How To Organize for School-Based Management

ED 328 944

AUTHORTITLEINSTITUTION

REPORT NOPUB DATENOTEAVAILAJLE FROM

PUB TYPE

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

EA 022 171

Prasch, JohnHow To Organize for School-Based Management.Association for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment, Alexandria, Va.ISBN-0-87120-174-790

65p.

Publications, Association for Supervision andCurriculum Development, 1250 N. Pitt Street,Alexandria, VA 22314 (Stock No. 611-90093; $6.95).Guides - Non-Classroom Use (055)

MF01 Plus Postage. PC Not kvailable from EDRS.Administrator Role; *Board AdministratorRelationship; Boards of Education; Budgeting;Curriculum Development; Decentralization; EducationalPlanning; Elementary Secondary Education;Organiza tonal Change; OrganiLational Climate;Organizational Development; OrganizationalObjectives; Parent Role; *Participative DecisionMaking; Personnel Management; Policy Formation;*School Administration; *School Based Management;School District Autonomy; School Districts; SchoolRestructuring; Teacher Role; Theory PracticeRelationship

Suggestions for the organization of school-basedmanagement (SBM) implementation are presented in this guidebook foradministrators. Five chapters cover the following topics: pros andcons of SEM; barriers to implementation; board of educationrelations; leadership roles; implementation mechanisms, such asgoal-setting, budgeting, and personnel allocation; curriculumdevelopment; and information sharing. A caution is that as SBEbecomes more integrated, union power is diluted. Empowerment ofindividuals, as differentiated from union power, may later threatenunion status quo. Figures illustrate the material, and lists ofreferences and 4:esources offer 38 citations. (LMI)

***********************************************************************Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document.***********************************************************************

How toOrganizefor School--BasedManagement

CIS

igi=.John Prasch

AW:

U.& DEPARTMENT OP EDUCATIONOffrea or Educational Research and improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

Xis document has bean raptbdudad asreceived from the person or organizatiOnoriginating it

11Minor changes have beAn ma6 to improvereproduCtrOn Qufility

Points ot vrew or opinions stated m tms don,-mom do nol necelaarny represent officialOERI pointiOn or Policy

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL IN MICROFICHE ONLYHAS BEEN GRANTED BY

e aikv,Lt-TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER IERIC)."

How toOrganizefor School-BasedManagementJohn Prasch

ACDAssociation for Supervision and Curriculum DevelopmentAlexandria, Virginia

The Author

JOHN PRASCH is an Instructor in the Department of EducationalAdministration, University of Nebraska at Lincoln, and wasformerly Superintendent of Schools in Lincoln, Nebraska, andRacine. Wisconsin.

Copyright© 1990 by the Association for Supervision andCurriculum Development, 1250 N. Pitt St., Alexandria, VA 22314.

Ail rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproducedor transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic ormechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any informationstorage and retrieval system without permission in writing fromthe publisher.

ASCD publications present a variety of viewpoints. The viewsexpressed or implied in this publication should not be interpretedas official positions of the Association.

Printed in the United States of America. Typeset on Xerox ruVentura Publisher 2.0. Printed by Automated Graphics Systems.

Ronald S. Brandt, Executive EditorNancy Modrak, Managing Editor BooksCarolyn R. Pool, Associate EditorStephanie Kenworthy, Assistant Manager, Production ServicesValerie Sprague, Desktop Tisesetter

$6.95ASCD Stock No. 611-90093ISBN 0-87120-174-7

Cataloging-In-Publication Data:

Prasch, John.How to organize for school-based management /by John Prasch.p. cm.Includes bibliographical references (p. ).ISBN 0.87120-174-7 : $6.951. School management and organizationUnited States. LTitle

L82805. P74 1990371.2'00973dc20 90-43061

CIP

4

How to Organize forSchool-BasedManagement

Why School-Based Management? 1

Start with the Board of Education 12

Define New Leadership Roles 17

Build Implementing Mechanisms 27

A Reflective Postscript 53

References and Resources 56

Why School-BasedMan ement?

DEMANDS TO RESTRUCTURE THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM CONTINUE

to increase. Not yet exhausted by the frenzy of new policies,programs, and regulations most states spawned in the1980s, the National Governors' Association adoptedrestructuring as its educational agenda for the 1990s(Cohen 1988). Governors are astute politicians; they do notstand alone. They are responding to a growing consensuscalling for improvements in the efficiency and productivityof schools, in tune with massive restructuring in business,industry, and agriculture and with rapid demographic andsocial changes.

Much of the dialogue to date deals convincingly withthe reasons for restructuring, but less precisely with how itis to come about. Restructuring means different things todifferent people, and the activities forwarded under itsbanner are many and diverse.

Nevertheless, imbedded in many of the approaches torestructuring is the concept of site-based (or school-based)management @BM). SBM is consistent with, if not parallelto, other popular themes such as teacher empowermentand shared decision making. The concept fits industry'smove toward decentralization and participatorymanagementthe idea tha, decisions are better when madeat operational points in the hierarchy. The statement byPresident Bush and the gc vernors following the President'seducational summit in 1989 lists decentralization ofauthority and decision making as one of the marks ofsuccessful restructuring (Pierce 1989). According to ErnestBoyer (1989), president of the Carnegie Foundation for theAdvancement of Teaching, "In shaping a national strategyfor education, school-based management is crucial."

How To ORGANIZE FOR SCHOOL-BMM MANAGEMENT

U.S. Secretary of Education Lauro Cavazos coupled histheme of choice to SBM by saying, "Schools of choicemust also have school-based management" (quoted inSnider 1989).

This book stems from the conviction that SBM is a partof the continuing restruc.uring movement and thateducators need to know how to organize for itsimplementation. Educators may be understandably wary,having been criticized on the one hand for being imperviousto change and accused, on the other, of jumping on everybandwagon. Yet they should rejoice at this turn away fronithe stifling regulatory nature of earlier reform measures andwelcome the freedom to change that is implicit in the SBMrhetoric. SBM is grassroots restructuring, a bottom-upapproach that depends on local adoption of reform ideas.SBM philosophy fits the considerable volume of educationalliterature on the change process, much of which has beenignored by noneducator policymakers. At last it may berecognized that teachers and school administrators knowhow to improve schools. But the pendulum swings. Seizingthis opportunity requires practical expertise. From thispoint of view, a "how to" book is timely.

Rather than a cookbook, this is a guide for puttingtheory into practice. Intended to provide help in movingfrom lip service to action, it gives practical examples ofways to foster SBM, recognizing that the vast differencesamong school districts will create many alternativepractices as the examples are applied. Though themechanisms explained provide only samples of the varietyof ways to proceed, the discussion of benefits, drawbacks,attitudes, and roles is generic to any plan.

By its nature, SBM rests on a commitment to situationalmanagement and leadership. That is, the dynamics of anygiven situation determine the most effective procedures;what works best in one place may not work elsewhere. It isinevitable and healthy that the degrees of implementation,the methods, and the results of SBM will vary.

Schools also have varying degrees of freedom wheninstalling SBM, depending on state statutes and localcircumstances controlling their operation. Empoweringteachers to select textbooks, for example, may not be anoption in states that make statewide adoptions. The

2

WHY SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEmerr

regulatory controls under which schools operate, rangingfrom curriculum mandates to minimum salaries andincluding personnel credentialing and accreditation rules,vary widely from state to state. Even the best intentionedaccrediting agencies limit the operational choices ofindividual schools. Despite these limits, there is a widerano,: r.if possibilities for implementation; practitioners needto choose those that are applicable or allowable in theirown districts.

SBM Is not new. It has been and is being practiced invarying degrees by school systems throughout the country.The American Association of School Administraiors (1990),in its 1989-90 opinions and status of members survey,reported that almost one-fourth of the school districtsrepresented had implemented SBM. An additional quarterhad such a move under consideration. Althoughorganizational emphasis on centralized authority ischaracteristic of many school districts, such practicecannot be documented as the norm. The ideals ofdemocratic administration of schools are as old asprograms to prepare administrators. The popularity ofthese concepts, now reborn or given new labels, simplymeans that school districts will move from where they areon the continuum to some further point. Viewing SBM inthis light gives it sanity and perspective and identifies it asa rational change rather than a bandwagon move.

In deference to the flexibility inherent in SBM,purposely avoid a tight definition of the term. It is morepractical and more useful if allowed different meanings fordifferent school districts. Renaming the movement to"school-centered decision making," as was done recently ata Joint conference of the American Association of SchoolAdministrators, the National Education Association, theAmerican Federation of Teachers, and the National Networkfor Educational Renewal (Fulbright 1989), is a legitimateattempt at a more precise definition. Yet the search forprecision only plays semantic games with a concept whosevery essence encourages variability.

3

How To ORGAN= FOR SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT

Pros and Cons

If fueled by logic, the choice to install SBM implies a carefulweighing of its advantages and disadvantages. Presumedadvantages include:

Better progmms for students. Resources are more likelyto match student needs when instructional decisions aremade by those who work more directly wl'h students.

Full use of human resources. SBM recognizes theexpertise and competencies of those to whom instruction isentrusted.

Higher quality e xisions. In an organization of highlytrained individuals, joint decisions represent a pooling ofexpertise and ensure that issues are examined from avariety of viewpoints.

Increased staff loyalty and commitment. Theopportunity to participate develops a sense of ownership.Plans are more vigorously implemented by those who helpmake them.

Development of staff leadership skills. Widerparticipation increases leadership opportunities for moreindividuals. Staff members build a broader understanding ofthe organization and have more opportunities to enlarge orchange their roles.

Clear organizational goals. Successful SBM dependson a careful balance between autonomy and control, whichcan only be achieved through full understanding of theorganization's mission and goals.

Impmved communication. Wide participation indecisions requires full understanding of the issues andpossession of all pertinent information.

Improved staff morale. Staff members feel better abouttheir organization and its leadership when they know theiropinions are valued, sought, and used. This provides theopportunity to attract and retain higher quality personnel.

Support for staff creativity and innovation. Theflexibility SBM provides counterbalances organizationalbureaucracy and frees staff to take risks.

Greater piblic confidence. By allowing parents,constituents, and students a larger voice, SBM increasestheir understanding, responds more readily and accurately

49

WIN SCHOOL-BASED MANAGDADrr

to their needs or demands, and increases their interest andsupport.

Enhanced fiscal accountability. Staff members willmanage more carefully the resources they actually control.

Restructuring. Because SBM changes mles,responsibilities, and district organization, Itsimplementation represents a restructuring. Paula White(1989) argues, 6'SBM is different from past decentralizationefforts which merely shifted authority from a central boardof education to smaller local boards."

Despite the current popularity of SBM, it has somedisadvantages as well as implementation barriers. Knowingboth in advance is helpful in smoothing the installation.Some disadvantages of SBM are:

More work. Decision sharing at the site is timeconsuming, and staff members can ill afford to becomeenmeshed in costly discussion of trivial matters or behandicapped by excessive meetings or committee work.Upper level management of a site-based enterprise takesmore time and effort because it is less routine, denandsmore coordination, and is generally more complex.

Less efficiency. Monolithic, centralized organizationappears to be more efficient in terms of per-unit dollarcosts, expenditure of time, or straight-line, no-nonsensetask accomplishment. Convincing a tax-conscious Publicthat efficiency and effectiveness are not the same is,therefore, an added public relations bueden of SBM.

Diluted benefits of specialization. If knowledge ispower, the in-depth knowledge of the specialist is a valuablecommodity in an ever more specialized society. In a sense,SBM limits the decision-making authority of the centraloffice specialist and moves it to the building-levelgeneralist. A specialist, alone, may make more informeddecisions than a group by virtue of greater expertise.

Uneven school performance. Schools that are alreadyweak will not automatically flourish when given moreautonomy. Indeed, the very cause of the weakness may bethat local leadership is unable to capitalize on additionalfreedom. By contrast, strong schools with alert staffs arelikely to become stronger under SBM. The potentialdifferences among schools in scope and sequence of

1 05

How To ORGANIZE FOR SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT

curriculum place a hardship on students forced to transferschools.

Greater need for staff development. Staffs need help inassuming the new roles that SBM requires. Moreover, tofully capitalize on the advantages of SBM, staff membersneed continuous access to new knowledge and skills.Retrainingas well as initial trainingis a continuous need.

Possible confusion about new toles and responsibilities.The development of new roles and relationships inevitablycreates a messy period, loaded with risks ofmisunderstanding, and having potential for personalinsecurity and eventual feuding among staff members.

Coordination difficulties. Autonomous sites maypursue their self-interest in disregard of the goals of thetotal institution. Conflict is possible between advocates ofthe individual school and advocates of the higher, generalgood. SBM can establish power struggles amongadministrators, teachers, parents, and students. Negotiatingthe inevitable conflicts is a difficult managerial task.

Unintended consequences. If the authority to act andthe resources to implement are not provided to site-basedstaffs when their participation is invited, alienation results.Conditioned by previous swings of the pendulum of reform,teachers are perceptive when judging if actions matchrhetoric. The best intentioned changes run the risk ofdamaging the fragile network of trust. Staff members willalways check external public relations against internalreality. In the loosely structured school world, opportunitiesabound for co-option, symbolic response, andnoncompliance.

Irreversible shifts. Once the process is started, it isdifficult and traumatic to change directions.

Some barriers to installation of SBM are:

Resistance to change. Preserving the status quo isfrequently the line of least resistance and provides staffmembers with the greatest degree of comfort.

Unstable school leadership. The change inmembership of boards of education is institutionalizedthrough the election process. Superintendents andprincipals often change positions.

ii6

WHY SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT

Budget increases. Change that costs money is difficultto promote in the cost-conscious educational environment.Both installation and maintenance of SBM require additionalstaff development funding.

Existing governance structures. Schools are imprisonedby a surprising range of federal and state laws andregulations as well as by the policies of local boards ofeducation. Moreover, union contracts frequently restrict theroles and functions of members.

Misinterpretation of control. Striking the appropriatebalance between centralized and decentralizedcontroland making sure that that balance is fullyunderstood by all staff membersis difficult.

"Quick-fix" attitude. SBM's installation will take time,and its results may not be immediately identified. Since SBMwill be no panacea, current hype may set expectations toohigh.

Inappropriate staffing. There is a danger that centraloffice or administrative staff will be inappropriately reducedif the complexity of implementation is underestimated or ifthe reasons for installing SBM go beyond the purpose ofimproving learning for students.

Reduction of administrative staff, a common goal inmany reform initiatives, is not a goal of SBM. Changingadministrative roles is an objective, one that may or maynot be related to staff size.

Not all the moves to SBM are the result of logicalanalysis of its pros and cons. It is possible to be swept intoSBM by the momentum of its popularity simply because it'sthe thing to do. Some features of SBM, most notably theestablishment of parent councils, have been legislated in atleast three states. The rhetoric of the movement isseductive.

Strange as it may seem for a concept that celebratescooperation, some school districts are pushed into SBM viathe collective bargaining table. SBM entered into as theresult of a win-lose power struggle may well founder. Ifbegun wider a cloud of coercion or if perceived as theopening battle in a continuing war, activities that implementSBM can be unproductive and impermanent. Trust is criticalto the successful implementation of SBM.

1 27

How To ORGANIZE FOR SCHOOL-BASED MAmontENT

The Importance af Attitudes

Those who would succ%sfully implement SBM mustembrace a state of mind that includes the follcwingprinciples:

SBM advocates understand that in democraticenvironments power is achieved by giving it away ratherthan by struggling for more. SBM flourishes when power isfreely and cheerfully shared. Suen environments thrive onlywhen there are attitudes of trust in the ability of colleaguesand trust that their motives are consistent withorganizational goals.

Successful implementation of SBM requiresunderstanding and acceptance on the part of all staff thatthe essential mission of schoolingthe instruction ofstudentsoccurs in the classroom, and that all otheractsvities of the district exist only to support thatinstruction. The most telling evaluation of SBM will, in thelong run, rest on the question of improved studentachievement.

In the SBM environment, personnel are notsupervised in the sense that there are ordinate andsubordinate positions. Staff do not "report to" but rather"work with" their colleagues. The hierarchicalorganizational chart may be a necessary bureaucraticappendage, but not one to be taken too seriously.Individuals feel that their contributions are valued and thatthey are free to take risks.

Accountability is achieved through a process of goalsetting with a maximum of freedom provided staff regardinghow goals are met. Problem solving is accomplished byteams, and evaluation focuses on programs, not onindividuals.

Diversity aud disagreement are revered and areperceived as opportunities for learning rather thansymptoms of discord and divisiveness.

Although maintaining positive human relationsremains important, successful SBM requires key staffmembers to be oriented more to the organization as awhole. Emphasis on the success of schools su estsa departure from the behavioral norms that fit the non-integrative organization, as described by Woodward (195.)

8 1 3

WHY SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT?

and Wieck (1976). In SBM, teachers get as much satisfactionfrom the school's success as from their individualaccomplishments. The congruence of personal andinstitutional goals is a sign of organizational good health.

Larry Dlugosh, Superintendent of Schools in GrandIsland, Nebraska, speaking at the annual convocation of

Nebraska School Administrators in August 198!",

summarized the orientation necessary for a successful SBMplan as "goal driven, needs responsive, results oriented, amteamwork/group operationalized."

Planning DedsionsSeveral preliminery planning decisions need to be made inpicking an implementation path for SBM. Installationproceduas will be different for an evolution as opposed toa revolution. Also, it may be a good idea to determine inadvance how far along the SBM continuum a district wantsto go.

An obvious way to move into SBM is slowly, one step ata time. An important advantage of the incrementalapproach is the time it provides for careful training of staffat each stage of implementation. Time is also helpful ingiving staff members a more comfortable climate in whichto adjust to change. Districts that already have someelements of SBM in place can simply add additionalelements. Finally, the evolutionary path fits a quieterprocess when a low rather that a high profile is desirable.According to Leonard Burns and Jeanne Howes (1988), intheir description of the Parkway, Missouri, SBM plan,"significant and lasting improvement takes considerabletime."

Although common sense suggests a slower pace,circumstances often argue strongly for more precipitousaction. High-profile, fast-paced action is more likely togenerate enthusiasm, full involvement, and commitmentfrom staff, as well as public support. Rapid change may benecessary to make full use of SBM's newfound popularity.Programs mandated by legislated action or born ofnegotiated agreements may not provide for leisurelyimplementation. For example, the new Chicago plan, an

1 49

10

How To ORGAMZE FOR SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT

extreme form of SBM with 540 local school councilsmandated by state legislative action, was put in place in ayear's time.

If forced into a fast track, a district should use thecircumstance as a positive opportunity for change. At thispoint, if the changes are to be substantive and lasting,leaders must be especially sensitive to the human factorsinvolved in change and understand the inherent pitfalls inSBM.

Related to the pacing decision is the question ofwhether to begin with pilot schools or include all schools atthe same time. The philosophy of SBM suggests that itmight be best to proceed on a broken front with all schoolsin the district participating but at varying stages ofimplementation. Selecting pilot schools implies specialattention to some sites and may, in the long run, destroy theclimate conducive to successful total implementation. Usingpilot schools creates a "project" mentality, suggesting anexperiment or trial rather than a permanent managementimprovement. Pilots or projects also connote thedevelopment of a model, whereas SBM should anticipateeach school's developing its own response. SBM philosophyis reinforced when the installation strategy creates theenabling mechanisms and encourages their use by allschools in a nonprescriptive way.

Nevertheless, many districts, especially larger ones,choose the pilot school approach. Hanson and Marburger(1988), who recommend the pilot, report that St. Louisstarted SBM with 12 schools out of 116 and added another12 the next year. Allentown, Pennsylvania, started with 4 of20 schools, and Dade County, Florida, started with 33 of 260.Ann Bradley (1990) describes the process by which NewYork City schools request to be included in their program.About 100 of 1,100 are expected to be chosen to participatein the first year.

Rather than arguing the relative merits of one type ofaction over the other, it is important to emphasize that aconscious decision on pacing is part of the installation plan.Also, an early decision on how far to carry SBM is importantbecause it affects all aspects of the plan, including thepacing and sequencing as well as the amounts and kinds ofstaff development needed. Effective SBM is not synonymous

1 5

WHY SCHOOL-BAW MANAGEMENT'?

with complete decentralization of all functions. Moreover,the centralization vs. decentralization issue is not a matterof either/or but of finding the proper balance. In practicalterms, the task is to identify functions hat are bestperformed when centralized and to centralize only Ciose.

In school settings, for example, it makes sense tocentralize the purchasing function. Teachers can ill affordthe time needed individually to buy paper, pencils, andinstructional supplies. Accordingly, writing thespecifications, taking the bkis, checking the invoices,ensuring the delivery, and making the necessary accountingentries are all functions best centralized. Nevertheless,teachers can still help decide what kind of pencils topurchase. Although teachers may not write specifications.they should influence the purchasing process because theyare in the best position to know what's needed. This is agood illustration of the balance between centralized anddecentralized functions and also supports the concept thatthe central office exists only to serve the school.

Student transportation is another function bestcentralized. Buying and maintaining school buses,developing efficient routes, and hiring and training driversare all activities better done on a districtwide basis. Therequired balance is maintained as long aS the transportationsystem is seen solely as a service supporting instruction.When requirements of the busing schedule interfere withthe delivery of instruction, It's time to involvebuilding-based staff in the scheduling decisions.

Payroll, legal services, and food services are also bestcentralized. Centralization provides efficiency and costeffectiveness and becomes most useful when there is a highneed for coordination. The concept of SBM is well servedwhen site-based staff are not unnecessarily saddled withfunctions more effectively performed at a central level.

1 6I 1

12

Start with theBoard of Education

DESPITE THE CURRENT PUBUC ENTHUSIAvl, FULL AND CONTINUING

support for SBM from members of the board of educationmay be one of the more difficult hurdles. Although likely togive lip service to SBM, most members of boards ofeducation are more comfortable with conventionalmanagement models. They understand bureaucratic

angements, they believe they were elected to control,they favor tight over loose organizational modes, and theyoverestimate the extent to which their decisions affectclassroom behavior.

Because of the responsibility they feel to theirconstituents, board members are frightened of losing4.ontrol, particularly if differences between buildings areperceived as chaotic or permissive. The responibility toexplain things to the public causes board members to favorsimple, easy-to-understand organization. Effective SBMproduces succeP., stories at indMdual schools, but typicalboard-member reaction to success at one building is tomandate the procedure districtwide.

Moreover, the task of keeping the board in tune is acontinuing one. Elections change board membership, andnewcomers frequently campaign on a platform of bringingabout change, if only for its own sake. Given the long timespan necessary from successful installation andimplementation to noticeable results, continuity ofleadership is a critical factor.

Nevertheless, board commitment is of paramountimportance because SBM can succeed only when thepolicies of the district support its philosophy. JamesMitchell (1990), Superintendent of School District #2,Northglen, Colorado, says, "Most of the policies in the

1 7

SUM' WM.1 THE BOARD OF EDUCATION

policy manual reflect centralized control." It is through thedevelopment and adoption of policy statements that SBMbecomes legitimized and institutionalized. Examples ofuseful policy statements are presented in the chapter of thisbook entitled "Build Implementing Mechanisms."

Several can be used to get board commitment andmaintain the SBM philosophy'.

Hold Board Retreats

The in-depth discussion of philosophy needed for boardmembers to develop attitudes associated with SBM requiresa format different from routine business meetings. Adaylong retreat, away from the usual meeting place and freeof disturbances, can afford a more appropriate setting. Useof an outside facilitator often enhances productivity.Retreats, institutionalized as an annual event, provide anexcellent vehicle for establishing goals for the district, anecessity in SBM. Retreats are also a good way to orientnew board members.

Hold Work Sessions

Short of a full retreat, informal work sessions are helpful inthe SBM installation process. Such meetings are particularlyus4u1 for the extended discussions needed for policyr.:-.velopment. Because finding sufficient time for policydebate is a persistent problem for many boards, having aspecific vehicle for such work is a convenient solution.Retreats and work sessions are also better environmentsthan regular meetings for discussing and evaluating the roleof the board in the SBM program.

Target the Dialogue

While the advantage of retreats and work sessions is theadditional time not usually available at regular businessmeetings, the availability of time is also an invitation fordiscussion to wander. A tightly drawn agenda and carefullyplanned process control are essential for a productive

13

How To ORGAN= FOR Sa4001,BASED MANAGEMENT

session. Though controlled, the agenda must still providefor broad coverage and free-wheeling opinion on basicphilosophic issues. Indeed, the philosophic nature of SBMdemands careful organization to reach consensus or closure.

A sample agenda might address the following questions:

What are the reasons for changing?What purposes will change serve?How do educational institutions change? (Thisquestion provides an excellent opportunity toshare with board members the educator'sperspective on the nature of organizations and thechange process.)How do board members best facilitate change?What are the next steps? Who does what?

Get Reports from Individual Schools

SBM is greatly enhanced if time 's allotted on the agenda ofeach board meeting for reports ft.= individual schools.Staff members or constituents should actively participate inthe reports so that board members learn that buildings andtheir staffs differ, having their own personalities, strengths,and needs.

Disaggregate the Database

Strong support for SBM is shown by disaggregating, orseparating out, school-supplied information to emphasizethe differences among schools. When only districtwide dataare shown, the implication is that all schools are alike.

Moreover, there are sound statistical reasons fordisaggregating data. Aggregate test scores, for example,easily mask both strengths and weaknesses of individualschools and obscure information that may be much moreuseful for diagnostic analysis or for guiding programs ofimprovement.

The practical problems associated with unfaircomparisons among buildings, resulting from disaggregatedachievement data, must be met head on. The antidote is tosupply copious additional information describing

1 914

START WFTH THE Bo Aan OF EDUCATION

environmental circumstances, from one building to another,and to mount public information programs to assist in theappropriate interpretation of achievement information.Indeed, a frank examination of the issues surroundingcomparisons makes a strong case for SBM as the bestmethod to ensure that programs flt the clients.

Plan Strategically

The principles of strategic planning support and enhancethe ideas of SBM. The emphasis on an environmental scan,a visionary mission statement, and a clear set of goalsestablishes an important backdrop for the coordination ofbuilding-level activities. At the same time, the developmentof action plans to accomplish goals serves to give buildingsan appropriate site-based role. The Richardson (Texas)Independent School District, for example, started its SBMeffort with a mission statement and strategic plan (Carr1988).

Emphasize Board Functions

Board members need reinforcement and instruction if theyare to play their roles properly. One direct strategy toaccomplish this is careful control of the agenda. Periodicevaluation of board functioning also helps. Use ofexperienced outside facilitators as process observers, alongwith careful follow-up on recommendations, helps keep theboard on track.

Service on a board of education can become stressfuland frustrating, but the organization and emphasis of boardwork can go a long way toward substituting fulfillmentfor frustration. For example, there is great satisfaction inplanning when it produces results, in setting goals whenhorizons are elevated, and in establishing policieswhen they energize staff.

20 15

How To ORGANIZE FoR SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT

Make Comparisons with Business

Many board members are prone to want schools to be morebusinesslike. Current trends in business and industrystrongly support the principles of SBM. When the board isfully committed, a broad-based development committee canhelp create awareness throughout the system and assistwith the decisions about pacing, sequencing, and the depthof the SBM program. Such a committee can also serve theongoing functions of monitoring, evaluating, and adjustingthe SBM plan as it is installed.

2116

Define NewLeadership Roles

THIS CI-1AFTER ILLUSTRATES DE.SIRED ROLE CHANGES FOR EACH

classification of personnel which will help ensure thesuccessful installation of SBM.

The Board of Education

Although ultimate control of the district rests with theboard of education, SBM requires the board to change theway it exercises that control. Instead of taking directadministrative action, it must set policy, establish goals,and monitor results. Instead of leading by exhortation anddemand, it must lead by enunciating a visionary missionstatement and by setting goals that stretch the abilities ofthe staff. The board must abandon the role of establishingrules for standardization and uniformity and accept acoordinating role played out by monitoring results ratherthan processes. Board members must understand that SBMdoes not change the legal governance system of schoolsand, more important, that they do not give up authority bysharing decision's. But in discharging its responsibility foraccountability, the board changes from an inspectorial roleto providing a forum for the staff to report progress ongoals.

Board members need guidance in learning to accept arole on the higher ground aril to delegate in ways that bestuse staff talents. Mundane as it may sound, helping boardmembers handle telephone complaints is a staff functionthat contributes to the ability of a board to play itsappropriate role in SBM. Without staff guidance, boardmembers are easily trapped into spending their time onrelatively trivial matters instead of the larger issues. The

22 17

How To ORGANLEE Foa SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT

often fuzzy demarcation between policy development andadministration becomes more clear as SBM is implemented.

The board must also accept a public relations role incelebrating the diversity among its schools and inchampioning the right of school sites to be different. Boardpolicy must define roles and must be explicit with regard tothe power and authority to be delegated and shared withparent councils and school staff.

The Superintendent

All of the items covered in the Importance of Attitudes"section could be repeated at this point because they applymost directly to the superiritendent's role. In addition toclanging his own attitudes, ix wever, the superintendentmust clearly understand that stAring power in no wayrelieves him of the burden of leadoship. Leadership of thehighest order is required to convince .7 board of educationto adopt the necessary policies and the operational stylerequired of SBM, especially considering that thesuperintendent serves in a subordinate posItion to theboard. Likewise, the superintendent must ini;late all thepractices and make available all the staff deveopmentactivities that support SBM, yet he must accomplish thistask in a nondirective way. The staff must not only bepersuaded to accept the idea in theory but must also beenticed into active participation.

Clearly, SBM demands stronger, not weaker, leadershipof the superintendent and requires a style of leadershipmore complicated and difficult. The "command and control"approach gives way to a "beseech and facilitate" mode. Thesuperintendent must abandon the "take charge" style forone that encourages and supports others to take charge. Inthis respect, the superintendent becomes less thesuper-administrator who manages programs on some grandscheme and more the mentor who, behind the scenes, heipspeople grow. Rather than the person who always has thefinal answer, the superintendent must have the keyquestionshe must be less a talker, more a listener. TheSBM superintendent makes heroes rather than becomingone. Murphy (1989) sums it up by saying, "Superintendents

23

DEFINE NEW LEADERSHIP ROLES

need to pay more attention to the unheroic dimensions ofleadership if they are to promote local autonomy." Thus, theemerging concept of leader as servant" flts the SBMphilosophy.

Although restricted to a softer leadership style, thesuperintendent must nevertheless transmit an overall,inspirational vision of mission to the entire organization.Such a vision is extremely important to SBM because itprovides the glue that holds the organization together. Thetask is accomplished not by making pronouncements but byengaging the staff in conversations that help them worktogether to develop and accept consensus. Such workdepends on establishing the institutional climate forcollegial work and skill in group dynamics.

Conflict management becomes an important skill forSBM superintendents because the process of sharingdecisions is likely to produce conflict. The superintendentmust not view conflict as dysfunctional but, to preserve itsproductivity, must learn to mediate conflicts rather thanresolve them by decree.

SBM is enhanced if the superintendent can abandon anadversarial role with employee unions in favor of a stancethat makes union officials partners in the installation effort.Establishing such a relationship is a year-round activity,requiring special attention to the problems related to thenegotiating season. Collaborative work on SBM outsideof negotiation time prevents it from becoming a bargainingchip.

Central Office Staff Members

Depending on the size of the district, a varying number ofcentral office staff members hold assorted titles andperform more or less specialized functions. To get each ofthem to play a role consistent with the tenets of SBM oftenrequires a significant role change, sometimes both difficultand traumatic. The important shift is from power by virtueof title to power based solely on ability to serve. Leadersmust challenge the idea that all important functions arenecessarily based in the central office. That is not tosuggest that functions be eliminated, but only that they be

24 19

20

How To ORGANIZE FOR Se Hoot.-BAsED MANAGEMENT

relocated, The following more specific observations refer tostaff titles commonly found in school district central officeorganizations.

Subject-Matter Specialists

If SBM is to work, those who serve at the central officeas specialists in a subject, such as mathematics or reading,roust give up any vestige of control and assume the role offacilitator or helper. Giving up control means among otherthings, that they do not have a portion of the school'sbudget to manage, nor are they expected to evaluate theperformance of school-based teachers. A change in titlefrom "supervisor" or "director" to "consultant" can conveythe direction of the intended change. Assuming the changedrole, however, is more difficult than merely changing thename. The best way for specialists to play their new role isto work with individual schools on an on-call basis.Specialists must be convinced that they are more effectivewhen their services are sought rather than imposednotan unreasonable assumption. Since the frequency withwhich they are called is a measure of perceived expertise orneed, the role is challenging. Yet, as in other aspects of SBM,such working conditions are powerful motives to hone staffcapabilities.

The possibility that the services of specialists might bepurchased by schools on an ad hoc basis, rather than beingprovided by permanent central office staff, is a legitimateissue in the move to SBM.

The Business Manager

Most school districts have a business manager whooccupies a relatively high rung on the organizational ladder.Given the increased complexity and cost of operatingschools, the business function takes on increasedimportance. The general perception is that money controls.Unfortunately, a mismatch usually exists between availablefunds and the tasks facing education. By nature, businessoperations are concerned with direct and logicalmanipulations of objects and moneyactions that fit anautocratic management style. Also, functions most likely tobe centralized are usually assigned to the business manager.

25

DEFINE NEW LEADEMIP ROLES

For all of these reasons, the busirvms manager, more thanany other central office administrator, tends to gatherpower and have the most difficulty playing the power-sharing role required in SBM.

The business manager must change from the role of amoney manager to that of an educator, one as dedicated tothe instruction of students as any employee in the district.She can no longer ignore the meetings that deal withinstruction, but must participate in enough of them tounderstand the instructional mission and to be viewed asknowledgeable and supportive. The business manager mustbe concern& less with efficiency and more witheffectiveness. She must relinquish sole proprietorship offiscal data and assume responsibility for sharing such dataand presenting them in a fashion that all can understand.Instead of being the stern protector of district funds with aready negative response to every request, the businessmanager must play the role of enabler, helping sitemanagers stretch their dollar resources. Granted, thisis a difficult role change, but it gives the business managera chance to change from a "bad guy" to a "good guy."

The Personnel Director

The personnel officer must give up the power base ofbeing the final selector of staff and play a role thatfacilitates sound selections by others. As withsubject-matter specialists, a name change that drops thetitle of "director" may be helpful in announcing the change."Human resources manager" or "personnel manager" maymore accurately describe this function in an SBM district.in any event, this person selects and interviews less, butensures better selection and interviewing proceduresthroughout the district. He keeps a comprehensivepersonnel database that includes information on activeapplicants, current vacancies, professional information onall staff members, results of exit interviews, and currentresearch on all phases of personnel management,particularly the best methods for staff evaluation andcounseling. By improving procedures and developing a listof qualified applicants, the human r, sources ruanager

2 G21

How To ORGANIZE Fon SCHOM-BASED MANAGEmErfr

exercises a powerful quality control function while allowingsite managers ultimate control over selection.

Instead of merely hiring and assigning people, thepersonnel manager facilitates a broad-based program ofimproving staff relations through such activities asadministering the benefits program, assisting in handlinggrievances and other aspects of the union contract, andkeeping ker staff members informed on improved humanrelations skills. In this sense, the personnel manager, likethe superintendent, becomes a developer of people.

The Srdal Education Director

Many school districts have a central office specialistwho directs a program of services for handicapped orspecial needs students. Frequently, teachers who work inmore than one school report to the central office director ofsuch a program. In SBM, special education directors andteachers must change their points of reference so that theroles they play work to integrate their program into theschool's regular program, as directed by that school'sprincipal. Although such arrangements complicatescheduling and other aspects of special education, theirlong-term benefits are worth the effort. In fact, they may bethe only avenue for achieving the integration implied inmainstreaming.

The Principal

Although it may appear that in SBM authority andresponsibility for the local school have been delegated tothe principal, that is not a completely accurate reading ofhow SI3M works. True, the principalship becomes animportant focal point, but SBM provides the principal withmuch more powerful tools for successful operation of theschool.

At the outset, the principal, like the superintendemust enter the SBM arena with all the necessary attitu,for successful installation. With the right mental set, theprincipal has the help and cooperation of the entire schoolstaff in the management of the school. Not only is theprincipal empowered by a different and more effective staff

27

DEFINE NEW LEADERSWP ROLES

support system, but she now has available the full range ofcentral office services, on her terms. Whereas the role ofthe principal has always been to orchestrate the services of

various providers to create optimal educational experiencesfor students, under SBM the principal has added authorityand freedom to get the job done. This is a welcome reversalof a longstanding trend to erode the principal's role by theonslaughts of increased central office control; aggressiveunion intrusion; and new state, federal, and judicialregulations. Reversal of this trend is in accord with theresearch on effective schools, which emphasizes theimportance of the principalship.

The principal must expand her horizons to play thisnew role. No longer can she hide behind the policyhandbook or central office regulations to defend herdecisions. Since the central office cannot be used as ascapegoat, the principal must play a more directlyaccountable role with staff and constituents. Rather thanviewing the central office staff as enemies, the SBMprincipal sees them as resources and frequently seeks andwelcomes their help.

To fully exploit her new authority and freedom, theprincipal needs to sharpen her human relations skills toattract the meaningful involvement of staff andconstituents. She must be a master in group dynamics sothat meetings are productive. The SBM principal mustabandon the routine tasks of keeping school and embracethe more important task of creating a climate in which allstaff and students share responsibility for not Just keepingschool, but also for improving its effectiveness. instead ofbeing the disciplinarian for the institution, the principal setsa tone in which staff and students share responsibility forbehavior, and the frequency of problems diminishes.

In SBM, the principal has an expanded role in thecommunity that the school serves. No longer can she besolely concerned about ,the school; she must get to knowthe community it serves much more intimately. Theprincipal must analyze the peculiar needs of the communityand fashion a school program responsive to those needs.Most likely, the SBM plan will include a parent council,which creates a new relationship between the principal andthe constituents. This new role requires more listening

281

23

Teachers

24


and more questioning than the principal's traditionalrelationship with parent groups. Indeed, in the Chicagoplan, school councils hire and fire principals. William Snider(1990) reports that 49 principals were ousted by the votesof newly formed local school councils.

In discharging responsibilities for staff supervision, theprincipal departs from the role of overseer of each facultymember. Instead, she adopts a "management by exception"mode, playing the supervisory role only with the smallpercentage of staff members whose performance ismarginal, and working with the rest of the staff as an equalpartner in the search for more effective instructionaltechniques.

A key to effective power sharing is information sharing.Staff must have access to relevant information if they are toparticipate intelligently in decision making. No longer canthe principal's office be simply the repository ofinformation; the principal must play an aggrebsive role indisseminating the information. This responsibility includesfinding ways to package and store information for easyaccess and use.

The SBM principal assumes a new relationship withnoncertified staff, such as custodians and food serviceworkers. In the SBM environment, these workers are more apart of the building staff and less under the direction of thecentral office. They must be welcomed and helped tobecome a part of the decision-making process at thebuilding, when appropriate. The individuals lowest on thetable of organization can make significant contributionswhen the decisions affect their work

In short, the principal's new role is to find ways toempower all staff members to maximize their contributionsin s,...ccessfully attaining the school's goals.

The leacher empowerment rhetoric that is part of the SBMmovement is easily misinterpreted. Teachers must beempowered to do what they do best, which is to teachstudents. Empowering teachers to be administrators duesnot necessarily move a school toward its goals, is not

2

DEFINE NEW LEADERSHIP Rous

welcomed by most teachers, and is unnecessary ifadministrators do their Jobs properly. SBM implies thatteachers must be served or ministered to by theirprincipals and superintendents so that students have betterlearning opportunities. Time for teachers to teach must beprotected. Teachers are empowered when they can act as,and are treated as, professionals.

Nevertheless, SBM changes teachers' roles bydemanciing more of their attention to policy and proceduralmatters. Teachers, therefore, need to become more adept ingroup dynamics so their dialogue can be more productiveand less time-consuming. More important, if teachers are tobecome significant participants in decision making, theyneed to be better informed, more alert to the large-scaleissues affecting all schools, and, most of all, abreast ofresearch results regarding the improvement of instruction.SBM challenges teachers to show that their new-foundfreedom can produce better results for students. Given theowortunity to take risks, teachers must become risk takers.

Any discussion of the teachers' role in SBM mustrecognize that the growth of auxiliary or support staff, suchas couoselors, psychologists, and special educators, hascontributed to the loss of teacher power, at least to theextent that specialized personnel narrow the range and typeof decisions reserved for teachers. Organizationally,support staff are often paid more, have greater control overtheir time, and are accorded more deference than areteachers. SBM must define these roles with care to ensurethe primacy of teaching and to convince teachers thatsupport staff are a resource for teachers. The inservicemessage is that teachers need training in the use ofpersonnel resources, and the organizational implication isthe need for team building.

SBM cannot flourish in a "we vs. they" environment.Teachers must therefore give up an adversarial relationshipwith administrators in the implementation of SBM.Fortunately, if administrators play their SBM roles properly,problems of adversarial relationships will diminish.

3025

How To ORGAN= FOR SCHOOIrBASED MANAGEMENT

ParentsParents, too, have new zuies in SBM. lf the movement is tobe successful and if parents are to be involved, they mustshift from the narrow concern, "What's good for my child?"to the broader concern, "What's good for all children?" Thisis a difficult shift, but with the establishment of powerfulschool-based parent councils, the success or demise of SBMdepends on whether parents play a more selfless role.Unfortunately, history is replete with examples of howlocal-based power, when used for self-interest, forces aretreat to centralized control. For example, when localofficials failed to address problems of racial and genderdiscrimination and lack of opportunity forlimited-English-speaking students and handicappedchildren, the federal government Ht compelled to act.

Parent councils must be guided around the rivalriesand factions within the school. Moreover, although formedfor the specific purpose of promoting the welfare of a givenschool, their activities should not be at the expense ordetriment of other schools in the district.

The opportunity for greater parent involvement carrieswith it a responsibility for parents to be well informed oneducational issues. As with staff members, SBM requires agreater time commitment of parents.

Fewer parents today have a direct relationship withschools because of demographic changes associated withlower birth rates, greater longevity, and employmentoutside the home. Also, the current emphasis on schoolpartnerships with business creates more nonparentinvolvement with schools. These and other reasons arguefor having nonparent constituents on site-based councils.

3126

Build ImplementingMechanisms

Au, OF THE DISCUSSION OF ATITrUDES AND Au, THE STAn .development activities for new roles are Just a part of thenice-sounding talk about SBM. The crux of implementationis in the specific mechanisms that, when put in place, makeSBM workable.

Getting Organized

Official policy statements adopted by the board clearlyestablish the tone for SBM. Policy statements are mostuseful when stated simply and in general terms. If SBM Is tohave any real meaning, schools and their staffs must havewide freedom withm broad guidelines. This requirementtranslates to slimmed down policy manuals, Although theiressence is clarity, overly detailed and prescriptivestatements do not fit the SBM philosophy. Administretiveregulations are developed to follow up or implement broadpolicies and tend, therefore, to be more focused.

Sample Policy 1The Pleasant Valley School District is operated on an

organizational plan in which the operational line ofauthority flows from the superintendent of schoolsdirectly to building principals and then, for instructionalpurposes, to teachers.

Sample Policy 2The Pleasant Valley School District's Table of

Organization shall clearly show the lines of authority forthe operation of schools and shall indicate that all otherfunctions support these operational lines,

3 27


Figure 1 shows a sample table of organization. Notethat, in the figure, some personnel titles are shown in boxeswhile others are shown in bubbles. Also, there are directlines between boxes that clearly trace the lines of authority,whereas the arrows from the bubbles show only direction,indicating to whom services flow but making no directconnection. Thus, the table of organization emphasizes lineand staff distinctions and clearly implies an SBM approach,whereas conventional models usually suggest a morecontrolling function for many central office staff members.

FIGURE 1SAMPLE TABLE OF ORGMOZATION

Board ofEducation

Prins COuncil

Principal A Prindpal Ei Principal C Principal D

1

Stiff Staff Staff Staff

School A School School C School 0

1J28

r r Management Intormallon System

Bump IMPLEMEN1ING MECHANISMS

Obviously, there can be many alternative patterns fortables of organization, and these patterns will vary withdistrict size. The table presented in Figure 1 is intended toemphasize that, if the district intends to use SI3M, theorganizational chart must clearly show that buildings are ina direct line of authority with a minimum of intermediatedecision makers.

An organizational structure in which principals reportdirectly to the superintendent greatly enhances SBM. Suchan arrangement reduces bureaucracy by providing theshortest possible vertical hierarchy, and it elevates the roleof the principal to the leadership level required by SBM.

Superintendents of larger divtricts will protest thathaving all principals report to them creates an impossibiemanagement situation. They will point out a seriousviolation of accepted span-of-control concepts. Yetimposing central office positions between the principal andthe superintendent is a sure way to minimize the site-basedleadership role. Moreover, span-of-control worries areassociated with tight supervisory models that connoteordinate-subordinate relationships antithetical to thecollegiality and empowerment that SBM promises. Dealingdirectly with principals requires the superintendent to shiftpriorities; It also forces the superintendent to know thestrengths and weaknesses of each principal and, moreimportant, to develop a more thorough and accurateunderstanding of needs of the district.

Sample Regulation 2.1. A principals' council, to includeall principals, will meet regularly with the superintendent.The purpose of the council is to advise thesuperintendent, to provide a forum for the identificationand solution of district problems, and to exchangeinformation.

The formal organization of a principals' council helps toalleviate the problems associated with having a largenumber of principals reporting directly to thesuperintendent. But it does a great deal more than that.Combining the expertise of the district's operationalleadership creates an unexcelled sounding board for thereview of all district policies and regulations. The councilinevitably becomes a coordinating agency for the district,

3 4 29

How To ORGANIZE FOR SCHOOL-BASS) MANAGEMENT

since it has representation from each site by someone whounderstands the program at that site and how districtactions affect it. The council also serves aS an importantvehicle for the dissemination of ideas from one building toanother, thus providing the cross-fertilization that spursinnovatic... information exchange through regular councilmeetings ensures common understandings among all linestaff. It is significant that these advantages accrue notsimply by having the principals together but by assemblingthem as site managers.

Principals are empowered through their participationon the council when they discover the effects of theirdeliberations on district progress. The council offers awindow through which to see the district as a whole, whichhelps principals put their own work in perspective andcounteracts the risk of myopia inherent in exclusive loyaltyto a single site. Participation in the council is an avenue ofprofessional growth as well as a convenient inductionmechanism for beginners.

A corollary to the rule of having principals reportto the superintendent is severely limiting the numberof central office staff who do so. Decreasing thenumber of central office staff members who report directlyto the superintendent clarifies that educators in these rolessupport, not direct, the instructional program. Consistentwith this organizational concept, assistant principals arenot members of the principal's council.

Although variations to the structure of a principals'council (or similar organization with a different title) are tobe expected, the concept that site-based managersthemselves are a team is key. Such a team helps maintainthe balance between district and school goals and ensuresthat site programs advance the mission of the district aswell as that of the school.

Sample Policy 3School buildings in the Peaceful Valley School District

are operationally under the control of the buildingprincipal. Principals have charge of and are responsiblefor the building and grounds, all supplies and equipmenthoused there, all students and staff assigned to thebuilding, and all school-related activities carried on at thebuilding.

3530

BUILD IMPLEMENTING MECHANISMS

It is important both that the extent of the sitemauager's responsibility be specified unequivocally inpolicy, and that the policy give the entire responsibility tothe principal. However, the principal should have theflexibility to have parts of some functions delegatedelsewhere.

For example, principais who want to maximize the timethey spend on instructional matters may want to minimizethe time they spend on managing custodial service in thebuilding. When this is the case, they may request a centraloffice person to draft the cleaning schedule, determineworking hours, or even select the custodians. Providing fordelegation of these services at the request of the principal,however, is completely different from centralizing thisfunction by someone else's choice. When the site managerrequests service, the implication is that the request can bewithdrawn or the arrangement changed, and that controlremains with the principal.

Furthermore, in SBM the arrangements for this servicemay vary from one school to the next. The loss in efficiencyas seen from the central office point of view is balanced bythe gain in effectiveness at the building level in terms of theservice matching building needs.

Management of food services, supervision of specialteachers who work in several buildings, and relationshipswith school nurses are other examples of buildingoperations that raise questions of control. Deciding issuesof this kind makes the principals' council most valuable. Itmay well be that the principal's council will agree that foodservices are most efficiently and effectively provided whencentralized and delivered uniformly throughout the district.When the decision is made by the council, it is most likelyto have strong support in the buildings.

Organizational policies and procedures, in addition tobestowing authority on the principal, must provideguidance on how that authority is used. The advantages ofSBM are not realized by empowering principals unless theyin turn empower their staffs.

Sample Policy 4Building principals are required to manage their

buildings by procedures that ensure staff and constituentparticipation.

eU 31

N:`

32


Sample Regulation 9.1. The annual principal's reportwill describe the mechanisms that ensure staffparticipation.

Sample Regulation 4.2. Principals are required to havein place a written organizational plan that ensures theopportunity of constituent participation in the affairs ofthe school.

Parent councils at the building level are the centerpieceof many recently acclaimed SBM plans. Presumably, thedifference between SBM parent councils and the moretraditional PTAs or advisory committees is the degree towhich the councils are given a formal role in decisionmaking. Including parents, constituents, or students in thedecision process is a logical and desirable extension ofSBM, but exact arradgements will vary from one schoolcommunity to the next. How council members are selected,how many there should be, how often they should meet,and what their agendas should be are all issues to beaddressed when councils are formed. The criticallyimportant concern is for everyone involved to becompletely clear on how the councils are to function. Thefollowing guidelines will help produce this clarity:

Develop a clear statement of purpose.Accurately define the limits of authority, carefully

delineating differences between advising, deciding,reviewing, and vetoing.

Formalize a selection process that providesbroad-based representation.

Identliy the kinds of issues with which the councilwill deal.

Develop a clear understanding of the relationship ofthe council to the board of education, the superintendent,and the principal. Councils are not miniature school boards.

Describe the relationship of the council with existingparent groups, such as special education advisory boards,school booster clubs, federal Chapter 1 advisory councils,and the PTA.

Provide a formal and carefully structured orientationfor all incoming council members.

SBM councils are sometimes made up of combinationsof staff, parent, and student representatives. Marburger

.3 7

BUIU) IMPLEMENT= MECHANISMS

(1985) prescribes which groups are to be represented "if itis to be called an SBM council." His material implies that theformation of a site-based management council, includingparents, is a first step when installing SBM.

Setting Goals

If SBM is to produce better outcomes for studentsitsultimate missionthen it must be goakiriven. At thedistrict level, a statement of mission and of broad goals isan indispensable mechanism for keeping the centrifugalforces of SBM from tearing the institution apart. Objectivesmust also be written at the building level to describe howthe building will further the mission and goals of thedistrict. Attention to goals is the ultimate discipline bywhich buildings are freed to apply their methods.

Not only do a mission statement and a set of goals setthe stage for productive teamwork, but when properlyconceived, also help define the role of the board as itrelates to the roles of central office staff and buildingpersonnel. Accepting tight definitions of the terms mission,goals, and objectives, rather than using theminterchangeably, establishes a hierarchy among the terms.

In this hierarchy, mission is a single, visionary, timelessstatement of purposed expressed in a way that inspires staffto rally around the cause. Goals, by contrast, define areas ofemphasis (for a given period of time) intended to fulfill themission. Objectives are achievable, measurable,time-bound, specific actions to accomplish goals. Withinthis hierarchy, framing the mission statement andprioritizing goals are board functions; setting objectives anddeveloping action plans become building functions.

The current widespread emphasis on strategic planningin all public institutions provides many useful models fordeveloping mission statements and setting goals.Workshops, training sessions, and publications on theseprocesses, including a handbook on the subject publishedby ASCD, are readily available (McCune 1986). Suffice it topoint out that the process is fundamental to SBM.

333

How To ORGANIZE Fon SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT

Sample Policy 5The board of education will annually review the

mission statement of the district and select goals for thecoming year

Sample Policy 6Building principali will annually report to the

superintendent and the board of education their buildings'progress in reaching their goals, and they will explain howthese accomplishments contribute to district goals.

Sample Regulation 6.1. Building principals, having beeninformed of the district goals, will submit objectives fortheir buildings with plans for their accomplishment.

Goal setting is easier to talk about than to do. Theclassic method of arriving at goals is through identifyingneeds, or by comparing what is with what should be.Because there are likely to be more needs or gaps thanthere can be goals in any given time frame, planners mustset priorities. But if an organizatfon deals only withpriorities, it runs the risk of neglecting ongoing or routineneeds. The sensible response to this dilemna is to selectareas of emphasis for a given year carefully, while alsomaintaining attention to continuing goals that can never beabandoned.

The struggles involved in goal setting nurture thegrowth of all concerned and deepen their understanding ofthe relationships among specific objectives, broad goals,and the institutional mission. Figure 2 shows aforced-planning management model, so named becauseplanning is a management function that should becontinuous, rather than done at stated intervals. Moreover,planning that does not become operationalized is oftenuseless. A management model that everyone in theorganization understands and uses promotes the viability ofSBM. The model in Figure 2 underscores the importance ofdeveloping and using a database, as discussed in thesection Information Sharing."

3934

FIGURE 2FORCED PLANNING MANAGEMENT

POLICY

MISSION

Strengths

RULES REGULATIONS

GOALS

NEEDSWes lutessas

Issas* Adjustmentlig/nernent Firelow

OBJECTIVES

IMPLEMENTATIONwho?what?tefloncosi?

EVALUATION

DATA BASE

4 0

How To °MAME FOR SCHooL-BAsED Mar./Amami.

When setting goals, it is easy to fall into thetunnel-vision trap of adopting a highly mechanistic, linearmodel. Although such models have the appeal of astraightforward and logical approach, they ignore thenonrational nature of the real world (Patterson, Purkey, andParker 1986) and the idiosyncracies of individuals.Inflexibility in process runs counter to the spirit of SBM.Understanding the "garbage can model" (Cohen et al. 1972)and accepting educational institutions as "organizedanarchies" gives comfort to SBM enthusiasts who may befrustrated that it does not fall into neat pact-ages.

The central office can facilitate the goal-setting processby supplying a simple format for submitting building plans.Budgeting is made easier if the format includes a summaryof the resources needed for each planned activity. Theprocess can be elaborated to provide a comprehensiveplanning model useful for both the building and the district.However, it is important to ke ,_ the arrangements simple.Proliferation of paperwork and bureaucratic processdestroys the SBM spirit.

Budgeting

The crux of SBM is to transfer control to school buildings.Since money so often controls, it follows that buildingsmust be given funds over which they have control. Thedistrict budget provides the most visible answer to thequestion of how far to carry the SBM principle. Thegradations of that answer vary from giving school buildingsdiscretion over a part of their supply budget to giving themcomplete control over all fiscal resources assigned to them,The degree of budget control by individual buildingsdepends on the district's purposes and the context in whichit operates.

Sample PolkyThe annual budget of the Pleasant Valley School

District is made up of the aggregate of those fundsnecessary to meet the needs of the programs in individualschools plus an amount needed for a central site tosupport building activities.

36 41

BUILD IMPLEMDITING MECHANISMS

Although the suggested policy seems only to state theobvious, it does establish that specific amounts arebudgeted for each building, setting a tone and suggesting aformat for SBM. The sample policy also suggestsabandonment of budgeting by a dollars-per-pupil formula infavor of allocations by objectives or programs.

There are two aspects to the budgeting process: Onedeals with determining the means by which funds areallocated, and the other deals with control of the allocation.

It is inconsistent with the tenets of SBM simply toallocate all buildings a prorated share of avallable funds.SBM assumes a difference in needs among buildings. Thenecessity, therefore, is to identify these variables amongbuildings that affect the amount of money each buildingneeds to meet the needs of its students in keeping withdistrict goals. The result will be variable allocations to thebuildings. However, a sense of equity must be built into theprocess to achieve fair results. Discussion and eventualdecision on an equitable allocation system is an excellentexample of the kind of issue best solved by the principals'council. In any event, feelings that the allocation process iscapricious or shows favoritism will quickly damage thetrust level so important for successful SBM. A groupprocess to determine the allocation system ensures itsfairness and acceptance and also broadens understandingof the participants.

Sample Regulation V.I. Funds for staffing schoolbuildings will be allocated on the basis of number andtype of students to be served.

Sample Regulation 7.2. Funds for the care andmaintenance of school buildings and grounds will beallocated on the basis of the size, age, and physicalcharacteristics of ea,:h building.

Staffing procedures are detailed in the nem section ofthis book, "Allocating Personnel."

The operation, care, and maintenance of buildingsfrequer tly fall under central control, even in school districtsdeeply into SBM. Nevertheless, interesting opportunities areafforded when control is transferred to buildings. TheSchool 3taff might care for a building so that less custodialtime is needed if they are assured that the savingsgenerated could be used to buy more instructional

4 2 37

38


equipment. Teachers might turn off unused lights morefrequently if the savings in the electrical bill would buymore books. Centralized maintenance systems arefrequently a source of staff discontent, especially whenthings that need fixing are Ignored while routinemaintenance schedules go forward regardless of need.Certainly a sense of ownership will be developed byapplying SBM principles to this aspect of school operation,resulting in better and less expensive care of buildings.

The implementation problem is twofold: Developing anallocation system for building maintenance is complex, ndschool staffs are outside their area of expertise in knowingwhen and how much service they need. Again, theprincipals' council is helpful in developing an allocationformula. Acceptable formulas are not impossible todevelop. Many are already in place in the form of guidelinesthat central office staff use to make maintenance decisionsin centralized management programs.

Principals may choose to keep the care of physicalfacilities primarily a central office functico.. Such a decisionmay be wise, but having the opportunity to make thedecision is of psychological importance. Much of the feelingof powerlessness that prevails among building staffs Isrelated to the relatively minor question of control over themaintenance system. A readily apparent limitation,however, is that SBM plans must include minimumstandards of maintenance and periodic inspections byoutside experts to protect against building deterioration.

Sample Policy 8Bulgeting and accounting procedures in the Pleasant

Valley Sa.hool District will provide for fiscal control at theschool building level and flexibility in the use of funds.

Sample Regulation 8.1. The accounting system willestablish each school site as a cost center having anannual appropriation. Monies expended at or for theschool site will be charged against its appropriation.

Sample Regulation 8.2. Transfer of funds withinaccounts is permissible at the building level at thediscretion of the building principal, provided that asummary of all such transfers Is included in the principal'sannual report.

4 3


Sample Regulation 8.3. Unspent funds in a schoolbuilding appropriation at the end of any budget year arecarried forward and added to the allocation for thatbuilding in the ensuing year. Allocations for the next yearshall not be reduced on the basis of availability ofcarryover funds.

Requirements that all funds be spent within a givenbudget yeara common feature in handling publicmoneyremove an important element of control. The needto get rid of money so as not to lose it hardly make.; forjudicious expenditures. SBM provides real ability to controlan account over a period of time. Staff members arepowerfully motivated when they can see the advantages intheir own building of economies they make. Without SBM,economies attained in one building are often used to fundthe extravagance of a neighboring building.

Implementing these concepts requires a change fromconventional school accounting practices. Budget formatsand accounting systems are frequently established by statestatutes or other regulations. Because such regulations areeasy to hide behind when the motive is to resist change,SBM managers must be creative. Identical budgets mayneed to be kept in two forms: one to fit state reportingreruirements, and a duplicate transposed to workable SBMformat. The SBM vers'on will be by cost-center breakdownsand program-budgeting format. Willingness to adjustaccounting to accommodate SBM is an important test ofcommitment.

If staff members are to participate in decisions thathave the potential to maximize the usefulness of theirdollars, they must understand the accounting system andhave Lontinuous access to the state of their accounts.Unfortunately, the practices used to account for publicfunds in federal, state, and local agencies seldom provideclear and current figures of fiscal position. School districtsinherit many of these accounting problems. Nevertheless,school fiscal managers must aggressively seek simplifiedaccounting procedures to implement SBM. Businessestablishments, because they price products and becausethey have more direct control, may offer valuable adviceand useful models.

4; 39


The concept that an expenditure at or for a building ischarged to that building's account seems simple enough,but some twists in implementation affect SBM. For example,when a central office service is provided to a school, themethod of cost determination can vary. On the one hand,the charge may be computed as the cost of materials andlabor plus an overhead charge representing the cost ofoperating the central office. On the other hand, the chargemay be materials and labor only, with costs of operating thece.atral office paid with central office funds. Purists willargue that true cost must include an overhead, evenincluding a portion of the superintendent's salary. Yet suchcomputations cloud rather than simplify accounting fromthe building point of view. They also diminish site control,since site staff can't dictate the overhead cost. A suggestedregulation for SBM purposes would be:

Sample Regulation 8.4. Only direct costs will be chargedagainst building appropriations for services provided bythe central office. Overhead cost will be charged againstthe appropriations to the central office.

Carried to its ultimate, SBM would give the authority toindividual buildings to contract for services with agenciesother than the central office. Such a system would force thecentral office to be competitive in speed and cost. A recentFortune magazine article (Pare' 1989) suggests that dramaticsavings can accrue to businesses by forcing their centraloffice staffs to compete with outside suppliers. If this routeis chosen, the central office would obviously appreciate nothaving to charge for overhead; but its actual overheadwould increase if the volume of its work diminished. Theadvantages of freedom for a building staff in these mattersneed to be balanced against the time and enc!rgy it takesthem to micromanage business affairs as opposed tospending their time on instructional matters.

There is no recommendation implicit in this discussion.The purpose Is to explore the variety of avenves SBM canfnllow and to emphasize that districts hrve alternativesfrom which to choose in installing SBM. One suspects thathaving the additional power is more a psychological than areal gain, and that in the business arena many principalswill use less power than they are given.

4 5


Allocating Personnel

In terms of personnel, the implementation of SBM requiresdecisions about allocating, selecting, supervising, anddeveloping staff, as well as administering staff contracts andkeeping staff records.

A regulation was suggested earlier for the allocation ofstaff (see Sample Regulation 7.1). One mechanism forimplementing the regulation is to provide a number ofstaffing points for each building. The points are spent bythe building in selecting the number and type of staffdesired. The points to be allocated are assigned torepresent building needs; the points to be expended arerelated to salary requirements of the type of personnelrequested. This system serves two purposes: It provides away to allocate staff that is equitable for all buildings, and itlets each building control the configuration of staff to meetits needs. See Figure 3 for an example of point allocation.

Assume an elementary school of 362 full-time students,72 of whom are on free lunch, IS level I handicapped, 3 levelII handicapped, 2 level III handicapped, and 22 gifted. Thebuilding is allocated 426 staffing points, including 7.6 for

FikiLlBE 3SAMPLE PoiliT-A LLOCATiON TABLE

Schools Receive Points: Schools Are Charged Points:

1 per studentadditionally:

.2 per free lunch student1 per level I handicapped2 per level Ii handicapped3 per level III handicapped.5 per gifted student.2 per each student less than 400

1 per each mobility percentagepoint

22 per assistant principal20 per team leader20 per department chair18 per classroom teacher20 per specialist (4 per day)19 per librarian19 per counselor8 per office worker (8 hr.)6 per aide (6 hr.)8 per custodian (8 hr.)

4 6 41

HOw To ORGANIZE FOR SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT

being less than optimum size and 6 for having a 6-percentmobility rate. The reason for allocating points on the basisof student mobility is that a high rate of student transfersincreases student need and staff load. The rationale forgiving extra points to small schools is to compensate themfor the fledbillty enjoyed by larger schools and to recognizethe need for certain staff categories, regardless of schoolsize. Librarians, for exanple, are not directly related toen-ollment.

Librarians and counselors in this sample cost morepoiots on the assumption that their certification Is at themasters' degree level. Specialists in this sample are specialeducation teachers, some of whom may be itinerant.

As illustrated in Figure 4, School A, in a team-teachingmode, has chosen to have three teams. Each team is staffedwith a team leader, 4 teachers, and 2 aides, and serves 121

Cost In StaffPoints Category

FIGURE 4SAMPLE APPLICATION OF USE

School A School B School C School D

.3>

$ 4

Se1. .14 4te a oe:1 le

4, a 4 a 4, aco

22 Assistant principal20 Team leader18 Classroom teacher20 Specialist19 Counselor19 Librarian8 Office worker6 Teacher aide8 Custodian

Totals

3 60 3 6012 216 15 270 21 378 14 2522 40 1 20 415 16 2 401 191 19 1 19 1 191 8 2 16 2 16 1 88 48 4 24 15 902 16 2 16 2 16 2 16

426 425 426 425

42 4 7

Butw IMPLEMEN1ING MECHANISMS

students. The teams are supported by 2 specialists, each ofwhom has an aide. A counselor, a librarian, and one officeclerk complete the staffing for School A.

School B, also a team-teaching school, has chosen tohave a richer teacher-student ratio at the team level. Eachof its three teams is staffed with a team leader, 5 teachers,and 1 aide per 121 students. The teams are supported byJust one specialist, a librarian, and two office workers, butno counselor.

School C, organized on a self-contained classroombasis, wants to provide the smallest class size possible. Itsstaffing configuration provides an average class size of 17.2studcnts, but very little support.

Scnool I), also self-contained, has an average class sizeof 25.8 students, but all teachers, including the specialists,have their own aides.

It must be noted that, although the cost of a categoryof employees in terms of staffing points must bear arelationship to the sala' y paid, it cannot be a straightline relationship to the salary of each individual employee.Salary schedules frequently pay experienced teachers twiceas much as beginners. Formulas that encourage or allow abuilding to trade two beginning teachers for one veteran arequestionable and certainly would not endear SBM to theleaders in the profession.

As in other aspects of SBM, a decision must be maderegarding how far to go with the plan. At one extreme, allstaff members except the principal are included in theformula. Indeed, the Hill City School in Hill City, Minnesota,does not have a principal but is operated solely byteachers, with some supervision from the distrktsuperintendent (National Clearinghouse on School-BasedManagement 1989). Gradations of the plan keep some typesof employees outside the system to ensure minimum orstandard staffing levels for some functions. Interestingquestions arise. For example, if custodians are part of theformula, can a building staff agree that each staff memberwill share some cleaning duties, eliminating the need forcustodians? Can a building be allowed to have no certifiedlibrarian, no school nursing services, or no specializedcounseling services?

443


Obviously, maximum flexibility has the potential to runafoul of union contracts, state and accreditation associationregulations, and the interests of certain employee groups.The dilemma is that if too many staff categories fall outsidethe formula, control and flexibility of the building arediminished. The problems are real and severe. As is so oftenthe case when trying to implement SBM, meaningfulstruggles expose the sacred cows in our accepted practicesand force practical solutions to ambiguous, theoreticalquestions. The stiff back of bureaucracy will not be brokenuntil the real issues are attacked.

Allowing for the selection of staff at the building level isa fairly easy mechanism to put in place.

Sample Policy 9The selection of staff assigned to a school building will

be made by the building principal, subject to the approvalof the board of education.

Although final selection may be deferred to theprincipal, a great deal of service can be provided a buildingby a central human resources office. The details associatedwith recruiting, checking applications, and following up onrecommendations are time consuming and requireexperience and expertise.

Sample Regulation 9.1. The human resources office ofthe Pleasant Valley School District is responsible for initialscreening of all applicants for employment and for keepinga current list of all candidates meeting district standardsfor employability. Principals will recommend staff from theapproved list to fill their buildings' vacancies.

Decisions also must be made regarding the degree ofstaff or constituent involvement in staff selection. Thisdecision will vary depending on the staff category beingfilled. Selection of a part-time food-service worker differsfrom selection of an assistant principal. The procedure usedis less important than the requirement that all staffmembers understand the procedure and the extent of theirinvolvement In advance.

A common procedure establishes a committee chargedwith defining the criteria that guide the appointment. If thecommittee is only to establish criteria, as compared withmaking an actual selection, it is important that they

44 A J

BUILD 1MPLEMEMING MECHANISMS

understand this limitation. If the committee is to make aselection, how that selection is to be made should beunderstood in advance. Plurality vote is different fromconsensus; weighting prioritized lists can produce differentresults from votes on single candidates. Some SBM planshave elaborate written agreements between the centraloffice and buildings and between buildings and SBMmanagement teams. These are useful in clarifying roles,responsibilities, and limitations of all those involved in staffselection. The caution for such instruments is that theirdetail may move school districts into varying levels ofaddition..1 bureaucracy or inflexibility, and that they maysuggest a standardized model that invites uniformity.

Suggestions for supervising personnel were provided inthe chapter, "Define New Leadership Roles." A sampleprocedure for putting these ideas into practicedeemphasizes much of the current attention to evaluatingstaff performance. In keeping with the concept ofmanagement by exception, the principal is not required toturn in an annual or routine evaluation for each staffmember. Instead, the principal is expected to inform thecentral office of those individuals whose performance ismarginal and for whom she is developing specific plans forimprovement or assembling documentation that could leadto dismissal.

The rationale for this procedure is the assumption thatSBM staffs are collaborating on the improvement ofpractices to help students learn. This assumption includesthe notion that real teaching improvement occurs whenteachers work together toward achieving building-levelinstructional goals. The corollary assumption is thattraditional evaluation processes that deal individually witheach teacher tend to be demeaning, concentrate onindividual as opposed to group improvement, have thepotential for destroying collegial relationships, breedapprehension and mistrust, inhibit risk taking andinnovation, and take an inordinate amount of the principal'stime.

Rather than looking for better evaluation instruments,leaders interested in SBM should consider carefully theresults achieved by the time spent on formal teacherprocedures.

45


The management of human resources in any institutionhas become quite complex. The management of fringebenefit packages, along with the record keeping involved insick leave, progressions on salary schedules, healthinsurance, and so on, are examples of personnel activitiesbetter handled centrally. Adding these chores at thebuifding level would not increase school-level control; doingthem centrally provides a valuable service. The objective isto strike an appropriate balance in this rewect and toreserve time and effort at the building level for attention tostaff development activities that improve instruction.

Sample Regulation 9.2. The human resources office ofthe Pleasant Valley School District is responsible formanaging all contracts made with employee organizationsand for keeping current and accurate personnel recordsfor all district employees.

Activities of school personnel are restricted by manyregulations, some of which arise from distrt rules, somefrom union contracts, and others from state regulations.SBM is enhanced when principals are allowed as muchflexibility as possible in enforcement of regulations.

Samn:e Regulation 9.3, Principals have theresponsibility, within district guidelines, for settingopening and closing times at their school buildings,including hours of in-building work for staff.

Teachers are quick to notice perceived inequalitiesfrom one building to another in hours of work. Unioncontracts often exact rigid uniformity on such mattersNevertheless, it is precisely this lack of control that givesteachers a feeling of powerlessness. Successfulimplementation of SBM sometimes requires running therisks of potential abuse to gain the advantages ofempowerment. Put more positively, SBM makes creativenoncompliance unnecessary. A statement of the Riverside,California, Unified District (Lantz n.d.), says it well: "Theorganization should avoid imposing general rules andregulations designed to protect against mistakes becausesuch rules and regulations tend to be designed with theleast competent individuals in mind, and uniformapplication of those rules will tend to force all individuals to

5146

Butm IMPLEMENTING MECHANISMS

perform uniformly at the lowest common level of

performance."

Establishing Curriculum

The greatest opportunities for achieving the overridingobjective of SBMbetter learning for studentsare in theareas of curriculum and instruction. Although the broadoutlines of curriculum content may be set by externalforces, teacher attention to its scope and sequence,articulation, alignment with the testing program, andassessment are indispensable to success.

There are good reasons for a degree of standardizationof the content of curriculum. The rate of student movementfrom school to school (20 percent per year by someestimates) argues for some standardization. Competence inthe basic skills is a universal requirement. And overallresultsthe basis for determining the success of SBMwillbe judged in terms of a fairly standard curriculum. Evidencethat this is true can be found in results of a recent Phi DeltaKappa Gallup Poll (Elam and Gallup September 1989)showing that most respondents favored a nationalcurriculum. Thus, in a general sense, curriculum content isstandardized by external forces.

Still, SBM can give building staffs maximum flexibility toselect and to experiment with teaching methods and canpermit them to match curriculum with student needs.Selection of textbooks and materials, arrangement of

instructional time, appropriate use of field trips, articulationof materials among and within grade levels and integrationof homework or schoolwide projects are all examples ofinstructional decisions reserved completely to the building.

One implementation hurdle that SBM must overcome isthe habit of some school boards of extending theirauthority beyond the policy level and into areas ofjudgment best left to professionals.

Sample Po lky 10The role of the Pleasant Valley Board of Education with

regard to instruction is to approve goals and monitorresults. The arrangement of curriculum content and the

5247


selection of methods and materials is delegated to thestaff.

Selection of textbooks is a district function in manyschool districts and a state function in others. A significantadvantage of districtwide selection is the staff developmentsupport that can more easily be provided when the entiredistrict is using the same materials. Some cost savings mayalso be realized in bulk purchases, and a greater depth ofexpertise is afforded the selection process when it is donecentrally. Nevertheless, freedom to select their ownmaterials empowers teachers in a visible and meaningfulway.

Sample Regulation 10.1. Building principals, inconsultation with their instructional staffs, will select theinstructional materials used in their buildings.

To take advantage of the savings and expertise inherentin central textbook selection without denying the buildingssome degree of control, an alternative position is possible:

Sample Alternative Regulation 10.1. In the PleasantValley School District, the central office will adopt alist of textbooks and will support their use throughoutthe district. School buildings wishing to depart from thedistrict adoption may do so with the approval of thesuperintendent.

DeJsion Making

A persistent problem in any complex organization is thedifficulty individuals have in recognizing how and whenthey influence decisions. Human nature dictates that peopletend to feel uninvolved or ignored when they disagree withthe final outcome of a decision. It is extremely important,therefore, for SBM leadership to expose the decision-makingprocess as clearly as possible and to follow it faithfully tomaintain the trust and ownership necessary for successfulSBM.

A useful way to clarify decision making is by developinga matrix. In its simplest form, a matrix lists the staffmembers involved on one axis, lists the activities on asecond axis, and provides a set of codes to describe thedegree of involvement of each member in a given activity.

48 53

BUID IMPLEMENTING MECHANISMS

The sample matrix in Figure 5 shows how decisions aremade in the Pleasant Valley School District regarding thepurchase of instructional equipment.

Although a matrix may identify individual responsibilityfor decisions, much of the SBM philosophy holds thatdecision making is a group process. Identifying

FIGURE 5DECISION-MAKING MATRIX

Pleasant Valley School DistrictProgram for Equipping Schools co

etdal

4re 0 4)...sb

410 icOecy A?' 0 s

,P4,141 47 4 4.

4.441/

cifell 14 4

it .41,$ gr 4/ct

Board of education A A A

Superintendent A R A A

Principal's counc r r R r R

Principal r r r

Teacher or user r r r r

Subject matter consultant r r r r r

Business manager r r r A r R r

Purchasing agent D 0 r

Accountant A r

A = Authority to act

0 0 Detegated authority to act

A ri Major responsbirty for initiating recommendation

r = May recommend; should be csnsulted

49


decision-making groups and defining their functions areimportant. In many SBM plans, the core decision-makinggroup is the school council, which is often known by othernames but is generally the representative group responsiblefor school improvement. Central task forces or planningcouncils are also common in the installation of SBM. TheNorth Syracuse, New York, Central School District has asimple, clear diagram that ilt-strates the relationshipsam-mg these groups (Figure 6).

,e decision-making tree, popular in business andind v, is another device for clarifying how decisions arema, t's important not to prescribe implementingmechanisms but, rather, to emphasize staff understandingof the decision-making process. For a useful modelapplicable to the school-level decision-making process, seeHow to Make Decisions That Stay Made (Saphier,Bigda-Pcyton, and Pierson 1989).

Information Sharing

Knowledge is power. To withhold inforn Anon is an act ofpreserving rather than sharing power. The successfulimplementation of SBM, therefore, depends on findingeffective ways to collect needed information and todistribute salient information to the entire staff. Because ofthe huge amount of information available, the problem isnot just to collect and disseminate it, but also to sort theavailable in'.ormation to determine what is useful, as well asto arrange and present it in ways that make itunderstandable.

A promising way to implement this phase of SBM ft, thedevelopment of a management information system (MIS).The purpose of such a system is to define the informationneeded, to provide for its efficient collection, to arrange itfor easy interpretatio 1, and to find suitable ways to share it.Sites are best served when the MIS is organized as a centraloffice service, provided that its purposes are clearly definedto maximize the easy flew of information. The emergingbusiness model places a person designated as the MISofficer in the highest level of the corporate structure.

50


FIGURE 6PLANNING COUNCIL DIAGRAM

North Syracuse Central School DistrictShared Dec !Mon-Making Model

Instructional Staff

Building PlanningTeams

DACSteering

Committee

District PlanningTeam

District AdvisoryCouncil (DAC)

Superintendent

Board of Education

NOTE: Used with poimission of Thomas C. O'Rourtco. supenntendent

56

4--Staff

DevelopmentCommittee

North Syracuse Central Schools SharedDecision Making Model

The District Steenng Committee shall facilitatethe development and implementation of distriot-and building-based shared decK, on-making pro-cessess to deal with areas of s nod Improve-ment that may include. but shall not neuessanlybe limited to.

1. Distribution of allocated resources2 Allocation of maleriMs and human resources

3 Building Scheduling4 Assignment of teachers5. Curriculum development6 Student outcomes and behaviors7. Student grading8. Development of policies, procedures, and

practices within a building that impact onteachers nonteaching duties andresponsibilities

9. Professional and staff development

51

How To ORGANZE FOR SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT

Establishment of an MIS is enabled by the intelligentapplication of computer technology. An integratedcomputer system that provides every building instantaccess to the MIS is technically feasible and solves manyproblems. For example, a principal can have continuous andaccurate access to her building's fiscal account using acomputer. Daily enrollment fluctuations at buildings can befed to the central oft ce as they occur. Student records canbe equally and simultaneously available at the teacher'sdesk, the principal's office, the guidance counselor's office,and the desk of a central office student-services official,provided the necessary computer hardware and softwareare available. Such applications are so elementary that theirinstallation in schools is inevitable. Moving aggressively tooperationalize such computer technology to develop an MISwill speed the installation of SBM and enhance itseffectiveness.

Better use of technology is only a part of the largernecessity to improve communications if SBM is to succeed.Because SBM pushes more decisions to the school level andprovides more freedom of response, it also increasescommunication needs. Routine procedures such as printingand circulating meeting agendas and summaries need to befollowed carefully.

A useful framework is to treat all district meetingsas a connected and interlocking whole that serves as acommunication network. In such a system, a masterschedule of meeting times is arranged to facilitateinformation flow from one meeting to another. For example,a Monday meeting of the board of education is followedby a Tuesday meeting of the principals' council, aWednesday meeting of school-based councils, and Thursdayfaculty sessions.

rr,i J i

52

A Reflective Postscript

IN A PHILOSOPHIC RATHER THAN A PRAC11CAL VEIN, ONE MARVELS

at the apparent inconsistencies in trends to whicheducators must respond. Witness the long-uninterruptedcentralizing trend from the family-controlled schools of theoriginal colonies to the highly organized bureaucracies oftoday. The growth of state departments of education, thegradual move to aggressive federal partication, and,finally, a national summit to set educational goals are allexamples of centralLing pressures. School boards, whoseformation was a centralizing move itself, complain of theerosion of their role through legislative action, morefrequent litigation, and growth of collective employeestrength.

Recognition that these societal changes are driven byadvancing technology and economic globalization does notprovide much assurance of reversal. Does the call for SBMat this Juncture in history pull educational leadership inupposite directions?

Perhaps not, if faith in SBM springs from a convictionthat it is a necessary and important accommodation tothe growing complexity of society. SBM takes full accountof the human element in complex organizations. It preventsthe failures that arise from bureaucratic overload andimpersonality. Seen in this light, SBM neither reversestrends nor stands in the way of progress, but becomes theindispensable ingredient by which more complexorganizations succeed.

I have said very little here about relationships withteacher associations or unions as part of the process ofinstalling SBM. Not much need be said of the evidentrequirement for cooperation. Currently, there seems to beno problem as unions appear to enthusiastically embraceSBMand to demand some form of it. There is little

Q 53

How To ORGANLZE FOR SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT

evidence that union leadership views SBM as threateningand little concern that some of the freedom needed for fullimplementation requires unions, as well as administrations,to give up power. We can hope that unions will continue tosupport SBM, but in some cases they may not.

A recent Wall Sireet Journal article (Koenig 1990) refersto a comparable concern in the industrial sector. The storydescribes the successful challenge of the Chemical WorkersAssociation to a quality-circle design team formed by theDupont Company. Although quality circles are a reveredform of moving decisions closer to the point ofimplementation and are generally lauded by both labor andmanagement, an administrative law judge ruled that in theDuPont case, the design team violated federal labor law.This dispute demonstrates the potential for implementationof SBM to threaten union power.

Consider an example of ultimate SBM implementationin which the entire salary appropriation is turned over to abuilding to manage. The building staff, responding to thelaw of supply and demand, may decide that having a goodscience teacher in the building is reason enough to pay ahigher salary on the basis of subject matter. A building staffseriously committed to the improvement of learning forstudents may agree to make some sacrifices to achieve animportant instructional objective. Whatever flexibility SBMprovides for managing the salary budget threatens thestability and importance of a negotiated salary schedule.Yet without the flexibility to make the changes to which thestaff agrees, there is no reason to give them site-basedcontrol.

A number of similar scenarios can be developed toshow that the farther down the SBM path a district travels,the more union power is diluted. In a sense, the negotiatingprocess depends on and assumes central control for thenegotiated contract to have force and meaning. One mayargue that the negotiations to protect employees can moveto the site as SBM is implemented. This argument losesstrength, however, when one considers the nature of therelationships at the building level envisioned for successfulSBM.

To the credit of union leadership, no one to datehas accused boards of education or administrators of

54 59

A REFLECTIVE POSTSCRIPT

using SBM as a union-breaking device. Happily, all sides arecloaked in the pious declarations that the motivation forSBM is to help students learn. Fortunately, installationof SBM processes appears to foster collaboration ratherthan confrontation. And as long as that trend prevails, wecan chalk up a huge benefit from SBM.

The issue is raised here only to alert those interested inSi3M of a latent problem as the concept advances and ifunions become threatened. Empowering teachers is not thesame as providing more power to unions.

Finally, it must be emphasized that SBM cannot besuccessful In the absence of a huge element of trust. SBM is

a process, not a product. Moreover, it is a continuingprocess that can be implemented in many ways and todiffering degrees. It is an ongoing process in the sense thatmost school districts already have some elements of SBM inplace. This book is intended to help them accelerate theprocess of SBM implementation.

o55

References andResources

References

American Association of School Administrators. (March 15,1990). Leadership News 61: 3.

Boyer, E. (August 1989). "School Reform Needs NationalFocus." The School Administrutor 46, 7: 48.

Bradley, A. (May 9, 1990). "New York City Schools Take FirstStep Toward Management at the School Site." EducationWeek 9, 33: 5.

Burns, L, and J. Howes. (August 1988). "Handing Control toLocal Schools." The School Administrator 45, 7: 8-10.

Carr, R. (August 1988). "Seconfi Wave Reforms Crest at LocalInitiative." The School Administrator 45, 7: 16-18.

Cohen, M. (1988). Restructuring the Educational System:Agenda for the 1990s. Washington, D.C.: NationalGovernors' Association, Center for Policy Research.

Cohen, M., J. March, and J. Olsen. (March 1972). "A GarbageCan Model of Organizational Choice." AdministrativeScience Quarterly 17, 1: 1-25.

Elam, S.M., and A.M. Gallup. (September 1989). "The 21stAnnual Gallup Poll." Kappan 71, 1: 41-54.

Fulbright, L. (October 30, 1989). "School-CenteredDecision-Making Comes to Light: Site-BasedManagement Renamed." AASA Leadership News 54.

Hansen, B.J., and C.L. Marburger. (1988). School BasedImprovement: A Manual for District Leaders. Columbia,Md.: National Committee for Citizens in Education.

Koenig, R. (March 28, 1990). "Quality Circles Are Vulnerableto Union Tests." Wall Street Journal Bl.

6156

REFERENCES AND RESOURCES

Lantz, G.C. (n.d.) "Riverside Unified District: ParticipationManagement System." (Unpublished report, Riverside,Calif.)

Marburger, CI- (1985). One School at a Time. Columbia, Md.:National Committee for Citizens in Education.

McCune, S. (1986). Guide to Strategic Planning for Educators.Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision andCurriculum Development.

Mitchell, J.E. (February 1990). "Coaxing Staff from Cages forSite-Based Decisions to Fly." Me School Administmtor47, 2: 23-29.

Murphy, J. (June 1989). "The Paradox of DecentralizingSchools: Lesson from Business, Government and theCatholic Church." Kappan 70, 10: 808-812.

National Clearinghouse on School Based Management.(1989). School Based Management Forum. Westbury,N.Y.: The Institute for Advancing EducationalManagement.

Pare, T.E. (September 11, 1989). "How to Cut the Cost ofHeadquarters." Fortune, 189-196.

Patterson, J.L., S.C. Purkey, and J.V. Parker. (19P6).Productive School Systems for a Nonrational World.Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision andCurriculum Development.

Pierce, N.R (September 3, 1989). "Educational Summit GoodBut Just First Step." Lincoln, Nebraska, Sunday JournalStar.

Saphier, J., T. Bigda-Peyton, and G. Pierson. (1989). How toMake Decisions That Stay Made. Alexandria, Va.:Association for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment.

Snider, W. (October 25, 1989). "Cavazos Couples ParentalChoice, Site Management." Education Week, 1.

Snider, W. (March 14, 1990). "Chicago Councils Begin toDecide Fate of Principals." Education Week 9, 25: I, 13.

Weick, K. (March 1976). "Educational Organizations asLoosely Coupled Systems." Administrative ScienceQuarterly 21, 1: 1-19.

57

HOW TO ORGANZE FOR SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT

White, PA. (September 1989). "An Overview of School BasedManagement: What Does Research Say?" NASSP Bulletin73, 518: 1-7.

Woodward, J. (1958). Management and Technology. London:Her Majesty's Stationery Office.

Additional Resources

Blumberg, A., and W. Greenfield. (1980). The EffectivePrincipal: Perspectives on School Leadership. Boston:Allyn & Bacon.

Brandt, R.S. (May 1989). "On Teacher Empowerment: AConversation with Ann Lieberman." EducationalLeadership 46, 8: 23-26.

Floden, R.E., A.C. Porter, LE. Alford, D.J. Freeman, S. Irwin,W.H. Schmidt, and J.R. Schwille. (May 1989)."Instructional Leadership at the District Level: A CloserLook at Autonomy and Control." EducationalAdmia,tration Quarterly 24, 2: 96-121.

Fulbright, L., ed. (1988). School Based Management: AStrategy for Better Learning. Washington, D.C.: AmericanAss miation of School Administrators, NationalAssociation of Secondary School Principals, andNational Association of Elementary School Principals.

Kaestle, C.F., and M.S. Smith. (November 1982). "The FederalRole in Elementary and Secondary Education." HarvardEducational Review 52, 4: 384-408.

Lewis, A. (1989). Restructuring America's Schools.Arlington,Va.: American Association of School Administrators.

Lieberman, A. (May 1988). "Teachers and Principals: Turf,Tension and New Tasks." Kappan 69, 9: 648-653.

Malen, B., R.T. Ogawa, and J. Kranz. (February 1990)."Site-Based Management: Unfulfilled Promises." TheSchool Administrator 47, 2: 30, 53-59.

Phillips, P.R. (March 1989). "Shared Decision Making in anAge of Reform." Updating School Board Policies 20, 3:1-5.

Prele, P.K., and S.C. Smith, eds. (1989). School LeadershipHandbook for Excellence. 2d ed. Eugene, Ore.: ERIC

58 63

REFERENCES AND RESOURCES

Clearinghouse on Educational Management. College ofEducation, University of Oregon.

Sasse, C., ed. (1989). Restructuring Education: What It Meansfor Principals. Tallahassee, Fla.: Florida Department ofEducation, Office of Policy Research and Improvement.

White, PA. (1988). Resource Material on School BasedManagement. New Brunswick, N.J.: Center for PolicyResearch in Education, Eagleton Institute, RutgersUniversity.

659

AairiNDAssociation for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Documents

How To Organize for School-Based Management