This is a Jigsaw Activity. Download and read your section of the article (determine your section by having the group make assignments).

The articles:

• Learning Organizations
• Systems Thinking

Discuss the article and share your thoughts. As a group post in the WIKI Social and Ethical Issues in Technology area.

Jigsaw Activity by Amanda Wagner (Simon), Rosanda Green, and Penni Uribe

"Systems Thinking: Untangling the Gordian Knots of Systemic Change"

The resounding theme in both articles is that school systems are both complex and dymanic organizations which face enormous challenges, most obvious in times of reform. Many of today's school districts follow the Five Disciplines of Systems Thinking to increase their understanding, strategies, and skills in leading and managing school system change effectively. In systems thinking, there is an understanding that when there is a problem, the problem  lies NOT within the people, but the system itself (behavioral norms, organizational structures, uncommunicated assumtions, and relationship patterns). This is an interesting concept in that within large organizations, there is often the tendency to shift blame to one another when a "breakdown" occurs. What about those members of an organization who are not team players and never plan on it? We all know who those are at the department, building, and district levels.  Will these be the same people who  continuously complain the loudest, produce the least, and then blame it on "the system" (rhetorical question)?

The identified "learning disabilities" within school systems was an intersting read. Crisis management, leadership and management, departmentalizing, narrow role definitions, blame shifitng, and are issues th at plague many school systems. This article provided seemingly simple solutions to significantly decreasing these problems. Does this type of thinking need to begin with our administrators and then trickle down into the classrooms? As in the Making Change game simulation, we didn't go anywhere fast without the support of the administration! 

The concept of organizational flexibility and collaboration among a common purpose was refreshing. Shared vision is a much needed and welcome change in our district. Several years ago, I remember spending hour after hour at staff developments trying to come up with an agree in a single mission statement for our building. It went to the site council, parents, and students. The concept of shared vision was never mentioned. Maybe it is time to revise the mission with some of these newer concepts in mind. I have a great appreciation for looking at the district as a whole, seeing the big picture.

In order for individuals to assume responsibility for addressing problems within their spheres of influence and within the system as a whole, it is time for all system members to see the larger "picture" and their place within that "picture". This is another breath of fresh air. When can we start? As a whole, the field of education is reactive rather than proactive in its essence. The article mentions the need to develop a long, whole-system view in order to see trends and patterns which will point to underlying systemic causes. Imagine the time and energy that could be saved on putting out little fires and spent on developing better relationships with children. 

While there is no one cure for all school districts or a single school district for that matter, there are several means of affecting positive and long-lasting changes on step at a time. I look forward to sharing this article with our site council next month.

 Learing Organizations

Reading this article caused us to reflect upon our school district.  Ww realize that our district is trying to become a learning organization but has a long way to go before it will get there.  For the past four years, many of the individual sites have focused on trying to create a shared vision that people believe in.  While this is happening, most are still struggling with the collaborative learning groups.  The biggest reason why we struggle with this is because of time- we need more of it.  We agree with the article's point that schools need to change to benefit our students.  However, we all know that change is a process and for some it is a slow process.

APA- Jurisch, Lardinois, Meddaugh

In reading the articles it seems as if the solution to planning in Education is also the problem- people. While structured planning and organizational techniques have not yet become common practices in Education, it was interesting to read about successful schools with successful processes.  Reading about those diverse schools, one realizes with commitment and direction these results could be achieved in any district with a dedicated staff.

Notably, each successful district focused on proactive, rather than reactive planning.  Collaborative teams were the primary source of action and teacher education and training was at the center of the plans.  These techniques not only reflect the successful modules described in the text, but clearly include the “4 C’s” as well.

In class we all bemoaned the excess reliance on talking about plans that occurred during the game.  It is clear from the articles that teamwork and staff buy-in is crucial to success. 

THUNDER-Beckman, Nelson, Pulvermacher, Simonson

We agree with APA. With the article "Can Schools Become Learning Organizations", we do as a group believe they can, but not by using tradidional models of learning. We are in the people business and people will ultimately decide the success or failure of a new idea regardless of how well it is planned for. The different disciplines, discussed in the article, each had their strong points. The authors believed by using a systems approach, utilizing all five disciplines for learning, we will move forward as an organization in the process of learning. Take for instance the personal mastery discipline. In our minds we know what the solution is to move forward, but we hesitate because we don't want to cause problems in our district.  The authors call for a change in how we view education and since 1992 when this was written schools have been moving beyond the idea of students as passive learners into the idea of students being active participants.  We see schools currently looking at the roles of school personnel as equal in the educational process.  Our concern or main question while reading the article was how much cooperative learning or group work was stressed while in reality the success or failure of a school is based on individual performance on one test.

The School District of Clayton, Missouri was an example of how problems can exist even is districts that are quite successful. In this upper-middle class district, standardized test scores were high. To many, this was a reason to not “rock the boat” sort to speak. Administrators and teachers who thought that there were better ways to reach students on a broader level found the faculty to be resistant to change. That changed when new legislation brought inner-city students to the suburbs. It was then that the district needed to change how things were run. By taking a systems thinking approach, the district was able to make changes effectively. Standardized test scores are still very good, but the teaching style of the faculty has changed dramatically. It is much more student centered and engaging.

In the strategies collection of articles we saw a parallel between the text and the experience in Collier County.  They had commitment from administration and were able to experience success integrating technology and creating a common goal.  When administration changed, so did the commitment.  They realized after the fact that they had not considered what next and had no plan on how to continue building on their success.  When the superintendent changed administrative support was lost and it was then they realized the importance of developing a shared vision that included the school board.  The second lesson learned was something we are all guilty of at some level.  They were busy celebrating the success of their plan they failed to realize they need to continue growing and improving.

The first school of the article, but last reviewed here, created a vision that 90% of the student body will read at grade level. Floyd Buchanan, former superintendent, set this standard before site based management and standards were in vogue in education. Through innovation the Clovis district created a system, CLASSI, to measure school success. The three pieces used to evaluate are student and school academic achievement, co-curriculars and community, and school process. Along with constant self evaluation, the district is highly committed to professional development for both teachers and administration. Get care is taken in recruiting and developing young teachers. There are support and assessments, programs, orientation, mentors, and learning academy for beginning teachers. If a support system for the teachers was not enough, there is a faculty senate. No union. By using the senate to focus on instruction, the district avoids the division that is prevalent in other districts due to adversarial nature of administration and unions.

Jigsaw Activity

Melissa Schuett, Kristin Hubmann, Kristin Haefke, Janet Yunker

Systems Thinking

Clovis, CA

This is a success story; their goal is to focus on every student in the system. All goals are specific and to the point, not vague. This allows individuals to clearly reach the goals. They maintain a community which embraces competition and respect. Teachers do not compete against each other; instead they compete against the standards. This district provides many opportunities for growth and support for both new teachers and current teachers. Further, power is spread between all stakeholders instead of centered around the administrations so there is a lot of freedom yet the system is still predictable.

Clayton, MO

This is a small, predominantly white and fairly successful school district faced major changes when they began to integrate a larger population of minority students. To help the school community transition smoothly the district created committees. Like a jigsaw activity, each committee was responsible for different goals. The committees were comprised of parents, students, teacher and administrators. The committees worked with deadlines and were regularly held accountable for the work they did and continue to do.  

West Des Moines, IA

This is a successful school district looking to further improve, they believe they needed to better prepare their students for the 21^st century. The district created committees whose focus was on continuous improvement, learning and diversity. The committees held frequent round table discussions to gain valuable feedback, which was invaluable compared to a one-way presentation. All decision the district and committees made were always focused on five driving principles. These principles focused everyone’s’ thinking and kept them all on the same page with a common goal and vision.

Collier Co, FL

This is perfect example of how change in leadership and lack of money can force a district to abandon ship and take on a new path. These hardships can lead to frustration and cause the district to run out of steam.  School districts need to make sure they have a realistic long range plan to help them stay afloat when major obstacles arise.

Learning Organizations

This article makes some valid points that the system needs to change in order for change to be successful. If schools continue to approach change in the same way they always have then that change will continue to be as slow and inefficient as it always has been. The change process itself needs to change. It does, however, need to be slow and well planned so that it can be long-lasting with everyone on board. Further, the article hints that school organizations need to shift away from being a place where students are shoved full of knowledge and shift toward becoming a learning community.

Chris See, Heather Slosarek, Brian Yearling

System Thinking

    This was truly an inspiring article.  We felt this was an article that should be shared with our administrators, school board members, and colleagues.  This article demonstated the real-world potential for change if inspired leaders can encourage enough people to break out of the traditional molds of public schools and begin to create a vision for something greater. 

    The article presented an interesting progression of ideas.  As we considered the Clovis story, it is hard to imagine that kind of change taking place in any of our districts without a visionary leader like Floyd Buchanan at the helm of our schools.  In the introduction it was suggested that we too often wait for the hero to step in and make the changes that warrant their hero status.  Floyd Buchanan was just such a hero.  Interestingly, it was his understanding of how to inspire others and move others to action that afforded him that "hero" status in the Clovis district.  The Clovis model is one that districts across the country can hold up as the goal for which to aim.

    One item that stood out from the Clayton, MO, story was the idea that each individual became responsible for their own learning.  We appreciated the reminder that we can look at systemic change as a goal, but it takes each individual making change in their realm of influence that will make that systemic change possible.  One of the most refreshing ideas to come from the Clayton example was the idea that, as educators, we should be pushing for lifelong learning opportunities to serve as a model for our students.  While that isn't a new idea to teachers, the idea that we can form our own learning communities to learn more about issues that directly relate to what we feel we need/want to learn.  The idea that colleagues will commit time and energy to thought and study without needing a class or facilitator to "teach" them is a unique idea that we feel is too often overlooked.  It was also impressive to witness a district that was committed to providing ongoing support and resources to help teachers reach goals that they had identified as important.

    The West Des Moines example seemed like the most attainable model of all of the districts presented.  While the other models were exemplary models to shoot for, the West Des Moines district had to contend with the far more likely realities like teachers unions, budget constraints, and resistance to change.  Despite those realities (with which all of our group members could directly identify from our own experiences), the West Des Moines school district found effective ways to press onward with the systemic changes.  The work that was done in this district was based upon wading through a new process together and finding a path that was not clearly defined for them.  It echoed some of our own experiences as we discussed changes that we had witnessed our own districts attempting to move forward with.  The idea that committees didn't always know what was expected of them or what to talk about just seemed like a more honest retelling of their journey as a district.

    The last story, Collier County, is a perfect example of why change is so scary and why people are so often resistent to it.  The initial surge forward and the success they did find was impressive.  They were headed in the right direction, had put in a lot of time and effort, and were beginning to collectively buy into change.  Then disaster struck!  A change in leadership took place (this could be supplemented, however, with a reelection of the school board, a new initiative from the federal government, a state government shake up, etc).  The vision was lost; the focus was changed.  While the article clearly made the point that planning should have included the involvement and buy-in of more people, it is this loss of momentum that is scariest about systemic change.  If districts could guarantee that these types of changes wouldn't affect their progress/goals/vision, we feel that more individuals within that district would be willing to buy in to change.  Of course, that is not the reality of life.  Therefore, we have to use examples like the districts presented before Collier County to support the progress of systemic change despite the reality that there may be hurdles along the path.

Learning Organizations

     Isaacson and Bamburg's article, Can Schools Become Learning Organizations? provided valuable insights into the how schools to become "learning organizations" that achieve meaninful changes versus schools that implement changes such as integrated curriculums, new grading policies, and daily schedule changes only to find out that student learning remains constant.  The article outlines the "five disciplines" introduced by Senge which, working together, lead to valuable gains in educator confidence and leadership and student achievement and learning.  The five disciplines outlined (systems thinking, personal mastery, mental models, team learning, and shared vision) give new meaning to professional development and cooperative learning, and outline a purpose for teaching beyond filling students with knowledge.

     When reviewing the "Systems Thinking" discipline, we all related to the idea that "the cause and effect of problems aren't always close in time and space" (42).  One of the conflicts that always occurs when wanting to implement change is that people instinctively want to see results immediately after the change.  Until we can learn that change often consists of multiple levels that take time to implement and apply, we will not have the right philosophy for change.  The articles suggests that the "system" needs to changed versus the individuals.  Therefore, staff development or changes in curricula will not yield better results in the same old system; the system needs to be changed in order to improve the quality of learning.

     The "Personal Mastery" discipline provides support to discussions that we have been having throughout this entire masters program.  The article states, "organizations learn only through individuals who learn" (42).  As students in an Instructional Technology masters program, we are exhibiting the personal mastery discipline through our inner desire to learn about technology and where education will be moving to in the future.  The new PI-34 requirements for re-certification (requiring initial educators to create a professional development plan) aids in giving educators ownership in their personal and professional vision.  Although the PDP process is tedious and requires a lot of individual work outside the school day, educators are forced to commit to telling the truth about their education qualifications - leading to a stronger personal vision and commitment to being a lifelong learner (just like the goal we have for our students to be lifelong learners). 

     We all hope that teachers see students as more than just "vessels for teachers to fill" (43).  The "Mental Models" discipline asserts that we should always reflect on our role as teachers and look at the role of students within those models.  We agree that when teachers stop reflecting and sharing their insights about children, learning, instructional strategies, and curriculums, the systems breaks down.  We need to work to share a new language by working collaboratively and valuing each person's personal vision and mastery.

     This transitions nicely to the next discipline, "Team Learning".  We all see the benefits of getting the staff together at the beginning of the school year to share information, curriculum ideas, etc. and to learn new skills through inservices; however, we also know that it is short-lived and the rest of the school year (with the exception of the occasional inservice) is highly individualized.  The article suggests that teachers should work in small work teams, just like we have our students do in the classroom.  Some of our group members have firsthand experience being that "beginning teacher" that was left after the initial week of inservices to completely fend for his/herself.  Why not collaborate more?  Why do staff development opportunities have to be geared toward the learning of individuals?  One of the main reasons that our group has discussed is that some people are very set in their own ways and practices, and have not experienced a system that promotes these "five disciplines."  Instead, teachers are allowed to close their classroom doors and keep their personal visions to themselves.  In changing the system, we could hopefully promote building on personal mastery and shared vision skills to create team learning environments.

     The hardest discipline to achieve in a school or district of so many varying opinions, experience levels, and commitment levels is the "Shared Vision" discipline.  The article states that "true shared vision is never imposed" (44).  We all see that in our school districts.  Teachers who believe that practices are being "dictated by administration" are very resistant to change and will often do whatever it takes to not have a shared vision.  In our group discussion we discussed how, last year, one member was trying to implement a curriculum change of adding a additional AP-level course that affected how the Honors courses were vertically aligned.  Veteran members of the department did not share the vision of some of the newer members, which caused resistance to change and strong division among staff members who believed their personal beliefs in a positive change were not being valued and staff members who believed that if they resisted or ignored the issue that it would eventually pass.  The members of the department eventually asserted their own personal visions to the group and it was then that they were able to create a shared vision for change.

     Overall, we see that change cannot occur without passionate people who a) value their role as educators, b) have a strong personal vision and need to be a lifelong learner, and c) are willing to work collaboratively with other members.  Ideally, we wish that all people in the educational field would have this ambition and embrace these five disciplines, yet everyone can identify those people that are complacent in their jobs, see students as vessels to "dump" knowledge into, and provide resistance to change.  Throughout this course, we hope to learn how to motivate these people in the hopes of creating these ideal "learning organizaitons."

 Isaacson, N., & Bamburg, J. (1992). Can schools become learning organizations?. Educational Leadership. 50, 42-44.