Mod 3 dis2
2
Katheryn Gonzales
Dec 20, 2022Dec 20, 2022 at 1:18pm
In my professional experience as a kindergarten teacher in a Title 1 elementary school, I have been through several programs that the district or my school has adopted. One specific program that has been especially difficult for the administration at my school to implement is the use of a Positive Behavior Intervention System (PBIS). PBIS is an evidence-based practice designed to support student needs and to create a positive, predictable, and safe environment for students. The staff at my school has been resistant to this change because of a lack of training, a misguided understanding of what PBIS requires, and a lack of implementation support from the administration. As a kindergarten teacher, the needs of our youngest learners in my school are not the same as those of fifth-grade students. Preschool and kindergarten teachers are frustrated with the lack of support specific to their student's needs.
According to Adams & Miskell (2016), trust from an educator's point of view can be characterized as "…a teacher's willingness to risk vulnerability based on the confidence that district administrators act benevolently, competently, openly, honestly, and reliably" (para. 9). The trust that teachers have for administration and district leaders is relational and formed by the observation and judgment of the actions they witness. To create trust and teacher buy-in, evidence-based research suggests the importance of communicating a clear vision, mission, values, and goals (Gurley et al., 2015). Another important evidence-based strategy that promotes trust and buy-in is transparency (Covey, 2009). According to Adams & Miskell (2016), high levels of trust come from openness, cooperation, and relationship. At the same time, low levels of trust come from limited information and a lack of shared knowledge.
Teacher pushback can deter the change process because unless a teacher sees or understands they need change, they will push back against the change. The first strategy I would employ to combat teacher pushback is to examine the need for change (Fullan, 2016). I would use the following strategy to fight teacher pushback, especially in the case of PBIS implementation at my current school. I suggest the school give more time for implementation to provide adequate resources and materials to each grade level. The adoption of a new program is not more important than the implementation of the program. According to Fullan (2016), the school needs to take a whole-system perspective by going back to the "four drivers," which are capacity building, collaborations, pedagogy, and systemness.
References
Adams, C. M., & Miskell, R. C. (2016). Teacher trust in district administration: A promising link of inquiry. Links to an external Links to an external site.
site. Journal of Leadership for Effective and Equitable Organizations, 52(4), 1-32. doi: 10.1177/0013161X16652202
Covey, S. (2009). How the best leaders build trust Links to an external site. Links to an external site. . LeadershipNow. Retrieved from
http://www.leadershipnow.com/CoveyOnTrust.html
Fullan, M. (2016). The new meaning of educational change (5th ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Gurley, D. K., Peters, G. B., Collins, L., & Fifolt, M. (2015). Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals: An Exploration of Key
Organizational Statements and Daily Practice in Schools. Journal of Educational Change, 16(2), 217–242.
Amanda Puryear
Dec 23, 2022Dec 23, 2022 at 7:04pm
My current district has experienced many changes over the past four years, from the new administration and conservators to new grants and curriculums. My program is one of these new programs. The gifted and talented program (GATE) is in its second year of relaunching. During its initial year, I had no support from the elementary campus, particularly from the campus principal. The gifted and talented program was not on the front burner of a district that is under the eye of state agencies. Other state initiatives like "reading academy" and grant programs that the district is a part of have taken a majority of professional development time from teachers. When I began the process of improving the program, gifted and talented was just "one more thing" on the teacher's plates, and there was resistance to getting trained in gifted and talented and in providing accommodation/implementing strategies for gifted and talented students. In order to gain some support, I focused on the data. After revamping the testing procedures of GATE, we increased the number of GATE students. This spurred the principal to take GATE seriously and begin the process of working GATE class into the master schedule.
Reflecting on this experience, two strategies that I could have used to gain more support is to be transparent and to have a mission for change. These two strategies work together to create an understanding of why the program and its changes were important and create a type of ownership in the change process (Gurley et al., 2015). Fullan (2016) discusses ten dos and don't when it comes to looking at change. One of these statements is not to assume that your version of what the change should be is the right one or the only one, something successful implantation of a plan for change evolves as more people begin to collaborate. The element of collaboration can help create buy-in from those individuals who are pushing back during implantation; sometimes, people simply want to be heard and involved. This will also create a sense of investment and ownership. Another factor that Fullan (2016) describes is pressure. This pressure can be applied by making the change implementation job-embedded, therefore making the change important to job success.
References
Fullan, M. (2016). The new meaning of educational change (5th ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Gurley, D.K., Peters, G.B., & Collins, L. (2015). Mission, vision, values, and goals: An Links to an external site. exploration of key organizational statements and daily practice in schools Links to an external site. . J ournal of Educational Change, 16(2), 217-242. doi:10.1007/s10833-014-9229-x