Stumbling, Falling and Not Getting Back Up With Educational Change
Initiatives
I came across an interesting quote from Andrew Stanton of
Pixar in a recent New Yorker article. Stanton is the lead writer for the Toy
Story trilogy, Finding Nemo and Wall-E. He was even the voice of the surfer dude Dad
‘Crush’ in Finding Nemo. As he discussed the development of a story, he made an
interesting observation that goes beyond the story and screenplay. I think it
succinctly describes why making systemic changes to how we operate in education
is so difficult, yet everyone seems to have an answer of how to do it. In
talking about creating a story he talks about how the beginning and end of any
story or film is easy, it’s the middle that is difficult. He sums this up by
saying:
“Any novice could start a film off or bring it to a
conclusion… just as any person with decent observation skills can probably
deduce if you’re sick or not. But only a doctor can diagnose what’s truly going
on. You can’t fake the middle of your story; if you haven’t achieved a deep
enough understanding of what your doing, it will always reveal itself in the
middle.” (New Yorker, October 17, 2011; pg. 67)
The majority of educational reform initiatives do start like
a story: a flurry of announcements from the government, the board or school
leaders. Each one filled with the promise of something better fixing a supposed
problem. The press jump into the story, cover it from two angles. A committee
is formed and challenged to report back in two months. Stakeholders are
represented and the story begins in earnest.
Fast forward anywhere from six months to two years and we’re
in the final chapters of the story. More often than not we have three endings:
- success with no chance of succeeding,
- failure spun into success, and
- lost in the noise
The first ending, success with no chance of succeeding is
more common than most of us are willing to admit. Many initiatives do have
solutions, but the system can’t afford the solution. Take for example teaching
science in elementary schools. Study after study confirms that science is not
being taught to kids. And this is sad because kids are primed for science more
than other subject. They are naturally curious and willing to explore anything.
The trails of adolescence are a few birthdays away and they are brimming with
confidence to investigate. But, back to the research that says teachers need
more training, more funding for resources and an allocation of time in the
teaching day for science are the answers to solving this problem. Translated
that means sustainable, targeted funding needs to be put in place. No
government in North America has the courage to do this. Consequently, we have a
solution to a problem that fails to be implemented.
More common is the failure spun into success. These are
initiatives that have a clear and quick answer. Cost is minimal or pushed to
another level of the system and everyone can claim success, point to it and
then walk away from it. A bit like President Bush when he proclaimed the war on
terrorism a “Job Done – Mission Accomplished.” Sadly, all that has happened is
the issue is pushed underground for a few years before it rises up again.
School Board budgeting deliberations fits this example very nicely. Boards are
not given enough money to meet contractual obligations or Boards have created
unfunded programs they wish to maintain. As a result, and especially if
enrollment is declining, yearly budgets face a shortfall; and in many cases, a
significant shortfall. Given the limited ability to raise additional funds,
School Boards take in public consultation and many sleepless nights before
difficult decisions are made to balance the budget. The majority of times, the
budget is balanced and the government claims success. Sadly, no one can explain
why my grade 5 son had to supervise grade 1 students at lunch. A somewhat
questionable activity for a kid is the direct result of being unable to pay for
adults to supervise children at lunch. The budget process was a complete
failure because the root causes were not addressed, but rather a band-aid was
applied to a gapping wound in the funding model. And the bleeding continued,
just temporarily out of sight.
The third possibility of being lost in the noise is probably
the most frustrating of the options. When an initiative works, it’s because
people with very little ego and unlimited amounts of professionalism commit to
making something work. The solution is not sexy, it’s pragmatic in nature and
works at the grassroots. No one really takes credit for the success, but rather
exploits the success to it’s full potential. Unfortunately decision makers
don’t like it because they can’t point to the success and build their careers
on the initiative. Many of us have been in an activity that worked, but could
not be sustained or funded because it was lost in the noise. And there is a lot
of noise being continually generated from various educational stakeholders and
we have no method of pulling a useable signal from the noise. This needs to
change.
I think it’s time we focused on the middle of the story when
it comes to educational change. As Mr Stanton points out any novice can start
or finish it, but it takes talent to control the middle. Isn’t that was being
an educational leader is all about?
