, drove home a program he created that explicitly stressed this need. He called it the Flawless First Day of School.
To hear him talk about it, their entire school year would be based on the results of their first day. He discussed, district-wide, his expectations for the first day at length on many occasions. And he reiterated his expectations over and over again to drive these points home. Buses on-time. Teachers on-time and present. Classrooms prepared ahead of time complete with student names posted on desks. All logistics at each school carefully planned, documented, and communicated to the regional assistant superintendent for approval. The list went on.
In fairness I thought it overkill at the time. His held seemingly unending discussions on the topic; the Flawless First Day required loads of extra work for principals and teachers. He was not satisfied with assurances that activities would run efficiently; he wanted to see written plans. He was still relatively new in his role (he had started in January of the prior year) and felt as though he had unlimited influence. I warned him to invest his goodwill wisely and be careful of using it all on this one subject; he had many initiatives to push and he would need to converse his political capital. He would not be deterred.
The results were, of course, not flawless. But it was the best school year beginning in many years for the district. The school administrators and teachers alike were very pleased. Buses did run the correct routes at the correct times. These routes and times were well communicated. Classrooms were decked out and ready to receive students. Teachers had actual lesson plans ready for the first day and were prepared to jump right into the challenging curriculum. Parent nights had be held prior where they received information about what to expect the first day / week / year. Staff and volunteers were carefully briefed and deployed to help direct students and parents to the appropriate place. Central office staff were, largely, deployed to schools to assist.
The superintendent later explained to my why the first day was so important to him. He had a large organization that, over time, became more focused on the internal workings of their jobs than on students and parents. In a huge cultural shift he needed to get the organization focused on caring for students, focus on their learning, on their experience. He used the first day exercise as an important reminder of two things: 1) students are the most important thing to us and are the reason we are here, and 2) by being intentional we can perform tasks exceedingly well. But we have to be diligent in how we go about executing those tasks.
It was an interesting activity to observe for me at the time and I think benefited him well. The first day of school marked a small but significant turning point in the culture of the schools and in their ideas about what was most important. To be sure, shaping and moving the culture of an organization that large is no small task. But influencing culture in a school district is not about one big task. It is about many small tasks and initiatives. It is about communicating a consistent message and consistent expectations regarding how we teach our students and how we operate our schools. This initiative was one small but important step in that direction.
I thought about this experience as I worked through my morning at my children’s new school. There were adults with orange vests at every turn to help. We ask one of the orange vests where second graders were supposed to go. She told us. Another explained the daily drop off procedure that made more sense with her pointing rather than referring to the map on the website. There were signs posted everywhere.
My kindergartner’s class was well prepared. Parents were welcomed (encouraged) to stay for the entire first day. My daughter’s name was on a desk which she quickly found. The teacher began a well prepared introduction to the class for the kids. As if on queue, she finished and the (new) principal came on the loudspeaker for the days announcements. We all did the pledge of allegiance. And the principal ended her announcement with the simple statement “Welcome again to the first day of school. We have no substitutes in the building.”
Scott Wallace is the Executive Director of the National Center for School Leadership. To learn more about their services and how they can help you improve school leadership and assess school culture, visit their website at http://www.ncfsl.org
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
In the Mind of Teachers: Measuring Commitment
Many of my clients are anxious to learn about how their teachers really feel. Principals typically feel as if they know whether teachers are generally pleased or not with their current lot. But, if their teachers are unhappy, just how unhappy are they? If their teachers are highly committed, how highly committed are they? And most importantly, if school leadership is focused on a massive school improvement initiative, how successful can they be if their teachers are marginally committed to the school?
The methodology for conducting this sort of research is not as easy as it may seem.
First, designing appropriate ways to ask the question is important. You can’t just ask “How committed to our school are you on a scale of 1 to 10”. The way individuals assess this questions is so variable that you see wild swings in the numbers because, frankly, this is poorly structured questions. But the fact remains, the only way to know for sure is to ask; we just need to be sure the questions are structured properly.
Second, one question won’t usually suffice – particularly with one broad, straightforward topic like “Commitment”. We use a survey design tool that we like to call “question layering”. By layering multiple, related questions on the respondent, we get a better sense of the strength of his/her feelings on a larger spectrum.
Lastly, we rely heavily on measuring results using norm data. Knowing how happy or unhappy a group of teachers is becomes relevant only when we know that measure in relation to a similar but different group of individuals.
If school leadership is focused on a massive school improvement initiative, how successful can they be if their teachers are marginally committed to the school?
In our research, when asked the question “I am committed to seeing my school succeed” very few teachers disagree with that statement. We use a 5-point Likert scale from “Strongly Agree” to “Strongly Disagree” for questions like this. If teachers, en masse, disagree with this statement then we have a big problem. But the truth is, once in a while you will get a teacher who will mark the questions “Neutral” or “Disagree” which is spurious, outlying data that we can typically discount. We almost always (98% of the time) see teachers rate this item favorably “Agree” or “Strongly Agree” with this questions.
This makes perfect sense. Why wouldn’t you be committed to seeing your school succeed? What kind of teacher would you have to be to “Disagree” with this statement? Probably an unhappy one who we all hope will find more luck in another field of work. The problem with this item is that it is of little use to us unless the results are different between our study group and our norm data. So we keep asking questions.
The next question in this series we will sometimes ask is “I am proud to be a member of my school”. This also a question that most teachers have a difficult time rating as anything besides “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”. Again, this makes sense given how closely teachers identify with their peers and students. Furthermore, the question doesn’t delve into particular hot spots that may be top of mind for teachers (pay, accountability, etc.) and, in avoiding these topics, makes in fairly easy to agree in schools where the culture is strong.
However, in schools with toxic cultures, this is where we begin to see the cracks. In a typical school it will be rare to see more that 2 to 5 percent rate this item anything other than “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”. But in schools with a toxic culture the level of agreement begins to deteriorate and it shows up loud-and-clear in survey data.
Individuals think little of dedicating themselves to a flawed organization but they will stop well short of recommending that organization to others.
The next “layer” in a well-devised commitment series of questions will be the deciding factor of whether the school has a positive culture or a toxic culture: “I would recommend my school to a friend seeking employment.” The psychology behind this question is interesting: individuals think little of dedicating themselves to a flawed organization but they will stop well short of recommending that organization to others. Thus, the results on this item are much less positive even in schools with a strong, positive culture. This illustrates the concept of “layering” question quite well. Agreeing with each question becomes, even in a positive environment, progressively more difficult. Average schools may have 15% to 20% of respondents “Disagree” or “Strongly Disagree” with this statement. This is much higher than the first two layers but still within the realm of acceptable.
The real difference comes when we look at the results of the school with the toxic culture. On the first two questions, even schools with a fairly negative climate and culture will still rate favorable. No so with item #3. Teacher will stop short here. They will not recommend their school (with its negative environment) to their friends. It is not unusually to see 30+% of teachers “Disagree” or “Strongly Disagree” with this statement. This is strongly indictment on the culture of that school. While 30% might not seem like a lot on an absolute basis (Hey, it’s less than a third), we only see negatives responses of this magnitude on this item in schools with some significant climate and culture issues.
If you are in a school leadership role at one of those schools, you are no doubt asking yourself what you should do to change. What might be cause your cultural problems? How might you improve school climate? However, the results of even the best survey remain murky. More research is needed to determine the cause of the organizational distress -- ideally with formal and informal discussions with teachers. We recommend facilitated focus groups in extreme circumstances.
The drivers of these culture problems are vastly complex. Too often, principals either refuse to acknowledge culture and climate problems within their schools, or they jump to conclusion as to its cause. Take time. Figure it out. Talk it though. React slowly and positively. If the problems stem from fatigue related to your change initiative, perhaps you can reevaluate your timeline. Or you can rack up culture as a price worth paying for you change initiative. No one can tell you the answer. But by asking questions, correctly, school leaders can gain some valuable insight into the minds of their teachers.
Scott Wallace is the Executive Director of the National Center for School Leadership. To learn more about their services and how they can help you assess school culture, visit their website at http://www.ncfsl.org
The methodology for conducting this sort of research is not as easy as it may seem.
First, designing appropriate ways to ask the question is important. You can’t just ask “How committed to our school are you on a scale of 1 to 10”. The way individuals assess this questions is so variable that you see wild swings in the numbers because, frankly, this is poorly structured questions. But the fact remains, the only way to know for sure is to ask; we just need to be sure the questions are structured properly.
Second, one question won’t usually suffice – particularly with one broad, straightforward topic like “Commitment”. We use a survey design tool that we like to call “question layering”. By layering multiple, related questions on the respondent, we get a better sense of the strength of his/her feelings on a larger spectrum.
Lastly, we rely heavily on measuring results using norm data. Knowing how happy or unhappy a group of teachers is becomes relevant only when we know that measure in relation to a similar but different group of individuals.
If school leadership is focused on a massive school improvement initiative, how successful can they be if their teachers are marginally committed to the school?
In our research, when asked the question “I am committed to seeing my school succeed” very few teachers disagree with that statement. We use a 5-point Likert scale from “Strongly Agree” to “Strongly Disagree” for questions like this. If teachers, en masse, disagree with this statement then we have a big problem. But the truth is, once in a while you will get a teacher who will mark the questions “Neutral” or “Disagree” which is spurious, outlying data that we can typically discount. We almost always (98% of the time) see teachers rate this item favorably “Agree” or “Strongly Agree” with this questions.
This makes perfect sense. Why wouldn’t you be committed to seeing your school succeed? What kind of teacher would you have to be to “Disagree” with this statement? Probably an unhappy one who we all hope will find more luck in another field of work. The problem with this item is that it is of little use to us unless the results are different between our study group and our norm data. So we keep asking questions.
The next question in this series we will sometimes ask is “I am proud to be a member of my school”. This also a question that most teachers have a difficult time rating as anything besides “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”. Again, this makes sense given how closely teachers identify with their peers and students. Furthermore, the question doesn’t delve into particular hot spots that may be top of mind for teachers (pay, accountability, etc.) and, in avoiding these topics, makes in fairly easy to agree in schools where the culture is strong.
However, in schools with toxic cultures, this is where we begin to see the cracks. In a typical school it will be rare to see more that 2 to 5 percent rate this item anything other than “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”. But in schools with a toxic culture the level of agreement begins to deteriorate and it shows up loud-and-clear in survey data.
Individuals think little of dedicating themselves to a flawed organization but they will stop well short of recommending that organization to others.
The next “layer” in a well-devised commitment series of questions will be the deciding factor of whether the school has a positive culture or a toxic culture: “I would recommend my school to a friend seeking employment.” The psychology behind this question is interesting: individuals think little of dedicating themselves to a flawed organization but they will stop well short of recommending that organization to others. Thus, the results on this item are much less positive even in schools with a strong, positive culture. This illustrates the concept of “layering” question quite well. Agreeing with each question becomes, even in a positive environment, progressively more difficult. Average schools may have 15% to 20% of respondents “Disagree” or “Strongly Disagree” with this statement. This is much higher than the first two layers but still within the realm of acceptable.
The real difference comes when we look at the results of the school with the toxic culture. On the first two questions, even schools with a fairly negative climate and culture will still rate favorable. No so with item #3. Teacher will stop short here. They will not recommend their school (with its negative environment) to their friends. It is not unusually to see 30+% of teachers “Disagree” or “Strongly Disagree” with this statement. This is strongly indictment on the culture of that school. While 30% might not seem like a lot on an absolute basis (Hey, it’s less than a third), we only see negatives responses of this magnitude on this item in schools with some significant climate and culture issues.
If you are in a school leadership role at one of those schools, you are no doubt asking yourself what you should do to change. What might be cause your cultural problems? How might you improve school climate? However, the results of even the best survey remain murky. More research is needed to determine the cause of the organizational distress -- ideally with formal and informal discussions with teachers. We recommend facilitated focus groups in extreme circumstances.
The drivers of these culture problems are vastly complex. Too often, principals either refuse to acknowledge culture and climate problems within their schools, or they jump to conclusion as to its cause. Take time. Figure it out. Talk it though. React slowly and positively. If the problems stem from fatigue related to your change initiative, perhaps you can reevaluate your timeline. Or you can rack up culture as a price worth paying for you change initiative. No one can tell you the answer. But by asking questions, correctly, school leaders can gain some valuable insight into the minds of their teachers.
Scott Wallace is the Executive Director of the National Center for School Leadership. To learn more about their services and how they can help you assess school culture, visit their website at http://www.ncfsl.org
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Transforming School Culture
In my work with schools I have seen all forms of resistance to change. In some groups of educators their focus on the status quo is difficult to spot. The untrained ear hears rational, logical arguments for current methodologies and current approaches. We can be quickly lulled into tranquility ... and loss of action. In other groups, the overt resistance to new initiatives is so obvious that it can be identified immediately. While we are not lulled into inaction, the hard-edged, purposeful resistance of an entire school of teachers is nearly impossible for even experienced school administrators to overcome.
In Anthony Muhammad's book, Transforming School Culture he does an excellent job of discussing these challenges. He also provides us a framework for understanding the different levels of resistance we may encounter. In doing so, he codifies the participants in resistance to better enable us to understand who they are, what they believe and how we can have an impact on them. Good stuff and very relevant.
However, I found something even more interesting. If you have not listened in on the Voicethread conversation regarding this book, please do it now. Hosted and moderated by Bill Ferriter of the Tempered Radical, this conversation is amazing. Anthony Muhammad contributed to the discussion throughout.
Here are a few of the interesting questions posed by the book and the discussion:
- How do we avoid exacerbating an us-vs-them mentality in public education in an age of accountability?
- How are we passing cultural expectation on to new teachers? Are we intentional about passing information on to new teachers through our actions or are we letting the "bad apples" pass on their own cultural expectations?
- How do we enable teachers (in an age of increased reliance on each other with collaboration, PLCs, etc.) to confront their peers? How can principals and other school leaders teach the skills to teachers which enable them to address their peers appropriately? How can we provide them with the courage and moral authority to do so?
- Are we overlooking a valuable group of people in our schools -- technology coordinators and media specialists -- who are best positioned to help enable cultural shifts in our schools? Does their school-wide (but non-administrative) role provide a communication point with all teachers that is critical in transforming the cultural norms of a school?
These are all topics of ongoing thought and discussions. Listen, enjoy and think.
In Anthony Muhammad's book, Transforming School Culture he does an excellent job of discussing these challenges. He also provides us a framework for understanding the different levels of resistance we may encounter. In doing so, he codifies the participants in resistance to better enable us to understand who they are, what they believe and how we can have an impact on them. Good stuff and very relevant.
However, I found something even more interesting. If you have not listened in on the Voicethread conversation regarding this book, please do it now. Hosted and moderated by Bill Ferriter of the Tempered Radical, this conversation is amazing. Anthony Muhammad contributed to the discussion throughout.
Here are a few of the interesting questions posed by the book and the discussion:
- How do we avoid exacerbating an us-vs-them mentality in public education in an age of accountability?
- How are we passing cultural expectation on to new teachers? Are we intentional about passing information on to new teachers through our actions or are we letting the "bad apples" pass on their own cultural expectations?
- How do we enable teachers (in an age of increased reliance on each other with collaboration, PLCs, etc.) to confront their peers? How can principals and other school leaders teach the skills to teachers which enable them to address their peers appropriately? How can we provide them with the courage and moral authority to do so?
- Are we overlooking a valuable group of people in our schools -- technology coordinators and media specialists -- who are best positioned to help enable cultural shifts in our schools? Does their school-wide (but non-administrative) role provide a communication point with all teachers that is critical in transforming the cultural norms of a school?
These are all topics of ongoing thought and discussions. Listen, enjoy and think.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
School Turnaround: Does it take an outsider?
School turnaround experts are becoming ever more popular in certain parts of the country. A recent NPR report on the use of Turnaround for Children in the Bronx provides an interesting overview on the situation creating this need as well as some insight into their approach.
The keys to success are clear (especially when studied in hindsight):
The keys to success are clear (especially when studied in hindsight):
- Focus on behavior. Don't allow classrooms to be disrupted. Learning does not happen when behavior problems arise. Teach teachers how to deal with these issues quickly and effectively. Ensure that school administrators do their best to support teachers.
- Separate academic issues from social / emotional issues. Schools must be able to sort through the issues and directly address the most significant issues first. Doctors call this triage. Do not try to do it all at once. Focus on where you will get the best return on your time.
- Individualize needs of students. This may be the most difficult part especially for large urban schools. Different students, different families have vastly different needs. Some have money problems, others have logistical issues. For some there are large cultural and language barriers. Understand this up front and focus on getting these students and families matched with the resources that can help. Quickly.
- Do it with existing staff. There are not enough quailified teachers. Period. Most schools and school districts do not have the luxury of replacing staff en masse. And while some may disagree, I content that most teachers are in it for the right reason. Focus on getting rid of the few bad apples if you need to. But work with the staff you've got.
So, if it is so straightforward (and let me assure you, in most cases it is), why do we need outsiders to do it for us? Or do we? There are some reasons for and against and I understand the emotionally charged nature of this topic. But I will offer an opinion: We need outsiders to do the work. Period.
In fact, schools use outsiders (by the classic definition) all the time. A school in need usually gets a new principal. He or she is - for the first two years anyway - effectively an outsider. They come in with few sacred cows or internal political issues. Their agenda is simple: do a good job as measured by student performance. Unfortunately a few things happen along the way that derail these efforts.
First, a new principal may be just that: a new principal. A school in need of turnaround is rarely a great environment for a first year principal. While some new principals are more afraid of following a great principal (perhaps rightly so though for different reasons), entering the treacherous water of a school in need is no place to learn.
Second, the district agenda and biases are still in play. A principal, though new to the school or even the district, is still subjected to many of the same machinations of the school district that the last principal was. This may be good though oftentimes it means business as usually. For turnaround situations, the status quo is rarely a positive.
Third, even experienced principals might lack the experience or the approach of a turnaround expert. Let us be honest. Turning a school around requires a certain stubborness, a thickness of skin, but also a perspective and approach that only comes from experience. Unfortunately most great principals I know end up at the central office never to return to school leadership. And so few principals, even great ones, have a full depth and breadth of experience in turning schools around.
So of course, bringing in a new principal is not the same as bringing in a true outsider. A true outsider would be unfettered from the cultural bonds that restrict his or her ability to make change. They are not worried about the perceptions of staff beyond the immediate term. They have the breadth and depth of experience. But not all of these will play as advantages either.
A lack of connection with the community will be felt by anyone who is clearly there on a temporary basis. And staff and students will feel this as well. As while turnaround organizations clearly have some resources and expertise to leverage, no two situations are exactly alike. These factors need be considered as well.
The best approach may be simply a blend of internal leadership talent supplemented by outside expertise. And regardless of whether an outsider is used or not their lessons can be applied to all: Focus on the areas where you can improve school effectiveness by the largest margin.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Top 3 Culture Killers
Climate and culture within a school is often underrated as a cause of failure among our schools. Indeed most leaders spend far more time focused on instructional related matter, personnel issues, bus schedules and even lunch duty. While these are all important aspects of running a school, many leaders spend little time truly understanding and actively managing school culture.
There are countless resources and studies that one can review for approaches to school culture. There are equally countless books on leadership that school leaders can leverage to understand how to address the management challenges associated with addressing culture issues. Our intent here however it simply to share some of the recurring themes we see in schools. While I am sharing three of the recurring themes that we have heard from teachers related to school culture, these will differ significantly school to school.
1. No one is listening to me
In many professions and in many organizations, employees often feel as though they have no say in how the organization is operated. And typically this is true by design. Leaders are often so busy that they not only do not seek input, they subconsciously avoid it. Let us face it: it takes time to be collaborative. This issue is exacerbated in schools where organization leverage ratios (the ratio between supervisors and subordinates or administrators to faculty) are over 1:25. Organizational theory suggests that and leverage ratio of 1:6 or 1:8 is optimal.
2. I feel overworked
The demands placed upon educators today is extreme. No Child Left Behind has imposed accountability for results with scant incremental budgetary resources. School leaders have worked diligently to test various instructional initiatives, implement new teaching methods and refine assessment processes. Teachers have felt the pressure as districts and school initiatives grasp at these initiatives often taxing teachers time inside and outside of the classroom.
3. I am not supported with discipline issues
Another of the most consistent themes I hear from teachers in schools with rifts between administration and faculty are related to discipline. Teachers may feel that administrators are more likely to "take sides" with the student or parent on discipline issues. Meanwhile, the situation may seem far different that through the eyes of the administrators. Often times the truth lies in the middle. Teachers do not like to feel unsupported. Administrators often want to reserve judgment until they have heard all sides to a story. However, reserving judgment leaves teachers with the feeling that although they feel they have already passes judgment, the administrators don't trust that the teacher has made a fair decision. This disconnect between administrators and faculty creates a nebulous understanding for teachers of their role as it relates to discipline and often leads to inconsistent (and progressively less effective) delivery of discipline.
Any of these three issues may be present in a given school. The reasons and the background are often complex and unique to the situation at a particular schools. However there are many themes associated with these issues that any school leader can learn from. Solutions to these types of culture problems should address the specific reasons for the culture and climate gap.
There are countless resources and studies that one can review for approaches to school culture. There are equally countless books on leadership that school leaders can leverage to understand how to address the management challenges associated with addressing culture issues. Our intent here however it simply to share some of the recurring themes we see in schools. While I am sharing three of the recurring themes that we have heard from teachers related to school culture, these will differ significantly school to school.
1. No one is listening to me
In many professions and in many organizations, employees often feel as though they have no say in how the organization is operated. And typically this is true by design. Leaders are often so busy that they not only do not seek input, they subconsciously avoid it. Let us face it: it takes time to be collaborative. This issue is exacerbated in schools where organization leverage ratios (the ratio between supervisors and subordinates or administrators to faculty) are over 1:25. Organizational theory suggests that and leverage ratio of 1:6 or 1:8 is optimal.
2. I feel overworked
The demands placed upon educators today is extreme. No Child Left Behind has imposed accountability for results with scant incremental budgetary resources. School leaders have worked diligently to test various instructional initiatives, implement new teaching methods and refine assessment processes. Teachers have felt the pressure as districts and school initiatives grasp at these initiatives often taxing teachers time inside and outside of the classroom.
3. I am not supported with discipline issues
Another of the most consistent themes I hear from teachers in schools with rifts between administration and faculty are related to discipline. Teachers may feel that administrators are more likely to "take sides" with the student or parent on discipline issues. Meanwhile, the situation may seem far different that through the eyes of the administrators. Often times the truth lies in the middle. Teachers do not like to feel unsupported. Administrators often want to reserve judgment until they have heard all sides to a story. However, reserving judgment leaves teachers with the feeling that although they feel they have already passes judgment, the administrators don't trust that the teacher has made a fair decision. This disconnect between administrators and faculty creates a nebulous understanding for teachers of their role as it relates to discipline and often leads to inconsistent (and progressively less effective) delivery of discipline.
Any of these three issues may be present in a given school. The reasons and the background are often complex and unique to the situation at a particular schools. However there are many themes associated with these issues that any school leader can learn from. Solutions to these types of culture problems should address the specific reasons for the culture and climate gap.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
