Fullan’s (2004) Leading in a Culture of Change asks the reader to consider the statement “Information is not pertinent until people decide what it means and why it matters.” Also to consider “It is a mistake to focus on information rather than its use.” Oh how I wish someone had explained that to my maths teachers way back then. If only they had thought to spend time sharing the ’secret’ of the why as well as the how. Without a use, the information on how to do the procedures never turned into learning, I gained no knowledge from the time spent in class.

Education is now making the shift from an emphasis on distributing facts (information) to creating and sharing knowledge. And creating a culture of sharing is one of the jobs of a leader. Fullan suggests that the conditions have to be right in order for this to occur. Quality relationships is the key, of course.

What interested me the most in this chapter  was Fullan’s take on the relationship between good relationships and a culture of knowledge sharing.  He cited Dixon’s observation that

… the exchange of knowledge happens only in organizations that have a noncompetitive or a collaborative culture. It follows that the first thing you have to do is to fix the culture and then get people to share. But I have found that it’s the other way around. If people begin sharing ideas about issues they see as really important, the sharing itself creates a learning culture. I have, of course, inserted an important caveat in that sentence: “about issues they see as really important” (Dixon as cited in Fullan, 2004, p. 124).

It interested me to compare it with an earlier blog quote I had

… many persons express the conviction that effective human relationships improve communication far more than communication improves relationships. (Savage, 1989, p. 109)

Do they contradict each other? If so which is right? What needs to be tackled first; relationship-building or communication/sharing?

Its one of those cyclic issues and perhaps that’s one of the reasons that collaborative cultures don’t develop easily. No one knows if its OK to start or where to start. In fact my own experience (tacit knowledge!) has been exactly that, no one wants to be the first. This is one of the places in which TLs can really take a lead. Someone has to break the ice, step up to the plate, lay their cards on the table and we have the training to do it.

______________________________

http://www.flickr.com/photos/salmon/463619313/

Fullan, M. (2004). Building relationships. In Leading in a culture of change: Personal action guide and workbook (pp. 77-114). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Savage, W. (1989). Communication: Process and problems. In C. Riches & C. Morgan (Eds.), Human resource management in education (pp. 103-119). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

… thinking about leadership as a practice makes more sense than thinking about leadership as an expression of individual agency. Practices may be singular or group. Regarding leadership as a practice helps us to see teachers and principals as members of communities of practice within which knowledge is used  and exchanged to achieve goals with little regard for roles and positions. Within communities of practice, for example, leadership activity takes place at the level of the community rather than at the level of individuals. (Sergiovanni, 2005, p. 49)

As a faculty member of an alternative, democratically aligned school, this definition interests me greatly. It fits very well with what happens in the classes and amongst the students. However this is not practised amongst the staff and wider community. (At times it becomes obvious where we have not applied the philosophy of the school beyond the students and it always hits me hard. Q. How can this be? A. No time to consciously examine this issue, complete focus by teachers on student/class day-to-day issues.)

Sergiovanni’s definition of leadership I find strengthening. It is not about someone giving you permission to lead. It’s not about getting out in front and saying, “I’m going to lead you.” Its not about roles and positions or positioning at all, it’s about action. I can relate to this, I have quietly taken action this year and begun to lead by walking the talk, and by saying, “I’d like to [do] … ”

What would our school be like if we all adopted a leadership of practice? Well it would improve, it has already. This year I’ve won a literacy grant, I’ve got parents now raising money for the library, I’ve got library sessions for the classes on a weekly basis, … things are changing and for the better. How to encourage the others? Well it always seems to come back to building relationships. Sergiovanni quotes Lambert as suggesting that leadership is a ‘pattern of relationships’.

Leadership is a reciprocal process that enables participants in an educational community to construct meaning that leads toward a shared purpose of schooling’ (Lambert as cited in Sergiovanni, 2005, p. 51)

Building trusting relationships and sharing, acting with moral purpose always …all very hopeful business. =)

____________________

Photo from: http://www.morguefile.com

Sergiovanni, T. (2005). Leadership as entitlement. In Strengthening the heartbeat: Leading and learning together in schools (pp. 41-54). San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.

What you are stands over you the while, and thunders so that I cannot hear what you say to the contrary

–Ralph Waldo Emerson

That old truth that actions speak louder than words. It is an idea I am considering again within the leadership unit of my TL course. In the case of leadership within a school, stakeholders will react more to the leader’s behaviours than they will to what that leader has to say. This is very important to understand in the communication within a school. Parents often complain about the lack of communication or the quality of communication from schools. Yet you can publish pages of reports and updates in the school newsletter and they don’t read them. This has always perplexed me. Perhaps without being able to express it, what parents are looking for is the behavioural communication not the written words.

We’ve been asked to read an article by W. Savage entitled “Communication: Process and problems” from Human Resource Management in Education. There was a paragraph that caught my eye in particular.

A school administrator’s demonstrated concern for the welfare of his staff and the pupils enrolled in a school will communicate his beliefs far more eloquently than any written or oral statement that he may provide concerning his belief in the dignity and worth of the individual. As a matter of fact, many persons express the conviction that effective human relationships improve communication far more than communication improves relationships. (Savage, 1989, p. 109)

I’m thinking this means then that a leader’s moral purpose is communicated through his actions far better than through speeches, articles or documents. It is of ultimate importance to ‘walk the talk’ and to constantly monitor one’s behaviour for consistency in communication.

The second important message within that quote is that of effective relationships building communication not the other way around. This may go a long way to answering why so many communication strategies (including a very detailed one developed at our school) never get off the ground. Without the relationships, it just can’t happen. So the question then is how to develop the relationships with school stakeholders — obviously it will involve some self-reflection on current behaviours on the part of the leaders (principal, TL, teachers).

I want to stop and think about my moral purpose and my relationship-building behaviours right now. I blogged about my moral purpose here — and looking back, strangely enough, I said I didn’t communicate this directly but hoped it would show through my actions. I was on the right track without knowing it, but conscious effort will, obviously, be more effective.

At this point my relationship-building behaviours are:

• I consciously stop and speak to parents I pass at school. I try to make a positive comment about their child’s use of the library or their reading habits. I want the parents to know that their child’s reading and use of information is important and important to me.
• I sometimes go out to the car-park and speak to parents about upcoming events or pass on information I think they might appreciate
• I quickly follow through on any requests for information/books from parents and also follow through on anything I say I will do in the school newsletter. I want to be seen as highly reliable.
• author events that invite and include parents

Are there other opportunities for the TL to build effective relationships with the parents?

• some computer tutoring sessions showing  parents how to use and access ICT’s the children are using
• sessions involving the children showing the parents how to use the ICTs!
• Reading challenges that involve adults as well as children
• attending some of the home group class meetings especially the lower primary groups

Parents do not habitually seek out school leaders (teachers, principals, TLs) to communicate with them unless they are dissatisfied. It is up to us to go beyond half-way, to get in amongst the parents, demonstrate our concerns and moral purpose and build some better relationships.

_____________________________

http://www.flickr.com/photos/micahe/2563154869/

Savage, W. (1989). Communication: Process and problems. In C. Riches & C. Morgan (Eds.), Human resource management in education (pp. 103-119). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

____________________________

Our first meeting involved only Step One – Mind-Setting (which needs to occur before the situation can be properly defined). It was very enlightening to get everyone’s perception of the problem/situation on to the table. Like the story of the blind men describing the elephant, it was important for everyone to see what everyone else assumed they were talking about. There was recognition of the complexity of the issue and that many were only considering one aspect of it. There was recognition that perhaps only symptoms of the actual situation had been dealt with in the past and so the actions were not successful. The picture became clearer as each member spoke around the circle and the the situation gained a seriousness it hadn’t had before; it became obvious that quick answers would not ‘fix it’ but that good decisions were possible.

The idea of information under-girding each step is one that I will have to further reinforce. We have talked about our feelings but now will need facts to base decisions on.

The most difficult aspect of the first meeting was for members to keep solutions out of the conversation when talking of their perceptions. I must be more strict about them not being verbalised at this point. I don’t want shortcuts to bias any definitions or criteria.

Just an interesting observation, but one I will address at the next meeting, is that of eye contact. I was surprised to see each member of the group when sharing their perceptions did not look at the group but spent the majority of the time making eye contact with me, the facilitator. I wonder if this is a hangover from ‘old school days’ when the student always addressed the teacher not the class’. Even the teachers in the working party did it. I tried to non-verbally encourage people to address the group by looking round at the group myself as each spoke, but that didn’t work. I’ll have to say directly.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/super_g/1671855523/

If only Rachel had told John that she was pregnant ..

If only Thorn said he had seen Ashley being comforted by Dallas (and jumped to a terrible conclusion) …

Anyways you get the drift. Not being open and honest can lead to drama but not to good teams or to good decisions. And I am very interested in having good decisions made.

I am preparing to facilitate a decision-making working party at school. It is my first time facilitating at school and the Situation-that-needs-attention (SITNA) is complex. I gave a presentation to the working group a fortnight ago about the 6 Step Core Decision Making Model as outlined by Harvey, Bearley and Corkrum in The Practical Decision-Maker. (This model was part of our course studies). The group has agreed to working through this model. In the first step, Mind-Set, the group is asked to address the circumstances and state of the situation. Getting the context right is my priority at this first meeting. The The Practical Decision-Maker authors state:

Often, you must deal with concerns about conflict, openness, trust, and communication as part of establishing a mind-set that is supportive of problem solving. (Harvey, Bearley and Corkrum, 2001, 21)

And I know this will be true so I am re-readng everything I own about effective communication and conflict management.

The soaps provided a good lesson about honest communication, other communication/conflict resolution gems I’ve revisited are from (a great book with an unfortunate title) Dealing with People You Can’t Stand: How to Bring out the Best in People at Their Worst –

• Poor communication/negative remarks often have positive intent – look for the underlying good purpose that was meant and acknowledge it ( don’t know what it is? make one up – communicator will either agree or make their good intent clear) Egs. want to get something done right, want acknowledgement for something done, want support.
• State your own positive intent. Tell people why you are telling them something before telling them. Directs more positive attention to your message.
• Whenever a discussion starts to degenerate into conflict, try to ascertain the reasons why people are for or against something.

I read on …

___________________________________________

Brinkman, R. and Kirschner, Rick. (1994). Dealing with people you can’t stand: How to bring out the best in people at their worst. McGraw Hill: New York.

Harvey, TR, Bearley, Wl & Corkrum, SM. (2001) “Core steps in decision making”, in The practical decision maker: A handbook for decision making and problem solving in organizations, The Scarecrow Press, Lanham, MD and London, pp. 17-34.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3208/2687076170_97c61fe8d6_m.jpg

When critically reflecting on things in this course, questions we are to ask ourselves are:

What do you think are the important features of …?

Why do you think that?

If you are correct, what would desirable effects be??

Why would these results be desirable?

What actions of yours would deliver those results?

Why do you think those actions would be effective?

So to begin …

The six step process of decision making starts with pre-prep work, ground work that I believe is often missing when groups are dealing with ’situations that need attention’. Helping people recognize and adjust their perception/feelings toward a problem or problems in general can empower a demoralized group to start afresh or at least to have another go at something rather than throwing their hands in the air. It can ‘bring them back to the table’.

Next the process brings objectivity to the ’situation that needs attention’ (SITNA) often a situation that until then has been charged with emotion and/or ego. The 80/20 ratio focusses on the four initial steps which clarify the situation and help to give a complete picture to often complex situations rather than trying to make things simple. This means the chance for better choices instead of ‘either/or’ decisions that no one is really satisfied with.

This leads to perhaps the feature that I see as the strongest; that decisions are reached by consensus not by a vote. Voting can leave certain people unconvinced of the solution and gives those people the power to cut off at the knees any action (based on the vote). I have seen this happen time and again. Consensus means that while not everyone is 100% convinced, they are at least in agreement enough to give the decision a go.

This brought to mind another article, A school Without a Principal, which described the staff’s decision-making process. They use a ‘fist-o-five’ consensus model that I think is brilliant (and has the bonus of feeling a bit pirate-y).

After discussion of a proposal, the facilitator calls for a fist-o-five vote. Five extended fingers signifies total support; four down to two indicates graduated degrees of support. Anyone who blocks a proposal (with a finger or a fist) must propose an alternative. We are encouraged to voice dissenting ideas; meetings are never boring … (Barnett, McKowen and Bloom, 1998, p. 49).

The advantage of having a team all pulling together is obvious — action.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dominik99/1403329318/

Barnett, D., McKowen, C., & Bloom, G. (1998). A School without a principal. Educational Leadership, 55(7), 48-49. Retrieved July 20, 2008, from ERIC database. (EJ563903)

Harvey, TR, Bearley, WL & Corkrum, SM 2001, ‘Core steps in decision making’, in The practical decision maker: A handbook for decision making and problem solving in organizations, The Scarecrow Press, Lanham, MD & London, pp. 17-34.

The statement that caught my attention the most was Adonis’s statement:

People falsely believe that email is communication. It’s not. Email is just a means of transferring information. It’s certainly not communication.

I have been coming to this conclusion myself, both as a TL at work and as a member of a team collaborating on an assignment for one of my subjects. Here’s my take on why emails are not communication.

Communication is meant to be two way. Emails get written and sent but that doesn’t mean they are received or read or responded to or that the content is understood.

Having a conversation via email even when the other party responds has complications. Like letter writing in days of old, it is hard to express the feeling, the weight or the intent of things you are trying to say. Even with the extensive use of emoticons (which can end up looking rather juvenile) nothing written can truly convey meaning like tone of voice, pauses, immediate clarification and feedback and the chance to hear the other person do the same.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/annabelb/533160375/