Illinois State University
C&I 407 Learning Theory
Dr. Vicky Morgan
Assignment 2b.
By Larry Pahl
6-25-02
From National FORUM of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal, Volume 17E, No. 4, 2001: The NFEASJ is the leading recognized scholarly, refereed, peer-reviewed professional journal in educational administration and supervision in the United States.
 | The Human Face Of School Reform, Sharron Jenkins Norman, Indiana
University–Purdue University Fort Wayne This article is available online at: http://www.nationalforum.com/12norman.htm |
| Abstract. "The purpose of this article is to reflect on the change process and understand factors that facilitate school reform. Sashkin and Egermeier (1993) suggested the following for the change process: (a) fix curricula, teaching methods, and materials; (b) fix the school climate and culture; and (c) fix the people through training and staff development. Fullan’s model (1982) is similar and discusses instructional strategies, new curriculum, and alteration of mindsets (pedagogical assumptions, values, and beliefs). Fullan’s theory supported Shahan (1976) who asserted that the process of change has a “human face.” This implies that programs, instructional strategies, or new curricula materials do not provide educational change; it is accomplished by focused and committed people." |
The
Human Face Of School Reform
Sharron Jenkins Norman
Indiana University–Purdue University Fort Wayne
|
Abstract The purpose of this article is to reflect on the change process and understand factors that facilitate school reform. Sashkin and Egermeier (1993) suggested the following for the change process: (a) fix curricula, teaching methods, and materials; (b) fix the school climate and culture; and (c) fix the people through training and staff development. Fullan’s model (1982) is similar and discusses instructional strategies, new curriculum, and alteration of mindsets (pedagogical assumptions, values, and beliefs). Fullan’s theory supported Shahan (1976) who asserted that the process of change has a “human face.” This implies that programs, instructional strategies, or new curricula materials do not provide educational change; it is accomplished by focused and committed people. |
|
|
The point of this article is that behavioral modification of school structure, organization, curricula and materials--in a word, "school reform"-- is not as important in effecting reform as is the the attitude, the self-efficacy of the human element involved, the teachers. In this article, Sharron Jenkins Norman cites literature that says that most "change in a school involves the alteration of beliefs and assumptions about education, the implementation of new instructional strategies, and/or the use of a new curriculum (Fullan, 1982; Sashkin & Egermeier, 1993). Patterson (1997) stated that systemic change happens only when the people inside the school critically examine their beliefs and change their instructional practices to fit these revised precepts. Therefore, teachers’ perception of the targeted modification and their voluntary participation are essential to a successful change."
This article brought to focus a question I had had while reading Bruning's account of Bandura's work on teacher self-efficacy. (Bruning, Cognitive Psychology and Instruction, pp. 128-137). Results were related which showed teachers who had high self-efficacy made more progress in helping "problem students." Obviously, at least with problem students, it is best that a teacher have higher self-efficacy. The question I had as I read was "how do you influence teacher self-efficacy? Are there studies which show that certain behavioral, instructional, or cognitive strategies help improve teacher efficacy?" The Bruning text provides no accounting of any methods or studies that deal with teacher efficacy. If all one had was the Bruning text, an initial fair conclusion might be that teacher efficacy, like hair or skin color, is something innate.
But Bruning does offer five suggestions for improving student self-efficacy, and specifically says, speaking of students, "self-efficacy is changeable." (136) Only one of the five suggestions refers to other literature on the subject (that of Bandura, 1993) and that reference is tautological in that it tells us that self-efficacy can be improved by "efficacy-increasing experiences." Bruning does not tell us what those are. The current article under review also lists the Bandura reference but again takes us no farther than the conundrum we have found: when one has high self efficacy kids learn more, but when does not there is resistance
We might conclude that since student self-efficacy is changeable (even though we are not told how--I am not being cynical here, just reporting--I am sure that there are articles and studies on how to improve self-efficacy, Bruning simply doesn't review them) so is teacher self-efficacy. The Norman article gives us some insight into some of the parameters that would be involved in improving teacher self-efficacy. The article actually uses the term "self-efficacy" in referring to teacher attitude and mindset.
The article suggests that the following steps could help improve teacher self-efficacy:
|
School administrators should create an environment where teachers can be "assisted in exploring their feelings, dealing with their uncertainties, and understanding their beliefs and attitudes." |
|
Have teachers form staff study groups geared to building their confidence and self-efficacy, as collegiality has been shown to be a an effective agent for change. Morale, trust, and cooperation are increased. (Barth 1990, Warren 1981). |
|
These initiatives must be incorporated in a manner which encourages teachers to take risks for pedagogical growth. |
|
As teachers cooperate to help each other grow, it ends up being modeled to students and helps their growth. |
There is a "catch-22" here in that "Teachers who possess a strong sense of self-efficacy tend to have a high level of commitment and confidence in their teaching ability. They are usually willing to take risks and participate in the change process (Sparks, 1988)." That is, teachers who already have high self-efficacy will take the risks toward change, but what about those with low self-efficacy? We are told in this article:
"Teachers who possess low self-efficacy usually resist change efforts for fear of disrupting what is already in place. Fullan (1982) stated that if teachers truly resist change, no mandate will deter that resistance."
It is hard to get around the conclusion that, to a large extent, when it comes to self-efficacy, you either have it or you don't.
I was rather surprised at this article in that without any direct research, and only a sprinkling of references to other researchers, it gave in a very short space a very long laundry list of things that might help accomplish school reform. But no practical methods or formulas are given on how to accomplish any of these. It is a fig tree filled with leaves, but without fruit. How can one gain help from being told to do all the following, without being told how?
|
Fix the curricula (how?) |
|
Fix the teaching methods (how?) |
|
Fix the teaching materials (how? with what?) |
|
Fix the school climate (how?) |
|
Fix the school culture (how?) |
|
Fix the people through training (how? what?) |
|
Fix the people through staff development (how? with what?) |
|
Improve instructional strategies (how?) |
|
Use a new curriculum (how? which one?) |
|
Alter pedagogical assumptions (how?) |
|
Alter values (how?) |
|
Alter beliefs (how?) |
|
Real change comes from focused and committed people. (how do you get them?) |
|
members of the school should be assisted in exploring their feelings, dealing with their uncertainties, and understanding their beliefs and attitudes members of the school should be assisted in exploring their feelings, dealing with their uncertainties, and understanding their beliefs and attitudes. how?) |
|
School leaders must create an environment of comfort (how?) |
|
School leaders must entice their teachers to conclude that there is also a need for change. (how?) |
|
School leaders must communicate openly and safely about the staff’s emotional perception of change. (how have they gauged what it is?) |
|
Opportunity to communicate openly may be provided through collaborative groups, grade level meetings, and staff meetings. (what is the topic of each of these meetings?, who chairs them? what is the agenda?) |
These are all good things, but I would rather have been helped practically through the successful implementation of one of them from a case study, step by step, than the feeling of exhaustion and frustration I feel by being given such a long listing of actions without specific methods of implementation.
References
Anderson,
B.L. (1993).
The stages of systematic change.
Educational Leadership, 51(1), 14-17.
Bandura,
A. (1993).
Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning.
Educational Psychologists, 28(2), 117-148.
Barth, R.S.
(1990). Improving schools
from within. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Combs, A.W.
(1991). The school we
need: New assumptions for educational reform.
NY: University Press of America.
Evans, R.
(1993). The human face of
reform. Educational
Leadership, 51(1), 19-23.
Fullan,
M.D. (1982).
The meaning of educational change.
NY: Teachers College Press.
Fullan,
M.D. (1990).
Staff development, innovation, and institutional development.
Changing school culture through staff development.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD Yearbook.
Hall, R.H.
(1996). Organization’s
structures, processes, and outcomes. NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Hall, G.E.,
& Loucks, S.F. (1978).
Teacher concerns as a basis for facilitating staff development.
Teacher College Record, 80(l), 36-53.
Joyce, B.,
& Showers, B. (1980).
Improving inservice training: The message of research.
Educational Leadership, 37(5), 379-385.
Katz, D.,
& Kahn, R. (1978).
The social psychology of organization, (2nd ed.).
NY: John Wiley.
Marshak,
D. (1996).
The emotional experience of school change: Resistance, loss, and grief.
NASSP Bulletin, 80(577), 72-77.
Milstein,
M.M. (1993).
Restructuring schools doing it right.
NY: Corwin Press, Inc.
Patterson,
J. (1997).
Coming clean about organizational change: Leadership in the real world.
Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administration.
Ross, J.A.
(1995). Strategies for
enhancing teachers’ beliefs in their effectiveness: Research on a school
improvement hypothesis. Teacher
College Board, 97(2), 227-251.
Sashkin,
M., & Egermeier, J. (1993).
School change models and processes: A review and synthesis of research
and practice. U.S. Government
Printing Office.
Shahan,
K.E. (1976).
The administrator’s role in developing innovations.
Unpublished manuscript: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
Sparks,
G.M. (1988).
Teachers’ attitudes toward change and subsequent improvements in
classroom teaching. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 111-117.
White, G.P.
(1990). Implementing
change in schools: From research to practice.
Planning and Changing, 21(4), 207-224.