This article was downloaded by: [Newcastle University]On: 19 December 2014, At: 07:13Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Educational ForumPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utef20

Teachers and School ImprovementWILLIAM J. BAILEY a & DANIEL C. NEALE ba Center for Educational Leadership , College of Education,University of Delaware , Newark, Delawareb Department of Educational Studies , University of Delaware ,Newark, DelawarePublished online: 30 Jan 2008.

To cite this article: WILLIAM J. BAILEY & DANIEL C. NEALE (1980) Teachers and SchoolImprovement, The Educational Forum, 45:1, 69-76, DOI: 10.1080/00131728009336051

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131728009336051

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoeveras to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of theauthors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy ofthe Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, inrelation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms& Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

WILLIAM J . BAILEYDANIEL C. NEALE

Teachers andSchool Improvement

If he schools of our country are suffering from both externaland internal shock waves that make dramatic schoolimprovement necessary. Public dissatisfaction with stu­

dent achievement, discipline problems, school closings, reduc­tions in force, budget cutbacks, and desegregation-all suchtroubles are well-documented. These are complex problems anddifficult times, and there are no simple solutions.

However, we believe that teachers must accept more responsi­bility for making the needed improvements than has been true inrecent years. Furthermore, as an obvious corollary, school boardsand administrators must accept the need for increased teacherresponsibility.

These beliefs rest on an extensive analysis, recentlyconducted by the authors, of the literature on plannededucational chanqe.' In particular, we were struck by the need forall educators to review their roles in school improvement in lightof current educational conditions.

Based on our practical experiences, the current changetheories found in organization development literature, and areview of the significant research, we have summarized the newreality of school improvement:

1. The new context for school improvement is an "Age ofSlowdown" in which enrollments and resources have declined. Anew emphasis upon reallocation and efficient use of existing

William J. Bailey is associate professor and director, Center for EducationalLeadership, College of Education, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware.Daniel C. Neale is professor, Department of Educational Studies, University ofDelaware, Newark, Delaware. 69

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

cast

le U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

13 1

9 D

ecem

ber

2014

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

cast

le U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

13 1

9 D

ecem

ber

2014

70

TheEducational

Forum

November 1980

resources is needed. In public elementary and secondary educa­tion, this new emphasis requires higher levels of collaborationamong elements of the educational system (i.e., local schoolofficials, state and federal education agencies, colleges anduniversities, and teachers' organizations).

2. Despite disappointments with attempts at school reform ,much knowledge has accumulated about how to succeed withplanned change in schools. Particularly promising are organiza­tion development (00) strategies that include: (a) a focus on thelocal school building organization; (b) clear identification of theneed for change; (c) strong commitment at district levels tochange individual schools; (d)sustained involvement and supportof staff to adapt new ideas to the local setting; (e) cooperationamong all members of the local school community; and (f) stronglinks to outside resources to support local change efforts.

3. Radical changes in attitudes toward school improvementare now required. The illusion that progress is inevitably tied togrowth has to be abandoned. The view that schools could quicklysolve deep-seated social problems needs modif ication. An over­reliance on hardware and the design of new educational prac­tices need to give way to an emphasis upon human resourcedevelopment and the implementation of new practices within in­dividual schools.

Traditional Teacher-Unlcn Behavior

The effects of the " Age of Slowdown" and the knowledgegained from research on change calls for a change in rolebehavior for teachers. First, what has been the traditional rolebehavior? We believe that it is safe to say that teacher-unionbehavior has centered around individual welfare rights. Theactivit ies of teachers ' unions and educational associations aregenerally targeted toward salaries, fringe benefits, rights ofappeal, and working conditions. The role behavior necessary toaccomplish these goals was by necessity antagonistic and polar­ized with management th inking. As a result of this polarization,teacher morale is at an all time low. Administrative morale is lowalso. To attempt to provide a historical analysis of the cause andeffect of this state of affairs is not product ive, given the spacelimitations of this article. What may be productive is the settingof some new directions in which both teachers and administra­tors can combine their energies to improve the public schools ofthis nation.

An Example of a Mistake From the Past

In 1966, a change project was initiated in one of the New YorkCity junior high schools. This project, as reported by Charles

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

cast

le U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

13 1

9 D

ecem

ber

2014

McMillan, had all of the ingredients normally deemed necessaryfor successful planned chance .' The project had support fromthe sophisticated Clinic of New York University, utilized subor­dinate participation for decision making, emphasized leadershipfrom qualified change-agent types , attempted to involve thecommunity, and the leaders endeavored to be cognizant of thesetting of the social milieu. The target for change was small(Junior High School #57 in the Bedford-Stuyvesant section ofBrooklyn), and money for a two year contract was provided, anunbelievable $450,000. According to McMillan, The New YorkTimes reported on the project during the second year referring toit as a "shattering experience," and the project was abandonedas a failure prior to the expiration date.

The post-mortems revealed explanations for the failure toimpact changes within the school. Teachers were not involved inthe earliest decision making process which established theorganizational structure of the project. Involving them at a laterdate was not helpful because, at that point, there was confusionabout the nature and responsibility levels of decisions that wereto be made by the teachers. This was due to power conflicts andpolitical implications caused by ambiguity over governancewhich led to lack of ownership in the problem solving process .The result was that many teachers did not see that they weregoing to be rewarded by innovative practices because the normsof teacher behavior for the school district had not been changedor even considered. This point was brought out through the factthat the leadership failed in diagnosing the organizational envl­ronment prior to the initiation of the project planning . The storyweaves an interesting study of intrigue and bewilderment, andyet across the country, there are manyexamples which portraythe same tableau of failure.

A New Approach

Clearly a different approach is needed. The large grants ofmoney (that were not usually successful anyway) have expired .What remains is the necessity to establish a new organizationalclimate that can set the stage for innovation and change asstandard operating procedure, and this must be done at the localschool setting with collaboration of teachers and administrators.

We are advocating that the teachers ' union must be moreinvolved in basic school decisions, and the administration mustencourage it. The historical pattern-administrators trying tosolve school problems unilaterally without teachers ' involve­ment, and teachers advocating only personal welfare rights­must shift directions. The unions and the associations willcontinue to function in the educational community, and we arearguing for increased teacher responsibility in basic educationaldecisions. This proposal includes the acknowledgment that

71

TheEducationalForum

November 1980

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

cast

le U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

13 1

9 D

ecem

ber

2014

72

TheEducational

Forum

November 1980

blame or credit also goes with responsibility. Further , we are nottalking about individual teacher representation on curriculumcommittees, but union representation on basic school decisions.

The societal demands on public education have resulted (andwill continue to result) in wholesale consolidation movements.School districts have become larger and more complex to accom­modate court rulings, appeals for equal financial base, demandsfor diversified programs, vocational interest groups, and thegeneral trends toward urbanization. This largeness means thatschool boards, superintendents, and district office staff arefurther and further removed from classroom teachers . At thesame time, the teachers ' professional organizations havebecome larger (in part to gain more power), and these unionleaders are also further removed from the needs of the individualteacher.

In general, these changes in size have made participativegovernance in both the teachers' organizations and the schooldistricts an unwieldy proposition. The effect on teachers andlower level administrators has been lower morale, becausemorale is related to the feeling that "what I do makes a dif­ference." We advocate a strong decentralized governance plan,coupled with a collaborative model for decision making. Thesetwo management concepts are important to the survival of thepublic school system as we know it.

Teacher power is here to stay, and no strategy for schoolimprovement can be successful without recognizing thelegitimacy and strength of teachers' organizations. Thus, werecommend direct liaison with officials of the organized teachingprofession for each school improvement project. In fact, we takethe position that teachers' organizations have a crucial stake ininitiating and supporting school improvement and that they mustassume greater responsibility in this process.

Collaboration: A Possible Key to Survival

In the present atmosphere of competition, educators from dif­fering points of view often view one another as enemies , eventhough their goals for education are similar. This situation willeventually weaken our educational system and retard educa­tional growth and progress .

To help prevent rivalries and political competition fromincreasing, we encourage the formation of a network of educa­tional partnerships that will establish common priorities andeliminate duplication of effort. More specifically, the formation ofpartnerships should be advanced as a mechanism to open com­munication between governmental units, professional organiza­tions, and institutions of higher education.

In other words, educators need to work together to examinethe cause of their present problems so that action based on

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

cast

le U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

13 1

9 D

ecem

ber

2014

intelligent analysis can be planned. Collaboration , in contrast toisolation, will provide methods for dealing with competition sothat growth rather than failure and frustration can occur.

Furthermore, school and college personnel, in conjunctionwith representatives from the general community, need to workcooperatively to define the problems of greatest educationalsignificance. Shared decision making will insure that all thepartners have a role in deciding their own destinies. It is furthersuggested that the reason so many school improvement effortshave failed in the past is due to the fact that educational kinsmenhave directed their energies in fragmented directions rather thanfocusing on a specific area.

The idea that the "whole is greater than the sum of its parts " isan important concept. In other words, collaboration could havesynergistic consequences. Educational partners , who in realityare " symbionts," traditionally have said to each other: " I can'tlive with you so why don 't you go away." Educators need to adoptstrategies which include the formation of collaborative arrange­ments that are crucial to the future of the entire teaching profes­sion. Collaborative dialogue will reduce the conflict betweengroups so that positive improvements in education can beachieved. In other words, educators need to know that "we havemet the enemy, and it is us."

Collaboration: How Does It Work?

Collaboration is not a new concept; its reference is frequentlyfound in the literature. However, problems exist in its usagebecause (1) an operational definition is lacking, and (2) a variety ofother terms (l.e., cooperation, partnership, consortium) are usedinterchangeably.

The term collaboration usually describes a voluntary relation­ship between two or more organizations, in which representa­tives of each work together to achieve both separately held andcommonly held objectives. Collaboration involves the sharing ofplanning , decision making, implementation, and evaluation. Acollaborative venture assures each organization of its indepen­dence and identity.

Figure 1 illustrates the relation between collaboration andother forms of conflict resolution. We believe it is poss ible forboth administrators and teachers to satisfy their own desires andneeds. We are aware of the present realities of negotiations, butwe submit that , without collaboration, public education may notsurvive. Since collaboration is a complex operation, we also sub­mit our companion recommendation of decentralization.

Each school building , with district approval, must work out itsown operational definition of collaboration, but the call forpartic ipative decision making is strong . Figure 2 depicts ourgeneral scheme for decentralized collaboration. Items can be

73

TheEducationalForum

November 1980

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

cast

le U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

13 1

9 D

ecem

ber

2014

74 adjusted up or down, depending on the local situation, but adownward trend for decision making involving teachers is urged.

Competitive Collaborative

High (Domination) (Integration)

1•

o mTrade-Off- Ql

c: .=o m •:;:;Ql (Compromise)11l"O.= c:u~.=0m >0. ->om-.-'-- Avoidant AccommodativeI1l I1la.. m

(Neglect) (Appeasement)

TheEducational

Forum

November 1980

Low------Party's inclination to --------...,.... Highsatisfy Other's desires

Figure 1. Conflict Resolution Otientetlon'

New Roles for Unions and Associations

As shown in Figure 2, new roles are prescribed for teachers inour collaborative-decentralized model. Some of these will bediscussed, but since we are advocating the independence of thelocal school, it is the professionals in the local school who willhave to determine which activities they choose to pursue and inwhich way. The overriding theme, however, is that both teachersand administrators must assume the mutual goal of schoolimprovement. "How can we improve?" is the constant demandtrue professionals place on themselves. In fact, that may be thedistinguishing criterion between skilled workers or the tech-nician category and the professional category. .

Personnel Decisions. Personnel decisions can be made atmuch lower levels than is typical of current practice. The localteachers' organization should be active in the recruitment andselection of new staff. Teachers' organizations must take moreresponsibility for standards of teacher performance, includingthe review of parent complaints. Professional self-policing hasmany drawbacks and is not a new issue, but it will contributetoward an "environment of change" necessary for the survival ofpublic schools.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

cast

le U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

13 1

9 D

ecem

ber

2014

PUBLICSCHOOLGOVERNANCE

State or CountySystem --.-.

Local SchoolDistrict --.

tIndividual School

Building --.

DECISIONMAKINGISSUES

-Certification-Hurnan & Material

Resource-Research-National Curriculum

Concerns , l.e.,Metric System

-Publications

-Salaries-Distrlct BudgetTaxes

-Personnel Decisions-Building Budget-Public Contact-Currlculum-In-Service-Working Conditions-Supervision-Child Placement-Instructional

Supplies

TEACHERORGANIZATIONGOVERNANCE

State Educati~n

..-Association(or Union)

School District....--Chapter

~Building

...Representatives

75

TheEducationalForum

November 1980

Figure 2. Collaborative Decentralized Schools

Curriculum Planning and Decision Making. One of the clearfindings from the change literature is that implementation ofcurricular changes is more successful if the users (teachers)have had something to do with design, writing, or choosing thecurriculum philosophy and instructional materials. Large scalecurriculum models developed in large educational communitiessuch as district, county, state, or federal levels sooner or later fallinto disuse. The professional growth that goes into developingcurriculum may be worth more than actually using it. The singleimportant element in learning success may be the enthusiasticteacher using instructional designs and materials which she orhe has developed. This means that curriculum development is anongoing school building level activity. Individual school buildingstaffs may develop less sophisticated models than largerresource based projects, but they will use what they develop.Basic design, implementation, and evaluation should be dele­gated to individual building staffs whenever possible. This alsomeans that each building must have a voice in the budget and in

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

cast

le U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

13 1

9 D

ecem

ber

2014

76

TheEducational

Forum

November 1980

establishing the priorities for spending. These priorities are to beset collaboratively with the administrators, teachers, and localparents from that sending area.

Public Contact. Parents are demanding access to the schools.In many new, desegregated systems , parents believed thataccess would be available if they had neighborhood schools; butthe neighborhood school is only a symptom of a deeper need:involvement. The neighborhood school concept is a myth ifparents do not have contact with their local principal andteachers . Parents claim that in smaller districts of the past, theyhad contact. However, in larger county wide systems, parentscan have meaningful contacts with their schools if and only if thelocal principal has autonomy and the teachers of that building areinvolved in the decisions of that school. It is not satisfactory to aparent to be able to know the principal and teachers, if thosepeople can only refer that parent to the district office aboutplacements, courses , curricula, or discipline codes, for example.People need to be able to get to the person who makes the deci ­sion. Principals who reject the idea of teacher involvement to theextent we are asking have probably never had autonomy in theirown right. They believe that if they would give the little powerthey have to teachers, the principal would be stripped of a job.Let the entire school-teachers and administrators-be account­able to the local public or lose their options to operate.

Professional Training. While serving as an assistant super­intendent a few years ago, one of the authors asked building prin­cipals to design their own local inservice meetings for the year.One principal stated he had no idea what to do for the teachers inhis building. That statement sounds incredible. Principals mustbe responsible for their own building inservice programs , whichmust be designed collaboratively with the building teacherassociation. Any other plan will leave the majority of teachers inthe low state of morale described earlier.

Colleges of education can participate by offering graduatecourses located in the school building. These courses wouldcenter around the problems of the teachers in that building. Pro­fessors could act more like consultants, but consultants who cangrant graduate credit for professional activities that have boththeoretical validity and practical utility.

Notes

1. See Daniel C. Neale, Will iam J. Bailey, and Billy E. Ross, Strateg ies for SchoolImprovement (New York: Allyn and Bacon Inc., in press).

2. Charles B. McMillan, " Organizat ional Change in Schoo ls: Bedford ·Stuyvesant," The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 11 (1974):437·53.

3. Jeffrey W. Eiseman, " A Third Party Consideration Model for Resolving Recur·ring Conflicts Collaboratively," The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science, 13 (1977):304 (as adopted fromK. Thomas).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

cast

le U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

13 1

9 D

ecem

ber

2014