Speaking for Teachers on the Issues

As you may well know, I am seeking your support in the upcoming election for the presidency of Edmonton Public Teachers Local No.37.

Some of the important issues which make up my platform, and for which I advocate continuously, are:

• Class Size and Composition -Class size and class composition are perhaps the greatest concern for a majority of teachers. Personal relationships are fundamental to the teaching-learning experience but increasingly crowded classrooms and complex classroom compositions have lead to work intensification for teachers and impeded the development of these positive relationships.

After a brief respite, we have seen class sizes once again begin to grow, year-to-year, especially in the middle grades. Coupled with this rise, teachers have also witnessed the early effects of "inclusive-education." This initiative, while being a laudable one, requires the necessary and sufficient support mechanisms be in place if it is to succeed. As with all new educational initiatives, without receiving the required support, all that results is more intensified working conditions for teachers and more intensified classroom-learning conditions.

Reducing numbers of students in classrooms and providing the conditions to make inclusive-education a successful initiative are definitely cost issues, primarily because they require hiring more teachers. Strong and persistent advocacy will be required to ensure that students have the support they need and to ensure, also, that teachers do not experience even greater work intensification.

While controlling class size and providing the conditions to make
inclusive-education successful remain cost issues, the next two concerns I want to talk about are not. They are more political in nature because they talk about power-relationships and the greater sharing of power. The first of these . . .

• Site-Based (Collaborative) Decision Making - Teachers want to be involved in the decision-making process in their schools. Such involvement brings strengthened engagement on the part of teachers and results in greater teacher retention and increased student achievement. We need a policy that brings consistency in implementation, in this regard, across the District.

About thirteen years ago as teachers entered into contract negotiations, our membership expressed some concerns with Site-Based Management (SBM). Because, in its implementation, SBM had not been coupled with Site-Base Decision Making (SBDM), teachers said they experienced a lack of consistency, school-to-school, with their ability to be part of the decision-making process regarding matters that directly impacted the conditions of their work. Although a joint paper, created by the district and the Local, came about as a result of the ensuing negotiations, little else has occured since then to ensure teachers have a part in making decisions that directly impact their work. We need to move forward on this issue in a substantive manner, and soon.

Educational writer and researcher, Eric Hirsch, in a recent study, found that an inclusive model of decision-making in schools leads to greater retention of teachers, greater capacity-building in those schools, and ultimately leads to increased student achievement! We can't afford not to move ahead with Site-Based (Collaborative)Decision Making to make sure it is practised consistently across the District.

• Self-Directed Professional Development – Teachers want and need ongoing PD. They want to be able to deal with their professional development in an authentic way and should be allowed greater decision making power in this area.

The Alberta Teachers' Association established, a number of years ago, Teacher Professional Growth Plans to give teachers the ability to determine their own professional development needs, establish goals by which they would be evaluated, and develop plans to meet those goals.

However, over the course of the last number of years, most teachers will tell you that self-directed PD has all but disappeared. Unless your growth plan closely follows school and/or District priorities you will likely not have it approved for the funding to see it through. Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI) funds are very much controlled by the District and targeted to District priorities. Professional development has, in essence, become limited to staff development - employee training, if you will.

Self-directed PD is important because teachers know the areas in which they need to grow their knowledge and expertise. As educators, we also understand that motivation and engagement and real learning occurs when learners have some choice in their curricula. Because of the nature of their profession, teachers need to be life-long learners so that they can address the varied and changing needs of their students and their society. Being allowed more self-direction and choice in their PD can ensure that teachers are satisfying their professional needs and growing in their professionalism.

• Local Accountability – All effective organizations have accountability measures and routine methods for gathering feedback from the members of the organization. The District Satisfaction Survey that you complete each year is an example of such practice.

Getting feedback is becoming increasingly easier through the use of on-line tools such as surveymonkey. And these tools are virtually cost free to the organization. GETCA, our convention association, recently sought my input  and level of satisafaction using this tool. Information gathering tools such as this could be a way our Local asks its members, "How are we doing?" This feedback could then be used to determine how best to continue serving members' needs. Establishing accountability methods and measures, as policy, would ensure our Local remains responsive, adaptive, and accountable to its members.

One thing individual teachers can do is register your personal email address with the Local. (Unlike many school jurisdictions, our Local is not allowed to communicate with you via your school email address).

We can do better but we need effective leadership in order to make progress on all of these issues. I believe I can provide that leadership and I ask for your support in the coming election, and in the days to follow.

Collaborative Decisiona Making; What's Toyota Got to Do with It?

"It should be self-evident that when you involve people in the decision-making process they are more likely to support decisions once they are made."

Prologue

Over twenty years ago our school district introduced sight-based management for its schools. This initiative greatly increasesd the ability of schools to make decisions at a site-based level. School administrators now had much more say as to how per-pupil funding would be budgeted for their particular school.The following was written more than three years ago and is slightly dated in some references but the concerns and underlying issues remain current. What I offer here is a perspective on the ways this management model has affected teachers and schools and include suggestions as to how site-based management could become more effective through the addition of a site-based decision making model . . .

So, what's Toyota got to do with it?

The odds are quite good that you own, have owned, or will own a Toyota. (Aren’t we teachers inclined to intelligent, practical, and somewhat conservative consumption?) Toyota has for a long time been the most successful car maker on the planet; their vehicles are in high demand the world round for their high quality, dependability, and resale value. This success is, in large part, a result of innovative practices including the value Toyota places on its employees’ input and the amount of involvement and engagement the company offers to them.

A longstanding policy of Toyota is to encourage its employees to offer any ideas that could potentially improve the quality or efficiency of any company process or product. Japanese companies get a hundred times as many suggestions from their workers as U.S. companies do.

Unlike their American counterparts, Japanese frontline auto-workers have the authority, and are given the responsibility, to make critical day to day decisions, even so far as to“hit the kill switch” if they identify a problem or potential problem on the assembly line. As a daily occurance, teams muster to identify and discuss emergent problems and how correct or mitigate their effect on production.

Allowing such considerable input to the decision-making process may seem like a simple, practical, straightforward approach to the management of an organization however it has proven more difficult for American companies like General Motors to implement. The difficulty, in part, is because “most companies are still organized in a very top-down manner, and have a hard time handing responsibility to front-line workers.” (The Open Secret of Success, The New Yorker, May 12, 2008)

As a model for effective management of organizations Site-Based Decision Making [SBDM] seeks to engage employees in a similar manner. Such a model has proven to be an effective strategy for organizations to improve their processes, products and profits through the involvement and engagement of their workers.

Such an approach recognizes the value of the education and training, experience, and overall knowledge of the frontline worker. In May, 2000 Edmonton Public Schools, in conjunction with Edmonton Public Local of the ATA, produced a school handbook entitled “Framework for Involvement in Site-Based Decision Making.” This document came about as a result of a letter of intent that was signed in 1998’s round of bargaining between our Local and the District.

At that time, teachers had expressed a concern that teacher involvement in a school’s decision making process varied greatly from school to school. Some schools allowed teachers considerable involvement in decision making while others may have allowed very little. The framework document defined involvement as “having the opportunity to make or influence decisions in a variety of ways,” and went on to say that, in general, “staff want to be involved in decisions that affect them and their job including direction setting, the use of available resources and the selection of staff.” (May, 2000)

The guidelines put forward in the framework are prefaced with the following statement: It should be self-evident that when you involve people in the decision-making process they are more likely to support decisions once they are made. The reasoning behind this notion is that participation and involvement will give participants a stake in the decision and engage them in a positive way. A further result of participation is that teachers become more knowledgeable about the issues as they engage in the decision-making process. They are also more likely to show a commitment to decisions once they are made and even more willing to accept accountability for those decisions.

So how are we progressing as an organization with respect to SBDM? Is there still a patchwork of involvement school to school within our district or have schools adopted a more uniform approach to decision making? What direction is being given by the district to administrators in order to realize the benefits of recognizing and involving teachers as stakeholders in the decision making process?

The annual district satisfaction-survey a few years ago indicated that about 75% of teachers were satisfied with their level of involvement in decisions. That may sound like a positive result but a rough calculation would indicate that about a thousand teachers in the district are not satisfied with their level of participation. That is a large number of teachers who are still waiting to be heard.