Building a Learning Organization

Ms. Mohr and Mr. Dichter outline the developmental stages that faculties go through en route to becoming learning organizations - reminding readers along the way that building consensus is not an end in itself but a starting place, a structure that works no miracles unless it is used wisely and well. WE HAD sensed for some time that something was wrong - site-based management had not been delivering the goods. We formed leadership teams. They met. Teaching and learning didn't change. Perhaps too much had been expected from simply the transfer of power, suggest Priscilla Wohlstetter and Susan Mohrman in an extensive study on the outcomes of sharing decision in schools. The idea was to improve education for students, but instead it seemed that there was always another meeting to attend and not much else was new. Wohlstetter and Mohrman looked at 30 schools in nine districts, each of which had at least four years of experience with school-based management. the theory flawed? Is the current wave of decentralization just another swing of the pendulum? they ask.1 Our own action research, added to the latest findings in the literature, paints a fuller picture. For more than 10 years we both were principals of alternative high schools in New York City, deeply involved in school reform. Our schools struggled incessantly with management, as it was called in the early days of Satellite Academy High School (Alan), and with consensus-based decision making at University Heights High School (Nancy). Our observations represent years of reflection on the process, some of which was joyous, some of which was not. The question for us is not Shared decision - when does it work and when does it not work? Rather, it's How do you develop site-based management to the point where it promotes rigor in teaching and learning? What is needed is a thorough understanding of a complex conceptual framework - one that requires continuing work and struggle to implement truly and honestly, but one that has the potential to genuinely transform what happens in classrooms for students. The observations that follow outline the developmental stages that faculties go through en route to becoming learning organizations. Of course, these stages aren't as clear-cut and neat as they sound on paper. We've lived through them, and we know how little can be predicted and how much can go wrong. We also know that building consensus is not an end in itself but a starting place, a structure that works no miracles unless it is used wisely and well. We know that leadership is essential to the success of this journey, and we don't mean only principal leadership. We know that school communities have to work through some fairly predictable problems in order to emerge in a more mature state, truly prepared to view power differently, able to make learning more meaningful for students, and maybe even modeling a just and democratic mini-society. The Honeymoon Stage: A Sense of Community Emerges This is terrific! Finally, I'm a part of a group that meets with the leader. I feel valued; my voice is being heard. I'm still not comfortable disagreeing with the group, especially publicly, but it's exciting to feel that we will be able to make real change. The eager members of such a group may begin by thinking that this is going to be easy. They may neglect to build, earlier rather than later, some common goals. Is the intent to give everyone a voice or to improve the intellectual quality of the school? Making decisions without a clear sense of mission or a shared vision can create a battleground for personal interests. Now is also the time to clarify the method of decisions and which ones are appropriately made by the group. Problems can be averted if consensus is introduced early. Voting leads to factions and polarization; consensus means having to look for the win-win solution, but it's not the same as seeking a unanimous vote and being held hostage by the holdouts. …