( ED 209 95

AUTHOR ,TIT =LE

INSTITUTIONSPONS AGENCY

PUB DATEGRANT' 1-ROTE

, EURS PRICE.DESCRIPTORS

..v

. IDENTIFIERS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESOMM

Massey, Sara, -Ed :: And OtheriStaff.Developpnt in Secondary Schools:Boston State,Coll., Mass. ,,Department of Education, Washin .D.C.-Zeach r

'Corts. .

s' Air131..G007B0310446p.

SPAIN 965I

,

4

.; MF01/PCO2.Plus Poitage. '.'-.College School Cooperation; Department Heads; Goa .Oridntation; *Inservice Teacher Education; *Probl m 'Solving;; *Program Iipleientation;, School CommunityRelationship; Secondary Education *StaftDefelopment;.Teacher4dministrator,Relationship;

_ *Teacher Participation; Urban Education ..Massachusetts; *Teachez Corps

".

4-

Four examples are givdt of Teadher Corps schoolrbasedstaff development-projects in Massachusetts. An introductory chapteridentifies characteristics of suCcessful'staff'development efforts,,based on.participatory'decision making, .the needs of teachers,students, 'And. the community, and coroperatiOn 'between the universityand the school. The'f't article describes the ginning ofschooI.aftmmgnity firour4e.centers in a high' school and in:two middle(Schools: Each. resource .center is "dined" by:itA44reators because ofthecollaboration between -parents and teachers -in planning, -staffing,-and,policymaking. Another focus -was adapted' in al.pwell high school,where a,Teacher.Corps needs assessment pinpointed several problemareas, but found thatlthe teachers did not want to acceptreSponsibility,t.oecomplex curricular issues. With the approval ofthe principal, a committee-'of six' department heads was empowered.toaddress not only curricular and instructional improvement, but alsoteacher evaluation, thereby broadening their leadership role"and

-improving "their relations vitfi.each othigThe,third-articie.____:describes'the development anddffects of a'

ilinistratfie.prictiCUm,offerekthrough Boston State College, toltVlit three high schools. A case study of the actlon$ taken by

teachers participating in the. practiCum illustrates the.pOsitivesteps invo/ving parents and .students in school events.-A'poncludingcommentarypoints out thd distinguishing characteriSticsTof staff.development, comparing it to continuing education, professionaldeveloPmento and ,personal detelopment. ItiS suggested that, througheffective laanning and goal orientation; staff :development success

:Stories will.he-common. (FGP

t.,C

f 0*************************4**ig******************************************

Reproductions sUpplied, by EDRS are the, be=st that can bp made *from the original document. , *

*******************************************************0**************

a ,

by

0 A

A

a'

.

a

Staff- Development

secondary_ Schools

ti

A

tif

2

U.S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

This document has been 'reproduced asreceived from the person or organization

Minor

itMinor changes have been mantE to imce4iye

repliiduction quality

Points of view or opinions stated in this doc u-

nion! do trot necessarily represent official ME

' position or policy

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

Sara R. Masse'

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." r. ,

q

August, 1981

Graphics By: Bob Nilso ssociatesBox scto.Durham, NH 03824

(i. tThe

. - . , .e materials firinted herein are the expressions of the writers._,

..T)rey de.not represent endorsement by the U.S. Education;Department. The materials were developed nder grant#6007803104 to Boston State College fro Teacher Corps,

: Education Department.

3,. ,

. t

9

_Ot\ITENTS'

PrefaceSara Massey

Effective SIA:Pevelopment Programs..kohn Nor.wood

1

School-Base Staff Development: SchOol/CommunityResource CEknterg

Jeanette P. Esposito and Susan Seibel

Working with High.School Department HeadsAllan Alson and Mark Piechota

The Administrative Practicum: A Staff Development Modal 26Cleveland O. Clarke, and Ann DePlacido

Goal-Oriented Staff De%;elopment' g4Sdra Massey

A

\

0,

Preface

a.

: eacher Corps, a program of the Department of Edu-cation, has funded project's,. which have as one of

'their goals an improved edubational professionaldevelopment system. Projects typically involve a university,three or four schools which inclpde all grade levels K-12, and,the community surrounding the schools. The four projeCtsrepresented in this booklet are within the Commonwealth ofMassachusetts and are located in 'the-urban areas of Boston,Lowell, and Worcester.

. .

. The four projects in seeking an improved educationaldevelopment system in their identified schools have becomeintimately involved in the 'staff development issues affectingsecondary school evoiumas have been written which reflect theinability of educators to effect virtually any kind of significant,Positive change in secondary schools. The four project direc-tors and their staff have seriously attempted to acrress theimpermeability to change of the secondary school and feel that

. their learnings te important for other staff developers. 'Theauthors have chosen toselect from the totality of their staff

`''development work discrete examples which have served asmechanisms for broader change within the secondary school.

The introduory chapter by John Norwood identifiescharacteristics of successful staff development efforts basedon his experiences of the past five years. These characteristicscan, provide a framework for the reader's analysis of the threesecondary staff development efforts that follow. -

Jean Esposito and Susan Seibel present the process used

el ment opportunities for the total school

in developing S hoot /Community Resource Centers. TheCenters in turn. b orne a place for designing and offeringfurther staff devcorrtmunity. The Centers are a staff development mechanismwhereby schools can become more self-renewing.

The staff development program undertalten by Allan Alson'and Mark Piechota evolved through meetingi with the heads ofdepartments,and the adminisfrationjof the secondary school.The meetings piovided an opportilKty to address the areas ofcurriculum and instruction, supervision, and leadership. The

ttotal school population was affected as the heads of depart-ments began implementing their new skills and ''earnings.

:

v.

t

Cleveland Clarke and Ann De Placid° present an approachcalled the administrative practicum which ihvolvedleachers inthe identification of specific problem's of the school. Eachteacher through group discussion and work with other schoolstaff designed and implemented a plan of action which 1.0Ktfi Idalleviate the problem.

The conclusion by Sara Massey presents a amework fordistinguishing between staff development arij professionaldevelopment and discusses the need for collecting informationon the achievements of goal-oriented staff development.

Educators involved with staff development-in secondaryschools are urged to study and analyze the examples and idea;presented here basecf`on their own experience and knowledge.

The problems of secondary education will not gp away bysimply ignoring or avoiding them. Only through the sharing ofour present anCtuttire efforts will sufficient. information beavailalqle for us tVglean the insights and knowledge essential toimproving the educatjort of all students in seCondarysschools.

The authors wish to express their appreciation to Dr. Clarkeof Boston State College, who originated ttre idea of this bookletand worked many hours to get it underway. Additionally theauthors are appreciative of thi. many teachers, administrators,parents, and *dents who have been involved in the efforts todevelop meaningful secondary staff development programs.

Sara Massey, Editor

t

3

Effective Staff Development Programs

John No/wood, Project Director,Nollheasterh University/Bosto9 Public Schools,District VII Teacher Corps Project

INTRODUCTION . \The search for effective staff development models forschool personnel is a continuous quest among pro-fessional educators. Ttle support of staff development

by federal programs such as Teacher Corps and Teacher,Centers and "projects of professional associations such asthe American Association of Colleges of Teacher'Education,the' NEA, and AFT is indicative of the level of concern,about this issue. This continuing search is based on the N.belief. that staff development, though successful in someinstances, has not effectively addressed the needs of per-sonnel working in public education. The experience in andassessment of these projects supported through governmentand professional organizations have provided those workingin staff development with some meaningful, though not con-'clusive, answers about effective models.

it"Staff-development in this chapter is defined as the vehicleby which all the personnel of a school acquire processes, infor-mation and skithancing experiences which afford them theopportunity to become more effective in dealing with school-wide concerns. The desired outcome!9f this definition' of staffdevelopment is school self-renewal,' process whereby indi-viduals as well as groups of teachers, administrators and.parents work together continuously to examine issues affectingthe school. This process implies individual and group capacity-building for problem definition, analysis, and resolution.Experiences in staff development projects in several cities andreading about others' experiences have led me to the conclu-sion that (Us-both-possible and necessary to begin to identifythose aspects of staff development projects that are most likeelyto result in school. self-renewal. Through the examination of myprofessional experiences, .I have begun to identify those aspectsof staff development programs that seem-to be essehtial.

-1

- 7

4 lk

J

.1,

1. Representatives of all school personnel should be Involvedin planning staff development. ..Traditional staff developmerit program are for themOst

'part, aimed toward the formal teaching- sta f of d.scheol. Toaccept this limitation can imply. that the other personnel arenot an integral part of the educational process for children.The assumption has been that beCause the greatest percentage' of4icstudent's time in most schools is spent in the classroom,only teachers need staff development which will enhance their

' effectivgness: But what about the relationship between-theother professional and paraprofessional personnel of a schoolwho have contact with students outside of the classroom?Inherent in this question is the belief that the educationalprocess in school occurs outside as well adinside the classroomand that, in most cases, school personnel other than teachersdo contribute to the learning process. The guidance counselor,the assistant principals, custodial workers, lunchroom super-visors, hall monitors, parents, secretarial staffs are all part of thestudent's education.

.It may be impossible tohave the entire personnel ofa school involved inA plan-ning effort. However, in atotal' school staff develop-

. , ment program, representa-tives from each facet of theschool would serve on astaff development planningteam: teachers, principals, .counselors, parents, students, custodiand, community agencyperk; nel, support pernnel, and central administration per-

scop4'e in charge of st ff Cieyelopment. This planning teamwoul be charged with the responsibility of devising plans andstrategies to address the educational needs and concerns of theschool. It is through participation in planning that ownership,consensus, and relevance emerge. Inclusion in the decision--making process builds within people a sense of efficacyoandcommitment. In today's schools these characteristics are sadly

,..absent. . .2. Parents should be considered as part of the total school staff

participating in the planning and implementation (*pro-grams., .To refer to the totality.of a school's existence would be in-

accurate if parents were not included. Vit)ile,research effortshave been unable to describe the impOrtance'of their role fully,it is clear that parents' perception of and familiarity with thequality of the schodl does affect the performance of students in

.: the school. ., . . . . .

8

Although educators disagree about the specific influencesof parents on formal -schooling, few arguments contradict thestrong impact that parents have onthe students. It is not the roleof the school to alter this impact or to change the way parentsrelate to their child ren,-but it is the responsibility of the schoolsto depict honestly to parents the content of the school's educational program. Conflict between the horhe and the school isoften a result of parents not knowing the Purpose of the school'seducational program. Schools are often unsure of what parentsexpect, other than that their children should be receiving aneducaticon. Both the school and the parent are concerned withthe quality of education provided to children. A staff develop-ment'format can. be developed to begin to resolve differencesin.expectatiohs and misunderstanding of purpose.

A total school .staff development program and planningteam would be a beginningBy being involved in the planning,implementation, and evaluation of the program, parents wouldhave their input reflected in the sChoors.educational program.

3. Staff deVelopment should be based on an assessment of the. s needs of the students of the school.

The basis for selecting the con\ent of a staff developmentprogram should be the educationa needs of the students. Aclear understanding of the needs of teachers ana the other per-sonnel is an important part of any staff development program,but the relationship bptween student needs and teaCher needscannot be overlooked. The content. of staff development pro-grams traditionally evolves from some form pf.a needs assess-ment, usuallyepicting the needs Of teacher's, not students.Such assessments tend to make the needs of students super-fluous tothe staff d'evel'opment program and teachers ratherthan students bacolne the primary berfeciaries of such pro>.grams. : ,,,'

Every individual comprising the staff development teamhas contact and experience with the students of the school.1 eref ore, they represent a valuable resdurce for getting infor-m\tion about student needs which should not be overlooked.They are aware of how students are responding to the totalenvironment of the.school and can provide the bageline fOrdetermining what staff development is most critical in a school.

4.. Staff development should be both innovative and flexible inorder to effectively meet the changing needs britudents.In traditional staff development programs innovation and

flexibility are sacrifice)i for the sake of Continuity. Many pro-grams seem to center On the belief that the needs of school per- .sonnel and students are constant, while in reality students who

. enter school in September need different Aducational experi-. ences by December. Their needs and, therefore, the school

3 9 -..,

i. 1

personnel's needs change. Any staff development pr gram thatdoes not have continuous assessment and is not flexible inmeeting the ever-changing needs of students and C11,01 per-sonnel risks being antiquated and irrelevant. ,

1

5. Staff development should be site-speCific..

One sure way to inhibit the success of any staff develop-ment program is to claim that it addresses the programmaticneeds of a school, while riot doing so. Most conflict around staff

..., development evolves from thissituatiOn. Mpny staff develop-ment programs are touted as being site-specific in content andoutcomet. However, a close examination often reveals the op-posite. Site-specific is more than conducting the training pro-grams at the school. The content of the program must evolvefrom the uniqueness of the school. .- . . .

Many staff development programs fail because there existsno connection with p school's educational program or with stu-dents' needs. The goals and objectives of the staff developmentprogram must come from those individuals serving on the plan-ning team who are aware of the day to day needs of their co-workers and the students within a school.

... .

6. Staff development should be viewed as important because'I .it enchatices the participants' perfoTmance.

Staff development programs should be seen as a natural,component of the educatidnal process. Currently, much staffdevelopment is separated from the life of a schoOl and theresponsibilities of the staff. An example of this separation isthe difference between the extrinsic benefits gained from par-ticipating in a staf development prdgram and the intrinsicbenefits clearly rela d to the needs of a school, its studentbody, anti its educational program. The extrinsic rewards arethose familiar incentives of graduate credit, stipends, andsalary increments which are accrued by the participants irre-spective of the impact on the learning process. These incentivesunfortunately often become the only reward for participating.Intrinsic rewards shojild be the major incentivefor participatingin staff development progams. . . /

. The benefits of .participa-ting in a staff development pro-gram should be directly relatedto the needs ofchildren met bythe"educational program, How-ever, intrinsic rewards are oftencompromised by ,the tradition'of extrinsic incentives. To re:

4cognize, the extrinsic rewardsand their impact on the profes-sional advancement of educe-.

41.0

(e

o I

tional personnel is warranted. But, it is also important to recog-nize that the educational profession' included Intrinsic re-wards the internal-satisfaction of knoWing that students are ,learning more as a result of Participant's improved perforthance.

7. Principals should have a central role in staff development.Most public school educators believ4' that the principal

sliould be the instructional leader of a school. He or she is the'person within the organizational structure of the sc'hool who isresponsible for seeing that the needs of perdonnel are met insuch a manner that enhances or, at least, does nbt threaten the,learning opportunities available to children. The total conditionof the school is his or her responsibility. Therefore, the principalbecomes a resource for and plays a central role in staff develop-ment programs.

,The school's staff development program depends on theprincipal's active involvement. The principal is usually the oneindividual who can facilitate the deliberations- of the staffdevelopment planning team; insure that the planningteam con-siderstthe total educatidnal program of the school; incorporatethe staff development planning team as an integral part of theschool's organizational structure; and provide input, along withthe other planning team members, for a monitoring system thataddresses the effectiveness of the staff development program.Staff development must be a part of fhe training experiences ofPrincipals; school systems must begin to support the principalin planning and implementing 'staff development programs; andthe organizational structure of a school must allow principalsto share their knowledge and expertise about the school's edu-cational program. ./ r AO°

8. Staff development programs should have formal monitoringsystems. rA, monitoring system that

provides information on a con-tinuing basis about effective-.ness for modification of theprogram is needed. In addition,the total school staff develop-ment team with its wide ragge ofinformation ari-iitirperspet-tivecan provide an urate assess-

. .m,,evrt and realistic opinion onfhe success and impact of the program. Often, however, the as-sessment process is glossed over because it is not formalized.A formal monitoring system is necessary if planning is to be in-formed by experienice.

5 11

4;

. Universities and schools must cooperate in 'staff develop-ment as equal partners.Although both universities and schools are truly concerned

about the quality of_educational experiences for students, theyplay different roles in the educational process. The staffcLevelopmert relationship between many universities andschools is contractual. Universities, through formal agreementswith sCboo,t systems, are contracted to deliver the content of aspecific training program.

Some of the intended outcomes of this arrangement arethat university faculty members will become more familiar and.knowledgeableabout the realistic and practical,needs of schoolpersonnel, a relationship will be established with public schoolsystems th"at will allow for collaboration betweeh the two onother professional endeavors;. and such experiences will en-courage the university personnel to increase their involvement.cesschools. However, past ekperiences indicate that most'ofthese stated outcomes seldom are reached through staffdevelopment programs. The relationship between publicsqhdool ap'ersonnel and university personnel is often less thancooperative. A wide range of disagreement, exists about thepractices and instructional techniques needed to strengthen

. the learning opportunities for students, and public school per-sonnet are often legs than enthusiastic about university involve-ment in their school. Although it is possible for each to pointthe finger at the other, the immediate need is to entour"age.a setof practices and postures that will improve not only therelation-ship between the two, but create more meaningful staff develop

. ment programs. .Thestructureof the planning team would allow for greater

interchange bgtween university and public school per5oruUniversity personnel serving NI the staff develOpme.nt'plarmingteam become more aware ofthe day tQ day needs of both situ- >JP,.dents and teachers, in addition to improving theisel4tionshipWith p,ublic school personnel.

Seveial'of thege n ine agpeas of effective, staff development,_programs drawn from my exper*nce are found in thie followingthree descriptions of specjfic secondarj/ 'staff developmentprograms. It is hoped that each reader will have, after readingthese chapters gnd reviewing this or per eXperience, a better:understanding of effective staff development progrAmi for 0,secondalz school. . r

Author. ,

John Norwood, Ph.D.,,Universityof Michigan", is director of the North-easterp UniversitylBostorf Public Schools, District VII TeaCher Corps'P oject. Prior to coming to Northeastern University he was director ofth Union Graduate SchooVCincinnati Public Schools Teacher Corps

6-.12:.

a

c

'Pro t.1.A

School- Based Vtaff Devekipment:School/Community Resource Centel

Jeanette P. Esposito, Project DirectorSusan Seibel, Curric)ulpm Resource

SpecialistWorcester.Public Schools/Univet:sity of

Massachusetts (Amherst)Teacher Corps Project

INTRODUCTION,

esource centers that have beeh developed this year inthree of the Teacher Corps project sch.00ls (North Hi&School, Worcester East Middle School and Arthur

R. Sullivan Middle School) are the :tistiect of this chapter.The Resource Center concept has encouraged a variety ,ofdifferent staff development activities, each reflecting the uniquepeople and needs in the different schools. We believethat Resource Center reVelajiment represents a promisingbeginning, an incentive and a means for school/communityinteraction and ongeing professional development, two key

efactor which we believe can strongly affect the school learningClime for children.

The neWenvironment that has been created in our schools,the School/Community Resource Center, is notan Office, not a'classroom, not a Ildrary, and not a lounge. All of these areaiarefirmly established "school pla es" where people perform 'cer-Jain set roles. Instead the ol/Communtty Resource Center

receptive place, ."neutral turf", whereteachers, ,parents,, administrators, community people-cansocialize and talk aiaduits interested in each other and mutuallyconcerned about children. The Reioutde Center can be spacewhete teachers shai4e-feleai about new methods or materialsand re5p, the benefits of each other's expertise, where parent orteacher support groups meet to identify and become involved'

, with educational issues that.affeotlearning. A Resource Center .can stOck4iSplay and make available constantly'2changingresources reference works, raw, materials; or sample cur-ricula created by colleagues. The Resou r;ce Center can sponsoriforkshops or presentations that draw. university or communityresources into the school or that,inform community members

,r i

7

can be a conifortab

13t"'

about school programs and activities. Such a Center can be allor none of these thing,s. Its existence and continued life dependsupon the school and community people who create'an_d use it.

(Creating three Resource Centers, as well as designingdiverse activities for each center, became part of a leirningprocess by which school and community participants as wellas Teacher, Corps staff members have developed new skills andconfidence in sharing and implementing ideas. We have dis-covered that parents' and community members' interactionwith teachers and administrators has become a significantmeans for professional growth. This interaction provides 14 away to learn more about adolescents' lives outsitle the class-

-. room and abW the community surrounding each school, 2) astimulus to reiThkik end then clearly dekribe school curriculaand programs to community members, and an opportunity toprovide instruction in basic skills to interested adiflts who canreinforce study skills as volunteers in school or as parents athome.

BELIEFS ABOUT PROFESSIONAL GROWTH. Our work to create Re-

source Centers was founded oncertain beliefs about profes-

. sional growth. Professionalgrowth that empowers peopleto make decisions, on an in-dividual and collective level, en-ergizes them to make changesin their own lives and to influ-ence others as well. Profes-sional growth that is self-initiated willtbe more personally mean-ingful and have more potential for lasting change. Self-initiatedactivity by its nature will focus on people's strengths and theirability to identify needs as well as to develop ways to meet them.Self-initiated staff development contrasts sharply,with the moretraditional approach of diagnosis and remediation, which tends

. to emphasize people's deficits rather than their assets:pi deficitapproach not only thieatens self-esteem, but also faiA to gainthe "ownership" of participants to create meaningful changesfor themselves. Self-initiated staff development presupbosesaninherent desire on the part of educators to do a good job and,given the opportunity, to continue to grow professionally.

Professional growth is a long developmental process, nota single event, ,and a high ly,personal experience that indi-viduals move through in different ways and at different rates.Ongoing istaff development that involves participants in plan-ning and implementing diverse activities at their school sitecan respond the different levels of professional' growth andtconcern. eI..

8 14

'1

PLANNING A RESOURCE CENTER: PROCESS VS PRODUCT

At,

rfirst, we. found that the idea of creating a Resource

. ... .

Center strongly encouraged "initiators" to focus on the product :17or the place. After an area is allocated, many pressures to li"produce'", to quickly set up an attractive,, inviting space can Idescend upon the planners. However, fostering a true owner- Lship of a Resource Center on the part of teachers, administra- '

:Itors and parents, encouraging genuine Collaborative planning

IIabout what they want in their space, takes much longer. Theshort trm goal of "implanting" a Resource Ce r in a schoolspleresemp es a "quick fix" approach that ultim ely does little toencourage a Center's meaningful use by those for whom it wassupposedly designed. % 4

A much longer process as necessary to gain ownershipand to begin determining the goals.of such 'Centers. The goalsthat emerged were: .

1. To improve the schoorlearning climate2. To foster ongoing professional development

and support for school personnel \'3. To strengthen poSitive communication and

collaboration among the schools and community\All agreed that the above goals were important that they.reflected real needs as identified by teachers, administrators,and members Of the cornmunity in our Teacher Corps project..We also agreed that any'effort to change a school learningclimate and to encourage new'behaviors on Our part must takeplace within the unique culture of each school.

We found that a long-term planning process ebbs andflows. Attirhes things tangibly and quickly. Com-I,mittees get prganized, decisibn are made and people take

. responsibility for many tasks. At other times, things seem tobe at a virtual standstill. One project has been completed andlittle is happening to identify or move toward a next step. Yet,ktwe also discovered t these intermittent periods of calm are ,often times for refle on and redirections necessary partsof an ongoing prOcess/that meets ever-changing needs.STAGES IN CENTER DEVELOPMENT

What we leaned from participating inthe simultaneous planning of three differ-ent Resource Centers in a high school andtwo middle schools has helped us to focuson certain key steps wich maybe-useful-to others. ..

, 1. Finding a Space.Y Involving the building principals in

planning for a Resource Center is a crucial

.

9

first step. Th allocation of space is a sensitive issue thatrequires ad inistrative ,and teacher ag.reernent andcooperation, especially since the space needs to be set .asidefor exclusive u e as a Resource Center wherd riew kinds of adultinteraction c take place.'We held two day-long summer meet-ings with pr cip Is and teacher representatives to discussteacher Corp al tivities, school goals in general and the Re-source Centerconcept in particular. Asa result, space in eachschool was initially identified. Principals continued to be in-volved in Fresqurce Center development at their schools. andsupported myriad printing, building and refurbishing projectsduring the yea.

Space in one middle school was apportioned from part of alarge library, wth the librarian's support. The principal and atask force of teal hers and community members requested sup-port from the school system to build a dividing wall between.two areas. After\ some delays and many months of effort, thewall, complete vith a new door and window, was built andpainted. This divider represented an impressive concreteachiwiement of a school/community group working togethertoward a cemmon goal. Spaces in the two other schools werecreated out of a teacher lounge and a mailroom and a teacheraide office.':

?. Designing the Space'Once as space has been clearly defined, a committee of

interested community members and 'teachers can begin todesign the environment and set it up. Our committees includedvolunteer teachers and community Members as well as teachersearning university credit for their participation and the TeacherCorps Curriculum Resource Specialist who served as facilitatoror the committees:

Planningior the environment ccurred in many stages.First, the "Atm stage" was a time for brain fstormir4 Usirtrthe open-ende'd statement, "A Resource Center can be . .individuals gave their input. A Resouice Center can be,"a placefor departments tomork together", "a place to train teachere towork with community .members ", "a room where parents couldteach an activity", "an information center", "a diplay area", "a,creative problem- solving space'f,, "a room for-wor kshops", -As a'part of the "dream stage", some committee members surveyedother faculty and community members to see What theywanted.When all ideas-were-grouped-togetherivdesign, of differentspaces in the room to accommodate diverse needs could begin.

At this point in the planning process, groups expressed theneed for a.concentrated block of time to work on second stageissues = space design and goal setting. In response, e.full-day

10 16:

4

"workparty" during a regular a.CliPOI day was planned. Sub-atitutes were provided for e teache-rs involved. Community.members who were available also attended,

During ,the workparty'people representing each Re-source Center committee usedposter-s,ize laminated scale .drawings to design furnitureand equipment placement andto draw, erase and rearrange.After their spaces were de-signedreachgroup worked witha facilitator to list whatthey hadaccomplished and where they wanted to be bY the end of theschool year. We used "action plans" that requrred us to focus onclear objectives. These objectives delineated steps to be talcento create functioning Resource Centers. The action planslre-

tcorded tasks to meet objectives, persons responsible, datesfor task accomplishment, resources needed and evaluationcriteria. The plans were then copied and distributed to members

11S 111 la 21..;.;. ,070211 IllilLi L. iSji yu;6511" 11111.7,

ilij jaiii_%; wavy ril::: firak

Ilpl i .-7,,,.

.V11111 to,;d01 1,72:40 uain

''"'"a".....''''''..a.".."'.'""./

of each scteed to bwek complschool grdesignsgrowth oferent schools' ideas ti22.1:_it the Centers' programs. The com-mittees found this to be so helpful that they requested a future

:sharing session.3. Using the Space ,

Since the "workparty" took place, Resource Center com-mittee members have followed- their action plans and havemoved to the ',using stage". As a result, they

', n Bite many

accomplishments. Centers have become reali0. ihrough theirmany activities: they have accommodated gs of schooltask forces and Resource Cater committee:" as II as manyinformal sharing sessions. Videotaping p

40e and work-

, shops for parefits and teachershave been hel in fheilesourceCenters. Open houses for parents and teachers in each Centerhave given participants an opportunity to examine displays ofteachers' or students' work, to sign up for \Works op% to learnabout volunteer oppArtunities, to take free mate i Is donated by,publishers and, perhaps most important, to ecome familiarwith_thenew place in their school that is available for their use.In some Resource Centers a calendar of events has beencreated to avoid conflicts in use of the space, a clear testimonyto its relevance for a variety of people.

ool group. One person in each school group volun-the "manager" of each action plan to see that tasksted on time. At the end of the "workparty", eachp presented their accomplishmentsnd the

d future plans to the other groups. uable out-the "workparty" was the opportunity to share .dif-

1

'PARENT HELPERS IN THE RESOURCE CENTERS a_ A major problem associated with the existence of anyResource Center, we all agreed, was staffing. Who is availabletd catalogue, stock and display materials or even to enlist.andteach volunteers to do this work? Who has time to conceptu-alize, organize and advertise open housed or to find presentersfor workshops? Who can just "be there" to welcome new schooland community users of the Resource Centers or to suggestways and means for parents, teachers and administrators toget together? ,

Resource Center committees have continued to remainactive in developing ideas for activities. However, ezcaminingthe busy schedules of the school and community people in-volved thus far increased our collective difficulty in answeringthe above questions. The answer to the dilemma of more helpin implementing activities was utilizing "parent helpers."

Parent helpers are parents of children in the three Teacher'Corps secondary schools who were selected by each schooltask force and who are paid by Teacher Corps to work five toten hours a week in their children's schools to facilitate the on-going functioning of the Resource Centers. Principals in theproject schools, who were closely involmed in designing theresponsibilities of the parent helpers, wrote to the parents todescribe this job opportunity. Interested parents applied forthe tAre,nt helper positions and school task forces examinedapplications, conducted interviews and selected two finalistsfor each school from among the candidates. As a result, sixparent helpers (two in each of the three schools) have beenworking on the countless tasks associated with ongoingResource Center programs. ,,

As members of each Resource Center committee, parenthelpers have contributed valuable perspective about usefulprograms which bring community resources into the schoolsand which strengthenschool/home communication and under-standing. During the padt three months, parent helpers havebrougM over 250 parents into the schools, have establishedphone committees and have succeeded' in bringing SchoolCommittee anti City Council members, in to visifthe schools.As a result ofAgreater parent presence in the s Pools, a varietyof school-home communication net4,rks have been estab-lished and pai-rnt helpers are enlisting volunteers to continuetheir work When funding for their positions ends:ROLE OF THE COMMUNITY IN STAFF DEYELQFMENT

Increased teacher interaction with parents has becomeanother area of professional6growth. Informal exchanges withparents and community members enable school people to learn

12.18

new information about their students' out-of-school lives aswell as community needs and perceptions of school programs.School people are also becoming more involved in offeringprograms for parents. A principal has offered an evening ses-sion on "Parents' and Students' Rights." Teams of teachers atone school have met with parents of their students to explainthe middle school concepts of teamed instruction, enrichmentactivities, skills centers and advisor-advisee relationships.Other schools have held orientations for parents of enteringstudents as well as separate workshops on improving readingskills, individualized teaching strategies and, computer-assistedinstruction.

This program has stimulated new thinking and possiblenew approaches as teachers describe and illustrate their dailywork with students to community members and, in the process,respond to. parents' questions and concerns.

ONGOING COLLEGIAL SUPPORT FOR TEACI4ERS

Plans for mere staff development activities in Centers arecontinuing.. Task force members are inviting (heir colleaguesto make presentations about new teaching strategies or ciir-ricula that they have found to be effective in their classrooms.One school has organized a teacher support group that willmeet weekly to discuss.common educational concerns. Presen-tations on new materials supporting education that is multi-cultural an&diagnostic-prescriptive teaching will be offered inResource Centers during the next year A videotape demon-strating peer support through clinical supervision made byschool people and Teacher Corps staff will be shown inResource Centers.

Maintaining ong self-initiated programming inResource Centers remal s our primary goal fdr the- future.Through the siold process of developing Resource Centers,self-confidence has grown4 collaboration an many, levels hasoccurred and stereotypingamongschooLand communitypeople lhaS,booken down. LikeCenter depn,.tuseOf the spacewill be,a ong-term, 'graduallychanging phenomenon whichencompasses a Variety of acti-vities arising.frorrkthe discOvalyof various group nee& We eX-pect that participation will ebb

.unit 'minium uuuniI (nuifirm.11111211103111111111100,

*IiirAilL41,_ 1121111R1116

and flow, depending upon the cycleS of energy and priorityduring each school year. Center gimps have begun to give usclear messages that the help of a facilitator is not always neces-

13 19

,4.

1 a.

, sary in these meetings. At these times we realize it is desirable ,tb disappear 'for a time and to encourage independence andegipower individuals to move ahead on their own our ultimate,goal if a self-reneWing school is tobe achieved.

We believe that a new environment in eacn school designed'10 'generate continuous effg6a- to improve schools will aidfaculty, adminitrators and parents to plan ways to make theirschools bettpr and to acquire the knowledge and skills neces-sary io carry out these improvements. Looking into the future,we hope that Resource Centers that are "owned" by theircreators can serve as:

neutral turf which regenerates relationships among th'eiprincipals, teachers, and community members and estab-

. lishes strong home/school support systemsa professional_ and social environment where teacher

isolation and privatism in teaching that has divided col-1,eaguefrom one another can be broken down and wherecollective problem-solving can develop as a new school.norm

a learning laboratory where adults continue to be stu*gents of teaching; where school professionals can lookfor new options, polish old skills and develop new oneki)

where on-the-job assistance can be available from -bcolleagues who mutually support One another

a stimulating climate where risk-taking by school/community personnel and experimentation in teachingand learning Is encouraged and commended, whereteaching becornei more than a matter of monotony androutine

;in a time of declining resources, unleashing the under-

utilized resources of teachers' and parents' perceptions ofinstructional needs and problems as well as their collectivetalents in devispig way& to solve them, strongly promotes on-going school 'renewal efforts. Continuous school and com-munity--

use of a Resource Center can insure that sharing andlearning.in ozcler to address school problems are w,Oven intothe fabric Of each 'School day.'!ThiS fabric, reinforced by thethreads Rf administrative and community support for andparticipation, in instructional improvement activities, can begreatly strengthened. Thus,, it can fgrbetter withstand today'ssocietal pressures as it is pulled 'and blushed by fortes of public,disaffection, legislative mandates, acoguntability and economicconstraints: .. ,.;'ik

t.-L. ,

Authors:. ', , . ,-

Jeanette P. Esposito, Ed.D., University.of Massachusetts, is the cffreo.for of the Worcester Public" Schools/University of Massachusetts

,, a i,

14. 20

Teacher. Corps Program. Dr. Esposito has worked as a teacher trainerfor the Office of Staff Development, Worcester Public Schools and asa curriculum consultant. In addition, she has taught at the college,high school and junior high school levels. --

Susan Sgibel, M.Ed., Worcester State College, is the. Teacher CorpscUrriculum.resource specialistMs. Selbeir a former middle schoolreading specialist, has also worked with emotionally disturbedadolescents and has led numerous training 'sessions for teachers andparents. _

WORKING WITH HIGH SCHOOLDEPARTMENT HEADS*

Allan Alson, Project DirectorMark Piechota, lnservice CoordinatorLqwell Public Schools/Lesley CollegeTeacher Corps Project

DEOINING THE PROBLEM

n November, 1979 the Lowell Hi h School faculty .I responded to a,Teacher Cor s questionnaire, noting

areas of the school that seem d to need improvement.IP The three items mentioned most were. .

eCurricul34rn to ,deal effectively with thestudents ...Student tardiness and absenteeism'Faculty. morale and job..satisfaction

An increasing number of students were entering the high

,

school 'unprepared for its -existing courses.' Many wee un-motivated and ,deficient in reading, computation and studyskills. Their lack of purpose was reflected 'rr their continuoustardiness and absenteeism. These factors h 1ped make teach- -

4' ..1,..ing less than satisfactory for many faculty embers, who com-Tajned'about the conditiorit of the school, who felt halicied anquniPpreciated, and who looked to administrators for bolutions

,to the probiems: ---; ,

basi'c skillS of

*.Note. We would like to express our sincere appreciation to the deparfment heads,the dean of faculty'and the headmaster for both their active involvement in and ap-proval of thegontents of this article. It is through their efforts that,a new, excitingand potentiary successful avenue for school self-% renewal, has been opened atLowell High chool.

15., 2,1

How Could the Teacher Corps project be helpful?. Withroject encouragement, the principal form d a steering Corn-ittee, cemposed of himself and six fa Ity representatives.:

This committee organized the faculty in task forces to analyze.theissues and propose solutions to em. It was assumed thatteacher involvement in problem-s ing would simultaneouslyraise morale and improve conditi ns in the school. .

These two outcomes were ac ieved in a number o taskforces, particularly those focusing 'n concrete, narrow topicssuch as a revised faculty handbok, an improved school cCir,n7'munication system, and a new method-for supervising Students.4'Yet the groupg looking at curricular issues made little progress.The issues seemed too complex to be easily resolved, demand-ing changes in scheduling, personnel, budgets, goals andobjectives. Members ,did not want /to be part of the .task forceeffort without guarantees that their work would be productive.

.Teachers seemed to be

looking to the administration ingeneral for leadership in thesematters, but to which' admini-strators specifically? The dezpartment heads seemed thelogical,choicec They were mid-dle, managementl. intermedi-aries between the principal andteachers on curriculum and in-structional issues. However,there was no clarity about What'curriculum and instruction re-sponsibilities actpally were del-pgated to them. They mettas a group only foi- informationalmeetings chaired by the principal, seldom to discuss commonconcerns about curriculum and teaching. They were not theprimary evaluators of the teachersjin their departments, andthere was no common system for curriculum evaluation and de-velopinent. ,

Wi the principal s approval, it w s decided to'shift thefocus fro 'working directly withtpache to working with thedepartmentheads, specifically the head six largestdepartments of the high school (english, math, science, foreigntangUages, social studies and busi ess). The problem now

. faced was hbw to empower the de artment heads as a newleadership body for curriculum and i structional developmentwithin the school.

GETTMSTARTED . _It was proposed to the heads that the Teacher Corps project

6 2 2

work with them in three ways: 1) to help them develop a systemfor curriculum- revision, particularly fo he needs ofunmativagil, low-skilled students; 2}-to look at ys to improvethe quality' of instruction in each department; and 3) to helpthem develop their skills for leadership in curriculum andinstructional development. .. : \---

The primary format to accomplish these goals was a weekly11/2 hour meeting of the hOads and two Teacher Corps staff. Themeetings- confronted issues of curriculum and instructionalimprovement and encouraged th group to plan ways to dealwith the issues. The meetings were lso a vehicle for the headsto discuss their roles and respo ibilities and how to enhanceleadership ..in their departments and in the .school. TeacherCorps staff acted as resources and facilitators of the sessions.The heads agreed to the proposal, thus beginning a series ofmeetings.

Previous to the first meeting, each head was interviewedto determine his or her priorities for curriculum and instruc-tional development:The responses were recorded on newsprintand displayed at lie group meeting, where each head read hisor h'er goals. Then they iderrtified their comsnon concerns:- DevelOping a new teacher evaluation form

Improving curriculum and instruction for lower levelstudents

.

Ctrifying the department I'eads' rights and responsi-bilities in relation to other administrators.

. These concerns'becaMe the group goals.THE PI30dESS OF THE MEETINGS

After the first meeting, the sessions were chaired on arotati%g basis by the department heads, each taking the

'meetingsfor a month. The principal did not attend the

'meetings unless invited because he wanted them to becomean independent body and felt his presence, particularly in the.early stage, would retard this development. He usually came tomeetings to respond to proposals that Weresent to him.

The assistant principal, to whom the heads reported on anumber of issues, participated ire most sessions. His overviewof organizational policieS and procedures was invaluable tothe group when it came time for decision-making. At the ses-sions there were nine official participants the Six hbads, the

. assistant principal and two project staff. In addition, the projectsecretary attended to take minutes of the meetings.'

The agenda usually resulted from a negotiation between--one of the project staff and that month's chairperson.. Theroles and responsibilities for this negotiation remained ur)

17 _23

=

0

clear for most of the year. Many times, staff ended up shapingthe agendas fot the. chairmarfs approval, because they hadMore time to think through issues. Lack of clarity about rolesaffectecNtre.clynamicsiof-the meetingi. The agendas wererecorded on newsprint and taped to a wall, providing a-visualreminderto everyone of the progress being made in a meeting,but it was often uncertain who was responsible for keeping thegroup foccrsed on a topic and bringing closure to discussions.Frequently the chairinan wad wicomfortable with the role andstaff assumed it°.

In mid-year, the staff told the heads they were ugcOm-fortable -with. the leadership role which had developed in themeetings, and the heads resolved to take more responsibilityfor setting agendas and chairing sessions. This discussionoccurred just as the heads were becoming comfortable witheach other and the focus and, process of the meetings. Fromthat point on, they took-much ,more control.

DEVELOPING A NEW TEACHER EVALUATION FORMInitially the heads- were encouraged to define their goals

for supervision'and evaluation and to consider peer and clinicalsupervision as possible Models. This direction was rillkisted.They Wanted to get something done quickly and decided saltrevising the presentteac her evaluation form, which they foundvague and subjective.

As the revision process weqalong, questions of goals andalternative processes emergecLespecjally when examples ofother systems' forma were revie d one meeting, the headsnoted aspects of the-evaluation pro ess hey thought important,erg, teacher .self-analysis, pre-ob on conferences andteacher-feedback on the evaluatio ess. They Were thenready to definettbe evaluative criteria ch would be listed on

he form. The task was frustrating. Crjteria seemed debatable,ambigimus and over- lapping,. leading one head to suggest anoutside consultant /0 help clarify their thinking.

A consultant gave the department Vkads a new perspectiveon classroom observation, but further progress on the evalua-tion 'form was impeded by a variety of factors: holidays, thepresure of 'other duties,_and the demands of other agendaReins (i.e. release-time planning). After four months we werenot very far along on revision of the evaluation form.

It was then agreed lo meet after schAthours in FebruaryJo define the evaluative criteria, and one of the heads volun-teered'to take responsibility for coordinating work on the form.Then things started moving. The criteria went through threedrafts and were put on a reorganized form ready tp be shared'

18 24

is

with other groups for their reactions. The heads realized at thispoint that though they had developed a new form, many thingsneeded to-be done in the coming year efore it could be used inthe evaluation process. These tasks included:

writing detailed definitions of the criteriadrafting a guide for evaluators which explained dueprocess and the use of the form/organizing training sessions in the use of various class-

, room observation techniques.sharing their document with teachers,*administratorsand the teachers' organization, and seeking their refine-ments and approvals

In one year the heads had expandedtheir goals from simplyaltering their existing form to improving the 'total:. procss ofteacher supervision and evaluation.IMPROVING CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION

Simu neously,/ -work onimproving the curriculum wasunderwa . It becape clear thatif curriculum for lower tevel stu-dents were going to be devel-oped, other curricular areaswould, have to be reviewed si-multaneously by the wholeschool. Most teachers agreedthat curriculum developmeritwas needed but were unwilling to spend time after school doingit, and not all were concerned with curriculum for lower levelstudents. the only alternative was to release all students fromschoot and provide prOfessional time for teachers to work oncurriculum topics of their choice. A series of release times forthe faculty to meet in subject area committees to revir and de-velop curriculum was proposed. Each committee was to have awritten plan of action with a timetable and expected product, I n-terdepartmental committees were encouraged. The principalsuggested the heads be the coordinating body for the releasetime, believing this responsibility would enhance the .heads'leadership and expand their view of the school. The heads ac-cepted ,,the task and set about planning the release time prosgram. Thisseffort dominated the agendas of their meetings forfive months. First they organized their departments into curri-culum development committees and then met three times withrepresentatives of other sObject areas of the school to explainthe release time plan to solicit proposals for curriculum de-velopment.

Everyone. realized coordination Of the release timp wouldbe corn plicated. There were thirty-three sub-cornmittees.work-

, IN. in eighteen subject areas. The heeds met for a full day toreview the curriculum development proposals, assign meetingrooms and draw up a summary of each committee's proposals:,One lof the heads volunteered to be the primary coordinator forthis program.

There were three release times (students dismissed 11/2hours early from school) for curriculum development:More

*P'Nwas not allocated because of scheduling constraints andtesher morale problems, but-it was a promising beginning.*The heads, in their report to the principal, noted that meetingtogether during release time to discuss curriculum was some-what noyalidt many teachers, but one could see by the .thirdsession that all were applying themselves to the task and thatcommunications Aare ,improving within departments gricl,betWeen teachers and adminittrators. In this short time'numerous Course changes (reading lists; sequences) were \iir

,

agreed upon and initiated and promisinp course ideas weredeveloped! Yet, it was just a beginning. They recommendedto the principal that more release time b set aside the follow-

_ ing year to continue the workeitcturricu urn, and they agreedto take responsi6ilityJor coor ing it.

'CLARIFYING ROLES-AND RESPONSIBI I10-0(The speCifid topic of rights and res onsk tties was not

directly addressed in the department tie d meetlitt.becausecurriculum development and thavijuation..form dominatedthe meetings. Yet indirectly theetneetilas dealt with leadershipissues. . -

Each head, took turns chairing the meetings, Ind whenproject staff .pointed out that they were dominating the meet-ings; acting more like Leaders than facilitators, the heads tookmore responsibility for keepin64meetings on the- plannedagenda. At this pbint two heads volunteered to coordinate .various- activities related to the curriculuM release days ,#nd.the evaluation form. Simultaneously, thetleads were assumThgmore of a leadership function in the school:Their responsibilityfor coordinating the release times ./a giving them more organ)zational visibility and power. By the end of the year, they wereplanning. second-year activities which would expand, theirwork on Curriculum and the evaluation system and solidify th rnew roles in thekschool.

*Note It was difficult for some teachers to devote energy to,curriculum developrfleniwhen they were not certain they would be rehired Budgetary cuts resulting fromMassachusetts passage of ProPosthon 2'.2 were threatenin the release of 500/0 of thecity's teach'ers.

20

IMPACTThe results of the department heads" work need to be

pated outcom s. A new form for teacher evaluation was themeasured agalst both the original objeCtives and the unantici-pated

objective identified by the department heads prior totheir meetings. As of this writing, a draft form has been pre-pared to be field-tested in the school during the next academicyear. The second objective of curriculum development andreview was more brodly based, slower than anticipated andmore oriented toward higher level courses. The work ofdeveloping department head leadership, though, has hadsignificant impact. This impact can be viewed from three per-spectives L- the effect on individual department heads, theeffect on the department heads as a group and the effect on thehigh school organization.

As outsiders who have slowly lost objectivity, project stafffind it difficult to measure the personal change of the depart-

. ment ffeads. How do individuals whotave spent fifteen to thirtyyears in a school system change in their perceplions of cur-riculum and instruction, and in their views of their role in theschool organization? One department head, who has obviouslyspent more time with his colleagues than we have, characterizedthe chap e in terms sf increased "self-confidence" and "self-estee ." nothef-deliartmentread was even more specific andself-dss red .about the changes she had undergone.

"I get self-satisfaction from our meetings ... The meetingshave widened my horizons."What effect has the year had on the department heads as d

group? One department head explained that before the meet-ings, "The department heads never worked as a group." Thedepartment heads had no tradition of meeting together,to plan,implement or monitor either curriculum ..and instruction norhad they examined together the supervision process they weremandated to follow. There had not been a history of collectiveaction across departments. Previously, the agenda for thedepartment heads meetings had been set by the principal and,while this did not necessarily perturb the department heads, itcertainly did not promote their tales as educational leaders andit prevented them from discovering and sharing common con-cerns.

It was the principal who made the conscious decision tovest more power, responsibility and .accountability with thedepartment heads. He was willing to have them explicitly take aleadership role in -both,*teacher supervision and curriculumdevelopment. In an interview, one department head indicatedhow thrngs had changed during the year.

21 2' 7 ;:,

The meetings have given department heads an opportu-nity to come together. Before, the department head meet-ings with the principal were done from his point of view,his problems. His agenda structured the' meetings. Hechaired them"... . Now there's more discussion, they'refree. More chance to talk among ourselves, bring thingsout in the open . . . It's an opportunity to address thingswe want to address our needs . . . Before this we justaccepted what was there.

There exists a healthy dy-namic tension between thde-partment heads and the princi-pal regarding responsibility and

and instruction. This changes iv/ 9Vifs 90accountability for curriculum.

the static condition which ex- , i%isted previously. It has been asignificant step this year for the '1principal to explicitly move cur-riculuni and instruction responsibility to the department heads.The shift has been accompanied by the principal's expecta-tions for evidence of concrete change. Though his expeCta-tions are certainly tempered by his understanding of organi-zational reality, they are nonetheless a factor in the departmentheads' productivity and motivation. The willingness of the prin-cipal to risk change and be supportive of the department headsshould not be minimized. Conversely, the widening new nicheenjoyed by the department heads as significant mid-level ad-ministrators is a result of their'effort to take advantage of the re-sponsibility relinquished by the principal.

In many ways the group's change has been almost imper-ceptible. Department heads have begun, though still not onevery occasion, to function in a cohesive mannerdemonstratedby theincreased frequency of_department heads behaving in aninitiating rather than a reacting mode. They have started todiscover whit:is important to themselves as a group in regardto curriculum, instruction and supervision. They more impor-tantly identify themselves as a leadership body in the school. agroup with the potential strength to collecti ely represent cur-ricula and instructional needs to the pri cipal. In turn, thedepartment heads have begun to develop vision of the entischoolas a complex organization.

A sampling of department head consents suppOrts henotion that the meetings have helped them to see the schoolfrom a broader perspective and to feel a higher degree Of affilia-tion with the organization. , p

"Department head meetings' cause you to 'react to theneed§ of other departments not just your own.""I get self-satisfaction from our meetings. I'm getting awareof,the school the total school.""Brore, the department head meetings were announce-ments of deadlines and budgets. Now I feel a part of thewhole school.""In the spring we were individually oriented. Now we seewhat we have in common."Another change felt by the department heads is in regard

to the relationship they have with the faculty in their depart-ments. They believe that the department head meetings andsubsequent curriculum development activities by teachershave enhanced their status in the school as educational leaders.Specifically, there has been a shift in the organization's per-ception of them. Previously, they were often viewed asadminis-trativefunctionarie,s to fulfill tasks such as scheduling, distribu-tion of supplies and student transfers. Rarely were they seenas the "prime movers" for review of curriculum and instruction.Now as one department head commented about his colleagues,"They seem to have more redpect from the school: They arevisible, active, leading."

As _discussed earlier the changes which have taken placedid not occur inexplicably or. overnight', nor are they, yetchanges which have reached a measure of permanence. In,Lewin's (1948) model of change unfreezing, change andrefreezing the department heads may be viewed as nearingcompletion of the unfreezing stage and entering the actualchange process. If the momentum continues, another yearshould 'yield the beginning stage of refreezing or institu-tionalizing those changes which have taken place.

An interesting shift of focus has of curred in the depart-ment head meetings, Initially their attention was primarily onthe completion of short-term concrete tasks. For example, the.creation of a new teacher evaluation form, once thought to be asimple, straightforwardt''matter, turned. out to be an extremelycomplex task* Each -question raised 'seemed to point to twoadditional questions. This activity, as well as the renewed -sense that curriculum development is dependent upon manyvariables and people, has moved the department heads to viewchange frollia more long-term perspective.

A willinghess and perseverance to grapple with. the in-tricacies and subtleties of change is present, Further, theirwork demonstrates a recognition that...while ,change may bequite slow and sometimes painful, the rewards are worth both

23 29

$

the time and energy required. The benefits have begun toaccrue on personal, group and organizational levels.

The changes are not restricted to the department headsalone. The project staff learhed that the original goals had un-

(drealistic time-lines. They did not take into account how slowlyorganizations reorient themselves to new ideas .particularlysegments of the organization with whom there was liftle con-tact, the other departments and administrators. They also over-looked the possibility of significant political changes in thecommunity changes which would threaten teachers' jobsecurity and destroy their morale. In working with the depart-ment heads, staff have also learned how difficult it is to,be out-side facilitators: when to offer advice, when to comment on theprocess, when to participate as a peer and when to speak as an

_expert. The staff areVill making mistakes and still learning.After one year of depart-

ment heads working togetherand working with "outside facil-itators," a number of learningscan be gleaned from the experi-ence. In turn, these learningscan be translated into generalrecommendations for those'who wish to explore a similarventure. The recommendations ...set forth below are intended to provide 'guidelines for_profes-sionals who chose to create a group of high school departmentheads who will eventually be seen as initiating leaders ratherthan responding managers.' ,

. .1. The high school administrator (principal or headmaster a§

they are known in New England) should clearly state theadministrative and organizational expectations for theworking group. These expectations, when feasible, mightinclude a time-line: ...it

2. It is critical for the school inistrator to be supportiveei..of this process by offering oth explicit and implicit.recog-nition to the group that while evidence c:,l' change andgrowth is evected, it is also acknowledged that group de-velopment and organizational change is a slow process.

3. Through administrative support and perhaps role_defini-tion, department heads need to develop their own internalleadership which will foster group accountability amongthemselves and within the

.organization.

After thigstnie.trial leadership has been structured, carefulattention mist be paid to group process matters, dynamicsduring meetings and recording of significant decisions orplanS.

, .

. , ,,

5. When necessary, department heads should focus on learn-ing rprocess" techniques (e.g, brainstorming, issueana ysis) related to problem solving.

6. When outside facilitators are involved, they need to beaware of the internal organizational dyne s as well asexternal school system forces. Their respo se shOuldemphasize the developmental nature of group uilding.Any work done by outside facilitators should directly re-flect the needs and concerns expressed by departmentheads, administrators and other faculty members.A major purpose of the work of the-Lowell High School

department heads has teen to accentuate the school's owninternal personnel resources. More specifically, it has been todevelop, and make visible the curricular and instructionalleadership. capabilities of.the department heads. ,As Esposito(1980) states:

UnClerly49 all of the educational research findings aboutsuccessful stafff development activities is an emphasis onusing a most under- utilized educational resource: teachers'and principals' experience-based perceptions of theirneeds and instructional problems as well as their collec-tiv talents in devising ways to solve them.

REFERENCESLevin, Kurt. Resolving Social Conflicts. New York: Harper and Row,1948. .Esposito, Jeanette P. "School-Based Staff Development: Collabora-

tive Planning anti Preparation for Change." Unpublished Disserta-tion: University of Massachusetts/Amherst, (February, 1981), p. 49.

Authors:Allan Alson is the director of the Lowell/Lesley Teacher Corps Project.He previously served as the assistant director of the Boston University/Boston Public Schools Desegregation Collaborative. His doctorate inurban education was earned from Boston University.

o

Mark Plethota is the inservice coordinator for the Lowell/LesleyTeacher Corps Project. Prior to this position he was the directorlf theWheelock College/Malden Public Schools Teacher Corps Prolpct. Heis a doctoral candidate in the Harvard Graduate School of EdtNation.

31.

°25

a.

The AdministrativeTkaCtlium:A Staff Developinent Model.

Cleveland O. Clarke, Project DirectorsAnn DePlacido, DocumentorBoston State College/Boston Public

. Sctiools District V Teacher -Corps Project

INTRODUCTION

Much has been written in recent years in educationaltextbooks and professional journals about trainingmodes employed to bring about instructionalimprovement of educational personnel serving in our nation'spublic schools. Colloquiums, cpnferencesnon-credit work-Ihops, study groups, credit-generating courses and consultantservices are training modes cited in the literature. No matterwhich training mode is in vogue or is chosen by a school, amajor generalized assumption behind staff development prorgrams conducted in our schools is that the education of childrenwill not be changed very much unless the professional and per-sonal lives of those who interact directly or indirectly with themin the school situation are made even richer with fruitful profes-sional learning experiences. A carefully planned and success-fully implemented staff development training program is seenas being_ able to do the following:

provide the opportunity for educational personnel(teachers, principals, librdilans, guidance counselors, de-partment heads, superintendents, etc.) to keep abreast ofcurrent trends in their respective fields of specializationprovide for educational personnel the opportunity not onlyto acquire new skills but to polish or eliminate overworked,,outmoded ones as well.

provide the opportunity for educational personnel to ex-perience ongoing self-assessment:and self-renewalprovide for a richer interactive environment for all rolegroups involved in the education* setting .. .

26

G.

I

1 :a

In examining the historical .perspectives of staff develop-ment programs, we find that in the past it was Common. practicefor .school systems to ,organize inservice activities withoutseeking significant inpult from those for whom theactivitieswere intended.. For example, teachers for whom most staffdevelopment training w4 directed had very little opportunity'to influence the nature or the scope of the training. Traditionallythe managers of the dystem (superintendent, principal's, supervisors) determined the need for training and were responsibfor determining all the logistical and program plans ,for thedelivery of such training. The result was that in too many casesthe training areas d lineated for staff development activity werenot always relevant o the needs and concerns of teachers.

The Boston State Co legeTeacher Corps staff develop-ment model gets to the heart ofthis problem in that it empracesthe philosophy that teachersand administrators indeed alleducational personnel of aschool or school systemmust participate ,decisionsthat determine the nature,scope and 'delivery of inserviceactivity that has as its primarygoal the' professionalizationand development of personnel. The primary argument in sup-port of this democratic approach is that people are changedthrough participation. In the past, attempts to improve schoolcurriculum and professional instruction by having outside ex-perts develop new programs or by having state, regional or focalcommittees develop new courses of study as well as trainingpackets for jeachers failed, mostly becau se the inten agentsof change were not intimately involved in the initial p nning anddevelopmental tasks.

Obviously if curriculum revision is to be an outcome ofchange in people, then staff members must unquestionablybecome involved in curriculum study and experimentation.Participation provides the major key to profession& impfove.:ment. Staff members who are denied accesOo decision-makingcommittees or who are never pdlled for inputlwhen change iscontemplated will never really e4perience a que sense of growthand belonging. Staff member be they teachers, principals,department heads, librarians or guidance cOuntelors are likelyto become terribly'alienated and disinterested. @Ow often havewe seen teachers-close their classroom doors and completelydisengage themselves from the' .overall fundoning of the

,

m.44k4

7 ISschool? How often have wet seen tellcshe rs and other personnel" ! ,

. participating' in after - school staff development activities onlybeeagse their attendanpae was mandated? How often have stti-dents been prompted into- disruptive behavior, of extremedimension's in sehopl corridors because teachers gave potintervened? This disengagement, this itTabilitito,act iffe.Onan7ner that demonstrates professional sophistication and.mAturity,is often dismissed With such pat respondes as "that's the r'espon-sibifity of the principal"-, or "what does he want me to do his

job and mine too?", or "under the rules of the contract, I don'thave to do that."

Attitudes and responses of this sort may seem grossly anprofessionally irresponsible, but we cannot totally blame anysingle role group because the structure of our schools oftensets the stage for pertain unpredictable behaviors. For too longteache,r4 have been led to believe that they have but litt effecton the running of the total school organization. b" fresponsibility for them means operating in the narrow boun-daries of a classroom.

. How do we turn this unfortUnate situation around? How caneducational personnel be made to realize that they can groWO'Ywithin the scope of the institution and Can become agents ofchange? How do we get educational persOnnel to be active in-novators rather than passive, worn-out, uninformed field-handsin the school environment? For school clinize to be improved,teachers and administrators, indeed all edacatiopal personnel,Must work collahoratilvely on staff development activities. If wewant to get individuals engaged, if we want them to experience -growth and improvement within an organization, we must inter-rupt the'cycle of powerlessness that entraps them.

The inistrative Prac-ticum i tituted by the BostonState ollege and Bodton Pub-lic Schools Teacher Corps Pro-ject is an attempt to help educa-tional personnel within the pro-ject schools break the "power-less cycle". by providing, oppor-tunities for staff members towork on problems that theyhad thought no one either cared about or was interested in soly-ing. This staff development format gives the individual teacheror administrator a remarkable opportunity to help bring aboutchange and improvement in scrtholltrimate and to experiencegrowth in problem-solving skills. °

WHAT IS THE ADININISTRATIVE-PRACTiCU01 ANDHOWBbES IT WORK?

L

__The Administrative.Prapticum is an activity'in which educa:tional personnel of a school engage in an attempt to resolvecrucial problems that relate to school climate. Carried outeffectively, it gives role groups within a school, especiallyteachers and administrators, the opportunity to work collabora-tively-in responding 10 dr solving prpblems id9ntified 4in thatschool. Two basic assumptions underlie the development andimplementation of the model: 1) that school.personnel growprofessionally and persorially as they undertake collectively.or,individually to identify problems, to dia§pose pdssible causes'and to develop and implement action plans for addressing iden-tified _problems; 2) that imprpvement in school climate is likelyto take place on a continuing basis when responsibility foraddressing such improvement plans is shared Noll personnel.

The idea for using the Admihistrative Practicum 'ova staffdevelopment format was born in the high school coerippnent of

, the Teacher Corps project. The high schodl presented thegreatest challenge for the Teacher Corps staff during theplanning year ofthe project. Arriving at the school, we found aschoOl staff which was terribly concerned about certain criticalissues which they thought needacrimmediate attention. A for.;mal needs assessment revealed that the primary concern's had'to do with poor communication among the various .professionallayers Within the school, inadequate security for personnelwithin and outside thschool, inadequate program articulation,poor school discipline and the lack of healthy school=community relations.

After much planning it became clear that teachers werewilling to work on individual activities but needed some incen-tive for such involvement. HowcOdld trtis be accomplished? At-o°

_ the college, the department of secondary educatiOnted det .record a &credit, graduate level course entitled "Practicum in .EducationarAdministration". The decision was made to adapttilts course and under its aegis provide teachacs anciadminis-trators academic credit for their participation in a supervised" !..activity dealing4with school climate. The .41aptation of thepracticum required participants to:4' -

. 1. work with a Teacher Corps staff member and a prin-L. -

cipal to identify a problem; .

2. develop .a plan for solving the identified°

probreni ."replete with processes, programs and time frames; '

t

3. pilot thprocess or program as delineated for problem.'solution; s 4,

4. make recommendations to the administration and theTeacher Corps Staff upontcompletion of practicumf

The four practica which evolved during the first year of theimplementation at the high school had to do with: 1) communi-cation problems between regular and speciaLeducation instruc-tors, 2) coordination of fhe reading program throughout theschool, 3) attendance record-keeping, and 4) high studentabsenteeism.

A review of the first roundof practica showed that in somecases one semester of activitywas nbt enough time for thesuccessful resolution of certainproblems. W. also found that insome cases there was a spiral-ing -effect in that some teach-ers who embarked at the start ofthe. practicum rather reluctantlybecame terribly interested as the semester, went, along aridworked on problems without requesting academic credits orclocking the amount of time devoted to the problem'

. During the next*year the idea of the pcactic*um was ex-panded to include the middle and. elementary schools of theproject. Participants. mot ars a group once a month over theyear. Sessions focused on the individual action plans prob-lem identification, problem solution, and progreSs of imple:mentatjoh. Learning from the high school experience, partici-pants modified the Model as indicated in Chart A, and partici-pation rose from 5 teachers to 20.

LJ M.N.., .--M -r vv -r c SS

' I '2'3.4;C,....,_' ... 4 . r6 , 7 Lt i9 i 43 in !It

S.:Ifitiir11.1.-nituillII- t -1- -,- -- r ") f2,0 1 2, 6 22 '23 12f II? V.5I.. ' - n". r i 1ip',2! z! Lioj 1...t...,

A CASE STUDYAt the start o the school year in the Oliver Wendell Holmeq

Middle School on b,h.grade cluster df four teachers indicated. . at a cluster meeti chat relations between the school and com-

munity and communication between the sAhool and parentsneeded immediate. attention. A ter a short discussion on thisobservation, it was decided that e problem would be put onthe next meeting's agenda for de per considerVionand thatthe Teacher Cbrps facilitator assigned tri the building be invited

o to attend. The'matter via addressed fully at the second meetingwith cluster: members agreeing that school-communityAlationswere poor, that parents were not fully aware of the various aca-demic programs and special events that were in operation in theschobl, and that steps should be taken by the school to ensure'that parents were nbt ,cutroff ,from their chilsken's,education.What could the 8th grade cluster do about 4he problem? What***It

30

4

CHART APracticum iri Education Administration Teacher Corps

. (Revised Fall 1980)

Stage I Development of ProposalA. Problem Statement

1. Participant will identify problem or need:

.

-- Stage II Sub s p and Approval of Proposal.- A. posal will be submitted to Teacher Corps

_facilitator and principal'Proposal must be approvediWprbject direc-tor and Boston State College GraduateOffice.

2. Participant will do some backgroundresearch and consult withTeacher Corpsfacilitator and principal.

3. Participant will state problem which willbe the focsus othe practicum.

B. Proposal Development1. Participant will develop a proposal

explaining what die /she intends to do toremedy the problem.

2 Participant will identify projected mile-,.stones in practicum exercise:

Stage III Practicum Exercise1

A. Participant must devote at least 5 hours aweek to practicum duties.

B, Participant must keep a log of all acfivitieswhich must be signed off weekly by principal.

C. Participant must meet with Teacher Corps,facilitator on 5th, '10th, and 15th week ofpracticum. t

D. Participant must develop recommendationsfor institutionalizing the positive outcomes

.of the practicum. This will ,be an action-plan.

Stage,IV InstitutionalizationA. Participant must spend one semester imple-

menting the action planB. Participant will develop an evaluation report

for distribution to school faculty

Stage V Practicum. Sign -OffAt :completion: of- practicum, participant - will.receive 6 semester hours of credit.

4.

0

kinds of strategies could be devised to relieve the situation? Towhat extent, could the support ,and encouragement of theadministrators and other teachers be obtained or assured?Thesse were, examples of theprobing questions _that. sur-faced at ttie meeting and which;meinbers thought. needed an-swers. The principal of theschtlol wag invited to the thirdcluster meeting and was im-pressed with the cluster's in-tent. He indicated a willingness

...e^

. 4remarkable .. . many more parents are visiting the school thanever before. The school's first evening "open house" sponsoredby the practicum held in April.was very well received by parents.Calls made to parents relative to student performance, diss-cipline or tardiness are no longer behg met with resistance.

The establishment of a newspaper club in the school withchildren from the 6th, 7th, and 8th grades contributing newsarticles; the placement of a news box in the school offide whereteachers, parents and administrators may deposit items fornewsletters or local newspapers; and the creation of fourgeneral parent meetings with teachers and administrators dur-ing the academic year have provided opportunities for adminis-trators and teachers at the Holmes to soar beyond the strictconfines of the classroom. They have experienced Orofessionalgrowth through the development of plans to improve a school'sclimate which capitalizes, on parental support and communityinvolvement.

:=3John, NorWood in chapter

tt:=3

one indicated that inflict oftenexists between home andschool because parents do notreally. understand the purposesOf the school's educational pro-gram and because schools arenot exactly certain about whatparents expect of them. To re-solve the differences in expec- --,....tations, Norwood suggests that parents, teachers and admini-strators must find viable ways of working together so that theschool's educational plans or programs reflect the collaborativeeffort of parents, community and schoots. The AdministrativePracticum has gone a long way toward achieving that in the pro-.ject schbols.

..,

FINDINGS .Some of the findings from the initial two years of the

Administrative PractiCum are:4. Teachers have many strengths and skills which have not.been previously recognized. Through being with the prob-lems on a day-to-day basis, teachers can devise more prac-tical solutions and when given the authority and assistanceto implement change, can do it very successfully.2. Individuals who participate in an activity. initially forcredit, can move through meaningful participation to a moreinternal, reward system:

'* 33 39 `,..., I..4

.

. 4 ,3, The collaboration between.teachers and administratorsih praettpum activity' as resulted in improved channels ofcommunication and k.greater professiorial esprit de corps.4. Adsministrators.beed the skills necessary to identify prob

. . _lems and to errotPage their staff to identify problems and td=4..; solve them.

5. The peacticum moves the princikal.into his /her important. role of educational leader.

6. The practicum encourages-action and minimizes. pathy.

7. It is important that some mechanism or policy be estab-ilmm lished so that all staff members .in a school can be kept

informed of the nature, scope and implementation of all,practica taking place in the school.

----The Administrative Practicum has proven to be an effectivestaff ci&velopment model. In the three schools in which it hasbeen implemented thus far, notable 'improvement in school cli-mate has taken placer Teachers and administrators are askingmore questions,.are working together on additional problems,and .the communication among all professional layers in the

(schools has improved. RelationS between the schooj with corn-munity and parenth,have improved drastically. The Admini§tra7tive Practicum, through its sharing of responsibility for prolem solving, a new senee.of powerfulness is emerging. t.

Authors: ' .Cleveland 0. Clarke, E d.D., Boston University, is a professor 4education at Boston Sfate College and director of the Boston State'College/Boston Public5chools, District V Teacher Corps Project.

Ann Gavin DePlacido, Ed.D. Boston College,' is professor of educa-tion at Boston State College. e is direct& of early childhood educa-tion in the depprtment of eleme ry education and the documentor/ iievaluator for the Teacher Corps roject.

1

GOAL -'ORIENTEDSTAFF DEVELOPMENT

Sara R. Massey, .educational ConsultantNew England Institute irt Education

Staff development has been with us in education for manyyears now, but there is still much confusion in our use ofterms such as staff deVelopment, inservice, professional

irs, development, personal growth, adulteducation, etc. Frequently

34 .40

the terms are used interc but they can not all meanthe same thing. There must be some conceptual order that willallow us-to distinguish among these terms. :cs .

Most of the terms are used to describe learning whichbegint'affer a person completes a degree and obtains certifi-cation. Education toihis point has been preparation for employ-nient. Once a person has a degree, certification, and a teachingjob, he or she becomes a professional. It wout seem logicalthat any education that occurs after employment could be con-sida(ed part of some bigger educational framework such asCONTINUING EDUCATION. It can be assumed all professionals must, continue their educatiOn, that no initial prepara-tion program can prepare professional sufficiently to last alifetime. Thus we can assi4me that all educators will have aneed for continuing ducation. ,

. Whether we call our learning "growth" or "development"appears idiosyncratic, but growth is usually associated withbabies getting bigger which can be' Seen. Development islets tangible and is relatively herd to see. Plants grow, but,developroent appears more concerned with long term changesin people. Thus-"development" seems more appropriate than'growth" when discussingpe

'llfttirtolearningof'adults.

Ai* --.. After employment, one kind of continuing