Education’s 2024 Year in Review

The Themes that Captured Our Time, Attention, Concern, and Consternation

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

 

Dear Colleagues,

Introduction

   Today’s Blog closes out my 10th full year of writing these bi-monthly Blogs.

   Over the past 231 Blogs—with topics ranging from research to reflections to rants—I have tried to analyze current topics, reports, and practices in education, psychology, and organizational change, emphasizing effective practices that improve student, staff, school, and systems-level outcomes. 

   I have done this in the spirit of “paying it forward”. . . and while it may result in a keynote invitation or a workshop presentation or a needs assessment or on-site consultation. . . the time I spend thinking about and writing these pieces really is the best “compensation.”

   The world has dramatically changed over the past ten years. . . our country has seen significant challenges and advances. . . and education—in its widely diverse areas—has selectively experienced innovation, inertia, stagnation, and regression.

   Rather than review an entire decade, let’s reflect instead just on the past year, and the “top areas” that caught my (and, hopefully, your) attention.

   Below, I have clustered (with some reordering) all 24 of this past year’s Blogs into organizational areas. While each cluster has a brief introduction, I will leave it to you to personally and professionally reflect on these areas. . . perhaps, revisiting a full Blog message or one that you missed.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

This Year’s Blogs: Themes and Clusters

   While some Blogs could have been clustered into more than one theme, and the theme titles below are broad, this year’s 24 Blog messages can be organized in the following areas:

·       Theme 1: School Improvement: Changing Thinking, Processes, and Practices to Change Outcomes

·       Theme 2: Choosing Effective School-Wide Programs and Practices: Avoiding Media Hype While Facilitating Staff Consensus

·       Theme 3: Students’ Engagement, Behavioral Interactions, and Mental Health

·       Theme 4: Improving Multi-Tiered and Special Education Services: Bridging the General Education and Special Education Wall

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Theme 1: School Improvement: Changing Thinking, Processes, and Practices to Change Outcomes

   Districts, schools, and other educational agencies or settings must continually evaluate their student, staff, school, and system outcomes—especially in the continually changing social, political, economic, and demographic world that we live in.

   Education is not a “one size fits all” undertaking. It needs to be responsive to many different stakeholders, constituencies, and consumers, and yet it also needs to be effective and efficient.

   Strategic planning, needs assessments, resource analyses, and formative and summative evaluations are conscious, continual processes that are essential for school improvement and success.

   But these processes need to be grounded in innovative thinking, evidence-based blueprints, and proven practices and strategies.

   Our 2024 Blogs in this area were [CLICK DATE to Link to Blog]:

·       November 23, 2024 School Improvement Requires Changing Thinking, Not Just Changing Programs: The “Moneyball Thinking” Needed in Education

Using the movie “Moneyball” as a metaphor, we suggest that many districts and schools are locked into antiquated data analysis and school improvement thinking. We advocate that they use “Moneyball Thinking” to rethink and revolutionize their thinking and practices, applying these to linking Needs Assessment results to more successful strategic planning and action.

_ _ _ _ _

·       July 13, 2024  The Seven Sure Solutions for Continuous Student and School Success: “If You Don’t Know Where You’re Going, Any Road Will Get You There” (Part I)

This Blog discusses the Seven Sure Solutions to school improvement and students success as significant numbers of students continue to academically under-perform and demonstrate social, emotional, and behavioral challenges in the classroom and across their schools. Too many schools still focus on how many students “pass the state test.” While they avoid school improvement status, millions of students are not proficient and unprepared after graduation.

_ _ _ _ _

·       August 10, 2024  Will Your School “Win the Gold” for Your Students This Year? Why the U.S. Women’s Gold Medal Olympic Gymnastics Team is a Model for All Schools (Part III)

This Blog discusses the courage, characteristics, and conditioning that educators need to consider so that their schools are successful for all students—especially as a new school year approaches. This Blog uses the Gold Medal-winning Women’s Olympic Gymnastics team—at this year’s Paris Olympic Games—as a model and analogy of what schools need to do to “Win the Gold” in these three areas for every one of their students.

_ _ _ _ _

·       October 19, 2024  Speed Counts When Making Successful Changes Across Your District or School—When to Go Slow and When to Go Fast

This Blog emphasizes that the success of a district or school’s change process or initiative often rests on the speed of its implementation. We review ten variables that help determine if a change process needs to be implemented slowly or quickly, and provide two Case Studies that apply these principles and practices.

_ _ _ _ _

·       November 9, 2024  Delegating Duties and Decisions in a Shared Leadership School: Avoiding Staff Reservations or Resentment

This Blog discusses the significant benefits of having a Shared Leadership structure and process in every school across the country. The structure is defined by seven research-to-practice components evident in all successful schools. These are aligned to six school-level committees—each responsible for their part of the school success operation. The process is defined by describing the different ways to make school and schooling decisions, and the importance of staff training in this area.

_ _ _ _ _

·       January 13, 2024  While Grades May Be Meaningful, It’s Still About the Skills. “Resolving” to Recognize that Report Cards are Less Meaningful than Student Mastery

This Blog reviews a major study demonstrating that high school grades across the country have been inflated from 2010 through 2022. At the same time, it emphasizes that grades are less important than the mastery of specific academic skills when predicting success in the next course, the next level of education, or a graduate’s performance once employed.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Theme 2: Choosing Effective School-Wide Programs and Practices: Avoiding Media Hype While Facilitating Staff Consensus

   Anyone can buy a website, garner some testimonials, collect some “data,” post a TikTok, and claim that their “new and improved” curriculum, intervention, application, or product has “changed the life” of a student or school.

   That is not research. It is marketing.

   In our quest for educational innovations that work, we need to apply sound, objective social media and product evaluation principles and skills to cut through the hype and get to the heart.

   We need to recognize and reject the fads, and embrace the fact that success in school takes time, resources, training, and persistence. . . and that it does not often occur immediately or without periodic challenges and temporary setbacks.

   It takes at least 12 to 14 years to educate a qualified high school graduate.

   Surely, we—the educators—can invest the time to validate the approaches that we select and deliver to these students. . . to ensure the optimal readiness for their post-graduation lives.

   Our 2024 Blogs in this area were [CLICK DATE to Link to Blog]:

·       March 16, 2024  Helping Schools Pick and Implement the Best Evidence-Based Programs: Avoiding Mistakes, Best Practices, and Pilot Projects (Part II)

Continuing this two-part Series, this Blog Part II discusses the evaluative criteria used by the What Works Clearinghouse and Evidence-Based Practices Resource Center to rate the validity of curricula and approaches in educational settings. We then summarize the five “mistakes” that educators should avoid when choosing evidence-based programs, and explain why education should change the term “Best Practices” to “Effective Practices,” and “Pilot Projects” to “Field-Testing.”

_ _ _ _ _

·       September 7, 2024  How Fad or Flawed School Programs Increase Poor Teacher Morale and Resistance to Change: When Education Keeps Adopting the Same Shaky Stuff, It Will Keep Getting Repeated Rocky Results (Part V)

This Blog reviewed and integrated recent articles reporting that (a) teachers’ job satisfaction and mental health worsened last year, as did the need for student supports and interventions; and (b) districts and schools continue to adopt unproven programs and practices as part of a fad-driven decision-making process. . . with no end in sight. An analysis emphasized the need for data-driven decision-making, and suggested that ineffective practices negatively impact teacher morale and create a resistance to future practices that will effect change.

_ _ _ _ _

·       February 24, 2024  What Super Bowl Commercials Teach Education About Media and Product Literacy: The Language and Process that Helps Schools Vet New Products and Interventions (Part I)

Metaphorically using the commercials at the Super Bowl as a guide, this Blog emphasized and outlined (applying the goals and questions within a sound middle school Media Literacy program) why educators need to be both Media and Product Literate when reviewing and evaluating the marketing materials or on-line reviews of new products or services.

_ _ _ _ _

·       March 30, 2024  How Cognitive Biases Affect Student Perceptions and Educator Decisions: Making the Unconscious, Conscious and the Implicit, Explicit

This Blog defines Cognitive Bias, discusses how eight specific biases affect educators’ positive and negative perceptions of students, staff, and systems, and then address how they similarly impact judgments at the individual, grade, and school levels. We especially focus on how to understand, prevent, or address the implicit or unconscious biases or explicit and conscious biases that interfere with or undermine productive interactions and objective decision-making.

_ _ _ _ _

·       April 27, 2024  Social Media and the “Double-Edged” Sword of Damocles: Survival Rests on Humility, Self-Control, and the Principles of Public Relations

This Blog discusses Social Media as a “Sword of Damocles”  that hangs above us with the power to enhance or destroy those who use it. We can control the power by (teaching) self-control, humility, common sense, and the ability to honestly self-reflective before making a social media faux pas.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Theme 3: Students’ Engagement, Behavioral Interactions, and Mental Health

   A clear post-pandemic theme—that persisted through 2024—involved issues related to (a) students’ chronic absenteeism and “quiet quitting” of public schools; (b) classroom disengagement and inappropriate behavior toward teachers; (c) social media addiction and peer-to-peer bullying; and (d) mental health concerns—including real concerns about school and personal safety.

   While these issues need data-driven analyses as to their root causes and multi-tiered solutions, easy-fix Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) solutions are continually cited. . . even as virtually any solution is touted as an “SEL solution.”

   During this year, we addressed the SEL bandwagon (and most of the other issues above) head on. . . we discussed the root causes. . . and we detailed the prevention, response, and intervention approaches needed.

   If you are amazed that 2024 is over. . . you understand the importance of time.

   We need to make sure that every school and schooling moment is well spent.

   Our next generation of leaders are in our classroom seats today. We don’t have time to waste on generic suggestions, self-serving frameworks, and unproven practices.

   Our 2024 Blogs in this area were [CLICK DATE to Link to Blog]:

·       January 27, 2024  Strategies for Safe, Productive Classroom Conversations on Race, Religion, and National/World Events: It’s Not If, It Should Be When

Many challenging, controversial, and emotional social issues have impacted the climate and interactions across students, staff, and schools. To ensure that discussions around these issues are safe and productive, staff need to be trained to teach and guide students in the necessary discussion expectations, ground rules, and conflict prevention and resolution strategies. This Blog describes seven phases to accomplish this, providing specific guidance and examples. The Blog also includes a YouTube video of a recent Education Talk Radio interview summarizing and extending the discussion to the next level.

_ _ _ _ _

·       August 24, 2024  Students' Health, Mental Health, and Well-Being Worsens Over the Past 10 Years: Summary of the August 2024 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Report (Part IV)

This Blog summarizes the CDC’s national 2013-2023 Youth Risk Behavior survey results for high school students. Detailing the shaky emotional status of our students, the Blog asserts why students need multi-tiered services and supports, and that an evidence-based social skills program—based on cognitive-behavioral and social learning theory research—should anchor the core preschool through high school universal instruction.

_ _ _ _ _

·       July 27, 2024  Are Schools Really Prepared to Address Educators’ Biggest Behavioral Student Concerns Right Now? “We’ve Got Serious Problems and We Need Serious People” (Part II)

This Blog discusses the significant classroom and school social, emotional, and behavioral challenges demonstrated by students this past year as identified in a recent national survey by K-12 school leaders. Using three quotes from a national presentation, short- and long-term solutions are recommended that will result in real and sustained success.

_ _ _ _ _

·       May 25, 2024  Increasing Student Engagement: The New School Year Begins Before this “Old” Year Ends. How to Prepare and What Needs to be Done

This Blog discusses the importance, need, and how to identify, analyze, and plan interventions for disengaged students before the end of the current school year so that the re-engagement interventions selected can occur either during the summer or immediately at the beginning of the new school year.

_ _ _ _ _

·       June 22, 2024  Does Your School’s SEL Program Teach Social Skill Behaviors, or Just Talk About What Students “Should Do”? If We Taught Reading the Way We Teach SEL, None of Our Students Would Learn How to Read

This Blog discusses the building blocks needed when teaching students—from preschool through high school—the social skills they need to be successful. Described are the specific skills, teaching steps, and scripts—using the Stop & Think Social Skills Program as an exemplar—to help students learn, master, and easily apply their social skills to real-life situations.

_ _ _ _ _

·       June 8, 2024  Revisiting Title IX’s Sexual Harassment Requirements While Avoiding Secondary Victimization: A Procedural Primer. Why Do Too Many Districts Not Know (or Abdicate) their Responsibilities?

This Blog provides a detailed overview of the federal Title IX Sexual Harassment law—describing definitions, required procedures, and sample district policies in specific areas relative to responding to and investigating allegations. It also discusses the psychological impact of sexual harassment on school-aged students, and the importance of avoiding secondary traumatization.

_ _ _ _ _

·       September 21, 2024  Research Teases Out the Impact of Adverse Childhood Experiences. . . But Many Educators Still Don’t Understand Social-Emotional Screeners, and the Limitations of ACEs-Only Assessments 

Given the school-related challenges since students returned from the pandemic, this Blog discusses (a) the characteristics and concerns with social-emotional screening, and with only using an ACEs tool; (b) how to interpret a recent ACEs study that found ACEs correlations for young students’ social-emotional status, but not for their academic performance; and (c) the serious limitations with ACEs assessments’ validity and ability to causally explain students’ social-emotional—and, especially, trauma-related—difficulties. We identify many reasons (beyond traumatic events) that explain students’ significant social-emotional challenges, and discuss Tier 2 and 3 interventions available to help.

_ _ _ _ _

·       February 10, 2024  Michigan Mother Found Guilty of Manslaughter in Her Son’s School Shooting: Should Schools Lean-In to Hold Parents More Accountable for their Children’s Behavior? 

On February 6, 2024, Jennifer Crumbley was found guilty of four counts of involuntary manslaughter for allowing her son to bring a gun to school where he killed four and injured seven others. This Blog analyzes the case and asks schools: Will this decision move the pendulum toward greater parental accountability when schools recommend outside supports to address their children’s significant health, mental health, and wellness needs; Will the threat of litigation motivate these parents to take timely and effective action—consistent with the recommendations; and Will schools become more assertive in their interactions with parents, especially when there is a documented threat of student, staff, and school violence?

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Theme 4: Improving Multi-Tiered and Special Education Services: Bridging the General Education and Special Education Wall

   The research has continually demonstrated that most “students with disabilities” do not have pervasive educational challenges. . . they have “niche” areas where their disability impacts their academic or behavioral progress.

   As such, these students are more typical than atypical, and their instruction is best guided by general education teachers in the general education curriculum in their general education classrooms.

   At the same time, special education teachers are important and needed. . . as consultants to their general education colleagues (and vice versa). . . and as direct instruction co-teachers and teachers for students with more strategic or intensive multi-tiered needs.

   But there should be no general education-special education “divide”. . . there should only be an educational “continuum.”

   Our 2024 Blogs in this area were [CLICK DATE to Link to Blog]:

·       December 7, 2024  Improving Special Education Services for our Students: What the New Administration Must Do on this 20^th Anniversary of IDEA 2004

This Blog uses the 20th anniversary of the signing of the last reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA 2004), and the coming second Trump administration to analyze, critique, and make recommendations on how to improve special education services in our country’s K-12 schools.

_ _ _ _ _

·       October 5, 2024  Breaking Down the Wall Between General and Special Education Teachers in Our Schools: How Organizational Missteps Create Classroom Barriers

This Blog discusses the institutionalized wall between General Education and Special Education Teachers that has existed since Students with Disabilities were fully included in our nation’s public schools in the mid-1970s. Organized in five “columns,” the Blog identifies bricks that need to be dislodged (i.e., changed) so that the Wall can come down. Many of the recommendations focus on changing staff and administrative beliefs, policies, procedures, or practices.

_ _ _ _ _

·       May 11, 2024  When a School’s Multi-Tiered System of Supports Needs Support: How Do You Motivate Educators and Avoid Educational Malpractice?

This Blog discusses the multi-tiered systems of support process, how to best prepare for MTSS Case Study meetings using six “First Things First” activities, the implications—through a Case Study—when these activities are not completed before an MTSS meeting, and what to do when staff refuse to prepare and participate in the MTSS process with intent and efficacy. The Blog asks, “Should school staff be cited, like doctors and nurses, for ‘Educational Malpractice’ when they have consciously and egregiously violated MTSS protocols and harmed students?”

_ _ _ _ _

·       April 13, 2024  Laundromats, Lawyers, Learning Loss, and Life: An Autobiographical Day in Education 

This Blog described an autobiographical day in the educational life of a school psychologist who works nationwide as a consultant. He reflects on the harsh and sometimes fixed realities he observed in a laundromat, on a special education due process conference call as an Expert Witness, and during his work in a rural school district with barely enough staff to address its students’ complex needs.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   Once again, today’s Blog closes out my 10th full year of writing these bi-monthly Blogs. Over the past 231 Blogs, we have tried to analyze current topics, reports, and practices in education, psychology, and organizational change, emphasizing effective practices that improve student, staff, school, and systems-level outcomes.

   The world has dramatically changed over the past ten years. . . our country has seen significant challenges and advances. . . and education—in its widely diverse areas—has selectively experienced innovation, inertia, stagnation, and regression.

   Rather than review an entire decade, this Blog reflected instead just on the past year, and the top areas that caught my attention. To do this, we clustered all 24 of this past year’s Blogs into organizational areas:

·       Theme 1: School Improvement: Changing Thinking, Processes, and Practices to Change Outcomes

·       Theme 2: Choosing Effective School-Wide Programs and Practices: Avoiding Media Hype While Facilitating Staff Consensus

·       Theme 3: Students’ Engagement, Behavioral Interactions, and Mental Health

·       Theme 4: Improving Multi-Tiered and Special Education Services: Bridging the General Education and Special Education Wall

   We hope that this analysis will help you to personally and professionally reflect on your year in Education. . . helped, perhaps, by revisiting a full Blog message or one that you missed.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

   Meanwhile. . . . as 2024 turns to 2025, and our students and colleagues return from their Holiday Break, I hope that your break was restful and filled with much cheer and joy.

   The “second half” of the school year gives us all an opportunity to rededicate ourselves to excellence and effectiveness. . . to improvement and success.

   If you experienced success during the first part of the school year, I hope that you continue to go “to the next level of excellence.”

   If you were not happy with your success—or need assistance with your next challenge, know that I am always available for a free “check-in” Zoom or conference call with you and your team.

   June will be here in six months. . . one way or the other.

   If you have a choice to act now or in June to improve your school or educational setting on behalf of your students or clients. . . which one will you choose?

   I look forward to hearing from you.

Happy New Year,

Howie

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

School Improvement Requires Changing Thinking, Not Just Changing Programs

The “Moneyball Thinking” Needed in Education

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

 

Dear Colleagues,

Introduction: Writing Federal Grants

   One of the things that I help districts and schools with is grant-writing.

   Grant-writing in education. . . especially when writing federal grants for the U.S. Department of Education. . . is not intuitive.

   Instead, it is definitely strategic, somewhat repetitive, and it has many layers of preparation and process.

   It is not like writing a novel. In fact, it is more like publishing a book of five to six different short stories with a thread of continuity running between them.

   Bottom Line: When you write a federal grant, you write for points.

 More specifically, each Request for Proposals (RFP) identifies the different sections required in the grant proposal, what each section must discuss, and how many points will be awarded in each section.

   Thus, the grant proposal is eventually written section-by-section. . . making sure that each section will receive the maximum number of points... even as the “story” of the proposed grant is not described logically and sequentially.

   And when a proposal is evaluated by the U.S. Department of Education’s grant reviewers, they similarly read each section separately. . . awarding points independently for each section. Indeed, if something required in Section A is “answered” in the proposal’s Section C, the reviewers do not go back to Section A (where that information was missing) and recalculate the score.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

The Shortage of Mental Health Providers in our Schools

   A recent U.S. Department of Education grant focused on the mental health needs of students across the country, and the shortage of trained mental health providers in our schools. The primary goal of the grant was to provide additional funds to help states and districts attract, train, and retain more mental health practitioners.

   The Department recently awarded 23 of these grants totaling approximately $19 million.

   Critically, many of the grant proposals that were not selected lost points because (a) the submitting district or school already had enough mental health practitioners. . . based on the number of enrolled students and the nationally-recommended ratios of students-to-practitioners; or (b) they did not demonstrate how they were going to retain the practitioners attracted by the grant money. . . after the five-year grant was over and the supplemental money was gone.

   The fact that. . . perhaps due to the pandemic or other local conditions. . . these grant-applying districts had more students with more mental health needs (when compared, for example, to their pre-pandemic years or nearby districts), was irrelevant to the grant reviewers.

_ _ _ _ _

   The grant process aside, for districts with “enough” mental health practitioners, it typically is not about finding more money to hire more staff. It is more about objectively evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of how the current practitioners are being used.

   Indeed, I know districts with schools that each have one or more full-time counselors, a full-time social worker, and a full-time school psychologist. . . in addition to a full complement of special education teachers and, sometimes, a shared applied behavior specialist or behavioral interventionist.

   Many times, they truly do not need more staff. They need to re-think how they are using and teaming the existing staff.

   I also know districts that. . . when you really look at their budgets and their (lack of) collaboration with community agencies. . . have enough money and/or potential community resources to effectively address their students’ mental health needs.

   What is “missing” is the willingness and/or the skill to modify how they prioritize and allocate money to mental health positions or externally-relevant contracts.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

“Moneyball Thinking” is often Missing in Education

   Clearly, I am using these mental health grants and the need for more mental health practitioners as but one example of how our districts and schools often think and run.

   Indeed, I could be similarly talking about, for example: (a) effective instruction and intervention in literacy; (b) how to successfully transition all students from one grade level to another. . . ensuring that their academic or social-emotional needs are addressed on Day 1 of the new school year; or (c) ways to improve students’ interpersonal and self-control skills as applied to peer-on-peer teasing, taunting, bullying, and harassment.

   But in these conversations, the importance of embracing—metaphorically—a “Moneyball Mentality” while completing a well-designed needs assessment is paramount.

   According to Wikipedia (with edits):

Moneyball is a 2011 American biographical sports drama film about the Oakland Athletics baseball team's 2002 season and their general manager Billy Beane's attempts to assemble a competitive team with half (or even a third) as much money as his rivals. In the film, Beane (played by Brad Pitt) and his deputy Peter Brand (played by Jonah Hill) scour the major leagues for undervalued talent by taking a sophisticated sabermetric approach to scouting and analyzing players, triggering skepticism and resentment within the baseball community.

 

Sabermetrics (originally SABRmetrics) is the original or blanket term for sports analytics, the empirical analysis of baseball, especially the development of advanced metrics based on baseball statistics that measure in-game activity. The term is derived from the movement's progenitors, members of the Society for American Baseball Research (SABR), founded in 1971, and was coined by Bill James, who is one of its pioneers and considered its most prominent advocate and public face.

 

The term “moneyball” is used for the practice of using metrics to identify "undervalued players" and sign them to what ideally will become "below market value" contracts, which debuted in the efforts of small market teams to compete with the much greater resources of big market ones.

 

   According to historicbaseball.com:

As we reflect on the ongoing influence of Moneyball and data-driven decisions in baseball, it’s clear that this is not just a passing trend but a fundamental shift in how the game is understood, played, and enjoyed. The marriage of data and baseball has not only transformed the sport but has also enriched it, adding depth and complexity to America’s pastime. Moneyball might have started as a novel approach by a small-market team, but it has blossomed into a movement that has reshaped the very fabric of baseball.

 

This exploration of Moneyball’s enduring legacy provides a comprehensive understanding of how data-driven strategies have reshaped baseball. From on-field tactics to front office decisions, and from player development to fan engagement, the impact of analytics is profound and pervasive. As baseball continues to evolve, the lessons of Moneyball will undoubtedly continue to influence its future, ensuring the game remains both a cherished tradition and a modern, dynamic sport.

_ _ _ _ _

   The point here for education?

   While districts and schools do collect, analyze, and sometimes use their data (often because it is required by their state department of education and the U.S. Department of Education). . . my sense—from working with schools across the country for 40+ years—is that they often use data randomly or haphazardly, their analyses are not always incisive or decisive, and they rarely successfully apply the data for meaningful and sustained change.

   At best, while districts may collect and analyze systems, school, staff, and student data. . . they rarely use sophisticated data analytics.

   Moreover, education as a whole has not yet experienced the pervasive, transformative “Moneyball” internalization of mindset, methods, and management that Bill James, Billy Beane, and Peter Brand inaugurated.

   Indeed, we have “large market” (usually, urban or county) districts that have too much data, and do not know how to synthesize them to their most-meaningful “least common denominators.”

   And, we have many “small market” (usually, rural or small, incorporated town) districts that do not have the resources to fully analyze their data to the same end.

   Said differently: If we keep doing the “same old” analyses, we will continue to use the “same old” methods, and continue to get the “same old” (and unhappy) results.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Right Now: The Best Time to Conduct a Needs Assessment

   Right now. . . as districts begin to plan and budget for the next school year, and schools are asked to evaluate their status to project their 2025 to 2026 needs. . . this is the best time to objectively conduct a needs assessment in the one or two areas either of most concern and/or most impact.

   This could certainly focus on the specific areas suggested above. . . whether your mental health professionals are working effectively and efficiently, literacy, transitioning student data and outcomes from one year to the next, improving students’ interpersonal and self-control skills as related to teasing, taunting, bullying, and harassment.

   Or it could go “bigger,” to look at, for example: (a) the efficacy of your multi-tiered early intervention and special education services; (b) how your SEL activities or program are integrated into school safety and climate, classroom management and engagement, and student behavior; (c) the interface, collaboration, and impact between district and school administrators and leaders; (d) how data are being used to truly understand and impact curriculum, instruction, and student progress.

   But the Needs Assessment may need to be comprehensive. . . it may be best completed by an outside expert. . . and it definitely needs to be done by someone with a Moneyball Mentality and Methods.

   These methods should include:

·       A Historical and Current Status evaluation, including a psychoeducational and ecological assessment of the current problem, and three (four, with the pandemic) years of longitudinal data;

·       A Strengths and Assets, Weaknesses and Limitations, Opportunities and Resources; and Threats and Barriers (SWOT) analysis;

·       Audits of the school and schooling areas relevant to the problem (and its potential solutions), including an internal (school/district) and external (community and beyond) Personnel Skill and Expertise assessment; and

·       A Gap Analysis and Closing-the-Gap Action Plan.

_ _ _ _ _

   All of this collectively should:

·       Analyze student, staff, and schools’ history, status, gaps, and needs in the area of concern;

·       Identify the approaches, activities, and initiatives that are working and that need to be maintained or extended;

·       Identify the approaches, activities, and initiatives that are not working and need to be phased out, retired, or discontinued;

·       Identify the service, support, and intervention gaps that are resulting in unmet student needs. . . determine their root causes, and research and link proactive, strategic, or intensive actions to address the needs and causes; and 

·       Complete audits to determine how to best align curricular, intervention, technological, and staffing resources and solutions to meet as many student needs as possible.

   While an outside-expert Needs Assessment is a financial investment for a district or school, it is also a critical investment in the success of a district or school, and its students and staff.

   But this investment also typically provides financial returns. . . relative, for example, to the need to pay for (a) more costly and intensive services and supports; (b) more specialized interventions and personnel; or (c) new staff recruitment, interviewing, and training to replace other staff who have resigned because they are unhappy with a district or school’s progress or commitment to excellence.

   Moreover, a district’s or school’s success also often helps its reputation in the community. . . a key predictor, for example, of residents’ support of local education-related taxes or bond issues for the district when they come up.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   This Blog discussed the results of a recent U.S. Department of Education grant program focused on the mental health needs of students across the country, and the shortage of trained mental health providers in our schools. We shared that some districts did not receive this grant because they actually have enough mental health practitioners. . . they are just not using them effectively or efficiently.

   We next talked about the need for educators to adopt “Moneyball Thinking” relative to their current school improvement thinking and practices. Using the 2011 film dramatizing how the Oakland Athletics major league baseball team used data analytics to revolutionize how it selected its players as a metaphor, we suggest that education needs to similarly rethink its data analysis applications to revolutionize its practices.

   Finally, we connected and applied this new thinking to the Needs Assessment process in schools, advocating for changes in this process so that student, staff, school, and system outcomes can be significantly improved.

_ _ _ _ _

   I hope that this Blog has been insightful, motivating you to reflect on your current (and past) school improvement and success practices, while rethinking how they might be transformed by “Moneyball Thinking.”

   I am constantly rethinking and revalidating how I analyze and apply the information and data collected through Needs Assessment and other consultation-related activities. Given this, I know that—in partnership with the districts and schools with whom I work—we have helped thousands of districts go “to the next level of excellence” relative to their practices and, more importantly, their student, staff, school, and system outcomes.

   As noted above, this is the best time of the year to conduct a Needs Assessment in either your most troublesome areas, or the areas where you want to extend and solidify your emerging successes.

   If you and your team would like to talk with me, please feel free to e-mail or call me, and we can schedule a free first consultation session.

   I hope to hear from you soon.

Best,

Howie

 

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

Delegating Duties and Decisions in a Shared Leadership School

Avoiding Staff Reservations or Resentment

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

 

Dear Colleagues,

Effective delegation is critical to administrators’ success. Delegating properly can empower staff and give them leadership experiences and decision-making control, allowing them to exhibit agency over important stakes. Yet, our research shows that, if not done effectively and at the right time, staff can view delegated decision-making as a burden that they would prefer to avoid. Knowing when, when not, and how to delegate helps administrators navigate this process effectively without paying an interpersonal price.

 

Hayley Blunden and Mary Steffel (with minor modifications)

_ _ _ _ _

Introduction

   When implementing a building-wide academic or school discipline, classroom management, and student engagement initiative, it is essential to work from a systemic, ecological, whole-school-improvement perspective. This is because classrooms’ academic/instructional and classroom management/student engagement processes are interdependent.

   I have demonstrated this for over forty years in the field by asking educators three simple questions:

·       Do you have students in your classrooms who are behaviorally acting out because of academic struggles?

·       Do you have other students in your classrooms who are academically struggling because of social, emotional, or behavioral challenges?

·       When you have an academically struggling student or a behaviorally challenging student, which is which based on why are they having these difficulties?

   Consistently, the answer to the first two questions is, “Yes.”

   The answer to the third question. . . after some thought and reflection on the interdependence of students’ academic and behavioral classroom performance. . . is:

   “I don’t know. It could be an academic or social, emotional, behavioral problem. . . or both.”

   And that’s the point.

   Before schools implement school-wide academic initiatives, they must look at how their school’s current discipline, classroom management, and student engagement processes are impacting their students’ academic instruction, learning, and mastery. . . and how the new initiative might positively or adversely impact these same processes.

   Similarly, before schools implement school discipline, classroom management, and student engagement initiatives, they must evaluate the impact of their existing academic program. . . and how the new initiative might positively or adversely impact these same processes.

_ _ _ _ _

   For me, the strategic planning for any school initiative. . . indeed, for all school improvement activities. . . involves a shared, collaborative leadership structure and process.

   And this shared leadership structure and process requires staff involvement, commitment, and productivity. . . and the delegation of certain duties and decisions by school administrators to school staff.

   And there’s the rub.

   How do administrators best delegate duties and decisions to school staff— to individuals, teams, grade levels, departments, committees, or everyone in the entire organization—so that they embrace them rather than (as in the quote above) “paying an interpersonal price” because they are seen as “burdens to avoid?”

   In this Blog, we will describe (a) the essential structure and process in a shared, collaborative leadership school; (b) recent research reported by Hayley Blunden and Mary Steffel on how to effectively delegate duties and decisions to staff members; and (c) how to apply the two together.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Expanding on the Shared Leadership School

   As emphasized above, there are two essential elements in a successful Shared Leadership School: (a) a formal and well-organized shared leadership structure, and (b) differentiated decision-making processes.

   While virtually no administrator would question this, most districts and schools have a loose shared leadership structure (if they have one at all), and they use decision-making processes that vary—sometimes unpredictably—over time and across different situations.

   Critically, the shared leadership structure should incorporate the science-to-practice components that (a) facilitate sound strategic planning and school improvement at the student, teacher, and classroom levels; and (b) result in successful and effective school and schooling outcomes.

   The differentiated decision-making processes need to use research, experience, and common sense so that they can be implemented flexibly to adapt to specific student, staff, and school questions and needs.

_ _ _ _ _

The Shared Leadership School Structure

   Based on long-standing science-to-practice studies, there are seven interdependent areas that help produce positive, sustained, and meaningful school and schooling outcomes (see Figure 1 below):

·       Area 1. Strategic Planning and Organizational Analysis and Development

·       Area 2. Multi-Tiered Problem-Solving and Systems of Support (MTSS)

·       Area 3. Professional Development, Supervision, Coaching, and Accountability       

·       Area 4. Academic Instruction, Assessment, Intervention, and Achievement (Positive Academic Supports and Services—PASS)

·       Area 5. Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Instruction, Assessment, Intervention, and Self-Management (Social-Emotional Learning/ Positive Behavioral Support System—SEL/PBSS)

·       Area 6. Parent and Community Involvement, Training, Support, and Outreach

·       Area 7. Data Management, Evaluation, and Efficacy

Figure 1.

_ _ _ _ _

   In a Shared Leadership School, the first six of these respective areas are overseen by specific school-level committees or teams (see Table 1 below). The last area is an embedded responsibility for all of these committees or teams.

   (Critically, this shared leadership committee “blueprint” may be adapted given the size, needs, or challenges within a specific school. Moreover, we certainly recognize the presence and importance of other teams—for example, grade-level teams—that also exist in effective schools.)

Table 1.

   Briefly describing these committees or teams:

   Led by the School Principal, the School Leadership Team (SLT) is primarily responsible for overseeing activities related to the Strategic Planning and Organizational Analysis and Development component within the effective school and schooling model. Thus, it makes most of the site-based management and related organizational and fiscal decisions on behalf of the school, or recommends these to the administration. The SLT is ultimately responsible for planning (e.g., through the annual School Improvement Plan) and evaluating all school-level and student-specific outcomes.

   Because the core of the SLT involves the Chairs or Co-Chairs of the other school-level committee, they report on their respective committee meetings and activities so that all SLT members are duly briefed and can coordinate and collaborate, as appropriate, across school committees, teams, and staff. All of this facilitates a seamless “bottom-up” (i.e., from individual staff to grade levels to school-level committees to SLT and administration) communication process, as well as a “top-down” (i.e., from the administration on down) process.

   While the SLT is the oversight committee to which all other committees report, there still is a clear delineation between the mandated and district-designated responsibilities of the school’s administration and the shared leadership responsibilities of the SLT. In the former area, the SLT may be advisory to the school’s administration relative to certain administrative responsibilities, actions, and/or decisions where the administration must make final decisions. In the latter area, the SLT has many of its own decision-making responsibilities—still as agreed upon by the administration.

_ _ _ _ _

   The MTSS—Multi-Tiered System of Supports Team is responsible for developing, implementing, and evaluating the continuum of services, supports, strategies, and interventions, and the data-based problem-solving process to address the academic and/or social, emotional, and behavioral needs of students who are not responding to effective general education instruction and classroom management.

   The MTSS team is composed of the strongest academic and behavioral intervention specialists in and available to the school, and it is also often responsible for determining a student’s eligibility for more intensive special education services if strategic interventions, over time and consistent with IDEA, are not successful. As such, this multidisciplinary Team is largely staffed by related service and specialization professionals—including special education teachers, the school nurse, the School Principal, and relevant others.

   Given all of this, this committee is largely responsible for the school and School Improvement Plan’s Problem Solving, Teaming, and Consultation Processes component and activities, but this committee’s activities clearly overlap with other committees, especially those focused on the school’s core academic instruction and social, emotional, and behavioral programming for all students.

_ _ _ _ _

   The Professional Development/Teacher Support and Mentoring Committee oversees, facilitates, and evaluates the school’s professional development (PD), and formal and informal collegial supervision and support activities. These activities should help all staff feel professionally and personally connected to the school and its organizational, planning, instruction, and continuous improvement processes, and motivate them to interact instructionally and personally with students and each other at the highest levels of effectiveness.

   With goals and outcomes connected to the School Improvement Plan, this committee helps to evaluate the short- and long-term implementation and outcomes of the school’s PD program, making recommendations to ensure that all PD initiatives (a) are delivered using appropriate adult learning approaches; and (b) implemented so that staff receive the depth of training, job-embedded practice, supervision and feedback, and time needed to be successful. Ultimately, this committee facilitates a process such that the information and knowledge provided during any PD training transfers into instructional skill and confidence over time, and that the school’s PD program and process collectively results in meaningful student outcomes.

_ _ _ _ _

   The Professional Development/Teacher Support and Mentoring Committee also helps welcome and orient staff who are new to the building each year, coordinates the teacher mentoring program for teachers who are new to the profession, and guides others who have completed this induction process and are moving toward earning tenure or continuing appointments. In addition, this committee stays abreast of new pedagogical or technological advances in the field, periodically briefing the faculty on these new approaches and how they can improve the school and schooling process.

_ _ _ _ _

   The Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment Committee looks at the most effective ways to teach and infuse the primary academic areas of literacy, mathematics, written/oral expression, and science to all students in the school throughout the instructional process and day. Meeting on at least a monthly basis with goals and outcomes connected to the School Improvement Plan, this committee also oversees the implementation of new and other existing district- and building-level curricula into the classroom such that they are most effectively taught to all students.

   The membership of this committee includes representatives from every grade or instructional/ teaching team or level, including representatives from every intervention support or consultation group in the school and administrators. Many times, this Committee extends from the school-level up to the district level, and from the school-level down to the grade (or instructional team) level and individual teachers’ classrooms. As such, this “Committee” often is as differentiated as the curricula being taught in the school and, in large schools, it may have curriculum-specific subcommittees or other organizational arrangements, as needed, to facilitate the instruction and achievement of all students.

_ _ _ _ _

   The School Climate and Student Discipline Committee is the building-level committee that oversees the school’s positive behavioral supports and interventions, school discipline, behavior management, and school safety processes and activities. Meeting on at least a monthly basis with goals and outcomes connected to the School Improvement Plan, this committee looks at the most effective ways to facilitate positive interpersonal, social problem solving, and conflict resolution skills and interactions across students and staff such that students feel connected to the school, engaged in classroom activities, and safe across the school’s common areas.

   This Committee also addresses large-scale issues of teasing, taunting, bullying, harassment, and physical aggression—working to prevent these situations across the student body, and responding to them with strategic or intensive interventions as needed. In addition, the Committee oversees crisis prevention for the school, and is prepared to intervene when crises occur. Finally, this Committee works to involve school support staff (e.g., custodians, cafeteria workers, secretaries, bus drivers) in its efforts, and it reaches out to parents and community agencies, and other community leaders in a collaborative effort to extend its activities to home and community.

_ _ _ _ _

   The Parent Involvement/Community Outreach Committee is responsible for planning, implementing, and evaluating the school’s parent and community outreach goals and activities as written into the school’s annual School Improvement Plan. As such, based ongoing needs assessments of the school’s different parent and community groups and constituencies, and analyses of their resources, interest, and capacity, this committee focuses on (a) establishing and sustaining the collaborative approaches needed to address students’ academic and social, emotional, or behavioral needs in home or community settings, and (b) increasing the support, involvement, and leadership of parents, community agencies, and other organizations in accomplishing the school’s mission and goals. 

   Consisting of a representative cross-section of staff from within a school, this Committee collaborates with and supports its school’s PTA leaders and members. This Committee also collaborates with other community agencies and organizations, establishing partnerships with relevant businesses and foundations, and becoming, formally or informally, the public face and public relations unit for the school.

_ _ _ _ _

Three Embedded Committee Structure Principles

   Critically, there are three embedded principles in establishing these teams or committees:

·       All instructional and support staff are on at least one school-level committee;

·       Every committee (except, perhaps, the Leadership Team) has representatives from every grade level (for elementary and middle schools) or departmental level (for some middle and all high schools); and

·       Every committee (except the Leadership Team) is co-chaired by instructional and/or support staff, and these co-chairs form the core of the Leadership Team (administrators are ex officio to all committees)

   This, once again, brings us back to the theme of this Blog. . . how to utilize these principles and establish these committees so that staff see them as advantageous—to themselves, their students, and the school’s culture and operation—and willingly participate and collaborate in the shared leadership process.

_ _ _ _ _

   For those interested in a more detailed discussion in this specific area, we show how to implement a shared school leadership committee structure and process in our popular monograph:

Shared Leadership through School-Level Committees: Process, Preparation, and First-Year Action Plans

[CLICK HERE for More Information]

_ _ _ _ _

   Moreover, we have discussed this committee blueprint in a previous Blog on staff development:

May 27, 2023

“Aligning the Seven Areas of Continuous School Improvement to Teacher Leadership and Advancement”

[CLICK HERE to Read this Blog]

_ _ _ _ _

Differentiating School Decision-Making Processes

   In a Shared Leadership School, administrators differentiate among the common decisions that typically occur on a daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, and annual basis.

   They then (a) determine how these decisions will be made and by whom; (b) share and confirm this information with the School Leadership Team; and (c) discuss them with the entire staff—providing training in how effective committees and teams run, and how sound decisions are made. . . even when they are complex or controversial.

   Focusing on the “how and the who” above, below are some ways that decisions are made by small and large groups in a school.

   Critically, staff need to understand that the absence or abdication of making a needed decision is actually a decision to either maintain the status quo or to allow (or force) someone else to make the decision.

   While this should not pressure staff into premature or rash decisions, it also should not routinely occur because, for example, (a) staff are unable to effectively discuss—or want to avoid making—complex or controversial decisions; or (b) a small number of staff are overtly or covertly “threatening” to undermine a majority decision.

   Conversely, then, it is assumed that school and schooling decisions that are made will be supported and followed by all staff—even when they disagree with the decision, or it was not their first preference.

   This is not to suggest that decision-making is dictatorial. Indeed, staff have the right to “agree to disagree,” express and document their concerns and apprehensions, and—in some cases—ask administrators to revisit a decision. In the latter case, decisions that are illegal, unethical, potentially unprofessional, or contrary to the common (student) good should be revisited. (Note that we are not discussing personnel decisions here.)

   While the assumptions above are implicit and universal, they may still need to be discussed explicitly— in general or when specific decisions are “on the table”—by school groups, committees, or with the entire staff.

   Different decisions in a Shared Leadership School:

·       Command Decisions: Decisions that are made by school administrators, largely on their own or due to their authority or official roles or responsibilities in the school.

_ _ _ _ _

·       Expert Decisions: Decisions that are approved by school administrators, but are made by (for example, educational, psychological, pedagogical, or legal) Experts who are working in the school or who have been consulted or researched by the administrators.

_ _ _ _ _

·       Consultative Decisions: Decisions that are made by school administrators, after consulting with a within-school team, committee, grade level or department, or individual staff member—or someone outside the school. Administrators here can make their own decisions; they are not bound by the information provided during the consultation.

_ _ _ _ _

·       Consensus Decisions: Decisions that are made by informally scanning or polling a group. . . where an apparent majority of the group agree with a specific direction or option. A consensus decision is as binding as one determined by a formal vote, and individuals should be allowed to request a formal vote and additional discussion if desired.

_ _ _ _ _

·       Voting Decisions: These are decisions where a formal vote (e.g., by a show of hands or “secret” ballot) is taken on a decision or a “motion on the floor” (if, for example, the school uses Robert’s Rules of Order for decision-making).

Administrators, the School Leadership Team, or school staff may decide—in advance—that some decisions will require a simple majority (i.e., 51% of the vote) to “pass,” while other decisions will require a “super-majority” (i.e., 60% or 67% of the vote). In very rare cases, a unanimous (100%) vote standard may be used.

When multiple options (e.g., selecting one curriculum from five options) are being weighed at the same time, the “standard for winning” should be determined or agreed-upon in advance. This, for example, may involve (a) an absolute vote—where the option with the most votes (regardless of the number or percentage) “wins;” (b) a weighted vote—where the options are given points based on each staff member’s ranked preferences, and the most-preferred option wins; or (c) a “drop-out” vote—where there are a series of votes, and the option with the lowest score in each “round” is dropped-out. 

_ _ _ _ _

·       Minority Decisions: This decision typically is not planned, and should be avoided. It occurs when one individual or a small (but, for example, vocal, powerful, or regarded) number of individuals vote counter to the majority, and/or voice a dissent after the votes and decision have been announced. At this point, in deference to these individuals, the rest of the group acquiesce to their dissent and vacate the vote.

If this “if I don’t get my way, I’ll take the ball and go home” tactic or strategy is allowed, then the “minority” could be empowered, and the integrity of a school’s decision-making process will be weakened or damaged.

The “antidote” here is to (a) reassert the expectation that the everyone will respect and support all final decisions; (b) review, in advance, the voting procedure—along with the standard of winning; and (c) ensure that the formal vote does not begin until sufficient discussion has occurred.

_ _ _ _ _

   When schools effectively implement and consistently sustain these two essential Shared Leadership School components—a formal and well-organized shared leadership structure, and differentiated decision-making processes—they create a culture and mindset where staff recognize that their involvement in school committees and relevant school decisions is:

·       A relevant part of their professional role and responsibility; 

·       Beneficial to their professional and personal well-being and success; and

·       An important contribution to the success of the school and its student body.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Research: How to Strategically Delegate Duties and Decision-Making

   Blunden and Steffel, in a September 10, 2024 Harvard Business Review article, completed a progressive series of controlled experiments and surveys with 2,478 participants from across the United States.

   They found that:

Delegating decision-making responsibilities, compared with asking employees for advice and maintaining decision-making responsibility, had significant interpersonal costs for delegators. But we also found material ways that managers can alter how and when they delegate decisions, so that employees feel empowered rather than burdened.

The results of the first set of these systematically-completed studies indicated:

·    Study 1. When recalling past incidents with their supervisors, staff who were delegated a task versus asked for their advice were less willing to help the same individual with a future decision–-regardless of the positive or negative outcome of the decision.

_ _ _ _ _

 

·    Study 2. As part of a research study, when asked to decide between two administrative candidates during an on-line chat, staff were more likely to hire the individual who asked their advice during an interview challenge than the candidate delegated a choice to them.

_ _ _ _ _

 

·       Study 3. As part of the next research study, when asked whether they wanted to continue working with their team leader during an online team chat, staff who had been delegated to during the chat were more likely to end their relationship with the leader when compared to staff whose leader asked for their advice.

_ _ _ _ _

   Blunden and Steffel concluded:

It turns out that the people in our studies thought being asked to make a decision was less fair than being asked for advice, and that this sense of unfairness made them view delegators more negatively. It may seem unfair when someone asks a colleague to take on decision responsibility—and its potential burdens—when the colleague views that responsibility as rightfully the requester’s to shoulder.

_ _ _ _ _

   Given these research outcomes, Blunden and Steffel next investigated the ways that supervisors or managers could delegate tasks or decisions without seeming unfair.

·    Study 4. In a controlled experiment, 578 participants were asked to imagine being asked by a supervisor either to make a decision or to give advice regarding laying off colleagues (a negative outcome) or awarding colleagues a bonus (a positive one). The participants were then asked to indicate how fair they felt the supervisor making the request was.

For those asked to make a layoff decision, Blunden and Steffel again found that participants whose supervisors delegated the decision to them (versus asking for their advice) were less willingness to provide help with future decisions. Yet, when asked to award colleagues’ bonuses, there was no difference in the willingness to help supervisors with future decisions between the participants delegated this decision versus simply asked for their advice.

 

In their follow-up analyses, the researchers found that participants told to make a positive outcome decision (i.e., awarding a bonus) felt that this was fairer than being told to make a negative outcome decision (i.e., laying someone off).

_ _ _ _ _

·        Study 5. Critically, the results of next study demonstrated that supervisors were not rated down when they asked staff to make decisions that were relevant to them and that were consistent with their work roles and functions. In this situation, staff saw the delegation of the decision to them as “fair.”

_ _ _ _ _

   Blunden and Steffel summarized all of their studies’ results:

When the decision outcome has a high potential to have negative consequences, is outside of the employee’s scope of responsibilities, and primarily affects others, there are likely to be interpersonal costs of decision delegation, and managers looking to utilize their employees’ knowledge should ask for advice instead. When these elements are reversed, transferring decision responsibility is likely to be less interpersonally costly and might provide employees a better venue to test out their decision-making skills.

Our work suggests that those seeking to delegate decisions may benefit from pursuing strategies that make their requests seem fairer. For example, delegators could consider framing a decision within the scope of their colleague’s responsibilities or could articulate how they will take active responsibility for any fallout from an employee’s choice.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Implications for Administrators in a Shared Leadership School

   Adapting the research summary paragraph immediately above into “action steps,” administrators would be well-advised to delegate duties and decisions to their staff that:

·       Are consistent with their existing (or imminent) roles, responsibilities, and job descriptions;

·       Bring their knowledge, skills, and competence to the “next level” of excellence and efficacy;

·       Have a high potential to contribute to and positively extend their success and impact on students and other colleagues; 

·       Have a high potential to identify and eliminate existing ineffective strategies and/or time-consuming or counter-productive tasks; and 

·       Are fair and equitable with respect to what other staff/colleagues are being asked to contribute.

   All of these should be accomplished by asking staff to help build the school’s Shared Leadership system, by actively soliciting and judiciously using staff advice and recommendations, and by ensuring that new responsibilities are counter-balanced with the release of existing ones.

   Moreover, relative to any new duties or decision-making responsibilities, administrators should publicly commit to and consistently demonstrate that they “have their staff’s back.” While mis-steps or mistakes may occur as staff get used to new delegated roles or decision-making and leadership responsibilities, administrators need to focus on how to succeed “next time” through analysis, adjustment, advancement, and improvement.

_ _ _ _ _

   As noted above, when schools effectively implement a well-organized shared leadership structure, and staff learn and apply sound and differentiated decision-making processes, staff embrace their new shared leadership roles and responsibilities because they enhance their professional and personal success, and that of their students, colleagues, and school.

   Indeed, through experience, they recognize that:

·       Schools and districts are stronger when experienced and talented people work together on shared short- and long-term goals, actions, activities, and accomplishments; and 

·       Having the responsibility to make some school and schooling decisions gives them an active voice in how the school is run, as well as what their future expectations, assignments, roles, and contributions might be.

   Ultimately, this is a win-win for both administrators and staff.

   When new roles and decision-making responsibilities are communicated and shared successfully by administrators, they have more resources and people contributing to all of the tasks that go into running a successful school.

   When administrators work as collaborative colleagues with staff, staff feel more trusted, involved, informed, and aware of the complexities of a school and the job of their administrators.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   This Blog discussed the significant benefits of having a Shared Leadership structure and process in every school across the country. The structure was defined by the seven research-to-practice components evident in all successful schools. These were aligned to six school-level committees—each responsible for their part of the school success operation.

   The process was defined by describing the different ways to make school and schooling decisions. This is critical as successful Shared Leadership occurs when staff, who serve on committees, learn how to make decisions within those committees—and elsewhere in the school—on their own and on behalf of their colleagues.

   Knowing that some staff may initially be uncomfortable in a Shared Leadership School, we summarized the research in a recent Harvard Business Review article by Blunden and Steffel titled, “How to Delegate Decision-Making Strategically.”

   This culminated in recommendations on how school administrators can best delegate duties and decisions to school staff so that they embrace their shared leadership responsibilities—rather than seeing them as unwanted or burdensome, and their administrators as unfair or insensitive.

_ _ _ _ _

   I hope that this Blog has either reinforced your current approaches to shared leadership in the settings where you work, or has opened a “new door” to you as to its benefits and features.

   As we near the mid-point of the school year, know that I continue to work on-site and virtually with schools and districts across the country—not just in strategic planning and the implementation of shared leadership approaches... but also in the areas of:

·       Enhancing school climate and student engagement;

·       Teaching students interpersonal, social problem-solving, conflict prevention and resolution, and emotional awareness, control, communication, and coping skills;

·       Implementing effective Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS); and

·       Implementing effective Tier 2 and Tier 3 services, supports, and interventions for students with challenging behavior.

   If you and your team would like to discuss any of these areas with me, please feel free to e-mail or call me, and we can schedule a free first consultation session.

   I hope to hear from you soon.

Best,

Howie

 

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]