Chapter 21
I agree that there are definite changes that need to take place within P—12 education and that, like the authors argue, the change should be systemic and process oriented rather than piecemeal. I think it is difficult for the current school system to wrap its mind around a paradigm shift that would incorporate completely tearing down what doesn’t work and re-building the system from scratch, but it definitely seems necessary.
Upon first reading about the GSTE (Guidance System for Transforming Education), a process model created to guide systemic change, I was surprise that it did not also include or “provide any indication of what changes should be made in the district” (p. 211). I assumed that they would at least have guidelines stating what specific changes would need to be made for necessary change. Instead, it guides the school system through the process of making successful changes. This system’s role is not to tell districts what to do, but how to do what it is that they aim for.
I was also surprised that although the GSTE model provides detailed steps for how each part of the process should look, much of the specifics are still left to the actual districts to implement within each step. I found that this provides guidance and freedom at the same time.
Something that I like about the other model for change, the SUTE (Step-Up-To-Excellence) model for systemic, process-led change is the structure that allows diverse groups from all levels to have input in the process for change instead of just administration. I feel it is important for everyone to have some kind of input because people on different levels and that interact with the school system in different realms can provide insight for effective change that administrators alone could not provide. Having individuals, teams, schools, cluster groups, and the district as a whole meet and discuss incorporates all points of view and expertise. This sounds like a very smooth process, considering the immense task of change:
Educators [align] the work of individuals with the goals of their teams, the work of teams with the goals of their schools, the work of schools with the goals of their clusters, and the work of clusters with the goals of the district (p. 215).
This step should definitely be included in any school system’s process to change. It makes sure that information and goals are all aligned and heard within each level and group of people throughout the process. It makes for a unified transition and I think it is a wise idea.
Reiser, R. & Dempsey, J. (2007). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall.
Wish I could have read your response before I had to post mine. You helped make much more sense to everything than the text did. I'm not working within a school district and found it quite confusing, so I didn't relate to it the same as you did. I only saw postive chances for changes and a need for funding, from people that didn't see the need for change and a need to revamp how funds are spent.
ReplyDeleteMargie
It does seem like an overwhelming process when you think about it. What is the underlying motivation for a school to change their entire system? I look at what Detroit Public Schools is going through and all the issues they were having. It took the State to take it over before people really knew what was going on. It is very unfortunate because I think it would have stayed the same. They are just going about a financial and leadership change. This seems like a piecemeal change and not a ecological systemic change.
ReplyDeleteIt must be so difficult to initiate such a large change as we've read about in the text or seen in the news. To balance the needs & wants of so many people, but still try to maintain the integrity of the schools. To keep progress moving quick enough to see changes, but not so quickly that people feel too much is happening at once. It seems much harder for the very large public schools, like Dean mentioned, trying to get that many people on the same page. To even decide what that same page is... Schools would definitely have to research different models as you have done, Abra. I agree with Margie, your breakdown of the chapter is very clear & helpful.
ReplyDeleteI think the point of the GSTE model was that it is adaptable to various types of change, and as such, it should be useful for an unforeseen amount of time. The specific change ideas are fleeting, but this available method is designed to apply to any situation - past, current, or future.
ReplyDelete