ESIS

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

1691 4263

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

Female Elementary Principals' Team Decision Making
in the North Central Association
Goal Selection Process

presented by

Rena Ellen Richtig

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. dqyeehi Educational Administration

 

flue/flax

ajorYraicssor

Dam August 1997

MSU (.1 1m Al/irrmmw' Arlinn/lfqtml ()plmrtunily Institution 0-12771

 

LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE iN RETURN BOX
to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

JUN 01 '
0402301
03§20

11g
1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1/96 chlRCiDaIeDue.p65—p.14

 

THESIS

LK

 

ll

"llt"‘l‘lglllllllll”till“

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

Female Elementary Principals‘ Team Decision Making
in the North Central Association
Goal Selection Process

presented by
Rena Ellen Richtig

has been accepted towards fulfillment ' V
of the requirements for.

Ph.D. degeehl Educational Administration

 

/ \Ma/jorlfrofessor

Dam August 1997

012771

MSU I: an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity lnxtilutt'on

 

 

 

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE [N RETURN Box
to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

JUN 01200;
W ‘Mfllizfi
03 0 i

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1/98 cJClRCIDateDuepiSS‘pJ‘t

FEMALE ELEMENTARY PRINCIPALS’ TEAM DECISION MAKING
IN THE NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION

GOAL SELECTION PROCESS
By

Rena Ellen Richtig

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Educational Administration

1997

 

1' sheen (ha:
place rate on in
reiazonships Ti
deosion making
literature about I
In this qu
emerged in six w
Practices in detis
process of NCA
Sistems lhlilkjng‘
A model
plan Was develop

ABSTRACT

Female Elementary Principals' Team Decision Making
in the North Central Association
Goal Selection Process
By

Rena Ellen Richtig

Women elementary principals are steadily growing in number. Research
has shown that they exhibit skills in collaborative and participative leadership; they
place value on inclusion and connection, have a strong caring ethic, and value
relationships. These qualities appear in most studies as highly effective in team
decision making. However, women's voices are nonexistent in the theory and
literature about their decision making thoughts and practices in school leadership.

In this qualitative study, the researcher explored the variations that
emerged in six women elementary principals' talk about their thoughts and
practices in decision making and team decision making in the goal selection
process of NCA. The conceptual framework, designed from the five disciplines of
systems thinking, shaped the methodology.

A model depicting each principal's decision-making/team decision-making
plan was developed during the first interview. Further data from follow-up

interviews of each principal, a focus group interview of each principal's stafi“, and

 

interviews of w
NCA artifacts, a
intense. The
tide women's L
matted the l

Prim 1
“PM 121k abet
tough the lens
“he no:‘ s'atiatlo
PM] models. a
melt and shar

Overall, 1
m0“ anempted t
demonstrazed an
slowly Changing,
intem'ews, tensio
constraints and Ct
liCiSlot] making.
include the To! e p‘
efforts, the impor

Wm" environme

Rena Ellen Richtig
interviews of each principal, a focus group interview of each principal's staff, and
NCA artifacts, along with the models, emphasized the major themes and tensions
that arose. Throughout the data collection, emphasis was placed on the variations
in the women's talk about decision making and the tensions that enhanced or
constrained the process of decision making.

Primary findings revealed variations, tensions, and themes in the ways the
women talk about their thinking and practice of team decision making viewed
through the lens of the five disciplines of systems thinking. Systems thinking had
the most variation, there were slight variations in their talk about team learning and
mental models, and little or no variation surfaced in the disciplines of personal
mastery and shared vision.

Overall, these principals thought about team decision making ofien, and
most attempted to embrace and use the process. Their models and stories
demonstrated an attempt to practice team decision making within the confines of a
slowly changing, but still hierarchical, bureaucratic school system. In the
interviews, tensions were uncovered that affected team decision making. Time
constraints and central oflice demands were major barriers to effective team
decision making. Major themes that influence their thinking and practice also
include the role parents played or did not play in the school's decision-making

efforts, the importance of a shared vision and leadership, and the effect the school’s

overall environment had on decision making.

’ "~ ..~._.. mi. r

 

 

 

COpyright by
RENA ELLEN RICHTIG
1997

To

 

Vic Lundgren

iv

 

lam gr.
spoon and en
believe it \t‘oulc

Public s
”5795mm Ban
Grosse Pointe }
Schools t CSpeci
(Alerting Guy
dememm schc
inthis StUdyz

QTEaLiz.
Nancy COlfleShl

Bushaw and De

DODDS‘NCA it

Dr, GeOrge Bab

(espeClally MIS.

%

Charles B. Th0”

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

She who plants a garden believes in the future.
I am gratefiJl to the following people for their intellectual and collegial
support and encouragement in helping plant the seed of a Ph.D. and helping me
believe it would come to fiuition.

Public schools. Colleagues in the Carman-Ainsworth Community Schools

 

(especially Bart Zachrich); Flint Public Schools (especially Dr. Larry Cywin);
Grosse Pointe Public Schools (especially Dr. Alfrieda Frost); Menominee Public
Schools (especially Ron Militello); Florence Public Schools (especially Gary
Osterberg, Guy Habeck, Irene Brunner, Sue Beasley, and Jan Dooley); and the six
elementary schools from which each principal and her staff so willingly participated
in this study.

mm. Colleagues in MEMSPA (especially Lynn Babcock and
Nancy Colflesh); the Michigan NCA committee and office staff (especially Dr. Bill
Bushaw and Deb Clancy) and others in the NCA-COS (especially Dr .Ken Gose);
DoDDS-NCA team members Dr. Larry Kelly, Dr. Bob Chalender, Dr. Bill Siler,
Dr. George Babich and Dr. Clyde Slocum; and Genesee Valley Rotary Club
(especially Mrs. Lou MacGready).

Universities. University of Michigan—F lint faculty Dr. Barry Franklin, Dr.

 

Charles B. Thomas, Dr. Ron Silverman, and Dr. Rich F ortner; Central Michigan

V

 

 

 

l'niversity fan
North Central
it llilliam R2
gggesttons. W
02-6. and adrisr
reared me to
: the months ‘

..' L.‘.". .‘ .

inends
lane Wallace.

liarlo’in. Dr S
Gent llhittem
him Anne H0
loll on bro

and their famili

University faculty committee member Dr. Larry Smiley for his knowledge about
North Central Association; Michigan State University faculty committee members
Dr. William Rainey, Dr. Steve Kaagan, and Dr. Phil Cusick for their guidance and
suggestions, which turned the proposal and final dissertation into an even better

one and advisor Dr.Maenette Benham, whose positive outlook and attitude

inspired me to forge ahead, even though the revision stack grew taller by the foot
as the months went by, and whose high energy level and even higher expectations

rightfufly but affectionately earned her the nickname of the General.

Friends and family. Friends Barbara Sawyer-Koch, Sharman Moore,
Laura Wallace, Dr. Sheldon Safer, Dr. Maria Shelton, Dr. Nikki Armato, Lynn

Franklin, Dr. Sue Stephens, Bev and Kelly Shaw, Dr. Bob Docking, Betty and
Gerry Whittemore, Bob Derusha, Dr. Steve Collins, Darlene Dean, Rich Albrecht,

Mary Anne Holloway (the best secretary and friend one could hope to have), and

family of 4 brothers, 3 sisters, mother and father, and daughters Dacia and Jayna

and their families.

vi

 

 

 

 

llSl 0F TAB

llSl 0F FlGl
[Egret
I
II.
III, l
l
l

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ................................................. xi
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................. xii
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW .......................... 1
Introduction .............................................. 1
Purpose of the Study ....................................... 3
Significance of the Study .................................... 4
Background .............................................. 5
The Michigan Landscape .................................. 5
The Principal's Role in School Improvement .................... 8
The North Central Association .............................. 9
Impact ofNCA Accreditation on Principals' Decision Making ...... 14
Conceptual Framework .................................... 16
Research Question ........................................ 21
Overview ............................................... 22
H. SHIFTS IN EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP OVER
TIME: A LITERATURE REVIEW ........................... 24
Introduction ............................................ 24
Historical Perspectives of Leadership .......................... 27
Leadership Prior to 1950 ................................. 27
Leadership in the Mid-Twentieth Century .................... 28
Leadership in the Late Twentieth Century ..................... 30
Decision Making ....................................... 65
Summary ............................................... 67
III. METHODOLOGY ........................................ 73
Introduction ............................................. 73
Design and Criteria ........................................ 74
Data Collection and Analysis ................................ 75
vii

 

 

 

Data Sources .......................................... 78
Data Analysis .......................................... 82
Ethical Considerations ................................... 87
Written Presentation ..................................... 87
Limitations .............................................. 88
WOMEN IN THE GARDEN ................................ 92
Introduction ............................................. 92
The Garden: Blooming Where They Are Planted ................. 94
Ernestine : Madam Galem Trumpet Vine ....................... 97
The Woman ........................................... 97
The School Setting ..................................... 98
Leadership ........................................... 100
Decision Making: Trimming the Vine With Research ........... 102
Team Decision Making .................................. 105
The Extent to Which Ernestine Thinks About and
Enacts Team Decision Making .......................... 1 15
Bobbie: Granny Smith Apple Tree ........................... 118
The Woman .......................................... 118
The School Setting ..................................... 119
Leadership: A Polished Apple ............................ 121
Decision Making/Team Decision Making: Never
the Twain Shall Separate .............................. 122
The Extent to which Bobbie Thinks About and Enacts
Team Decision Making ............................... 134
Cindy: Siberian Iris ....................................... 135
The Woman .......................................... 135
The School Setting ..................................... 136
Leadership: A Supportive Backdrop ....................... 137
Decision Making/Team Decision Making: Multi-Purposeful ...... 140
The Extent to Which Cindy Thinks About
and Enacts Team Decision Making ...................... 151
Debbie: Gaiety Ajuga (Bugleweed) .......................... 153
The Woman .......................................... 153
The School Setting ..................................... 155
Leadership: No Weed Lefi Unturned ....................... 157
Decision Making/Team Decision Making: Ground Cover ........ 159
The Extent to Which Debbie Thinks About and Enacts
Team Decision Making ............................... 170
Nancy: White Oak ....................................... 171
The Woman .......................................... 171
The School Setting ..................................... 172
Leadership Role: As Strong as the Oak ..................... 174
Decision-Making Model: Stand Alone ...................... 173

viii

 

 

 

Team Decision-Making Model: Empowerment ................ 17 9
The Extent to Which Nancy Thinks About and Enacts
Team Decision Making ................................ 188
Rita: English Ivy ........................................ 190
The Woman .......................................... 190
The School Setting ..................................... 191
Leadership: Undying on the Vine .......................... 193
Parents in School: Fungus on the Vine ...................... 196
Decision Making: Site-Based, District Mandated .............. 198
Decision Making/Team Decision Making: Intertwined on
on the Vine ......................................... 200
The Extent to Which Rita Thinks About and Enacts
Team Decision Making ............................... 204
A GARDENER ......................................... 207
Introduction ............................................ 207
Principals' Thoughts About Decision Making/Team Decision Making . 211
Models as Tools for Thinking About Decision Making .......... 211
Principals' Thoughts About Team Decision-Making ............ 213
Team Decision Makers: Change Agents in Practice ............. 217
Strategies of Systems Thinking in Decision Making/Team
Decision-Making Practices ............................. 217
Major Themes in Team Decision Making ...................... 223
Themes That Enhance: Environment, Parents, Community,
Parameters, Leadership ................................ 226

Themes That Internally Constrain: Time, Environment, Community,
Staff Changes, Parameters, Parents, School Day Structure,
Budget ........................................... 227
Themes That Externally Constrain: Time, District Policies,
Environment, Parents, Community, Leadership, Structure

of Day, Budget ..................................... 229
How Principals Think About and Practice Team Decision Making . . . 231
Cloudy Systems-Thinking Lenses in Team Decision Making ..... 231
Changes in Practice ..................................... 232
Barriers to Change .................................... 233
Implications ........................................... 235
Implications for NCA .................................. 237
Implications for the Leadership Literature .................. 238
Conclusion ............................................ 239
The Five Disciplines .................................. 240
External Support/Barriers ............................... 241
Grapple With Power and Authority ........................ 241
Reflection in Action ................................... 243
Final Comment ...................................... 243

 

 

 

 

APPBDICE

.t L'CRI]
Guide.

8 Princit
Letter

C NCA .1
Accrec

llSl 0F REF

APPENDICES
A. UCRII-IS Approval Letter, Interview Guide, Focus Group Interview

Guide, Focus Group Questions ................................... 246
B. Principal Letter of Request, Principal Letter of Consent, Staff Member

Letter of Request, Staff Member Letter of Consent .................... 255
C. NCA Annual Report Sample Form, NCA Report for Outcomes

Accreditation Schools .......................................... 260
LIST OF REFERENCES ............................................. 277

x

 

 

 

 

Major
Chara:
Princii
Sysren

Major

LIST OF TABLES

Major Authors and Systems Thinking Disciplines ...................... 69 l

 

Characteristics of Principals in This Study ............................ 96

Principals' Thoughts About Team Decision Making and Systems Thinking . . . 212

 

Systems Strategies in Principals’ Practice of Team Decision Making ...... 218
Major Themes in Principals’ Decision/Team Decision Making ........... 224
xi

Systerr
Systerr
Emesti
Emesti
Bobbie
Cindy‘s
Debbie
Nanci";
Nancy!

Rita’s I

10.

LIST OF FIGURES

Systems Thinking Conceptual Model ................................ 19
Systems Thinking Conceptual Model With Identified Tensions ............ 20
Emestine's Decision-Making Model ................................ 103
Emestine's Team Decision-Making Model ........................... 104
Bobbie's Decision/Team Decision-Making Model ..................... 123
Cindy's Decision/Team Decision-Making Model ....................... 141
Debbie's Decision/Team Decision-Making Model ..................... 160
Nancy's Decision-Making Model .................................. 175
Nancy's Team Decision-Making Model ............................. 176
Rita’s Decision/Team Decision-Making Model ....................... 195

xii

 

 

\r

 

This c
arched in N
the goal selec
utcStigate to
and to what e
principal with
resources and
decision maki
recommendat
10 describe th.
0” the role of
leSOUices 01 t

organization.

and need SUpp

Conve

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
Introduction

This dissertation is a study of female elementary principals in Michigan who are
involved in North Central Association (NCA) accreditation and who recently completed
the goal selection process in their schools. My goal in conducting this study was to
investigate to what extent principals think about their practice of team decision making
and to what extent they conduct the decision-making process. As a practicing elementary
principal with questions about the process of team decision making, I searched for
resources and materials which might help guide a principal through the process of
decision making with staff on goal selection under the constraints of state mandates and
recommendations by the accrediting organization. Little was found. A manual prepared
to describe the complete process of NCA outcomes accreditation includes one paragraph
on the role of the principal. The Michigan Department of Education provides no
resources or training for principals on team decision making, nor does the accrediting
organization. This lack of guidance has become a serious concern for principals who want
and need support in their leadership role in team decision making.

Conversations with elementary principals who had completed the goal selection
process revealed an uncertainty with their roles. Principals, whether recently graduated

l

 

 

it‘ll an ammo“
gm they shou
iecisiorr making ii
In the rec:

121' can out the
2e aimed this
fission making l
: as regard beg
raring is as'ailat
should do it the:

In additic

nesh well with p

protide for team

recommended by

articulation, thre

has always been

lmdpal from It

Mm
Some p

do it because th

“homes for th

WWMM

BMMMr

2

with an education leadership degree or with years of experience, seem to have little grasp
of what they should do in the decision-making process. Training for principals in team
decision making is nonexistent.

In the recent past, principals had the power to make the decisions for their schools
and carry out the policies of their districts, but social changes and school reform efforts
have affected this authority. As teacher empowerment became more prevalent and
decision making began to involve more of the stakeholders, the principal's responsibilities
in this regard began to shift. Since this shift tends to be loosely defined at best, and no
training is available, principals are often uncertain of what they should do and how they
should do it when it comes to making decisions for the school.

In addition, the hierarchical, bureaucratic organization of most schools does not
mesh well with participative management tenets. Bureaucracies as systems fail to value or
provide for team decision making or consensus, yet this style of reaching decisions is
recommended by state mandates. Within the context of all of this uncertainty and lack of
articulation, three types of decision-making practices seem to have emerged: business as it
has always been with the principal maintaining all of the power, complete removal of the
principal from the decision-making process, or team decision making facilitated by the
principal.

Some principals who make solo decisions justify the practice by claiming that they
do it because the staff is too busy to be involved in all of the decision making on goals and
outcomes for the school. Others simply do not want to change from the traditional roles
they have held for years; they do not want to share their power with teachers (Conley &

Bacharach, 1990). Other principals, because of the myriad duties a principal must handle,

 

 

 

resistance to ch
elation-making
decisions Still
stakeholders in1
caticipative de

The que

apron-nae tecl

Stent to have b.
research on the

makir1g lltrougl

The pu,
team decision r
Specifically, in 1
accreditation p;
Plincipa|s COuh
mOdel C011] d be

3

resistance to change, and/or lack of training, have abandoned the responsibility of team
decision-making altogether and allow their school improvement teams to make all of the
decisions. Still other principals recognize the value of having the staff and other
stakeholders involved in the school improvement process and attempt to incorporate
participative decision-making.

The question is, if principals use team decision making, how have they learned the
appropriate techniques? The findings of this study indicate there are few similarities in this
regard that elementary principals share, because no models have been presented to them
either through graduate courses, through the Department of Education, or through the
NCA staff development process. Any team decision-making methods that principals use
seem to have been gleaned either from district inservice presentations or from professional
research on the subject, then developed as the individual principal enacted team decision

making through trial and error.
Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to determine to what extent principals think about
team decision making and how they implement the team decision-making process,
specifically, in the selection of goals for school improvement within the NCA
accreditation process. Through this study I hoped to find a model that elementary
principals could use to develop their leadership roles in team decision making. Such a
model could be helpful to NCA and the Department of Education in providing the

guidance needed to carry out mandates. School districts and central office administrators

 

 

 

eight also find 2
gmMCfldflllOl

The rese
9313 Leithu'oo
an does not c
:eoreical fram-
itgarizational t
19321 contributr
as or her decisi
research or‘femz
implement team
to the practicing

Wants to learn h

The NC.
Present to pn'nc
With the team d1
Presentations, 0
SCllool improvei
llfllillng in teams

decision making

pllflCipalsl Unit

4

might also find a model of effective team decision making helpfiil in following the
recommendations of the NCA and the guidelines of state mandates.

The research offered bynoted authors in educational leadership (e. g., Sergiovanni,
1993; Leithwood, 1978; Bolman, 1991; Rost, 1991) describes what team decision making
is but does not describe how to implement team decision making. In other words,
theoretical frameworks are presented, but guidelines for application are not.
Organizational theorists (e.g., Senge, 1990; Ogawa, 1993; O‘Toole, 1995; Wheatley,
1992) contribute more in prescriptives which support what a principal needs to do to shift
his or her decision-making practices successfully. The present study, based on case study
research of female elementary principals to determine to what extent they think about and
implement team decision making in connection with systems thinking. This is significant
to the practicing principal who, recognizing the importance of team decision making,

wants to learn how to develop the appropriate skills.
Significance of the Study

The NCA may see this research as important in designing training programs to
present to principals or for visiting team chairs to offer to principals who are struggling
with the team decision-making process. Indeed, seminars, workshops, video
presentations, or printed text outlining the process would be useful to all key players in
school improvement planning and implementation. Many principals have not had formal
training in teamwork, collaboration or facilitation skills. These findings offer a model of
decision making that may assist both principals new to the profession and veteran

Principals. University undergraduate and graduate education courses may consider

 

 

 

 

incorporating ‘3

changes in the '

 

Rapidly
null} since 1
ignored This r
educators in a r
State of Michig
reiomt prompt:
to 35 This it
financial Suppo
prescribed addi
aditrstments.

One as;
rePorts which
are ”‘1”le to
Accreditation p
to a list of ques

the ll'flchjgan E

schools involve

5

incorporating this model into their curriculum in order to better prepare their students for

changes in the world of education.
Background

The Michigan Landscape
Rapidly changing mandates have affected public schools in Michigan almost
annually since 1990. These mandates, in theform of four separate public acts, cannot be
ignored. This constant shifting of requirements by the state Department of Education has
educators in a quandary because compliance is tied to the per pupil allotment that the
State of Michigan awards to schools. In 1990, partly in reSponse to new waves of school
reform prompted by the Nation at Risk report (1983), Michigan legislators passed Public
Act 25. This measure held schools accountable to prescribed indices to qualify for '
financial support from the state government. In 1993, Public Act 335 and Public Act 339
rescribed additional requirements, and in 1995, Public Act 289 created fiirther
djustments.
One aspect of compliance with Public Act 25 is that schools must submit annual
eports which include their accreditation status. Public schools in the State of Michigan
are required to be accredited by the state Department of Education's Michigan
Accreditation Program (MAP). To qualify for MAP accreditation, a school must respond
0 a list of questions and attain certain scores on state assessment tests for students, called
e Michigan Education Assessment Program (MEAP), over a three-year period. For

chools involved in the NCA, a voluntary accreditation organization, responding to the

 

 

 

 

 

MAP question
accrediting pro

1n addit
along list of ti
schools of choi
allow diversity
shoots are doi
demoEmphics.
Muse of tigh
accolilpanieti b
Mpg farmn
fora'ard into 1h
“‘Orld is discov
iItvolvement an
“misc, educ
outmoded and

Not on]
(it part ate to
Changing- Tear
indecisiol, map
and have deVela
maze of Chang e

to underseand t

6

MAP questions is not difficult, since there is some degree of reciprocity between the two
accrediting programs.

In addition to meeting the requirements of these mandates, the public schools face
a long list of challenges from both the public policy arena and the broader environment:
schools of choice; the voucher system; teacher empowerment; waivers of contracts to
allow diversity in school policy and implementatiOn; public unease regarding the job public
schools are doing to prepare students for tomorrow's world of work; changing
demographics, family structures and values; programs and directives from central office
because of tightened budgets; union pressures; the urgency to change which is
accompanied by too many new approaches to education; and changes in economic forces
affecting families and schools. With our macro economic system in transition, thrusting
forward into the information age and competing in the global marketplace, the business
world is discovering that traditional hierarchical leadership is no longer effective. Worker
involvement and team efforts are but a few of the changes linked to a business's success.
Likewise, educators have learned that the old "factory model" of educating students is
outmoded and ineffective.

Not only are school structures changing in curriculum design and implementation
(in part due to state mandates and accreditation guidelines), but the position of teachers is
changing. Teachers need to learn how to become team players and understand their role
in decision making. Administrators, unless they have been able to learn how to collaborate
and have developed skills as facilitators, find it difficult to lead their schools through the
maze of changed roles and requirements. Principals often do not have the knowledge base

to understand the changes in the socioeconomic environment and how these changes

 

 

 

 

 

afiett the condi
rate in school it
rprorement it
at extensive r
consensual deci
Sate of .\lichi g
teachers in adap
hart principals
principals have

As men
it the state De
W) This pro
is involved in tl
recOmmends th

Because
[fairing 01 man
iImplementing tl
no”Willi Orgar
and Processes f
majm dlfieienc
meWarship is r

are Offered to s

7

affect the conditions necessary for success in our schools. The State of Michigan sees its
role in school reform as regulatory. Mandates require buildings to have school
improvement teams, with representatives from school, community and parent factions and
that extensive minutes of all team meetings be kept. These mandates also recommend a

consensual decision-making process at the building level. Unfortunately, however, the

 

State of Michigan offers no training or staff deveIOpment programs to assist principals and
teachers in adapting effectively to this decision-making style. No research is available on
how principals now view their roles as decision makers or on the changes, if any, which

principals have made in their decision-making practices.

 

As mentioned above, public schools in the State of Michigan presently are required

by the state Department of Education to be accredited by the state-sponsored program,

 

MAP. This program requires schools to select goals and implement them, specifying who
is involved in the process and how it is conducted. Further, the State of Michigan
recommends that consensus be used as the model of decision making.

Because of this regulation and the corresponding fact that no staff development

r training or materials are offered by the state to the schools to assist in understanding and

 

. implementing the process, a number of schools have turned to accreditation by the NCA, a

 

r nonprofit organization. For the most part, MAPand the NCA require similar standards

 

and processes for school improvement. There are, however, important differences. One
major difference is that MAP is regulatory and commands compliance and NCA
: membership is voluntary. Another major difference is that staff development Opportunities

* are offered to schools by the NCA; staff development from the State of Michigan is

 

 

paling. Furth-
slits regular 1F

\lhethc
ad 289 of Mi
school must se
achievement, 1
taint step urhi
pears HOW tit
principals defrr

selection decisi

The rol
began to Chang
loundthemselt
liptesematives
'nempling to c
on habits die i
new Process pr
Practice €0nser
th

em in") Pract

W0“ Proces

' _'——_— JR -
-VM ,‘ -. _ ~ ‘m-

8
lacking. Further, the NCA peer review process is stable, while MAP's "reporting" style
shifts regularly. ’
Whether a school is responding to the requirements of Public Acts 25, 33 5, 339,
and 289 of Michigan or is abiding by the guidelines of another accreditation process, the

school must select target area goals they believe will move their school forward in student

 

achievement. Setting goals to move the school forward in its improvement efforts is a
major step which creates a powerful impact on the school for at least the next three to five

years. How this goal-selection process occurs and who is involved gives us a view of how

 

principals define their decision-making roles and their level of involvement in the goal

selection decision process.

The Principal's Role in School Improvement

 

, The role of the principal as the decision maker in the school improvement arena
r
began to change with the implementation of Public Acts 25, 335, 339 and 289. Principals

 

r found themselves working with groups of people, including parent and community

 

representatives (and mandatory student representation at the secondary level) and

 

attempting to create consensus on the selection of goals and strategies for improvement.

 

Old habits die hard. For those who had acted for years in traditional leadership roles, the
new process proved difficult. Without training other than a brief description of how to
r practice consensus, even the most willing found understanding the concepts and putting

them into practice nearly impossible. Teachers were not accustomed to being part of the

~ decision process, nor were parents and community members, who asked additional

 

 

questions regal
$311th do to i

Articles
movement it
guerion thems
principals are r

situations in sc

consisung of 1
Depmment of
could utilize to
Outcomes Acc
mgr am requi;
School accredit
selection and j;
differences bet
Process are pet
Wiles and i

Anothe
Transitimsl P1

chose" ‘0 Pilm

 

9
juestions regarding the educational process. Ultimately, many principals did not know
vhat, to do to incorporate these changes into their everyday professional lives.

Articles touting the benefits of teamwork and collaboration with staff on school
mprovement began to appear occasionally in education periodicals. Principals began to
[uestion themselves and others on their role as principal. One way to determine how
irincipals are redefining this process is to examine their involvement in decision-making

.ituations in school improvement.

the North Central Association
The NCA Commission on Schools, a voluntary nonprofit accreditation agency

:onsisting of 19 states in the midwestern United States, the Navajo Nation and the
Department of Defense Dependents Schools, has had several processes K-12 schools
:ould utilize to achieve accreditation status. The most common one today is the
utcomes Accreditation (0A) process, which closely parallels the school improvement
rogram required by Public Act 25 of the State of Michigan. Although the standards for
chool accreditation are specific, school improvement team deveIOpment and goal
election and implementation vary considerably from school to school. The major
ifi‘erences between the NCA OA process and Public Act 25's school improvement
~rocess are peer evaluation and more stringent reporting of holistic target areas and goals,
trategies and interventions.

Another process in the pilot stage in several NCA member states is called

ransitions. Presently, 14 Michigan public schools, 8 of them elementary schools, have

 

nosen to pilot this process. The process is based on individual credentialing of students

‘.,. M‘ .-

 

 

 

aodallows fle
program is on
outcomes,
The .\’|
diswss says I
Standards for l
on Schools (N
otluation fun
members. Tht
SChools‘ progr
each school a;
By mo
Sill Outside c
“alloflfll attent
Cleflnition and
early on meml
llaodards defit
leap forWard,

facilities and a

Evaluuion in I

establishment

10

and allows flexibility to address the needs of all students. The emphasis of the Transitions
program is on meeting individual needs, just as the 0A process focuses on student
outcomes.

The NCA was born out of a group of educators who began meeting in 1895 to
discuss ways to better articulate the transition from high school to college. It developed
standards for high schools. In 1904, the accreditation flinction of the NCA Commission
on Schools (NCA-COS) came into existence with 157 member schools and in 1905 the
evaluation fimction became operational. In 1997, more than 8,000 schools are listed as
members. The evaluation process includes 5 to 7 year cycles of activities comparing
schools’ programs with their success within the context of the philosophy and objectives of
each school and its community (Shaw, 1990).

By most standards, K-12 accreditation is still very young--only about 70 years old.
Still, outside of postsecondary education, accreditation has become the subject of serious
national attention in just the past 15 years. Accreditation began because of a problem of
definition and articulation between high schools and colleges. The NCA-COS established
early on membership requirements for schools. These requirements generally set minimum
standards defined in quantitative terms. In 1929 institutional accreditation made a major
leap forward, with NCA leading the way. Standards were revised to focus on judging the
facilities and activities of an institution in terms of the purposes it was designed to serve.
Evaluation in terms of an institution's stated purpose, rather than by arbitrary standards,
was adopted by the NCA and gradually by other associations. This step led to the

establishment of the self-study process (Young, 1993).

 

 

In the
loutcomes). rt
Terms such a:
leaning.“ and
timed at pu
educational pl
renewed impc
251d dft'elopet
fmshg too t
hallo:

ln resl
executive secs
Ills“: new 0 A e
will Student
be taught in a
target goals a.
(Colin, 1993)
piece“, Whlc
the institution
sytem today.
(Crossen, 198

The Ill

oleplsodic fe'

 

11 .
In the 19705 and 1980s, the focus in evaluation shifted from process to product

(outcomes), reflecting the changing emphasis on school improvement (Young, 1993).

Terms such as "effective schools, " "exemplary schools, successfiil schools, mastery
leaning," and "outcomes-based education“ came out of responses to the criticism being
directed at public schools during this period. Bloom and others studied outcomes as an .
educational phenomenon, and the effective schools research in the 19905 gave the concept
renewed importance. Mastery learning and outcomes-based education filither influenced
and developed the outcomes concept (Shaw, 1990). Accreditation came to be viewed as
focusing too exclusively on quantifiable resources and not paying sufficient attention to
quality.

In response to the cry for school improvement in the 19703, Dr. John Vaughn,
executive secretary of NCA-COS, presented a 7-point plan which became the nucleus of
the new 0A evaluation process. Fundamental assumptions in the OA process are that
every student has the potential for successfiil learning, and every student has the right to
)e taught in a manner that makes learning possible. The process focused attention on
arget goals and organizational process as concomitants rather than ends in themselves
fCohn, 1993). In 1985, the NCA-COS approved an outcomes-oriented accreditation
>I'OCCSS, which focuses on student success and quality-with-equity attention to the goals of
he institution. This OA process is the most widely chosen form of evaluation in the NCA
ystem today. Attention to goals as the primary norm has continued to the present
Crossen, 1987).

The new process offered a different approach to school improvement. The notion

fepisodic reviews was gone. Instead of one or more school staff responsible for

 

 

 

undertaking n
l'srally, thec
Community mi
in slIich ever)
prodded an as
owed then i
utolsement b
POllCS l Coho

The 0
fipossible on
solid assessmt
intenemiom i
result in imprc
MIME}! Spec
Values lflfluem
1313le Objec
film decisiom
C(’"lmissitm 0

At the
is noi Only the
be the manner
Ofteachers to

one With} e a

12

ndertaking periodic self-studies, a school improvement steering committee was formed.
'sually, the committee consisted of teachers and other stakeholders. The entire faculty,
ammunity members, parents and students participated. A school mission was developed
which everyone had a voice. The mission statement, along with school profile data,
“ovided an axis around which the target area, goals and strategies, and interventions were
eated, then implemented and evaluated. Policy decisions became invested. with this
olvement by teachers, who held the knowledge and were expected to carry out the

licy (Cohn, 1993).

' The DA process is said to be faculty-driven and data-driven. Its success is viewed
possible only when faculty members own the process and make the decisions, based on
lid assessment data. The continual monitoring of causal links assures that changes in
ervention, instruction, curricula or organization are not accepted unless those changes
Lult in improvements in student performance and achievement (Armstrong, 1994).
:hough specific standards are required and the process is data-driven, participants'
ues influence the process and product (Meadows, 1987). However, evaluation is
:ically objective in nature. Panels of reviewers from other NCA-affiliated states make
11 decisions on the status of a school's accreditation at the NCA's annual meeting of the
mmission on Schools.

At the heart of the OA process is the assumption that bottom-up decision making

lot only the most powerful means of achieving school improvement but that it may also

 

he manner in which authentic and lasting improvement can be made. The willingness
eachers to participate is a key factor. In this regard, a study of a K-8 district showed

variable as statistically significant: the relationship between the teachers and their

 

 

 

principal. If n
sipportis-e. th
1992)

Conce
along ssith otl
Rescued atte
NCA-COS or.
administrators
together to m
1993)

Armst
10 release so”
ltssarch has C
IOll‘dOVm dec
Will it) a bolt
Personnel f0].
internships 0r
Protessors to
Programs; ant
eXpefience,

0Vera
Education an

ill lhe NCA a;

13
. principal. If teachers perceived that their principal was open, collaborative, facilitating and
. supportive, they were more willing to participate in the decision-making process (Smylie,

= 1992)
Concepts like effective schools, curriculum alignment and site-based management,
: along with other school reform efforts, have moved to the forefront of education.
Renewed attention is being paid to what schools are like and how well students learn. The
. NCA-COS maintains that school improvement can occur only when teachers,
administrators, school board members, parents and citizens in local communities work
together to make it happen (Cross, 1987). Recent research supports this belief (Little,
1993).

Armstrong (1993) urged the NCA to use its influence to encourage administrators
to release some of their authority to other members of the school community. His
research has demonstrated that most of the failures in the OA effort have been the result of
top-down decisions. Thus, Armstrong concluded that tOp-down management styles must
yield to a bottom-up method of addressing issues. To help prepare fixture school
personnel for this change, he suggested that the NCA encourage graduate student
internships or assistantships in NCA programs; work with university officials and
professors to merge NCA programs into university missions and graduate education
programs; and assist in expanding university principal preparation programs through field
experience.

Overall, a partnership of the state NCA, the K-12 schools, the state Department of
Education and the institutions of highereducation would aid in developing improvements

~ the NCA and ensure more knowledgeable leadership in the school improvement

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

process, whi
o'elldesigne
udergradua
makers De;
policies that

pregams to

process for;
dcs'elopmen‘
accreditatior
Principals at
One of three
and WW ch
hand Ol’er a1
team buildin‘
making Re:
little improp.
Skills 10 gUid
SUCCesg of“

Am

making 01' f0

14

rocess, which should lead to improved student achievement. Outcomes might include
rell-designed graduate coursework that reflects changes in leadership requirements and
ndergraduate coursework that prepares fiiture teachers to be knowledgeable decision-
.akers. Departments of education and other accrediting agencies also need to develop
)licies that reflect the best practices in school improvement, with staff development

'ograms for support.

tpact of NCA Accreditation on Principals' Decision Making
The NCA must take all stakeholders into consideration in the decision-making

ocess for accreditation. Although the NCA is known for its wide array of staff
velopment materials, workshops on the principal's role in leading a school in NCA
:reditation efforts are minimal. Informal observation and discussions have indicated that
ncipals are uncertain of their role in the accreditation process, and they tend to make
3 of three choices. Some see collaborative decision making as a threat to their power
I resist change. Others know they need to give teachers a voice in the process, so they
rd over all the decisions and sit back. Finally, some principals have developed skills in
n building, collaboration and facilitation, and lead effective, participative decision
ring. Research shows little improvement in a school‘s goals without staff input and
3 improvement if the leader does not help guide the process. Giving principals the
s to guide their staff in the decision-making process should increase the possibility of
:ess of school improvement plans.

As mentioned above, principals have little preparation in participative decision

Eng or for their role in the process. Schools of education sorely lack course offerings

 

 

 

 

 

which reflect I
require of sch
the schools r
on faculty or
understand lht
the necessary

Some
and voluntary
modates are ‘
rodeo the man
i”lllltmenred r
ifa new §0\'er
lStoopS‘ 19%
“lb Well-esta
accredited [hp
Proticienr in II
decision makir
fineElected ar
added to a Ch:
and “HSUCCess
reSitecripe of I
change" (Leitl

assist in a char

15

‘ch reflect the changing roles of leaders in today's society and what state mandates

uire of school leaders. Principals who are used to being the power-wielding force in

: schools may find themselves struggling with the new decision-making requirements or
:h faculty demands for more voice in school improvement decisions. Principals who
lerstand the need for change may not be able to find the resources they need to develop
necessary skills.

Some state policymakers recognize a direct connection between state mandates
voluntary accreditation processes and allow reciprocity in most areas. Typically, new
idates are brought in by new governors. A year is needed to design a protocol to
ect the mandate and another year to communicate and staff it. The mandate is
lemented in the third year and adjustments and changes begin. In the fourth year, even
new governor is not elected, other changes occur, creating instability and uncertainty
pops, 1996). Cycles for accreditation by voluntary agencies are five to seven years,
twell-established procedures. However, those schools that choose not to become
edited through a voluntary organization often do not have any way to become

cient in the changes brought by staff empowerment and involvement in school
sion making. Research-based evidence demonstrates that the change process has been
glected area in policy implementation (Hord, 1992). Even when mandated policy is

,:d to a change, little change actually finds its way into schools. Studies of successful

 

unsuccessful change efforts show that the key factor is "the presence or absence

 

ective of persons who assist others in the adoption and implementation of plans for
ge" (Leithwood, 1994, p. 95). Specifically, Leithwood advocates these six actions to

tin a change process:

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘ J. u.) t-.) _~—-
‘1 .

O‘x

Weiss
We {1.
panic
only '
fact. 1
burea
0W] (
\lher

Changed the s

IrallSliOrrnaric

This 5
team decisim
lllis task, on t
f0“Wine dis.

1 .
Ogawa, [993;
Ihjnklng is he

Wholeness an

 

16

Create an atmosphere and culture for change.
Develop and communicate the vision plan.
Provide resources.

Provide training and development.

Monitor and check progress.

Continue to give assistance (p. 96).

mwewww

Weiss (cited in Blase, 1994) reported:

We now know that attempts to restructure schools such as site-based management,
participative decision making and restructuring have for the most part resulted in
only "partial" development of successful democratic structures and processes. In
fact, the idea of school-level decision making has been constrained not only by
bureaucracy, tradition and school context, but also by administrators' and teachers'
own discomfort with radically different roles. (p. 154)

When one considers how drastically changes in the decision-making process have

urged the school principal's role, it is understandable that, to be successful,

rtsformation this significant requires a specific plan.
Conceptual Framework

This study explores the thinking of female elementary principals as it relates to
1
hr decision making at the goal—setting stage of NCA accreditation. Before undertaking
task, an examination was made of the literature on leadership, which exposed the
l wing disciplines and their definitions common to the theories of major thinkers:
i 1. Systems thinking (Senge, 1990; O'Toole, 1995; Sergiovanni, 1993;
swa, 1993; Patterson, 1993; Leithwood, 1978; Rost, 1991; Bolman, 1991). Systems

, 'ng is how learning organizations view the world. Thinking is not linear; circular and

aleness are key words to describe systems thinking.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

993.0gawa
Sergios'anni. 1
gm creati
vision and foc

3 .\il
than 1993
Sergiot'anni. 1
includes retler

t Sh
data 1993
he "that" of

5. Te
Ogawa, 1993
learning inclu.
cOllllict is han

Forth
setting, 1 cm
through their
Ptome togeth

technl‘llles an

are:

17

2. Personal mastery (Senge,1990; O'Toole, 1995; Katzenbach & Smith,
, 93; Ogawa, 1993; Patterson, 1993; Leithwood, 1978; Rost, 1991; Bolman, 1991;
rgiovanni, 1993). Personal mastery is a personal motivation which generates and
rtains creative tension. A person sees reality objectively, develops patience, deepens the

ion and focuses the energy on the vision.

 

3. Mental models (Senge, 1990; O'Toole, 1995; Katzenbach & Smith, 1993;

gawa, 1993; Patterson, 1993; Leithwood, I978; Rost, 1991; Bolman, 1991;

 

'giovanni, 1993). Forming mental models is how we understand and take action; it

 

pudes reflection and influence.

 

4. Shared vision (Senge, 1990; O'Toole, 1995; Katzenbach & Smith, 1993;

 

:awa, 1993; Patterson, 1993; Bolman, 1991). Shared vision is the group commitment,
"what" of the organization.

5. Team learning (Senge, 1990; O'Toole, 1995; Katzenbach & Smith, 1993;
awa, 1993; Patterson, 1993; Leithwood, 1978; Rost, 1991; Bolman, 1991). Team
hing includes insightfiil thinking, coordination, action, dialogue, discussion; how
flict is handled.

For the purpose of understanding how principals make team decisions in goal-

.ng, I examined principals' practice through the disciplines of systems thinking, and

 

ugh their use of the 12 techniques Senge (1994) believes effective leaders use to bring

. Dle together and enable them to mobilize their efforts. These team leadership

niques are also discussed in research by Katzenbach and Smith (1993). The techniques

 

 

I b’.’"‘

\I‘

00%)?"
\o

10

l l

12
A cor
disciplines or
the discipline
practices in t
think about a
decision mal
A mc

progressed.
making proc
most of the p
imtenant tr
how the ptin
tensions and
These tensio

for Stall (1th

Planning tim

h—
I

10.
11.
12.

>09°>lpxyrgsmm

 

18

Focus on the real work.

Keep it simple.

Learn by doing.

Focus on the best.

Find out what brings the group together.
Timing is everything.

Design places where community can happen.
Find the people who share your passion.
Learn how to host good gatherings.
Acknowledge peoples' contributions.
Involve the whole person.

Celebrate.

A conceptual model in the form of five overlapping circles, representing the five

sciplines of systems thinking, was developed to illustrate team decision making, how

1e disciplines articulate, and how they are incorporated into or are missing from principal

ractices in team decision making. (See Figure 1.) This model helps reveal how principals

rink about and practice team decision making. I also identified tensions that affect team

ecision making in the elementary principalship.

A more detailed model (see Figure 2) evolved as interviews with the principals

rogressed. It became evident that tensions arose which greatly affected the team decision

 

aking process. As the talk continued, the various tensions became significant across
.ost of the principal interviews. Because of the roles they played, these tensions became

.iportant to identify and consider in the conceptual model. Common tensions specific to

7w the principal viewed and responded with the various disciplines were noted as internal

nsions and external tensions are concerns outside the control or view of the principal.

rese tensions were almost universal in all six schools. They included the budget (money

r staff development or off-site meetings), the structure of the school day (a common

inning time for teachers to meet), a sense of community (the school, parents, and others

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

19

 
  
  

   
  

Systems
Thinking
Team
Learning

0

‘v .

Shared
Vision

    
  

Mental
Models

{Ute 1. Systems Thinking Conceptual Model

 

 

 

20

External Tensions

      
   
 

 

  

 
 
 

 
   
 

to
. 4°
“3:. Internal Tenszons &‘
are of
‘3- Q; ‘5‘ .65
-¢ 9 °\'\"
<e re s
4 9?
b 0 ‘
r 0 6° \
’90 ,0 ‘3- \°\ no“? gt“
’4, 91’ '9 6t“
9 .‘o
d; $q\
d‘ 4o $
49 0/0 “k
0 ' . . o
’4»? 9’ Lear mng Thinking 090‘
~s
Q\
Shared Personal
Vtswn Mastery
Cot“ Mental 9’
e
0 0‘ Models ’3'
s 'W‘
C0 \Q’ L? 04"
0 0.17 9’
‘1 g: a,
J‘
Q"
S
s39
«
c
Q
-Q
g
5‘
o
b
a?
\.

re 2. Systems Thinking Conceptual Model With Identified Tensions

 

 

 

pulling togeth
non'ledgeabl
temp, time (1.-

L'airnng 116W r

The pt
:rhcipals thir
similarities an
aallng reflec
This study is t
improvement
decisions \s'er
implemented,
“ill among t

This 3
elementary SC

and imillemer

1- Tt

 

21

together), parents (in the role of joint decision makers), leadership (supportive and
:dgeable in team decision making), parameters (understanding and providing for
time (lack of it for effective team leadership), staff changes (input into changes,

; new members), and environment (space for meetings, a trusting atmosphere).

Research Question

The purpose of this study is to determine the extent to which female elementary
118 think about and implement team decision-making processes by examining the
ties and differences among six principals and to what extent their team decision
reflects the systems thinking concept of leadership in their thinking and practice.
tdy is not anexamination of goal selection, nor is it an examination of student
:ment as a result of decision making. I am not interested in determining what
13 were made, but to what extent team decision making is thought about and
anted, what model or process is used, and what similarities and differences, if any,
tong the six case studies.
This study addresses the research question: To what extent do particular female
ary school principals in the process of NCA accreditation goal-setting think about
lement team decision making within their school's environment?
To what extent do female elementary principals think about decision
making and team decision making?
a. What do decision making and team decision making mean?

b. What elements of systems thinking disciplines are missing?

 

 

 

lea)

This
lllelatllre 0
ll relates to
dtscn‘bes 1h

findings ant

making that

 

22

c. What elements other than the identified qualities of the discipline

model are being used?
2. To what extent do female elementary school principals enact team

decision making?

a. What factors enhance their practice?

b. What factors constrain their practice?

c. What changes have principals made in their practice at the goal-setting
stage of NCA accreditation to accommodate team decision making?

(1. What changes have principals made in the team decision-making
process from the first term of NCA-OA goal-setting to the second
term of that process? What caused those changes?

3. What are the implications for NCA and school leadership literature?
a. In what way will this study contribute to NCA and school leadership?
b. Who will benefit from the contributions?

c. How can these contributions reach its beneficiaries?

Overview

This dissertation is organized into 5 chapters. Chapter 2 contains a review of

are on leadership from early in the century to the present and on decision making as
:s to leaders in education, followed by a critique of the literature. Chapter 3

es the methodology used for the study. Next, Chapter 4 contains a summary of the
s and results of the study, which explores the use of and models for decision

that emerged from interviews with the principals and other sources. Conclusions

 

 

 

and implicati
farther resea

models derel

23

implications of the study are discussed in Chapter 5, along with suggestions for
her research. The appendix includes interview and focus group protocols, conceptual

lels deve10ped by the principals, and an example of the NCA report.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This
practiced tea
bodies of lite
and leadersh
leadership in
leadership re
helpful in prt
leadership w
exists as to s
Practiced. A
PelSpectives
c0lllpared to
assumotions
reVOlVes 2110]
th

eliterature

 

 

CHAPTER TWO

SHIFTS IN EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP OVER TIME:

A LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction

This study focused on female elementary principals and the extent to which they
:ticed team decision making in the goal-setting process of school improvement. Three
es of literature on leadership (leadership prior to the 195 Os, leadership in mid—century,
leadership in the late twentieth century) were examined to explore the history of
ership in general, the changing definitions of leadership through the years, and current
arship research, theories and discussion. This grouping by time period is artificial, yet
ill in presenting information in a concise and organized fashion. In addition,

:rship was studied chronologically in order to determine whether or not a pattern

5 as to when leadership theories were introduced and when these theories began being
iiced. An obvious lag appears. Next, present-day concepts of leadership from the
tectives of educational researchers and organizational researchers are reviewed and
tared to determine similarities and differences. This part expands on the specific
options of the characteristics of leadership. Then, because the nature of the study

ves around team decision making, a particularly close look is taken at discussions in
:erature pertaining to this t0pic. A matrix showing the leading educational and

24

 

 

 

 

organization
indicate key
arationale 5

lead
meaning oft
and muddlet
school of lea
is A definit
researchable

It is
Course of th
Practitioners
three basic t
descnilltion l
directing Otl
Paradigm Of
par adlgm w.
The Vallle st
lOgic) Object
9°“Sidered l
pettple in all
descn'be leat

Slli)0rdinateE

25

anizational theorists and the major precepts presented in their work is displayed to
icate key similarities and differences. The chapter ends with a summary which includes
'ationale supported by the literature for the need and purpose of this study.

Leadership proves to be a somewhat elusive term; there is no consensus as to the
:aning of the word. Attempts to define leadership have been confusing, disorganized
l muddled. Moreover, the leadership literature since about 1910 has not generated a
tool of leadership, and there seems to be no common understanding of what leadership
A definition of leadership still has not emerged that is clear, concise, understandable,
earchable, practically relevant and persuasive.

It is clear, however, that the concept of leadership has changed radically over the
use of the century. Rost (1991) said that since about 1910, leadership scholars and
ctitioners have tried to develop a reality-based understanding of leadership. He lists
:e basic uses of the word: a description of someone who is "number one," a
cription of collective learners who are in office, and a description of one person
acting other people. These uses reflect the dominant characteristics of the industrial
1digm of leadership for the past century. The concept of leadership within this
tdigm was straightforward: good leadership was deemed to be good management.
value structure in which leadership was understood and practiced leaned toward
0, objectivity, rationality, individuality and detachment. Because those who were
sidered leaders were the managers, followers logically had to be the subordinate
)le in an organization. Indeed, starting in the 19303, the leadership literature began to
:ribe leaders as managers who direct others and are active and followers as

trdinates who are submissive and passive.

“ m3! ,_,_zu.v—_M o" n '

 

 

 

Post
are not equa
relationship
purpose” (a
is based on i
followers int
lay concepti
leaders are
done; leader
StIUCture or“
leadership, t
approaches ;
emPathetic \
into images

ln th
administrato
unllltrsity pp
include any ‘
suilablp reflg
Selglttvanni
psychl’logicr

values info”

26

Postindustrially, however, leaders are not equated with managers, and followers
are not equated with subordinates. Today, Rost (1991) says, "Leadership is an influence
relationship among leaders and followers who intend real changes that reflect their mutual
purpose" (p. 102). Rost believes leadership entails four essential elements: the relationship
is based on influence, leaders and followers are the pe0ple in the relationship, leaders and
followers intend real changes, and leaders and followers develOp mutual purposes. The
ay conception of leadership offered by Bolman and Deal (1991) is somewhat similar:
geaders are able to get others to do what they want, leaders motivate people to get things
lone; leaders provide a vision, and leadership is really facilitation (p. 421). The value
rtructure within leadership as practiced has changed as well, as this definition of
eadership, by Tichy (1990), suggests, "Leaders are individuals out to create new
pproaches and imagine new areas to explore, relate to peOple in more intuitive and
mpathetic ways, seek risk where opportunity and reward are high, and project new ideas
no images to excite peOple " (p. vii).

In the push for educational reform, the leadership approaches and practices of
dministrators are being increasingly scrutinized. Technical leadership, which most
niversity programs in educational leadership espoused for the past 30 years, does not
.clude any of the moral, ethical and value dimensions of leadership which would more
titably reflect the needs of today's schools (Murphy, 1993). Along the same line,
:rgiovanni (1992)) says that leadership has been viewed as behavior rather than action,
Lychological rather than spiritual, people rather than ideas. However, our attitudes and

hes inform our leadership practices, visions frame our views and others' views,

 

 

leadership 1

of leadershi

The
introduces 1
principles 0
presented a
into three e
of the centt

the late twe

Acc
OCCttrred in
aStrong cor
50h001 leadt
toward a m;
insll'llClltm ;
involved in
econompCs é

responsibilit

27

eadership belongs to everyone, and building learning communities is the appropriate goal

of leadership.
Historical Perspectives of Leadership

The review of the literature explores leadership within its different contexts,
itroduces the main contributors to the research of leadership, and describes the basic
rinciples of leadership and how these have been transferred into practice. This review is
resented according to Goodlad's (1978) division of the history of educational leadership
.to three eras. Thus, it is woven through three broad timelines: leadership from the turn
:‘the century to the mid-19503, the mid-century concept of leadership, and leadership in

e late twentieth century.

eadership Prior to 1950

According to Goodlad (1978), the first era in the history of educational leadership
curred in the years prior to 1950 when educational administrators were characterized by
strong concern for instructional management. In the early 19003 the conceptual focus of
1001 leadership began to moVe away from scholarship and educational philosophy
avard a management perspective. Starting in the 19303, principals focused on managing
truction and curriculum, but this slowly changed. In earlier schools, principals were
'olved in managing the peripheral areas of the cairriculum such as music, home
)IlOI'fllCS and vocational education, but as schools grew larger, management

ponsibility for these areas lessened. At the same time, management involvement in

IL

 

 

 

other areas

personnel, l

Leadership

The
19705 t Goo
managemen
1957. maggj
Within a Sht
numerous rt
of adoption
Chaftges no
Businesses 1
better prepa
Pllmary fum
and With the
EduCation a
the SChOOIs.

Alth.
Sthools unfr
results, COI
Programs w]

encolIraging

28

.rther areas of instruction and the curriculum increased but not as much as in areas such as

eersonnel, business matters or child services.

eadership in the Mid-Twentieth Century

The second era of educational leadership began in 1950 and continued through the

 

5703 (Goodlad, 1978). During this time, administrators were concerned with the

.anagement of non-instructional fimctions. However, following the launch of Sputnik I in

 

957, massive efforts were undertaken to improve mathematics and science education.

 

:ithin a short time, change became a primary objective for American schools and

merous reforms were introduced. Indeed, Fullan (1993) identified the 19605 as a period

 

“adoption of reform. However, such adoption hinged on funding; without it, educational

anges would not be initiated (Berman, Greenwood, McLaughlin, & Pincus, 1975).

 

rsinesses provided funding incentives to encourage innovative educational programs to
tter prepare the students for the world of work, but the federal government was the
mary fiinding source. Federal funding was the catalyst for many planned change efforts
1 with the funding came new laws and regulations. The Elementary and Secondary
acation Act of 1965 signals the beginning of the federal government's expanded role in
schools.

Although this period was marked by new program development and adoption,
ools unfortunately put new programs into effect with little planning and achieved few
rlts. Consequently, in the 19703 educators began to question the effects of many of the
grams which had been adOpted. The results of subsequent evaluation studies were not

)uraging. Inconsistencies in results between school settings were evident as well.

 

'llhar worl
diherent set

In tl
access in n
derelopmer
education 0
tithing forc

E
major contr
dininguis'ne
holistically,
Unit 0i Chan
"ability," to}
0l'erall stud
efifiCllVe SCl
psychOiOgic
Student 0U“
Correlated (
but effectiw
SQnSe, Opera
SChoOI, the E

The

w [,w—-- ~-.,:u( —IA ‘_—-.- A su- ' - fl.-m*—.W-d‘

29
’What worked well at one time and place may not work at all at another time or in a
lifferent setting, " concluded Berman, et al. (197 S, p. 5).

In the meantime, criticism of the public schools increased. Because of little
mccess in new program development and adoption due to poor design, planning or
levelopment, something significantly different was needed to pull American public
:ducation out from under severe scrutiny. The effective schools correlates became a
lriving force for change.

The effective schools movement. The effective schools movement made many
[rajor contributions to school improvement (Murphy, 1992). Four correlates
istinguished this movement: Educators emphasized equity, schools were viewed
olistically, an emphasis was placed on teaching and learning, and the school became the
nit of change. In the past, schools had sorted and selected students according to
tbility," which was, in general, thought to be represented by the Bell Curve for the
rerall student pOpulation, and education was not concerned with student outcomes. The
fective schools movement's aphorism of "All Students Can Learn" pushed aside this
ychological model of learning. Equity became a concern, and quality was judged by
tdent outcomes, not socioeconomic status. Historically, instruction had been loosely
related (what was taught in one class may not relate to what was taught in another),
effective schools were seen as tightly correlated in a structural, symbolic and cultural
36, operating more as a whole. As emphasis was placed on teaching and learning in the
ml, the school became the key unit of change.

The instructional leadership of the principal emerged as a pivotal factor in the

ass of the effective schools movement. Ron Edmonds ( l 979), a major contributor to

 

 

 

 

 

the effective 55h“
achievement and a
achievement. lie 1
about change tow:
indispensable and ‘
another researche
it change efforts a
to behave ditierent
out behatior and
demonsrrated. W01
ueu' emphasis on t

o'entuallt' led to t1

Goodlad ( 2

third era in Amerit
thepn'ncipal. His

early 19803, more 1
publicized 1983 re;
that was reminisce
enough positive of
education and edu

enough and gradu

 

30

effective schools movement, studied schools that were successful in improving student

ill

)1

.,a

evement and attempted to identify factors which had a direct influence on student

_fli

:evement. He found that the leadership of the principal was a major factor in bringing

= t change toward effective schools. In fact, Edmonds concluded that one of the most
pensable and tangible characteristics of an effective school was a strong leader.

ather researcher (Blase, 1989) explored the reasons for the importance of the principal
ange efforts and concluded that differences in the principal's behavior caused teachers
have differently. Consequently, the study suggested that principals reflect on their

behavior and move toward a more open style of leadership, which, the study

onstrated, would allow a significant, positive difference in teachers' interaction. This
emphasis on the principal as a key factor in bringing about effective school change

ttually led to the term "instructional leader" to describe the principal.

lership in the Late Twentieth Century
Goodlad ( 1978) predicted that with the push for reform in public education, the

. era in American schools would also include a return to instructional management by
trincipal. His prediction proved to be at least partly correct on both fronts. In the

19803, more negative news about schools was in the public eye. The widely
tcized 1983 report, A Nation at Risk, seemed to force schools into a frenzy of reform
hvas reminiscent of the 19505. The effective schools movement had not generated
gh positive change; according to the report, the world was changing around

ation and education was not changing fast enough to keep up. Goals were not high

 

gh, and graduation requirements were weak. This report to the nation drew a variety

 

 

 

 

 

of reactions from
according to the
as the mid-19805
programs accorc
edeccire princip;
Research
schools. hlost c
principals who t
retiett of the lit
premise that if e
teachers with th
improve their pr
11980) stated tl
pllmlpal's abilit
inStructional lez
(1980) went a s
conduct the my
On being a key
leaders are a] SC
011 the mall/Sis

influellCEd lead

different roles

31

of reactions from parents, communities and educators. Administrators who behaved
according to the management perspective did not vanish from American schools. As late
as the mid-19803, school leaders develOped, implemented and evaluated educational
programs according to the management by objective theory. However, research into
effective principal behaviors did not support a management focus.

Research continued to show the critical role of the principal in the success of
schools. Most of the findings, extending from the late 19703 into the 19803, indicate that
principals who were instructional leaders could bring about effective schools. In their
review of the literature, Hall and Hord (1987) reported that many studies support the
premise that if educational programs for students are to improve, principals must provide
teachers with the instructional leadership they need and are entitled to as they strive to
improve their practices. There is no mention of the principal as manager, but earlier, F ege
[1980) stated that the success of the principal as instructional leader depended on the
principal's ability to distinguish between the routines of management and the goals of
.nstructional leadership and improvement. Citing Mitzel (1977), Cotton and Savard
:1980) went a step further. Although some principals had questioned being able to
:onduct the myriad management duties of their positions and at the same time concentrate
)n being a key instructional leader, Cotton and Savard asserted that effective instructional
eaders are also efi‘ective administrator/managers.

Principal behaviors and situational leadership. The literature on leadership centers
)n the analysis of traits, behaviors, or styles and the extent to which the situation
nfluenced leadership behavior. In addition, the literature on change suggests there are

lifferent roles for the leader, and the literature on school principals explains how the

 

 

efiwjve princi]
hterature: that i
Despite
insrruCtional le.
principal behat
Although by tl
has their mos
fact exercising
pointed out the
found that inst
principal.
Regart
actual int'olver
Several studie
ufinstnictiona
For instance, ]
Manes (1978
leathers. Fou

1. Ac

Ufa“ CVldem .

2, Int
exclusively th

basis),

32

efl‘ective principal behaves. One theme, however, is consistent in all three groups of
literature: that leaders are the focal point from which action and effects emanate.

Despite these findings and the findings of other research showing that the
instructional leadership of the principal is critical to the success of the school, studies of
principal behaviors suggest that, in general, principals have neglected fulfilling this role.
Although, by the early 19703, principals had widely agreed that instructional leadership
was their most important responsibility, McNally (1974) noted principals were not, in
fact, exercising instructional leadership (Sergiovanni, 1992). In addition, Sergiovanni
pointed out that several researchers (Wolcott, 1973; Sproull, 1977; Martin, 1980) had
found that instructional leadership was not the central focus of real-life practices of the
principal.

Regardless of whether instructional leadership was the central focus or not, the
actual involvement in this area of a given principal might fall anywhere on the spectrum.

Several studies reporting on specific behaviors identified in principals found that the level

of instructional leadership varied from virtually no involvement to significant involvement.

For instance, Rutherford (1984) cites the study of Leithwood, Ross, Montgomery, and
Maynes (1978) of 27 principals on their influence on curriculum decisions made by
teachers. Four types of principal behavior were discovered:

1. Administrative leaders (passive observers, only getting involved in case
of an evident problem).

2. Interpersonal leaders (directly involved in curriculum decisions almost
exclusively through interpersonal relationships with teachers, usually on a one-to-one

basis).

 

 

 

 

3. Forrr

4. Eclet
mpporting and t
forming teacher

About a
of the principal -
resource and a t
and behatiors st
of the principal
unanswered this
behatiors consi

The ans
leadership theo:
be fulfilled by t1
bUlk of leadersl
(1987), is baset

(liedler, 1967;

I977) Hall an

fl"lotion 0f beh
situation is the

that Fischer's n

change with th

 

33

3. Formal leaders (relied on authority to influence teachers).

4. Eclectic leaders (influenced decisions by a variety of strategies for
supporting and directing teacher choice, such as involving teachers in decision making,
forming teacher planning groups, etc.).

About a decade later, Smith and Andrews (1989) found the instructional leadership
of the principal described in four ways: communicator, resource provider, instructional
resource and a visible presence. These findings appear to broaden the scope of the skills
and behaviors which principals need to be effective. Other studies reflect vague handling
of the principal's importance in promoting school effectiveness and innovation, and leave
unanswered this important question: The question is to determine which administrator
behaviors consistently are associated with what effects, how and why (Mitzel, 1977).

The answer to this question takes on additional significance within situational
leadership theories. Some of these theories infer that leadership responsibilities can best
be firlfilled by the leader changing his behavior or style to fit the situation. Indeed, the
bulk of leadership theory developed in the past 20 to 30 years, reported by Hall and Hord
(1987), is based on the belief that successfirl leadership is influenced by the situation
,Tiedler, 1967; House, 1971; Vroom & Yetton, 1973; Bass, 1960; Hersey & Blanchard,
1977). Hall and Hord's findings led them to contend that successful leadership is a
irnction of behaviors, not traits, and that the interaction between behaviors and the
tituation is the key (Weiss, Cambone & Wyeth, 1992). Earlier, Garland (1976) pointed out
hat F iedler's research shows it is easier for leaders to change the situation than for them to
:hange with the situation. However, there is considerable disagreement regarding the role

nd importance of the situation in determining leadership style. Blake and Mouton (1964,

fiw‘E-..

 

 

 

1976) propose 1
tashhigh relatit
assess the phen
change facilitatt
There is
'heitatior." Pa
and the same
behatiors tt'hilt
bettt'een style 2
Which have be
research led th.
their behaviors
cOutem and to
Style and behat
rePresent 3 ch;
HerseY~Blanch
iSnore many 0:
leadership as r
aSSert that C01]
keeping SChoo
The M
styles) and, as

lasldlllgh,re]at

34

1976) propose that there is one way of behaving that is best for all situations: high
task/high relationship behavior. Further studies indicate there is no way to specify and
assess the phenomenon called "situation" so that it can be correlated with its influence on
change facilitator behavior (Rutherford, 1984).

There is obvious disagreement over the meanings of the terms "style" and
"behavior." Part of the confusion stems from the belief that behaviors and style are one
and the same. Research by Rutherford (1984) has shown that leaders utilize a variety of
behaviors while maintaining a constant style. Mitzel (1977) states that clear distinctions
between style and behavior are lacking but that they are two very different concepts
which have been confused. Further, Mitzel points to Hall and Hord (1987), whose
research led them to the conclusion that style is not changed easily, but leaders can change
their behaviors. Mitzel explains that if style is a gestalt of leaders’ behavior, knowledge,
concern and tone, then it probably cannot be changed that easily. Rutherford agrees that
style and behavior are different, adding that a change in behavior does not necessarily
represent a change in style. Bolman and Deal (1991) claim that Blake and Mouton's and
Hersey-Blanchard's situational leadership models, as well as F iedler's Contingency Theory,
.gnore many of the most critical challenges that leaders face, which includes seeing
.eadership as relational and contextual and not just power-wielding. Bolman and Deal
assert that competent management and skilled human relationships have more to do with
seeping schools from failing than with helping them to excel (Sergiovanni, 1992).

The Managerial Grid developed by Blake and Mouton indicates Specific leadership
:tyles, and, as reported above, they believe that the best style in all situations is high

ask/high-relationship-oriented. Hersey and Blanchard indicate that the style of the leader

 

titttstchauge 3‘
Contingency T
for leaders to C
major). 1109
makes one tasl
needs to be to

Being:
change style 1
between style ;
that there is lit
addition, a styl
explanation f0
1984) suggests
but from what
Also, teachers
Indeed, accort
(Rutherford, l!

M
envir0I1ment ll
““986 is bout
1993101aimss
lortherefonn

Schools, EXte

35

must change as the maturity of the followers in the organization changes. F iedler’s
-.ontingency Theory is somewhere between these two theories. F iedler believes it is easier
or leaders to change the situation to fit their style than to change their style to match the
ituation. However, these situational-style models of leadership do not indicate what

takes one task or situation different from another or how different the task or situation

 

eeds to be to require different leader behaviors.

Being able to change behavior may be far more important than being able to
hange style. Much attention has been given in leadership research to the relationship
etween style and leadership success or effectiveness, and findings have led to acceptance
tat there is little direct relationship between leadership style and leadership success. In
ldition, a style successfirl in one school situation may not be so in another. Part of the
:planation for this may involve teachers. Attribution theory (Calder, cited in Rutherford,
84) suggests that leaders' successes and failures do not come solely from what they do
it from what their followers (teachers) expect them to do and perceive they are doing.
130, teachers have a powerful influence on the effectiveness of school leadership.
deed, according to the literature on change, teacher involvement plays a major role
putherford, 1984).

Educational changeJeadership. and empowerment. If our society as a changing
lvironment is discovering new meanings and purposes, different values and purposes,

ge is bound to affect schools from all angles. Cambrian-McCabe (cited in Murphy,

-93) claims shifting economic, social and political systems have brought urgent demands

' the reform of schools. These societal changes are bOth external and internal to the

 

tools. External challenges include a thrust to privatize education, voucher proposals,

 

 

 

 

use of private t
instructional pr
as an aging pot
schools. racial
conditions. ant
chahenges atfe
distancing bett‘
preparation pm

These 1
Tensions inclu
reality, betwee
the transform
acOucem that
although a few

Perhap
emerging para
the two leader
the technical It
C001ml Over 0
achltEVemem, ‘
unilateral advc
consequenCeg,

With limited or

 

36
use of private contractors in public schools, and conservative citizen groups who challenge
instructional programs and pedagogical approaches. Others are demographic trends such
as an aging population, economic trends reflected in decreasing financial support for
schools, racial diversity, racial tensions, safety of staff and students, environmental
conditions, and the ever-widening gap between the very rich and the very poor. Internal
challenges affecting school leadership are the bureaucracy in education, continued
distancing between administrators and teachers, and lack of change in administrator
preparation programs in educational institutions.

These pressures forcing change in leadership have created tensions in many arenas.
Tensions include struggles between stability and change, between denial and acceptance of
reality, between fear and hOpe, and between manager and leader. According to firturists,
the transformation of leadership to a postindustrial framework has barely begun. There is
a concern that schools of leadership are still in the industrial paradigm (Rost, 1991)

) although a few have already made the change.
Perhaps the best comparison between the industrial paradigm of leadership and the
l

emerging paradigm is offered by Argyris and Schon (cited in Schon, 1991). He describes

the two leadership theories in practiCe known as Model I and Model II. Model I reflects

 

,the technical leadership style which has been used for decades. It is one of unilateral

:control over others where the action is designed to sustain four underlying values:

achievement, winning, suppressing the negative, and being rational. Strategies include

taunt: 111

111)

;unrlateral advocacy, controlling inquiry, and protection of self and others. The
l

. a

consequences, Argyris and Schon say, are defensive interpersonal and group relationships

with limited or decreased effectiveness. Model II is an alternative theory that must be

 

inlened from 4
world by prop
behatior, Lea
joint control a
informed choi
inquiry: to ma
same. Positis
unproting strr
goals. and ya]
possibly becat

Other
require motin
The hope of r
19500nsibility,
inStitutional rt
bureaucracy t
genetic SOlUlll
have better ar

Surnm
Call) out map
achievement 2
SUpp0n to the

37

inferred from actual behavior. It is described as fitting the needs of the postindustrial
world by proposing that people hold theories of action which determine all deliberate
behavior. Leadership according to this model creates learning systems and encourages
joint control and inquiry, and holds underlying values of valid information, free and
informed choice, and internal commitment. Strategies are to combine advocacy and
inquiry, to make reasoning explicit and confrontable, and to encourage others to do the
same. Positive consequences of Model II include increasing the capacity for learning and
improving strategies for achieving existing goals and choosing among competing norms,
goals, and values. Many readily espouse this model, yet cannot act consistently with it,
possibly because it requires changes in underlying values and assumptions.

Other researchers also propose that the changes necessary for authentic reform
require moving from administrative control to teacher empowerment and decision making.
The hope of reform in education "rests in empowerment that generates action at the site of

esponsibility," Astuto (1994, p. 89) states. Further, he sees a shift from individual to
nstitutional responsibility for achievement, from bureaucratic control to self-control, from
. ureaucracy to democracy, and from intervention to facilitation. He also states that

eneric solutions will not fit local needs, that those closest to the point of action usually

iiave better and more effective solutions.

Summers (1995) disagrees, asserting that empowerment alone is not enough to
any out major reform, and decentralized decision-making programs seldom claim student
chievement as their main objective. Further, Summers states that there is no significant
Upport to the claim that site-based management has a positive effect on student

,Chievement and that there are questions as to what goes on in schools when teachers are

 

 

 

 

gjten formal re!
neither linear fit
(Rutherford, 19
and found teacl
principal who a
achieyement.

In truth
teacher intolye
systems may et
classroom to tie
panicularly acu
become the nor
Wyeth, 1992).
managed, it is t

As note
emphasized the
instntctional le.
making efforts.
lEClSlOIt-makin
decisions for st

ellorts to minir

Place.

 

38
iven formal responsibility for participating in decision making. The link, he concludes, is
either linear nor clear. In at least partial support of Summers's view, an earlier study
Rutherford, 1984) identified 4 different management systems in 20 elementary schools
nd found teachers use more effective strategies when decision making rests with a
rincipal who acts as a leader. This, the researcher said, may lead to improved student
chievement.
In truth, no one has clarified the series of assumptions that would lead from

:acher involvement to student performance. Some elements in teacher participation
ystems may even detract from student learning, such as time and energy diverted from the
lassroom to decision-making councils. This diversion of energy and effort may be
articularly acute in the transition phase; perhaps as shared decision-making processes
ecome the norm, they would take less output of human capital (Weiss, Cambone, &
yeth, 1992). However, even if the shift to shared decision making were expertly
anaged, it is not clear that it would lead directly to better student achievement.
1 As noted earlier, one of the first generation correlates of effective schools research
nphasized the crucial role in the school improvement process of the principal as

structional leader, affirming the importance of the principal's role in shared decision-

 

.aking efforts. Weiss (1993) confirms the importance of principal participation in a shared

-.,cision-making process, one that allows a true sharing of ideas which can produce better

51111—10 _

:cisions for students than either group could achieve separately. Recently, however,

lI'Jllllt

orts to minimize the impact of a competent school leader on that process have taken

ace.

 

 

 

 

There 11
improvement a
indicate a relati
tensions and st

Addres
11981) referred
implementatior
factors. liebet
utmahing char

Several
Plujccts as are.
llcprincipal'g
COmmunity "jg
The Effectiven.
11119919 to 111
with research 5
lugether in sor
Reinhard, Alltt
prinCiPill behat
Principal had 1
Others. SECOn
Provide all not

39

There is conflict in the literature on how effective the principal can be in school
improvement as well. Some noted authors have identified specific behaviors believed to
indicate a relationship between effective school principals and effective schools. The
tensions and studies in this area were examined in an effort to gain a clearer picture.

Addressing the relationship of leadership to school improvement, Rutherford
(1984) referred to Thomas's study, which determined that although many factors affected
implementation, the leadership of the principal appeared to be one of the most important
factors. Lieberrnann and Miller (1981) agreed, stating, "The principal is the critical person
in making change happen" (p. 783).

Several studies focus on goal-setting, communication, and implementation of
projects as areas in which the principal's influence is important for a successful school.

The principal's role in developing clear goals and communicating those goals to the school

 

community "is related to school effectiveness" (Goldring & Pasternack, 1994, p. 248).

 

The effectiveness of principals also depends on whether they contribute directly or

r indirectly to the realization of goals (Leithwood, 1989). Leithwood's observations, along

 

; with research studies, show that an effective principal is the glue holding the school
together 1n some kind of framework and that his or her goals tend to be student- oriented.
Reinhard, Amends, Kut, Lovell, and Wyant (cited in Rutherford 1984) investigated the
principal behavior that supported or hindered projects. They discovered that, first, the
principal had to agree with the project and communicate support and enthusiasm to

. others Second, the principal had to "sell" the project to teachers and the community and
provide all necessary material and resources Third, during the project' 3 development and

, implementation, the principal needed to remain interested and ready to help solve

problems. It '
operation of t
commitment 1
authors on tee
teams go togt
leaders rem0t
direction and
different indir
skills requiret

As m
PllflClpalship
lhe Principals
fIurn others;
Possible (Tm
that leadersht
leadership alt
elementary 8‘
do not direct
the“ degree I

Chan
its effect on 1
l'lllctpals to

0ftllElT job a

 

40

problems. It was in this stage that principals in successful projects began to turn over
operation of the projects to other personnel. However, the principal needed to continue
commitment to the project (Rutherford, 1984). Katzenbach and Smith (1993), noted
authors on team leadership, indicate a similar support sequence, stating that hierarchy and
teams go together almost as well as teams and performance. Furthermore, they add,
leaders remove obstacles and get people to buy into a meaningfirl purpose, shaping
direction and learning, and encouraging others to lead. Shared leadership means that
different individuals lead the team at different times, depending on the issue at hand and
skills required.

As mentioned earlier, studies relay a mixed message about the realities of the
principalship and the potential of principals to lead. The ability to manage the demands of
the principalship is not the main attribute that distinguishes an effective educational leader
from others; rather, Krug (1992) identified a distinctive set of beliefs about what is

possible (Tucker-Ladd, Merchant, & Thurston 1992). Although there were earlier claims

 

that leadership is the responsibility of the principal and could not be left to others, effective
leadership alone does not necessarily lead to successful schools. In a recent study of 44
elementary schools, researchers found principals who demonstrate supportive leadership

do not directly influence school effectiveness. This is because principals are limited in

 

their degree of influence over school outcomes (Hoy, Tarter, & Witkoskie, 1992).
Change in educational practices requires a close look at educational leadership and

its effect on school success, along with an exploration of new ways for teachers and

principals to work together. Principals involved in restructuring see managerial functions

of their job as staying the same but acknowledge the need to develop a collaborative

H— fi,*.‘_at-*_n ‘ . ~'

 

problems. II we
operation of the
commitment to
authors on tearr
teams go togeth
leaders remove
direction and 1e:
different inditid
skills required.
As men
Pdntipalship an.
llrpnnctpatsnt;
110m 0111618; [31.
Possible (Tucke
that leadership i

leadership alone

elementary scho

do not directly i

lllelT degree 0f 1'

Change i

to effect On 3C1“

Principals to W0

 

40

problems. It was in this stage that principals in successfirl projects began to turn over
operation of the projects to other personnel. However, the principal needed to continue
commitment to the project (Rutherford, 1984). Katzenbach and Smith (1993), noted
authors on team leadership, indicate a similar support sequence, stating that hierarchy and
teams go together almost as well as teams and performance. Furthermore, they add,
leaders remove obstacles and get people to buy into a meaningful purpose, shaping
direction and learning, and encouraging others to lead. Shared leadership means that
different individuals lead the team at different times, depending on the issue at hand and
skills required.

As mentioned earlier, studies relay a mixed message about the realities of the
principalship and the potential of principals to lead. The ability to manage the demands of
the principalship is not the main attribute that distinguishes an effective educational leader

from others; rather, Krug (1992) identified a distinctive set of beliefs about what is
possible (Tucker-Ladd, Merchant, & Thurston 1992). Although there were earlier claims
that leadership is the responsibility of the principal and could not be left to others, effective
leadership alone does not necessarily lead to successful schools. In a recent study of 44
elementary schools, researchers found principals who demonstrate supportive leadership
; do not directly influence school effectiveness. This is because principals are limited in
their degree of influence over school outcomes (Hoy, Tarter, & Witkoskie, 1992).

Change in educational practices requires a close look at educational leadership and
, its effect on school success, along with an exploration of new ways for teachers and

r principals to work together. Principals involved in restructuring see managerial functions

 

of their job as staying the same but acknowledge the need to develOp a collaborative

culture. Teach
principal's attitt
relationships is
middle positior
from principals

m
management it
lSergiovanni, 1'
laid with more
panly because
10 3 llflllSTOrma
reflective leam

Tucker.
Ira”fibrillation:
exclapse relati
It has its Origin
trillions llades 1
leadership is m‘
SllCcessfo] Soho
meaning as real
Ticlry. 1990) di

A close

PulpoSes, and l

 

 

 

41

ulture. Teacher inclusion in schoolwide decision making depends as much on the
rincipal's attitude and beliefs as on the new process skills of teachers. A new web of
elationships is developing in the school. The principalship is changing from occupying a
riddle position in the bureaucratic chain to becoming a leader of leaders, a major shift
rom principals as positional, to principals as relational.

Transactional to transformational leadershh). For the past 40 years, the simple
management rule of "expect and inspect" placed teachers in a subordinate role
Sergiovanni, 1992). Today's changing society, however, demands that educational leaders
ead with more than the authoritarian, power-wielding approach. Along with and perhaps
rartly because of changes in society, leadership is changing from a transactional emphasis
o a transformational model. Alternative models are coming into view as well, such as

eflective learning, systems thinking and team and organizational leadership.
1

ransformational leadership styles. Transactional (ordinary) leadership is based on an

Tucker-Ladd, et a1. (1992) and Weiss, et al.(l992) describe transactional and

Lehange relationship where followership compliance is exchanged for expected rewards.

f. has its origins in the competent application of managerial and interperSonal skills as

 

.arious trades take place in order to reach some kind of compliance. Transformational

:adership is more difficult to describe, but it is, according to some, a key to creating

llll—lll _

)ccessful schools. Transformational leadership involves values, purposes, symbols and
11

.eaning as realities are negotiated and created. A conceptualization by Burns (cited in
ichy, 1990) differentiating these two types of leadership reflects similar thinking.

A closer look at this new type of leadership offers a glimpse of the qualities,

lrposes, and values of these leaders. Transformational leaders have these indicators;

They identify
beheve in pet
complexity, a

Gendt
transformatio
transactional
men and won
Organizationa
used transfon
and lfllonnati
Transformatit
3000 about t1
OfemPOWerrr
take" 011 ”TON
acceptable an

In his
tOdal's leader
and the technj
neglect of pro
Suggests, may
19” (beliefs,
Wurld Wits.

head of leader

 

42

They identify themselves as change agents, are courageous individuals, are visionaries,
believe in people, are value-driven, are lifelong learners, and have the ability to deal with
complexity, ambiguity, and uncertainty (Tichy, 1990).

Gender may play a role in the tendency to use either transactional or
transformational leadership. At least one researcher contends that men tend to use
transactional leadership, while women tend to use transformational leadership. In studying
men and women in business, Rosener (1990) found that men, relying on their
organizational position and formal authority, used transactional leadership, but women

used transformational leadership. Those using transformational leadership shared power

 

and information with workers and strived to enhance workers' self-worth.

Transformational leaders further supported their people through enabling them to feel

 

good about themselves and their jobs. This leadership style appeared to generate feelings
of empowerment and commitment to the organization. Rosener says that as women have
taken on more formal leadership roles, their more collaborative approaches have become
acceptable and quite successfiil.

In his discussion of transformational leadership, Sergiovanni (1992) states that
today's leadership practice relies heavily on bureaucracy, psychological knowledge or skill,
: and the technical rationality that emerges from theory and research, which can cause

. neglect of professional and moral authority. Attending to the moral dimension, he

i heart (beliefs, values, dreams, personal vision) and the head (a mental picture of how the

suggests, may cause a reinvention of the concept of leadership. Sergiovanni thinks the
world works--reflection, personal vision) of leadership need revisiting. Moreover, the

* head of leadership is shaped by the heart, Sergiovanni states, while reflection on decisions

 

and actions re
regarding trar
leaders and fc
hfluennalreh
These are pur
quantification
because follor
hdependentg
(1991) believr
mmmpmn

Purpo
be obtained b:
Serve as the b
followership i
“Delusion, 5
and can beeo;

PUFpo
cOncepls. Le;
nonns, and TIC
directions b€c
The bean of r
to SergiOVann

mumwhu

43

and actions reshapes both the heart and the head. In reviewing Sergiovanni's beliefs
regarding transformational leaders, Rost (1992) emphasizes Sergiovanni's claim that
leaders and followers develop mutual purposes, with mutuality being forced through
mfluential relationships where interactions are vertical, horizontal, diagonal and circular.
These are purposes, not goals; purposes are overarching and holistic, less oriented to
auantification and less rigid than goals. Mutual purposes become common purposes
>ecause followers and leaders engage in leadership together, Rost suggests, while
ndependent goals mutually held do notqualify as mutual purposes. Bolman and Deal
:1991) believe transformational leaders bring out the best in their followers and move
hem to pursue higher and more universal needs and purposes.

Purposes play an important role in transformational leadership. Followership can
re obtained by practicing purposing. Barnard (cited in Sergiovanni, 1992) says purposes
erve as the basis of developing a cooperative system. Barnard fiarther states that
ollowership is built by developing people who can work by themselves without close
upervision, self-assessing, committed, purposeful and with a vision of what the school is
nd can become.

Purposes, values, and vision are complementary transformational leadership
ancepts. Leadership purposes evolve into strategies, whereas values become linked to
arms, and norms are linked to policies. Vision, on the other hand, is linked to forecasts,
.rections become objectives, and frameworks evolve into blueprints (Sergiovanni, 1992).
he heart of the school as a moral community is its covenant of shared values, according
. Sergiovanni. Purposes and values, he believes, can become the glue that binds peOple

a loosely connected world and can become the center from which the school begins

-_,..._ .__, ..._.

 

 

 

 

development
set of moral b
aperson or St
17), while Gu
\lhen shared
lranlrena con
from adminisr

These
may help exp?
Women's ider
0f responsibil
male PerSpect
morality base
and COmpetiti
Helgesen (19.
coml’lnment.

Refler
Changing ValL
i"‘Plementatir
0“ their Own
Pattergm1 eXp
to talk things

been reSOlVed

44

development as a learning community. F rankena (1973) defines morality as " a code or a
set of moral beliefs rather than to a pattern or quality of conduct as character to something
a person or society has or subscribes to, rather than something he, she or it is or does" (p.
17), while Guy (1990) adds that everyone who makes a decision relies on a moral code.
When shared values, purposing, professional socialization and collegiality are emphasized,
Frankena continues, they become substitutes for leadership, which means direct leadership
from administrators can be more informal (Sergiovanni, 1992).

These concepts of values and morality in the context of transformational leadership
may help explain why women are more inclined to use this leadership approach than men.
Women's identities have been defined in a context of relationships and judged by principles
of responsibility and care (Gilligan, 1982). This type of moral reasoning is dissimilar to the
male perspectives of justice and rights, Gilligan found. In other words, women see
morality based on responsibility and relationship, while the men tend to espouse separation
and competition. Women regard their personal lives woven into their professional lives.
Helgesen (1990) described women's ability to integrate home and work without
compartmentalizing these aspects of self.

Reflective leadershig Senge (1990) and Patterson (1993) talk about reflection as a

, changing value. Although today's world values firm decisions, followed by

implementation without looking back, the two researchers believe people need to reflect

; on their own and others' thinking in order to achieve better organizational decisions.
: Patterson explains that valuing reflective time in reaching consensus means allowing time

‘ to talk things out until virtually all serious objections to a unified course of action have

been resolved. Consensus requires suspending judgments and refraining from premature

 

 

 

positioning; '
group decisit
organization.
achieve two
onnership 01
on reflection

Scho:
thinking proc
these models
distinguishes
doing and int
reflective pra
Cambron-Mc
practice being
cultural Contt
ultimately me

“fleetive abo

Sever
l990) fOUnd tl
abOUt their r e

regarding thei

ham and achi

 

 

45

>ositioning; when positions are taken and defended the possibility is lost of reaching a
group decision that includes the best of individual perspectives. In tomorrow's
>rganizations, Patterson states, allowing reflective time for consensus-building would help
tchieve two fiindamental goals of lasting decisions, a shared knowledge base and group
twnership of decisions. Bolman and Deal (1991) and Schon (1991) also place a high value
>n reflection as a leadership characteristic.

Schon (1991), a colleague of Argyris, has shown that skills in reflection slow down
hinking processes and increase awareness of how mental models are formed and how
hese models influence actions. He states that the practice of "reflection in action"
listinguishes the truly outstanding professional. He suggests considering learning by
loing and incorporating the techniques associated with good coaching. To enhance
‘eflective practice, he recommends bringing together technical and moral considerations.
Zambron-McCabe (cited in Murphy, 1993) presses the importance of administrative
lractice being informed by critical reflection which is situated in the moral, political and
ultural context of schooling. She claims that if restructuring will create changes which

ltimately mean results that are different, leaders will have to allow themselves to be

 

 

 

eflective about schooling and critical about their work.

Several studies (Astin & Leland, 1991; Helgeson, 1990; Van Velsor & Hughes,
'90) found that women practice reflective thinking, not only about themselves but also
'Jout their relationship to their organizations. The studies show that women are learners

agarding their work, themselves, and the process and practice of leadership, and that they

 

 

am and achieve significantly from other people's expertise and experiences. Helgesen

 

 

also found I
to handle Ul

m
also receive
emphasis frt
a sense of d
leadership is
Values, respt
bond betwet
authority be
be advanced
Create leami
leadership. '
SIewardship
allowing tho

The 3
(1992) Sugg
Variability, g,
exercised ind
organiZatiOm
and can be re

 

46

also found that women leaders tended to design more breaks into their scheduling of time
to handle unexpected demands and for personal reflection.

Other leadership concepts. Servant leadership, stewardship and ministering have
also received considerable attention. These concepts redefine leadership by shifting the
emphasis from behavior to the moral dimension of leadership. Servant leadership provides
a sense of direction, establishes an overarching purpose and a trust of others. Steward
leadership is the kind that touches people differently, taps their emotions, appeals to their
values, responds to connections with other people and is morally based. However, the
bond between servant leadership and moral authority is tight as well. When moral
authority becomes the main effort in a school, Sergiovanni (1992) believes leadership will
be advanced. In order to do this, however, he says that we need to direct our efforts to
create learning communities in each school. Norms and values become substitutes for
eadership. These can change the image of the school. The concepts of servanthood,
.tewardship and ministering redefine the routine and sense-making work of administration,
= llowing those aspects to become interdependent and indistinguishable.

The gains for the "new school" from such a change in orientation, Sergiovanni
$71992) suggests, would include democracy, group authority and accountability,

.9
&

gariabilit , generality, interactivity in work assignments, self-discipline and control

J

g.

*xercised individually and collectively, and group commitment to and consensus about
rganizational goals and means. He claims that what gets rewarded gets done, is extrinsic,
nd can be termed calculated involvement. What is good also gets done from a sense of

uty or obligation and can be termed moral involvement. This is a new concept--that what

 

 

 

 

 

we believe i
done.

Qrg:
organizatior
only very re
Deal in 1991
organizatior
systemic ch;
Organization

Leac

medi

0pr
and t

Ogawa cites
Thompson.
”1056 in ever
organization
leadership, a
Spanning lev

Ogav
dimensions c
to inflUence ‘
Leaders are l

recently Oga

 

47

we believe in and what we feel obligated to do, because of a moral commitment, gets
done.
annizatirggtgtl perspectives. The concept of leadership as a quality of
organizations has been mentioned in past research. Later work does not reflect on it and
only very recently has begun to be expressed again by researchers such as Bolman and
Deal in 1991. Ogawa (1993) and others wanted to see how leadership affected school
organizations. Their hunch was that leadership is treated as a quality of organization--a
systemic characteristic-—and that leadership needed to be mapped throughout the
organization to find it. Ogawa states:
Leadership flows through the networks or roles that comprise organizations. The
medium of leadership and the currency of leadership lie in the personal resources
of people. And leadership shapes the systems that produce patterns of interaction
and the meanings that other participants attach to organizational events. (p. 225)
Ogawa cites two other studies that support his findings, one by Barnard and one by
Thompson. Barnard (1968) observed that the "authority of leadership" is not confined to

those in executive positions, indicating that leadership may be practiced by anyone in an

organization. Thompson (1967), although describing administration rather than

 

leadership, asserted that leadership is something that flows throughout an organization,
rspanning levels and flowing both up and down hierarchies (Ogawa, 1993).

Ogawa (1993) lists four underlying assumptions which attend to the four
[dimensions of leadership: finnction, role, the individual, and culture. Leadership functions
to influence organizational performance. Leadership is connected to organizational roles.
Leaders are individuals with certain attributes, or who act in certain ways, or both. Most

'ecently Ogawa reported that the literature shows leaders Operate within organizational

 

 

 

cultures, as
Sergiovanni
emerges fro

Twc
technical-r21:
leadership 5.
technical-rat
explanation

The
and organiz:
(Ogawa, 199
Leadership i
the relations
Possess gem
are resoUrce
lCttdershjp C;

The t
Culture is a l
Va“1‘38, laws,
Scholars afgt
that others fi
Corbauy) 198

Shaping Ofm

 

 

48

cultures, as reviewed by Daft and Weick, 1984; Pfeffer, 1981; and Schein, 1985.
Sergiovanni's (1992) view of the concept of community and shared meaning and values
emerges from the cultural perspective as well.

Two theories on organization are considered in Ogawa's work (1993), the
technical—rational perspective and the institutional theory. Most theories of organizational
leadership seem to be dominated by one perspective of organizations, which is the
technical-rational system. Because the technical-rational system is familiar, the
explanation here will focus only on the institutional theory.

The fiJnction of leadership from the institutional perspective is social legitimacy
and organizational survival, which affects the minds and behaviors or external constituents
(Ogawa, 1993). The organization seeks legitimacy rather than technical efficiency.
Leadership is seen as a systemic quality of the organization, where leadership is meshed in

the relationships that exist among members rather than in particular roles. Further, leaders

 

possess certain attributes and take actions acquiring added significance. These attributes

are resources on which individuals who draw on them attempt to exert influence; thereby,

 

leadership can flow up and down as well as across levels in the organization.
The context of leadership from an institutional perspective is largely cultural.

,Culture is a pattern of development reflected in society's system of knowledge, ideology,

l llllll—lll

values, laws, and day-to-day ritual (Morgan, 1986). In recent educational literature,

llllll

15"

”scholars argue that administrators lead by shaping school culture, affecting the meanings
hat others fix to events (Bolman & Deal, 1994; Deal & Peterson, 1990; Sergiovanni &
Zorbally, 1986). Even though this cultural context evokes a focus on symbolism and

haping of meaning, Ogawa (1993) sees this form of leadership as technical-rational.

 

 

 

The
referred to t
influence the
the culture 2
beyond the r
organizatior
that the tota
school perfc
the perform;
Performance
building met
external ent.

Tear

\

Katzenbach
really be dis.
organization
leaders: follr
than their f0
to herding C.
to patemaliz

To e
qudlltieg 0ft

Wilmington

 

4.9

The four dimensions of leadership (function, role, the individual, and culture) as
referred to by Ogawa (1993) lead to a depiction of organizational leadership as the
influence that individuals in high-level offices exert through their attributes and actions on
the culture and performance of organizations. Pounder, Ogawa, and Adams (1995) move
beyond the emphasis on individual leaders to the concept of leadership as an
organizational quality. The concept of leadership as an organizational quality suggests
that the total amount of leadership found in schools will have a positive relationship to
school performance, and it also suggests that all members of schools can lead, affecting
the performance of their schools. Pounder et al. concluded that leadership affects
performance by shaping the organization of work, deveIOping solidarity among members,
building member commitment to the schools, and managing schools' relations with their
external environment.

Team leadershm Noted authors such as O'Toole (1995), DePree (1987), and

Katzenbach and Smith (1993) agree that discussions of leadership in today's world should

 

really be discussions of followership. Peter Drucker, a well-known writer on
organizational leadership, notes O'Toole, observed only one characteristic common to all
leaders: followers. O'Toole declares that leaders can no more be likened to shepherds
than their followers can be thought of as sheep. Leadership has been likened more often

to herding cats than to herding sheep, since in today's society, few people will allow others

 

to patemalize them.
To explain leadership effectiveness, O'Toole (1995) reviews the leadership
qualities of the presidents depicted on Mount Rushmore. He characterizes Presidents

Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and Roosevelt as "representatives ofa SChOOl 0f values-

 

 

based leader
Rushmorear
has little rel:
elicctivenes:
trust, respec
recent top e
creating foll
Deming De
about chang
manuals. R.

Lear

relat

and ‘

elfer

leads

O'Tt
0Wen lived
devised of a
P01icies that
the Owner a
HOWever) h,
Cllmgfree C
school) who
Schoel also ;

COHlfibutiOn

' 50

based leadership dedicated to democratic change" (p. 21). He coined the term "the
Rushmorean approach" to describe his philosophy, which is that leadership effectiveness
has little relationship with matters of what to do or how to do it. Rather, leadership
effectiveness has to do with apprOpriate morals, values, attitude and philosophy, such as
trust, respect and inclusionary practices. O'Toole refers to the leadership of several fairly
recent top executives in America such as Alfred P. Sloan to emphasize the importance of
creating followers in an atmosphere of trust and respect. He draws from Drucker,
Deming, DePree, Burns, Bennis and Nanus, among others. When leaders fail to bring
about change, O'Toole says that the fault rarely is from reading the wrong how-to
manuals. Rather, O’Toole says:

Leaders fail when they have an inappropriate attitude and philosophy about the

relationship between themselves and their followers. Those who do not respect

and trust their followers cannot lead them. Those who succeed at bringing about

effective and moral change believe in and act on the inherent dignity of those they

lead--in particular, in their natural, human capacity to reason. (p. 37)

O'Toole (1995) also gives an instructional account of Robert Owen's leadership.
Owen lived from 1771 to 1858 and, according to O'Toole, was a social inventor who
devised or advocated a number of industrial relations and educational practices and social
policies that are still considered progressive today. He became successfiil in Scotland as
the owner and manager of a textile factory, practicing what is now called paternalism.
However, he treated his workers with respect, providing clean housing and a disease- and
crime-fiee community in which to live. Young childrendid not work; he founded a
school, where he invented preschool and day care. Education was progressive; adult night

school also started here. Even though he provided many innovative and important

contributions, his career is a classic example “OT only 0f resistance to change but Of an

 

unproductiv
other factori
alienating hi
want to ace:
knew the m

As tl
nor is it simt
points our. l
1011' expecta
Which leade:
TOSTQI'lllg su;
initiative" ((

In th

ntttdels of le

1. St
thro“ghana
2. l
SUPeFiOISan
3. P

4.3

“"' -'J- fir}.- -'

51

unproductive leadership style. No capitalist of the time followed his lead. As a visitor to
other factories, he "spied," then reported the poor conditions he observed, therefore
alienating himself from his peers. Owen also wanted to move too far, too fast, and did not
want to accept slow changes. He would not listen to others and was sure that only he
knew the truth. He never created followers.

As the Owen example illustrates, creating a followership is far from a simple task,
nor is it simple to attempt to create unity without conformity. In addition, O'Toole (1995)
points out, leadership requires listening to followers but not becoming imprisoned by their
low expectations. He refers to Bennis' observation that there is a " paradox of values in
which leaders must create a culture with strong strategic unity while at the same time
fostering sufficient internal openness to encourage freedom of action and entrepreneurial
initiative" (O'Toole, 1995, p. 47).

In their work in organizational leadership, Bolman and Deal (1991) describe four
models of leadership that are essential to effective teams. These are:

1. Structural leaders, who exhibit a powerful approach. These leaders lead
through analysis and design rather than charisma and inspiration;

2. Human resource leaders, who focus on interpersonal relationships between
superiors and subordinates and on the values of openness, sensitivity and participation;

3. Political leaders, who are clear about their agenda and sensitive to political
reality and who build alliances;

4. Symbolic leaders, who are artists, poets or prOphets who use symbols and

stories to communicate a vision that builds faith and loyalty among an organization's

 

employees and others.

$.41

-- via-

The
weaknesses
singular lea
four approa

Kat;
Their findin
discomfort
team is a w

"A t
COmntitted
themselves

To 1
they face, 6.
decisions ne
need Some I

as they pror

52

These four approaches to leadership all have their individual strengths and
weaknesses. Bolman and Deal (1991) claim that the weaknesses can be fatal if there is a
singular leader. They believe singular leaders could be unable to see their own limits. All
four approaches should be represented on teams to be effective.

Katzenbach and Smith (1993) are considered giants in the field of team leadership.
Their findings indicate that resistance to teams is caused by lack of conviction, personal
discomfort and risk, and weak organizational performance ethics. Their definition of a
team is a working one:

"A team is a small number of peOple with complementary skills who are
committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they hold
themselves mutually accountable "( p. 45).

To make decisions, teams must be able to identify the problems and opportunities
they face, evaluate the options they have, and then follow through with any trade-offs and
decisions needed to move forward. Katzenbach and Smith (1993) argue that most teams
need some members with these skills to begin with, although many will develop them best

as they proceed. Six necessities of good team leadership, according to Katzenbach and

 

 

 

Smith, are to:

t

I. Keep the purpose goals and approach relevant and meaningful

2. Build commitment and confidence

3. Strengthen the mix and level of skills

4. Manage relationships with outsiders, including removing obstacles
5. Create opportunities for others

6. Do real work (p. 44)

"VIJ -_~

 

 

 

It is interesti

team perforr

and compell
In a

real change Z

Tunher. the
measuremer
('Katzenbacl
lead initiatis

The attentiOr
His six poin
among the f

l.

 

 

 

 

53

It is interesting that Katzenbach and Smith contend that the most important determinant in
team performance is not the team leader, but a specific performance challenge that is clear
and compelling to all team members. They say this motivates the most.

In a later work with the RCL team, Katzenbach (1995) lists seven characteristics of

real change leaders:

1. Commitment to a better way

2. Courage to challenge existing power bases and norms

3. Personal initiative to go beyond defined boundaries

Motivation of themselves and others

Caring about how people are treated and enabling them to perform
Staying undercover

A sense of humor about themselves and their situations .(p. 13)

>399?

Further, the authors ascribe to the principles of vision, courage, performance
measurement, team performance and discipline which allow for successfiil change
(Katzenbach & RCL Team). Their definition of real change leaders is: "Individuals who
lead initiatives that influence dozens to hundreds of others to perform differently, and
better, by applying multiple leadership and change approaches" (p. 16).

DePree (1987), the former CEO of a large office furniture company, drew
the attention of other leaders with what he had to say, and practiced, about leadership.
His six points, listed by O'Toole (I995), reflect his belief that the signs of leadership are

among the followers. These points are:

l. The first responsibility of the leader is to define reality. The last is to say
thank you. In between, the leader is a servant. .
2. The signs of leadership are among the followers. Are they reaching their

potential? Are they learning? Are they achieving the desired results? Are
they serving? Do they manage change gracefully, and do they manage

conflict? .
3. Leaders don't inflict pain, they bear lt‘ , . . .
4. Leaders respect people. Leadership is about relationships. Relationships

count more than structure.

 

 

 

DePree sai
the most e

As
clear, valu
leader. Gr
peOple fee
certain to :
powerful"

Sig
that are ta]
hheatley t
and under:
SYStems tl
OfPIOblen
Personal vi
and noted
leader in tl
develop a :

O'gthizarit

54
5. Good communication means a respect for individuals. Good
communication is an ethical question.
6. The best communication forces you to listen. Information is power, but it

is pointless if boarded. Power must be shared for an organization or a
relationship to work. (p. 44-45)

DePree said that the art of leadership is liberating people to do what is required of them in

the most effective and humane way possible.

 

As the philosophy practiced by the Rushmoreans and other historical figures makes
clear, values-based leadership espouses respect; and followership is what makes a leader a

leader. Getting others to follow is complicated but not impossible. However, when

people feel threatened in their beliefs, followership is resisted, " and nothing is more
certain to stir up resistance to change than a challenge to the psychological comfort of the

powerful" (O'Toole, 1995, p. 238).

 

Systems thinking Research on how organizations view the world and the shifts
that are taking place has been carried out by organizational theorists Senge (1990),
Wheatley (1992) and others. The term "systems thinking" is becoming more well known
and understood as leaders feel the push for change and seek ways to manage change.
Systems thinking, Senge says, focuses on how to restructure assumptions to reveal causes
of problems. The traditional view of leadership is based on lack of people's power, lack of
personal vision and inability to master change (Senge, 1990). Thus, according to Kiefer
and noted in Senge’s work, the skills and behaviors which made a person an effective
leader in the past could be counterproductive when people become open to new ideas and
develop a sense of their own vision and commitment. Senge adds that in learning

organizations, leaders are viewed as designers, stewards and teachers. Further, mastering

 

 

a systemic '1
that when t

"Le
control," P
essence of
as the proc
organizatic
participatic
Openness tr
make assur
disciplines,

In 1
"disciplines
Sl’Stems thi
"Discipline
ComPetenc
emulating ;
Schon, Ch:

Ser
View their .
tndiVidUal 1
dCVeloped

Them efl‘em

u~-“—-i

55

a systemic language provides a new framework for thinking. Kiefer, Senge says, explains
that when this thinking happens, people become system thinkers ever thereafter.
"Leadership has consistently been characterized by the central values of power and

control," Patterson states (1993, p. 2). He believes these values do not describe the

 

essence of leading at all; rather, they describe bossing. Patterson further defines leadership
as the process of influencing others to achieve mutually agreed upon purposes for the
organization. He lists five values needed to implement systems thinking: openness to

participation, openness to diversity, openness to conflict, openness to reflection, and

 

openness to mistakes. Senge (1990), Wheatley (1992), and Ogawa (1995)
make assumptions that are similar to Patterson's values thinking. These five values,

disciplines, or assumptions are discussed in detail below.

 

In his recent work, The Fifth Discipline, Senge (1990) names and explains five
"disciplines" that he considers essential in systemic thinking. These five disciplines are
systems thinking, personal mastery, mental models, shared vision, and team learning.
"Discipline" is defined as a developmental path for acquiring certain skills or

competencies; to practice a discipline is to be a lifelong learner and is different from

emulating a model. Senge has drawn heavily on the research of Chris Argyris, Donald

 

Schon, Charles Kiefer, and David Bohm.
Senge describes systems thinking as the cornerstone of how learning organizations

View their world. It is a discipline in which one contemplates the whole, rather than any

individual part of the pattern, a conceptual framework that includes knowledge and tools

developed over the past 50 years to make patterns clearer and help show how to change

them effectively. Senge claims that systems thinking is truly a shift of mind (metanoia) in

 

 

how we see
we have, an
whole think
future.

Syst
sees proces
"Reality is r
relationship
chains" (p
believe in sf
concept the
nothing is E
their realitir

Acr
function pg
011 the systr
‘0 related 5
(tithe CUm
beyond SYI
thj‘lk Whol
and anticip

Sunmhhize

56

how we see ourselves connected to the world, in how our own actions create the problems
we have, and in how we create reality and change it. More so, it is a shift from part to
whole thinking, from helpless to active shaping of reality, from reacting to creating a
fiiture.

Systems thinking sees interrelationships rather than linear causes and effects; it
sees processes of change rather than snapshots. More specifically, Senge (1990) states,
"Reality is composed of multiple-simultaneous interdependent cause-effect-cause
relationships. From this reality, normal verbal language extracts single, linear cause—effect

chains" (p. 73). The result is a tendency to see the world in simple, obvious terms and to

 

believe in simple, obvious solutions. Feedback in systems thinking is also a broader
concept than it is in other contexts. Feedback means any reciprocal flow of influence;

nothing is ever influenced in just one direction. People are influenced by and influence

 

their realities.
According to Patterson (1993), a system is a collection of parts that interact to

function purposefully as a whole. His guidelines for applying systems thinking are: Focus
on the system, not the people; learn how the current system evolved and how it connects

: to related systems; expect the system to resist interventions meant to disrupt the stability
.
: of the current system; evaluate the system against the organization's core values; look
beyond symptomatic problems and symptomatic solutions to fundamental systems issues;
think whole-system, long-term solutions and allow time for the solutions to take effect;

and anticipate new system problems arising from current system solutions. Senge (1994)

summarizes Patterson's detailed guidelines in the first of two strategies he offers to

 

 

accomplish
of methods

lt‘l
inforrnatio:
point conn
back and r
standing b.
understanr
looking fo
Shape rath
33 polaritir
0n relatior

5y
infofrttatic
Organizati
altd develt
I'Crsonal r
fOcuses e,
mastery tl
motivatio:
Persona] 1
lehSTOrt l

force is CI

S7

accomplish systems thinking: peripheral vision. The second strategy is using the language
of methods, tools and principles.

Wheatley (1992) weaves systems thinking and reflection together. She warns that
information overload can result from the standard view of systems as requiring point-to-
point connections that must be laboriously woven together. Rather, she suggests stepping
back and refocusing attention on the whole. Giving up close attention to detail and
standing back to observe the movement of the total system helps develop a new
understanding of what is required to manage a complex system. In addition, she advises

looking for patterns of movement over time and focusing on rhythm, flow, direction, and

 

shape rather than seeking linear causes and effects or regarding people, events, goals, etc,
as polarities. Instead, she recommends ignoring analysis and planning and concentrating

on relationship facilitating by linking people.

 

Systems thinking is time consuming, requiring more dialogue, explanation,
information, and practice. It is a completely different way of looking at and thinking about
organizations, how they work, and the individual's role in them. It means understanding
and developing the discipline of personal mastery, along with the other four disciplines.
Personal mastery is a discipline which continually clarifies and deepens personal vision,
focuses energies, develops patience, and aids in seeing reality objectively. Calling personal
mastery the spiritual foundation of an organization, Senge (1990) says that it is a
motivation to continually learn how personal actions affect the individual's world.

Personal mastery, Senge (1994) says, is learning how to generate and sustain creative
tension. Creative tension is generated by the gap between What is and what iS desired; a

force is created by the natural tendency of tension to seek resolution. He endorses holding

 

 

apersonal
achieving 1

R0
describes t
not what tl
one of rwc
they belies
powerless
conflict. I
vision eror
Such as a r
since they
is develop.

Th
ingrained ;
lllleldual
mental m0
exllerienct
decisions,
quantum t
and menta
knoWledgt

(1994) SUE

58

a personal vision and keeping a clear picture of current reality as primary strategies for
achieving personal mastery.

Robert Fritz, a colleague of Chris Argyris and referred to by Senge (1990),
describes the effect personal mastery or vision has in a learning organization, stating, "It's
not what the vision is, it's what the vision does" (p. 206). Fritz claims that people hold
one of two contradictory beliefs that limit their ability to create what they want: Either
they believe they are unworthy and undeserving of what they desire or that they are
powerless to bring about what they really care about. These forces can result in structural
conflict. Fritz identifies three generic "strategies" for coping with this conflict: letting
vision erode, creating artificial conflict (fear of failure), or employing sheer willpower,
such as a maniacal focus on goals. He claims that these strategies are not readily changed,
since they are developed early in life, but that they eventually change as personal mastery
is developed.

The third discipline in systems thinking is called mental models. These are deeply
ingrained assumptions, generalizations, images, or pictures that influence how an
individual understands the world and how he or she takes action (Senge, 1990). Most
mental models are systemically flawed, claims Senge, who believes peeple learn from
experience, but never directly see the consequences of many of their most important
decisions, which is a core learning dilemma for organizations. David Bohm, a leading
quantum theorist referred to in Senge’s work (1990), connected the systems perspective
and mental models more explicitly when he said the purpose of science is not accumulating
knowledge but creating mental maps which guide and shape perception and actions. Senge

(1994) suggests two strategies for creating mental models which are appropriate to

 

 

 

 

systems thi
inquiry, wt
Developing
strong rela
groups.
Me
team dowr
example. '
express inr
Th
together tl
aset of pr;
rather than
Process of
emerges fl
mission, w
Th
lll Senge,
Certainty i
this State,
quotes Fri
In the abs.

organizati

59

systems thinking: reflection, including attention to how mental models are formed, and
inquiry, which involves sharing views openly and learning about the assumptions of others.
Developing this discipline in organizations, Wheatley (1992) believes, will require building
strong relationships through developing skills in listening, communicating, and facilitating
groups.

Mental models, as some principals will contend, can slow the school improvement
team down. Time is not allocated properly to explain thoughts to one another, for
example. Team members do not know how to take the time nor do they take the time to
express individual viewpoints.

The fourth discipline in systems thinking is shared visions. These bind people
together through establishing a common identity and sense of destiny. Shared visions are

a set of principles and guiding practices foster genuine commitment and "enrollment"

 

i rather than compliance. Senge (1990) refers to Kiefer‘s comment that enrollment is the

 

1 process of becoming part of something by choice. Shared vision, a powerfiil force,

: emerges from the personal visions of a group and becomes the what; informed by the

‘ mission, which is the why; and the values, which determine how.

The Openness necessary to create a shared vision, according to David Bohm (cited
, in Senge, 1990), emerges when two or more individuals become willing to suspend their

; certainty in each other's presence, and are willing to share thinking and be influenced. In

i this state, they gain access to depths of understanding not accessible otherwise. Senge

1 quotes Fritz relative to shared vision: "In the presence of greatness, pettiness disappears.

; In the absence of a great dream, pettiness prevails. You cannot have a learning

* organization without shared vision" ( p. 209)- Senge suggests five strategies central to

 

 

creating a
all visions
ongoing p
tension.
Ar
develOpin
structures
organizati
shared me
deveIOpec
all ways c
possess, c
People Clt
Characteri
The f0nn;
ability to .
CUltures if
asfleets, is
It
dialogUe t
(a befitting
devek)Pin

”lee criti

6O

creating a shared vision: knowing that every organization has a destiny, accepting that not
all visions are equal, ensuring that members have a collective sense of purpose, designing
ongoing processes where all can speak from the heart, and creating organizational creative
tension.

An organization's culture may either enhance or reduce the likelihood of members
developing a shared vision. Institutional theory suggests that organizations erect
structures to reflect cultural rules in their internal environments, and indicates that
organizations conduct activities around those structures to facilitate the development of
shared meaning and value among the organizations' members. In this way, culture is
developed. In fact, shared meaning, shared understanding, and shared sense-making are
all ways of describing culture. Rather than a simple variable that societies or organizations
possess, culture must be understood as an active, living phenomenon through which
people create and recreate the worlds in which they live (Morgan, 1986). One of the
characteristics of culture, according to Morgan, is that it creates a form of ethnocentrism.
The formation of a group or the process of becoming a leader ultimately hinges on an
ability to create a shared sense of reality. The challenge in understanding organizations as
cultures is to understand how this system, in its mundane as well as its more dramatic
aspects, is created and sustained.

The fifth discipline in systems thinking is team learning, a discipline that allows
dialogue (assumptions are suspended and genuine thinking together occurs) and discussion
(a heaving of ideas back and forth). Team learning is the process of aligning and

developing the capacity of a team to create the results its members truly desire. It has

three critical dimensions:

 

 

 

 

b)

It
discussior
"become :
conclude"
organizati
complex i
1990). Se
team men
diTeCtivet
conflict.

B.
theory an
rePresent
discipline
in this cor
diaTOgUe

Ti

MAWNH

 

61

1. The need to think insightfully about complex issues

2. The need for innovative, coordinated action

3. The role of team members on other teams (Senge, 1990, p. 236)

To develop team learning, teams must master the practices of dialogue and
discussion, be able to balance advocacy with inquiry, bring assumptions to the surface, and
"become aware of the assumptions and beliefs that link 'what we see' to 'what we
conclude'" (Senge, 1994, p. 352-353). Argyris, who worked with mental models and
organizational learning for over 30 years, said that when teams are confronted with
complex issues which may be embarrassing or threatening, "teamness" vanishes (Senge,
1990). Senge supports Argyris's observation, saying collective inquiry tends to threaten
team members. Argyris further claims that the difference between mediocre teams and
effective teams is how they handle conflict and deal with the defensiveness which envelops
conflict.

Bohm has contributed to the discipline of team learning through his study of the
theory and practice of dialogue, and his work is drawn on by Senge (1990). His work
represents a unique synthesis of the two major intellectual currents relating to the
disciplines of the systems view. Two observations of Bohm's seem particularly significant
in this context: that perception and action cannot be separated and that (productive)
dialogue must be learned as a team and cannot be achieved individually.

The laws of the fifth discipline, according to Senge (1990), are:

We need to look at our own solutions to other problems in the past.
The harder you push the harder the system pushes back.
Behavior grows better before it grows worse.

The easy way out usually leads back in.
The cure can be worse than the disease.

.V‘PP’N?‘

 

 

 

 

mdtpfl
Eventuall
separate 1
their own

It
Numerou
leaning,
Consensu
the need :

team the

discipline
teaming).
striding ic
mummy
ation to r

impTOVen

89‘

8.
9.

10.

Patterson (1993) states his belief in team learning strongly: “We are smarter than
me" ( p. 11). Thinking as a group, governed by particular values, is today's value.
Eventually, leaders will learn to create a safe environment for team members, learn to
separate the person from the issue, and even develop the capacity to publicly challenge
their own thinking.

It should be noted that educational researchers are silent on this fifth discipline.
Numerous educational articles and workshops refer to team building, but not to team

learning. Principals and team members can receive professional development training in

62

Faster is slower, cause and effect are not closely related in time and space.
Small changes can produce big results, but the areas of highest leverage are
often the least obvious.

You can have your cake and eat it too, but not all at once.

Dividing an elephant in two does not produce two small elephants.

There is no blame. (p. 57-67)

 

 

 

consensus building and learn the tools to help select goals, but little has been offered on

the need for teams to think insightfully, use innovative ways to coordinate actions, and

learn the differences between dialogue and discussion.

According to Senge (1990), there are three distinct levels of the five learning

disciplines (systems thinking, personal mastery, shared vision, mental models, and team

learning): practices, in other words, what is done; principles, which can be described as

guiding ideas and insights; and essences, the state of being of those with high levels of

mastery in the discipline. Overall, the five disciplines provide a framework for focusing the

effort to develop the capacity to lead (Senge, 1990). Those invested in school

improvement need to be developed into knowledgeable decision makers by a capable

 

leadervvl
guideline:
a frarnew
chahenge

long-rem

pannipat
cnnques
Becausei
also may
pntdenn
hundwe
ammo
indudest
Wasonta
letdershi]
aPnroach
it Seems C

Player.

0

\

OrganiZat
that aliho

Concept c

 

63

leader who has the personal capacity to continually learn and grow. Although these brief
guidelines cannot include every aspect of implementing systems thinking, they do provide
a framework for moving from theory to practice. By using systems thinking to tackle the
challenges of the future, an organization can learn to develop more effective practices and

long-term solutions to problems.

 

There is, however, disagreement on the applicability, morality, and feasibility of
participative management, including the systems concept. Wheatley (1992) tells us many
critiques are offered regarding the current growing shift toward participative management.

Because it is based on democratic principles it may be nontransferable to other cultures. It

 

also may be a sophisticated way to manipulate workers. Further, relationship-based

problems, such as how to get people to work well together, how to honor and benefit

 

from diversity, how to get teams working together quickly and efficiently, and how to
resolve conflicts, can be confusing and hard to manage. Leaders are being encouraged to
‘ include stakeholders, evoke followership, and empower others. Earlier, when the focus
was on tasks, people were the annoying inconvenience. Leaders thought about situational
leadership--how the situation could affect the choice of styles. The team learning
: approach has caused a different understanding of leadership to emerge. Despite criticisms,
: it seems clear that the era of the rugged individual has been replaced by the era of the team
L player.

Other organizational theories. Managers have been trained to focus on ethereal
organizational qualities such as culture, values, vision, and ethics. Wheatley (1992) said
that although these can be experienced they can be difficult to explain explicitly. The

concept of field creation, filling space with the messages an organization cares about,

 

produces
change in
Senge's bl
a by-prod
build own
implemen
employee

Tl
organizati
define its
level of St
0rgantzati
patterns, ;
examined
flitilleWor
but the V2

Tr
Pounder,
achievem.
Perlbrma]
Participar
OUTCOmes

integrand

_.._.,_Aq

64

produces a developed field with the capacity to shape and direct energy. These fields can
change in content and shape through individual activity. This "field creation" is similar to
Senge's belief that an organization's vision grows as a by-product of individual visions and
a by-product of ongoing conversations. Wheatley adds: “We know that the best way to
build ownership is to give over the creation process to those who will be charged with its
implementation. We are never successfiil if we merely present a plan in finished form to
employees” (p. 66).

The four organizational functions that Parsons (1960) claimed were necessary for
organizational efi‘ectiveness and survival--goal achievement (an organization's ability to
define its objectives and mobilize its resources toward their attainment), integration (the

level of social solidarity that exists among an organization's members), adaptation (the I

 

organization's ability to control its relations with its environment), and latent (the cultural
patterns, motivations, and commitment of an organization's members)--were recently
examined by Pounder, et al. (1995). Their findings were consistent with the theoretical
framework of leadership as an organizational quality. Leadership did vary across schools,
but the variation was moderate.

Total leadership in schools is associated with school performance, according to
Pounder, et al. (1995) and overall leadership in schools is related to the level of both goal
achievement and latency in schools. Organizational leadership affects organizational
performance by shaping the organization of work and building commitment among
participants. Leadership that shapes the organization of work is predictive of student
outcomes. The leadership of principals is positively related to social integration, but

integration is negatively related to student achievement. This is contrary to the

 

researcher
integratior
satisfactio

measure 0

Re
Senge ( 19
leader wh.
scholar in
Where m;
the 19505,
internal in
Conceptua

As
descdbe t}
depisiong
and evalu:
ttnsesun
theiob.

In
noncoerci

Setgiovan

65

researchers' theoretical framework, which indicates that leadership enhances the social
integration of school organizations, which, in turn, enhances performance. However, job
satisfaction was used as the definition of social integration; the researchers suggest that a

measure of group solidarity might more validly capture the integration construct.

Decision Making

Research on decision making is sparsely described in the leadership literature.
Senge (1990) claims that peOple are developed into knowledgeable decision makers by a
leader who has the personal capacity to continually learn and grow. Another noted
scholar in the field, Wheatley (1992), describes decision making as a participative process

where management empowers others. Katz (1974), well known as a leadership author in

 

the 19505, claims leaders must develop intergroup skills in high levels of management and
internal intragroup skills in lower to middle management, and utilize these skills with
conceptual, human, and technical skills to make decisions.

As described above, team leadership authors Katzenbach and Smith (1993)
describe the team decision-making process as a group making necessary trade-Offs and
decisions about how to proceed; after they have identified the problems and Opportunities
and evaluate the options, they have to move forward. Teams need some members with
these skills to start the process, although the authors believe many develop them best on
thejob.

In his leadership research, Rost (1991) defines team decision making as
noncoercive, not power-based, authoritarian, or dictatorial; yet leaders influence decisions.

Sergiovanni (1992) is more descriptive but may be considered more elusive as well. He

 

says trust
addition,
group cor
both drav
complem
shared. I
organizat
multiple 1

A
making, 1
0n the 0‘
systems 1
by Which
follower:
govern h
Stress at r
memberE

T
tdnrdina
how Con
Fr0m thi
Who hav

teaming

66

says trust and integrity must be built before allowing others to assume leadership roles. In
addition, Sergiovanni remarks that democracy is an attribute, along with group authority,
group commitment, consensus and accountability. Leithwood (1994) and Tichy (1990)
both draw from Burns, and their concepts of decision making are somewhat
complementary. Leithwood says collaboration is essential, and decision making is to be
shared. Tichy indicates leaders must mobilize and get commitment from the entire
organization. Bolman (1991) uses terms such as facilitative and empowering, combining
multiple flames, knowing the limits.

Although educational researchers are specific about the constructs of decision
making, they are inconsistent. Very few translate decision-making theories into practice.
On the other hand, organizational theorists provide a plan for decision making through the
systems thinking disciplines. They describe the discipline of team learning as the method
by which a leader can develop an effective, responsible means of decision making with the
followers. Along with the other disciplines of the systems approach, team learning may
govern how decisions will be made and carried out by the group. Organizational theorists
stress a meshing of members, participative management, leadership meshed among
members, and relationships as key to team learning.

This discipline of team learning is described by Senge (1990) as insightful thinking,
coordination, action, dialogue, and discussion of issues. These guidelines help determine
how conflict is handled. Team members are encouraged to network, to join other teams.
From this team learning, the leader develops people into knowledgeable decision makers
who have the personal capacity to continually learn and grow. Wheatley (1992) says team

teaming is carried out in a participative management mode, which is not situational.

 

 

 

Relationship:
participative

Tearr
effective dec
understandin

Just 1
to use by 1181
schools has y
the other ma
may create ir
cOntrnitment
principal. y.
The transfor:

1991).

Lead

as Wheatley
O'TOOTB ([99
“do (1990).

perspeCllVes

organizatiOn

 

67

Relationships are key. From this discipline, decision making is carried out in a
participative style by empowered peOple.

Team learning offers an approach for leaders to prepare followers to become
effective decision makers. Yet successfiil team learning is inextricably linked to an
understanding of the members' mental models, personal mastery, and systems thinking.

Just how principals can balance the decision-making process they are encouraged
to use by new researchers with the hierarchical model of leadership still being utilized in
schools has yet to be answered. Such balance appears to be an impossible task. One or
the other may have to be chosen. If both are used, a question arises as to the conflict this
may create in and of itself. Along with other increases in principals' duties, the time
commitment necessary for shared decision making creates additional pressure on the
principal. Yet the world is changing. Values are changing radically, including leadership.

The transformation of leadership to a postindustrial teamwork has barely begun (Rost,

1991)
Summary

Leadership has been the thrust of recent research by such organizational theorists
as Wheatley (1992) and Senge (1990), whose work has influenced Ogawa (1995) and
O'Toole (1995). Noted educational leadership researchers such as Sergiovanni (1992),

- Tichy (1990), Bolman (1991), Patterson (1993) and Leithwood (1994) have added their
perspectives of what is happening in education administration.

A pattern of concepts emerges from the works of these well-known thinkers. The

organizational theorist group coined the term "disciplines" to describe the major

_._.‘-.. , -~ A». ~ .-...-—..

 

assumptions t
four of the ill
mental model
and LeitthC
team learning
matrix at the
contribute to

Altho
participative t
decision-malt
environment ‘
Senge's syster
theorists' thin
which helps lt
contributions

Womt
and participat
connection, h
described by :
highly el'fectir
This also he];

decision maki

68

assumptions of a new way of looking at leadership. Educational theorists tend to describe
:‘our of the five elements of the same basic concept: systems thinking, personal mastery,
nental models, and shared vision. (Shared vision is absent in the work of Bolman. Schon,
tnd Leithwood.) Educational researchers do not describe a parallel to the discipline of
.eam learning, nor is it addressed as significant to leadership in education; however, as the
natrix at the end of this chapter shows, they do include indices of attributes that may
:ontribute to team learning.

Although noted educational researchers seem to recognize and agree to a
)articipative form of decision making, a model has not been proposed for developing a
lecision-making process in schools. Despite the parallels, it is clear that the school
environment would require a significant change to adOpt the five disciplines included in
Senge's systems thinking model. A matrix of educational researchers' and organizational

eorists' thinking as it relates to the five disciplines is included at the end of this chapter,
hich helps identify the similarities and differences in systems thinking in their
[ontributions (See Table 1.)

Women leaders hold characteristics Regan and Brooks (1995) call collaborative

nd participatory styles of leadership. Further, women place value on inclusion and

onnection, have a strong caring ethic and value relationships. Because these qualities,

 

.escribed by the authors as feminist attributes of leadership, appear in most studies as
ghly effective in team decision making, females were selected as the gender to study.
éhis also helps limit the variables and increases the POSSibility 0f finding effective team

r
H
(Necision making taking place in their schools.

 

 

 

 

 

_ _ ~ ~ \
nw-m~>=§x~ ~239~t 23.3.?» E92256 § u<b§~§< xtxiux—x \ Aubuxvéfinx \QtfihkmaN \ Mfiwuv‘fimRN h~§mfiwkwi \ KQA§§V \

 

ZU.-.:Q..Uv..~fi~ owMCmCrF WHZUHWKW UCG Whon~w3< hObwz -N U~fi-wrfi

 

 

 

69

 

 

 

bum—ES @2235 -
Eofizfifiou -
32302.8
:5 swab:
mEanv 88:0 03 -
625835 =2:me -

8:30:00 :5:
=02::% Bot

x83 mo :ocmnmcmwho

 

 

3396 5:956 05 89% a -
fl 2: mo 3%“: 2:. - 5233:: SEE -

8558.“qu :ocanfimwuo wEEoEOm 2.550055 - 252??
Beta :3 =< - :ocmfiuwwuo fl 8230 2 scum—om - 5:9: @825 - mm @2803»: -

23— 35? Ba 38% 332 moon—82: 2:29?

:8 €382: =< - $5832 @2on - 3 conga 25:50 - wcofia 8:82 - 395m aims—owe..— - «Bawo
182337. 82 -
>8—
Ba maEEoqum - 2636qu -
95332—3 - £3239: =w wfiaaoz - maven—0:3 -
EoEowmfiE Eoc 8:3?wa 5638 wcobm - msoom - Secs—82 -
333633 - 05 mo comm? 2E. - 309nm - 3:38 ham - 25E - 3:855
comma“: @3380
Esmsmbfiuoaoo -
”:82 $50 cocguoE

no 33508 58,—. - 852:5 - 2338.30 :38qu - 5385 -
cocoa 33538.0 - Sosa—:33 - b33830 >5on 8m - 30:20:? -

3:855: - Eofimfifioo soccer—om - 85:3 @2050 - 283 05 Sosa MES

88% «29:8 Sosa @280 - 2038 8:2 28 com; common— - x55 8235:de

bEEwEE wag—EH - :23}. 2: M: - 33.225: 2» Bo: - Queue 280m - manna“: Rom - om=ow

 

 

M5533 SSH

 

29.2.3 383%

 

“4&3: ~52»:

 

@3963 3:2.ng

 

M23335 $83.?

 

.3531

 

 

 

AUMDCCCOUV

- N U~Q~wrfi

 

 

7O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EoEo>0E§
30:50:00 :0 £00809“ .200w $5000:— Eeflmcoo 2:0? $52: 005600
bnmomaazobfim 600900 008:.00 0020000 0. 0000: 0:0 w:_>_0w-Eo_00a mco_.mw_cmw._0 $0000 .EEm d
Siows 0:03 a 0. 02:8050 0925 :08 :5 50:5 .0503 ©9580—0800 0:0 03:3 00300005 53:055—
Amfiow 0006502060000
0003.000 098% - 000% 00 005000000 :06? 000m .80
230005 - $200: 50:00 0 20:00:00 000 £282 082m? h.0 82035; 000356»—
00032 EowEEoU -
@305 080??
0:0 65:00 .53 - 0025, E mowfifiu 0008:8500 5:25 9:502 0200.0 :35
0>coocom -
0:853 -
500500 :32me - 205E - 30038305
133085 - wEwE - 6000080 00805 20202 -
0300885 - 825/ .- 302200 02< 0002 v =< - 58—0:
003883. 052m -
€035 was—002 mac—0:1— -
03000 32500;; 9:223 8300 “oz 029$ 02? 35:00 00:00:05; mdcowa owcacu - 20?
«2.3203 3005 20.3.3 033% £000: ~35: ©2003 Ezabm M06355. 0.503% 3530‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

{Gin-lull“ h lullau'H‘ — II!!.I.§.I\- h\!\:II\INpU _ :ha\\utu§! hix‘dl“! ~ .uula-\r!l\‘! NI‘III\I\1II\AN K l|1lnllhllolci l ‘I{I“luul.rH ~ II‘IH‘II‘ \

 

38:22:08 . u 03m,“

 

 

 

Fm. “

--.-_.__.__‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

>535 2 85:5
3253 Mo Enacts—om- magma “0 ~83 -
5% 13:38 H :3» 353250 :Ew Swazi sound—«35- :37. 383280 - in!
i9 95.832 mo
each—go 2 2093. So :285 man? 3050 ES 25 26: fl b_==EEoo
Beans—Eco €82 ago—n5 9:32:34 82S, 28 3.552 9503 :5 mean: cos; wEEau— a wEEEm _=:a>o_w.8m
9:80:23 concocom -
a 5 8a 236:8 852:5 3538:2232 -
98 22:34 so 53 afimcosflom - 8893 125:8 moEED owcwno ES 225 - “mom
bofifiouhi -
8an no.“
1 “commas 530%
7 8.2: 2 Bo:
020% 3:8 £2.34 - .
92:53 - 8:23 5:53:50 .565... :wmmun 2850
3.29? 3:28
9 5:358 23
E25396 Enou— -
36830 - 038m 8:
$658825 6829? so 38m -
x55 asew - 8050 ES Sacco - wcififihfioaxm 528.5“
oéanEam - #55 @280 :8230 :0 cocoocom 323m - $85.25) -
3&5qu Earn «55> 3.55. 235% N82»: bmaafix ~23me ENQSSN $33.? 333‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

802583 ._ 03¢

 

\ ‘cm

Liter
framework 1
principals, v
team decisic
processes. 1
involved in ‘

matrix also '

72

Literature on systems thinking and recent educational research provided a
framework for the attempt to determine to what extent women elementary school
principals, who are involved in the NCA accreditation process, think about and implement
team decision making in an environment historically not supportive of participative
processes. Several matrices linked the various behaviors of six elementary principals
involved in the NCA goal selection step to the five disciplines of systems thinking. One

matrix also helped identify behaviors not directly connected to any of the five disciplines.

 

 

 

 

The
elementary l
setting, A q
major resear
0n the findir

Upo
sources wer
The Michig;
selection ac
reports and
as a form 0‘
as another I

Dur

intelplelatk

CHAPTER THREE

 

NIETHODOLOGY

Introduction

The general purpose of this study was to determine to what extent female

elementary principals think about and implement team decision making in NCA goal-

 

setting. A qualitative research design was selected. This design was used to address the
major research question as I believed it would be effective in carrying out the study, based

on the findings of research design authors such as Yin (1989) and Lincoln and Guba (1985).

 

Upon choosing a case study design, which is descriptive in nature, three data

. sources were developed: NCA artifacts, focus group interviews and principal interviews.

The Michigan NCA State Committee ofiice ofi‘ered information to guide me in principal
p selection according to specific criteria and provided artifacts such as the visiting team

reports and annual reports. Focus groups of teachers took place in each principal's school

as a form of data source. Two to three in—depth interviews were held with each principal

 

as another means of data collection.
During the process of data collection, data analysis occurred which helped
. formulate questions for further clarification or expansion. Further analysis allowed for

interpretations of the principals‘ team decision-making efforts and for conclusions and

73

 

implications

cases. Furtl

Yin t
contemporar
phenomenor
evidence are
mmmwr
Since organi
making in gr
nithin its un
meet the crit
evidence are
Pfincipals; fi
regarding {h
Michigan Nt

lden
Which had c
cormmmity r
SClectiOn 0f
although fer

a‘lmlnistrati‘

74

implications to be drawn from the themes as they emerged from the analysis across the

cases. Further description of the design, data sources, collection, and analysis follows.

Design and Criteria

Yin (1989) defined a case study as an empirical inquiry that investigates a
contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries between
phenomenon and context are not clearly evident, and in which multiple courses of
evidence are used" (p. 23). Principals' perceptions of the process they use and to what
extent they use it to make decisions is the phenomenon of interest described in this paper.
Since organizational contexts and individual perceptions and meanings related to decision
making in goal setting are not easily separable, it was important to examine each case
within its unique school context as well as to make comparisons across cases. In order to
meet the criteria for valid case study research according to Yin, multiple sources of
evidence are necessary. Three primary data sources were used: interview data from
principals; focus group interviews of three to five of each principal's staff members
regarding their perceptions of the building’s team decision making; and artifacts from the
Michigan NCA state office, specifically, annual reports and visiting team reports.
Identifying sites in which team decision making occurred was important. Schools
which had completed one cycle of outcomes accreditation had involved staff and school
community members in the process of decision making. Equally necessary was the
selection of female school principals according to specific criteria. Women principals,

although fewer in number, are perceived to be more effective leaders than their male

administrative counterparts (Sergiovanni, 1992). The NCA state ofiice personnel

 

 

 

identified 11
Michigan wt

and who met

For t
women print
described in

The

study:

The southea
ntimber put
assisted in n
f€c0mmend
above (met
The require,
accreditatio

Practice for

75

identified 11 female elementary principals located in the southeast quadrant of lower
Michigan whose public schools had undergone at least 1 cycle of Outcomes Accreditation

and who met the other criteria. Ultimately, 6 women were able to participate in the study.

Data Collection and Analysis

For this qualitative study three primary sources of data were used to study 6
women principals: interviews, focus groups and documents. These 3 sources of data are
described in more detail below.

The following characteristics were used to identify candidates for inclusion in the

study:

*

principal of a southeastern Michigan public elementary school

* NCA member school for at least 5 years

*-

completed 1 cycle of NCA Outcomes Accreditation

*-

school had only 1 administrator

* female
The southeastern Michigan geographic area offered the highest concentration of NCA
member public schools from which to select principals with the specific criteria and
assisted in minimizing travel and time constraints. Principals were selected from a list
recommended by the state office personnel of NCA, who identified them as meeting the
above criteria. The principals listed were also considered successful building principals.
The requirement that a candidate have completed 1 cycle of the NCA outcomes
accreditation process in an elementary school ensured that the principal had been in

practice for more than 5 years and had experience in team decision making. Selection of

 

 

principals w
practices rel
another adn
Cha
feminist attr
styles, placi
relationship
morality bag
separation 2
Connection
Hurry ( 1 99:
p.400). B
making, ant
selected,
Res
administran
Skills to brii
the “Ced to
leadership i
Usir
Hiral) and 3
the Small p.

SpeClfic‘ 0

76

principals who practiced in one-administrator buildings ensured that team leadership
practices reported by staff members were indeed practices of the principal and not of
another administrator.

Characteristics of female leaders are referred to by Regan and Brooks (1995) as
feminist attributes of leadership. These include collaborative and participatory leadership
styles, placing value on inclusion and connection, a strong caring ethic, and valuing
relationship. Other research by Gilligan (1982) found women's development leading to a
morality based on relationship and responsibility rather than a focus on masculine values of
separation and competition. Helgesen (1990) identified the values of inclusion and
connection as valuable leadership qualities for organization in the next century. Further,
Hurty ( 1995) defined women's leadership as "connective, persuasive, and collaborative"
(p. 400). Because these attributes appeared in most studies as effective in team decision
making, and limiting the variables would benefit the study, female candidates were
selected.

Research conducted by Dunlap and Schmuck (1995) points out that women enter
administration after a longer career in teaching than men have and use their leadership
skills to bring about significant change and growth in the schools. This finding reinforces
the need to better understand the experiences women have and how they affect their
leadership in schools.

Using additional variables, such as the location of the school (urban, suburban,
rural) and socio-economic status of the student population, was not possible because of
the small pool of candidates. The original list of 25 qualified schools was non-gender

specific. Only 11 candidates were female; of those 11, two principals moved to other

 

districts, am
one principa
interviewing
she could m
and eager tr

"Boi
learn more :
Detroit; she
administratc
school, in n
lone admini
With some r
years. "Em
been in adn
building Wit
SUburban, n
Plincipa] th.
Silldents, 10
University t.

Although at

lea“ 5 Year

Years,

77

districts, and 1 moved mid-year to another position in another district. Of the remaining 8,
one principal's mother was quite ill, and the principal was not sure of her availability for
interviewing. Another principal claimed she was too pressured by other demands and felt
she could not devote any time to the project. The 6 remaining principals were agreeable
and eager to start the interview process.

"Bobbie" quickly decided to be involved in this study; she saw it as a chance to
learn more about herself. Her school is considered metropolitan and is southwest of
Detroit; she has been principal there for 8 years. The school population requires only 1
administrator. "Cindy" also did not hesitate to agree to become part of this study. Her
school, in northeastern metropolitan Detroit, has more than 600 students, but she is the
lone administrator, although she has a full-time counselor assigned to her building to help
with some nonadministrative duties. Her experience as a principal in this district spans 6

years. "Ernestine's" school is located near Cindy's, and has about 400 students. She has

 

been in administration for 11 years, the past 6 as a principal. "Debbie" is principal of a
building with fewer than 400 students in a community which could be classified as
suburban, near Flint. She is in her sixth year as principal as well. "Nancy" has been
principal the longest of the six; she has 11 years of experience in her school of about 350
students, located in southwestern metropolitan Detroit. "Rita's" school is situated in a
university town and has about 400 students. She is in her 6th year of administration.
Although all of the schools had been accepted into the NCA accreditation program for at

least 5 years, Nancy's and Bobbie’s schools had been members of NCA for well over 10

years.

 

Mars

The
artifacts. T?
minutes, be
transcripts
revision if r
NCA team
a 45 minuit
selection. .I
Prepared bj
peer grOUp
All 3 some
means by p
‘0 question
multiple 30
the data to!

lie

\

least 4 5 mi
What Plinci
interview v
Principals S

practice, in

 

78

Data Sources

The three sources of data used were interviews of the principals, focus groups and
artifacts. The interviews, consisting of 2 to 3 sessions each planned to last about 45
minutes, began in each principal‘s office. Questions were designed to be Open-ended, and
transcripts were reviewed and returned to the principal after each session for clarity and
revision if necessary. The focus groups were conducted with 3 to 5 teachers from the
NCA team of the school. These took place either before or after school, and consisted of
a 45 minute, 10 question session, focusing on team decision making in the process of goal
selection. Artifacts from the state committee's NCA office consisted of annual reports
prepared by the school, and the visiting team report, which was prepared by the external
peer group of teachers and chair, whose purpose it was to validate the school's progress.
All 3 sources addressed the phenomenon of triangulation (Denzin, 1978) and provided the
means by which data could be compared. Using different modes of inquiry offered a way
to question conflicting data as well as show confirming data. Yin (1989) stated that using
multiple sources of evidence in a case study allows the researcher to review and analyze
the data together so that the case study's findings are based on the convergence of
information from different sources, not on quantitative or qualitative data alone ( p. 96).

Interviews of principals. Two to 3 semi-structured interviews, each lasting at
least 45 minutes, were conducted with each principal. The lst interview concentrated on
what principals thought about in their practice as it related to decision making. The 2nd
interview was designed to be conducted about two weeks later and concentrated on how
principals saw their decision-making practice in metaphors and how they applied the

practice, including any enhancements, constraints, and missing or additional factors. The

 

 

 

2nd intervi
decision-m:
into compu
Altl
firrther by 2
experience:
principals' :
requesting
Wo
qualitative
addition, t2
review and
Place, one
When the it
Which ther
Th.
Process an
HOWGVer,
deemed it
ROSSman)
OCCUITed, I

 

79

2nd interview and 3rd, if necessary, allowed more open-ended responses to team
decision-making queries. Most of the interviews were tape recorded and later transcribed
into computer text files. (See Appendix A.)

Although basic questions were used in the interviews, opportunities arose to probe
firrther by asking for clarification, requesting details, and asking for examples of
experiences through report or story format. Linkages seemed to appear among the
principals' stories as the interviews were held, so further exploration took place by
requesting an expansion of their responses to some of the questions in the protocol.

Wolcott (1994) indicated that in order to satisfy the challenge of validity in
qualitative research, the interviewer had to. listen more than talk during the interviews. In
addition, taping the interview and returning the interview transcript to the interviewee for
review and revision are methods to increase validity. When two to three interviews take
place, one interview may inform the next, especially if linkages are sought. Therefore,
when the information I gathered showed impressions, hypotheses, facts, and ideas on
which there should be a follow-up, I did so in the next interview.

The design of the interview protocol provided a structure to guide the interview
process and gain a clear picture of what principals think and do in team decision making.
However, responses that were not part of the original protocol were pursued when I
deemed it necessary, thinking that they could contribute to the study (Marshall &
Rossman, 1989). This reasoning supported the necessity to analyze the interviews as they
occurred, rather than conduct the analysis after the interviews were completed.

Consequently, I reserved the right to modify aspects of the interview protocol as the

 

 

interviewe
Rossman, '

Int
exploratior
allowed me
study(Seic
the order it
noted that
case studie

E0.
data obtair
Phenomenr
the Purpos
techniquef
collection;
type Ofinfc
Focus gron

1. j
discussions

2. .
dlSCUSsion.

3. 1

Morgan. 19

80

interview evolved by encouraging filrther information on specific responses (Marshall &
Rossman, 1989).

In order to test the quality of the interview protocol, I piloted the questions and
explorations with two elementary principals who fit the selection criteria. This step
allowed me to adjust interview questions as appropriate to the research questions of the
study (Seidman, 1991). Piloting may also decrease bias by testing question development,
the order in which questions are asked, and presentation to the interviewees. It should be
noted that the principals who helped pilot the interview protocol were not included in the
case studies on which this research is based.

F ocus group interviews. The purpose of the focus group is to collect qualitative
data, obtain general background information, and learn how responders talk about the
phenomenon of interest (Stewart & Shamdasani, 1990). These basic premises supported
the purpose of this study. In addition, the characteristics and benefits of the focus group
technique fit the needs of this study. Although interviews provided the central data

collection method, focus groups allowed pursuing a broader research agenda through the

type of information sought, the specificity required, and the way the information was used.

Focus groups have specific characteristics:

1. Focus groups involve homogeneous people in a social interaction in a series of
discussions.

2. The purpose of focus groups is to collect qualitative data from a focused
discussion.

3. Focus groups are a qualitative approach to gathering information (Krueger &

Morgan, 1994, p. 37).

 

 

 

 

Mul‘.
social envir
and the size

A f
members tc
Staff were .
process. 1
steering co
either co-c]
chair. Alth
Shamdasar
serendipito
Creates stir
occurred 3:
focus grou
focus grou

Ba:
the glOUp,
formed as
queSliOngr
r‘iVleW ant

critiques a

 

81

Multiple benefits can accrue from the use of focus groups. Data are gathered in a
social environment, the cost is usually low, the process can be flexible, results are quick,
and the size of a qualitative study can be increased (Krueger et al., 1994).

A focus group interview of 3 to 5 school improvement steering committee staff
, members took place soon after the 2nd set of principal interviews had been completed.
Stafi‘ were selected on the basis of their specific roles in the NCA school improvement
process. I asked each principal to request that at least 3 teachers who were on the
steering committee join me in a focus group interview. Steering committee members
either co-chair the schoolwide NCA accreditation process or serve as a goal committee
chair. Although each focus group interview represented a single observation (Stewart &
Shamdasani, 1990), a group setting often creates a situation in which ideas are generated
serendipitously. The spontaneity and synergism generated through group discussion
creates stimulations can add significantly to the collection of qualitative data. This
occurred several times. To encourage this to happen, looser scrutiny was allowed in the
focus groups, another benefit of the technique. However, by design the structure of the
focus group interview was tighter than that of the individual interviews.

Basic questions focused on team decision making drew out the collective efforts of
the group. This focus group information was documented with the use of charts that were
formed as the process unfolded (see Appendix C). The charts, consisting of the 10 basic
questions with group members' responses listed underneath, were posted on the walls for
review and reflection and provided a means of documenting participants’ comments and

critiques as they talked about team decision making in their building.

 

-__

 

M
annual repc
research pu
to the scho
report and
team with l
purposes b

Appendix

E
number of
leadership
leadership,
slStems th
Process of
the intervi:
rtflated to .
differences

Th
Process of
literature I

The data t

82

Artifacts. Documents from the state NCA office consisting of each school's
annual report, OA annual report, and the visiting team chair reports were available for
research purposes. The annual report and team report provided contextual data relevant
to the school setting and the backgrounds of the principal and the staff. The CA annual
report and visiting team chair report indicated the progress of the school improvement
team with their goals. This information was approved for confidential release for research
purposes by the NCA state director. Samples of these two artifacts are included in

Appendix C.

Data Analysis

Thematic analysis across cases. Examination of the literature showed that a great
number of the aspects of systems thinking were repeated in a variety of contemporary
leadership theories: in transformational leadership, reflective leadership, organizational
leadership, team leadership, and systems thinking leadership. Therefore, the themes of
systems thinking were used as a lens through which to view the team decision-making
process of principals. The conceptual framework was designed to identify these themes in
the interviews and focus group experiences. A compilation of the 5 disciplines as it
related to each principal's team decision-making process revealed similarities, additions,
differences and omissions among the 6 principals.

The real value of qualitative research is in the process of using data rather than the
process of gathering data (Wolcott, 1990). The conceptual framework, supported by the
literature review, served as a guideline to identify data that seemed relevant to the study.

The data then were organized and interpreted. This process brought meaning to the raw

 

 

 

data in the
recomment
and interpr

As
I searched
thinking ar
techniques
organized
artifacts, p
categories
outlined t1

MI
may be ob
interviewe
design,

It
be interpr.
“Next ()1
aceOrding
Guha (19:
Out discip
the Only a

83

data in the interview transcripts (W olcott, 1990; Marshall & Rossman, 1989). Wolcott
recommends qualitative data be presented in the final document as description, analysis,
and interpretation. These suggestions are followed in Chapters 4 and 5.

As each interview and focus group was completed, the discussion was transcribed.
I searched for general statements about the relationships among the disciplines of systems
thinking and the strategies that link to this theory, along with effective team leadership
techniques that emerged from the conversations. Once this step was completed, I
organized and interpreted the data, comparing and contrasting data from all three sources:
artifacts, principal interviews, and focus groups. This step helped further develop the
categories and themes and cued me to look for other possible explanations. Finally, I
outlined the findings.

Multiple case studies follow a "replication logic" (Yin, 1989, p. 53). Similar results
may be obtained from the cases; therefore, replication will have taken place. Each
interviewee is considered a single experiment, and the analysis constitutes a cross-case
design.

It must be noted, however, that the context with which an experience is seen can
be interpreted and perceived differently. Not only the writer but the reader "will bring a
context of meaning and interpretation to an account or text, and will interpret it
accordingly" (Altheide & Johnson, cited in Denzin & Lincoln, 1994, p. 496). Lincoln and
Guba (1985) explain that nothing is neutral, not our mental processes, our instruments, or
our disciplines; therefore, objectivity is an illusion, but subjectivity in the usual sense is not
the only alternative. She suggests we consider perspective as a more usefiil concept. From

Where we look affects what we see. Any particular focus gives only a partial result, and

 

 

 

no single d5
morphoger
Pa‘
methods sf
advocating
the priman
subjectivist
Lincoln, 19
transcribed
for further
helpful in e
emerged
Principal tr
Th
out in a sh
indexing tl
Provided t
1a“guilge,
could not
Johnson, c
Wi
included v

were anah

 

34

no single discipline ever gives us a complete picture. "A whole picture is an image created
morphogenetically from multiple perspective" (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 15).

Patton (1990) claims that the selection, design, and implementation of evaluation
methods should be based flexibly and on need and responsiveness in situations,

advocating a paradigm of choices. These choices favor methodological appropriateness as

 

the primary criterion for judging methodological quality. Therefore, objectivist and
subjectivist methods can be used together without problem (Greene, cited in Denzin &

Lincoln, 1994). As the interviews progressed and notes were reviewed after being

i

transcribed, certain patterns or themes began to emerge. Follow-up interviews allowed
for further questions to tease out more information on these themes. This flexibility was
helpful in enhancing responses to certain issues or tensions across the cases as they
emerged. In addition, an attempt was made to use my own experience as an elementary
principal to help interpret and understand the principals in their talk.

This awareness of the position of the principal plays a significant role as pointed
out in a study by Manning (1987) of police call codes. Although he analyzed codes by
indexing them, only his extensive knowledge of the police organization and culture
provided the knowledge for the meaning of these codes. "He knows the work, the
language, and the situations, typical, routine, and unique. As he clearly acknowledges, he
could not have rendered a valid sociological account without this awareness" (Altheide &
Johnson, cited in Denzin & Lincoln, 1994, p. 497).

With this in mind, subjective notes that I made before and after the interview were
included with the taped interviews and transcribed onto computer file. Then the printouts

were analyzed by searching for key terms and descriptive words that indicated a

 

 

knowledge
decision m
leadership,
decision m
differences
Ta
flwwh
Lincoln (1
own biase
pure form
subjectivit
concerns a
While obje
PUblic (101
by relying
At
different 1
qualitativt
baSEd on
& Guba,
and relial;

the panic

 

85

knowledge and practice of the disciplines of systems thinking as they relate to team
decision making. For instance, when principals were asked about techniques in team
leadership, this part of the conversation revealed further findings on their practices in
decision making. As this information was placed in a matrix design, similarities and

differences appeared.

 

Taking into consideration what the teachers had to share in the focus groups
allowed for a more objective viewpoint to be created and a more critical view to evolve.

Lincoln (1985) claims, "Multiple perspectives are needed so that we aren't blinded by our

 

own biases" (p. 15). She further cautions that "we need to recognize that objectivity in its
pure form is an unattainable state" (p. 108). Lincoln offers a description of objectivity and
subjectivity by Scriven (1971), to help explain firrther, "Subjective refers to what

concerns or occurs to the individual subject and his experiences, qualities and dispositions,

 

while objective refers to what a number of subjects or judges experience, in short, to the
public domain" (p. 95). That objectivity, in expanding the conversation, can be threatened
by relying exclusively on one single observer.

According to Creswell (1994), scholars contend that qualitative research is
different from quantitative methodology in 10 identified characteristics inherent in the
qualitative design. One of the assumptions indicates that the researcher seeks believability
based on coherence, insight and utility (Eisner, 1991), along with trustworthiness (Lincoln
& Guba, 1985), through a process of verification rather than through traditional validity
and reliability measures. In-depth interviewing, if done in a manner of trust established
between the interviewer and the subject, can lead to realistic and intuitive interpretation of

the participants' perceptions and experiences. Van Maanen's (1979) standpoint is that

 

 

qualitative
on to pos
soft, objet
broad ran
broad-has
research t
Vi
basically '
aspect lie
model, w
identifyin
F.
conversa:
the quest
Tom 33 1
reviewed
A.
is intimat
POSSibly
distance
Social sci

comm \

 

86

qualitative strategies emphasize an interpretive approach where data are worked with and
on, to pose and resolve research questions. Therefore, he claims, "There is nothing hard or
soft, objective or subjective, about a qualitative orientation; within its reach are found a
broad range of craft~like approaches to particular research problems" (p. 253). This
broad-based View reflects the need for objectivity and truthfirlness, which is critical to both
research traditions but allows for judging a qualitative study to be different.

When analyzing focus group data, the data are deve10ped mechanically, which is
basically "cutting and pasting" the material into categories and concepts. The interpretive
aspect lies in determining criteria and coding the data (Knodel, 1993). The conceptual
model, with the circles depicting systems-thinking disciplines, provided the tool for
identifying and categorizing the data.

Focus group information had been charted onto large sheets of paper as the
conversations evolved, so that their contributions were visible and could be reviewed as
the questions were asked. The sheets of paper were taped on a wall or window in the
room as the interview progressed; the complete set of questions and responses was
reviewed with the group toward the end of the interview to clarify and finalize the data.

According to Knodel (1993), accuracy of the analysis is enhanced if the analyst(s)
is intimately involved with data collection by being present at the focus group sessions and
possibly serving as moderator. Further, Knodel says, "This eliminates considerably the
distance between the analyst and subject being studied that so often marks quantitative
social science research in which only interviewers and not the eventual analysts have

contact with respondents” (p. 50). Because I was the moderator and facilitator of the

 

focus grou
desirable 11

Ar
reports, at
member sr
chairs and
report req
enrollmen‘
regarding

school has

A
the study
settings, 1
interview
rellOTting
were gem

foi feviev

W
In
which 1 u

87

focus groups, I had the opportunity to make field notes after the process, allowing me a
desirable level of intimacy with data collection, and thereby enhancing the data.
Artifacts from the NCA state office consisted of annual reports, OA annual
reports, and visiting team reports. The annual reports, due every year from each N CA
member school, are completed by the school (often the principal) and signed by the co-
chairs and superintendent before being sent to the state accreditation office. The annual
report requests data regarding the context of the school (i.e., changes in school faculty,
enrollment) and the OA annual report asks for specific information from the school
regarding its accreditation progress in the past year, including the level of progress the

school has made.

Ethical Considerations
A letter was secured from each principal indicating her agreement to participate in

the study. The principals' names were changed, along with details about their school

 

settings, to enhance confidentiality. To firrther ensure confidentiality, I was the sole
interviewer, transcriber and data decoder. The same method of data decoding and
reporting was followed with focus group interviews as with principal interviews. All data
were secured in locked files. Each interview, once transcribed, was sent to the participant
for review and clarification purposes, if needed. Principals were asked to make comments

or changes where necessary and return them to me for revision.

Written Presentation

 

In Chapter 4, each woman in the study is identified by the name of a plant or tree,

which I use as a metaphor to describe her strengths and/or limitations as a school leader in

 

 

the team (
describe t2
principal's

decision/t

Sr
reported 1
self-repor
from Whit
beliefs, vz
principal .
either. C
their OWn
Practical -
rather rel;
This stud
making si
these lear
thelllselw
the leSpo

accurate]:

88

the team decision-making process. I then present the reasons for each metaphor and
describe the setting of the particular school, the principal's leadership role, and the
principal's discussion of decision making and team decision making. Each principal's

decision/team decision-making models are included at the end of each narrative.
Limitations

Several limitations occur in this study. First, the interviews reflect the self-
reported perspectives, beliefs, and values of each participant and are, of course, subject to
self-report bias. This limitation was minimized by the data collected in the focus groups,
from which I analyzed the actual behavior as viewed by subordinates versus the reported
beliefs, values and perspectives of the principals. My experience as an elementary
principal cannot be discounted or considered a limitation with the self-reporting style
either. Qualitative evaluators "acknowledge if not celebrate the influential presence of
their own selves in the inquiry process, and seek in their work primarily to augment
practical program understanding, " thereby emphasizing context but not generalizations,
rather relying heavily on qualitative methods to construct meaning" (Greene, 1994, p. 537).
This study was concerned solely with principals' thinking and behavior in team decision-
making situations. "Even though espoused theories may not accurately represent what
these leaders actually do, they are likely to influence the expectations these leaders have of
themselves as leaders as well as their behavior" (Bensimon, 1989, p. 109). In other words,
the responses to questions asked of the principals about their decision making may not

accurately reflect what is taking place but may, in turn, bias their actions.

 

 

Se
in this stur
is not one
and revea
further ex
the categt
begins" (p
ethnic ant
varied in ‘
some app

Tl
nonverbaj
(Lincoln .
Provided
Maanen (
qUeStiong
resPonses
and WM]

Ft
years 0ft
Significant
Principal,

lecemly i

89

Second, a small number of participants from a finite geographic area was included
in this study, thereby limiting its generalizability. However, as noted earlier, generalization
is not one of the characteristics of qualitative research. "Qualitative work aims to disclose
and reveal, not merely to order and predict" (Van Maanen, 1979, p. 256). Creswell (1994)
firrther explains qualitative research as "an emerging design, not a static design, wherein
the categories develop during the study, rather than are predetermined before the study
begins" (p. 44). The schools selected were of varying socio—economic circumstances,
ethnic and racial mixes, sizes and locations, and were headed by female principals who
varied in their ethnicity as well as their length of experience. These variations allow for
some application of the findings to other schools.

Third, interview bias can enter when utilizing qualitative techniques through
nonverbal cues by the interviewer and through question presentation and development
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985). To minimize this bias, pilot interviews were conducted, which
provided healthy feedback on the questions and the interviewer's style. According to Van
Maanen (1979), "qualitative work is, by design, open-ended" (p. 253). Open-ended
questions decreased bias as well, since they allow interviewees to expand on their own
responses. Presenting transcribed documents to the interviewees to review for revisions
and accuracy further decreased bias.

Fourth, an experience bias may limit the study. In other words, a wide range of
years of experience may create a notable impact. Of the six principals, one had
significantly more experience as an administrator than the others. Although all the other
principals had practiced for at least 5 years, one who had entered the principalship most

recently indicated she felt she had more prior knowledge in team decision making to help

 

 

 

 

guide her
compilati
figure ou'
making si

A
school cc
making is
Other p01
remembe
possibilitj
bias of th
encourag
clarificati

T'
Shamdas;
larger p0,:
another; 1
Phenome;
"all" e of
moderate
to minimi

dowh anc‘

90

guide her in this process than did the more experienced principals. However, data

compilation and analysis showed that the more experienced principals had been able to
figure out on their own, through research and trial and error, methods of team decision
making similar to the ones practiced by the principals who were newer to their position.

Another limitation in the study is the participants being of one gender and the
school context being dissimilar. Although a focus on both genders in team decision
making is possible, the effort to only consider females was the emphasis of the study.
Other potential limitations in interviewing include but are not limited to the difficulty of
remembering what is said and accurately reconstructing events and experiences, and the
possibility of miscomprehending responses (Marshall & Rossman, 1989). To minimize
bias of this nature, I endeavored to establish a trusting relationship with the principals,
encouraged frank discussion, and returned each transcribed interview to the principals for
clarification or changes.

The use of focus groups brought potential limitations as well (Stewart &
Shamdasani, 1990). Again, the small number of participants limits generalization to a
larger population. Responses of members of the group were not independent of one
another; results therefore can be affected by a dominant or opinionated member. This
phenomenon, however, did not seem to occur with any significance. Also, the open-ended
nature of responses often makes summarization and interpretation difficult, and the
moderator can send cues to participants which could bias the results. Caution was taken
to minimize these possibilities by a carefiJl phrasing of responses as they were written

down and a review of responses near the end of each focus group session. Charted

 

 

response:

danfican

 

91

responses were posted as each question was completed, for visual reminders and firrther

clarification of the discussion as the meeting was reviewed at the end.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

G
Vision for
intervemi
Mhry's fa
Simule; it
fertilizing
Variables
Willingne:
esPecially
The data
PrincipalS
they thinl

”linking

 

 

CHAPTER FOUR

WOMEN IN THE GARDEN

Mary, Mary, quite contrary

How does your garden grow?
With silver bells and cockle shells
And pretty maids all in a row.

Introduction

Gardening presents an apt metaphor for the process of creating and developing a

vision for a school, then leading a staff in making decisions on the goals, strategies and

 

interventions that are needed to produce a good crop of student outcomes. Despite
Mary's facile reply in the nursery rhyme quoted above, having a successful garden is not
simple; it depends on many factors, including the weather, the quality of the seed and soil,
fertilizing, pest control, and the knowledge and care of the gardener. So, too, do many
variables affect the results of participative decision making: the suitability of the vision; the
willingness, interest, and knowledge of the staff; the support of other stakeholders; and
especially the team leadership and facilitating skills of the master gardener, the principal.
The data gathered and analyzed for this study show to what extent female elementary
principals think about, plant and grow a vision for their schools and work with staff as
they think about and implement team decision making within the framework of systems
thinking. i

92

till

 

 

Be
in NCA at
selected.
probed for
of each Wt
first inters
model or 1
decision n
encourage
decision-r
recorded .
second int
for clarifit

Ir
related qu
the focus
recorded .
reports at
hegate inf
A for sum
of inform:

Tl

Studv. T1

93

Because of my interest in decision making as it relates to the goal-setting process
in NCA accreditation programs, female principals from NCA-accredited schools were
selected. I interviewed each principal two to three times, employing a protocol that
probed for stories or examples of practice that would explain, in detail, the leadership role
of each woman and the decision-making strategies that she used. At the beginning of the
first interview, each woman was asked to review, and draw on paper, the decision-making
model or process she used. The interview continued with additional questions about
decision making and team leadership concepts. Questions were Open-ended and
encouraged story telling, allowing the principals to give examples of their leadership and
decision-making processes. Each interview lasted at least 45 minutes and was tape
recorded with the principal's permission, then later transcribed into computer files. In the
second interview, and the third interview if necessary, we reviewed the previous interview
for clarification and made any changes before continuing with open-ended questions.

‘ In the focus groups, comprising three or more steering committee members, 10
related questions were asked about the goal-setting process of NCA. Responses during
the focus group sessions, which lasted about 45 minutes, were charted, and similarly tape
recorded and transcribed. Data were used from NCA annual reports, NCA-OA annual
reports and visiting team reports provided by the Michigan NCA office to support or
negate information received in both individual and focus group interviews. (See Appendix
A for samples of annual report forms from NCA.) These 3 data sources were rich bases
of information for the study.

This chapter begins with an introduction of the principals who participated in this

study. Then the unique stories of each principal's decision making are recounted. These

 

 

 

principals
schools, 1
decision 1
think abo
beginnint
leadershi]
major the
model by
separate -

making a

making e
making.
making a
exarrrple

Principal

94

principals, dubbed Ernestine, Bobbie, Cindy, Debbie, Nancy, and Rita, describe their
schools, leadership, metaphors for team decision making, views of systems thinking, and
decision making/team decision making conversations. Their accounts illustrate how they
think about and practice decision making. Extending the gardening metaphor used at the

beginning of this chapter, each woman is given the name of a plant that represents her

 

leadership and practice. As part of each section, subsections are included to amplify the
major themes in the accounts. Some principals responded to the interview request for a
model by describing decision making with one model and team decision making with a
separate model. Others described their models for decision making and team decision

making as one and the same.
The Garden: Blooming Where They Are Planted

Look at my arm! I have (plowed) and planted
and gathered into barns. . . and aren’t I a woman?
«Sojourner Truth

 

The 6 women who participated in this research discussed their team decision
making experiences and how they think about, learn about, and practice team decision
making. As they did so, they described their models of decision making and team decision
making and told stories that framed their team leadership experiences. As they talked, one
example of decision making led into another, exposing rich detail and adding to the pool
of data that supports their thinking and action as leaders in the decision-making process.

An avid flower gardener, I liken gardens to the position of principal. Like

principals, gardeners must work with many variables. Each planting, growing and

 

 

harvestin;
and grow
among ot
plant, as
the plant
to, thew
to decisit
was plan'
gives the
category,

educatior

aPpreciat
than the -
even Wilt
agreed.
reSponde
adillStme
exercise
f”Tiller v
A
decision

priI‘Cipal

95

harvesting season teaches us how to be even better gardeners the next season. We learn
and grow. Plants are all unique, like people, and are affected by environmental conditions,
among others. I saw a resemblance in each principal to the characteristics of a specific
plant, as it related to her qualities of leadership, so I christened each one with the name of

the plant that reflected these likenesses. Like the plants they were metaphorically linked

 

to, the women have unique, yet similar, characteristics and have given meaning and value
to decision making in both unique and similar ways. Each woman "bloomed where she
was planted, " depending on her own skills, experiences, abilities and beliefs. Table 2
gives the pseudonym. of each principal, her plant metaphor, ethnic background, age
category, the characteristics of the school setting, her level of education, her tenure in
education leadership, and the current NCA process the school has chosen.

During the interviews with these women, it was apparent that all but one

appreciated being able to share their thoughts and beliefs. All interviews lasted longer

 

than the time originally planned; all but one woman were quite willing to continue talking
even when I brought up the fact that we had gone past the time frame to which we had
agreed. The principals seemed to be aware that they were thinking out loud as they
responded to interview questions, and as they verbalized their thoughts, they also made
adjustments. All of the women found developing a decision-making model a most useful
exercise to them; a few shared their models with staff to obtain feedback from them and
firrther validate that this is what they actually do.

As the interviews began to sprout the seeds of how principals go about the task of
decision making, commonalities began to appear, including ones indicating struggles the

Principals have with schools as systems. Differences in how they learned about and

 

.mfizum 7.1: E inlwofitltwo .aOCthfiuuoahfifiU .N D~n~m§t

 

 

96

 

 

0883

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

nowfimceoo< .Efiw< 0:628 “can: mow b; Amamam
88850 .8» 6 .5 98am am 8 0:622 WM o9V 23 x85 3:—

2:83
863595 0:68 9 won ago 933
32:28; we» _ _ mac: B +4.2 0:.va 333 WM on m 85 8:555 .352
ESE: 803086
maven—.2034 awn—BEE .mbm c .§< mow \mmEm «we? 56an
35850 888 Hanna .3 N B .88 em 23.8 533 am so 33 page «5%:

581% 0885
. em .38 em 28:: s we. a: 583
865mg; .8» 6 882:0 .um :42 23...: 833 TM coo BE mow—m .350
08003 8:. 033‘
28:: 2 wow imam flaw Eco
2885 868; a» : .§< em .65 case 333 ex so new Base 2.23.
0862: 03> 8955.
288.8 a» e 383 B :95 22:8 a wow 825 .522
363328 figment; 3858 .mb» 2 6m 30on ..<.E 0838 Stag m-m com beam #85 2535m—

:83.
339: 882.3... ranch
no—oauam 6.8.53— .88m .964 Begum .

:eaaoaem and. «mafia: 3:983:
8395 955,—. .255...— % Emmet—BE
<02 Seneca ”Bug—8922.0 323m 1365.:—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

aam as a 8385 do 885886 .N 032.

 

 

 

approache
evident. I
found my:

IT
this study
and drawi
Maap
systems t]
The relati
models (V
their sum
are descri
for future
names an
drawings

such and

8r0w1h.

reblOOm

97

approached the changing responsibilities of decision making with staff also became
evident. As I listened to each woman and her staff, wrote notes and transcribed the data, I
found myself examining my own experiences in decision making.

The following individual compositions portray each of the elementary principals in

this study and are drawn from a combination of interviews, notes, focus group responses,

 

and drawings developed to describe their thinking and behavior in decision making in their
roles as principals. Patterns and variations are drawn from the conceptual framework of
systems thinking and the techniques identified as significant in developing effective teams.
The relationship between what the principals espouse as beliefs in their decision-making
models (what the seed package directions are) and what they practice as interpreted from
their stories (what the mature plant looks like), metaphors and focus group perceptions
are described in the final chapter. Conclusions, implications of the study, and suggestions
for future research are also described in Chapter 5. To ensure confidentiality, fictitious
names are used for the principals, and no school names are mentioned. Conceptual
drawings of decision-making models and team decision making models are identified as

such and are included at the end of each woman's story.

Ernestine: Madam Galem Trumpet Vine

The Woman

 

The trumpet vine Madam Galem is fast-growing, hosting showy, trumpet-shaped
flowers of orange or red from midsummer into fall. It must be cut back hard to control its
growth. A clinger, it needs support such as a trellis. This sun-loving vine will continue to

rebloom lightly until frost. The multiple blossoms that grow on this 20- to 30— foot plant

 

 

attract hL
woman.
iE
elegance
environrr
making.
and coul<
and press

the vivid

The Sch

1:
metr0pol
Wide hall
Superior
bUSy four
industry,
bracket,
School,

I
tried the
r ePeated

98

attract hummingbirds. Madam Galem is an appropriate symbol of the presence of this
woman.

Ernestine is a stately, well-dressed black woman in her forties who emits an
elegance and elan that seem to support the calming effect she has created in her office
environment. In her leadership role, she appears to play a significant part in team decision
making. Her staff has the impression that central office is the entity that calls the shots
and could be viewed as the trellis, directing which way the vine will grow. The stateliness
and presence of the woman Ernestine, who wears flowing, impressive clothes, resembles

the vivid trumpet vine blossoms, which cannot be ignored in a garden.

The School Setting

Directly off a busy highway near middle-income homes in a northeastern
metropolitan area near Detroit, the school is a sprawling, one-story brick building with
wide hallways and large, Spacious classrooms. The school was built in the 19503 with
superior materials, and is well maintained. The school is on a street that angles onto a
busy four-lane highway leading to the downtown area. It is near businesses and light
industry. Houses nearby seem to belong to people in the middle-to low-middle-income
bracket, although the school draws from the whole community as a grade 3 through 5
school.

I parked in a nearly empty lot, because school had been out for about an hour. I
tried the main door, knocked on some windows, then went to the side entrance where I
repeated my efforts in vain. I returned to the front and knocked again, and this time, I saw

the principal walking around the corner of the hallway. She came to the door. She had

 

 

 

expectet
and uncl
several r

bulletin

the bust
interfere
purpose
meditati
0n displ:
tastefullj
large, fu
The prin
iSdone}

I
Visitorg_
EXpoum
and Wan

I
Principal
about 5c
Adminisr

SECOnd c

 

99

expected me later, so' she was not watching for me. The main office area is large, spacious
and uncluttered, with numerous desks. A conference area and principal's office, plus
several other small offices, branch off this main area. The vestibule is wide and airy;
bulletin boards are posted with student work.

The principal's office is off the main office. Its atmosphere creates a haven from
the hustle and noise of an elementary school. Blinds on the window control light and
interference from the nearby street; fluorescent lighting is not used. The principal has
purposely installed indirect lighting and a lamp for softer light in the room. Quiet
meditational music plays from a multi-disk unit on a shelf. Sculpture and fine pottery are
on display on a shelf, along with books on educational topics. Posters and certificates,
tastefully arranged, partially fill one wall. Although the office space could not be called
large, furniture is appropriately placed, with comfortable conference chairs near the desk.
The principal's desk is neat, but indicators such as file folders and papers show that work
is done here. The atmosphere encourages thoughtful conversation and a sense of calm.

Ernestine says she purposely designed her office to elicit that kind of feeling in her
visitors. She says it makes a difference to her and to students, parents, and other visitors.
Expounding further on her space, Ernestine claims she spends a lot of time in the office
and wants it to be as pleasant as possible.

Her experience includes 11 years as an assistant principal and almost 6 years as a
principal. Her district reconfigured the elementary schools recently; now the school holds
about 500 students in grades 3 to 5. Ernestine earned a Ph.D. in Educational
Administration several years ago. The elementary schools in this district are all in the

second cycle of NCA. A previous attempt was made to encompass all 3 elementary

 

 

schools

IlOt rear

Leaders

support

and diS¢

With Er
Princip;
focused
building
Saw the
Control,
anolVe:
decided

Where \

100

schools with 1 set of goals, but that was unsuccessful because the individual schools could

not reach consensus on goal selection.

Leadgrsjip

Ernestine describes her style of leadership as being organized, consistent,
supportive, practical, the person who lays out the parameters. She says ideas are shared
and discussed with respectful exchanges.

I mean listening does not mean agreement-—that other peOple could voice opinions.

You wouldn't see eye rolling, or arms across chests. As adults, we need to talk

about it and reinforce it. I say that to them because I have to hear it for myself. I

would not ask my staff to work on anything I would not ask myself to do. That is

something I have struggled with myself. I am Opinionated. I can intellectualize,

but in actuality, I forget. Listen, this person may have something to say. I do a

fairly good job of that, but it has to be a continual reminder of that, particularly

when most of my ideas are fairly good, so why should I have to listen to the team?

A successfiil leader does that. She lays out the parameters, and reminds them of

the rules.

HOping to compare the image of leadership the focus group has of their principal
with Ernestine's perceptions of herself, I gave them the Opportunity to talk about specific
principal leadership roles, but nothing was shared. Their opinions on leadership mainly
focused on the directives that central office issued to the buildings, rather than the
buildings having control over their decisions. I was given the impression that the teachers
saw the process of team decision making as a farce, one over which Ernestine had no
control, and that the recently chosen Transitions Accreditation process narrowed their
involvement even more. "They [central office] asked for input, but it was already

decided that we were going to take on the 0A process. There was a central office view of

where we were going, unbeknownst to us at the elementary and middle schools."

 

No men

selectior

office di

A recent

(‘1‘ 5-1-1 r—O D-i ‘_

teacher 2

O‘K‘sc—T‘wl-‘rfi

 

101
No mention was made of the principal or the principal's role in the process of goal
selection. The feeling seemed to be that the principal had no control over what central
office did. She was only the messenger.
Ernestine recognized a similar constraint with central office:
I guess when the decision needs to be made from the outside and you can't get an
effective team going with the amount of time given, or the subject is not conducive
to allow enough information, such as central office requests. It is an artificial
setting; it is not real team making.

A recent situation supported what she was trying to say:

A good example would be central ad telling me recently that we will be doing
more testing on 3rd graders. This is not going to go over big, as the 3rd grade
teachers are already overloaded with piloting their new program of improvement.
Had we known sooner, we could have paced our grumbles. Now there will be a
big roar. I have no control. If you know, you do things differently.

As the focus group discussion of the central office issue deepened, however, one

teacher added:

But then it depended on the schools. When we got into the smaller groups,
strategies and interventions, then it was more of a team. Yet that is where we
bogged down. But we could start to see some things happen, and that was helpfiil.
One school had more gains than the others. Then when we made progress it was
different.

Ernestine believes a successful, strong leader has other characteristics as well, and
she described what she meant by that: "I allow them to grow and have the opportunity to
do that. They are doing more things themselves. A successful, strong leader is one whose
staff can run the building; the school can survive without the principal there." She gave an
example of what she meant:

We planned a fairly complicated procedure of dismissal for the first day of school.

Well, guess what. I got a flat tire the first day of school, and didn't get here until
about an hour and a half after it started. The whole routine went off without a

 

 

 

Decisio

uses for

and 4).

and pra
adminis
eerCiSt
"l teacl
What gr

leaders

better u
She tea

because

 

102

hitch and without me here. We had it all in place, and others made the necessary

decisions.

Decision Making: Trimming the Vine With Research

In our discussion of decision making, Ernestine drew 2 models; 1 of which she
uses for decision making, and 1 of which she uses for team decision making (see Figures 3
and 4). When asked to describe how she makes decisions, Ernestine said:

I always begin with the end in mind. Parameters play a heavy part. The lst thing I

am concerned about is the deadline. I don't involve anyone for input until I weigh

the pros and cons in a plus/delta chart. Only when I completed this step and had
something to offer, do I start to gather input, unless I haven't a clue about the issue
at hand. After this step, I filter it through my own thought screen. [Once through
her filter] I revisit the input again if needed, then implement a final decision, assess
the outcome, and make changes if needed. It can be never ending.

Ernestine learned her decision-making style through experience, trial and error,
and practice, she said, although in our talk, I learned that Ernestine teaches education
administration courses at her alma mater, and she finds that teaching these courses is an
exercise in staying abreast of new concepts and research by doing a lot of reading.

"I teach graduate classes in administration leadership, and I explain directly to students
what good leaders do. I have to capsulize what I do and what I believe makes good
leaders in education."

Teaching keeps her thinking about her practices as a principal and helps her to
better understand team dynamics in her school. She said, "I refine my beliefs constantly. "
She teaches team decision making and finds that to her benefit as a practicing principal,
because understanding how it works is an important part of the process.

At first, when a group gets together, productivity is low and morale is high. As

they begin to get into the problem solving, the morale goes down before it levels
off with productivity. If you don’t understand how that works, then you think, oh,

 

 

IF

QR

FiguI-e 3

103

 

PROBLEM

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

y
BEGIN WITH
END IN MIND

j

 

    
    
 

 

DETERMINE

IF OKA Y
Continue

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IF NOT OKAY
Start over DEADLINE
l
ASSESS FACTS
OUTCOME Components that
contribute
l l
”N“ PLUS-DELTA
DECISION CHART

 

 

 

 

    
   
    

l
INPUT / HAVE
Through NO CLUE? SOMETHING
\ \ TO OFFER
\\

Thought filter
\\ \
‘\\§ INPUT

\ From others

 

 

 

Figure 3. Emestine’s Decision-Making Model

 

Figure 4

 

104

 

 

TEAM
PROBLEM

 

l

 

 

SET PARAMETERS
What is important?
Time? Money? Who?
Facts? How?

 

 

 

l

FA CILITA TE
Plus/Delta Chart

 

L

DECISION

 

l

ASSESS
OUTCOME

 

Figure 4. Ernestine’s Team Decision—Making Model

 

 

Team I

process
sets par
her filte

follows

making
to the p
Emestii
facts ar.
central

eXpect;

"The In
paramea
Whatevr
model,

Process

' '"- Arm--~..-,.g_ -. ~_- -—--E—"

105

my God, what is happening here with these people? If you do understand, when
the morale goes down, you say, oh good, and you are there to help them through
that spot.

_T_ez_1m Decision Making

When Ernestine was asked to draw how she sees herself in a team decision

 

process, she regarded herself more as a facilitator. The entire team considers the problem,
sets parameters, and, as facilitator, she processes information in the parameters through
her filters in a circular fashion. A decision is then made, and an assessment of the outcome
follows. She warns, however, that the process can he never ending.

To Ernestine, parameters play a heavy role in decision making and team decision
making. She lists parameters specifically as facts, deadlines, components that contribute

to the process. In team decision making, after a problem is identified as a team problem,

 

Ernestine sets parameters, such as what input is needed, timeline, budget, who, what the
facts are, and how the decision will be made. Her staff sees the parameters set by the
central omce and NCA. "If assessment shows it is not working, change it. You don't
expect perfection on the first go round."

Further into the interview, Ernestine elaborated more on team decision making:
"The more the people, the wider the opinions. In team decision making, I give
parameters, for example, the timeline, budget, already certain goals or guidelines or
whatever flexibility we might have." However, in reviewing her team decision making
model, she described the team as setting the parameters in the team decision making

process.

 

\¥

assessir

story. i

continu

decisio
school.

the oth

Emesti

decisio

Process

lcoping

106

As team decision making is implemented, Ernestine said changes occur: ”We are
assessing as we go. It looks good on paper, but when it involves people it is a different
story. Factors that never occurred can emerge. There are different dynamics. It is a
continual assessmen ."

When she reflected on how she had made adjustments in her thinking about team
decision making, Ernestine described what she tried to do when she first came to this
school. The district had completed a reconfiguration, and a portion of her staff was from

the other school.

When I was new, I was trying to pull people together to make decisions, and you
just don't know the people. Two years ago, all of the elementary schools got
reconfigured. When you are new, you- are trying to pull people together to make a
decision, and you don't know all the people. If you had enough familiarity with
staff, then it is easy. But team decision making is really group dynamics. You
have to know them and how to approach it at my school. It has a life of its own.
It is a living entity.

Ernestine referred to the team needing to know each other and the benefits of it to team
decision making:
I don't have to work as hard. The staff knows and understands the process. They
have worked in groups, set priorities and come to consensus. They understand the
term. People are working better in groups. Teachers, by nature of the job, work
alone, and at first they didn't know how to work together. That all takes time.

They have a good working relationship with the process now and understand what
needs to be done.

Metaphors from the vine: Highway, stoplight/freewayiign. and the wind. The
highway is a metaphor that represents decision making for Ernestine. She views the
process as a highway, with exit and entrance ramps, some going straight off, and some

looping around, and with rest stops along the way.

 

 

 

sophg

pnndde

tohdp

arrange
With or
What w

with th.

focus g
involve

0fdech

SYSiemg

107

Originally, Ernestine said a metaphor for her decision-making process would be a
stop light, explaining that its job was to indicate "OK, go ahead, caution, or stop. It still

provides direction.“ Then, after a short pause, Ernestine said:

Or better yet, those new signs you see now on freeways at various spots. They are
electrical display signs with directions or warnings. It is a changing sign. The

message changes, it is not permanent, as a highway with entrance and exit ramps,
and rest stops along the way.

 

In our interview, Ernestine shared a story of an event that took place this past year

to help show how she works with her staff on decisions.

Two 3rd grade teachers came to me concerned with the achievement levels in their
rooms. We discussed it, and agreed to go to the other five 3rd grade teachers.
We all met, and as a result, have a commitment and with help from the assistant
superintendent to meet for a four-and-one—half-day release time workshop to
develop the plan.
Ernestine met with central office to discuss the problem, and central office
arranged for the staff to meet off-site to develop changes in the curriculum, and helped

with other resources as well. Ernestine said: "My job was to let the rest of the staff know
what was happening, be the spokesperson, following up, supporting. I needed to deal
with the parent component as well; all need explaining."

As a team leader she sees herself as the wind beneath their sails. A review of the
focus group interview showed little that expanded their perceptions of their principal's
involvement, other than that the principal and central office were involved in the process
of decision making.

Systems thinking from the trumpet vine perspective. Ernestine is familiar with
systems thinking concepts. Her view of systems thinking is one of connection and

interaction: "It flows back and forth among the disciplines. You can't be very effective if

 

you pull
or wher
that all :
ideas, it
person i

the rule

choices
staff kn

share it

roles a]
When 3
after-s.
the snc
Custod

bact.

iItdicat

know .

108
you pulled any of them out. I couldn't even rank them. Depending on who you are with
or where you are, then you go back and forth among the disciplines." Ernestine believes
that all staff bring their own gifts to the group. She continues: "'Other people have merit,
ideas, talents, abilities. Individual thought helps you to learn and grow. Listen, this
person has something to say. A successfiil leader lays out parameters and reminds them of
the rules. "

She makes a conscious effort to focus on the task at hand and give the staff
choices supported by information from the best research and best practices. Letting the
stafi‘ know what she sees as the link that pulls them together, she indicated, is important to
share with them.

It is important for me to find that common thread, when the staff are there, or

finding the common link that unites this group. It is important for me to do it and

also let the group know what that bond is, letting them do things so that they can
discover it for themselves.

Ernestine believes that, for teams to be effective, "PeOple have to assume different
roles and you have to look at them in a different light." Ernestine also points out to staff
when someone does something worthwhile. One evening while the teachers were in an
after-school meeting, it began to snow heavily. The custodian went out and brushed all
the snow off the teachers' cars before they left school. Ernestine recognized the
custodian's kindness to the team, and suggested to them that they give him a pat on the
back.

Communication is an important aspect of Ernestine's position. Although she

indicates that staff can discover links for themselves, she agrees that she needs to let them

know what she sees as well. Talking to individuals about specific situations and getting

 

 

their in]
them w
story at

illustrat

decisio:
said, "1

all that

claims -
coming
around
rtprese

They h

ErTlesti

them, It

Expant

 

109

their input helps guide Ernestine in her decision making, but she sees it also as involving
them with feedback. Not categorizing people helps her involve the whole person. Her
story about the helpfirl custodian who brushed the snow off all the teachers' cars
illustrates what she means.

I am not just looking at what their job has to be, but who is he, such as the

example of the custodian, but doing that when working with people in a group, it

helps you pull out some other things. You don't categorize them by what they do.

You come up with a shallow pool when there is much more available.

The focus group presses for more diverse leadership when they are in a team
decision-making process. When they were asked to expand on what they meant, a teacher
said, "The same people tend to be asked, or volunteer. Others just don’t want to take on
all that headache. "

Team leaming Something to toot about. At some time in this process, Ernestine
claims the team needs to learn about each other and understand where each person is
coming from. This step takes time, and often the timeline is extremely tight. She gets
around this step in an interesting way: "I just pull out those who are excellent
representatives of the group and select those that will zero in and give good feedback.
They have learned to let go of a personal hold."

Listening: Twining around mental models. Communication is the key to
Ernestine's perceptions of mental models. “You need to hear the mental models, hear
them, " she emphasized. She shared this story to make her point:

Even kids. I had a kid who was told to come to the office, and he disappeared.

He said, "The teacher said for me to go to the end of the hall; she didn't say to the

office." Was he stretching his logic? Perhaps that is how he saw it. If I don't

listen, I can't help him rethink.

Expanding on this theme, Ernestine includes teachers in this discipline. "It is important to

 

 

do that with
a conclusion

The 1
the process i
there was to
come up wit
stage. We v

M
the vines in 1
She states th
know what t
more acknor
Ernestine, "t
be Part of th
be acknowle

Erne
in a team siti
Other becaus
Teams by doi
The mOre a 1
at something

Wha'

110

do that with staff; how they arrive at conclusions. I am fascinated by it, how they arrive at
a conclusion and understanding how they got there."

The focus group believed that it should be suggested that central office stay out of
the process of decision making and allow teachers the freedom to decide. They thought
there was too much control. “I still think this was a central office thing. We may have
come up with the same goals, but people didn't want to look beyond because they set the
stage. We were told. "

Tendrils: A fined vision. Just as tendrils twine around a trellis or arbor to hold
the vines in place, Ernestine sees a shared vision as the glue that holds the school together.
She states that giving people credit for their contributions is necessary, as is letting others
know what their contributions are. In this regard, the NCA visitation team suggested
more acknowledgement of the good work the school is accomplishing. According to
Ernestine, "Celebration marks an event and brings a closure, then you move on. It should
be part of the process." She adds, "Festivities do something for the spirit. Progress should
be acknowledged in a team. "

Ernestine sees her staff coming together as a group and individually, but notes that
in a team situation the dynamics are always different. "The team has to learn about each
other because we have to learn how to work together, " she said. She believes the team
learns by doing, because they will be the ones who will have to implement the decision.
The more a team works together, the easier they find it to narrow down choices and arrive
at something they agree upon.

What holds Ernestine back from good team decision making, she insists, is lack of

time and information. Interestingly enough, because the focus group seems to want to

 

 

view the pr
from centre
model and
consider th
about brair
waste of tir
She

for meeting
and the tin
more succe
Err

teams for g
SChOOi W01
exPetience
committee
(Visiting '1
fl
selection I
aSked to d
the things
the same E
the Same E

that didn’t

111

view the process as a district directive, they see the agenda as driven from the top down,
from central office. The group recommends that leadership be diversified, with a clear
model and direction. The time issue arose for them as well. Ernestine says one must
consider the time frame in a team decision process. Twice in her conversations she talked
about brainstorming being a waste of time and more. "Sometimes brainstorming can be a
waste of time, energy and trust. You need to make the most use of time."

She concurs that, although schools usually have no control over the surroundings
for meetings, good gatherings can still take place if one plans and creates an atmosphere,
and the time element arises once again. "The better presented, worked on, you will be
more successful, depending on the time."

Ernestine may want to have her team consider joining other school improvement
teams for group meetings, as suggested by the NCA team. They recommended that her
school work with other elementary schools in the district, to share and learn from their
experiences. The chairperson stated: "Try to find a way to meet more regularly as a
committee. My perception is that you have a need to share your ideas with each other”
(Visiting Team Chair Report, 1992).

The stakeholders: Who does what? Participation in the team decision making goal
selection process is driven by district mandates, according to the focus group. When
asked to describe the decision-making process that first time, they said: "We brainstormed
the things we thought should be goals, because we looked at the possibility of doing all
the same goals for all our [elementary] schools. All the schools got together to agree to
the same goals, and it just didn't work. We were too big. That was another top-down thing

that didn't work. "

 

 

 

 

No
parental in;
agrees with
develop in 1
parents wht
goal selecti
decisions if

Em
evening, th
talked to a
the fair so 1
matters as ‘
t0 make an

Tea
be hem sin
Will be affe
'“ regard it
[attention (
what they 1

Th:
howeVer:

The men bl'

 

112

No parents were present during the goal selection process, but Ernestine elicits
parental input by informal contacts in the building with volunteers whom she knows. She
agrees with other female principal participants that parent participation is difficult to
develop in her school because of so many working parents. She asks teachers to identify
parents who may volunteer because they knew the parents best. Parents are not on the
goal selection team, but she communicates ideas to them and gets their input on building
decisions if they are affected by the decision.

Ernestine described how her school had scheduled an art fair in the gym in the
evening, then discovered that it was at the same time as a high school concert. She then
talked to a parent who was active in the school. The parent suggested an earlier time for
the fair so that parents could attend both. She described parents' view regarding school
matters as peripheral, though, suggesting that they do not have all the information needed
to make an informed decision.

Team decision making is seen by Ernestine as needing input; however, it needs to
be kept simple, parameters should not be changed, and parents' input is important if they
will be affected by the decision. She mentions simplicity and consistency more than once
in regard to team decisions. She claims, "Teams are sometimes like kids with ADD.
[attention deficit disorder]. They are all over the place unless you just put in front of them
what they need to know at the moment."

The focus group offered paradoxical comments about the goal selection process,
however: "It made you think about where your building was at; it made you focused." In

the next breath, they stated that they believed the process was still a "central office thing. "

W-..—

 

 

 

 

 

In 0
Emestine’s
process ech

I M
me.

try 1
stro

@
instructor g
a graduate
building w}
adults. She
presenting
better unde
Wc

how she in
teachers 3;
sees POWeI
Education
it took Cla:
apilreCiatir
"gym. " n

113

In our interviews, no mention was made of Emestine’s personal vision.
Ernestine’s viewpoint of how the staff sees her as a leader in a team decision making
process echoes how she designed her decision making process. She said:

I would hope they would say I ask their opinion. I listen. to what they are saying to

me. I use that information in making my decision. I would hope they would say I

try to make fair decisions. The more the staff can participate and think, the

stronger leader I am.

Langpgge trumpets direction and meaning. Ernestine's experiences as a graduate
instructor give her the opportunity to think about how she uses language. On 1 occasion,
a graduate student of hers asked if she uses a different vocabulary in the elementary
building where she talks with children, than the one she uses in the evening class with
adults. She responded: "There are a few degrees of change. I make sure that I am
presenting this at a level that my students will understand. I keep it simple. There is a
better understanding. "

Words also play an important role in how Ernestine perceives situations and in
how she interprets others' views. When she first arrived at the school, she was aware that
teachers spoke about and perceived each other in terms of their particular discipline. She
sees power in terms of teachers' disciplines, regardless of what they teach. The Michigan
Education Assessment Program (MEAP} is not just a classroom responsibility. Shesays
it took classroom teachers awhile to accept her message. Special area teachers are
appreciative of this. Ernestine also says there is power in words; students don't go to

"gym." That is an area, not a discipline. This emphasis gives the teachers authority;

teachers have their parameters.

(-

 

 

 

 

Hor
something
one in whit
consensus i
It was like
to say that
The two m
hidden age
wasn't in-h
to consens‘

Co
this school
this partici
gathered tl
as a resear
Shedding 1i

Th

on

On

wc
ele

114

However, the teachers in the focus group still see power, roles, and authority as
something that central office controls. They also recall their process of goal selection as
one in which they struggled with language; the wording of the goals and the definition of
consensus held them up. "Every time we did this, we would struggle with the language.
It was like lawyers arguing. The language would hold up our consensus." They continued
to say that once they arrived at a definition of consensus, they accepted it and went on.
The two main conflicts they tussled with were the definition and use of consensus, and
hidden agendas. One teacher added, "I think central office had the hidden agendas. It
wasn't in-house." They worked in small groups, brainstormed and prioritized, then came

to consensus after some time.

Consensus was an important element of the report from the target area chair for

 

this school after the second team visit of 1994. He had been given no written report from
this particular committee at the school, but from a discussion with committee members, he
gathered that "long and difficult discussions concerning what the staff would agree upon

as a research-based program which will address the needs of their students" had occurred,

shedding light on the problem of defining consensus. He recommended:

The first thing I would like to suggest is to have the committee and principal agree
on what they will accept as consensus and then convey that definition to the staff.
Once the hurdle of consensus can be overcome, the rest seems to all fit together. I
would strongly encourage this committee work closely with. the other two
elementaries and use their experiences to benefit from one another.

Not surprisingly, the visiting team chair came to the same conclusion from his

overall observations of their process:

One of the biggest issues that came out in each committee is the extent to which
"everyone" has to agree before consensus is achieved. Some committees had let
this issue slow them down. Give everyone an opportunity for input. Research and

 

 

dat
eve
dirt
wo
Th.
office, it is
shape of ti
have on th
Ernestine t
seems to u
conversatiu
improvemr
majestic flr
W
W
Th
and the N(
Sees herse]
Erhestine r
the ddving
teachers: p
Er

 

 

115

data are the key. Then make a decision as a group and move on. If you wait for

every single person to get his/her way you will be pulling against each other in all

directions, going nowhere. Achieving consensus is hard work, but important

work. (Visiting Chairperson's Reflections, 1994)

The trellis supports the trumpet vine. If the trellis is used to symbolize central
office, it is clear that the direction in which the trumpet vine heads is a direct result of the
shape of the trellis. The focus group's view of the stranglehold central office seems to
have on their school improvement process, along with the beliefs on decision making that
Ernestine espouses, reflects the differences between the two entities, neither of which
seems to understand the other's perspectives. Ernestine's leadership did not enter the

conversation at all; the staff believes that central office is the guiding force for the school

improvement plan. Ernestine just follows their path, gracing its way with lovely, bright,

 

majestic flowers.
The Extent to Which Ernestine Thinks About
and Enacts Tpanr Decision Making

The focus group's fixation on central office as the controller over all decisions
and the NCA reports, which reflect struggles, along with the description of how Ernestine
sees herself as a team decision maker, are far from alike. Minimal comments from
Ernestine of central office do not support the teachers' views. Central office seems to be
the driving force that works through Ernestine through no fault of her own, according to
teachers' perceptions.

Ernestine's decision making and team decision-making processes are thought of
and described as separate models. She was one of two out of the six principals who

described them as such. Although her language includes words such as sharing and

 

consensus,
making onl;
knowledge
nonentity ir
about Eme.
view of cen
questions e

Ena
she offered
inPut, but d
view succir
Teachers 52
from centra
did agree, i

NC.
Process, as
"ConSellSug
Further stat
Schools, w}

Hos
thinking dis

Thinking C0:

 

116

consensus, she involves staff members and other stakeholders in the process Of decision
making only by having them give input. Her language leans toward participativeness and a
knowledge of systems thinking and team efforts, but her staff see her almost as a
nonentity in decision making. In the focus group, although they had Opportunities to talk
about Ernestine and her leadership, the entire conversation focused instead on a negative
view of central office as the controlling force that made all the decisions before the
questions ever filtered to the building level.

Enacting team decision making was described by Ernestine in several stories that
she offered; however, the focus group had none to share. Teachers believed they had
input, but did not have any decision-making responsibility. One teacher described her
view succinctly: “The top never released the authority for the site to make the decision."
Teachers saw their goal selection experience as a mandate, where directives were sent
from central Office to use MEAP scores, and the process as full Of hidden agendas. They
did agree, however, that everyone had a chance to talk, some more in the small groups.

NCA team members were aware of the struggle that occurred in the goal selection
process, as the report identified the problem with language as to what the term
"consensus" meant to all the stakeholders, and encouraged them tO agree on a definition.
Further statements fiom the team encouraged them to work with each other and other
schools, which seems to indicate an awareness Of communication and working together.

How Ernestine thinks about team decision making through the lens Of systems
thinking disciplines is evidenced by her language. As noted, she describes systems

thinking concepts well, so she does have a grasp of what it is about. Her comments about

 

 

 

team learn
specific str
Th
conversati
indicate th
articulatec
others' me
of mental
the staff.
the staff i
accomplis
articulater
or
her action
making 1-
Was it util
the Princij
based and

aliVe and

 

117

team learning were verbose, but her thinking denotes a framework that is devoid Of
specific strategies for carrying out the team decision-making process.

The five systems thinking disciplines strategies that arose in Ernestine's
conversation may imply their use, but in Ernestine's case, knowing the language did not
indicate that she has internalized the concepts. She knows her personal vision and
articulated it, but the staff did not speak to this vision. She is aware Of and spoke about
others' merit and ability, but only as input. Reflection, another strategy along with inquiry
of mental models, was not discussed, nor did it surface in any discussion with Ernestine or
the staff. Although she said the team must learn about each other, neither Ernestine nor
the staff indicated that any situation was created where this could be or was
accomplished. A shared vision was seen only in a collective sense, and none was
articulated, either through Ernestine or her teachers.

Overall, Ernestine knows the terminology and seems tO think in those terms, but
her actions and examples do not reflect an internalizing Of the process Of team decision
making. Her staff did not indicate that any team decision making process was in place nor
was it utilized; to them, central Office made the decisions which seemed to flow right past
the principal to the teachers. The constraints Ernestine mentioned were central Office-
based and had garnered minimal emphasis. Implementation Of team decision making is not

alive and well, except in Ernestine's eyes.

 

 

 

Ihelhkun
A
a grandmr
metaphor
From the
parties shr
school is 5
there are l
but the G1
t0 ripen.
Ar
requires tr
matriarch;
Purpose o
gratidmm
only grou
also Stick.
aPProach,
eduCation
and is the
Process 0

doesthel

118

Bobbie: Granny Smith Apple Tree

The Woman

Although this woman is the oldest of the six female participants in the study and is
a grandmother, these are not the primary reasons that the Granny Smith apple tree is my
metaphor for Bobbie. Her sense of family pervades her role as leader Of her building.
From the new hires who have become part of her staff in the last five years, to the huge
parties she throws for more than 300 peOple, her ability to create a sense Of family at her
school is strong. She is all-encompassing, much like an apple tree can be. In the spring,
there are fragrant blossoms; in summer it provides shade. In the fall, the tree bears fruit,
but the Granny Smith apple is not ready for eating until November; it is one Of the slowest
to ripen.

Another interesting fact is that the Granny Smith apple tree is not self-fruiting; it
requires two varieties for pollination. TO Bobbie, the importance of family is not
matriarchal; she is an encourager and nurturer who attempts tO create unity to serve the
purpose of the school. Although one or more of the other women in the study might be
grandmothers, Bobbie is the only one who spoke Of her grandchild, and her staff is the
only group who spoke of their leader's grandchild or any other family member. Bobbie
also spoke Of her parents, and in particular, her father's influence on her leadership
approach. Bobbie's need to be fruitful in her leadership role is supported by the symbol Of
education in America, the apple. A Granny Smith apple, when ripe, is a light green color
and is the last species of apple to ripen. The color green identifies the new, almost unique
process of team decision making. Most Of the time, team decision making takes longer, as

does the ripening Of the Granny Smith.

 

 

M01100
Sitt
metropolitz
students. "I
nearby stre
two blocks
roads that 1
community
The
history ofi
former par
of the com
1 le
soc
mic
hav
nur
cla:
Or
entrance W
0rganized '
Walkway, ,
feeling Off

°V€rsized 1

equipmem

 

119
The School Setting

Situated on a rolling hill in a middle-to lower-middle—class setting in southwestern
metropolitan Detroit, the one-story brick elementary school building houses about 300
students. The school was built in the early 19603 and is well preserved. Some Of the
nearby streets are unpaved. Most students are bused to the building because the school is
two blocks from a major freeway and is bordered on two other sides by highly traveled
roads that lead to the suburbs. There is a scattering Of factories and businesses near the
community.

The school appears to be a focal point for activities and happenings and has a
history of ice cream socials and picnics that goes back for many years. Bobbie tells Of
former parents, students, and neighborhOOd members who attend these functions as part
Of the community culture:

I learned a lot from this community. It has such a sense of family. The ice cream

social has been at this school for 35 years. Not only families with their kids, but

middle and high school kids will come too; some people come every year. They

have taught me the important things. After-school activities are also apparent. A

number of classrooms are used for a variety of scouting classes and enrichment

classes for students.

On my first trip to the school, a group Of students was milling around the main
entrance waiting for alternate transportation. They seemed to belong to some kind Of
organized group that met after school. The path to the main entrance has a covered
walkway, which is inviting and most likely appreciated in inclement weather. It lends a
feeling Of entering a fine restaurant or theater. The Office, although not as spacious as the

oversized foyer, is equipped with a security television and various pieces Of Office

equipment situated behind a service counter. The principal noted at one point in our

 

 

conversatit
meetings ir

Th:

giv

is 5

me

to r
The pervat
program fr

Tl
state, Bobl
mostly Ge;
from scho<
faces the f.
large book
Children's ;
teacher w}
Visitors' cl.
They are v
803 Pastel
Commente
Paintings,
somewher
Homing in

 

120

conversation that space was at a premium in her building, and Often she was forced to hold
meetings in the foyer.

That has been a real problem. We don't have hardly any space. It has all been
given to kids. Meetings in classrooms can be interesting, but the reason we don't
is Scouts and enrichment classes scramble to see which room is empty. Often we
meet in the lobby; as we sit and meet in our committee meeting, kids go aroundus
to get to the gym or other areas of the school.

 

The pervading attitude in this building is that kids come first, and if a space is needed for a
program for students, it will be used. Adults' needs are not tOp priority.
Three years after starting her career as an administrator on the western side Of the

state, Bobbie moved to this building and is now in her eighth year as the principal. Of

 

mostly German and English heritage, she is in her early fifties. She took some time Off

from school administration to complete her Ph.D. Her separate Office, with a window that !

 

faces the front of the school, has a desk with a new computer, monitor, work area, and a
large bookshelf that is jammed with curriculum books and folders. A few pieces Of
children's art work are visible near her desk. These were gifts from an enrichment class
teacher who donated projects to be framed and given tO Bobbie. The wall Opposite the
visitors' chairs displays two beautifirl pieces of art work that she said she recently hung.
They are watercolors with foil, each about 24 by 36 inches and framed in modern style.
Soft pastels and gold fOil create a somewhat impressionistic lOOk. People have
commented on what they "see" in the paintings. When asked why she chose these
paintings, she says she had always surrounded her space with children's work, but. read
somewhere recently that people don't get a sense of who she is and what her tastes are if
nothing in her Office speaks Of her essence. She recently brought the two framed

watercolors into her Office area and placed them so that when her visitors sat down

 

 

opposite I
have hung

starters. I

m

Be
sharing he
started on
participate
and an org

As
lea

pr.
ev

the
int
rol
re:

Be
diVOl‘ce, “
imPOI‘tant
in Africa e
Character .

Were Can-3

six
clc

121

opposite her desk, they would notice them easily. She is finding, in the short time they
have hung, that people are responding wamrly tO them and they are good conversation

starters. It was a conversation Starter at the beginning Of our first interview as well.

Leadership: A Polished Apple

 

Bobbie sees her leadership as evolving into one of influence, spreading shade,
sharing her fruit, rather than accomplishing things based on the position itself, although it
started out positional. Now she views herself as an instructional leader, democratic,
participatory, influential; a cheerleader; a moral and spiritual leader; but also a manager
and an organizer. Specifically, she states:

As a leader, I see myself as democratic and participatory. But also a lot Of

leadership is from influence rather than power, and I have seen that change in my

principalship. In the beginning, I had tO use my position sometimes to accomplish
even little things. I was democratic and participatory. But there were occasions
then when I needed to do that, but almost never now. Now I have established
integrity and respect. It is legitimate leadership, because of the person I am, the
role model. I am the beliefs I have and what I live. They make me believable and
respected.

Bobbie talked about two life experiences, missionary work and going through a
divorce, which helped her appreciate and understand other peOple and their views,
important qualities for team leadership. Immediately after college, Bobbie spent six years
in Africa doing missionary work. This experience taught her to be a gOOd judge Of
character and to be intuitive in knowing other people's feelings and what baggage they
were carrying. Most important, it helped her develop interpersonal skills and appreciate

differences.

I am sensitive to that and quick to help others to get to that. I lived in Africa for
six years, and grew up assuming right meant being on time, having one wife, how
close you stand to each other. I never thought to question it at age 23, but then to

 

family dyn
understane
it feels like
experience
strength tr
points of i
m

Be
PFOCess, a
same (see
researches
00nsiders
three sore
or a 00m
agreemen.
and her 0!

adlust. H

 

122

be put in a different culture; I had students whose dad had more than one wife. To

try to change that would have been disastrous. Others' perspective and ways of

thinking took me past my Protestant, parochial, narrow set of glasses and gave
many points of view, that helped me.

Bobbie's other major life experience offered her keen insight into families and
family dynamics. She said being divorced after 16 years Of marriage helped her to also
understand pain. She has told people, "I don't know how your pain feels, but I know what
it feels like to have pain, to hurt." She is sympathetic to single-parent families. An

experienced, knowledgeable educator who cares about peOple, she is a mature source of

strength to many. "Those around me have that empathy now and see it through other

 

points of view, " she explains.

Decision Making/Team Decision Making: l
Never the Twain Shall Separate

 

Bobbie discussed making decisions as a building principal and described her
process, and her sketch of decision making and team decision making became one and the
same (see Figure 5). The first item she considers is to define who is be involved; then she
researches to find out what is known, consults with peers, considers her own experiences,
considers the time element, then puts all this information through what she calls one Of
three screens, a screen Of personal values and beliefs, or Of community values and beliefs,
or a combination of the two screens. Next she meets with those affected and comes tO
agreement on a solution. From there she draws the action plan developed by the group
and her own plan of action, then both are implemented. The final step is to monitor and

adjust. Her staff agrees that her decision-making process is participative:

 

 

123

 

 

PROBLEM

J/
DEFINE

A. Sources (people involved)
8. Research (paper, conversation)

l

CONSULT

A. Peers
B. Own experience

i
PARAMETERS (Time, etc.)

/
COMMUNITY

PERSONAL
Values/Beliefs Values/Beliefs

\ /

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
     
   
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    
   
    

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MEETING
With those affected
1
@REEMED
l
l
SOLUTION
/ \I H h .
r— ow s e Views
GROUP PLAN SELF PLAN $ the management
\ / piece
IMPLEMENT
l/
MONITOR AND ADJUST

 

 

 

Figure 5. Bobbie's Decision/Team Decision-Making Model

 

 

 

making in

observing

She claim
dad has be
COmpassie

Nt

discovere.

role mod

for me II

In

Values ant

i 7 7 7 7 7 ~ 7 ~" m—m'v— ~—--—~~

124

We did a lot of discussing. We wanted to know where peOple were coming from

with their ideas, and where they were seeing support for that goal. We felt people

out. We talked an awfiil lot. We didn't stop discussing until everyone was happy.

And it was pretty much by consensus.

Bobbie learned team decision-making skills by studying literature on decision
making in education leadership classes, her experience as a principal, her upbringing and
observing other administrators in practice.

I have been fortunate to have a good education, a wonderful array of experiences,

a good upbringing. I have had wonderful role models; my parents, women in

education about 10 years older than me that I admired; they impacted me. There

were a few at the university, too. The director Of elementary education when I

first started my career as a principal.

She claims her father and her mother are still major influences in her life. She adds, "My
dad has been very influential. He has taught me win/win strategies. He is very
compassionate. "

Now that she has been a practicing administrator for 11 years, Bobbie has
discovered that her role is shifting. "At this stage in life, I find I have fewer and fewer

role models, and that I am one in some instances. Some people are sounding boards

for me."
In the second interview, Bobbie talked more about being a role model.

Now I have established integrity and respect. It is legitimate leadership. Because
Of the person I am, I am the role model. I am the beliefs I have and what I live.
They make me believable and respected. Sometimes it is frightening how much Of
a leader I am sometimes, not so much to the staff and my children, but the
leadership and respect I hold in the community, not only parents whose kids are
there now, but previous ones, and ones that will be coming to my school. They
see me as someone who they can seek advice from. It makes me feel as if this is a
worthy job.

Family and community values: Roots Of the granny apple tree. In discussing family

values and how they play heavily into how she thinks and makes decisions, Bobbie has

 

 

discovere
others, th

hears fror

Ir—l

metapho
making 1
to think
he a time
into her

her th

 

' 125

discovered that the more she sees family values and beliefs affecting her relationships with
others, the bolder she gets and the more she expects. She talked about comments she

hears from others regarding her expectations.

Not only do I expect the best from teachers and kids, but from the parents. I
expect this from them, being part of the global village, not only caring for one child
but the rest Of the village. I certainly expect that of myself, the kids, everyone who
comes in contact with our school. People feel that from me strongly. For
instance, at a board meeting a month ago, 18 parents made a presentation about
what is happening in our school. Parents say, "If you ask her what is there to do,
she will expect you to do your best." The Accelerated Reader is up and going. I
say, "Are you still willing to do this?" to a parent. This parent said I can't wait to
start a new project.

The metaphors: Florist. farmer. tree. When Bobbie was asked to describe herself
metaphorically as a decision maker, team leader, and team leader in a team decision-
making process, her response was not immediate. She asked if she could have some time
to think about it and get back to me. She said she found her involvement in this study to
be a time for her to reflect on her feelings about education and wanted to put some effort
into her responses to make it worthwhile for herself as well as for the study. I contacted
her two weeks later, and she stated:

I appreciated having the time to think about this some more. As you know, I

mentioned to you that I wanted to have the time to reflect on these questions, and

it was for a reason. I have applied for some superintendent positions, and I find
these questions valuable for me to consider as I may have the Opportunity to
weave them into my interview, if I am fortunate to get one.

Bobbie had spoken earlier about her belief in a shared vision, and she had reflected

on that as well.

It is important. Recently I have been examining my own ability to articulate a
vision and clearly know what my vision is, clearly articulate, and I am feeling a
need to extend myself in that. The staff I have are ones I hired, picked out, and
even the ones I didn't, they hold the same shared vision. Yet COOperative learning

 

 

is '
be

Be
settled bar

talk.

As a team
for the cre
peOple." '
Speaking,
I s
an
co
e“.
for
I a
Process, j
tree. A m
such a fan
[Tamra] TO
Ht

deCiSion.r

par[TCTPati

126

is valued by all the staff; it is COOperation instead of competition. There is a strong
belief, even with the physical education teacher, we promote cooperation.

Bobbie slipped off her shoes, prOpped her feet on the rung Of a nearby chair, and
settled back. She asked if I was ready to hear her metaphors. I nodded and she began to
talk.

As a decision maker, I see myself as a florist. I gather the flowers, arrange them to

make meaning to the collection, to create beauty. A florist cares for the flowers,

waters them, then sends them out, to bring happiness to someone. In other words,
making children happy and successfirl.
As a team leader, Bobbie described herself as a farmer. "A farmer sows seeds, cares
for the crops, nurtures, grows the crops, then sends Off the products tO nourish other
people." To Bobbie, a team leader in a team decision-making process, metaphorically
speaking, is a tree.

I see myself as the trunk. My values and beliefs that we have created in the family

and community are the roots. The teachers, kids, parents, grandparents and

community are the branches, leaves, buds, flowers. The tree provides shade,

enjoyment. The seeds that fall sprout and grow more trees; eventually there is a

forest.

I agree with Bobbie's metaphor for herself as a team leader in a decision-making
process. However, I believe that Bobbie Offered more in her leadership than a generic
tree. A maple tree, or a pine tree, for instance, drops its seed pods or cones. Bobbie is
such a family-oriented person and so strong in nurturing and giving ways, that it seemed
natural to connect her with a healthy fruit tree, such as the apple.

Her staff perceived her as participative, a person who cares. They saw the team

decision-making process as a team effort: "Yes, the principal played more Of a

Participative role than leader. Everyone got involved, everyone shared."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

V:
offered w
function t
what she
believe th
my value
declined 1
them kno
situation,
who also
from the
aIryway.

Bobbie re

Study, Be
making t

instead,

127

Values are important to Bobbie in her role as decision maker. One example she
Offered was a response she gave when her administrative group was invited to attend a
function that involved travel to a warm climate in the middle Of the winter. She described
what she did and why. "It did not fit in with my values. I felt uncomfortable about it, and I
believe that the community, if they learned about it, would not approve as well. SO both
my value system and the community values "filters" helped me with that decision." She
declined to accompany the other administrators, of course, and had no problem letting
them know why she had decided not to go. Ultimately, the trip was canceled. In another
situation, some Scouts set Off firecrackers outside the building one evening, and a parent,
who also was a Daisy leader, became upset and wanted the Scouts permanently removed
fiom the building. She could not see why these kids should be allowed tO use the building
anyway. Even though they lived in the area, they attended a different school. Again,
Bobbie reflected on values before responding tO the situation.

The Webelo leader who told the Boy Scout leader and the Scouts' parents that
those kids had to go find somewhere else to meet, later called me. I heard about
the problem from the scoutmaster also. But I also talked to the parent club
president whose group sponsors these Scouts, and the custodian. I needed to
collect as much information as possible. And I gave it some time. I reflected on

the community values, and my own values, and was sure tO give the Webelo leader
a sense that I was listening to her.

Consensus: The nutrients for team decision making. Like Other schools in this
study, Bobbie's school was involved in training, firnded by a state grant, in team decision-
making techniques. Trainers encouraged voting, but Bobbie's team practiced consensus
instead. Bobbie explains it with few details.

We are presently using a process designed by them for decision making as a team.
It starts with a needs assessment, profile, surveys, but they ask us to use a vote

 

 

 

128

process with a certain percentage agreeing before we move forward on a decision
I always use consensus rather than voting.

She described how the team worked through this process.

There was a vagueness at first. As they got closer to the end, it got to look more
like a research project. They had to work together and work better because they
learned how to work with people. They had lots of practice with consensus
decision making. Making the involvement voluntary gave them the energy to do

what they wanted to do. We broke up into two separate teams or committees and
adapted the process to our building.

Bobbie‘s team also described how they made decisions in a group.

You see, we had this district wide committee that came up with these goals for all
the schools. The people on that committee were from all over the area, parents,
people from the community, Rotary Club, and other organizations. They had lots
of meetings, and came up with this plan for our school district. SO we tried to see
if we could fit it in with those district goals, which seemed to make sense. We
debated back and forth and then the staff narrowed it down, but I think we did
brainstorming to start with. Then we got into small groups and talked some more,

we prioritized the goals, grouped common ones together, found common overlaps,
then agreed in the large group by consensus.

According to the teachers, they received training other than that from the NCA
training and from the principal sharing information with the staff. Bobbie and the focus
group both listed discussion, brainstorming and consensus as part of the group process.
Keeping a project or task simple is not a priority to her; she says, "If complex gets it done,
then it is O ."

Bobbie believes the school mission provides a focus in decision making and for the
school overall. She explains: "It means help us in decision making, to come back to the
mission of the school, in classrooms, field trips, do not let projects get away from the real
mission of the school.“ She finds herself not searching for special ways to bring a group

together. She says she is too busy focusing on the real issues. "I don't do this well, and I

 

 

get guilt c
focusing <

B:
technique
a team lez

I<
cc

Bobbie's l

process t1

She had a
recomme
Summer I
research,
explained
school cc

 

129

get guilt over this. I see other schools with refreshments, sweatshirts, and I am too busy
focusing on the real work. I just assume they want to be together. "

Bobbie does not give involving the whole person a high rating as a team leadership
technique. However, she believes that finding peOple's passion is an absolute necessity as
a team leadership technique, and she describes how she does this.

I do it by talking about things I feel passionate about. My enthusiasm is

contagious, then those peOple are interested in what I want to do. I am looking for

those people in my school community, and sometime outside my school
community. I share what I am learning, and what I am interested in. I casually
talk with people about an interest of mine, parents, and teachers, and those that
become excited, they let me know. I share my excitement and it spreads. I solicit
their help, and look for those with certain enthusiasms.
Bobbie's caring seems contagious. The staff describes how this fits into the goal-setting
process this way:

You see, everyone here is pretty agreeable. Even though there are differences of

opinion, we listen to each other and respect other people's opinions. We really

value each other as individuals with individual differences and gifts that we bring to
the school. Our principal is wonderful at drawing that out in peOple. She is very
caring, and has developed a wonderfiil feeling of family in this school. We care
about each other.

When the staff began to discuss possibilities of goals to embrace, Bobbie told them
she had a specific goal she wanted the staff to support and develop. Someone had
recommended that Bobbie read a particular book about gifted children. She spent the
summer reading and rereading the book, considered it a profound piece of educational
research, and became convinced that this was a topic that had to be expressed and
explained to her staff. This book about gifted children supported a view that others in her

school community had been encouraging over a long time; the students who were gifted

and talented were not treated fairly in the school.

 

 

 

 

 

Bc
and did a l
bubble up
could to c
attention.
It

go
011

pa
git
ldl
Bobbie he

She descr

130

Bobbie knew that she could influence her staff if she gave them the information
and did a lot of talking. She had not "pushed" for any goals before; she allowed them to
bubble up fi'om the profile and staff discussion. However, she was willing to do what she
could to convince the staff to look at the gifted/talented pOpulation as a group that needed
attention. i

The goal possibilities were generated by staff first. I added the gifted/talented
goal. As they discarded ideas, they did not toss out that goal. We decided that
our goals would be technology-related, to tie into our district's bond issue that had
passed. We wanted to integrate language arts, math, and science. My priority was
gifted/talented students. I presented it to the teachers as my idea. We shared
ideas, and I told them about Ellen Winters‘s book I had read over the summer.

Bobbie has a keen sense of how to influence her staff; she refers to this sense as intuition.
She described what she did when school resumed after the summer break.

In order to raise their interest, I started talking to them about their curriculum,
which reaches 80% of the students, not the top or the bottom 10%. I am
interested in the top 10%, and I know you are interested in both sides. Let's
consider concentrating on gifted and talented students this time, then next time let's
concentrate on the at risk student. The process evolved by talking about it and
giving them the chance to feel my enthusiasm, develop their own, and work out
compromises. It helped soothe the ones who felt strongly about the students at
risk. They know their time will come.

Even though Bobbie was so vocal about including a goal she felt strongly about,
the staff believes they set the goals as a team and were more focused.

The second time we went through this process, it was much smoother. Our staff is
much more cohesive now. Our principal has replaced those who retired with
people she has interviewed and hired for the positions. So she has been able to get
staff she believes will work well in our building. Half left our staff in the last five
years. I would say there wasn't a lot of ownership in the goals that first time. The
second time we had more staff to discuss which goals we should select. The
meetings were more positive, and I think that is because those new teachers were
"hand picked" by our principal. She selected great teachers. The meetings were
much more positive. We were more experienced in what we needed to do, we
needed few directions, and we were much more focused. It makes such a
difference when the staff is all together.

II-

 

 

 

 

 

Th
selection.
level facul

Th

1m

SCt

co
During thr
skills has 1
strategies
1994).

M
i“ PeOple':
now their
does it ofi
Other's e3
Concemer
group sea

It
Shtired vi:
80 Strong
had retire

it is a 80(

 

131

The focus group was asked about roles people played in the process of goal
selection. The conversation centered on the additional staff members other than grade-
level faculty members and on the principal's role.

The principal played more of a participative role than leader. Everyone got

involved, everyone shared. Even though there were more of us involved the

second time around, we were still small enough to allow everyone to feel
comfortable to talk about whatever they wanted to talk about.
During the second NCA team visit, the team observed "Increased achievement in listening
skills has been attained and no longer appears to be a critical issue. Continue using your
strategies but shift your focus toward your [affective] goals " (Visiting Team Report,

1994).

Mental models. Bobbie reminds teachers and parents that there are different stages

 

in people's lives. "A single parent may be going through horrible times, but 10 years from
now their lives may be very different." Bobbie says if that is what mental models are, she
does it often. Those around her also have empathy, she says, and see things through
other's eyes. Bobbie went on to explain how she talks to teachers when they seem
concerned about a family situation or do not understand the situation fully. The focus
group saw her as encouraging them to look at people as individuals.

In turn, the understanding her staff has about other people helps them develop a
shared vision. She said, "There is so much of that here, and we move in sync with it. It is
so strong." The staff supported Bobbie's conviction, adding that almost half of the staff
had retired and the principal replaced them with teachers who "fit the family." Bobbie
believes she has become better at acknowledging peOple's contributions and is aware that

it is a good technique. She likes celebrating when it is apprOpriate. The NCA goals were

 

 

 

celebrated

genuine tr

party to c

us.
g
providing
needs to t
The proc.
school, it
available
classroom
sense oft
yearly at
believes i
Open hor
attendant
8Me of
Was that
V
decision
that thes

anything

 

132

celebrated through newsletters, at parent club, and in presentations, which seemed more
genuine to Bobbie than gathering for punch and cookies. She stated, "When we had a
party to celebrate the completion of our NCA visitation, it didn't seem a natural feeling to
us."

Casting shadows and offering fruit. Just as a mature tree can meet needs by
providing shade for the weary traveler and food for the hungry, Bobbie knows what she
needs to do to get people on the bandwagon; she builds on what people are excited about.
The process is participatory. Learning by doing keeps everyone actively involved. In this
school, it is diflicult to provide places where community can happen because all of the
available space is devoted to kids. Even after school there are many activities in which
classrooms are used. Bobbie sees timing as important but not everything. Building a
sense of family is her key to hosting good gatherings. She hosts several large gatherings
yearly at her home for groups of people connected to her profession because she strongly
believes in their value in keeping that sense of family. At holiday time, Bobbie holds an
open house, inviting board members and spouses, parent club, staff and spouses; the
attendance at these open houses, she says, has risen to more than 300 peOple. The staff
spoke of Bobbie's gatherings at her. home, and what was significant to them during one
was that they had the opportunity to meet her grandchild.

When Bobbie and her focus group were asked what they see as constraints to team
decision making, their responses skirted the issue. I sensed in both interview situations

that these women did not want to say anything negative or contrary about anyone or

anything. It seemed as if they may view it as airing dirty laundry, which families are taught

II

 

 

 

 

 

 

not to do
parents ll
E
that she :
complair
parents r
focused

When th

”—1 FIN (A /

broad,s'
thoughn

there H

a SUperj
inmem
embrace
fOrward

theone

 

133
not to do. Comments were focused on recommendations. Bobbie says she will have
parents involved in goal-setting this time around.

Bobbie says the one complaint I might hear from teachers about her leadership is
that she sometimes listens to parents too much and gives them too much power. This
complaint did not surface in the focus group discussion. Bobbie firmly believes that
parents must be listened to and be involved. She believes that the staff is more family
focused in approaching the current goal-setting process than they were in the earlier one.
When the focus group was asked what would they do differently, they responded:

We need to do to each other what our principal does to us, and that is she listens.

She asks how we are feeling, and no one is threatened. You can say what you feel.

She has such a warm way with staff. Having her select the new staff is great; it has

made a big difference in how we operate in our building.

The values that drive her model of team decision making are two-fold, big and
broad, she explains. "Each day, be a better person, be kinder, more loving, more
thoughtful. The other, I need to make a difference, make it a better place because I was
there."

Bobbie's view is one that her staff has seemed to embrace. Recently, she accepted
a superintendency near Traverse City, Michigan. It will be interesting to see what happens
in the next few years at this school. If the values they have adopted from her are
embraced and embedded in the staffs vision and mission, they may survive and move

forward, continuing to provide shade, offer fruit, and perhaps even create an orchard like

the one growing well in her former metropolitan Detroit elementary school community.

IL

 

 

 

 

reflected
report ei
that not
involve s
E
Her lang
about ev
reflectiv:
example;
dissimjla
Say aboo
HOI Olfer
Process
gave the
I
hard at f
Sc11001.
finds it i]

Vaers d

 

134

The Extent to Which Bobbie Thinks About
and Enacts Tgam DecisiLon Making

Bobbie's concept and involvement of herself in the team decision-making role is
reflected accurately in the voices of the teachers. There were no comments in the NCA
report either way on the aspect of decision making. However, there was a brief comment
that noted parents were involved in the strategies, indicating the school's intention to
involve stakeholders.

Bobbie's decision making and team decision-making models are one and the same.
Her language leans on "family," and the teachers reiterated the same views. Her caring
about everyone, putting children first, valuing everyone, focusing on the best, and being a
reflective participative leader are identical when listening to staff or principal voices. Her
examples of team decision making correlated to the stories teachers told. An interesting
dissimilar comment is the suggestion Bobbie offered that she thought the teachers might
say about her; she said they would say she listens too much to parents. The teachers did
not offer this viewpoint. They talked about the improvement in the team decision-making
process through acquiring new staff in the past five years by Bobbie's selection that which
gave them a more unified "family" of staff who are making good decisions for the school.

Bobbie is knowledgeable about leadership and seems to have worked long and
hard at finding ways to incorporate stakeholders in the decision-making process at her
school. It is evident that she spends a lot of time thinking about decision making, and
finds it important to take the time to reflect on decisions before she implements them. Her

values drive her beliefs on how to lead as a decision maker.

fl

 

 

 

 

T
her build
many sta
she think
represen
good do
making,

been cor

adapts r
provide
PUIple,
Siberia:
grow u
is a plat
are 10v:

3&3an

SCh001

and bi

 

135

The sense of family is key to creating the kind of environment that Bobbie wants in
her building so that effective team decisions are made. Decisions are made involving as
many stakeholders as possible, and she has developed the kind of family in her school that
she thinks will make the right kinds of decisions. Her staff seems to be tightly knit in
representing the family atmosphere she believes is important in creating the conditions for
good decision making. Although the buildingienvironment helps her in decision
making, the central office environment has caused her some concern because she has not

been comfortable with some of their decisions which do not fit her beliefs.
Cindy: Siberian Iris

The Woman

 

The Siberian Iris stands apart from other members of the iris family because it

 

adapts to partial shade and is one of the first in the iris family to bloom in the spring, yet it
provides nice fall foliage to any flower border. Its varieties include plants with blue,
purple, white, and yellow flowers, all of which bloom in June in this plant zone. The
Siberian can bloom at a height of 24 inches, significantly shorter than the others, yet it can
grow to 36 inches as a mature plant. This perennial is known to attract wildlife. The iris
is a plant that often is found in old-fashioned gardens. Its purpose is two-fold: the blooms
are lovely to look at in spring, but the foliage is an effective backdrop the rest of the
season, particularly in fall.

Cindy has bloomed early in her role as principal. The recent reconfiguration of her
school has forced change, and she has managed it well, helping the changes to be good

and long-lasting. Cindy's belief in old-fashioned morals and character undergirding

 

 

 

 

 

 

educatior
attributes
children.

C
students,
nanm
Her man
Master c
administ
area of t
office is

also con
The Sch
hospital

dlSlI‘ict r

bUlldlng

 

136

education parallels the longevity of the iris as a staple in the flower garden. She says these
attributes are not new to education, but we have gotten away from teaching them to
children.

Cindy is the only administrator in the school, even though it has more than 600
students, but she has a full-time counselor assigned to her building. A black female in her
mid-forties, Cindy has been at this building since she began her principalship six years ago.
Her manner is friendly, helpfiil, understanding and professional. She has earned both a
Master of Arts degree in counseling and an Education Specialist degree in educational
administration. Her office, conveniently located off the front entrance and main office
area of the school, has a computer work area, conference table, desk, and bookshelf. The
office is uncluttered but looks lived in. A sense of orderliness pervades the office which

also comes through in her manner of responding in the interviews.

The School Setting

The school is a 2-story brick building set in a suburban neighborhood near a large
hospital and next door to a parochial school. The school had K-S students until the
district was reconfigured a few years ago, splitting the elementary grades into 2 separate
buildings. It presently has kindergarten through 2nd grade students.

Traffic is heavy. The street the school is on is 2 blocks from a high volume artery
Off an expressway. There is 1 parking lot, which is a considerable distance from the main
entrance to the school. I entered a door close to the lot and found my way to the office by
walking through the gymnasium. A latchkey program is located just inside this door. A

community education basketball class for older students was in progress in the gym.

 

 

 

 

few buli
come:
that the
district'
session
follow-
the dist

strips p

Leader

and ch.
of hon
"Pe0p1
model
an exa
311d nc
She a1

She ha

l3 7

The hallways I walked through were devoid of student art or displays, except for a
few bulletin boards. It could have been the hallway of some nondescript institution. A
comment made by a teacher during the focus group interview left me with the impression
that the superintendent was highly sensitive to anything hung in the windows of any of the
district's schools. I was warned of this when I hung a chart sheet on a window during our
session. Perhaps there was a carryover to the hallways being left barren as well. In a
follow-up discussion with Cindy, I asked her about the starkness. She explained that in
the district emphasis was placed on "how it looks." Teachers are asked to use the cork

strips placed in the halls for any student work.

Leadership: A Supportive Backdrop

In her leadership role, Cindy sees herself as a moral-5piritual-instructional leader
and cheerleader who also manages and organizes facilities and resources. Her description
of how she thinks as an administrator also explains her concept of herself as a leader:
"People look at how you handle conflict, problems, difficult parents. My behavior, how I
model what I do, how I handle tough situations, my staff will mirror what I do. I must set
an example, and model how I want my staff to behave. " Setting examples for her staff
and not asking them to do anything she would not do are some of her leadership qualities.
She also talks about the moral aspect of leadership and how it ties in with conversations
she has with teachers.

I tell teachers, you don't just have kids memorize rules. That doesn't do it.

You have to sit the child down and talk to him, and explain to him. Children need

to see the connection. The older teachers or ones with a Catholic school

background, they see this and teach this automatically. Our young teachers don't
see this, they haven't been taught this at the universities. We have gotten away

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

children
to teach
single tt
teacher:

should '

charact
certain
measut
say car

succes

Althot
Charac

On the

138

from teaching morals and character in recent years. Those teachers come in and
talk about how mean kids are to each other and how badly they treat each other.

There are staff who do not see the connection between student behavior and what
children have been taught or not taught elsewhere. She must explain to them, "You have

to teach children this, they don't get it at home. They come from apartment buildings,

single trailers, one parent, and a television, and we find they have no social skills." Some

teachers balk at assuming this responsibility, and believe rote learning of the school rules

should be adequate background for good behavior.

When talking about morality, teachers say we shouldn't have to do that. We have
our kids recite our school promise every day, which refers to the rules and

expectations we have for the students as far as overall behavior. They think that is
enough. With all they have to do, they shouldn‘t have to be involved. But teachers
that do teach character and take time to talk to the kids rather than have them

recite, realize that it is worth their time. The kids have internalized the rules that
are not only good for the school but good for life.

Cindy recognizes that schools must be careful with lessons on morals and
character, particularly in talking with parents. Cindy explains, "With parents, you can't use
certain words when you talk to them about character. People react to labels. You have to
measure your words." She has learned that if teachers stick to basics, phrase what they

say carefully, and honor people's uniqueness, the responsibility can be carried out
successfully.

Parents and children come to us with different value sets. We need to honor their

individuality, but it is all right to be exposed to the basics in morals and character.

They should be taught, they are the foundations for learning. Character,
responsibility, they undergird education.

Although the task may be sensitive for some teachers who have not grown up with

character lessons woven into their instruction, Cindy encourages them to do their best.

On the whole, she sees her staff attempting to carry out this important mission.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Respon
educator
professit

f

interesti
l
l
l
l

COHVCIS

opportu

and me
new co
I!

Educa
changil

have to

 

139
"Responsibility, reliability, truth, community spirit, working hard to do our best, as
educators we seem to need to stress morality and character more than people in other
professions. "
A charter school recently started in Cindy's nearby community. She has heard
interesting comments from parents as to their interest in this alternative education.
Parents are attracted to the character-building component in the charter schools.
Parents want stricter rules, they want uniforms. I have been approached by
parents to get uniforms in our school. Uniforms don't get at the underlying belief.
We need to be more concerned with the inward instead of the outward. I like and
encourage individuality and don't see how uniforms would make a big difference.
The charter school being established in her area has actually helped initiate
conversations about morals and character with parents, and she appreciates the
opportunity.
Charter schools, what is interesting about them is they have a strong emphasis on
morality and character-building. But that is not new. Responsibility, truth, respect
was taught, but we got away from it. We were concerned about going into a
"neutral zone" and not offending any religious group or teach any religious tenets.
We went to the extreme and left out the basics. But it is really about being a
decent, responsible person. Children have not been taught those basics. It has to
be part of the educational process.
Although Cindy sees the necessity of these long upheld, basic beliefs in character
and morals being embedded in the school day, she is cognizant of the need to embrace
new concepts and encourages teachers to seize new thoughts and ideas and try them out.
"Education is always changing; the curricula, the delivery systems, the materials, they are

changing with the times. I encourage them to realize that they don't have to feel like they

have to do as they have always done. Our clients have changed."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

asked he
Figure 6
decision
to lllVOlt
she com
slightly.
of the tr
This is 5
She beli
said she
didn't h.

With pa

Cindy 5

dBCldeg

140

WWW

As Cindy and I talked about how she made decisions as an elementary principal, I
asked her to draw a model or picture that best explains her style of decision making (see
Figure 6). My next basic question would have been to describe her model of team
decision making; however, one of the first considerations she had in her model was whom
to involve. With either a team or single decision, her model was one and the same. When
she completed the process and we reviewed the drawing, the order of the process changed
slightly. To Cindy, the framework of parameters is one of the most important components
of the model. The framework includes who leads and how it will be worked through.
This is something she learned to do; as a new administrator she did not practice this step.
She believes in a democratic process but at first did not set parameters. As a result, she
said she had people all over the board. "If you set parameters at the end, then people
didn't have a handle on what was going on." More specifically, she describes how framing
with parameters fits in with her style of team leadership.

When you get a team together, you philosophize, then you get to specific tasks and

assigning those tasks and timelines, and check-off points. You need to make sure

you are not out in left field. It has to fit. Everything has to fit in the plan. This

plugs in with framing the problem and the vision.
Cindy sets the framework first, determining who will lead and how it will be handled, then
decides who will be involved. She explains:

The first thing to consider when making a decision is who should make the

decision. Is it one that requires the instructional leader or the building leader

because that person is totally accountable, or is it a decision that involves other

people? And in order for the decision to be successful, they need a certain
amount of buy in, and if that is true, then a mechanism needs to be put in place.

141

 

PROBLEM

      
 

Minor
ADJUST
ifneeded

 

   
   
     

Revisit if
Needed

GET FEEDBA CK
Adjustments?
Revisit?

  
 

'GETA FEEL
Building/staff
(What they think)

       

  

 

 

SE T FRAMEWORK

involve who?

Accountability?
Those involved in outcome ARTICULA TE

need to have a say DECISION
How to work it through

* I GIVEN PARAMETERS
CONVENE I MAKE DECISIONS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 6. Cindy's Decision/Team Decision-Making Model

 

 

 

Next, sh
stakehol
decision
needed.
is not af
other cc
may tint

have to

as facili

wooing

Once C

Urges t

Her st:

142
Next, she finds out what the building staff thinks about the situation, then convenes the
stakeholders, and given those parameters, the group makes the decision. Once the
decision is articulated, she gets feedback on the decision and makes any adjustments

needed. If it has not been successful, she revisits the problem from the beginning. Cindy
is not afi‘aid to revisit a problem. Her attitude is: "Some may want a time limit on it, or
other concerns, then we adjust, any decision is up for review. If it doesn’t work, or we

may find downstream we need to make changes. Just because we try it doesn't mean we

have to live with it forever. "

Adaptability of the iris: Leadership role. Cindy views her role in the group process

as facilitator, democratic, framing, painting the broad picture, a mixture of passion and the

wooing of others. Cindy explains the passion and wooing further.

I watched a lot of administrators over the years; some let the group go at it, and
the people who are the most passionate get their way and that is not a model I
particularly follow. Then there are others who act under the guise of team
decision making, will have a preset agenda, and spend most of their time trying to
woo people, but teachers are sophisticated nowadays, and I wanted to arrive at a
mixture. You can't be totally loose. I don't think you can just throw everything

out there.
Once Cindy finds this balance by employing wooing and a noncommittal attitude, she

urges the process forward.
What I try to do is paint a broad picture, make sure the staff understands our
vision, where I think we might want to end up, understand how the staff wants to
fill it in, fill in the blanks, and then the principal brings closure to it. We expect the

team to pull together once the decision is made.

Her staff describes her as supportive, helpfiil, ready and knowledgeable, but not

dictatorial.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

roles in
at differ
visualiz
good d-

setting

She wa
hard or
offered
"Well,
not C01
will lor

metapl

of the

143

Metaphors: Visualizer, team member, conductor. Just as the iris plays a variety of
roles in the garden depending on the season, Cindy sees the value in playing different roles
at different times. When she needs to lead or conduct, she is there in colorful splendor. A
Visualizer, she is able to see the big picture and has the background information needed for
good decisions. As a team member, she fits in with the cluster of greenery to make a nice
setting any time of the season.

Cindy struggled with choosing a metaphor to define her decision-making style.
She wasn't sure what word or words would be appropriate. She claimed, "This is really a
hard one. I am not sure if there is a word to describe it. I don't know what to say." I

offered some time for her to reflect on this request, and when she did respond, she began,

"Well, I guess I could call it a Visualizer. " It was evident that responding to this query did
not come easily to her. She continued, saying, "I visualize the final product and what it
will look like before I mix some of the ingredients. I am just not certain of a good
metaphor for this style. "

Of the team concept, she says: "The team is greater and more powerful than any
of the individual members, and yet the team is only as good as the individual
commitment of the members. " As a team leader in the decision-making process, she says,

"I see myself as a conductor. V I want all voices to be heard, but in the end, we make
beautiful music together. " However, she says her staff would be of two different camps if
I were to ask them to describe decision making in their school.
People who like making decisions would say, "I would like to do more. In fact, I
would like to do the schedule for her! " Then there are others with tunnel vision,
and they would say, "That's your job, " so it would depend on the person. You

have to develop a style you are comfortable with, then develop a framework; who
should get involved, get a feeling, convene, make a decision, articulate it, get

 

 

 

 

 

 

of mist:
of what
not effe

continu

were it
improv
confert
one we

OlllCOII

thinkir
made :

that 1,

144

feedback, then decide whether or not to go back to the issue or framework or
continue on.

Cindy learned about decision making from other administrators, from making lots
of mistakes, and from trial and error. As she was learning, she would make mental notes
of what worked and what did not, what approach was effective and what approach was
not efi‘ective. She saw a pattern developing that she became comfortable with, and

continued in that vein.

Her staff has learned about the NCA process from district meetings; outside people

were invited to talk to them, and they watched Larry Lezotte films on school
improvement. Although Cindy encouraged five staff members to attend an NCA
conference about a year ago, the focus group members said they did not want to go. No

one went. Cindy's style of decision making requires participation of those involved in the

outcome.

In order to be open and democratic, you need to ask teachers, "What do you think

about it?" Of course their opinions are all over the place, but if you say, you
know, one of our goals is to develop our students to be responsible and we don't
want a whole bunch of rules to say this, if they know this is a goal, then they won't

send home 30 rules for the children to follow.
Systems thinking: The panorama of the garden. Cindy interpreted systems
thinking as partly circular in school systems. "It is partly circular. Some of the systems
thinking has more emphasis than others. Individual grade teams have found when they
made a decision it affects others; the ripple effect. " As an example, she recalled a request
that lst grade teachers had. They wanted to change their entrance and exit procedures.
A lst grade teacher came to me with what she thought was a major problem.
Normally, it is the small things that are most pressing for them. She came in with a

good idea to dismiss the lst grade. I told her to discuss it with the other lst grade
teachers. The teachers then went and talked to the 2nd grade team who said,

AL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lldsex
andthe

change

lthou
snnet
"TOO I

includt

"The I
theiss

nothe

asked
nOtte
imp01

Proce

145
"Listen to us. First grade is only thinking about xyz." We listened to everyone,
then we agreed that with a few changes, we agreed with the 1st grade teachers
that their plan would work. After a few weeks, they thought it wasn't really
working, and they wanted to go back to the old way, but they agreed to try it for
six weeks, so I said, "We really need to stay with it for that time, then we can
switch back. "
This experience also pointed out the value of setting a timeline for piloting something new,
and the willingness the team needs to allow enough flexibility, within parameters, to
change.

"We don't want to confiise the children or parents by changing every month.
Ithought about it, even when people go through the process they think they want
something, but they are not sure, so it is important to set a time to try it. " Cindy added,
"Too much change too fast isn't good for anyone, either." The parameters she set

included piloting the idea for a specific time.

Role of iris in the garden. Cindy spoke of decision making and people's roles.

 

"The role of people in a decision-making process changes with the person. It shifts with
the issues." Too often, she believes, people tend to talk only about the negatives, which is
not helpfirl.
We need to focus on the positive. Once we understand where each of us is coming
from, it is easier to get the discussion going. Finding people who share your
passion is all right if appropriate to the situation. We need to know each person's
strengths and weaknesses. We are all different and we are important.
Cindy's teachers agreed, as a whole, that the principal encouraged them. When
asked if their principal encouraged people to do things, they replied, "She worked with us,
not telling us what we had to do. She encouraged us." Cindy seems aware of the

importance of letting teachers share their ideas and comments, but she sees her role in the

process as different.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a particu
beyond I
explains

decision

"forget .
their 0“
make dt
When t<
Cindy's

they net

togethe
necessa
attetttio

all of tl'.

146

Some people are very vocal and others are very shy. Their opinions are personal,
they don't want to criticize. When you remove that and give them an opportunity
to think and share, they know they are not going to be attacked for adding their
ideas to a list of ideas. There is no judgment here. PeOple are freer to talk and add
to the list.

She views individuals as advocates for their own areas, and she says that gives her
a particular role in the process: "They will speak up. Sometimes the staff doesn't look
beyond that. They need a person who stands away and sees how the pieces fit." She
explains how she feels about staff members assuming new roles in the process of team
decision making.

This is important. I had to learn to think about this. Some become very good

leaders. You have to encourage people to play different roles. The principal

doesn't have to be leader all the time. You can be active, and sometimes not so
active.

When Cindy holds staff meetings, there are times when she asks teachers to
"forget what your position is. What would work?" She nudges them to think beyond
their own initial reactions. People bring "crib baggage" with them, she believes, when they
make decisions. This term helps her to understand where people are obtaining ideas.
When teams work together, they get to know each other better, and they get stronger.
Cindy's staff asserts that she does not force issues; people tend to make issues bigger than
they need to be.

Team learning: As the stalk grows. so SM“ it bend. If a team is to learn and work
together, Cindy thinks team members must have a common base of knowledge; this is also
necessary before anyone can verbalize a shared vision. This area was seen as needing

attention by the NCA visiting team in 1994. In its report, the visiting team suggested that

all of the staff be informed of what is happening:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

be afrai
the are:
gatherii
contrib
precedi
the buii
help fu
Chair's
YourSt

YOU ca:

Vision

Her st.

Theret

147

Please make sure all staff are aware of the plan and understand the important role
they play toward reaching your success. The’motivational speaker needs to be
followed up with building sharing sessions so the successes of some can be shared
by all. Iwould also encourage you to share beyond your building since the three
elementan'es are targeting the same area . (N CA Second Team Visit Target Area

Report, May 1994)
As a team learning together, Cindy encourages people to try new things and not to

be afraid to do so. She adds that timing is important. Cindy feels she has not done well in

the area of designing places where community can happen, and she thinks hosting

 

gatherings is all right if they are productive. As to letting people know of others'
contributions, Cindy maintains it sets the tone for the school. However, as we saw in the
preceding paragraph, the NCA team recommended that the school share successes within
the building and with other schools in the district. More emphasis on this technique may

help further develop the tone she would like to set for her school. The visiting team

Chair‘s final report to the school in May 1994 offered the following suggestion: "Celebrate

your successes more. If we educators don’t support each other and cheer each other on,

you can bet that few others will" (Visiting Team Report, May 1994).

Shared vision: Beauty in the eye of the beholder. According to Cindy, a shared

vision cannot be forced, but having one helps in team decision making.

You don't waste a lot of time if the thoughts don't coincide with your vision. It is
one of the correlates of an effective school. Someone has to set the vision for the
organization. That creates the framework for which decisions are made, even if
you go to the stafl‘and develop that vision with them. But, stafl‘looks to the
principal to have some ideas as to how the team should move; you stop the
confusion, looseness, openness. If they know how to look at a decision, you don‘t
even have to articulate the framework, they know that, they use that framework.

Her staff said that during the process of‘ goal selection, the goals were obvious.

Therefore, there was very little discussion. They described the process this way. "We

 

 

 

 

never ha
principal
on the rr
strategic
philosop

practice

commit:
teacher
"We dic

explain:

empow

for autl

looking

to Why

148
never had to push, or tell someone else what or what not to do. We never had to ask our
principal to step in, nor did she. It just worked out." The staff found it easy to be focused
on the real work, which plugged into the vision. But when this group started discussing
strategies, it was a different story. The staff said there was: "difference in Opinion,
philosophies, personalities, attitudes. We said you don't have to love this, and we tried to
practice consensus. Can you live with this? And, I guess they have. "

The steering committee was careful in their planning. They saw that the goal
committees were heavy in one area and needed help in another area, so they did what one
teacher described as "this volunteer thing." Some volunteered to go to other committees.
"We didn't want to tell them we wanted them off, didn't want feelings hurt," the teacher
explained.

Tendinthhe garden: Team decision making in progress. The staff is more
empowered now, Cindy said. The building has a different feeling. There is more respect
for authority in the building-mot necessarily a shift in authority, but a different way of

looking at authority. She claims:

When accountability is shared, they look at the authority figure as a person who is
a colleague. One of the characteristics of a strong principal is to pull it all together
within some framework and express it to those in school and out of school. You

definitely need a person who has the big picture.

All is not rosy with team decision making, however. Cindy says questions arise as

to why certain parameters exist and who decides on which groups will be involved.

In teachers’ minds, they see conflict in team decision making. It is difficult for

them to understand sometimes who should be involved in what decisions and why.

I ask them to think about their students’ parents. Some decisions are made that are
just the responsibility of the parent, some require teacher and parent, and some just
the teacher. In an organization, not all decisions are group decisions. Some are
joint, and some are not. If this is made clear, then people aren't upset. You get

 

 

 

 

 

decisior
cases, (

keep th

decisic

altema

back.
that tl.
that la

iHarri

149

hostility if this is not clear. You need to identify when and who. When site-based

management came onto the scene, no one identified which decisions will be group

and which ones will not be group decisions.

At times, some information cannot be shared with teachers, nor can they make
decisions that they believe they should make, because of outside restrictions. In these
cases, Cindy carefiilly words her explanation, understanding that this is one way she can
keep their morale up.

You have to keep to a minimum any decisions normally made by the group that for

some reason they can't make. You have to be honest, to keep your credibility.

What I do in this case, is I word it in a way that tells them I understand they would

like the final say, but we are working with certain restrictions here. Then I talk

about the one or two things they can decide on. If a teacher asks to be involved in

a particular decision where it is not possible, I just tell them that it is not a decision

that we can make in a group, but we can do such and such, and then I talk about

what we can do. It is like the analogy of the flag. We can't make the decision to
fly the flag. We know we have to fly it every day. But we can decide when to
take it down.

There are times when her team reaches a point where they are not able to make a
decision. Rather than arbitrarily making the decision for the team, Cindy considers other
alternatives.

When team decision making doesn't work, when you reach an impasse, or it is an

emotional issue, I find we have some choices. We can try to construct a partial

buy-in, table the problem, revisit, or I can make the decision myself. Often, the
luxury of time to revisit an issue is just not there.

Lack of time to develop, review and reconsider decisions holds Cindy and her team
back. A 50-minute planning period is not enough for the staff. Teachers and Cindy agree
that they need more time. Cindy offers: "Teachers appreciate being involved but there is
that lack of time; some aren’t made by the team because of time. You know, let me know

in an hour! "

 

 

 

 

Cindy b
Sometir

central .

convers
how pa
One ca,
related
the ma
strong
childre
Popula

Annua

its effe
Cindy
and or
now f

Slight]

STOUF

a tren

 

150

Another constraint comes from central office pressures and preferences, which
Cindy believes tend to give too much direction as to which way they should go.
Sometimes there is little room to fit in differing points of view when she considers board,
central office, and other outside group expectations.

Neither Cindy nor her five staff members speak of or refer to parents in their
conversations, except for the anecdote about changing the exit/entrance for students and
how parents would View this change if it were dropped before the pilot was complete.
One can assume that most parents work and are not readily able to participate in school-
related activities or committees. The school's annual report of 1995 to the NCA shows
the major findings of their student profile, which indicates possible reasons for the lack of
strong parent involvement. "There is a great deal of mobility. A large percentage of

children move in and out of our program. We have a multicultural, racially integrated

 

population that ranges from the upper class to the lowest socio-economic levels" (NCA
Annual Report, 1995).

In a follow-up discussion, Cindy talks about the transiency of the population and
its effect on volunteerism. Students are particularly transient at the kindergarten level.
Cindy says parents seem to have the attitude that it is all right for kindergartners to float in
and out of this grade. "We always did have this problem, but we see it so much more,
now that we are a K-2 building." Turnover is about 20% at the kindergarten level, and
slightly less at the other two levels.

When the school had a K-5 configuration, there was a more homogeneous
grouping of middle class students. Now they draw from all over their city, and they have

a tremendous mix of socioeconomic levels. They have students who leave for weeks of

 

 

 

 

vacatio
women
volunte
volunte

reconfi

workir
from tl

seem i:

Which

head c

The t<

her as

attitut

 

151
vacation to exotic places, along with trailer park children and youngsters from the battered
women's shelter. However, Cindy does not think that transiency has as much to do with
volunteerism as other constraints such as jobs and distance fi'om school. "Parents do

volunteer. It is not strong, it is not a large group. It may be due to our recent

reconfiguration, and for awhile we weren't sure if that was the reason. "

Cindy“ suggests the lack of volunteers comes from the fact that more parents are
working or have other responsibilities which keep them away from the school. Distance
from the school also may play a role in lack of parent involvement. She says the parents
seem interested but do not become involved.

Keeping the school moving forward amidst all the change and other dynamics
which pound away on the doorstep is reflected in how Cindy sees her responsibility as the

head of the team. She describes this responsibility

As a moral leader, when decisions are made that are out of our control, decisions
that come from Lansing, the teachers feel they are not appreciated. They don't
have any control. They work 8 to 10 hours a day. The leader of the building has
a responsibility to be a cheerleader, a spiritual encourager, to tell them to continue
to do their best, that somewhere down the road, someone will see the hard work

they did.
The team's overall sense of who Cindy is and how she leads seems to indicate that they see

her as an encourager and a team player. Her words of encouragement and positive

attitude are qualities that offer fertile soil for ideas and decisions to blossom and flourish.

The Extent to Which Cindy Thinks About
and Enacts Team Decision Making
How Cindy sees herself in team decision making, and how the teachers view her in

this process, support the model that she developed in our conversation. Teachers'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

languag
not a di
specific
and linl
encour:
elemen
in tearr

stakehc

only or
we we
Emest

it diff

makin
know
has p]
for st

Thef

Situat
lime

altho

152

language describes Cindy as an encourager who shares leadership, is a listener, supportive,
not a dictator, and knows what to do. Although the language Cindy uses is not
specifically reflective of systems thinking terminology, her decision-making model loops
and links the disciplines together. The NCA reports had little to add, although they
encouraged follow-up training and sharing successes with each other and other
elementary schools. Both principal and teachers were curious about the role parents play
in team decision making and indicated a genuine interest in how to involve them more as
stakeholders in their school.

A fascinating point that cannot be ignored is that central office was mentioned
only once by this focus group. They stated, "Our t0p administrators didn't know where
we were at either. " To review the numerous negative central office comments that

Ernestine’s teachers offered, and then to consider comments from Cindy's teachers, makes
it difficult to believe that these two elementary schools are from the same district.
On the whole, through Cindy's talk, the awareness of what role team decision
making plays in her leadership is strongly present. Her thinking about the process shows a
knowledge of some of the terms, through her descriptive model. Further, the value she
has placed on the process, as indicated by this self-described model, reflects a deep regard
for staff involvement, although the parent component had not been a significant concern.
The focus group talk did not place emphasis on parents either.
Cindy is conscious of team decision making and implements it across the myriad
situations that arise to which decisions must be made in the school setting. Once again,
time is a constraint both to her and the teachers, making team decision making difficult,

although a sense of urgency or utter frustration did not come across in any interviews. The

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

parent invr
lack of cor

addressed

W

A _
soil that d
selected fr
Spring the
blossoms.
and blend:
properly a
about f0u1
Buglewee

As
baCkgrour
0f not sta:
requiring
Childhood
valued }

to grow a

 

153

parent involvement component created some questions directed to me. I consider this
lack of concern for parent voices to be a lack of awareness, which will most likely be

addressed in the near future, now that it has been brought to their attention.

Debbie: Gaiety Ajuga (Bugleweed)
The Woman

A perennial ground cover, Ajuga is a low, fast spreading plant that grows best in
soil that does not dry out and it grows in the sun as well as the shade. The plant is often
selected for erosion control and is an excellent ground cover for borders and banks. In
spring the plant makes an effective background, blooming with single stalks of blue
blossoms. Multicolored with green and bronze leaves, the plant is not striking or showy,
and blends so easily one does not realize its presence, yet it fulfills its purpose if treated
properly and will give extensive coverage in a few short years. Normally growing to
about four to six inches high, Gaiety Ajuga is drought resistant and attracts wildlife.
Bugleweed mats so heavily that weeds will not grow through the ground cover.

As we shall see, Debbie and the ajuga go hand in hand. Known for staying in the
background, she is effective in her knowledge and is all over the place doing a superb job
of not standing out; rather, she is adept at encouraging others to take over the show. Not
requiring a lot of care, she methodically works hard to develop her philosophy of early
childhood, a place that is good for all kids, and where all stakeholders are accepted and
valued. Her mission is to spread that phi1050phy so it will cover the school and continue

to grow after she leaves.

 

Deb
as principal
at another 1
courseworl
Debbie did
goal. How
elementary
director p(
she still m;

Th
populatior
in implem
with the y
about the
Debbie w
Parents a

S
relations]
through.
(Collabo
Uanergi
school i]

“Wit.

154

Debbie is of German, Swiss, and Ukrainian heritage. She was sent to this building
as prinCipal almost 6 years ago, after completing a two-year stint as an assistant principal
at another elementary school in the district. She earned her bachelor's degree, then took
coursework in educational administration and earned an Education Specialist degree.
Debbie did not apply for this position because being in a supervisory position was not her
goal. However, she had been placed as an assistant elementary principal in another
elementary school in the same district, dividing that responsibility with a federal programs
director position, which had been a full-time position in years past. As building principal,
she still maintains the federal programs title.

The school district reconfigured two K-6 schools into one with a K-3 student
population and another with a grade 4-6 population. Debbie, having a strong background
in implementation of the early childhood philosophy in her district, was given the school

with the younger student enrollment. She found her first year difficult due to concerns

about the recent reconfiguration, a major change for staff, students and school community.

Debbie weathered the first year and began to learn more about her school, students, staff,
parents and community, along with developing her own skills as a building leader.

Since then, Debbie and her staff have learned and grown together, strengthening
relationships with parents and each other, and building trust. When they were going
through the pangs of major change, they were awarded a grant called C-SIP
(Collaborative School Improvement Plan), under the guidance of Eastern Michigan
University. This grant offered training and other support to help move the process of
school improvement forward. More than 2 years ago, they began a new cycle of NCA

accreditation and have completed their goal selection process. This time, her team had a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

strong par
mothers a
focus gror

the schooi

M

N
school is
is close t<
unpaved;
kinderga:
holds abr
however
and bulk

lmfldng

line One
the class
tow) ant
headed,
bird fee

this Spa

155

strong parent component, with 5 parents on the team. These parents started as room
mothers and have been involved in various activities of the school for several years. The
focus group said the parents were chosen because they had knowledge of the school and

the school improvement process.

The School Setting

Nestled at the end of lower middle income homes off a main thoroughfare, the
school is a one-story, well-constructed brick building that is about 40 years old. The area
is close to small businesses and strip malls and at the edge of a large city. Some streets are
unpaved; a trailer park is being built adjacent to the school building. Formerly houSing
kindergarten through 6th grade, the school was reconfigured about 4 years ago and now
holds about 300 kindergarten through 3rd grade students. The classrooms are small;
however, the lower elementary student fumiture seems to be a comfortable fit. Hall walls
and bulletin boards are filled with artwork; one bulletin board has all the staff of the
building highlighted with a photo and some information about each one of them.

The school has a definite emphasis on little children. At the entrance, red wagons
line one side of a cheery, spacious area. These are used for teachers to haul materials to
the classroom and for parent use as well. Often, families who visit have little children in
tow, and the wagons come in handy to transport them to wherever their parents are
headed. In the middle of the school building is an atrium displaying rose arbors, benches,
bird feeders, and a wide variety of plants and shrubs. A group of parents has taken on

this space, transforming it into a place of beauty at any time of the year. Before school, a

 

 

 

 

 

group of s
organized
\l
hwuah
Bright co
and whiS]
I met in
friendly a
activity a
is all rigl
I
With pap
attentior
easily, 5
on her fi
Squeeze
Often, a
ADD,
She had
SQUirt g
Child's 5
some H

tollChin

156
group of staff members meet early and power walk in the halls. Another group has
organized an after-school aerobics class.

When I walked into the building at 10 am. on a school day, I had the feeling that
it was a haven for children. Artwork and displays were placed at children's eye level.
Bright colors were everywhere. The children in the hall were on their way somewhere,
and whispered and giggled as they turned down a hallway from the office. An adult whom

H

I met in the hall smiled and offered a pleasant "Good morning. Office personnel were
fiiendly and helpful and knew where I was to meet the teachers. The rooms were full of
activity as I passed by; a low hum emitted from most of them, giving the impression that it
is all right to talk and learning seemed to be occurring in a friendly atmosphere.

Debbie's office is small, and loaded with boxes and books. Her desk is covered
with papers and toys. She says she has the toys there for kids and adults who have
attention deficit disorder (A.D.D.). She has a plastic open-winged bird that can balance
easily. She said that, recently, a teacher took it and balanced it on her shoulder and then
on her finger while they talked. A student balanced the bird on his nose. She has a
squeeze ball that people manipulate as they sit and talk, a magnetic chip toy that gets used
often, and a sand timer that just gets looked at. She said the toys on her desk are her
A.D.D. test. She told about a preschooler who was in her office recently who asked her if
she had anything there that she didn't want anymore. Debbie opened her desk and found a
squirt gun, a puppet, and some Tic Tacs and gave them to the child. A moment later, the
child's sister asked Debbie the same question, so she dug deeper in her desk drawers for

some more little surprises. Debbie found the openness and honesty in these children

touching yet humorous, because it points out how her office can seem a mess to adults but

 

 

 

 

delightful '
came over
neater. D

everything

m

A
given tim
Debbie e:
do have t
people w
iInportan
Parents, 5
getting ti
tables re
Says this
forward
allllrecia
authofitr
VisiOn, t
eVEI'yon

carrying

157

delightfirl to children. When she was out of the building for a few days, another principal
came over to cover her lunch hour, and boxed up all the supposed junk to make the office
neater. Debbie says the messiness does not bother her at all. She knows right where

everything is and can put her hands on it in a second.

Leadership: No Weed Left Unturned

Ajuga will mat so thickly that no weeds can sprout. Debbie's style of leadership,
given time, can create the same condition, allowing for her vision to continue to grow.
Debbie explains her View as a building principal and leader of the school: "As a leader, you
do have to set the tone for the building. If the tone is strong enough, then only strong
people who believe in the vision will bid into positions in the building." Debbie finds it
important to be willing to relinquish authority and trust others, peers, teachers, and
parents, including her community education liaison person. "My liaison is so good at
getting things ready, and I am terrible at it. She came in last night and worked getting the
tables ready for a meeting today. It looked so nice. I was so glad she offered." Debbie
says this liaison has come up with some good ideas, and she has encouraged her to move
forward with them. Not surprisingly, the liaison's efforts have been well executed and
appreciated. Debbie is now willing to have committee chairs run meetings and share
authority. But she said, "They are not really there--the shared knowledge, sharing the
vision, trusting the people; they know the focus and the vision." She explains that not
everyone is at the same place. For instance, there is no support from the supervisors in

carrying out the vision of the school.

 

 

 

 

 

Debbie at
to call in

D
questions
simple, "
came ov:

an early

(I)

"(Db—t

view her

- ._.- .__4 A__1

the ViSit
01' 4 wk
blOCker

much II

 

158

It has fallen down with the noon-hour supervisors. These supervisors are paid
little and are only in the building and playground during the noon hour for
supervision. Their responsibilities are difficult but they are unwilling to make
efforts to attempt making changes in their views and how they handle the
children.

Debbie adds that they have a lot of substitutes for the noon hour supervisors, as they tend
to call in "sick" often.

Debbie shares a story about a visitor in her building recently who asked enough
questions to cause her to reflect, "How did I do it?" Her first responses seem to be a
simple, "It just happened." This visitor, a new principal from a neighboring school district,
came over to tour her school because the visitor's school was in the process of redesigning
an early childhood center.

She had so many questions for me. "How did you do this? How did you do that?"

I don't know. I guess being there, supporting, being patient, a cheerleader, taking

extra time and effort, encouraging them so they don't give up. Working alongside

the team. Doing the unexpected. But, Rena, it is killing me.

Letting the staff take the leadership role has made a difference; she believes. They
view her as a teacher, as one of them. She elaborates on how she accomplishes this.

I do things to give them time to take the leadership role. I have become a model.

I teach in the classroom to help out. Reflecting on it, I also wonder, is this worth

it? I have my 30 years, but I know how hard they have worked; I could leave.

They told me not to leave. They feel insecure yet, they need three or four more

teachers for strength. I choose to stay to see the vision through.

She elaborates on how she supports and encourages those who are carrying out
the vision, and how she handles those who do not. "They have bought into it. I let the 3
or 4 who have the vision and are carrying it through, to go on while I deal with the

blockers. I work with them, do things for and with them, so they won't complain so

much. "

(In.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

drawing
incorpor
problem
determir
of four 2
support

not don

discussi
decisior

they diC

times t]
and at 1
adOpte
decisio

am hav

 

159

Decision-MakingZ'I'eam Decision-Making
Model: Ground Cover

 

As Debbie talks about her method of decision making, we discover in an elaborate
drawing her perceptions of how she makes decisions, and create one decision model that
incorporates both decision making and team decision making (see Figure 7). Once a
problem comes to her attention that requires a decision, the first step she takes is to
determine who needs to be involved. The parameters are set, then the process follows one
of four avenues: teachers in a faculty advisory committee framework, a parent committee,
support people or "other," or a decision that she can make on her own. This, however, is
not done without input.

In making decisions involving the staff, Debbie and the teachers have an open
discussion. If more information or research and discussion is needed, this occurs, then a
decision is made as a group. In the process of goal selection, the teachers described what
they did.

We brainstormed, we broke up into groups, we put up sticky notes on what we

thought was important, we prioritized, and we came up with three areas we

needed to improve on. It was real clear, it came through loud and clear, it popped
right out. We prioritized with complete staff and parents. Brainstorming took
time. We had a lot of lunch meetings, and finally settled on our three cognitive
goals.

In meeting with parent representatives from homerooms, Debbie says there are
times they are able to make a decision, but other times they require input from elsewhere,
and at times, they adjust their decisions after input. The same input-adjust technique is
adopted for the "other" component. She says she needs feedback and closure in making

decisions. Debbie talked a bit more about not making any decision totally on her own. “I

am having a hard time recalling when I have made a decision without input from someone

 

 

 

 

Flgul-e

 

 

160

 

Problem
needs decision
b
Who needs to
be involved

 

 

 

 

 

Set parameters

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

t l/ \L
Fla-2:32:52: Decision Homeroom i
COmmittee Parana: Reps. \
Input Decision
Open Adjust l
Discussion |

 

 

 

 

        
 
     
 
 

 
 

Decision

Figure 7. Debbie's Decision/Team Decision-Making Model

‘ r a
More info or
research &
discussion

   
 

\L

 

 

Secretary,
Custodian, etc.

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

else, and
I just hav
D

ill

or

it

c:

in reflect
would he
15

she sells
with the
treats ha

I

slowly a

knowler

knew th

improve

Present:

Went to

describ.
as One .
dCClSiQ-

She is V

 

161
else, and decisions impacting others aren't made without their involvement in the process.
I just have always been that way."

Debbie recalled a situation when the school had trouble with a parking situation.

We had trouble with parents parking right where our buses load and unload, which

created a dangerous condition. I knew if I wanted that situation to improve, I had

to get input from parents, teachers and bus drivers. Well, we all got together and
came up with a plan that all had input on and agreement.
In reflecting on it, though, she said people were starting to ignore the plan, and they
would have to revisit it.

Another team decision was made on how to solve the problem of congestion when
she sells goodies to kids at lunchtime to help supplement the school's slush fiind. She met
with the teachers and they developed a plan that would end the disruption that selling the
treats had created in the hall and lunchroom.

Debbie also knew she needed to get more parents involved in the schools, so
slowly and carefully, she incorporated room mothers, who have gradually become
knowledgeable in the process of schooling, and who now are on the NCA team. She
knew that all of the parents needed some idea of what the school was doing in school
improvement, so she had her co-chairs attend the parent club meetings and give
presentations. The focus group agreed that this was a good idea. They commented, "We
went to parent meetings and kept them informed along the way."

Systems thinking: Essential to bugleweed's Success. Metaphorically, Debbie
describes her leadership as that of a coach, and in team decision making she sees herself
as one of the members of a crewing race team. She sees herself as starting the process of

decision making in a group setting, then she goes to the sidelines. A believer in modeling,

she is willing to give power awaY-

 

 

 

H
she told z
The print
him up a
appropri:
could m2
apprecia‘

I
are in, w
to spend
school a
Debbie‘s
as one n
bUt also

l

i
1

have to]
by Debi
Parents
'0 Pater

effort i1

 

162

Her firm convictions regarding the power of modeling are evident in an anecdote
she told about a little boy who punched another child as he got on the bus to go home.
The principal took the child off the bus. The mother had to be called to come and pick
him up and was angry about the situation. When the mother arrived, Debbie modeled
appropriate questions as she talked to the child about his behavior and the choices he
could make. The mother called the principal the next day to say how much she
appreciated how Debbie had talked to her son.

In telling this story, Debbie again talked about the plight that many of her parents
are in, with little or no income, long hours of work with low pay, and precious little time
to spend with their families. Many of these parents had had unpleasant experiences in
school as children or their children had had difficulties in another school before coming to
Debbie's school. Debbie says she works hard to turn those attitudes around. She sees this
as one main way of helping kids to learn. Not only does she model with and for parents
but also for teachers.

I am shocked at how some of my teachers talk to parents. They seem to have no

idea what these parents are going through, or what could help these parents. I

model, model, model, and talk to the teachers. It has been quite an effort. I don't

think I will ever reach some of the "old guard. "

Understanding people's perceptions is the top priority for Debbie. Schools must
have tolerance for where the parents are and where the kids are. This belief is supported
by Debbie's descriptions of her strong beliefs regarding the treatment she models towards
parents and how she wants teachers to treat them. Debbie has spent a lot of time listening

to parents and developing a comfort level with them. She says she has put tremendous

effort into encouraging parents to become involved in the school. There have been times,

 

 

 

L._

she says.
lost by a

1
model it

staff, at

it. She

the toe

leaChip

163

she says, when all the hard work she would put into developing a parent's trust would be
lost by a staff member who would not be understanding.

Debbie has a strong belief in modeling. She said, "You have to believe it and really
model it. Live the process, draw them in, model when you talk to students, parents, total
staff, at all levels." She also is supportive when it comes to teachers going to training.

I encourage training, any kind of training, and I tell them if they all go to the
training, that I will go with them. How often have you heard a group of teachers
at a conference or training session say, "You know, I wish our principal were
here." I think this builds respect for what they are learning. Then you also have
that common language.

She pitches in and works alongside or for the teachers when the situation calls for
it. She will take over classes when possible.

I think more horizontally than vertically. If a teacher has an appointment and
needs to leave school early, I take their class. I do it all the time. I go into the
classrooms and teach with them, too. It is not to show them how to teach well,
but to give them time or to build a comfort level. It is not a reprimand situation. I
would say I do this with about 80% of the rooms. I went into the art room
recently, made a project right along with the kids, and when the class was over, I
said to the art teacher, I just evaluated you!

Debbie understands that the comfort level is important in teachers allowing her in
the room. She has found another creative way to get into the classroom and model
teaching, as well as to share and model her beliefs of reality therapy/choice theory.

With "bad kids" I offer to come and sit with them in the room rather than have
them sent to the office. That way I see what is happening in the classrooms, and it
The older teachers, they don't want to be the bad guy or take the time to talk to
the kid who disrupts the class. They send the kids to the office. I can't give up
MY principles to discipline the kids their way. The kids come out of the room, or
I will go into the room with them, but I won't write discipline slips. The kids don't
connect the behavior with the discipline slip. I am trying to teach them how to
solve problems.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E
COIlVlllCCl
shared. '.
chairs. C
somethin
ask Debi
she runs
We likei

I
does not
they alsc

describe

l

Debbie
informer
cOlllme:
because
howev€

the tea

 

164

Nutrients for'fisuccess. Along with her belief in modeling to the staff, Debbie is
convinced that decision making must be staff led; decision making and leadership must be
shared. The staff views Debbie as supportive and encouraging; she truly counts on the co—
chairs. Often, rather than asking Debbie what they should do or for permission to do
something, they tell her what they plan to do. One focus group member said: "We don't
ask Debbie if we can do something. We tell her. And sometimes, if she has an idea that
she runs past us, we tell her if we don't think it will work. She listens to us and trusts us.
We like it that way. "

Although Debbie attends most committee meetings, in the minds of the staff she
does not need to be there. They are comfortable discussing issues without her input, but
they also appreciate it when she is there. The staff has accepted this empowerment and
describe how they began their process:

We ran the whole group meeting; we would leave an hour so the small groups
could meet after them. The principal was not involved in this at first. We tried to
keep her out. We just wanted to talk about NCA. We didn't want to talk about
state mandates, or annual reports. It was overwhelming. We siphoned things.
What will help staff understand? They were getting too much information. We
had to keep it simple. We wanted it to be a staff thing.
Keeping a group decision-making task simple is effective and something that
Debbie agrees she needs to do more. She said she tends to start at the top with too much
information, which perhaps is too complicated for some to understand. The focus group
cemented that her depth and breadth of knowledge sometimes hampered discussion
because of too much information. The staff thinks that this seems to be changing,

however. They find it helpful to get just bits of information at a time. Debbie agreed that

the team should focus on the research that supports the issues at hand.

 

 

 

 

 

The focu

she is trt

Debbie t
educatio
iterated.
in gettin
impleme
are, it is
group, i
COhfirsir
Consultz

more he

cOnvicti
wOrk' it
She say

Others i

 

165
I attempt to focus on the real work, but not as much as I should have, or try to do,
but I am easily sidetracked. Someone will usually say, this is important.
Sometimes you have to deal with it then go on. If this is the vision, then you need
to do it. Businesses do a better job of it. Schools are bad at it. Unless we teach
what they are supposed to learn, other things are extraneous. But until we know
what the teachers are supposed to teach, we won't know. That is a real eye

opener.

The focus group comments cited above support this disclosure. Debbie says she believes
she is truly an A.D.D. person.
Thinking further about her team decision-making model and how it has evolved,
Debbie believes she has learned decision making through trial and error and reading in
educational journals and articles. "Trust is important, you must know your people," she
iterated. Debbie did not consider parameters at first, but found them to be more effective
in getting the job done. Now defining parameters is part of her method, and she
implements it early in the process. "When everyone knows up front what the parameters
are, it is easier, " says Debbie. Attending NCA meetings helped, according to the focus
group, but they received conflicting information from different presenters, which was
confirsing to them. The information and guidance they received from an outside
consultant who had come in to teach them how to make team decisions was somewhat
more helpfiil. This consultant was provided through funding from a grant.
Bugleweed: Continuous growth. A firm believer in modeling, Debbie says with
conviction, "We learn by doing, by modeling. If I don't try it, I won't know if it will really
work. " She relates this to involving the stakeholders in any decision that affects them.

She says if she models this enough, some of her staff will eventually catch on and get

Others involved in decisions they have to make.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(
things 0'
and thin
mph 1
particip:

from thi

compo]
and lllli

Debbie

Theta;
four b;

Studen

says, b

leamir

166
One area that Debbie is not comfortable with is conflict. She attempts to smooth
things out when it occurs. She sees the value of disagreement and tries to let it happen
and thinks she is getting better at it. On the other hand, she finds it exciting to meet
people who share her passion for education. When I asked her if she was willing to
participate in this study, she did not hesitate. When she returned the transcribed notes
from the second interview, which I had given her for review, she wrote:

Rena,

-looks good

-I didn't recognize myself

-I really enjoyed this

-Let's do it again.

She finds education challenging and believes that a passion for it is an important
component, one that her focus group reiterates. They think highly of Debbie's knowledge
and intellect and depth of reading about educational issues. The staff also noted that

Debbie has a keen way of discovering and developing their strengths.
.She believes training she has recently completed in William Glasser's Reality
Therapy has helped her see and be more sensitive to the whole person. She considers the
four basic needs that people must have met, and she applies this thinking to parents,
students and staff.
Recognizing people's contributions must mean something and be personal, she
says, but it is time consuming. Knowing that some staff rate this technique of team
learning valuable as helpfirl to her.
We can't treat peOple the same, you need to know their individual strengths, their
physical needs; how long is the meeting, how much background knowledge do

they have? I have become more knowledgeable to the staff; I am more sensitive to
them. I find if you know the whole person and you know their limitations, and

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SL'
116

A

states tha

“10.09?

IN).

moved b
their ow
chair wa
in Marci
another

district's
heaVy e1
accredit
most of
district

meant a

and~Wa

bUill in

Calend;

 

167

support their strengths, know their needs, make them needs fulfilling, the Glasser
needs; this is more so since I have had the training.

As to her team having a shared vision, Debbie surmises this is very important but

states that they are not there yet.

Ifeveryone has the vision, they operate within the principles of that organization
and they support the goals. When one doesn't, it takes time to go back. The
quickest you advance is if everyone is on the same page. If you focus your energy
on one or two teachers that aren't there, it doesn't get you toward the vision.

Bring them in slow, model it, model it.

Accreditation: Bugleweed or weed. The team is upset because their plan got
moved back due to an emphasis on the district rather than the building continuing to have
their own visiting team. The 1995 annual report stated in July 1994 that a visiting team
chair was assigned, but the school heard nothing from her, and the NCA office responded
in March 1995 that the chair resigned because she did not have time. In August of 1995
another visiting chair and co-chair were assigned, but as district co-chairs. The school

district's K-12 population are all in schools involved in the NCA accreditation process, and
heavy emphasis was placed on individual buildings to consider and agree to a collaborative
accreditation effort from a district standpoint. At this point, the school agreed to join
most of the other schools in district accreditation. Because of the decision to work as a
district in this process, some schools had to be brought up to where this school is, which
meant a hiatus of a year to allow the other schools to catch up. It seemed like a hurry-up-
and-wait process to the team at this school.
Ironically, though, both Debbie and the team see a need for more time, but time
built in to the school year, to develop and implement their goals. A yearly planning

calendar for teacher involvement in school improvement is not available, and total staff

 

 

 

 

 

 

meetings
most of l

NCA anr

~r-1 Hfi '1'!
-1

H

In

school i

"Amon

They s;

(iotthr

accredi
Proces
to arm

So littl.

168

meetings are not arranged for NCA teamwork. However, Debbie has agreed to spend
most of her required staff meeting hours on NCA-related work, according to the 1996
NCA annual report.

Release time for committees to meet and be inserviced continues to present a
problem. The requirement for staff to fiilfill (6) hours of building inservice relating
to building school improvement needs and the flexibility to use some of the
required staff meeting time for NCA work has provided some assistance. A
problem of the limited availability of substitutes who can cover for staff to provide
release time for NCAcommittee work or attendance at training during the regular
school day remains a problem. The majority of the work still occurs outside of the
regular school day, during staff meetings, and from regular staff coverage within.
(Annual Report, 1996)

 

The focus group spent considerable time on the logistics of meeting to discuss
school improvement and to plan.

Time was a struggle, but we did a lot of lunchtime meetings, and some were
getting upset with us because we found it best to meet then, and others didn't.
Time taken from class was real hard, too. We put so much time into this. We
have family and after school is hard. Planning periods are different and that is so
hard.

What holds this principal and her team back, she believes, is central office.

 

 

 

 

 

"Among principals, there is support and help. Central ad, though, doesn't walk the talk.
They say they want to, but when it gets down to the nitty gritty, no. One on one, yes.
Got the foundation but haven't done much to build the house."

Central office claims to encourage and believe in school improvement and
accreditation, but Debbie thinks they need to show support for and understanding of the
process by meeting the building team's needs. They seem to have no grasp of the struggle
to arrange for substitutes and the time needed for the process to work effectively. "I have

so little control over this, and no one seems conscious of other things. Required deadline-

 

 

 

 

-they wa
time issu

1
consister
providin
doesn't t
has hirer
addition
would b

improve

change
don't th
the tim:

only pf

SPreadi
r€place
dream.

garden

 

169

-they want you now, " says Debbie. Planning ahead is an effective way to deal with the
time issue, Debbie surmises, "Then we can't use time as an excuse. "

To improve the process, the focus group suggests more support and more
consistency in what presenters share in staff development sessions. They also urge
providing training for new staff in the process of NCA school improvement, so that it
doesn't take years to get them up to speed with the rest of the staff. This school district
has hired more than 40 new teachers in the past two years and expects to hire an

additional 25 to 30 teachers for the next school year. It is doubtful that more than a few

 

would have experience in or knowledge of the process of accreditation, school
improvement, and team decision making.

Debbie spoke of seeing the school as a circular system. Her comment on systemic
change reflects her views. "I like to think I go for systemic change, but it is so slow you
don't think it is happening. If you wait, it will get there.” She believes that one must take
the time to learn, and learning has to carry over to everyone to be effective. She is the
only principal who used the term "systemic change. "

With Debbie’s decision to stay on board as their principal for a while longer,
spreading support and nurturing the shared vision, she and her staff may entice
replacement teachers who believe in the school's philosophy and want to be part of that
dream. Debbie says, "The most important lesson I have learned is patience. " As any good

gardener knows, time is essential to healthy growth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

process i
valuable
at gettin
process.
the teaci
consider
them wi
She is p
letting l
leaders
to her v
Was C01
represe
Central
langua!
System

Of any

Parent:

 

170

The Extent to Which Debbie Thigks About
grid Emwts Team Decision Making

The view Debbie has of herself in the decision-making/team decision-making
process is supported by the teachers' stories. She thinks about team decision making as a
valuable link to the community and the success of her students and staff. She works hard
at getting everyone to understand what is necessary and getting them involved in the
process. She is brutally honest in her disclosure of what she sees is her weaknesses, and
the teachers refer to the same weaknesses as she does, but they indicate she has improved
considerably. They kept her out of the process at first so that she wouldn't overwhelm
them with too much information. Staff see her as excellent at finding peOple's talents.
She is passionate about involving parents in their children's education. Debbie's talk of
letting her staff run the meetings supports teacher voices; they said they see themselves as
leaders of the team and the principal counts on them a lot. They admit, too, that they go
to her when they need her help. The only frustration teachers talked about was how NCA
was constantly shifting requirements and that consistency was lacking among NCA
representatives on certain issues. Debbie is frustrated with the lack of support from
central office, although the teachers did not broach the role of central office. Debbie's
language and actions indicate a knowledge, understanding, and use of the concepts of
systems thinking across most of the disciplines. Once again, the NCA reports were devoid
of any evidence in this arena.

Debbie has spent considerable time and effort thinking of ways to involve the
parents in the process of decision making, and she talked at length about the efforts she is

making to get staff to understand and become part of the decision-making process.

 

 

 

 

 

Constrai:
decision

discussic

her effor
with sta
through
genuine
making
on as pr

decisior

throng]
bears a
Present
acOrns
lnfotm
Creatur
are tin

the inf

171

Constraints (leadership from central office, enough parents knowledgeable about team
decision making for her school, and the structure of the school day) all are part of her
discussion that she struggles with and attempts to overcome.

Other pressures cause Debbie to be frustrated not only in her thinking but also in
her efforts to implement team decision making. The schedule allows for little time to meet
with staff, and the same concerns she voiced in her thinking, hampers her following
through as the kind of team decision maker she would like to be. Debbie demonstrates a
genuine attempt through use of her model and desire to implement effective team decision
making which comes through in her staff's talk about her leadership. Her decision to stay
on as principal one more year so she can continue to develop a solid team of good

decision makers indicates a wish to overcome obstacles in this arena.
Nancy: White Oak

The Woman

The white oak is different from other oaks in that it retains most of its leaves
throughout the winter, making it easy to distinguish from other deciduous trees. Nancy
bears a resemblance to this mighty tree because her style of leadership is an obvious
presence at all times but not necessarily flashy or presidential. The white oak bears
acorns, treats to herbivores who often'store them for winter forage. Nancy plants seeds of
information as she talks to her staff. This oak easily reproduces itself, with the help of the
creatures who bury the acorns, but conditions have to be right. Nancy recognizes there
are times when she needs to share information with staff overtly instead of covertly, and

the information may not be taken into consideration. Sometimes seedlings come up in the

 

 

 

 

wrong p
aware t1
nuisance
The whi
is to prc
situatior
principa
the fall,
because
leadersl
the end
oak's 1e

Nancy.

The Sc

stands
middle
buildin
l5 Rm 2
Parkin;
inside

elahOr.

 

172

wrong places, but these are easily pulled and discarded when they are little. She also is
aware that mistakes happen, and she has learned by doing. Acorns and leaves can be a
nuisance when cleaning a yard, yet the spreading adult tree provides shade in the summer.
The white oak provides shade, beauty, and strength, and it is long lived. Nancy's purpose
is to provide the support and the strength for staff to make good decisions in a team
situation. Nancy is retiring this year after a long, stable career as a successful elementary
principal; she has taught and administered in the same school district her entire career. In
the fall, the white oak's leaves turn a rust color but are noticeable throughout winter
because they remain on the tree. Nancy's influence on her staff is widespread; her style of
leadership has affected the staff broadly. Ifit is up to the staff, her retirement will not be
the end of team leadership in the building. Her vision and beliefs will hang on like the
oak's leaves in the fall. The mighty oak is a symbol of wisdom, strength, and power, as is

Nancy.

The School Setting

The school, a one-story brick building housing about 350 elementary students,
stands at the end of a narrow street about a half mile from a major thoroughfare in a
middle-to lower-middle-class neighborhood of a metropolitan area. The exterior of the
building is close to sidewalks and has a boulevard of mature trees lining 2 sides. Parking
is not an effort; both the front office area near the street and the side entrance off a
parking lot allow convenient access to the building. I entered a large, airy vestibule just
inside the front doors. Two sofas flank a large fish tank built into 1 wall, and a fairly

elaborate tiered planter occupies another corner. The plants and fish tank, upon closer

 

 

 

inspecti

in pots,

vestibu
pleasar
phone.
trust ti

momir

adjace:
secret:
the app
and w.
cuts fr

much

Princii
her ch
OVer t
he Wa
Classr
Work

Start,

173

inspection, need some immediate care. The tank is ready for a cleaning, and some plants,
in pots, have outgrown their containers and need repotting, trimming, and watering.

The office is located opposite the planter/aquarium area. Glass walls face the
vestibule and the street. The secretary was helpful, friendly, and talkative, providing
pleasant chatter during the short wait I had while the principal finished talking on the
phone. The secretary said that her children are in middle school and she is still not able to
trust them to get off to school without her guidance, which makes her late to school every
morning.

The secretary's office is small; the copy room, closet area and bathroom are
adjacent to the main office and are cluttered and cramped. Apparently, neither the
secretary nor the principal is overly concerned with neatness. The principal apologized for
the appearance of the bathroom. It was just off the secretary's office, with old fixtures,
and was obviously used by students to wipe up bloody noses and wash off scrapes and
cuts from outdoor recess or physical education classes. This room looked like it saw
much use in an ordinary school day.

On my early morning return visit to meet with the focus group, I knew that the
principal would not be there. The secretary arrived after 8 am. because she had to send
her children off to school before she left for work. A teacher from across the hall came
over to assist me. When I told him I was to meet with a small group of teachers, he said
he was aware of the meeting and knew where I was to go. He guided me to a 4th grade
classroom. The walls, constructed of high-quality tiles, were relatively clear of student
work or other diSplays. Just as the focus group session ended, the bell rang for school to

start. Children Opened the classroom door and entered (in a rather noisily fashion). They

 

appeare
room, 0
group a
and stur

day star

has spe
degree
that in
armour
of boo?
bulletir

papers

m
Study.
to faci
staff k
COnsir

Perce]

 

174

appeared curious and open, and greeted their teacher warmly. As they filtered into the
room, one student spied the picnic hamper, which held juice and snacks for the focus
group and asked if I was taking the class on a picnic. The relationship between teacher
and students seemed to be receptive and polite, and good natured—bantering began as their
day started.

Nancy, of Ukrainian heritage, has been principal in this building for 11 years and
has spent her entire career in education in this school district. She earned a master's
degree in Growth and Development, and believes she has accumulated 15 to 20 hours past
that in Supervision. Nancy plans to retire this year, but at this point has not made the
announcement. Her office, directly accessible from the main office, is filled with shelves
of books, a work table, and her desk, which is piled with stacks of books and files. A
bulletin board hangs over the desk, covered with announcements, schedules, and other

papers.

Leadership Role: As Strong as the Oak

Nancy has been in the profession longer than any of the other principals in this
study. She has experienced her position as principal shift from "she who walks the halls,
to facilitator, to discuss difficulties with." Most decisions are now team decisions, yet the
staff knows the final decision rests with her (see Figures 8 and 9). As a leader, Nancy
considers herself not the decision maker, but a facilitator, a team player. She hints that her
perceptions may not be the same as the perceptions of others.

I look at my people as professional and I expect them to be professional. I want a

team atmosphere in the building. I always have. Everything I have done has been
to that end. I don't think I am autocratic. I am not one who is the decision maker.

 

 

 

 

 

appeare
room, c
group 2
and stu

day sta

has spe
degree
that in
armour
ofboc

bulleti

Papen

lead:
study
to fat
staff
consi

pelCt

174

appeared curious and open, and greeted their teacher warmly. As they filtered into the
room, one student spied the picnic hamper, which held juice and snacks for the focus
group and asked if I was taking the class on a picnic. The relationship between teacher
and students seemed to be receptive and polite, and good natured-bantering began as their
day started.

Nancy, of Ukrainian heritage, has been principal in this building for 11 years and
has spent her entire career in education in this school district. She earned a master's
degree in Growth and Development, and believes she has accumulated 15 to 20 hours past
that in Supervision. Nancy plans to retire this year, but at this point has not made the
announcement. Her office, directly accessible from the main office, is filled with shelves
of books, a work table, and her desk, which is piled with stacks of books and files. A
bulletin board hangs over the desk, covered with announcements, schedules, and other

papers.

Leadership Role: As Strong as the Oak

Nancy has been in the profession longer than any of the other principals in this
study. She has experienced her position as principal shift from "she who walks the halls,
to facilitator, to discuss difficulties with." Most decisions are now team decisions, yet the
staff knows the final decision rests with her (see Figures 8 and 9). As a leader, Nancy
considers herself not the decision maker, but a facilitator, a team player. She hints that her
perceptions may not be the same as the perceptions of others.

I look at my people as professional and I expect them to be professional. I want a

team atmosphere in the building. I always have. Everything I have done has been
to that end. I don't think I am autocratic. I am not one who is the decision maker.

 

 

 

175

 

 

 

 

 

 
    
   

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 8. Nancy's Decision-Making Model

 

 

SITUATION
QUICK DECISION LONG RANGE
ALONE Have Time
(Based on experience)

BRAINSTORM

ON OWN RESEARCH

(cause/effect)
DRA W ON STRENGTHS, (- — _ _ —' GET FEEL/INPUT
EXPERTISE OF STAFF _ _ _ FROM STAFF
DECISION

 

 

 

 

176

 

PROBLEM

1

WHO NEEDS TO
GET lNVOLVED
(Who has ownership)

1

L SET FRAMEWORK

L

SEND lNFORMATlON
(FRAMEWORK)
TO TEAM

l

DEClSlON MADE

l

lMPLEMENTATlON j

 

 

      
     

  

INPUT
if necessary

as team member only

or “side-bar"

 

 

 

Figure 9. Nancy‘s Team Decision-Making Model

 

 

 

 

 

driven.
there a

are pro

leanur
suhlk
Bohr:
Chah:
"SUpe
Schoc

(Visit

Both

mentf

177

I look at myself as a facilitator and as a team player with the staff. But that is my
perception.

The focus group sees the goal—setting process and its implementation as staff
driven. They support her perception Of her relationship with the staff. "If we need help, if

there are personality conflicts, that is where she is helpfiil. Her leadership style is that we
are professional."

The visiting team chair evidenced the contributions of the principal in this report.
Support for outcomes accreditation is evident at different levels of the

administrative structure in this school district. The principal shows long
standing knowledge of North Central and a commitment to the outcome

accreditation process which she shares with her staff. (Visiting Team Report,
1992)

Nancy learned decision-making techniques by experience; she is an advocate Of
learning by doing and finds that she learns best if she practices something and adapts it to
suit her needs. Her superintendent is one of her role models and has been for many years.
Both administrators have been in the same district all of their careers. The visiting team
chair also recognizes the commitment that her superintendent has for the process.

“ Superintendent support for the NCA-0A process was evidenced by his attendance at this

school's luncheon and his interaction with various members of the Resource Team"

(Visiting Team Report, 1992).

Nancy‘s team co—chairs had training at NCA conferences in Lansing and Chicago.
Both Nancy and her staff seem to lOOk at the group process of decision making similarly,
mentioning consensus and brainstorming. The staff described their process thus:

It was a group decision. Basically, what we are doing now, putting up chart

paper, we took reading as an overall goal, looked at every aspect Of reading, broke
it out. We tried to get people‘s expertise. We brainstormed. At first, it was a

 

 

 

 

' llancy
needei
coukl
usedt
"Ther

thnez

(D
Q
n

l.

cond
ofthi
for'd
Sher
reacl
reset
drav
shei
deci
ever

vvay

 

178

small group collecting data. Then we got more staff involved. If we are going to
do it they are going to have a voice in it.

Nancy also spoke Of brainstorming, but on her own. "An example Of a parent council I
needed to put together, I brainstormed, wrote down, then developed a framework for who
could serve on the council." Earlier, when she talked about making decisions, she also
used the term "brainstorm," again. referring to it as a technique she practiced alone.

"There are other times when the situation calls for long range planning and I have more

time and can actually sit down and brainstorm on my own."

Decision-Making Model: Stand Alone

 

I asked Nancy to describe in a drawing how she makes decisions. She was not
comfortable with the idea Of drawing out her process, saying she was not good at that sort
of thing, so I Offered tO sketch as she talked. Nancy is specific in describing her process
for decision making, and a separate process for team decision making. In some situations,
she makes a quick decision alone based on experience. If the decision will be long-
reaching and she has the time, Nancy brainstorms on her own, looks at cause and effect,
researches the problem, and then goes to the staff to get a feeling and input from them,
drawing on their strengths and expertise. After she internalizes their input and feelings,
she makes the decision. The process is linear tO Nancy. "They acknowledge the final
decision rests with me, and some are totally mine; I am not in the position of dictating
everything that goes on, and that is most of what we do in a team decision. I want it that

way, and that is my goal. "

Her process evolved through experience, and maturity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

breath
hower
up for
ultimz
role a
her at

relati.

@
ihvol
lnfor
from
lmplr

deci:

 

179

I have to be involved and do it and make mistakes, and develop my strategies and

strengths, and that is how I developed as a teacher. I had a protective mother and

I had tried several approaches with her. I went and talked it over with the 3rd

grade teacher who helps me to see things in a different perspective. You know,

the first few years teaching, parents never argued with staff, but the last few years,

I saw a difference in parents. They want tO know, do we have a right to make that

choice? I would hear that. Then, as a principal, a parent would come in upset, and

immediately, I would get defensive. You have to lOOk at the whole picture. I am
not the one who gets upset now. I began to change my responses, parroting to
them, you are really angry. I got the input, tried it, and as I dealt with different
parents, it works. All of a sudden I find that the parent is on my side and we are
both working for the best Of the child.

When one stands underneath a mature white oak, its size alone can be
breathtaking. The tree can seem intimidating, all powerful. On closer inspection,
however, we see that the oak Offers us shade, a place to climb, bark to peel, acorns to pile
up for happy squirrels to take away and bury for a winter meal, leaves tO collect, and
ultimately, branches to help start a fire, or wood to build firrniture. As Nancy grew in her
role as principal, she developed the tools tO handle tough situations and used her skills tO

her advantage. She converted the intimidating position Of principal into a helping

relationship, much like the oak.

Team Decision-Makingjylodel: Emwwerment

When making a team decision, Nancy's first step is to determine who needs to get
involved--what groups have ownership in the process. Then the framework is set,
information including the framework is sent to the team, and Nancy's input is added only
from her position as a team member. The decision comes from this group and is
implemented. This is supported by her metaphor Of a pyramid as a description Of her

decision-making style. "What I see is that if I develop a strong team atmosphere in terms

 

 

 

 

 

of deci:

built ut

sees he
perspe
irnpass

Change

tells it
drowr

CODCC

what
DUI d:
decisi
consr

COHSE

She

JUSt ;

 

180
of decision making, that becomes a strong foundation and everything in this building is
built upon that--a pyramid."

For the most part, Nancy steps back in a team decision-making process, and she
sees herself separate from the team in her drawing. Her purpose is to provide a different
perspective. She says, "You have to lOOk at the whole picture." If the team ends up in an
impasse, then she tells them she will make the decision. "If we don't like it we can always
change it, " she adds, "but it is a rarity that I ever have tO do that."

She uses terms such as data, assessment, consensus, and accountability. Nancy
tells what happened when they first started out. "When we first started out we were
drowning in data that we never used. We are now more selective. When we have a
concern and collect data, we make sure it is specific and related to the goal or problem. "

If someone were tO Observe at her school during the goal-selection process, this is
what Nancy says the person would see the staff doing. "They probably would be getting
out data, looking at and discussing results, classroom assessment, Observation, come to a
decision as to what area would need our focus most." Nancy made references to
consensus throughout her discussions with me. She related how the staff learned to reach
consensus as they developed their team decision-making skills.

Initially, when we started school improvement, it was 2 steps forward and 3 steps

back. As the staff matured and became more involved in decision making, and

especially when they had tO account for their results, you began to see more
consensus building and more give and take.

She kept a low profile when the visiting team came to meet with her co-chairs and staff,

just as she does in team meetings. "Each committee sat at the table with the team, I did

 

 

not. Vi

others

goals,

take 0

steppi

team

exar

rele:

 

181

not. When the team came, I sat at the back and co-chairs sat with the team and all the
others were there, and it was theirs. "

She purposely removed herself fi'om the process. As the staff worked on their
goals, there were times when she felt like adding something to the discussion or wanted to
take over, but she did not think she should, so she would get up and leave the room.

Nancy had learned some lessons the hard way, particularly when it came to
stepping in and making decisions for the group. Those lessons started 11 years ago.

In this business, 11 ago when I became principal, I stepped right into the school
improvement, the Larry Lezotte stuff, and it took us through the process. We
learned all the steps, mission statement, goals, and I came back all fired up. We
broke up into committees and got to work, and all of a sudden I found that I was
doing all the work, all the writing, lots of talking, but down to the bottom, I did all
the smoothing out, and we would try it and it wouldn‘t work, and I was taking all
the responsibility and it got worse and worse. Then we went into accreditation --
not the traditional which we had done for 15 years, but the 0A, and at first it was
a nightmare. I stepped back and listened to some of the teachers and got to
thinking about it. They have 2 co—chairs. "Here, you are in charge, go do it, tell
me when you are having a meeting and I will drop in." And it got worse. The
ultimate came when one of their strategies was to highlight every inferential
question in a book. And I thought, this is not a strategy, but I thought, good, bad
or indifferent, it is sink or swim, this is yours. When the team comes, I will just sit
back. If I keep stepping in, it will become mine.

 

Since those early years, Nancy has grown and developed. She has now expanded
team decision making into other aspects of school Operation.

I separate what decisions should be made in my office, or relinquish it to staff or to

parents. I think I can separate those things more easily now, and I can make

decisions without any hesitation. Some are easy to make, or I will do my stepping

back and working it out with staff, and I feel comfortable.

Nancy describes how class lists are developed for the next school year as an

example of team decision making. She gives the team overall criteria and then gives them

release time, and they make up the lists. Only if she thinks there will be a clash between

 

 

 

 

 

nudent

same \i

cum'c1
leave}
nfidye
"Forg

done

decni

Just:
kn0\

Pres

atm.

Slip]

Pro:

182

student and teacher because of a parent concern will she make a change. She does the
same with the budget. She tells the teachers:

Here is the money. If you use reams of copy paper, then don't complain if you

come wanting a class selection of books; you made that decision. They monitor

themselves, they bargain with me: "If I get the workbook and use blackline masters
instead of individual books, then can I ...?"

Every once in awhile, she becomes autocratic. If there is a change in the
curriculum, staff members must go along. "If you can't change with it, you need to
leave. " A teacher had agreed earlier in the year to take on a particular project, and at
midyear, the teacher told Nancy she was going to drop the chair. Nancy told her:
"Forget it. Sounds good but we are doing this. It could be done, should be done, will be

done. You took this job on; you need to see it through."

The border collie metaphor. In a metaphorical sense as a team leader in the team
decision-making process, Nancy envisions herself as a border collie.

You guide them. You try to keep their direction and you keep your goal focused.

Ifyour team is going, if it is good they will spread out broad, you let them bring in

their own views, their own passion, and they develop a wide spectrum and you

keep moving toward that goal.

The oak tree is an impressive presence, not allowing other trees to grow nearby,
just as the collie, with its herding instincts, has its own particular job, and its presence is
known to the sheep or cattle. Neither tree nor dog is what one would call flashy or
presidential, yet they accomplish their tasks.

Nancy perceives herself as a facilitator and professional. She strives for a team
atmosphere in the building. Her staff believes she allows them to lead, prods if needed, is

supportive, and treats them as professionals. Her participation in the goal-selection

Process, through their eyes, was thus:

 

 

 

 

 

the en

the bt

Then
focus
the 31
held

50 o;

Nan.

distr

 

183

The principal would share perspectives of seeing things come full circle, and letting
us know in no uncertain terms which way education was heading. She would
expect us to be professionals, and gives us space. We came up with ideas she
didn't agree to 100% and let us know her ideas, but still she would go along. She

has done everything possible to get research for us so we don‘t go off running all
over the place.

 

The morale in the corral. Paralleling team decision making, according to Nancy, is

the environment, the morale of the building. The morale of the staff and atmosphere of

the building, she believes, stem from a shared vision.

A shared vision is absolutely important but you don’t necessarily achieve it in the
team decision making. It is in the morale and environment in the building. You

want an environment where people enjoy and want to come and I think that lends
itself to group commitments. It has to be built and developed well before you get

into the team decision-making process. They go parallel; you don't ignore
decisions and work on morale of the building.

Her staff claims they are not there yet, but believe a shared vision is important.
There did not seem to be any feeling of lack of morale or strained relationships in the
focus group. No discussion of celebration came up either, but Nancy talked about how
the staff plans parties around specific milestones in teachers‘ lives. A tenure party was
held recently, and a 50th birthday party was held for a fellow teacher; each person brought
50 of some item to give to the teacher. Nancy herself is not prone to celebration:

...even though school improvement tells us to celebrate. It seems contrived. The
staff set their own ways to celebrate for various things, but it was not consistent

with accomplishments in decisions. Better we celebrate for personal things that
are meaningful to us.

There seems to be a more widespread team effort taking place beyond the walls of
Nancy‘s school, according to her observation. The improvement teams in all of the

district‘s elementary schools communicate with each other.

What I see our school district doing among elementary schools is that feeling is
becoming far-reaching. Our curriculum coordinating council and school

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

process

usbnn

finenh

autoc

Nancj

SlOpI

done

 

184

improvement teams meet and discuss. Not only teachers in the building
communicate with each other but across the schools they are doing that.

Nancy has developed a relationship with her staff in the team decision-making
process that she believes provides a level of comfort and support from all of them.

The staff is accustomed to making key decisions and agreeing to reach consensus.

I know as a principal there is often griping, but there is not an overt attempt to

inhibit or sabotage a decision in any way. Over the lunch table, they may say this

is stupid, and that kind of thing, but when the decision is made, everyone puts
forth an effort.

Nancy finds some people struggle with issues in team decision making. "Each of
us brings our own prejudices and viewpoints, and that is what is so difficult to give up in
listening to another viewpoint." She offers these words of wisdom:

I think whoever is the leader of the group needs to remember when you are dealing

with people, that‘s what teachers bring to teaching--their personal motivation, their

strong feelings, and if you discount it, it is like turning off the tap, the energy flow
just isn't there anymore. For example, in setting up groups for school
improvement, if you have someone with a drive for science, it makes no sense to
say no, and put them in the reading section. Their drive and passion is in science,
then they will serve as a model. You will need to know your people, and have
them use it to their maximum.

Nancy explains how this is important to shared decision making: "That's why
autocratic leadership doesn't work, autocratic doesn't see that." Knowing your peOple,
Nancy indicates, allows you to understand what they have to offer to the team.

When we look at people, we don‘t see all the gifts people bring. I think that goes

along with learning about your people. The more you learn about them, the more

aware you are of what those other compellates are. Then you can call on them,
and that way, you can acknowledge them.

The staff takes more responsibility as a result of team decision making. She

stopped making schedules for showcases and bulletin boards. She says, "Somehow it gets

done; there is always stuff up, they do it themselves. Sometimes it is better than other

 

 

times." A
upset. T1
the princi
into big ti
time and
of team

Q
better ch
mine. It
it throug
when in

invades

team (16
Parents
school,
Who wt
commit
about i

said, In

 

185
times." A new principal in the district was not making schedules, and the teachers were
upset. The principal before him had done all that. She said, "You are kidding, you want
the principal to do all that?" She added, "Some things are very small, but it transfers over
into big things. I see a big difference in the staff. " This level of trust and agreement takes
time and effort. Nancy sees accountability playing a role in the staff learning the process
of team decision making.

Growing strong teams. It is apparent to Nancy that team decisions often have a
better chance of being successful. She states, "When it is a team decision, it isn't just
mine. It has a strong chance of being a good decision, and we have a better chance to see
it through to fruition." Patience enters as an attribute that Nancy has to be conscious of
when in the process of making team decisions. She is aware that time is an element that
invades the process as well.

Any time you are doing anything with a team, it is time consuming and you need

everyone's voice, and sometimes I have a tendency to be impatient. Let's just do it

my way. The constraints of time, sometimes more frustration, and you are forced
to listen to the other person and hear their point of view.

Staff members are not the only ones in the school community to be affected by
team decision-making practices in her school. Nancy said, "I saw a big difference in
parents, too." She describes a hand-picked parent council that she developed for her
school, selecting a variety of males and females, ethnic representation, and 3 vocal parents
who were sometimes critical, to allay any concerns that this was a rubber-stamp
committee. They were together for 3 years, tackled the homework policy and argued

about it, conducted research and discussion, before finally leaving it the way it was. She

said, "They learned a lot, they argued for 3 months on that one alone. " These parents now

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

have becor
intimately
parents ne
Fo
sel
dii
kn
Tl
in the pro
our goals
If
parents b
PTOgram.
students.
mmme
Parents.
l‘
Ofgettin
COmmitr
SChedult
impleme
that all 1
a good

01' app“

 

186
have become knowledgeable about school issues; 5 of the parents from this group are now
intimately involved in the NCA team process. It seems evident that the staffs view is that
parents need to know how schools operate.

For the past couple of years, we have had a parent advisory council. We made our

selection for our school from those parents, that was a natural process, they were

directly involved and knew the school improvement process. They were already
knowledgeable.

The focus group wants to continue the parent component, keeping them involved
in the process. "We don't see more parents involved...but we thought we would present
our goals to a parent club group and let them know where we plan to go."

The NCA visiting team recognized the effort the school made to reach out to
parents by noting a summer tutor program that included parents as necessary to the
program. "This school sponsors a summer tutoring program for identified 'at risk'
students. Students as well as parents are involved" (Visiting Team Report, 1993). A
special evening program during the school year also targeted at-risk children and their
parents.

Nancy is cognizant of the importance of parents but is sympathetic to the difficulty
of getting them to attend fiinctions in her school community because of work and other
commitments during the day. She holds evening meetings to accommodate their
schedules, and informs and involves them in school processes, such as bond money
implementation in the school and parent advisory group sessions. The energy, the drive
that all people bring to the group cannot be discounted, in Nancy's estimation. "If you are

a good administrator, you need to know their vision, their style. With every new strategy

or approach, there are some things that are excellent, and some that are not, and you need

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

to take the
process wl
to the real
have a foc
committee
and simpli
this is the
about is v
strong fee
other tim.
of the par
1‘

firm belie
Works. (
regard tc
there. "I
time con
done thi-
also indi

and mor

ago) the

 

187

to take the best of those things." The staff seemed to feel the same commitment to the
process when they discussed goal setting. Nancy believes that the NCA process helps get
to the real focus. Her staff supports this belief, stating, "Without it, your building doesn't
have a focus. You have a commitment on paper with your group. When I am on a
committee I want everyone to be involved in the building." Keeping the process selective
and simplifying is important to help members understand it. Nancy asks herself often if
this is the best research, the best way to do something. One of the last things she worries
about is what brings the group together. She searches for someone on the staff who has
strong feelings about something, then looks for people who have similar passions, but
other times she looks for a balance of peOple in a group to round it out, as in the makeup
of the parent council she developed a few years ago.

The process of school improvement made the greatest growth, she insists. As a

firm believer in learning by doing, Nancy says, "You have to try something to see if it

 

works. One must trust the teachers to try something and put their own stamp on it." In

 

regard to timing, Nancy believes it depends on the issue, but time constraints are always
there. There is so little time to gather in meetings, and she tries to take the pressure of
time constraints off the teachers. Having to rush gives her the feeling that she has not
done things well, and she doesn’t want the teachers to feel that kind of pressure. Teachers
also indicated that having a calendar planned out for at least a half year, with due dates
and more parameters, would help them.

Developing places where community can happen is also important to Nancy, as is
demonstrated by her anecdotes about meeting with parents in the evening. A few years

ago, the staff got together and traveled to Traverse City. Nancy was excited about the

 

 

 

 

 

team buil
of experi

but assur

affects h
hinderer.
there no
more tin
growth.

decision

c0171mm
lmprove
as a SCll

YOU Ste]

and tea

188
team building that took place on that outing. Time constraints just do not allow that kind
of experience to occur often. She attempts to accomplish this somewhat in evaluations
but assumes people know how much she cares about them and what they do.

To Nancy, as with almost all of the other principals, time is a major element that
affects her team's work. Although she sees central office as a helper rather than a
hinderer, the budget that is set by central office constrains them, as does the problem of
there not being enough time built into the contract. The teachers also recommend that
more time be scheduled in their school year to plan and to implement team learning; it is
growth. Nancy believes the longer the team is together, the better the process of team
decision making gets.

Team learning builds coordinated action, the shared vision, allows for the personal

mastery, it incorporates that, and the longer you do it, the more the staff grows

and operates as a team without consciously thinking about it. It doesn't just
happen. It comes through the team meetings, arguments, discussion, agreement.

The more they do it, it almost becomes part and parcel to the teaching. All of ‘a

sudden, you see sharing of ideas...how did you get over this hump?

Nancy sums up her vision for the school. "That was my goal, to develop a
community spirit, a team effort within the school. The OA process, the school
improvement process, was the vehicle that helped me to do this." On the flip side, her role
as a school principal is different from her school vision. The lone white oak says, "When
you step into this office as principal, you really are alone."

The Extent to Which Nancy Thinks About
and Enacts Team Decision Making

As the most senior administrator in the study, Nancy describes decision making

and team decision making as two separate models. In the stories that reflect her

 

 

 

implemer
understa
indicates

the decis

on, and
and foc
but not '
working
they did
gave thi
teacher'
Althoui
vision,

Seemed
report

planne.

one in
ditfere
decisir
deClSlt

driving

189

implementation of team decision making, it is evident that her knowledge of and
understanding of systems thinking is minimal. The processes she describes are linear. She
indicates she has made significant changes in leadership to accommodate stakeholders in
the decision-making process.

The role parents play is something Nancy has spent considerable time and effort
on, and one that teachers recognize as important. Teachers see Nancy as knowledgeable
and focused, keeping things simple for them, helping with research, sharing her views
but not forcing them, and practicing consensus. Further, Nancy's teachers viewed her as
working at keeping the group together. They used the term "we" often to describe what
they did, and the role they saw their principal in was one of knowledgeable helper who
gave them space and time and was on the periphery. Central office did not come up in the
teacher’s voices, but the principal referred to her superiors as supportive and helpful.
Although Nancy did not directly indicate that teachers were not in agreement on a shared
vision, the teachers commented that they were "not there yet, but getting there." This
seemed to be the only critical comment that surfaced from the teachers. The NCA
report commended Nancy and her staff for the development of programs that were
planned for the evening so that parents of at-risk students could attend.

Nancy thinks about team decision making as a force for change in her building,
one in which the parents are an integral part, as are the teachers. She also described a
different way of handling decisions alone and is not afraid to go ahead and make a
decision if one has to be made, so her thinking still allows her to indulge in single
decisions if and when she deems it necessary. Her staff does not describe her as a single

driving force in decisions, however.

 

 

 

F
the last t
wanting
team-pla
way, altl
school a

the choir

"Ivy Le:
universi
her lead
better it

no blos:

She allc
Want to
necessa
Unassur
fine fea

meeting

 

 

190

For Nancy, team decision making seems to have evolved over a period of time in
the last ten years, she says, and she finds it easier now than before. She fought off
wanting to give the teachers the answers and let them learn the hard way. She does play a
team-player role, however, as much as she can. The focus group painted her role the same
way, although they indicated she helps them in a number of ways. The voices in this
school are heard collectively, through Nancy's ears, and she includes her own voice among

the choir.

Rita: English Ivy

The Woman

Often peOple associate the climbing ivy vine with college campuses, and the term
"Ivy League" depicts a well-known group of colleges and universities. Rita's school is in a
university town, creating an appropriate association, but the plant also has similarities to
her leadership. It offers excellent wind protection, but it cannot tolerate fiJll sun, growing
better in shade or partial shade. As an evergreen, its presence remains constant; there are
no blossoms.

Rita, in describing herself, shares her preference of remaining in the background.
She allows discussions to follow their course, patiently offering time for all those who
want to, to get in on the conversation. She stands up for her staff and takes the heat when
necessary. She sees herself as consistent and always there for the staff, a stable but
unassuming part of the structure. Rita, a gracefiilly tall, trim woman in her forties with
fine features and some black ancestry, has been a principal for 6 years. At our first

meeting she was still in tennis shoes from a walk she had taken earlier in the day. Ruth

 

 

 

preferrer

question

_The_Sch
l
both sid
commur
class ne
has a lo
building
because
and par
OUlSlCll
60 year
400 str
lmpairr
Studen
sPot b
A Woe
of the
t0 the
mUFal:

With a

191

preferred that the conversation be scripted rather than audio taped. Her answers to

questions were well thought out, and when verbalized were short, direct, and to the point.

The School Setting

Large elegant homes, some of them identified as fraternities and sororities, flank
both sides of the streets in the area of Rita's school. One gets the sense that this is a stable
community with historical pride and respect for itself. In the center of this upper middle
class neighborhood in a university-based city juts this imposing, three-story school which
has a longstanding tradition of excellence. A parking lot is adjacent to the side of the
building, and has two speed bumps strategically placed, but they are hardly necessary
because of its small size. An orange mesh fence, partially fallen, separates the sidewalk
and parking lot from a play area that looks like it was designed for younger children.
Outside is a large playground with mature trees and shrubs. The building itself is at least
60 years old, with narrow halls and solid wood doors and trim. Currently it holds about
400 students, about 100 of whom are bused to the school. One class of trainable mentally
impaired students makes its home here, along with kindergarten through 5th grade
students from the community. Signs leading to the main office are posted as difficult to
spot because they have been lost in the mix of materials and pictures posted on the walls.
A wood-floored auditorium with a raised, curtained stage is in the center of the main floor
of the school. Originally, the school was built for middle elementary students, according
to the secretary. The halls are filled with classroom projects and art projects. Painted
murals line both sides of the hall in one lower wing, which leads to a kindergarten room

with an old warped wooden floor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1
neahdq
view, an
the publi
emphasi
wearing
notes. 1
Thetea
thatthe

made th

Opposit
books
area as
Paperw
the day
availab

her. S]

intervi.
in, fair
test. }

bUSlne

192

The main office area is simply furnished and cluttered. I did not get a sense of
creativity or any attention given to decor in this area. There are teacher mailboxes in plain
View, and 3 desks are perched behind the low counter, separating the secretarial area from
the public area. In spite of the lack of decor in the central office, there seems to be strong
emphasis on the arts in this building. Two staff members whom I met in the hall were
wearing matching vests. They were in a black and white print, with patterned musical
notes. I asked one of the teachers whether the vest was a kind of uniform for the staff.
The teacher replied that staff members who taught art and music wore the vests to indicate
that they were part of the fine arts staff in the building. One of the fine arts teachers had
made the vests for similar teachers in the school.

The principal's office, fiirnished with a desk and chair and two guest chairs
opposite the desk, is flanked by a bookcase filled with spiral ring binders and educational
books. Rita's office has a wooden glass-paneled door that opens out into the main office
area as well as one that leads to the secretary's office. Rita's desk has a busy look, with
paperwork and folders covering much of the space. Our first interview was held during
the day, and because of the openness of the office and the visibility through the glass door,
availability to the principal was easy to those in the main office area who needed to see
her. She saw 6 people during the interview, which made data collection a bit difiicult.

Four students were in the office when I arrived for the first interview; during the
interview, a parent came in and asked for an explanation of some project. A teacher came
in, fairly excited and in a rush to tell Rita about the phrasing of a question on the MEAP
test. Rita spent time listening to the parent and the teacher, took care of whatever

business she needed to, and they left. Shortly after the teacher left, the same 4 students

 

 

 

who we:
go homr

The sec

Leaders

collegia
would I
the tow
empow

decisio

offers 1
leader
knOWlt
Onwarr
as she
Spoke
of the
comp1

ability

193

who were in her office when I arrived returned to pick up letters of reprimand that had to
go home to their parents. The students had written some improper notes earlier that day.

The second interview took place after school, with only one interruption.

Leadership: Undja'ng on the Vine

As a building principal, Rita regards herself as a leader who is collaborative,
collegial, flexible, participatory and personable. She said, "My personality is one that I
would rather blend in." She describes a good leader this way: "A person who likes to set
the tone, be the example for others to follow, one where I am flexible and like to
empower others, more of a person who is inclined to empower others to make a good
decision. Participatory. . .not autocratic. "

As the ivy plant winds its way, it covers its host well. The ivy, preferring shade,
offers protection, beauty and its mission to cover as it grows. Rita's view of herself as a
leader reflects the strengths of the English ivy. No showy flowers, but quiet strength,
knowledgeable about what she perceives her role to be, she forges the path, leading others
onward. Rita depicts her leadership style as constantly going around, gaining knowledge
as she goes. She not only involves herself with staff for constant interaction, but she
spoke early in the interview about parents' involvement at her school and their role. One
of the parents on the site-based team said: "This has been a good year. No parent
complaints, teachers are working hard. We are pleased with how you have arrived at
these goals by looking at the data."

Rita enjoys honing in and picking up on what the real issues are and sees this

ability as one of her strengths. One way she finds out what is going on, she says, is, "I am

 

 

 

 

 

 

always ir

to create

issues a
some di
would t
deve10p
member

appreci

Staff h.
over 111

Percep

new 8‘

 

 

194

always inviting comments." (See Figure 10.) She sees herself as personable and attempts
to create conditions in which teachers will talk to her.

I try hard to get to know each teacher, their personalities. I am sure all building

principals do that, but I really do try to develop a relationship of mutual respect so

even the younger teachers aren't fearfiil to come and talk to me. I am a talker, I

am out and about. In hallways, I get to know little small things about each person.

I want to know their interests, who is going through the "change" like myself. We

are human beings.

The focus group stated that Rita was supportive and gave them time to discuss
issues among themselves. There was a brief discussion about conversations that needed
some direction at times, in which Rita chooses not to be involved, and the staff wishes she
would be. The teachers said they want focus and a "stick to the knitting" attitude when

deve10ping strategies and interventions. The focus group spoke specifically about a new

member on their faculty who seems to be taking over discussions, which they do not

 

appreciate.

 

We have a new member on our staff now who is quite vocal, and she thinks she
knows everything and I see where there are times when she speaks up in staff
meetings but no one challenges her. Yet we talk later and disagree with what she
has to say.

Staff have not talked to Rita about their awkward feeling when this new member takes
over meetings. They have not told her that they talk later among themselves. Rita's
perception is that staff are comfortable with her.
When I first came here, it took the staff a while to know that. You can say
anything you want, you can disagree, with what I said or how I said it, I might
disagree with you, but that's OK, that is part of the learning mode. If we put our
heads together we can come up with something. If you don't think something is
right, let me know. I try to remain available.

When I asked the focus group whether they thought the co-chairs could talk to this

new staff person and whether their principal is aware of what is going on, they said they

m!

 

195

 

QUESTION

 

 

 

 
       
   
 

AFFECT
Entire school
population?

 

 

STAFF
DIS CUSSION

'\

 

 

1 7k\ "Plant a Bug"

SITE BASED TEAM

6 Teachers
6 Parents (elected)
1 Principal

 

 

GROUP
CONSENSUS

SCHOOL GOALS
Achievement?

\

 
 
   
 

CONTRACT
Issues, etc?

‘ :4,
If necessary
get input

é/

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure l O. Rita's Decision/Team Decision~Making Model

 

DECISION

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

did not lc
need to d
participat
that ever
choose t1

interactir

1
parent c
many of
accredit

study. 1

The N(
relifese

rcport

-;x.'z:-‘.TT- - - < _,

 

196

did not know. They couched their response this way: "We aren't sure about that. But we

need to do something if we want it to be as good as it was before." Rita's low-key

participative style might be keeping the staff from sharing their concern with her. I sensed
that even though they may tell her about this woman's dominating behavior, Rita may

choose to give it time to work itself out, letting the team take the responsibility for

interaction with this new staff member.

brents in School: Fungus on the Vine

Probably the most obvious difference between this school and the others is the
parent component. Both principal and staff talked about the role parents play and the role

many of them want to play. Rita's predecessor did not include parents in the NCA

accreditation process. The first team visit report did not indicate a lack of a community

study. During the second visit, however, this gap was identified in their findings.

It was not apparent during the first OA team visit that the necessity for a study of
the community as the context for school improvement had been communicated to
the staff The selected goals were presented apart from any particular comment as
to their relevance to the community, and no data were offered which
indicated that a community study had been undertaken. (Visiting Team Report,

1994)

The NCA report recommended that the school consider its school community and their

representation and connection to the school in their plan. This particular visiting team

report points out interesting characteristics of the school.

No one can live long in this town, or for that matter in much of southeastern
Michigan, without having heard of this community and this school which serves
it. There is a community culture here which is as rich and diverse and compelling
as could be encountered anywhere. The values and expectations of this
community have found expression in the school for decades and have contributed

significantly to the education offered there. (Visiting Team Report, 1994)

 

 

Tl
exists, at
improver

the scho<

C
l\
d
u
e

I

focused

Submin
The sa
based 1

Continr

 

197

This section of the report gives the reader a taste of the culture which the school
exists, and the important roles that parents and community could play in school
improvement. The visiting team member encouraged the school to gather data specific to
the school community. She stated:

Gathering together the data obtained will serve the building many times over.
Most importantly, it will give the entire building staff, most of which presumably
drive to the school each morning from other neighborhoods, a stronger sense of
understanding and belonging to the community which entrusts them with the
education of their children. (Visiting Team Report, 1994)

In her summary, this visiting team member offered some concluding remarks that
focused on the necessity of including the school community in their accreditation process:

We hope that you will not be unnecessarily uncomfortable about having neglected
the School and Community study out ofsmisunderstanding of its essential
contributions to the total process. It is not too late. While "baseline" data about
other factors such as student outcomes related to your specific goals are essential
and can never be re-created if skipped, the truth is that community data are slow to
change and are still out there waiting for you. However, the data you find have
relevance to the goals you will set out to achieve. We recommend, therefore, that
the data—gathering process begin now and that the findings be given thoughtfiil
consideration as the context within which your fine school has defined itself in the
past and will do so in the fiiture. (Visiting Team Report, 1994)

The NCA annual report is usually written by the principal and/or co-chairs and is
submitted to the NCA office yearly. In the annual report for the 1994-95 school year.
The same year the visiting team report was written, a subcommittee report of the site-

based management team, entitled "Parent Involvement," is explained. The report

continues:

The committee was developed and given the charge to look at the current range of
intensity of parental involvement in the school, to develop categories of parental.
involvement, to develop a list of alternative volunteer opportunities (especially for
parents who are working and are unable to come to the school) and to develop a
philosophy and guidelines regarding parent volunteerism. This committee
presented to the site based team a policy statement on parental involvement, a

 

 

 

 

 

subcom
activitie
created

that tim

intervie
interest

are site
Decisic
Operatt
site-ba

Princip

team,

Rita's I

 

198

range of volunteer activities and an activity proposal to be submitted by any parent

who wishes to do a special activity in the classroom. All three were approved by

this team. After approval, the subcommittee held a meeting with interested parents
to apprise them of the new policy statement, guidelines and activity proposal. This
meeting was videotaped for use by parents who were unable to attend. (NCA

Annual Report, 1994-95)

Neither the principal nor the focus group discussed any impact that the
subcommittee may have had to that point, nor were any of these parent opportunities or
activities brought up in conversation, even though this avenue for parent involvement was
created 2 years ago. This may mean that the policy is not well known by the parents, or
that timely notification of the policy in some form of communication does not exist.

Rita explained her concept of parent involvement in her school early in the
interview. Her points seem well—rehearsed. "We need to move away from personal

interests and make decisions that are best for kids; we need to determine what decisions

are site-based, and which ones the building principal makes."

Decision Making: Site-Based, District Mandated
Site-based decision making, the format in which the previous subcommittee
operated, was implemented in the district about 5 years ago when Rita first arrived. This
site-based committee offered parents a voice in school operations. The staff and the
principal see it as time consuming. The staff described how they feel about the site-based
team.
Our site-based team, we have to explain everything to the parents, because they .
don't understand the curriculum or how the internal process of the school works,
and it just takes way too much time, and they want to get in there and make all

kinds of changes.

Rita's comments run along the same Path-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

rn v-Q r1"

want to
the curt
curricul
district

parent i

parent:
school
have 21
Their ]
the fu]

fOrrnaf

and se

and“

 

199
With an informed parent population like ours, there is an assumption that site-
based decision making will make all the decisions. We had to work through who

makes what decisions. How much authority does a site-based team have over a

school. There can be conflicting information; that is a lesson we learned over the
past 5 years.

Rita complains that parents have no knowledge of how a school functions. Some
want to come in and change the curriculum, not aware that the district develops and sets
the curriculum and that teachers have the obligation to meet the criteria set in the
curriculum. Approaches vary by teacher, but the curriculum cannot be changed without
district agreement. Teachers agreed overall with Rita's view of the curriculum issue and

parent involvement. One of them shared a situation that occurred a few years ago.

One of our teachers really struggled with a professor and his committee who had
this whole new plan all written out, and couldn't understand why we just couldn't
adopt it for our school. They had no idea how involved our curriculum process is,
and that it is developed through the district, not the school. They ask so many
questions, and they really can't make decisions on things that they want to make
decisions on, such as the curriculum or textbook adoption. It is amazing.

The parents in this school community are mostly educated, diverse, interested
parents who want a voice in the school. Both principal and staff see parent involvement in
school decisions as something that needs carefiil guidance. They see parents as wanting to
have a say in everything, who find issues such as contracts and curriculum confiising.

Their knowledge is limited. Even now, the principal plans to develop the goals only with
the full staff, then take these goals to the site-based group as a "for your information"
formality. It is as if the parents might force something that the teachers do not want.
Although the staff members talked about the training they received to understand

and serve on the site-based team, there still is confusion as to who makes what decisions

and what knowledge needs to be shared to help make good decisions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I)echdc
Inunts

odyoi
exphur
dechnc
sense:
dedne
conser

ivorks

iRhat
1n Sta:
the d:

appn

VVork

Itha

200
If you put. a group of parents and educators together, there is an attitude that it will
automatically result in good decisions being made. With an informed parent
population like ours, there is an assumption that the site-based decision team will
make all the decisions. We had some work to do to get the parents up to speed

and understand how the process works. For example, when we must assign a
teacher to teach a certain grade, the contract dictates the procedure.

Decision MakingZTeam Decision Making:
Intertwined on the Vine

Rita has gained knowledge of decision making from classes she has taken, and has
only operated as a principal only under the site-based decision-making process. She
explains, "I grew up with it." Believing herself to be relatively new to the process of team
decision making, and not having to break any of those "old habits" of autocracy, Rita has a
sense of ease in practicing team decision making and thinking in those terms for many
decisions. She says, "You need to spend time, to do trust building, be trained in
consensus decisions." She believes that her teachers have a grasp of how the process

works now.

There are decisions that we need to make collaboratively and we all have
accountability for those decisions. Teachers understand the process better.
Overall, yes. It depends on the decision, though. For the most part, teachers feel

good that I want them in the discussion before a decision is made.

Rita then goes on to describe what she does if they reach a stalemate, which happens often
in staff meetings. "If we are at an impasse, I simply state that, then tell them I will make
the decision. They seem comfortable with that. Teachers and parents want to be

apprised of decisions and why. They have a better understanding then of how a school
works. “
As she describes how she makes decisions, it is evident that the first consideration

Rita grapples with when there is a question to be answered is who should get involved. If

 

 

 

the ques
achiever
necessar
way. A
Then ill!
6 electe
contract

make tf

decisior
comfor
Sphakg
knowle
back q
leader
hone i1
metapl

a surgt

Selling

Under

 

201

the question involves the entire school population or relates to school goals or
achievement, it immediately goes into a staff discussion mode. Then, if she feels it is
necessary, she will "plant a bug" to get more information out to them in a round-about
way. A decision is made by the group, who come to consensus and make a decision.
Then their recommendations go to the site-based team, which consists of 6 teachers, and
6 elected parents, and Rita. Rita determines that questions that must be answered is a
contractual issue or something along those lines, she will get input if necessary, and then
make the decision on her own.

As the tendrils turn: Metaphors. As we talked about how she would describe
decision making metaphorically, Rita considered a number of possibilities before she was
comfortable with the descriptors she chose. She sees the decision-making process as a
spiral, going round and round, rechecking as it goes, moving up and gaining thickness,
knowledge, as it goes. As a team leader she describes herself as a dynamo but in a laid
back, quiet way, yet she can hit peOple with things that cause them to think. As a team
leader in the decision-making process, she sees herself as knowing how to pick up on and
hone in on what the real issues are and how to pull them out. Urging her to use a
metaphor for this behavior, she guessed a word to describe that method would possibly be
a surgeon.

A learning curve: Goal selection process. The focus group reviewed the goal
setting process that took place 7 years ago and compared it to what is taking place today

under Rita's leadership. They believe the training that accompanied the district

 

 

 

 

directee

making

of 0A.
their c?
princip
previo
prepar

team 1

proce:

what .

going

y0u l

HaVi:

202

directed, site-based management teams has increased their knowledge of team decision
making. Rita also says,

The teachers understand the process better. Teachers and parents want to be

apprised of decisions and why. They have a better understanding then of how a

school works. The previous principal was very knowledgeable in NCA and taught

the staff the process.

Presently, this stafi‘ is in the middle of deve10ping their goals for the second cycle
of OA They have been reviewing their data from the student profile and are narrowing
their choices. However, their first cycle more than 7 years ago was with a different
principal. They have worked with Rita for more than 5 years, however, completing the
previous goals, and have developed a working relationship with her to this point in
preparing for goal selection. The experiences they have had with her on the site-based
team have given them practice in team decision making.

Considering that the site-based team comprises almost half the team and this
process was where the staff learned how to make team decisions, I was curious to know
what direct involvement parents will have. The focus group, when asked if parents are
going to be involved in their goal selection process this time around, responded:

No. Even now, our staff is working on our new goal selection, and we don't have

any parents in our group. It is just staff. We will bring our goals to the site-based

group which has parent representatives, but it will be a "for your information"

type of thing. Parents here are very vocal. They want a say in everything we do,

and they want to make decisions on what we teach and how we teach. So we have
to handle this thing quite tightly.

Rita sees the school as a system that Operates more like a wheel with cogs; some

you have control over, some you do not. Some things are important, and some are not.

Having a specific focus is important to Rita. As she travels to and from her school, which

 

 

 

 

 

isafair

herself

immers
unders
team d

togeth.

uses is
learnir
mean 1
team 1
pnont
says, '
believ
and St
SOmeI
run tf
COmp

SUCCe

makii

 

 

203

is a fairly long daily commute, these are the kinds of things she thinks about. She asks

herself if the team is focusing on the best.

Rita agrees that a shared vision is part of the process. "We need to be totally
immersed in the job, and give all our time and attention to it." She knows that
understanding what motivates people and what makes others think are key aspects of
team decision making. One of the last things she worries about is what brings the group
together. She recognizes others' strengths and wants them to share what they know.

She responds in conversation in a no-nonsense fashion. An expression she often
uses is, "Say what you mean and mean what you say." She feels that some of our best
learning comes when we take risks. However, too many irons in the fire, however, can
mean less control, so Rita says that limits must be set. Timing is important to Rita in a
team leadership role. If time is treated as a high priority, then the team may want to
prioritize how to spend it. She recognizes that mental models play a part here as well, and
says, "It may not be high for me but for others it is, then I need to relook at it." Rita
believes that what she espouses depends upon the audience. "We all have mental models,
and sometimes it calls for a paradigm shift," she states. Hosting good gatherings is not
something Rita is interested in; she prefers to blend in with the group and not stand out or
run the show. Yet, designing places where community can happen is an important
component of decision making, she revealed. She noted that schools celebrate kids'

successes, but it is not done enough with staff.

Reflecting on the team process, Rita says that if she has to use team decision

making, she finds that it takes longer but the benefits are worth it.

 

 

 

but it d

who he

is 00m
convie

weakr

decis
l00pi
keen]

inclu

 

204

You can't put blame on someone else in a group decision. It made a difference
with parents. They get to see it from staff perspective, and staff get to see it from
the parent perspective. You can put the 2 perspectives together. The parents help

to get the information out to others. They get the message that good decisions are
being made for their kids.

With problems come solutions. People hear the word "tension" and think negative,
but it does not have the same connotation to Rita. Faced with a problem, she finds staff
who have strong feelings about an issue and then they discuss it. Her view of her staff is:

They are now more willing to bring up issues that are controversial. They are
willing to risk to put it on the table. It is a combination of factors. I am open to
constructive criticism. I am very direct. I tell it like it is. I want you to know that
you have the right to tell me if you disagree and tell me your rationale. There is a
freedom to disagree. They view me as pretty fair. I am not here to do someone in.

If staff and principal practice consensus, the dominating new member that the staff
is concerned about will not have the opportunity to take over the meetings. Rita's
convictions about the benefits of team decision making seem to outweigh their
weaknesses, and she points out how it helps her in the long run with accountability.

There is good healthy interchange with teams. There is nothing wrong with saying
I have a problem with this. You have to get most people to a point where they are
comfortable; also, getting everyone to a point where they understand the issue.
The staff have concerns that it takes longer. Some days they say, "Rita, just tell us
what to do.“ But then, they can blame Rita if it doesn't work.

The Extent to Which Rita Thinks About
and Enacts Team Decision Making

 

Seeing herself as a collaborative leader who involves stakeholders in team
decisions, and one who uses the language of systems thinking, Rita does not practice any
looping or linking in her conjoined decision-making/team decision-making process. Rita is
keenly aware of the strong parent component in her school community but does not

include them in the actual process of team decision making in the goal selection process.

 

 

 

 

Teache
dechic
strictly
suppor
other:
sees a:
proces

rnany

partici
andtf
indica
exhts
paren

rec0g

VVOIk
Chuni
thou:
decks
descr

dink

 

 

205

Teachers are aware of and support this lack of involvement. The school has a site-based
decision team designed for parent involvement, but their role in goal selection is seen
strictly as "for your information" only. Rita prefers to stay in the background and act as a
supporter but places responsibility on team decision making just with the staff and no
other stakeholders. The teachers see the principal's role similarly to what the principal
sees as what she thinks and does in team decision making. They see their role in the
process as having ownership, being encouraged by the principal, and in agreement on
many concerns, practicing consensus when needed.

There is a fear, however, that voiced in from the teachers' conversation about a
particularly loquacious teacher. They worry that she may attempt to control the meetings,
and the principal has not come forward to curb her conversation. This seems to be an
indication that there may not be the freedom to talk and share that the principal thinks
exists with the group. The NCA report had an extensive narrative regarding the lack of
parent and school community involvement in the accreditation process, although they did
recognize a sense of staff pulling together on shared goals.

Rita has implied that she has learned about team decision making through course
work and has not learned any other way to make decisions in the school setting. She
claims she "grew up with it." This implication would lead one to think, then, that little
thought goes into the process of team decision making. Her own model incorporates both
decision and team decision making, and gives the impression, though it is simplistic and is
described that way, that things are cut and dried. Further talk, however, nudged her

thinking more, and she gave the idea that she spends effort considering ways to go about

 

 

 

parent

passiv.
thanit
nakeh
invoht
sheik
ofthe

Inany

thehe
Ineun
tense

artifar

206
carrying out the process, especially when it comes to how to involve or not involve the
parents.

Obviously, Rita sees the parent component as a constraint in implementing
passive team decision making. The process seems to have a different connotation to Rita
than it does to the other principals. She does not enact this process with all the
stakeholders in a total sense. She sees herself as only giving parents information and not
involving them in a school decision such as goal selection. The school district mandated
site-based teams t seem to wield little if any power. The power is maintained in the grasp
of the staff and principal, even though she attempts to use team decision making in as
many instances as possible, and stays in the background herself.

The stories of these 6 women and the roles they play in team decision making in
their elementary schools have been shared through a series of interviews, and linked to
metaphors that reflect their leadership as principals. The variations, similarities and
tensions evolving from these stories and the focus group interviews, along with the NCA

artifacts, provide data for the findings of this study.

 

 

 

 

on gr<
shoot
with j
fearer
the lit
const
cokl
r6qui
deck
IllllSt

capa‘

CHAPTER V
A GARDENER

Did you ever see the devil
With his little spade and shovel
Digging taties in the garden
With his tail tucked up?
(Mother Goose Rhyme)

Introduction

Gardens can be inundated with creatures, human and nonhuman, who wreak havoc
on growing things. Rabbits and squirrels are great at nibbling off the tops of tender young
shoots or digging up bulbs nestled just below the ground. Children can come along, and
with pudgy little hands, yank anything out of the ground that looks interesting. Borers are
feared by the iris lover, mold can consume garden phlox, and slugs make happy homes in
the hostas. The elements of Mother Nature play a role in the life of any plant. Drought or
constant moist soil is a killer to some, as too much or too little sun, and too hot or too
cold temperatures can be. Each plant has its own special needs and particular environment
required to survive; many intrusions are capable of stunting its growth. Successful
decision making in an elementary school is similar to a successfiil garden. The conditions
must be appropriate, the environment conducive, and the caretakers knowledgeable and

capable. However, the landowners can pressure caretakers with time and budget

207

 

 

 

constr:
disgin.
Barrie

must f

framei
impler
Their
systen

broad

makin

makir

208
constraints, allowing situations to occur similar to those of Mother Goose‘s devil, such as
digging up, uprooting, and shoveling out good decisions nurtured by the caretakers.
Barriers to good decision making exist in today's schools, much like the ones gardeners
must face.

The research questions stated earlier were addressed by employing a conceptual
framework to examine the extent to which female elementary principals thought about and
implemented team decision making in the goal selection process of NCA accreditation.
Their discussions of decision making were viewed through the lens of five disciplines of
systems thinking and the techniques used in effective team leadership (Senge, 1990). This
broad research question was fiirther defined by the following specific questions:

1. To what extent do female elementary school principals think about decision
making and team decision making?

a. What do decision making and team decision making mean?

b. What elements of systems thinking disciplines are missing?

c. What elements other than the identified qualities of the discipline
model are being used?

2. To what extent do female elementary school principals enact team decision
making?

a. In what ways do principals enact team decision making that are

similar and dissimilar to systems thinking strategies?

b. What shifts in practice have principals made to support team decision
making?

3. What are the implications for NCA and school leadership literature?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OAgm
dem

accredi

mmun
then de
lhinkir,
framei
examp
aswd
guna
mane
deterr
other
tmm
whu
durin

NCA

 

209
a. In what way will this study contribute to NCA and school leadership?
b. Who will benefit from these contributions?
0. How can these contributions reach beneficiaries?

The 6 women selected to participate in this study had completed at least 1 cycle of
OA goal-setting in the NCA accreditation process. This process involved participative
decision making, and each school had to meet specific criteria to be considered for
accreditation, narrowing the variables.

I used a conceptual model framed around Senge’s (1990) 5 disciplines of systems
thinking to tease out how the women thought about and enacted team decision making. I
then developed a matrix and organized the explanations of the principals‘ terms of systems
thinking and examined the information systematically through the lens of the conceptual
framework. Using strategies identified in Senge’s (1994) work, I further identified
examples of their practice from interviews with the participants and with the focus groups,
as well as from artifacts from the NCA office. I organized this information in a matrix to
gain a better understanding of principals' practices in team decision making. These
matrices and a third one that identified the major themes emanating from the data, helped
determine whether any of the disciplines were not used by the participants, what elements
other than the identified qualities of the discipline model were being used in principals’
team decision-making practices, what factors enhanced and constrained their practice, and
what changes they had made in their practice to accommodate team decision making
during the goal-setting stage of 0A. These interpretations led to possible implications for

NCA use and school leadership literature.

 

 

 

 

 

to tean
concept
learning
discipli:
thhfldn
uncove
univers
decisic
princir
was in
princi;
decisi<

Or the

practi
decisi
Syster
Share

thOug

210

The primary findings revealed several variations among the principals with regard
to team decision making as it relates to the systems thinking disciplines. The overall
concept of systems thinking had the most variation, followed by some variation in team
learning and mental models. Little or no variation existed among the principals in the
disciplines of personal mastery and shared vision. The basic conceptual model of systems
thinking evolved as the interviews progressed; specific and unique tensions were
uncovered that significantly affected the process of team decision making. Almost
universally, time constraints and central office demands were indicated as barriers to team
decision making. Other tensions also were identified across the 6 interviews. How
principals thought about the practice of team decision making had little effect on how it
was implemented. The focus group comments either supported or failed to support the
principals' talk. The NCA documents, although not designed to provide specific details of
decision making, did, in some cases, identify problem areas such as lack of parent support
or the inclusion of parents in the process.

In this chapter I will explain the extent to which principals thought about and
practiced decision making and team decision making. First, principals designed their own
decision-making model, then they related it to strategies indicating the use of the 5
systems thinking disciplines: systems thinking, personal mastery mental models,
shared vision and team learning. This will be followed by a synthesis of how principals

thought about and enacted team decision making and implications.

 

 

 

 

 

Pnndpz
deunnfi
coflect:
nodes
hdped
therec

was US

binge
Spend
their r
proce
bent
orga]

issue

circr
Print
K)a

Pom

 

211

Principals' Thoughts About Decision Making/Team Decision Making

I used the lens of systems thinking disciplines to help guide the interviews,
Principals responded to open-ended questions, providing rich data with which to
determine the extent to which they thought about decision making in their role. The data,
collected in a series of three interviews that took place in about a month's time, included
stories from the principals as they talked about the decision-making process. The stories
helped to explain their practice of team decision making. The first interview began with
the request for them to describe in detail the steps taken in decision making, which in turn

was used to create a model. This model then became the catalyst for further talk.

Models as Tools for Thinking About Decision Making

As a group, the 6 principals are conscious of decision making in their practice and
spend time thinking about it. This became an immediate awareness as a result of seeing
their decision-making models, which were drawn at the beginning of the interview
process. Systemically, their view of school is linear, which seems to reflect the current
system these principals must operate in, which is a bureaucratic nature of public school
organization and administration. Some principals think they have control over some
issues, which reflect the thinking in their decision-making models. (See Table 3.)

Although the decision-making models were holistically linear in design, there were
circular patterns in and among some components. The models were similar for 4
principals; 1 model fit all, whether the decision was a team effort or only a quick response
to a question. They saw decisions as joint efforts involving the stakeholders whenever

possible. The other 2 principals described decision-making models differently. These

wExEFP mEBmkm Ucm 9.:me :O._m..0®Q Enoyh “Jon

 

 

< EEMBOFH .2695:le

R ¢~£Grb

 

 

212

 

  

:0::o :08 30::

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3000:: :20; 22200: :00m @9020qu E00: 0: 3:
::0E0>o::E: _oo:0m :0:m:m 05:0: 0:: 00:2: 0: E8: 320:0 E8: 238w 00 ”5:30:
>8 :9: :0:3 5:05 :0 0w0::a>:m 30:00:» :00: m0w:0_3o:o_ a ma :0::0m0: :0:_0x0 0:: 0300: :SN 33:23:05 500:.
600:: so: :0:3 amm 0:: m: 0:: 5:380 :0 03: 58:50 E02 :32 :m:3 :0 ES: 03 :0::0wo: wEEoU lillL
20:09::
092: b:w._: a: :o
mEEE: :o 0E3 :o m: 0:0b0>0 02w: 0: :00: :20;
::0E:o:_>:0 .222: t 30:03:: 00:m>:0 .0::: 000.0: :0:0:m
3000:: E mEv—mE 55:00: :9: 40: 0:0:: n0.:030EEH: 05? E 0>oE 03 E00:
0:::o :2: m: £51 800: $2130: :0: , :Etoaé b0> 8:32: .20: m: :02: om 0:: 0::0: ::
..0wmwwm:
9:0: .m:0::o
w:_:0:m: :0:3 30:: :0m:o::m 0E: 08:00:50 20:22
a: 03w 0: :_=0_.:.:: 0:: 0:3 :5: 3:03: m:0m m_:: :EN :51: :030: :35:
0:: $5830; 0:0:3 :0 00:80:: :0::0wO: 0:03 000:0:098 E0::
:ri SEES: 003:0 :5: 02:30:: do: :0 2:: Es: 0:50: 5:3 0:: 03% :00: 0: :00: 30>
m:_::0:m:0:::
020m: :00. £2: :0::0: m 35:00:):
:E:: 20::0 :ofimwn: 0:: Saga: :5». :85: ::_3 ”0:29: E0: 8:32: 03E? 3:020:
8wa :_ ”000:: >0: 03:: 0:: 30:0 0:: :_ :0_ .02? 0:: 00m 00m:m:0 0:3: :m0: 0:: 0:00mxm: 058:: @303:
w:tm:m
"9:20: $550
53:0: w:_::_0:_
:_:o: so: 088 £05.05: m0::&0m_: 0:: w:_::_::r
.:0>o 3:50 02:: so: E05? 330:0 3:22:30: w:oEm :to: :5: 0E0:m:m
0E8 HMS :::3 :00:3 E29? E06? 2.30:0 b—Etma ::m 3:5: :03 m:_3oc
m 00:: 05:: 60:8 000m 80:: mm _oo:0m 000m mm :oo:0m m00m 00 30:8 00m 2: 30:00 00m mm 828 m00m
«:5: 5:07: 03:3: 350 05:3: 05:85:: 053605

 

 

 

335:: 2:033 :5: 92:2 :o_m_00n: 500% :so:< m::w:o::r _m_0&0:_:n: .m 030.:

 

 

 

 

princip:
was de
roles in

than n<

decisic
they rr
descri-
that I}
while

and e1

make
the p
out t1

founc

Only
betv

befc

213
principals described how they think they made decisions, then a completely different model
was described for team decision making. This task brought out how principals see their
roles as decision makers; evidently, thoughts of team decision making are more prevalent
than not.

All of the principals spoke about setting parameters as a key step in their
decision making model. This was one of the lessons all but one said they had learned as
they made improvements in their practice of team decision making. One principal
described this step as one that is crucial to develop early in the procedure. All indicated
that they learned how to make team decisions and develop their plan or model on the job
while making decisions. All but one said the process was one of many mistakes and trial
and error. I

In the principals' talk of their models and what steps they believed they took to
make decisions, all commented that the opening interview exercise of designing a model of
the process they use to make decisions was most helpfiil. None of them had ever drawn
out the process. Afier their models were sketched, all but one indicated that they
found themselves looking at the model either before they had to make a decision or

immediately after, to see whether this model they drew was what they really did.

Principals' Thoughts About Team Decision Making

Although she described it as circular, Debbie's decision making was only circular
only in some segments of her model. One connection she mentioned was the relationship
between team learning and shared vision; she stated that team learning had to take place

before shared vision was possible. As a leader, Cindy saw her role as partly circular, and

 

 

 

 

 

her mo
by usin
the pro
empha:
Nancy'
convic
was sl<
fashio:
her m
a fairlj

seeme

using
are (it

undei

disch
ours:
think
dlSCt
Eme
disci

Coul

214
her model reflected that viewpoint. Bobbie alluded to the disciplines of systems thinking
by using the family and its relationship qualities of caring, sharing, and helping as driving
the process. Her decision-making model was linear but included looping, with much more
emphasis on planning, defining, consulting, and thinking before setting parameters.
Nancy’s view was pyramidal, not circular, and her model of decision making indicated this
conviction. Ernestine said she integrated all of the disciplines. Decision making by itself
was sketched out as a circular process, which indicated that she thought in a circular
fashion as an individual, but her team decision—making process was linear. Rita described
her model as a constant going round and round, although the model we ended up with was
a fairly simplistic and linear one. The linear view of decision making these principals took
seemed to reflect the top-down structure emanating from the central office.

Major points that principals mentioned in their discussions of decision making,
using the lens of systems thinking, were placed in table form. In the following paragraphs
are detailed descriptions of the five disciplines of systems thinking and each principal’s
understanding of the concept.

The svstems thinking lens. Systems thinking, according to Senge (1990), is a

 

discipline in which one contemplates the whole, not any individual part, how we see
ourselves connected to the world, a conceptual framework, a shift from part to whole
thinking. Debbie seemed to understand Senge's concept, describing it more fully when she
discussed systemic change. She described the school as a circular system, slow to change.
Ernestine described systems thinking as a flowing process, back and forth among the
disciplines. Rita explained systems thinking in terms of a wheel with cogs, some of which

could be controlled by the school whereas others could not. Nancy viewed systems

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

thinldn;
partly c
level. 1

goals, -

discipl
and vi.
action
would
occur.
drive,
leader
evide:
Bobb

self, l

ment
gene:
actio
mod.
aPPY
strer

Posi'

 

215
thinking as linear and pyramidal, with steps building up. Cindy saw the school system as
partly circular, and understood that one grade-level decision could affect another grade
level. Bobbie's idea of systems thinking was relational; she viewed it as a family, with
goals, caring, helping, sharing, and activity with and among the members.

The personal mastery lens. Personal mastery, as described by Senge (1990), is a

 

discipline that continually clarifies and deepens our personal vision, focuses our energies,
and views reality objectively; it is a personal motivation to continually learn how our
actions affect our world. To Ernestine, personal mastery meant making decisions that
would not have to be changed. She carefiilly considered decisions so that this would not
occur. Rita said personal mastery makes others think, but Nancy defined it as energy,
drive, and passion, and emphasized that it could not be discounted. Debbie believed a
leader must understand the value of personal mastery and allow it to occur. Cindy said
evidence of personal mastery differed from person to person and issue to issue, whereas
Bobbie was convinced that personal mastery occurred through expecting the best from
self, parents, students, and staff.

The mental models lens. The third discipline in the systems thinking framework is
mental models, which, in Senge's ( 1990) description, are deeply ingrained assumptions, ‘
generalizations, or pictures that influence how we understand the world and how we take
action. Mental models affect what we see and help expose hidden assumptions. Mental
models need to be heard, according to Ernestine. Two life experiences helped Bobbie
appreciate mental models and realize their importance. Cindy said that mental models are
strengthened by teams working together. She encouraged her staff to "forget what your

position is. What would work?" Debbie considered this particular discipline the most

 

 

 

 

import
are. T

listenii

identit
1990)
so strt
frame
also r
when
decis
build

elabc

(199
tOge
and
indi‘
lear.
excl
exa
80c

Del

216
important. To her, it meant tolerance and understanding of where the parents and the kids
are. To Nancy, it was diflicult to give up prejudices and personal viewpoints when
listening to others. Rita believed mental models caused paradigm shifts.

The shared vision lens. Shared vision binds people together around a common
identity and sense of destiny; it fosters commitment rather than compliance (Senge,
1990). This discipline bonded the team for Ernestine. Bobbie believed this discipline was
so strong in her school that they worked "in sync." To Cindy, shared vision provided a
framework, took time to develop, required agreement, and was highly important. Debbie
also rated this discipline as very important; she said the fastest progress could be made
when everyone was "on the same page." Nancy saw shared vision paralleling team
decision making and believed it was evidenced in the environment and morale of the
building. Rita concluded that shared vision was part of the team process but did not
elaborate on it.

The team learning lens. The fifth discipline is team learning, described by Senge
(1990) as one that allows dialogue (suspension of assumptions and genuine thinking
together) and discussion (a heaving back and forth of ideas). It is the prOCess of aligning
and developing the capacity of a team to create the results it wants. This happened
individually and within the group, claimed Ernestine. She added that the team also had to
learn about each other. Bobbie saw this discipline as building on what people were
excited about; she thought it was participatory. Cindy described team learning as
examining the issue, looking at it from all sides, and learning together as a team to make
good decisions. To Debbie, team learning meant having a common base of knowledge.

Debbie believed team learning as she defined it was a necessary condition to achieving

 

 

 

 

 

 

shared
the gr:

straigl

is anc
how '
deter
maki
inter
selec
(199
were
ease
strat
tllei

folk

dist

stra

217
shared vision. Nancy saw team learning as- growth and considered accomplishing this step
the greatest advancement in school improvement. Team learning to Rita was being

straightforward in a team setting.
Team Decision Makers: Change Agents in Practice

Strategies of Systems Thinking in Decision Making[
Team Decision-Making Practices

It is one thing to ask principals how they think about team decision making, but it
is another to ask what happens as they implement team decision making. In other words,
how we think about something and what we end up doing may have little similarity. To
determine the extent of these principals' practices in decision making and team decision
making, I isolated indicators or strategies of systems thinking disciplines expressed in their
interviews that would define their thinking and clarify their decision making models. I
selected 2 strategies from each of the 5 disciplines of systems thinking listed by Senge
(1994) that represented systems thinking disciplines put into practice. These strategies
were linked to examples principals gave of how they practice team decision making. For
ease of review, I developed a table to determine whether principals applied any of the
strategies of systems thinking to team decision making (see Table 4). The strategies and
their enhancement or constraint in the team decision-making process are described in the
following paragraphs.

Strategies in systems thinking. To determine how principals employ the five
disciplines in systems thinking (Senge, 1994), I reviewed the interview transcripts for

strategies that indicated principals' understanding and possible use in team decision

218

 

 

 

 

 

 

95:» 0:00: u :8:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

iii liiiilllllllllll
835%:
a 0:2: 3::
85:00 03:00:: .0: 0: 3:3 305:
EBMMM a 0: 22E :0: seat: a: as: a: bee: 3:03: :Etwu
0:02: .5 000m: 0: 3:565:00: 350:0: 0302305: 3:0: :82: :0 0:03 :9: 30:5 4:08 :0 9.50:: :0 :0 E3005:
. . 08 momsbfim 0: 0: 0:03 6:3 0:060 1:0: 0:: :0 0:00.: 03:: 0:050 12:030.:
llllll
::
0:: mama; 8:3 05:8 0: 6:58 a new: 228:3 :30: 53>
. :3 305: 0: :82 05:0: 0: 050:: :0: 003:0 befi :9: :: 305: 3:020: :03:
ililtl
00338:: filllllll
was:
:20000: £00: £03 80:03:: 080:0? =0
.MMWMWHHM .E: SE: 00:”: :03“: ‘5:0 £55300 “05:00:00 00:0:w0fi: :00: owe—ans
sagas a swan: . dam: 85: S deter: 00:90:: :8 saunas 2:: an:
£03000: .5538 330:0 mafia”: .0300: «00:00:: 9:853
55:000.”: caufihm .§0:0::Em: AEQmEEm: -30»: ”:23:
Ill wag—HEB
min: 0:: 0: 2:30;
0: :0: 63325::
:0: :5 RS 5:05
mEofioa—hfi: 3:053:03
E 258300: 058:: :5 03:58
:53 0.: 000:: :gofixoa: :: 05:05 000 6:2: :92m 35:60:37:
«5: :057: 05:09 EEC 03:0»: 05:85:: 30:25 05:38::
£2.03 “530$

 

 

 

mama): new—00A: 800:1:0 00:08: .m:0::0=.cn: E m0:w0:0:m 080:0:mm .v 030:.

 

 

 

30:23:00 .V 203%

 

 

219

 

 

 

 

Q\\\\

30% £83 u Amt

 

 

 

\
\1
3653302:
.wEEEn :oEES
b5 Each—“ESE 8 m: $55 3 5:5
£208 2: .355 woow @8103 mam Amt 089:5
$235 m_ : REC—«E mm? Bosh Amt 038.605 35.8 _ 8 c0
6:023 Soc 556% Oman 0E3 on "8% ocobgo 20:3 8ka 98 :Bow 3.. = _
33m o>oE :88 5 32:8 :0 a 2.9005 :m 80¢ 25$ SN Echo:>:o \wotmm 8 Saws =o_m.>
633.8550 @5380: 5:3 fl @2536 3 x02 8 388 65$ 5533 3:0 cal—«.5
oEoBm whom 29A $8350 2m 3» :88 a m< E o>oE 03 :52 202 \J
coEEo .EoEo
52> Somme $5 95 «:3—
Emflmzficw no so oohwm 2 c8: Enema on. .855
£92 EBMEE :5 EEoEE baa: an 32> . . .
Em 22$ @v ageing mo 3qu be: n||.\\L
EntotE
8 m_ SE:
95% amps E z m_ E5 .363 838323 ESE:
8532530: £823.35 >3 :2: 96: :5:th 89c mwni 5:8 :08 Sosa
8m 2:8 :30 mag 03 ocobu>o 3: E0505 6 x00: voow 63:35 Em»: 3:8 Emu? 2252
:0
286 zfi 2:8 :3 2
$55 .58
328E a: 5:353.
Enm EwEENQ v.23 maroon“: Eatomé mussemxomn
F8 m=mo Boga 8:2‘ m_ 8:28; 2:8 02E {SD
SE 552 «Egon 3:6 «Egon 2585m— zwouatw 95.985
§EQE 2.2%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8:528 .v 22¢

 

220

98% £50m n Rb

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

003600
0018 8
0% Eu @0055
0030—00 00%:
a0. ufi u000$ oust—i
0.00% was 0055 Amt m:0_EE=nn<

8 82:35.50 80 10002
~0st Eb 00m0> Ema—ohm .935
033 05 3507300000“ was amt 30% z“ n 023 >06 .00“ was 8:030:89

:0 a Em aid 000 000055 05 3-35 0002 Bod 0388"“; m2: ..z @0202: $80 0.82 ”50.3:

E00?
308
000— ..000 03009 mom—030000 093mg: 05
0060 £000 0m Eaton—E .3633 mag 53 50% £5 00—ww0bm
305— 03 3% 03 m0_E 88> m 3: 2:. Rb 0:3 2 town—00 03 $5 Egan—.005
name—0:0 how @505 Awb ouobgm Amt Hem—«800%: a a 000m; Eb 02390 06 030—05
05: 600936 H.203 023m 200 “on 03mm 0% 03% EB :82 Haggai 003m 0023 03000
00 800005 2&0: mi: 302 8323 bfim noumaomfi 000$ 05 502 .0035 0.88 0H?
52 haul 0152— #050 uzaom 0530:.5— 332% 0.5.503:
€2.03 2:393

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8=§=o0 .0 as;

 

 

 

makin
pay at
how )
meth<

SCCOF

backg

supp!

PUTP

pers
it, 211
no 5
wk
sup

oth

oth

do

an
f0

an

221
making. Systems thinking is evident when someone has a peripheral vision, “the ability to
pay attention to the world as if through a wide angle, not a telephoto lens, so you can see
how your actions interrelate with other areas of activity” and uses the language of
methods, tools and principles, “speaking the systems language skillfully, when it becomes
second nature” (Senge, 1994, p. 87-88). Three of the principals preferred to blend in the
background rather than take over or run the decision making group. Two focus groups
supported the roles these principals assumed. It was evident that all 6 principals used the
language of systems thinking, but as I analyzed the interviews, I saw that the overall
purpose or meaning of the common language was lacking or misunderstood.

Strategies in personal mastery. Two basic strategies suggested in developing
personal mastery, according to Senge (1994), are to keep a personal vision and not lower
it, and to keep a clear picture of current reality, seeing the world as it really is. Although
no specific use of the word vision evolved in the conversation with Cindy, her sense of
values pervaded much of her discussion on leadership. There was a sense of respect and
support and willingness to belong to a cohesive group that came from her staff. The
others felt strongly about their own vision and the importance of sharing it, as well as
knowing the others’ vision. The principals alluded to an understanding of knowing what
others have to offer. Debbie’s focus group recognized that their principal knew what to
do, which they claimed made a difference.

Strategies in mental models. Skills to accomplish the discipline of mental models
are reflection, “slowing down the thinking processes to become more aware of how we
form our own thinking," and inquiry, “holding conversations where we openly share views

and develop knowledge about each other’s assumptions” (Senge, 1994, p. 23 7). The

 

 

 

strateg
refeire
educat
within
group
appro;
of the
some

8.1" OllIl

ViSlOl
and

1994]
choi<
conti
orga
says
Coll<
Viev
fron

eacl

list

222
strategy of reflection was little used in their language or in their practice. One focus group
referred to their principal’s technique of explaining to them how she had seen numerous
educational reforms come full circle and shared that knowledge with them; the context
within which this sharing was placed indicated that she gave some thought to what the
group was talking about and offered her viewpoint. All principals spoke about inquiry but
approached it from difi‘erent angles, from seeing opinions mushroom according to the size
of the group, to valuing a group’s different perspectives. One woman recognized that
some people choose not to participate in a large group setting, although a way to get
around that issue was not discussed.

Strategies in shared vision. A shared vision has strategies and skills, such as, that
visions are not all equal, there are different ways or thrusts of prioritizing information,
and members have a collective sense of purpose, that we are all in this together (Senge,
1994). One principal sees the shared vision as a way to have the team narrow down the
choices, but another sees this as an opportunity to look at an issue from all sides. Debbie
contends that if everyone has the vision, they operate within the principles of that
organization. "The quickest you advance is when everyone is on the same page." She
says there is more openness in bringing up problems. Yet another principal sees the
collective purpose as being in the environment of the building. Although the concept was
viewed more broadly, the principals and teachers placed high value on a shared vision
from the staff feeling more responsible, comfortable, and respectfiil of each other and
each other's’ level of enthusiasm.

Strategies in team learning. Strategies and skills for the discipline of team learning

list include dialogue, skillful discussion, balance advocacy with inequity, bring assumptions

 

 

 

 

 

 

to the
what 1
to list-
focus
togetl
under
of tea
staff
and 2
learn
deve
Cinc
wen
The

list.

the
lea

del

00

 

223
to the surface, and "become aware of the assumptions and beliefs that link what we see to
what we conclude" (Senge, 1994, pp. 352-353). As teams worked together, some learned
to listen and share information and some principals encouraged freedom to disagree; one
focus group agreed with their principal. It is obvious that a group must have time
together to learn and grow as a team before they can reach a level of acceptance,
understanding and freedom to share. Three principals whose talk indicated a strong sense
of team leadership were conscious of the value in team learning and worked to get their
staff to a point where their comments reflected a sense of encouragement, having a voice,
and a comfort to talk about anything. One principal framed team learning as important to
learn about each other and saw this as a way to strengthen her leadership as the team
developed. This particular team still saw central office as the one pulling the strings.
Cindy, whose teachers saw her as an encourager, talked about her team learning as they
went. "When you bring people together to discuss tense concerns, you want it productive.
There is an art to this. You learn as you go. People are freer here to talk and add to the

list. As a team, we are forced to examine the issue and look at it from all sides."

Major Themes in Team Decision Making

As the principals talked about their team decision-making experiences several
themes emerged. The themes were time, parent participation, central office, shared vision,
leadership and environment. These themes created both positive and negative tensions in
defining the principals’ practices of team decision making. Table 5 lists the six principals’

comments and those of the focus groups along with language in NCA documents that

 

224

\lli

flmow

3:27. so 550on
$53 \Esoé

mo umcquUZV

: a @353

agate. <02 u 2on

98pm mach n 8b

 

up» 82: 8 Z Rt
95% oZEQSEmQ
.EoE:0:>:o
.222: fl

H9» 22: Ho:
6me 2:3 2: co
:m “SE—e. .mEoEQ

fiEoBOn—Eo

beam 5.:5
955 bo>

$3826
223on
98% 820

”8:0 «2:230

mm 2.8m meow
actoBoEmt 2: E

3:83 use
tea mitommsm
wcobm 88? E :<

£02 :38
Bohm: 8 cameo
.323 0282—00

5:5 SEE

 

tau 5:5 :2me
L85. oEOm chasm
C80 .252 oEEr

.3528 Be
Howvsn use 9::
"$526:
sauna—8:183
32m .oZtoqmnm

2:

DE: ESE at
38: 2:5 See
:5 eczema—=8
5.5 £3

2: x33 :89

20:98me
.mwcmEun
.BEwbmcoU

0:5 .0050 35:8
Eob moanmmoi

850 52.8
E 0E8 “8 80%“:
0E: :3. «55>

8 3608.80

eczema

Esoc mobflwb
:o:m:t£5 S
uE: @505 “oz

350 E550

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Row n8 v—omnnofl
Eugen EEon EmE meoEbw
A<OZV 28:8 .5583 E 353m #0058 E $302:
E8952: A<UZV toga £58 :0 £55m A<UZV 53363;.”—
uo: on 42:50 muwfizooco EoEoZoZ: 20E 8:— EeEoZoZ: 39: E25—
283 355$ ”:83 :0 3:05am @eoi 2:03 :eEEE 3:28 mcobm com Escort:
mac—«E EoEoEE 3562:
556% E8“ use. SE 8 ..cfim :38 “9:58“
32:03:: wove»: 25.—t Q8 Sm. 08F 3.: 0E; 0828 «EC.
9 cocoa: 2:: :0 E6550 2:: $me 29: 302 $5 85o 3on
mm 025 £02 H255 min—:5 E85 89: @82 3 BEmbmcoU
SE 352 225 :55 22am 2.525 25.:

 

 

 

 

 

@532 55600 E89 can main: :oiooo 23.555 E 3E2: 8.32 .m 038.

225

33.53 <02 n A<UZV

gnaw macaw u Amt

 

 

 

 

“8&2

beams 93 48358“ 85:8 mason» =5 835

:32 9 >5: amwfl Boga 2.50 $550 co,“ wage oztommsm ..befi 60ch 3550 wEEflQhZ-m
mnemo— Ewm him mung 523.5% 23 EEG $3.30 Ea o>Em=om womaoon. 315m @532 2:83

.52 9
$5308 Bnfiua Ego. Seabed 023 03 3 mom 9 5: z
05 5... 3.30.8 « mw 93 50532 am: “.3835 Jo. Mama 9 can 35: :23 9 vomommnm
13% 5:5 mason .8an a m: no 3580 .2. 2 :33 m: =2 :5 35 wEBEv one 95 Ea com;
o. bane—ammo m: moZm cam M033 0% augmenta— 5: moot .m: 5? “a iguana; 350 3950 Ear—£53
:33 conga :80 3:388; 5:5 2: ma: 8: $195 .mowfiaooao a Fascia a a 055 .2253
>68— ?» flown mam—on cam Hog diagno— wnobm 0% .355 625, JoummB 5me was
83. 5 mm g 6% team 0.3 93 3.: coo: ow 50> 3b fl 35533 3.: .56: 03%: 850 15503:
SE mus—«Z ~35: EEG 9153* 2535”,— 25.—h.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.538 .m 22%

\

 

 

 

 

 

supp<

theme

111m
_C_on_n

maki
and :
knox
mak
had

pro:

prir
res]
cre
pri
pa;
en

€11

th

226

supported the major themes that arose from the study. A detailed discussion of how the
themes enhanced and constrained the team decision-making process follows.

Themes That Enhance: Environment. PM

Community, Parameters, Leadership

First, enhancements of team decision making are reviewed. Team decision

making affected the internal environment of the school, parameters, parent involvement
and sense of community in a positive manner. Teachers and principals both spoke of
knowing each other better and understanding each other more through team decision
making. Teachers appreciated knowing the parameters in a decision; all but one principal
had learned to develop this technique and found it integral to the decision-making
process. Teachers stated that parameters helped them to focus on the issue at hand.
Knowing that parents can play a key role in the success of a school has encouraged
principals to work hard to involve parents in the school, and the principals have found the
results of these efforts to be positive. A sense of community inside and outside the school
created a supportive environment for all stakeholders. Also, in an external sense,
principals who actively encouraged and supported parent involvement spoke of their
participation as key to school success. Leadership played a significant role in the
enhancement of the team decision-making process. Staff who expressed support and
empowerment from their principals saw this as integral to their team efforts. Some of
these enhancements played an opposite role for particular principals, however, and became

constraints. The enhancements and constraints are shown in Table 5.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

conve
\vere
invol
pnnc
settir
ugly
enou
desc
ofpi
are:
had
fink
hia
Spo

Inal

des
ne<

nu

 

227

Themes That Internally Constrain: Time,

Environment, Community, Staff Changes,
Parameters Parents. School Day Structure. Budget

 

Constraints arose in myriad contexts, internal and external to the school, and most
conversations reflected these struggles. Constraints affecting some principals internally
were time, environment and sense of community, staff changes, parameters, parent
involvement, the school day structure, and the budget. External constraints that some
principals enumerated were time, district policies, the environment, parameters in goal
setting, parents, sense of community, school day structure and budget. Time reared its
ugly head in all but one conversation with principals and focus groups. There was not
enough time to learn and develop together as a team. All of the principals but Rita
described the decision-making process as being developed through trial and error and lots
of practice. Learning how to balance all the duties a principal has, especially when roles
are shifiing, is difficult at best. There seemed to be no simple solution other than having
had the luxury of time to spend with staff in a team learning environment. There was no
time for the team to reflect on decisions or revisit and redo a decision. Any decision made
in a team framework took longer, according to every one of the principals. This was not
spoken of negatively, but the complaint about the lack of time signified that decision
making with others involved could be difficult or troublesome because of the time issue.

One principal described the environment in the school as the morale; she also
described it as their shared vision. She explained fiirther that shared vision is not
necessarily achieved in team decision making. The school that did not encourage parents
into their environment seemed to feel constraints because of their attitude toward parents,

Which, in turn, appeared to affect their internal sense of community. Respondents from

 

 

 

 

 

 

other
were :

as iO'

team
kno“
coulc
settir
knov
ill-d<
prim
vievi
had

stafi

eXp
pro‘
fror
wer
par
Stat
wh

aff

228
other schools gave the impression that the teachers worked together only because they
were forced to by the central office forced them to do so. Their discussion gave no clues
as to the quality of the teamwork or their enjoyment of team learning.

Staff changes affected the group because most new members had no idea how
team decision making worked or what their role was, nor did they have experience in
knowing and working with the others in a team setting. Parameters in the school setting
could affect decision making negatively, as well. Along with finding the time to meet,
setting a meeting place, working within the time lines, and learning what they need to
know and do took a toll on the process, because often these parameters were narrow or
ill-defined. Money to go off-site was not in any principal’s budget. The leadership of the
principal had a direct effect on the team’s decision-making process. Principals whose
views or knowledge of team decision making were minimal, often had not practiced it and
had teachers who were not in the same frame of thinking as those from schools whose
staff had been able to develop a team learning environment.

Parent participation was thought to be a major constraint in one principal's view;
experiences with parents in the past had not been pleasant, and parents were viewed as
problems in the building. The other principals found parent participation difficult only
from the standpoint that few were able to attend meetings. Although evening meetings
were more difficult for staff to attend, one principal held meetings at night so that more
parents could attend. The structure of the school day, including when the teachers met for
staff meetings, and whether or not they had common planning periods or lunch hours
when they could meet, also affected team decision making. Building budget constraints

affected team decision making in multiple ways, through lack of money for staff

 

 

 

 

 

develc
work,
Then

Di_st_ri
Co_mn

decisi
paren
calen
heart

that 1

reco
kind
3rd '
tran
one
ano
thrr
out
in a
tea

affi

 

229
development, off-site meetings, common planning time to meet, extra pay for committee
work, and environmental limits affecting what teams were able to accomplish.

Themes That Externally Constrain: Time,
District Policies Environment Parents

Community, Leadership, Structure of Day. Budget

 

Not only did the principals grapple with internal issues in a sense that affected team
decision making, but external pressures created conflict as well. Problems with time for
parents to attend meetings, time allotted for team decision making built into the school
calendar by central office, time to reflect on decisions, and time to learn together were
heard again and again from teachers and principals. It was evident in fiirther discussion
that most of these interviewees saw central office as holding the strings on the time issue.

One central office decision affected two schools significantly. The district
reconfigured from a neighborhood school concept to a modified plan that relocated all
kindergarten through 2nd graders into one building, and miles away, another building held
3rd through 5th graders. Parents ofien could not get to the schools because of
transportation problems. The sense of community support suffered. This was noted in
one conversation about parent availability and was evident in an annual report comment to
another school that did not encourage parent involvement. This school had not followed
through with a school profile that included valuable information about their community
outside the school. Central office demands, which tended to be created and implemented
in a hierarchical setting, filtered down to the slowly emerging, democratically structured
team decision-making group in the changing school setting, which seemed to profoundly

affect teachers and all but one principal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

pnnci
pnnd
htas
ofnd
Office
rvas:
sync
and:
squa
lead
ghe
fiari

awa

dhc
flex
aHe
Par

dur

bei

230
Leadership suffered directly from central office mandates and policies. Some
principals experienced difficulty with their superiors regarding their evaluations. One
principal perceived that her superintendent saw her as weak because she involved her staff
in as many decisions as possible. She complained that there was a lack of understanding

of what she was attempting to do by developing team learning. Principals spoke of central

 

offices that wanted answers now, giving them little time to pull their staff together. There
was also the perception among principals that central office still operates under the old
system and treats schools accordingly but expects them to become knowledgeable about
and adept at participative management and team building. It is like trying to place a
square peg into a round hole, This pressure from central office directly affects the
leadership of the principal, especially in the eyes of her constituents. One principal, when
given a demand for an immediate answer, scrambled around and pulled out her “experts”
for input before responding to central office with an answer, which they wanted right
away.

The lack of an adequate building-level budget, set by central office, crept into the
discussions as well, and was said to' put up roadblocks to some well-laid plans. The
flexibility to transfer fimds or be given more autonomy with the budget, which could
alleviate some of the budget pressure, was not commonplace for elementary principals.
Parameters such as proximity of the school to parents’ homes and holding meetings
during the day affected the quality of the team decision, as well as who would be able to

be involved in the decision.

 

 

 

_C_lo_u

The
grap
unde
not
con
dire
for
to 1
sur:
3P1
pri

yet

231

How Principals Think About and Practice Team Decision Making

Cloudy Systems-Thinking Lenses in Team Decision Making
It was obvious that the principals saw the school as a system in different formats.

The concept of systems thinking was not clear to these principals. They seemed to be
grappling with what team decision making meant in terms of practice. A practical
understanding of how to accomplish team decision making seemed to elude them; they had
not reached the point where they could work with it comfortably in their practice. The
context within which the principals worked was top—down decision making, with
directives from central office, but they had to shift to the team decision-making process
for goal-setting purposes and seemed to feel caught in the middle. They were attempting
to practice team decision making in a rigid, hierarchical system. There had been little
support or professional development to help them understand their roles and learn the
appropriate techniques of leadership in a team decision making context. One of the
principals was caught in both paradigms. She thought in the team decision-making mode,
yet in practice she had not yet embraced the tenets of team decision making. The way
most of the principals thought about team decision making, as illustrated by their decision-
making models, tended to be quite linear, indicating a lack of control. Some of the
principals were attempting to move the empowering process forward by being more fluid
or circular within their linear models.

Disciplines understood. The shared vision discipline received strong support from
the principals in their discussions and anecdotes. All of them highly valued team learning

and seemed to give it the strongest support or level of importance. Several principals

L

 

 

 

 

used c

need t

team I
advan

withir

under
litera
notic
allov
to th
thinl
prac
mas

lead

dur
the
the

tec

232

used compelling anecdotes about team learning. They had strong feelings and indicated a
need to study learning together.

Disciplines defeated. Principals did not see the connection of mental models to the
team decision-making process. They were unsure of how to use mental models to their
advantage. They appeared to find that attempting to practice an empowerment process
within a hierarchical framework was like trying to put a round peg into a square hole.

Language misunderstood. The principals also seemed to find it difficult to
understand the language of team leadership and decision making. Current leadership
literature discusses team building, shared vision, and systems thinking. However, the
notion of personal mastery, which can be described as self-learning and reflection,
allowing others to help in thinking, and learning about others, did not seem to be related
to the principals’ practice. Personal mastery is indicative of transformational leadership
thinking. Principals seemingly were not taught to question or validate what exists. The
practice of team decision making requires reflection, questioning, and revisiting personal
mastery and mental models, which appeared to be relatively new concepts for these

leaders.
Changes in Practice

These principals recognized that their decision-making practices had changed
during the time that they had been involved in the NCA process. They noted changes in
their practice regarding how they managed time, their emphasis on parental involvement,
their development of team leadership, their role as a team player, and the use of the

techniques they saw as important in developing a working model of team decision

 

 

makir
One r
the st
these

leade

of In
print
tried
that,

to b

mal
The
sch.
cen

adc‘

tea
the

inc

233
making. All of these seem to be significant changes with which the principals struggled.
One woman saw herself as becoming more collaborative, but she did not seem to be so to
the staff. A few knew the methods of making team decisions but chose not to practice
these participative methods. A few others seemed to be truly moving toward team
leadership.

Most of these principals learned how to be team leaders by “trial and error and lots
of mistakes," according to Cindy. This took a lot of time and effort, one indicated. The
principals also said they read research to find out what worked and made changes and
tried different methods, while practicing and adjusting their changing roles. This meant
that, for any of these principals to understand and practice team decision making, they had

to be self-motivated enough to learn how to accomplish this process.

Barriers to Change

A number of barriers inhibited principals in moving forward in the team decision-
making process. These were time, contracts, the structure of the day, and central office.
The overarching problem with implementing systems thinking was the time required in a
school setting to accomplish all of the disciplines effectively. Time constraints from
central office and contract language hindered the process in a number of ways. In
addition, researchers have suggested that effective team learning takes time.

Although some principals had made significant changes in their leadership roles in
team decision making, no changes had been made at the central offices to accommodate
these changes in the buildings. Changes that the principals and teachers advocated

included modifying the structure of the school day, budgeting for school improvement

 

 

 

 

stake]
their 1
decis?
it toc
day 2
year

meet

mak
the :
Tw<
the
pro
was
par
abc
she
inv

par

en

pr

234

planning and implementation, and arranging the school day to allow. adequate time for the
stakeholders to meet and further develop their team learning skills. Two principals, in
their models of decision making, reflected the thinking of the central office on how
decisions were to be reached in their buildings. The principals complained about the time
it took for their staffs to learn about each other and to learn together. Their structured
day and contractual constraints did not allow time to be built into the day or the calendar
year for teachers and principals to spend the amount of time all believe is necessary to
meet the demands of implementing effective strategies and the skills of systems thinking.

The variation of viewpoints about how parents should participate in team decision
making was interesting. Two principals saw parent involvement as integrally meshed with
the school improvement plan and as valuable and essential to the success of the school.
Two other principals, although they spoke about parents, did not give the impression that
the parents were or could be a key link that must be included in the team decision-making
process. Both of them asked about the role of parents in school improvement and how it
was accomplished elsewhere. It was obvious that they did not know what parent
participation was or what it looked like, but they were curious and wanted to know more
about it. Cindy believed it would make a difference if parents were more involved, but
she did not see this as possible because of a number of issues that kept parents from being
involved in the school community. To Nancy, team learning included growth in parent
participation.

It was evident that the process of team leadership caused principals to experience
errors and trials as they slowly improved their skills. The principals indicated that their

present relationship with their staff was different from their relationship with staff five

 

 

 

 

years
way.

to ge

the l
Alth

8.00

mat
of "
role
ere.
the
ind

hat

StE

235

years ago, but that change was not automatic. They had to work at it and learn along the
way. Bobbie said when she first became a principal she used the authority of her position
to get what she wanted. Now, she said, she uses influence. She learned that this method
was much more acceptable. Nancy saw her position change as well, from " she who walks
the halls" to facilitator. All of the principals spoke of their role as that of learner.
Although learning is included as an enhancement, it might be viewed in a general sense as
a constraint, especially if the principal and staff do not have a good working relationship.
Three of the principals were specific in describing their role in team decision
making as team players, not leaders. In numerous instances, the principals played the role
of "teacher" and the teachers played the role of "leader." They thought that when their
roles switched, much more learning took place. This switch, according to Nancy, also
created more responsibility. Debbie experienced more openness with the staff because
they say what they want to say, and there is more buy-in and risk taking. Rita agreed and
indicated that teachers had the freedom to disagree. Bobbie believed a new environment
had been created, one in which everyone counts. Ernestine said team decision making was
easier in the long run; that it was refreshing to learn others' views and skills, and observe

staff thinking and working as a team.
Implications

As a member of the board of NCA Michigan Committee for 6 years and a
practicing principal of an NCA member elementary school for 10 years, I have been
acutely aware of issues surrounding the process of accreditation as it affects schools and

changes in leadership. These issues have been noted from a principal's viewpoint and from

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the var
school
disapr
along
what
There
lackii
these
indic

accn

to tl
pro.
lang
to i

wit

236

the vantage point of a state committee member, where major issues from NCA member
schools in the state are brought to the committee for review, discussion, and approval or
disapproval. I have experienced concerns with the language in the accreditation process
along with its interpretation and use, the role of the principal in NCA accreditation, and
what kind of framework would be best to carry out the responsibilities required by NCA.
There is confirsion among principals as to what the best practices are. The literature is
lacking in these areas, and professional development programs to help principals answer
these questions are nonexistent. This study has grounded these concerns in empirical data
indicating that, in fact, there are dilemmas in carrying out the responsibilities for NCA
accreditation that can and should be addressed.

This study in particular suggests that we seriously consider developing a
framework of team decision making that is flexible enough for individual schools to adapt
to their unique situations. A common language is commendable in implementing new
projects or concepts, but it seems obvious that the principals neither understand the
language nor know how to put the concepts into practice. A list of terms and simulations
to interpret the meanings would be helpfirl for principals and other stakeholders to practice
with, before developing the goal selection process. The next step in accreditation after
goal selection becomes even more complicated because the school develops strategies,
interventions, and time lines to carry the process through to fruition. This step entails
more lengthy involvement than the goal selection process.

A variety of constituencies can benefit from these conclusions. These include:

1. Elementary principals

2. Education leadership literature

 

 

 

 

 

 

decis
schor
their
accn
that

deci.
para
and

prin

bey

mal

COT

 

237

3. North Central Association
4. School boards

5. Central office personnel

Implications for NCA

This study can benefit NCA by providing examples of effective methods of team
decision making in elementary schools, supplying sample decision-making models for
school principals to use to develop a framework unique to their needs, and drawing to
their attention the necessity of defining the list of terms used in the language of NCA
accreditation, so that schools can understand the language and build learning teams around
that language. It is obvious that principals as well as teachers are grappling with team
decision making; they have questions about what model is effective, how it works, what
parameters should be set, and who are the stakeholders. These questions are answerable
and need to be framed in a seminar or other method of communication and offered to
principals who are in the process of NCA accreditation or who plan to be shortly.

Some considerations that could benefit NCA and its constituents are:

l. A workshop for principals on team decision making in goal selection and
beyond (including a knowledge base of the five disciplines and a model of team decision
making to be tailored to the individual).

2. An article in the NCA Quarterly offering suggestions for effective parent and
community involvement in the goal selection and implementation process.

3. An article in the NCA Quarterly indicating what some elementary principals

have done in the goal selection process as team decision makers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

princ

team
way
of th

mod

deci
sch<
Ser
autl
coll
tea:
cor
set
the
pr<

Ull

23 8

4. A section written in the NCA accreditation handbook written specifically for
principals which deals with team decision making.

Principals involved in the NCA process will benefit by learning how to develop
team decision making with an effective model. Having such a model will also enhance the
way they look at setting parameters in the team decision-making process. Principals spoke
of this concept as being the most valuable tool they had added to their decision making

model; they learned it on their own through trial and error and much practice.

Implications for the Leadership Literature

The findings confirmed that some principals risk being collaborative in their
decision making because this is in direct conflict with the bureaucratic nature of the
school setting. The findings also confirmed what educational researchers such as
Sergiovanni have determined--that collaborative leaders in schools are more effective than
authoritative leaders. As indicated in the stories, reflective leadership supports a
collaborative environment. This study indicated that principals have learned to become
team decision makers through a trial-and-error method; they have not learned this in
courses or workshops. Some principals are not aware of the importance of parent and
school community involvement or how to go about creating an environment in which
these stakeholders can be knowledgeable about and integral to the school decision—making
process. The study also adds to the literature that the language of systems thinking, when

understood and internalized, is enacted in team decision making.

 

 

 

and
taug
stre‘
deci

the

van'

oftc

Ext

int

239
Conclusion
She who loves a garden
learns the lessons of the seasons
and how life itself
adheres to nature's plan.
Mary Engelbreit

Principals think about decision making a lot, as it is a significant part of their role
and responsibility that is undergoing major restructuring. Overall, principals have not been
taught how to make team decisions. It has been a trial-and-error process in a mistake-
strewn path. Principals also have not been taught how to think reflectively about team
decision making. The nature of the position historically has not encouraged nor fostered
the importance of taking time to reflect on their practice.

The extent to which principals enact team decision making varies greatly, for a
variety of reasons. The language of systems thinking as it relates to team decision making
often is not understood and when it is not understood or internalized, it is not enacted.
External and internal tensions affect the level and implementation of team decision
making. The bureaucratic nature of school systems is not synchronous with team decision
making at the building level. Struggles that principals deal with, such as their leadership
skills, environment, beliefs, and other outside tensions such as parent involvement, central
office demands, and the external environment, all come into play when these principals
carry out team decision making.

The role of central office as a bureaucratic entity is in direct conflict with the
collaborative efforts that team decision making entails. A certain amount of risk-taking is

involved in making team decisions at the building level. One principal suffered a poor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

evalu
like 5
educ
on tl
their
som
stat<
acti.
deli
but

to:

fun

pri
efl

liC

240
evaluation because central office saw her team decision making as a weakness; it looked
like she could not make decisions on her own. Cooper ( l995) described how women in
educational administration have responded to bureaucratic pressures by learning "to reflect
on their organizational lives in order to survive and advance in the hierarchy. They carry
their female views with them into the male bureaucratic realm and must consciously put
some of them aside to 'succeed' in this world on its own terms" (p. 244). She further
stated that women are claiming their place in their professions, moving from reflection to
action and making a difference. As they proceed with this resistance to bureaucracy, they
deliberately are transforming their own spaces. Although they are still part of that stifling
bureaucracy and still use the rational, linear procedures, they are "moving from discourse
to action and claiming their right to have their own part matter. These women can

fiinction as influential agents of change" (p. 245).

The Five Disciplines

The systems-thinking disciplines were understood and internalized by a few
principals. Most but not all who did so grasped the concepts they enacted. Bobbie was
effective in her explanation of the disciplines, although she did disagree that simple was
not necessarily better. She believed whatever got the job done was all right, whether it
was complex or simple. Nancy did not understand the terminology or its meaning;
systems thinking was not part of her thinking or behavior in team decision making. The
techniques identified by Senge (1990) and Katzenbach and Smith (1994) that affect team
leadership were lacking in the stories shared by Nancy and her teachers in the focus group.

Ernestine spoke the language, but in the teachers' eyes she was a transparent leader. They

 

 

 

 

 

saw 7

lead:

E_XT_€

hind
prin
not
befi
ma]

inl

 

241
saw her as someone who handed down central office edicts rather than practicing team

leadership.

External Support/Barriers

Tensions affected team decision making to a significant degree and either helped or
hindered the process. Parental involvement was integral to the school where Debbie was
principal; her teachers recognized and valued parents as well. Rita and her teachers did
not want parental participation whatsoever and did not see their value. As mentioned
before, Debbie's evaluation was negative because central office viewed her team decision
making as a weakness. A strong dominant central office affected the team decision making

in Ernestine's school. Her teachers said that central office called all the shots.

Grapple With Power and Authority

The struggles that some of these principals are experiencing with power and
domination from central office conflicting with their collaborative thinking are still evident
in their practice. In an article about women principals and power, Hurty ( 1995) referred
to other research describing a different kind of power encouraging a feminist ethic of risk.
She detailed work by Dunlap and Goldman, who proposed that facilitative, interactive
power is more useful in school reform than top—down vertical systems of authority. Hurty
reviewed Judy Rosener’s challenge that the "command and control" leadership style
frequently associated with men then suggests that " women tend to use ‘interactive'
leadership which encourages participation, shares power and information, enhances self-

worth, and gets others excited about their work" (p. 381).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

print
schc
mor
Furl

whe

dist
The
em
cor
cre

iCE

dc
cc
th

flt

242

There is little in the literature about the dimensions of power women hold as
principals, Hurty (1995) explained. Further, she pointed out in a study of small-town
schools by Schmuck and Schmuck the researchers found that women administrators were
more skillfirl in interpersonal communication and most instances of collaboration.
Further, involvement and shared influence occurred in schools with female principals,
where the authors saw teamwork, excitement, and enthusiasm.

Hurty (1995) concluded that women principals use and talk about power in ways
distinctly different fiom traditional ways. They saw power "with," not power "over."
They referred to connectedness and coactivity, shared and expandable power, and
empowerment. Connectedness was described by caring, interdependence, and
commitment to community. This perspective was circular and paradoxical. They saw
creating change not by commanding but nurturing growth over time, through a cycle of
teaching, learning, and acting. Their world was less oppositional and more relational.

Others such as Sergiovanni (I992), Fullan (1992), Shakeshaft (1986), and Foster,
(1989) have challenged the traditional organizational theory of schools, which is
dominated by concepts of hierarchy, power, and authority and have endorsed the
concepts of collaboration, community, and relationships. However, as we have heard
through the voices of these principals and teachers, the time has not yet arrived. The
flower has not yet bloomed. The struggle continues in public education; restructuring
continues to move forward slowly, as a newly planted flower in a garden that needs care,

nutrition, and time.

 

 

 

Be_f

prir
bet

attr

to}

De

 

243

Reflection in Action

Those principals who did not talk about or refer to spending time thinking about
an issue or revisiting an issue in their decision-making model were not rare. Only two
principals, Bobbie and Debbie, talked about spending time thinking, or putting distance
between the issue and when the decision needed to be made. Their models reflected this
attribute. They saw value in reflection before and after action.

Senge (1990) talks about reflection as a changing value. He believes people need
to reflect on their own and others' thinking in order to make better decisions. Bolman and
Deal (1991) and Schon (1991) also support reflection as an important leadership
characteristic. Schon further states that reflection in action distinguishes the truly

outstanding professional. Women have been found to practice reflective thinking about

 

themselves and their relationship to their organizations (Astin & Leland, 1991', Helgeson,
1990; VanVelsor & Hughes, 1990). They learn and achieve significantly from others‘
expertise and experiences. The two reflective principals seemed to be the'most effective
collaborative thinkers and decision makers in this study. Their actions support the

literature on reflective leadership as we know it.

mal Comment

Research has shown that team decision making can affect school improvement.
Pounder et al. (1995) claim: "Overall, current efforts to implement shared decision
making have the potential to improve school performance. This study suggests that
people in many different roles can lead and thereby affect the performance of their

schools" (p. 564). Leithwood (cited in Pounder et al., 1995) warns principals if they

 

expe

toa

me

SCI

tez

pe

 

244
expect to have any influence on the school‘s improvement, they must give more emphasis
to a shift in leadership to a transformational concept. Further, he states:

Principals continue to have little influence on the emphasis given to instructional

work and thus student achievement. It calls for the adoption of a more inclusive

transformational conceptualization of leadership, considering that instructional
leadership alone is insufficient to produce meaningful change and improved

academic performance. (p. 567)

Just as a gardener has to learn the right times to reap, sow, and harvest, the
principal must learn and practice effective team decision making to positively affect the
results of goal implementation. The elementary principals in this study demonstrated a
belief in their role as a model and facilitator, always learning and took considerable
measures to develop their abilities as team leaders in a restructuring environment. It
seems obvious that they consider their roles seriously and believe in what they do. Their
team decision making, if enacted as such, can have far-reaching positive effects on student
performance.

It seems that if the process of team decision making is about growth: growth of the
team's knowledge about each other and is working as a team; growth of accountability and
responsibility across the team with team decisions; growth in knowledge of the school;
and growth in the effectiveness of the school through school improvement plans
developed and implemented through this group process, making school a better place for
children to grow and learn.

Keeping the devil out of the garden so that the plants can grow and flourish is no
small task for the principal, but the team decision~making process, with its "enrollment"
(Senge, 1990) of all the stakeholders and ensuing joint ownership of decisions, gives

growth a chance. A favorite saying on a plaque hanging in my school's kindergarten

 

 

clas:

tear

245
classroom aptly phrases what may happen as principals and teachers practice and model
team learning in the school environment:

Kindergarten is, you know, a place where little people grow.

 

APPENDICES

 

 

APPENDIX A

UCRIHS Approval Letter, Interview Guide, Focus Group
Interview Guide, Focus Group Questions

 

 

 

ornceor
RESEARCH
AND

GRADUATE
STUDIES

UnIvererv Committee on
Researcntnvolfln

Human Subjects ‘

(UCRIHS)

ilIICi‘rIQBn Stare Unwersrry
246 Administration Burlqu
isttannng. lhcmqan
W882 046

517/3552180
12X Eli/’432-I17i

17.5.". :17 5.51:: ummsm
554 vs r o anal DIVE/SIN
:'t.5.’I€/ICE J/I JESS/7

      

115 U :5 5n Jar/mam e-scllcn
immerse/121mm msmunon

 
 
 
   

246

MICHIGAN STATE

UNIVERSITY

February 13, 1997

TO: Maenette K. Benh am
430 Erickson Hall

RE: IRB#: 97-085
TITLE: FEMALE ELEMENTARY PRINCIPAL'S TEAM DECISION
MAKING IN THE NCA GOAL SELECTION PROCESS
REVISION REQUESTED: N/A

CA . l-C,D
APPROVAL DATE: 02/11/97

The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects' (UCRIHS)
review 0 this project is complete. I eased to adv1se the

protected and methods to obtain informed consent are appropr e
Therefore, the UCRIHS approved this prejecc and any rev1sions 3listed

above

RENEWAL: UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year beginning with
the approv val date shown abov ve. Inv vestigacors olam ng
continue a projecth be ond one year must use the green renewal
form (enclosed w1 e original approval letter or when a
project is renewed) to seek updateo certification.
maximum four such expe ited renewals possible Investigators
wishing to continue a project beyond that time need to Wubm
a sin or complete rev1ew.

REVISIONS: UCRIHS must review any changes in $procedures involving hum man
sub cts, prior to in1tiation or chan If is is done at

approval and referencing the pr oject's IRE # and title. Include
in your re de cription or the change and any revised
instruments, consent 5forms or advertisements that are applicable.

PROBLEMS /
CHANGES: Should either of the following arise durin ng the course of the
work, investiaators must notirv UC IHS promptly: (l ) roblems
(unexpected Side effects, complaints, etc.) involving gm
5 jects or (2) c anges in he research environment or newn
information indicating greater risk to the human sub ects than
sted when the protocol was previously rev1ewed an approved.

If we be of any future he elp, please do not hesitate to contact us
at (517)355— 2180 or FAX (517)432— 117

vid E. Wright,
RIBS Chair

 

DEW : bed

cc: Rena Richtig

 

 

 

PI

or

IE

an

pr

de

ho

pk

 

247

Interview Protocol

 

Purpose of Interview Protocol and Focused Group Interview:

To systematically collect and document information relevant to what principals do
or do not do in the of NCA goal setting process. These tools were designed to respond
to the research questions. Two to three separate interviews each lasting about an hour,
will be conducted at the principal's building about three to four weeks apart. As soon as
possible afier the second (or third, if needed) interview, the interviewer will meet with
three or four stafi‘ members for a focused group interview. The focused group interview
will gather staff members' viewpoints of the team decision making process.

My Role:

To develop the interview and focus group guides and use them to ask questions
and allow for fiirther exploration to gather information about their thinking about and
practice and promotion of team decision making. To move the interview forward by
encouraging fiirther response to questions which may give a better picture of team
decision making.

Introduction for Participant:

I am interested in how principals have learned about, think about and practice team
decision making. Two or three separate interviews have been devised to give me an idea
of how you learned about and think about decision making, team decision making, and
how you carry out decision making in your school setting. During the interview process,
please feel free to expand on any idea or belief you feel will offer a good picture of how

you think about and practice team decision making. I will audio tape record our

 

 

CO]

ICC

cla

de‘

248
conversation during the interviews; however, at any time you may turn off the tape
recorder. The transcribed interviews will be given to you for review and timber
clarification if you deem it necessary. All information will be kept confidential; changes in

detail about specific location and other descriptives will help to maintain confidentiality.

 

 

Inter

 

249
Interview Guide
Interview Number One:

1. Would you please draw a picture or model that best explains how you make

decisions?
a. What does this model mean? Please explain. Describe your terms.
b. How did you come to this process?
0. How do you apply your model? Please give examples in your principal
practice.
2. How is your decision making model the same or different from how team
decisions are made in the NCA goal setting stage?
a. Please give an example of each.
b. Have you experienced any significant changes in decision making from the

first experience of team goal setting in NCA? Are there specific groups
that you relate with that are affected? Please explain.

0. What do you see are the causes for any differences?
3. What do you believe has been most difiicult for you in this process
a. Are there any factors in the school setting that enhance or constrain your
practice of team decision making? Please explain.
b. Have you experienced any changes in relationships in the school setting as
a result? Please explain.
c. Can you describe how your own beliefs of leadership may have influenced

your team decisiOn making process? How did you arrive at these beliefs?

How do you view the school as a system?

How do you view "creative tensions" in decision making?

How do you influence your staff in team decision making?

What does team learning mean to you? How do you see it relating to team

decision making?

h. If I were to ask a teacher to describe how you involve him or her in the
decision making process, what would I hear?

(tonne

Purpose of Interview Number Two:
To gather more information from the participant on the model, review anything I
didn't get to finish or need clarification on from the first interview, and narrow our

discussion on team decision making to its relation to systems thinking and techniques.

 

 

IE

bent
inte

den

tecl

ab0i
syst
bell:

Illle‘.

250
My Role:

To probe further on questions and responses from the first interview that would
benefit the study. I may respond to questions the participant may have from the first
interview, as the time between interviews will allow for reflection. I will discuss the
decision model the participant developed in the first interview. The questions will focus
on more specific information on team decision making, and bring systems thinking and
techniques into the conversation to learn what principals know about and do with team

decision making.

Introduction for Participant:

In this interview I would like to briefly review our first interview, talk more
about your decision model that was drawn and discussed in the first interview, focus on
systems thinking, team decision making and how team decisions are made. If we
believe that we need more time to answer all the questions, we will schedule a third

interview to be held in the next few weeks.

Interview Number Two Guide:

1. Reflecting on our first interview, is there anything you would like to talk about or
explain further? (At this point, I will ask for clarification or fiirther explanation on any
responses I believe are important or complete any portion of our first interview not yet
addressed).

2. What does team decision making mean to you?
3. Can you describe a specific process that you utilize to help you with team decision
making and how it relates to the decision making model or picture we discussed in our

first interview?

4. How do you see team decision making impacting relationships with others in the
school setting; outside the school setting; in the classroom?

 

 

 

 

7 Re
imple
each
descr

toge
ask j
how
exar

 

251
5. Have you experienced any changes in power; roles; authority?
6. Are there any factors of team decision making that enhance or constrain your efforts?
7 Research today tells us that five disciplines of systems thinking are an efl‘ective way to
implement team leadership. I will talk about each discipline and list three descriptors of

each discipline. As we look at each one, please tell me how you see these disciplines and
descriptors fitting or not fitting in to your practice.

a. systems thinking (descriptors: circular; fluid; systemic)

b. personal mastery (descriptors: personal motivation; shared reality; creative
tension)

c. mental models (descriptors: reflection; influence; assumptions)

d. shared vision (descriptors: group commitment; meshed; relationship)

e. team learning (descriptors: coordinated action; followership; participatory)
What are others?

8. There are some techniques that are described as effective ways to bring people
together to enable them to practice team decision making. I will mention each one and
ask you to respond to the technique in two ways: 1. what does the phrase mean to you? 2.
how does this technique fit or not fit into your practice of team decision making? Give
examples if possible:

focus on the real work

keep it simple

learn by doing

focus on the best

find out what brings the group together

tinting is everything

design places where community can happen

find people who share your passion

learn how to host good gatherings

acknowledge people’s contributions

involve the whole person

celebrate

rar'cammneop‘e

9. If I asked an outsider to come to your school during its NCA goal setting process,
what would the person see? How would it be described?

 

 

 

in th
inter
profi
proc
proc
eithi

of t]

IS

tea]
wil'

m

 

252
Focused Group Interview Guide

This process will document the conversations of staff members who were involved
in the team decision making process of goal selection in NCA with the principals
interviewed earlier. The group will be moderated by the interviewee, and facilitated by a
professional focus group consultant offering this service in a volunteer capacity. The
process will last about an hour and will be held in the school after school hours. The
process will be charted and developed as it progresses. Up to five staff members who
either served on the steering committee, held the chair of a selected NCA goal, or co-chair
of the steering committee, will be invited to participate in the interview to respond to
questions.

My Role:

To gather information from staff members relevant to their perceptions of the
team decision making process in the NCA goal selection process. The primary questions
will encourage fithher depth into the process.

Introduction for Participants:

I am interested to hear your perceptions of how team decision making is used,
particularly in the NCA goal selection process. Your involvement in this process will help
us to chart how your group saw decisions being made. I ‘will ask about 10 basic questions
and will expand on the questions if we need more information to clarify or understand the
responses. Each of you is encouraged to share your comments and suggestions as we go
through this process, which should take about an hour. The consultant is here to chart the

responses as we go. If you see something you wish to clarity or question as our progress

253
is charted, please feel free to say so. The chart is an excellent visual tool to help us reflect,

restate or change our comments.

 

 

254

Focused Group Interview Questions

The following primary questions will be posed and expanded upon to help guide

the process:

I. Who was involved in the NCA goal selection team decision process?

2. How were they selected?

3. How would you describe the team decision making process during the goal
selection?

4. Elaborate on the role of all the participants.

5. What preparation took place before the steering committee began this
process?

6. What were the conflicts during the process?

7. How were the conflicts negotiated?

8. What are your feelings about this process? Why?

9. Did you see this process as a team effort?

10. What would have improved the process?

 

APPENDIX B

Principal Letter of Request, Principal Letter of Consent,
Staff Member Letter of Request, Staff Member Letter
of Consent

 

 

 

 

(date

I)ea1

accr
lflte
deci

invc
grou

I)ec
abo
in d

fr01
0ft
spe
eel

 

255

(date)

Dear Principal:

You have been identified as a female principal whose school has completed one cycle of
accreditation with North Central Association. Because of this accomplishment, I would
like to invite you to participate in a study which will explore female elementary principals'
decision making, specifically in the goal selection process of NCA. Six to ten female
principals, identified as successfiilly completing one cycle of NCA accreditation, will be
involved in the study, which will take place in the next few months. (A follow-up focus
group consisting of three or four staff members who will reflect on team decision making
will help round out the study). The study, entitled " Female Elementary Principals' Team
Decision Making in the NCA Goal Selection Process“, seeks to learn how principals learn
about and think about decision making and how they apply their thinking when involved
in the goal selection process.

My interest in this study grew from discussions with personnel and committee members
from North Central Association in Michigan and other states, which pointed out the lack
of understanding principals seemed to have in their role with NCA accreditation,
specifically goal selection. Discussions with elementary principals in Michigan seemed to
echo the same sentiments. A review of available information and staff development
seminars and workshops showed very little was offered in the way of suggestions, models
or guidelines. This study is important because it may present a model of team decision
making that principals may find helpfiil.

The study will involve three or four separate visits to your school; two to three separate
interviews each about an hour in length, will take place about a month apart, involving you
and me. The interviews are semi-structured and will focus on how you think about
decision making, a drawing or model of how you make decisions, and discussion on how
the model is implemented. The last visit will be a focused group interview scheduled with
three or four of your staff members who have agreed to participate and whom you have
identified as being involved in NCA goal selection. All three visits will be held at your
convenience. A tape recorder will audio record our meetings; however, at any time you
can turn off the recorder and hand notes will be taken in its place. Background
information regarding your school and your progress in goal selection can be gleaned from
the NCA annual report and student profile.

At the end of each interview, I will transcribe the session and return it to you for review,
comments, and clarification if needed. At the end of the study I will send you copies of
the reports. Please be assured that I will treat all information with the strictest confidence.
All transcriptions will be done by me alone; any recorded information in the observation
will be coded. Any information in the study regarding you or your school will be altered
or removed to maintain confidentiality. Charts developed in the focused group interview
will be coded and kept in my locked file as well.

 

 

 

I will
ques
be hz

Itesp

Rena

256

I will contact you in the next two weeks to discuss this study further and answer any
questions you may have. If you wish to speak to me before that time, please do so. I will
be happy to respond to any questions. I look forward to talking with you soon.

Respectfully,
Rena Richtig
(home) (office)
3020 Curtis Drive Rankin Elementary School
Flint, Mi 48507-1218 3459 Mundy Avenue
Phone 810-732-5691 Swartz Creek, MI 48473
email: rrichtig@admin.carman.k12.mi. us Phone 810-655—4697

Fax 810-655-8440

 

 

 

 

Iagr
thel

Ihai
desc
addr
thes

Iun
sepa
ll'lI'CI
COHt
li(Ir

Ian
inte
in a
pan
tot
rvhl

s7,

257

Letter of Consent

I agree to participate in the study on Female Elementary Principals' Decision Making in
the NCA Goal Selection Process.

I have received and read the letter from Rena Richtig dated , which briefly
describes the purposes and procedures of the research. The letter includes her name,
address and methods of telecommunication in case I have any questions or concerns about
the study.

I understand that my participation in this study requires me to participate in two or three
separate interviews, each about an hour. I understand that one focused group interview of
three or four of my staff members on the subject of team decision making setting will be
conducted, and I also understand that documents about the school and its progress in
NCA accreditation will be reviewed for information that may be relevant to the study.

I am aware of and understand that all interviews and data including the focused group
interview will be held in the strictest confidence and that my identity will not be disclosed
in any form during the preparation or completion of the study. I understand that my
participation in this study is completely voluntary and that I may ask for the tape recorder
to be turned off at any time, I may choose to not respond to any question, and that I may
withdraw from the study at any time with no repercussions.

 

 

Signature Date

 

 

 

 

(date
I)ear

Your
hnph
sdec

You
IICA
toin
tdk
IICZ

Afb
spec
to g.
trah
COdt
rent
prol

The

men
met

que
hap

Res

Rel

 

r. g..- :ri/1 *- -(,w s .-.. p . , ~ F

258
(date)

Dear Staff Member:

Your principal has agreed to participate in a study I am conducting on how principals
implement team decision making in their buildings, specifically during the NCA goal
selection process. An important aspect of this study hinges on the participation and
viewpoints of staff members.

You have been identified as having been involved in the team decision making process in
NCA goal selection in your school. Because of your knowledge in this area, I would like
to invite you and a few other stafl‘ members to participate in a focused group interview to
talk about team decision making in your school, as it relates to selecting goals for the
NCA accreditation process.

 

A focused group interview, which consists of a small group of people who will be asked
specific questions and the information charted as the discussion flows, is an excellent way
to gain different perspectives. I plan to facilitate the group in this hour long session, and a
trained focus group consultant will chart our progress. The information we gather will be
coded by me to mask the identities of the participants and the school. The charts will
remain in my locked files and kept confidential, and the consultant will maintain her
professional status as treating all information confidentially.

The focused group interview will be scheduled after school sometime during the next
month, and will be held at your building at a time convenient to you and your fellow staff

members.

I will contact you in the next two weeks to discuss this study further and answer any
questions you have. If you wish to speak to me before that time, please do so. I will be
happy to respond to any questions. I look forward to talking with you soon.

Respectfiilly,
Rena Richtig
(home) (office)
3020 Curtis Drive Rankin Elementary School
Flint, MI 48507 3459 Mundy Avenue
Swartz Creek , MI 48473
phone 810-732-5691 phone 810-655-4697
email: rrichtig@admin.carman.kl2.mi.us fax , 810-655-8440

 

 

 

I agr
Elen
Proc

I ha‘
desc
addr
abor

the
the

259

Letter of Consent

I agree to participate in the focused group interview which is part of the study on Female
Elementary Principals Implementing Team Decision Making in the NCA Goal Selection
Process.

I have received and read the letter from Rena Richtig dated , which briefly
describes the purposes and procedures of the research. The letter includes her name,
address, and methods of telecommunication in case I have any questions or concerns
about the study.

I understand that my participation in this study requires me to participate in a focused
group interview, which will last about an hour, and will consist of about three other staff
members in my school, a professional focus group consultant, and Rena Richtig.

I am aware of and understand that all information will be held in the strict confidence and
that my identity will not be disclosed in any form during the preparation or completion of
the study. I understand that my participation in this study is completely voluntary and that
the charts developed during the focused group interview will be coded for the study, and
kept in a locked file. I understand that I may choose not to respond to any question, and I
may withdraw from the interview at any time.

 

 

Signature Date

 

-u_..,_s.cm.e.p “with: _ .

APPENDIX C

NCA Annual Report Sample Form, NCA Report
for Outcomes Accreditation Schools

 

Gov

 

 

260
NCA Commission on Schools Annual Report FonnESA
Elementary Schools 1996-1997
ACompilation of Term: 0 1996 North Central Association
School:
Address:

 

City, State, Zip:

 

Principal:

School Phone:

 

 

District:
Address: '
City, State, Zip:

 

 

 

County:

 

Superintendent:

 

DiStric: Phone:

 

 

Gove:nance: Public Non—Public
1. Grades included in the school
2. Enrollment by grade: FIE
Pre—K students in half—day sessions + 2:
Pre- K students in full- -day sessions:
Kindergarten students in half-day sessions
Kindergarten students in full-day sessions:
Grade 1:
Grade 2:
Grade 3:
Grade 4:
Grade 5:
Grade 6:
Grade 7:
Grade 8:
Total Enrollment
3. School year in which the school was first accredited: —
4. School year of the most recent NCA team visit:
5. School year in which the next NCA team visit is planned: _
6.~ Do all teachers have at least 200 minutes per week of

planning time within the teacher's work day? [24.06] Yes No

 

 

 

F<

Pa

 

261

Form ESA
Page 2

7.

PROFESSIONAL STAFFING Note on the chart below the number of persons (whole
number) in each position, along with the full-time equivalencies for the
positions. In calculating the full-time equivalencies for district office
personnel, an estimate is to be made of the percentage of time those educators
spend in providing service in this school.

Certificated Staff Number of Full-time
P sons Equiv l ,

  

  

 

 

 

 

Totalréert

 

 

Student/Professional Staff Ratio [24.02] to one

Number of media aides
Full-time equivalency of media aides [26.02]

Number of secretaries/clerks
Full-time equivalency of secretaries/clerks [24.14]

Are there kindergarten sessions which exceed the 25 to 1
ratio? [24.04a] Yes No

If yes, is a full-time aide provided for the
session(s) in which the ratio is exceeded? Yes No

Does the prekindergarten program comply with standards
24.04b, c, and d relating to class size and presence of
instructional a-de? Yes No

For grades above kindergarten, how many days were classes in
session last school year? [22.06]

For grades above kindergarten, how many hours, exclusive of
lunch, are included in the School day for grades? [22.02]

How many days were classes in session last school year for
kindergarten students? [22.04a]

How many hours are included in a kindergarten session? [22.04a] H: Min
If prekindergarten programs are provided, are standards

for length of school day and duration of program
consistent with standards 22.04b and 22.04c? Yes No

 

 

 

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

262

equipment)?

year? [26. 30]

 

 

 

 

[6.30: 6.32]

[3.708]

Form BSA
Page 3
How many volumes does the media program include, excluding .
dictionaries, encyclopedias, and texts? [26. 20]
What was the total expenditure last school year for books,
magazines, and audiovisual materials (excluding textbooks and
What was the enrollment last school year?
What was the per pupil expenditure for the media program last
If the school is NOT in compliance with a standard,
an explanation is to be provided in the comments section.
Is instruction in the use of media materials and
equipment provided to students and teachers? [6.36] Yes No
Are media materials and equipment available to students
and teachers throughout the school day and school year?
Yes No
Do policies and procedures exist which address the
selec:ion, evaluation, quantities, and distribution of
media material? [6.02-6.18] Yes No .__.
Is the curriculum aligned with commonly accepted
practices of human growth and development? [3.12] Yes No
Does the faculty adapt the curriculum to the varying
abilities, needs, and interests of the students? [3.10] Yes No
Are evaluation data from a variety of sources used to
assess the strengths and weaknesses of the program?
Yes No
Are parents and students significantly and appropriately
involved in the school program? [3.18] Yes No
Are pupil personnel services which maximize teaching and
learning available? [5.02-5.04] Yes NO
Does the school emphasize the importance of the acrs of
teaching and learning through such means as inservice, an
emphasis upon instructional leadership, and staff
training and retraining? [2.048; 4.282: 4.30E] Yes No
re written guidance procedures available? [5.06] Yes No
Are there written procedures for reporting child abuse
and neglect? [3.88] Yes No
Is a school action-budget plan available? [8.06] yes No
Are there written procedures for safety of students
traveling to and from.school? [9.30] Yes No
Do governing board/staff relationships support the
teaching/learning environment? [2.20] Yes No

 

 

 

 

 

Form
Page

 

263

Form BSA
Page 4 ‘

 

34. Does the school have a new principal?
If yes, has he/she had two years of elementary classroom

teaching experience? [24.22] Yes No ,
35. Does the school have a new assistant principal? Yes No

If yes, has he/she had two years of elementary classroom

teaching experience? [24.24] Yes No

36. E Standards. Complete the enclosed E Standards Report: then transfer the
responses for each of the 12 standards below. Please return the completed
worksheet with the annual report materials.

1 2 3 4 5
Not Implemented Well Implemented

[1.025] Statement of philosophy and goals 1 2 3 .4 5

[2.043] Instructional leadership of principal 1 2 3 4 5

[3.02E] Quality programs accessible for all 1 2 3 4 5

[3.34E] Students/parents informed of objectives 1 2 3 4 5

[3.568] Productive use of classroom time 1 2 3 4 5

[3.608] Teachers involved in assessing effectiveness 1 2 3 4 5

[3.62E] Students receive frequent feedback 1 2 3 4 S

[3.70E] Assessment used to modify curriculum 1 2 3 4 5

[3.76E] School climate conducive to learning 1 2 3 4 5

[3.96E] Students involved in development of rules 1 2 3 4 5

[4.28E] Inservice programs developed via assessments 1 2 3 4 5

[4.305] Professional staff improvement program 1 2 3 4 5
37. Has your school been officially accredited by NCA

under the Outcomes Accreditation model Yes ___ No ___
38. Has your school been officially granted7 Outcomes

No

Accreditation candidacy status by NCA Yes

39. Comments (add additional pages if necessary):

 

264

Form SSA
Page 5

[To Be Completed By the School]

| School Status Last Year I

Status given this school by the North Central
Central Association last year:

 

Initial Membership

Continuing Accreditation
Accreditation With First Warning
Accreditation With Second Warning
Candidacy Status

Dropped From Membership

withdrew From Membership

|Disposition of Violations Cited Last Year]

Use the following code to indicate actions taken on personnel:
1 = Has left this school.
2 = Has been reassigned to a field in which qualified.
3 = Has taken additional work to qualify. (Supporting
documentation is to be included with this report.)
4 = Has taken additional work but is not as yet fully
qualified.
5 x Remains on the staff and is still not qualified.
Describe the action taken to rectify other violations.

lllllll

 

to Correct

Last Year's

 

 

We, the undersigned, have examined
this report and hereby certify that
it is complete and accurate.

 

Building Administrator

 

Superintendent

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ila-Antary lchoola I Standard Report 1996—1997

School

 

City, State

 

 

 

 

The lohool and Certain Qualltatlvo ltandarda

The l2 alalamnnta below are the 8 Standard: of the Conmlsslon. They refer to
charactarlatlca that appaar to ba anpaclally portlnonc to quallty programs of
aducatlon. The numbared statement. accompanylng each 8 Standaxd axa some of the
way. ln which the meatlng at [ha 8 Standard may be avldancad ln the school. (The
laltar Elaaana that avldanca can be provldod regardlng [ha nesting of the standard.)
Alta: ualng tha lnaart anaat to asses. the school agalnst (ha E Standards, tho
lChool'a :aaponaoa are than to be recorded in the space provided on tha
Annual Report torn.

The lnsart ahaal may be used to provlde tha school wltn dlractlon ruqardlng
school lmprovamant actlvltlal. The school's avaluatlon of ltsalf ln [ha areas of
(hi E Standards could be a uaalul lnsorvlca actlvlty (or the school laculty and wlll
tavaal acme aapacta of tho school whlcn might ba strengthened.

Uslng tha lcllowlng assessment scale, please lndlcata to what degree thosa
standarda ara being lmplemantad or addraaaad in your school.

I 2 J 4 5
Not Implement-d Hell Implemented

l. 02! There ahall be a written atatonant of phlloaophy
and goala which la tha governing docu-ant (or tho
school and lta program.

1. The school's program and oparaclona ara based upon the
phlloaophy and goals.

..-
N
U
‘
U!

2. The statement is ragularly dlscuaosd by the total staff. 1 2 3 4 5
3. The alatamant la ragulnrly lncludad ln a school

publlcatlon. l 2 J 4 5
4. Tha statement la ragularly ravlawad by the governlng board. 1 2 3 4 5
5 Parents, communlty Koprascntatlves, and staff member: are

lnvolvad ln approprlata ways in the development and
ravlalon of the atatament.

2.04! Inatruotlonal leader-hip ahall be the chief
location of the aohool'a admini-crater.

The prlnclpal'a daily, weekly, and monthly schedules
lndlcala that a majorlty at the tlma l: devoted to
acllvltlas whlch are daalgnad to enhance student laarnlng
and attactlva taachlng.

2. Tha prlnclpal partlclpataa ln courses, workshops, and
aumlnara to enhance har/hls lasdershlp slllls and to learn
new undaratandlnga of tha alamanta of attactlvo Loachlng.

3. lndlvldual and group contorencas of the admlnlstralor wlth

members of the stat! locus prlmarlly on aspects 0! good

taachlng, currlculum avaluatlon, and other locals of the
taachlng/laarnlng procaaa.

Provlslona are made ln the school to permit the prlnclpal

to lunctlon altoctlvaly ln dlscharglnq leadershlp

roaponslbllltloa.

5. The ralaclonshlp between the superlnlendont and the

prlnclpal ensure: allactlva admlnlatxatlon of the school.

The talatlonshlp baluaon tho prlnclpal and the stat! ls

such as to (acllllala aftectlva amnlnleraLlon and

oparatlon at the aducatlonal program.

The school prlnclpal sota expectatlons for curtlculum

quallty through use of standards and guldollnas.

.—
.

A

0‘

~.‘

 

J. 02! Quality progra-a ahall be aaooaalbla to: all
atudanta.

l. The currlculum ls broad ln acopa and provldul [or a wlda
range at sLudunt, Kata, roadlnass, and potonllal (or
learnlng.

2. Students ara prcvldad opportunltlaa to develop Ihllla ln
(he attautlva, paychonctor, and lntalpalsonal araaa.

3. The (aculty has hlgh expectations [or studenta.

4. Stall members are appropzlataly (ralnad to: (halt
responolbllltlaa.

5. Allccntlono at time and raaourcas ara sufflclant.

6. The curriculum dualgn anphaalza: lha lnlal-rolallonahlps
among varlcua area- of laarnlng.

7.-Procaduraa have baan aacabllahad to anhanca horlzontal and
vertlcal aitlculatlon.

3 .34! ltudanta and paranta ahall ha lnlorncd of the
objectivaa at each component of tho atudant'a
progra- and about the activitlaa to be undartakan to
help the atudant achieve tboaa objectlvaa.

l. Admlnlstratora hava establlahad standard procadutaa whlch
encouraga parent lnvolvamont.

2. Laalnlng octlvlllas are derived from the currlculum
ob)ecllvos ol the school.

3. The school conuunlcntas to students and parents the
objectives ot the student's current classwozk.

4. The student has been Introduced lo and can dascrlba the
mlnlmal learner outdo-as (or the age and grade laval ct
[ha aludunt.

3.56! Taanhara ahall uaa alaalroo- praotloaa which
make tho loot productive no. of claaa tl-A.

1. Classroom lnlotruptlona are top: to a mlnlmun.

2. Routlna school acllvlLlaa ara kept to a mlnlmum.

3. Tho achool'a admlnlatrotora antorca ptocuduraa and
regulation: whlch protect student laarnlug tlma.

4. The master achadula la daalqnod to allmlnala, to the
graatasl extant posslbla, the head for aLudenLa to laava
thelr regular class-s (or other actlvlllas.

5. Acllvltlos wlthln tha classroom are (alaLed to currlculum
objectlvas.

6. The vast majorlty of the day cantor: on opportunltlaa (or
all atudanta to lCAIlL

7. Unaaslgnud tlnm and tlmo spent on non—lnslructlonal
actlvltla: are kept to a nlnlnum

8. Extra laaxnlng tlnu la provlded [or students who need or
want 1:.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

,5"‘-"‘ -a—— «v.4

‘\

 

ZOO

 

 

 

3. 60K The principal and teachers shall be responsible

3.

for assessing the effectiveness of the program and
for planning improvement of the program.

i. The school calendar includes time reserved for individual
teachers and the total staff to review the effectiveness
of the school program.

2. individual teachers, groups of teachers at the various
grade levels, and the total staff establish improvenent
objectives each year and annually assess progress toward
those objectives.

3. The school has specific, written procedures for curriculum
revision.

4. The school conducts a planned and continuous evaluation of
the effectiveness of its program.

5. The principal involves staff and others in planning
implementation strategies.

.62! ltudents shall receive regular and frequent

assessment of their progress.

1. Student assessments are used by the teacher to alter
teaching strategies as the need for that arises.

2. Teachers view assessment as a means of fostering student
IUCCQII .

3. Students are assessed in light of their individual
characteristics.

4. Testing data are used by teachers as indicators of the
effectiveness of instruction.

5. Measures such as an assessment of student attitudes, an
evaluation of school climate, and dolineations of parent
expectations are used by the school to determine the
effectiveness of instruction.

6. The school provides for the inventory and diagnosis of
students who have physical, social, emotional, mental, and
academic characteristics requiring specialized educational
programs.

7. Services are available to students whose exceptional
abilities, talents, or physical attributes present unique
needs and opportunities.

70! The results of the school‘s student assessment
program shall be used to modify curriculum and
instructional methodology.

1. Individual test scores are used by teachers to identify
students who need additional or different instruction.

2. The school uses test scores to examine the strengths and

weaknesses of the curriculum design and to make

appropriate modifications.

3. Both norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests are
used to make judgments about curriculum modifications.

4. The purposes and nmchanics of the testing program are
described in school-to-home comnunications.

5. The school conducts periodic surveys of how well the
program has served former students.

 

3. 76! The school climate shall be conducive to
learning.

1. Expectations regarding conduct are clearly stated.

2. Disruptive students are not permitted to interfere with
the learning activities of others.

3. Student infractions of the conduct code are dealt with
promptly and consistently by faculty and administrators.

4. The physical enviromunu is clean, pleasant, and safe.

5. The school provides adequate health services.

6. The school facilities are adequate to accouundate an
effective instructional program.

3. 96! ltudents shall be appropriately involved in the
development and monitoring of the school's rules of
conduct and scholarship standards.

l. When sufficiently mature, students, through formal means,
are involved in the development of rules of conduct.

2. Student organizations, such as a student council, have
meaningful responsibilities and are part of the governance
of the school.

3. The student handbook describes the various leadership
opportunities available to students.

4.2!! Inservice program. shall be developed through
needs assessments, faculty involvement, and faculty
evaluations of each inservice program.

i. A program of inservice education is maintained to
stimulate the continued improvement of teaching and the
curriculum.

2. The relationship between the inservice activity and the
ohjectivee of the school is determined prior to the
activity.

3. Teachers are involved in the planning and evaluation of
inservice programs.

4. The objectives for inservice activities are known by the
participants.

4.30! The professional staff development program shall
provide diagnoses of performance strengths and
limitations and shall specify processes and
resources available to enhance performance.

1. For each teacher theru is on file a current record of
performance evaluations, including plans designed to
strengthen instructional skills.

2. The teacher evaluation process is described in an
appropriate school publication.

3 The faculty indicates satisfaction with the evaluation
plan and with options available to teachers who wish to
strengthen performance.

4. lnforuutlcn about the preparation of professional staff

umubers, as recordnd on official transcripts, is used as a
source of data for developing improvement programs for the
staff as a whole and for individual teachers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NCA
A Co

Th1:
Re:
yOL

267

NCA Commission on Schools Annual Report Form Form 0A
A Compilation of Terms © 1995 Nonh Central Association
School Year

Report for Outcomes Accreditation Schools

This form is to be completed and returned to the NCA state office prior to January 15.
Responses should be typewritten. Please use only the space provided. Thank you for
your care in completing this report.

Name of School
Street Address
City, State, Zip

 

 

 

 

 

Principal
School Telephone Fax
Governance Public Non-Public

Grades In the School

Total Enrollment (FTE)
Professional Staff (FT E)
Steering Committee Chair(s)

 

 

 

 

How To Use The CA Report Materials

This OA annual report "cover" or "folder" is to be completed each year by the school so that
the current year's materials can be appropriately prepared for review by the State Committee
and the Commission on Schools.

The annual report questions are organized by the OA phases. Once you have completed a
phase, that section of the report should be completed. The completed "phase" can be .
reproduced and reused each year in the reporting process. A computer program lS available
for completion of the phase reports. it you are interested in obtaining a copy, please contact
your state office.

 

We, the undersigned. have examined this repon and
hereby certify that it is complete and accurate.

 

Steering Committee Chairperson(s)

 

Building Administrator

 

 

Superintendent

 

 

(A

268

 

L Criteria for CA Schools |

 

Among the criteria the NCA will use in developing accreditation recommendations for DA
schools are these:

Are the target areas selected for concentrated attention during the current cycle
reflective of student outcomes important in all aspects of the school program?

Are the target areas derived from the school's stated mission and performance
outcomes?

Is the student performance information and contextual information about the school and
community adequate in quality and quantity to serve as a basis for conclusions
regarding areas in need of improvement?

Are the strategies identified for closing the gap between current levels of student
performance and desired levels of student performance based upon research and
likely to achieve the objectives?

Has the school provided evidence of success (assessment techniques) to identify
current levels of student performance and to trace changes in levels of student
performance?

Does the school staff view the OA activities as efforts having and deserving the highest
priority for time and resources?

Are the school's OA activities resulting in improved student performance?

 

269

 

Report on the School's Progress Along the 0A Timeline

 

| Phase I: Making the OA Commitment |

Has the school gained the commitment of the faculty, building-level and central
office administrators, and the governing board? Yes No

Date Completed

List issues which were addressed and resolved in gaining this commitment.

269

 

Form 0A
Page 1
Report on the School's Progress Along the 0A Timeline
| Phase I: Making the OA Commitment |
Has the school gained the commitment of the faculty, building-level and central
office administrators, and the governing board? Yes No

Date Completed

List issues which were addressed and resolved in gaining this commitment.

r7

270

 

Form OA
Page 2

| Phase ll: Getting Started |
Has a visiting team chairperson been identified? Yes No

Date Completed

Name the visiting team chair, his/her professional affiliation, and address. indicate how the visiting team chair
has assisted the school in the OA process.

 

 

I Phase III: Develgging the Student Profile I

 

5. Has the school‘s student profile been developed and analyzed? Yes No

Date Completed

 

6. What are the major findings, particularly as they relate to student performance?

 

k.

272

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Form 0A
Page 4
Phase IV: Developing the Mission Statement, Target Areas
and Target Area Goals
7. Has the school completed the mission statement? Yes No
Date Completed
Does the mission statement focus on student outcomes? Yes No
(Please attach a copy of the mission statement.)
8. Has the school identified the target areas and target area goals it will study during
this OA cycle? Yes No
Date Completed
List below (and on the back of the page) the TARGET AREAS AND
ASSOCIATED TARGET AREA GOALS include two sources of data to
provide the rationale for the selection of each target area. Note. For those In a
second or later OA cycle, please place an 'by those target areas continued from the
previous cycle.
Please use the following format:
Target t:Area
Target Area Goal: (list One or more goals for each target area)
Data Sou
Data Source #2
9. Has the visiting team chair visited to affirm target areas and target area goals? __ Yes __ No
Date Completed
When Phases 1 - IV have been satisfactorily completed,
the school may apply for DA candi dac cy
©1995

273

 

Phase V: Assessing Student Performance and
Establishin Ex ectations

10. Has the school selected subcommittees for each target area? Yes No
Date Completed

11 Have baseline data for each target area been gathered and analyzed for
development of the School Improvement Plan Yes No
Date Completed
What assessments/instruments were used in securing the baseline data?

12. Has the school hosted its first visit by the visiting team (following selection of the
target areas?) __ Yes __ No
Date Completed
What were the findings of the visit? include a summary of the observations and suggestions made as a
result of the visit.

©1995

 

 

 

13.

 

274

Form 0A
Page 6

 

| Phase Vl: Developing the School lmgrovement Plan |

List examples of specific imerventions the school will implement for each target area goal. Where
appropriate, indicate the research upon which these interventions are based.

Has the school established desired levels of student performance for comparison
with current levels of student performance for each target area goal? Yes No

Date Completed

What are the areas of discrepancy? On what basis were decisions made
regarding the expected levels of performance for each target area?

Describe how quality with equity as been addressed. On what basis did you disaggregate the data? What
criteria were used in selecting student subpopulations?

Has the school hosted a visit by the resource team following the development of
the school's improvement plans? __
Date Completed

What were the findings of the visit? include a summary of the observations
and suggestions made by the visiting team.

@1995

 

 

275

Form 0A
Page 7

 

| Phase Vll: Monitoring and Documenting Student Success |

18. What modifications in program, time allocations, pedagogy, or other elements in the teaching/leaming
process are to be effected to reduce or eliminate the discrepancy between actual and desired student
performance in the target area?

19. Has the school hosted a visit of the resource team where the school has
documemed improved student performance in the target areas? Yes No

Date Completed

20. List the areas of improved student performance by showing a comparison of results with the baseline data.

 

When Phases V-Vll have been satisfactorily completed, the school
may qualify for initial or continuing?

 

 

 

©1995

\
Q‘ A

21 . Date Outcomes Accreditation Candidacy was awarded:

22. Date Outcomes Accreditation was awarded:

 

276

Form 0A
Page 8

 

Phase Vlll: Continuin the Outcomes Accreditation Process

 

 

23. List the target areas and goals currently addressed, interventions currently in place, and measurements

being used for each intervention.

24. List each target area goal which has been accomplished and describe, briefly.
the maintenance plan currently in place.

©1995

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF REFERENCES

 

 

 

REFERENCES

Anzul, M., Friedman, T., Garner, D., Steinmetz, A., & Ely, M. (1991). Doing qualitative
research: Circles within circles. Philadelphia, PA: Palmer Press.

Armstrong, R. (1993, Winter). Review of the literature. NCA Quarterly, 67 (3), 384-
389.

Armstrong, R. (1994). Outcomes accreditation: A response to innovation and
instructional change. NCA Quarterly, 68 (3), 379-385.

Astin, H. S., & Leland, C. (1991). Women of influence women of vision: A cross-

generational study of leaders and social change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

 

Astuto, T., & others. (1994). Roots of reform: Challenging the assumptions that control
change in education. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
Abstracted in Effective Schools Research Abstracts 1992-93 7 (3).

 

Berman, P., Greenwood, A., McLaughlin, M. & Pincus, J . (1975). Federal programs
supporting educational change: Executive summary, 5. Santa Monica, CA: Rand

Corporation.

Blake, R., & Mouton, J. (1982). Theory and research for developing a science of
leadership. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 18, 275—291.

Blase, J. (1989, November). The micropolitics of the school: The everyday political
orientation of teachers toward open school principals. Educational Adminis—

tration Quarterly, 25 (4), 371-407.

Blase, J ., & Blase, J. R. (1994). Empowering teachers: What successful nrincinals do.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and
leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Burns, J. M. (I978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Cohn, S. (1993, Winter). Out of the ivory tower and into the grass roots. NCA

Quarterly, 67(3), 390—394.

277

hp] ‘,

 

 

C01

C0

Cc

C1

 

278

Cooper, J. (1995). Administrative women and their writing: Reproduction and resistance
in bureaucracies. In D. Dunlap & P Schmuck (Eds), Women leading in
education (23 5—246). Albany: State University of New York Press.

Conley, D.T., & Goldman, P. (1994, August). Facilitative leadership: How principals lead
without dominating. Eugene: Oregon School Studies Council.

Cotton, K., & Savard, W. (1980). The principal as instructional leader. Portland, OR:
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

Creswell, J. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Crosson, F. (1987, Fall). The philosophy of accreditation. NCA Quarterly 62 (2), 387-
396.

Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological
methods. New York: McGraw—Hill.

 

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.

DePree, M. (1987). Leadership is an art. East Lansing: Michigan State University
Press.

Drucker, P. (1977). An introductory view of management New York: Harper's
College Press.

Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37
(1), 15-24.

 

 

Fiedler, R. (1978). The contingency model and the dynamics of the leadership process. In

L. Berkowitz (Ed), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 59-112).
New York: Academic Press.

Fleener, M. J. (1995, April 18-22). Dissipative structures and educational context:

Transforming schooling for the 21 st centum. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

F ullan, M. (1993). Innovation, reform and restructuring strategies. In G. Cawelti (Ed),

Challenges and achievement of American education (pp. 116-134). Alexandria,
VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform (\36). Bristol,

PA: Palmer Press.

279

Garland, P., & O'Reilly, R. (Fall) The effect of leader-member interaction on

organizationaleffectiveness. Educational AdministrationQuarterly 12(30),
9-30.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theogy and women's
development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Goldring, E., & Pasternack, R. (1976, November). Principals' coordinating strategies and
school effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement. 5(3), 239-
253. Abstracted in Effective Schools Research Abstracts 9(6).

Goodlad, J. (1978). Educational leadership: Toward the third era. Educational
Leadership, 35, 322-331.

Hall, G., & Hord, M. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany: State
University of New York Press.

Helgesen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women's ways of leadership. New York:
Doubleday Dell.

 

Hord, S. (1992). Facilitative leadership: The imperative for change. Southwest
Educational Development Lab, Austin, TX. Office of Educational Research and
Improvement, Washington, DC.

Hoy, W., Tarter, J., & Witkoskie, L. (1992, Fall). Faculty trust in colleagues: Linking the
principal with school effectiveness. Journal of Research and Development in
Education, 20(1), 38-45. Abstracted in Effective Schools Research Abstracts
1992-93 7(7).

 

 

Hurty, K. (1995). Women principals--leading with power. In D. Dunlap & P. Schmuck
(Eds), Women leading in education (pp. 380-406). Albany: State University of
New York Press.

Katz, R. L. (1974, September-October). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard
Business Review Classic Reprint (pp. 90-102).

Katzenbach, J., & RCL Team. (1995). Real change leaders. Cambridge, MA: McKinsey
& Co., Harvard Business School Press.

Katzenbach, J., & Smith, D. (1993). The wisdom of teams. Cambridge, MA: McKinsy
& Co., Harvard Business School Press.

Kirby, P. C., & others. (1992, May-June). Extraordinary leaders in education:
Understanding transformational leadership. Journal of Education Research 85,
303-311.

 

280

Kirkpatrick, K., & Brainard, E. (1994, Fall-1995, Winter). Images for NCA's future:
Perceptions in one state. NCA Quarterly, 69(3), 329-332.

Knodel, I. (1993). The design and analysis of focus group studies: A practical
approach. In D.Morgan ( Ed), Successfiil focus groups (pp. 35-50). Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.

Krueger, R. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lashway, L. (1995, April). Facilitative leadership. ERIC Digest, 96. Eugene, OR: Eric
Clearinghouse of Educational Management. Office of Educational Research and
Improvement, Washington, DC.

Leithwood, K. (1989). School system policies for effective school administration. In M.
Holmes et al. (Eds) Education (pp. 73-92). Abstracted in Effective Schools
Abstracts 1990-91 5(6).

 

Leithwood, K. (1992, January). Transformational leadership and school restructuring.

Leithwood, K. (1994 November). Leadership for school restructuring. Educational

Administration Quarterly, 30(4), 498-518.

Lieberman, A. (1986, February). Collaborative research: Working with, not working on.
Educational Leadership, 28—32.

Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1990, June). Restructuring schools: What matters and what
works. Phi Delta Kappan, 759-764.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquigy. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Little, S. (1993, Winter). OA target area selection: A study. NCA Quarterly, 67(3), 311.

Marshall, 0, & Rossman, G. B. (1989). Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.

Meadows, B. J. (1987, Winter). The influence of participants' values on group process
and decision-making. NCA Quarterly, 61(3), 442.

Miskel, C., McDonald, D. & Bloom, S. (1983, Winter). Structural and expectancy
linkages within schools and organizational effectiveness. Education

Administration Quarterly, 19 (1),49-82.

Mitzel, H. (Ed). (1984). Encyclopedia of educational research, administration of
education institution New York: The Free Press, MacMillan Publishing.

 

281
Morgan, D. (Ed). (1993). Successful focus groups. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Morgan G. (1986). Images of organization. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Morgan, J ., & Krueger, R. (1993). When to use focus groups and why. In D. Morgan
(Ed), Successful Focus Groups (pp. 3-19). Newbury Park, CA : Sage.

Murphy, J. (1992). School effectiveness and school restructuring: Contributions to
educational improvement. School Effectivness and School Improvement, 3(2), 90—
109. I

Murphy, J. (Ed). (1993). Preparing tomorrow's school leaders: Alternative designs.
University Park, PA: UCEA.

Ogawa, R. T., Bossert, S. T. (1993, May). Leadership as an organizational quality,
Educational Adminstration Quarterly, 31(2), 224-243.

 

O'Toole, J. (1995). Leading change: The argument for values-based leadersl_1ip. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Patterson, J. (1993). Leaders for tomorrow’s school. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Pounder, D. G., Ogawa, R. T., & Adams, E. A. (1995). Leadership as an organization-
wide phenomenon: Its impact on school performance. Educational Administration

Quarterly, 31(4), 564-588.

Rosener, J. (1990, November-December). Ways women lead. Harvard Business
Review, 119-125.

 

Rost, J. C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty—first century. Westport, CN: Praeger.

Rutherford, W. (1984, November). Styles and behaviors of elementary school principals:
Their relationship to school improvement. Education and Urban Society, 17(1),
9-28.

Schon, D. A. (Ed). (1991). The reflective turn: Case studies in and on educational
practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Seidman, I. (1991). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in
education and the social ‘ New York: Teachers College Press.

Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Doubleday Dell.

282

Senge, P. (1994). The fifth discipline fieldbook:Strategies and tools for building a
learning organization. New York: Doubleday Dell.

Sergiovanni, T. (1992). Moral leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey—Bass.

Sergiovanni, T. (1992). Reflections on administrative theory and practice in schools.

Education Adminstration Quarterly, 28(2), 304-313.

Shaw, R., McCampbell, R, & Thrasher, K. (1990, Winter). A study of the North Central
Association outcomes accreditationpprocess. NCA Quarterly, 451-456.

Smylie, M., & Brownlee-Conyers, M. (1992, May). Teacher leaders and their principals:
Exploring the development of new working relationships. Educational

Administration Quarterly, 28(2), 150-184.

Solomon, B. (1994, Summer). A comment on the authority structure of the school.

Educational Administration Quarterly, 281-290.

Stefanich, G. ( 1993, Winter). The relationship of effective schools research to school

evaluation. NCA Quarterly, 58(3), 343-349.

Stewart. D., & Shamdasani, P. (1990). Focus groups: Theory and practice. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.

Stoops, J. A. (1996, Winter) The last sanctuary: Profiles of peer and regulatory authority
in education. NCA Quarterly 70(3), 393-396.

Stronbach, T., & Morris, B. (1994). Polemical notes on educational evaluation in the age
of "policy hysteria." Evaluation and Research in Education 8(1,2), 5-19.

 

Summers, A., & Johnson, A. (1995, March). Doubts about decentralized decisions.
School Administrator, 52 , 24—32.

Tichy, N. M., & Devanna, M. A. (1990). The transformational leader. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.

Trout, F. J., & Martin, O. L. ( 1994, November 9—11). Can principals shed their
traditional style of governance? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-
South Educational Research Association, Nashville, TN.

Tucker-Ladd, P., Merchant, B., & Thurston, P. (1992, August). School leadership:
Encouraging leaders for change. Education Administration Quarterly, 28(3), 297-
409.

Van Maanen, J. (1983). Qualitative methodology. Bevery Hills, CA: Sage.

 

283

Van Velsor, E., & Hughes, M.W. (1990). Gender differences in the develppment of
managers: How women managers learn from experience. Greensboro, NC: Center

for Creative Leadership.

Weiss, C., Cambone, J., & Wyeth, A. (1992, August). Trouble in paradise: Teacher
conflicts in shared decision-making. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28(3),

350-367.

Weiss, C. (1993, F all). Shared decision-making about what? A comparison of schools
with and without teacher participation. Teachers College Record, 95(1), 69-92.

Wheatley, M. (1992). Leadership and the new science. San Francisco, CA: Berrettt-
Koehler.

Wilson, B., & Corbett, H. (1983, Fall). Organization and change: The effects of school
linkages on the quality of implementation. Educational Administration Quarterly.
_1__9_(4), 85-104.

Wolcott, H. F. (1990). Writing up qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (1993). fliplications of case study research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Young, K., Chambers, H., Kells & Associates. (1993). Understanding accreditation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.