LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

Past reform efforts have been characterized by a lack of clarity on intended results. While there has been general agreement that schools should improve, consensus on the criteria that should be used to assess that improvement remains elusive. This inability to articulate the desired results in meaningful terms has led to initiatives that focused on methods and processes rather than on results.

      Lack of perseverance. Because schools have been unable to articulate the results they seek, they have become susceptible to following the educational fads du jour. As a result of the constant cycle of initiating and then abandoning innovative fads, educators rarely pursue ideas with the diligence and tenacity that is necessary to anchor a change within the school. Overwhelmed by disconnected, fragmented change initiatives that seem to de-scend upon them one after another, teachers often respond to calls for change with jaded resignation. New proposals fail to generate either enthusiasm or opposition from teachers because experience has taught them that “this too shall pass.” As one battle-scarred veteran teacher summarized his experience, “Everything has changed, but nothing is different.” Phil Schlechty (1997) argues that nothing has been more destructive to the cause of school change than this inability to stay the course.

      Failure to appreciate and attend to the change process. Most educators have not been trained in initiating, implementing, and sustaining change. They have moved too quickly, or they have lost momentum by not moving quickly enough. They have thought too big—or too small. They have neglected the process of creating a “critical mass” of support or have failed to proceed because of the mistaken notion that they needed unanimous support before launching an initiative. They have regarded conflict as a problem to avoid rather than an inevitable and valuable byproduct of substantive change. They have failed to anchor the change within the culture of the school. They have considered a change initiative as a task to complete rather than an ongoing process. In short, school practitioners have not learned how the complexities of the change process transform organizations.

       Can This School Be Saved?

      It is far easier to critique past strategies for improving schools than it is to identify and implement strategies that are more effective. There is, however, an emerging consensus on what pathway offers the best hope for significant school improvement. Researchers from a variety of fields—organizational development, school improvement, teacher preparation, professional development, effective schools, and innovation and change—have all offered remarkably similar models for school improvement. As Milbrey McLaughlin (1995) excitedly proclaimed at a national conference, “We are closer to the truth than ever before.”

      What is that truth? It is simply this: If schools are to be significantly more effective, they must break from the industrial model upon which they were created and embrace a new model that enables them to function as learning organizations. We prefer characterizing learning organizations as “professional learning communities” for several vital reasons. While the term “organization” suggests a partnership enhanced by efficiency, expediency, and mutual interests, “community” places greater emphasis on relationships, shared ideals, and a strong culture—all factors that are critical to school improvement. The challenge for educators is to create a community of commitment—a professional learning community.

      So there you have it. Educators seeking to create more effective schools must transform them into professional learning communities. It sounds simple enough, but as the old adage warns, “the devil is in the details.” Educators willing to embrace the concept of the school as a professional learning community will be given ambiguous, oftentimes conflicting advice on how they should proceed.

      Just how daunting the details can be is illustrated by the following story. When Germany launched its first submarines, Great Britain feared its naval superiority was in jeopardy. An international prize was offered to anyone who could develop a strategic defense to eliminate the threat of the submarine. Mark Twain wired a solution—“Boil the ocean”—and asked that his prize be sent immediately. When an incredulous naval officer asked Twain how he proposed to boil the ocean, Twain replied that he had developed the concept; it was now up to His Majesty’s Navy to work out the details! So it has been for those who would reform education.

      Concepts are great, but at some point most of us need practical suggestions on applying those concepts to our current situations. This book begins with the premise that schools need to develop into professional learning communities and includes specific steps educators can take to succeed in “boiling their oceans.”

       Summary

      Despite persistent attempts to reform public education, there is little evidence to suggest that schools have become significantly more effective in meeting the challenges that confront them. The Excellence Movement of the 1980s represented a top-down improvement initiative that was based on standardization, increased reliance on rules and regulations, and detailed specifications of school practices at the expense of local autonomy. The Restructuring Movement of the 1990s based its approach to school reform on the premise that the paired concepts of national goals and local, site-based autonomy offered the best hope for genuine change. The failure of these reform initiatives has led to heightened disillusionment with public schools. Educators have become increasingly defensive and often either blame the problems of public education on factors beyond their control or challenge the premise that problems actually exist. While these responses are understandable, they do little to improve the effectiveness of schools.

      Past efforts to improve schools have not had the anticipated results for a number of reasons: the complexity of the task, misplaced focus and ineffective strategies, lack of clarity on the intended results, failure to persist, and lack of understanding of the change process. But educators should not succumb to despair. There is growing evidence that the best hope for significant school improvement is transforming schools into professional learning communities. This book provides educators with specific, practical strategies they can use to make that transformation.

      Chapter 2

      A New Model: The Professional Learning Community

      Our decade-long effort to reform U.S. education has failed. It has failed because it has not let go of an educational vision that is neither workable nor appropriate to today’s needs.

      —Seymour Sarason (1996, p. 358)

      In times of drastic change, it is the learners who inherit the future. The learned usually find themselves beautifully equipped to live in a world that no longer exists.

      —Eric Hoffer (1972, p. 32)

      American public schools were originally organized according to the concepts and principles of the factory model, the prevalent organizational model of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The professional learning community is based on an entirely different model. If schools are to be transformed into learning communities, educators must be prepared first of all to acknowledge that the traditional guiding model of education is no longer relevant in a post-industrial, knowledge-based society. Second, they must embrace ideas and assumptions that are radically different than those that have guided schools in the past.

      By the late nineteenth century, efforts to create schools in the image of the factory had become explicit and purposeful. In Principles of Scientific Management, the bible that articulated the concepts of the industrial model, Frederick Winslow Taylor (1911) argued that “one best system” could be identified to complete any task or solve any organizational problem. According to this philosophy, it was management’s job to identify the one best way, train workers accordingly, and then provide the supervision and monitoring needed to ensure that workers would follow the prescribed methods. Thus, a small group of people could do the thinking for the entire organization. Workers were regarded as relatively interchangeable parts in the industrial process. Taylor’s model demanded centralization, standardization, hierarchical top-down management, a rigid sense of time, and accountability based on adherence to the system. The assembly line embodied Taylor’s principles and had helped the United States become the world’s industrial giant. Assured that they had discovered the one best way to run an organization, business

Скачать книгу