McREL Products - Developing Organizational Learning in Schools

Developing Organizational Learning in Schools
By Susan Toft Everson

Our last observation on the school process issues...concerns the difficulty of making any observations about the factors that are associated with "effectiveness" independently of the local or national context of the schools concerned. (Creemers & Reynolds, 1989, p. 381)

During the past twenty or more years, a growing knowledge about school improvement, school effectiveness and school change has been applied in many schools and districts. Additionally, the increasing knowledge about successful practices in areas such as curriculum, instruction and leadership has been applied. These applications have informed educators about educational reform. However, while we have learned a great deal about educational change and about specific improvements, we still lack a very clear understanding of contextual influences on educational change and practice improvements. Context refers to the organization into which improvements are placed and within which change processes are practiced. The hope has been that school organizations are adaptive, learning systems that are receptive to change and continually modify assumptions, purposes and behaviors. Unfortunately, that hope is often dashed in the real world of educational reform.

For more than a decade, educational leaders have managed educational improvement and reform projects in which it is assumed that the improvement of schools and school districts will benefit students. That assumption is based on research and development literature that describes "best practices" in such areas as educational change, policy, management, leadership, instruction, curriculum, assessment, professional development and so on. With a goal that every student should succeed, educators have searched for the right combination of best practices to implement in order to reach that goal.

While this sounds like a reasonable approach to improve education, large scale success has been limited. Certainly, individual examples verify that some practices have some impact in some settings; the problem comes in verifying long-term impacts that result from implementing combinations of practices in a variety of districts, schools and classrooms. While there are principles of best practice, every organization in which they are applied requires the people involved to study and use knowledge of best practices in idiosyncratic ways that fit their school.

Educational leaders are beginning to understand just how powerful, comprehensive and complicated organizational influences are. Thus, an interest in systems research and its implications for action has grown dramatically in the past few years. An organization is the system into which interventions are placed. What do we know about that system and what can we learn about the system that will enhance its development so that learning at all levels is optimal?

Assumptions

In order to improve schooling and learning so that learners benefit, assumptions about how organizations and systems develop become critically important. Articulating assumptions that are based in the research literature about organizational behavior (e.g., Argyris and Schon, 1974; Fullan, 1991, 1993; O'Toole, 1995; Senge, 1990; Wheatley, 1992) provides a framework from which educational leaders can address the systems they must manage as they work to improve schooling and learning. The following assumptions begin to build that framework.

Assumption 1

There is a gap between current organizational practices and the knowledge about successful organizational practices. Closing the gap often results from an event or crisis and often exists for only a limited time (e.g., a principal leaves and the school returns to old practices). Sustainability for organizational growth--or working to "close the gap" between current organizational practice and best practice--requires time, energy and a tolerance for risk.

Assumption 2

So many organizational changes occur continuously that it is futile to address only one aspect of change. Rather, the dynamics and relationships among changes must be addressed systemically. There are so many interacting variables that controlling them is impossible; rather, the goal is to increase the probability that the change effort will approximate intended outcomes.

Assumption 3

All systems continue to adapt to and accommodate for new information. The key is to adapt and accommodate in progressive, constructive ways rather than to adapt in order to protect existing practices.

Assumption 4

Closed systems do not survive; they wither from lack of input. Open systems adapt and grow, yet there is no guarantee that the adaptation will be constructive (see assumption 3).

Assumption 5

The larger the system, the more variables there are. Each can be catalytic so that complex systems are dependent on a huge number and variety of interacting variables. Acceptance, rejection and sustainability of new information are related to the catalytic functions of variables within the system.

Assumption 6

By definition, learning is change. In social systems (as in organic systems), learning (adaptation) occurs because of the input of new information. The concern then is about the quality of learning and its influence on growth rather than maintenance.

Based on these assumptions, the definition of a learning organization is an organization skilled at creating, acquiring and transferring knowledge and at modifying its original assumptions, purposes and behaviors to reflect new knowledge and insights (adapted from Garvin, 1993, p. 98).

Educational organizations, in general, and schools, in particular, have been extraordinarily successful at adaptive learning that maintains current practice. In Chris Argyris' words (Argyris & Schon, 1974), this type of learning is "single-loop." In "single-loop" learning, consequences or results are reviewed in a way that reinforces the actions or behaviors that caused them. Using the aforementioned definition of a learning organization, schools, as well as most other organizations, traditionally have not been learning organizations. In order to become learning organizations, schools need to engage in Argyris' "double-loop" learning, a practice that demands open discourse about individual and organizational beliefs and purposes as well as behaviors, actions and consequences.

Suggestions

What are some suggestions that will help organizations initiate and develop this type of "double-loop" learning?

Carefully manage routine daily tasks while changing to a new system.

Implementing school reform is like trying to put your pants on while you are running as fast as you can. (Lezotte, 1990)

The educators who carry the greatest responsibilities for improved learning work in complex organizations that must be managed on a daily, if not hourly, basis. Managing policies; time; schedules; work tasks; facilities; resources (human, fiscal, material, etc.); and numerous other tasks are critical functions in the life of any school. Unfortunately, most leaders who guide school reform efforts miss, perhaps ignore, pleas from school participants for assistance to maintain a management system that supports a semblance of stability while they study and apply innovations that will turn that same system upside down.

Educators are besieged by a multiplicity of demands which preclude adequate time for planning, reflecting, collaborating, researching, and assessing. The shortage of time is a problem in all schools and is one of the most complex and challenging problems teachers face every day. These limitations impact the working lives of teachers and other school employees, causing frustration and inhibiting change. The primary dilemma is that school personnel require time to restructure, while restructuring time. (Nelson & Associates, 1993, p. 1)

In some of the literature on organization development, the term "system entry" is used to describe the start-up process whereby an intervention joins the system in which change occurs (Dalin & Rolff, 1991; Dalin & Rust, 1983; Schmuck & Runkel, 1988). System entry is precisely what the process is. A new system is not being created; an existing system is being modified. School development works in the same way. No district can suggest that the students stay home for a year while the educators study, plan and implement innovations. Instead, the schools function while the interventions are introduced. The existing management system must be healthy enough to function and must be sustained in a parallel path to the path of the improvement effort. When that existing system has weak spots or falters, those troubles must be faced in order to protect the energy and time that are needed to support the implementation of innovations. Otherwise, that energy and time are continuously used to address the management problems.

Use information to manage and make decisions.

They [organizations] have capacities for generating and absorbing information, for feedback, for self-regulation. In fact, information is an organization's primary source of nourishment; it is so vital to survival that its absence creates a strong vacuum. (Wheatley, 1992, p. 107)

The literature on organizational change is clear about the value of using information to guide development. A feedback loop is essential to organizational learning. Feedback occurs as part of an information system that exists in every school. That information system needs to be comprehensive, multi-leveled, accurate, clear, applicable to practice and immediate. Current systems are often compartmentalized, unusually obtuse, irrelevant to practice, or the feedback loop between data collection, analysis, reporting, and application is extremely long. Matthew Miles (1992) clearly articulated the importance of feedback in successful school change efforts. And, study after study have revealed that failures of school change programs often occur because of the lack of effective feedback systems. The current interest in action research is a move in the right direction for improving classroom practices. Expanding the same concept to the school level provides a needed feedback system regarding the success or failure of organizational practices related to growth and development.

Provide time and leadership for transition from old to new organizational practices.

Unless transition occurs, change will not work. (Bridges, 1991, p. 4)

Even though an effective information system may exist, the needed changes that such a system demands greatly affect the people and organizations who must make those changes. Within each identified realm of learning--personal, organizational, technical--there are research-based suggestions about approaches to manage transitions that occur when changes are systematically introduced, implemented and institutionalized-or when changes occur informally and unpredictably (Bridges, 1991; Deal & Kennedy, 1982; Hall & Loucks, 1979; Louis & Miles, 1990).Furthermore, in the last few years some experts have begun to suggest a more comprehensive transition management system (see Michael Fullan's Change Forces, 1993, for an example). Transition management is not an event. People, organizational structures, and relationships to external systems will transform as school development activities occur. At each level, leaders need to attend to the transition that must take place--the space between the old and the new. For example, Deal & Kennedy (1982) suggest ceremonies to formalize mourning the loss of old practices and procedures. Whatever the form, transitions need time and support if the organization develops successfully.

Increase the engagement of all stakeholders in the organization.

In the case of an organization, much depends on the nature of the assets and commitments. Every manager of a large-scale enterprise knows the difference between the kinds of organizational commitment that limit freedom of action and the kinds that permit flexibility and easy changes of direction. But few understand how essential that flexibility is for continuous renewal. (Gardner, 1981, p. 52)

Stories about organizational change are full of descriptions of empowered stakeholders, those who participate in organizational learning activities and have ownership of the task at hand. However, the rhetoric about stakeholder engagement and the realities in practice often are quite different. The gap between what is expressed and what is done (Argyris & Schon, 1974) regarding the extent of participant engagement in organizations is frequently quite large.

Recently, experts have studied and written about the characteristics of leaders who are powerful as well as inclusive, collaborative and effective. In other words, such people work in an environment where they can be equitable, interdependent and investigative. This is a culture in which stakeholders are effectively engaged. (For examples, see Bolman & Deal, 1995; Covey, 1989; Gardner, 1990.) Specifically, Sergiovanni (1990) wrote about these kinds of educational leaders, people who are "of service," adding value to others. Such leadership results in a stakeholder "covenant" to engage in continuous learning and development. In order to develop and support a learning organization in which people are actively engaged, open discourse among stakeholders, collaborative work designs, and respectful leadership are essential.

Effective management of routine details, use of information, and attending to transitions will work only if the people within each system are actively engaged in the work to be done. They must be collaborators in an organizational learning process. While implementing one of the suggestions described above may help move an organization forward, the application of all four suggestions, in a comprehensive approach, will be far more powerful in producing the organizational learning that is critical to any school where growth is the norm and learners continually reap the rewards.

References Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1974). Theory in Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1995). Leading with soul. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bridges, W. (1991). Managing transitions: Making the most of change. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Covey, S. (1989). The seven habits of highly effective people. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Creemers, B., & Reynolds, D. (1989). The future development of school effectiveness and school improvement. In B. Creemers, T. Peters, & D. Reynolds (Eds.). Scbool effectiveness and school improvement (pp. 379-383). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.

Dalin, P., & Rolff, H. G. (1992). Changing the school culture. Oslo: International Management for Training in Educational Change.

Dalin, P., & Rust, V. D. (1983/1987). Can schools learn? Berkshire, England: The NRER-NELSON Publishing Company, Ltd.

Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London: Falmer Press.

Fullan, M. G., with Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

Gardner, J. W. (1981). Self-renewal: The individual and the innovative society. New York: W. W. Norton.

Gardner, J. W. (1990). On leadership. New York: Free Press.

Garvin, D. A. (1993). Building a learning organization. In D. A. Kolb, J. A. Osland, & I. M. Rubin (Eds.). The organizational behavior reader (pp. 98-109). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Hall, G., & Loucks, S. (1979). Implementing innovations in schools: A concerns-based approach. Austin, TX: University of Texas, Research and Development Center for Teacher Education.

Lezotte, L. (1990, April). Effective schools overview. Presentation at Kansas Effective Schools Conference, Wichita, KS.

Louis, K. S., & Miles, M. B. (1990). Improving the urban high school: What works and why. New York: Teachers College Press.

Miles, M. B. (1992, April). Forty years of change in schools: Some personal reflections. Invited address at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

Nelson, J. A. and Associates. (1993). It's about time!! Washington, DC: National Education Association.

O'Toole, J. (1995). Leading change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Schmuck, R. A., & Runkel, P. J. (1988). The handbook of organizational development in schools. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.

Sergiovanni, T. J. (1990). Value-added leadership. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Wheatley, M. J. (1992). Leadership and the new science: Learning about organization from an orderly universe. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.