Organizational Planning and Development in Education

Assignment #1 How Important are School Plans

Christopher Stephen Gamble

University of Manitoba

The process of school planning involves all levels of government, parents, teachers, administration and other community members.  The environment in which schools exist is constantly changing as are the expectations of its stakeholders.   Sybouts (1992) stated the following:

The tides of change swirl around each educational system, and the eddies and currents are indeed treacherous.  One reaction to the tumultuous setting is to go with the tide. But there is another option.  Planning is the only way educational leaders will be able to direct the fortunes of their educational institutions (p. 14).

Change happens at times is unpredictable and although our environments are changing Davies & Ellison (2003) state that:

The problem of developing strategy in education is that there is often a feeling of being unable to control, at the school level, what is happening because of externally imposed changes but this is, perhaps, an inappropriate excuse for not developing relevant strategies for the school. (p. 36)

Which means that just because you don’t know what is going to happen in the future that is no excuse for not going through the process of planning.  A best guess and planning for the future is better than waiting and reacting to change without preparation.

Our schools are currently in political environment which demands accountability for taxpayer spending.  This results oriented environment has lead to our use of school plans.  I will focus on two main rationales for planning.  Firstly the technical-bureaucratic reasons which are modeled and provided by our governing bodies in our means meeting ends focused, smart goal driven school plan forms.  Secondly I will address the larger more philosophical question of why we plan, what the spirit and motivation of planning is.

Beurocrats give models of school plans which are the execution of the strategic planning which happens at the provincial and Divisional levels.  Administrators and teachers are responsible for the implementation of the ideology which is directed by the division and province.  As a school administrator I see the value in these plans because they provide schools with a view of the long term strategic goals which our individual goals help reach.  Each school has individual site needs which change the expression of the strategic goals but the spirit and may be expressed.

Before any attention is paid to the individual school plan it is important to address how and where these plans should come from.  I will describe the context in which school plans are emerging including the Provincial and Divisional goals.  The Province of Manitoba has identified five priorities which are:

1. Improving outcomes especially for less successful learners.
2. Strengthening links among schools, families and communities.
3. Strengthening school planning and reporting.
4. Improving learning opportunities for educators.
5. Strengthening pathways among secondary schools, post-secondary education and work.
6. Linking policy and practice research and evidence.

Superintendants and Administrators of School divisions are required to interpret these priorities and to set divisionally relevant local goals which suit the contextual environment of the division they serve.  I currently work for Prairie Rose School Division and have taken part in the refreshing of our the Strategic Planning in our division where we have had the opportunity to update the Strategic plan and reflect on successes as well as the needs for changes to our long term Strategic goals.  The other function of this exercise was to maintain our alignment with Provincial Priorities which also change over time.  Our divisional goals are as follows:

1. Professional learning communities will encourage a culture of collaboration to accomplish the goal of improving student learning.
2. Prairie Rose School Division will ensure stimulating and appropriate programming for its students.
3. Literacy will be enhanced by Information and Communication Technology (ICT) across the curriculum.
4. Assessment practices of and for learning will support literacy development of all students.

Looking at the Divisional Priorities of Prairie Rose School Division you can immediately see the lines of congruence between the school division and the Province.  This congruence is a clear sign that the planning process is working.  Besides these written “Priorities” which are basically promises of future effort in each area, divisions and the province are looking for ways to measure their efforts, which is evident in the use of the standard assessments in grades three, seven, eight and twelve.  The next level of Planning which is at the core of this essay is the individual school plan.

I have provided my schools goals as a model of a school plan.  Our school has 183 students in grades K-12.  There are 13 teaching staff one (lonely) administrator and six Educational Assistants.  The community of Miami has a population of just over 500 residents and students are bussed from up to 40 km away.  Our school is suspiciously homologous, consisting almost entirely of white children with parents who either farm or are involved in the farming industry.
First I will identify our school goals which are as follows:

1.   Professional Learning communities Will encourage a culture of collaboration to accomplish the goal of improving student learning.

2.   We will strive to provide a stimulating and appropriate program for all of our students.

3.   Student literacy will be enhanced by Information and Communication Technology.

4.   Assessment Practices of and for learning will support literacy development for all students.

We came to these goals by reviewing the Provinces priorities and our Divisional plan our school has set the following goals, which have been set to better student learning in our school.  Each goal is supported by a list of activities which support the achievement of the goal.  

Our school is using Professional Learning Communities (PLC’s) as a vehicle to explore, share, and implement, and accomplish our school goals.  These communities have been formed by matching personal interests to school goals and are centered on bettering student learning.  The PLC’s meet during early dismissals to research, plan, and reflect on practices in their area.  These meetings are captured on our school WIKI where any staff member can see what other groups are working on.

The use of PLC’s and staff involvement makes our school more resistant to change in demands, and resources available in our environment.  Our staff has a vested interest in achieving the goals of its group, which in turn allows for flexibility and resiliency built into our system.  The PLC Model also allows for more ingenuity because of the effect of delegation.  

One conceptual trap set by all of the SMART goals, PLC’s, Strategic plans, and means to ends thinking is that it does not necessarily focus on the big question which is Why is our plan the way it is or Why plan at all.  Everyone of the Priority areas and Goals above is the result of a value judgment.  Christopher Hodgkinson would say that as leaders in education we are in the Axiology business, the business of making value judgments.  Our bureaucratically programmed obsession with aligning ourselves up the chain of command leaves us vulnerable to setting goals that may not be student centered. Robert Starratt warns that school leaders need to avoid doing what has been done traditionally because things are fine the way they are and that it is important that leaders be lead learners and innovative thinkers who capitalize on their individual talents.  Starratt (2004) stated that:

The school administrator of the future needs a different mindset and skills that  the status quo administrator of the past …Those contemplating a career in educational administration need to make a sober assessment of their own talents, motivations, and dispositions for meeting the challenges in educational administration in the 21st century. (p.24).

To continue the thoughts of Robert Starratt our school plans are less about submitting plans that will be good enough and will satisfy governments and our divisions, and more about the mission and vision of our schools.  This question of why is what will drive meaningful change in education.  Our focus on change and a continuous looping of planning, doing, measuring, evaluating and then making adjustments I think that that school plans are essential because they focus schools efforts and ensure that student learning is at the center of each thing that we do.

If you follow the Provincial and Divisional Priorities as a lens for viewing school plans and to filter possible school goals it ensures alignment within the school.   School plans are an opportunity for schools to set meaningful long and short term goals to improve the functionality of the environment they work in.  One thing that I believe is missing in our Provincial guidelines is a clear picture of our desired results.  I think that the process of backward design would help at all levels of planning.  

Another benefit of our school planning process is that it forces schools to put into print their expressions of their vision and mission so that the goals are mutually intelligible and accessible to all members of the community.  When the mystery of planning is removed and targets are clear, they are easier to achieve.

Exercises like “Picture the graduate” where those setting goals and planning are asked to describe what a graduate would ideally have when they leave the public school system if our plans work and they achieve what we want them to.  This exercise strips the planners of biases and alterior motives for planning which don’t stand up to the question “Is what we are doing getting us what we want?”

The benefits of school planning are clear from the bureaucratic alignment of levels of our educational system laden with SMART goals and gathering information for change to the philosophical based deeper benefits of planning which reveal the why’s of planning including morals, and values of our society.  Our success in the future will rely on planning and change.  “To change is to risk something.  That makes us insecure.  Not to change is a bigger risk, but it seldom feels that way….There is not choice but to change.” (Sybouts, 1992, p.15).

As a school leader I am learning the benefits of setting these goals and then sharing results which increases job satisfaction and the functionality of the school.  Our Parent Council is aware of the school plan and enjoys reviewing goals in the school in order to take part in the planning process.  Our school has successfully satisfied the provincial and Divisional requirements of a school plan but needs to focus more on the Why’s of planning.  The PLC system in place helps my staff take ownership of the initiatives in our school.   I plan to use what I have learned to spend more time developing our school’s Vision and Mission and then looking through our Schools goals to make sure that we are setting goals after we determine what we want our school to be.  

The question presented by the question “How important are school plans” is broad in nature and my response was limited to two primary areas firstly the most obvious technical-bureaucratic reasons modeled and provided by our governing bodies, and secondly the philosophical question of why we plan, what the spirit and motivation of planning is.  Beyond these two areas discussed Starrat (2004) suggests some general guidelines for aspiring administrators in all of their endeavours: Responsibility, Authenticity and Presence.  These are identified as the pilliars of success in ethical leadership by Starratt which should be followed in planning and any other actions in administration.

References

Davies, B. & Ellison, L. (2003). The new strategies direction and development of the school: Key frameworks for school improvement planning (2nd Ed). New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Starratt, R. J. (2004). Ethical leadership.  San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Starrett, R. J. (2003). Centering educational administration: Cultivating meaning, community responsibility.  New Jersey: Larwence Erlbaum Associates.
Sybouts, W. (1992). Planning school administration: A handbook. New York: Greenwood Press.