Schools That Change

Evidence-Based Improvement and Effective Change Leadership

Lew Smith

• Publisher: Corwin
• Year: 2007
• Print ISBN: 9781412949521, 9781412949514
• eBook ISBN: 9781452280738
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

"Schools That Change integrates equal parts passion and intellect. A well-crafted contribution to the literature on successful reform and a sophisticated and nuanced book that should be read with care."
—From the Foreword by Michael Fullan

"Schools have shown themselves to be gifted and talented at resisting and subverting change. Lew Smith hands us the keys to the storehouse of insights about how schools can change—really change."
—Roland Barth, Founder, The Principals? Center, Harvard University
Author, Lessons Learned

Learn from schools that have made meaningful, positive, and lasting changes!

With an in-depth look at eight schools across the nation—winners of the National School Change Awards—this illuminating resource shows how schools can transform themselves from low-performing into exemplary national status.

Qualitative research, specific examples, and portraiture offer an inside view of the day-to-day dynamics of change in schools. This insightful book examines questions such as:

• Why are some schools able to change while other schools cannot?
• Why are people challenged by change?
• What is the best way to measure change?
• What professional characteristics must principals develop to bring about significant and sustainable change?

Learn how your school can realize substantive change that supports a culture of learning, teacher development, and enhanced student achievement.

PART I

---

The Dynamics of Change

“Tell me, Mr. Mott: have you tried any experiments with any of our new educational systems? The modern kindergarten methods or the Gary system?” “Oh. Those. Most of these would-be reformers are simply notoriety-seekers…. what these faddists advocate—heaven knows what they do want—knitting, I suppose, and classes in wiggling the ears!”

—Sinclair Lewis, Main Street (1920)

Life is full of challenges. And we measure ourselves and our success in life by how we meet those challenges… Challenge validates our aliveness and often disturbs the order of our lives.

—Barbara Jordan

An innate, searching curiosity about all around us—What do we not know? How can we do it differently? How can we do it better? is at the heart of excellence. Then human progress and excellence comes when someone goes beyond “why” to “why not?”

—John Glenn, U.S. senator, astronaut

This book is concerned with why some schools can significantly change, while most schools cannot or do not. To begin, we consider the human dynamics of change. In Chapter 1, I describe change, taking into account theoretical models and human reactions; look at the reluctance to embrace change and the resistance it can cause; and consider the implications of change being described as unpredictable, nonlinear, and chaotic. I discuss the importance of routines being disrupted, assumptions being attacked, and the emotional nature of change.

In Chapter 2, I present the criteria for measuring the degree to which a school has significantly changed. In Chapter 3, I present the conceptual framework developed through the study of eight schools that changed from unacceptable to exemplary.

Questions we might ask include the following:

• Why is change appealing, exciting, and motivating to some people and not to others?
• What is the significance of the following point of view? “People like change but don’t like being changed.”
• How might an understanding of the human elements and dynamics of the change process help a principal charged with the task of significantly changing a school?

1

---

Describing Change

A chapter called “Describing Change” is, by its very nature, an oxymoron. Change, whether personal or professional, large or small, local or global, is a concept that defies definition or description. Although change can be tangible and obvious when we hold a cell phone or iPod in our hands, it is also intangible and elusive when policies and practices are changed. Change involves emotions and often defies logic. It is complicated and complex, yet much of the time most of us, as individuals, manage to deal with it. Organizations, such as schools, are not so fortunate; few are able to significantly change. Consequently, we need a better appreciation of change, as it plays out in schools.

There is no question change can be rewarding, even joyous. Frequently we seek change and fight hard for it. We celebrate change. We mark achievements. We are in awe of progress. The eight school portraits in this book symbolize the beauty and essence of change: determination, passion, and triumph.

Change frequently feels daunting, however. It can be difficult, very difficult—at times it can seem virtually impossible. Change endeavors can involve the practical and political, the rational and emotional, the subtle and the obvious. The impact can be immediate or distant. The desires of some individuals may be anathema to others; what is viewed as progress may be seen as a setback. We all do not view or react to change the same way; change involves an individual endeavor and experience and can feel like a struggle, a battle.

Looking through the lens of human dynamics, in this chapter I review how change and the change process have been described, particularly in regard to schools; consider the range of reactions to change; and reflect on what this means, in general, for leaders who try to change schools and, in particular, what it meant for the principals of the eight schools described in this book.

As we explore each of these descriptions of change, you might consider the efforts to change (or not change) in your personal and professional lives. Consider, in particular, the attempts at change in schools you and your family have attended, schools you have worked in, and schools you have observed or heard about.

A RELUCTANCE TO CHANGE DIRECTIONS

Roland Barth is a noted educational reformer and a highly skilled sailor. His love of the sea and his ability to navigate choppy waters have compelled him to use sailing as a metaphor for school change. He tells of a transmission of a U.S. Navy radio conversation:

Transmission:	Please divert your course fifteen degrees north to avoid a collision.
Response:	Recommend that you divert your course fifteen degrees south to avoid a collision.
Transmission:	This is the captain of a U.S. Naval ship. I say again, divert your course.
Response:	No, I say again, divert your course.
Transmission:	This is the aircraft carrier Enterprise. We are a large warship of the U.S. Navy. Divert your course now!
Response:	This is a lighthouse. Your call. (Barth, 2001, p. xxiv)

---

Reprinted with permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Changing direction is not easy, especially for warships—and schools. Ogden and Germinaro (1995) believed we can understand the reasons for this reluctance to change by looking at the “essence” of a school, its underlying values and beliefs and how they are translated into practice. They looked at how schools define what they do, make decisions, and respond to parents and the community as well as how instruction is delivered, accountability is defined, and principals do their jobs. In their view, American schools can be classified in one of three categories: (1) conventional, (2) congenial, or (3) collegial.

Conventional schools were characterized by teacher autonomy and isolation, very little conversation among staff, and a feeling research and professional development are unnecessary. “These are schools that have no common goals, no collective sense of what they are trying to accomplish as a whole, as a school” (Ogden & Germinaro, 1995, p. 4). The principal served as a manager, keeping things moving along: Supplies were delivered, parent complaints were handled, discipline was maintained. Teacher evaluation was considered to be an intrusion, an unfortunate bureaucratic requirement, and a waste of time. Positive assessments of conventional schools were generated by what was not happening—no major complaints or crises, no disruptions or violence, no staff grievances. If standardized test scores were low, it was because of the problems students brought to school. It was inevitable that some students would fail. In the eyes of the school, “a good year is one in which there have been few calls for change” (Ogden & Germinaro, 1995, p. 5). In conventional schools, administrators and teachers did not look at what they were doing or for a moment consider they could change direction.

The second category of schools was labeled congenial. They were very similar to the conventional schools, except the teacher isolation had broken down. These teachers did talk to each other; however, the conversations were about social activities (e.g., When are we having the staff holiday party?), not about student progress, teaching methods, or school success. The focus was on the adults, improving the school climate, and relieving their stress. The overriding concern was having a school where people were happy. There was little, if any, thought given to changing direction.

The third category was the collegial schools (also called effective or professional or student outcome-based schools). In these schools, “satisfaction is derived from professional work accomplished together and from the achievement of students” (Ogden & Germinaro, 1995, p. 7). In these schools, the principal served as an instructional leader, making sure everyone understood the message that all students could achieve. Conversations about students, teaching, new ideas, and vision were encouraged and valued. The staff welcomed research findings and found great merit in professional development. Time was provided to ask the hard questions, research and reassess, and take risks. These collegial schools constantly raised the bar for all students and staff. They believed data frequently had to be collected, disaggregated, and analyzed so continuous improvement could take place. The collegial schools were committed to changing direction.

Unfortunately, in the view of Ogden and Germinaro (1995), the vast majority of schools were conventional or congenial. Few were collaborative. Few had a commitment to change.

INEVITABLE RESISTANCE

American colonists in the 1770s were divided into three almost equal-sized groups. About one third was firmly committed to remaining British colonists, loyal servants of the king. In light of their political, economic, and social status, it was in their interests to maintain the status quo.

On the other end of the spectrum were the revolutionaries, who desperately wanted freedom from England. They were determined to do what it took to win independence. They would not be deterred. In the middle stood a third group, whose members were not sure which side to join. This metaphor speaks to the range of responses to proposed change: refusal to change direction, reluctance to change direction (To which side do I turn? What’s in it for me?), and a passion to bring about the change.

The same range of responses will exist in organizations, like schools, that are initiating change or responding to change. It is important to recognize and respect these different perspectives and responses. Principals who wish to be effective facilitators of change need to think carefully how to handle these reactions. For example: What is motivating the resisters? How can we gather more information about this resistance? Once we know more, what do we do? As for the change proponents, how do we reward and support them so we can keep them in our camp? Perhaps the most critical group is the middle group, intrigued by the change but reluctant to commit. Here we need to ask: How can we show them the proposed change is in their interests? What frightens them? What can we do to overcome their wariness?

The big question I address in this book, and critical to my research, is: Why do people firmly stay on their usual course, ignoring warnings (or incentives) to do otherwise? Whether it is personal change or organizational change, why do people resist? Reich (2000) wrote about resisters in the corporate world, but these reactions to proposed change will be familiar to educators. In both the worlds of business and education, change involves moving people to a new place, and often they don’t want to go there. The excuses many people use include “That seems risky… let’s go back to basics … it worked before … we’re just fine the way we are … there will be unforeseen consequences” (Reich, 2000, p. 150).

Seymour Sarason (2002), in looking at educational reform, wrote that “resistance to change is as predictable as death and taxes” (p. 30). Therefore, as students of change, we must recognize and understand the many possible forms of resistance, how subtle resistance can be, and the depth it can reach. More disturbing for Sarason (2002) is that he has “never known an instance, or heard about one, where the new reformers seriously and sincerely sought to elicit the diagnoses of those who are now being asked to change their thinking and actions” (p. 31).

Conner (1995) outlined the main reasons for resisting change by noting that the initiation of change will be both rational and irrational, and the responses to it likewise will be rational and irrational. People do not trust impending change or those who would initiate such change; they believe change is unnecessary or not feasible; they resent interference. There is fear of failure and threats to values and ideals. People are being asked to leave their comfort zones, and naturally they will resist.

What Kotter (1996) found amazing is how change facilitators and managers do not take the time to think about who might resist change and why. In his view, organizational change will inevitably run into some form of human resistance, which will sometimes go underground and emerge again at a strategic time. Consequently, it is essential to understand the range of reactions to change, sometimes obvious, sometimes subtle, that may emerge. The problem is that leaders have not been prepared for transformational challenges (Kotter, 1996).

Nonetheless, resistance to change is not automatic. In fact, the onset of change can produce a variety of responses. As Tyack and Cuban (1995) put it, “Educators have variously welcomed, improved, deflected, co-opted, modified, and sabotaged outside efforts at reform” (p. 7). Furthermore, when there is resistance, not all of it is uncalled for, irrational, or bad. It may be needed. “Resistance to change is sometimes dismissed as the result of popular ignorance or institutional inertia, but that oversimplifies. Often teachers have had well-founded reasons for resisting change, as have parents” (Tyack & Cuban, 1995, p. 7).

CHANGE IS UNPREDICTABLE

In August 2005, nature’s fury and man’s folly fused together as Hurricane Katrina uprooted the lives of hundreds of thousands. Packing the energy of a ten-megaton nuclear bomb, exploding every ten minutes, the hurricane devastated the Gulf region, leaving in its wake physical destruction and loss of life not experienced in the United States for more than a century (Thomas, 2005). The days leading up to the hurricane, the storm itself, and the aftermath provided insights about the unpredictable nature of change.

Tropical storms, including hurricanes, have been forecasted for decades in terms of when they will occur, where they will strike, and their anticipated force. We have sophisticated software models, satellites beaming critical information, and complex mathematical formulas. With all our technology, human error is supposed to be virtually eliminated. Hurricane Katrina’s approach was being tracked, with initial predictions that the storm would slam directly into the historic city of New Orleans. Then, the predictions were changed; New Orleans would be spared. Finally, both predictions proved wrong. The hurricane did not frontally smash into New Orleans; however, it did take a furious swipe at the city, causing damage and loss of life that defied expectations and explanations.

Life defies predictability. Whether a monstrous act of nature, a terrible family tragedy, or a sweeping and drastic change in an organization, no one knows for sure how things will unfold.

Loss of life is certainl...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of Figures
• Foreword
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• About the Author
• Introduction
• Part I. The Dynamics of Change
• Part II. The Elementary Schools
• Part III. The Secondary Schools
• Part IV. Bringing About Significant School Change: The Essential Elements
• Part V. Bringing About Significant School Change: The Catalytic Variables
• Part VI. Creating Meaning
• References and Suggested Readings
• Credits
• Index