School Learning Laboratory

Learnings and Insights (2003-2006)

The School Learning Laboratory experience has yielded some intriguing insights/lessons. The development and deployment of this collaborative model for contracting and providing services to schools led to these three primary learnings:

1. Schools need organization development services in order to be successful with their improvement efforts.

SLL worked with eight schools to identify and confirm service needs, connect them with reliable and appropriate service providers, assure quality services, and assess the results of the work. Six of these sites clearly identified their need to establish or strengthen how they function as organizations as essential to being successful in their improvement efforts.

Client School	Implementing	Systemic
Kingfield Elementary School	K-8 Staff Collaboration: Reading	Organization Development/Literacy Content
SAD #44 – Three Elementary Schools	Building a Professional Development Model: Math	Organization Development/Math Content
Governor James B. Longley School	Strategic Planning for School Improvement	Organization Development
Livermore Falls Middle School	Arts Initiative	NA
Mt. Vernon Elementary School	Service Learning Project: Creating a Community Resources Directory	Implementing a Service Learning Project.
West Paris Elementary School	Building Professional Learning Community	Organization Development
Waterford Elementary School	Building Professional Learning Community	Organization Development
Lincoln Elementary School	Building Professional Learning Community	Organization Development

Attending to how people work together (processes) in school organizations, and, in addition, to what they do together (the tasks/content) represents a radically different approach than has been in favor since 2001 and the enactment of the No Child Left Behind Act. Federal, state and local improvement efforts have focused vigorously on improving schools with professional development efforts in Mathematics and Literacy. All the schools in our program had been working in these content areas and had participated in such professional development activities. Nonetheless, most staff members we worked with were feeling stuck, overworked and isolated. These feelings seemed to intensify over the three years of the project.

In the final year the three SLL schools all identified the need for organization development services as their highest priority – although they did not use that specific term. The school people were much more likely to say things like:

“We need to improve the school’s climate.”

“People in the school could learn from each other in a collegial and positive way.”

“We need a vision that connects to the district mission yet touches students, parents, teachers and the community.”

“Staff needs to be more cohesive and less defensive so we can collaborate and build from a broader knowledge base.”

“We need to build a structure that will allow teachers to have input to some of the calendar meeting dates to respond to their own learning needs, to solve problems, look at student work, and hear all voices.”

“We want to build a more respectful community environment in the school.”

It seems obvious that schools are, in fact, organizations, and that they need to attend to organizational needs in order to succeed at improvement. However, it seems that schools have neither this understanding nor the language to frame their service needs as organizational in nature. The schools that participated in SLL also did not see themselves as consumers of external services. Typically, they were the recipients of services that the school districts arranged. Very few of the principals and even fewer teachers had ever contracted with a service provider for external services.

2. School service providers’ consulting skills/capacities vary widely.

Another lesson for SLL staff members was this one: Not all service providers have the requisite consulting skills to describe, negotiate and deliver quality services. SuperEd members represented a wide variety of services, personnel and consulting orientations. Each one saw a school’s need and how their services addressed that need through their own unique lens. While some service providers understood very clearly their purpose, mission and service capacities, others did not. Not all of the service providers we worked with could represent their services in such a way as to make them clear and understandable to schools. Not all of them had products or materials that schools could review. Similarly, some service providers were skilled at negotiating with client schools, listening to their needs, and collaborating with them to craft a mutually agreeable charter. Others had one-size fits all approach to clients, with little or no room for negotiation. SLL staff did not adequately foresee this range of understandings and skills.

3. School leadership is a critical element in successful improvement efforts.

A great deal has been written about the issue of school leadership and its importance. Throughout this work, SLL staff was reminded of its value in change efforts. In two sites, there were changes in leadership during the projects. In both cases, this seriously compromised and affected the work. In one case, the work was eventually abandoned. In another, it was cut short.

Those school leaders who understood the SLL work within the larger frame of the school district also seemed to have more success. In three cases, the principals actively engaged the support of the district superintendent to assure that the work aligned with larger district directions and goals. Likewise, the leaders who were able to use the SLL projects to mobilize and engage staff also experienced more success with the work.

Concluding Statement

This project has been productive in many ways, even while exposing some of the weakness in the process and interaction among service providers and schools. The interaction between these two types of organizations is complex, context bound and fluid as there are internal changes within both. The issues that cause a drag on successful improvements identified by the SLL, lack of communication, leadership and organization development seem to be critical and are also well documented aspects for carrying out successful interaction and improvement in schools. The structured process and tools produced by SLL are designed to help address aspects of these issues, and hence should contribute to the knowledge base in school improvement literature and pool of practical tools that schools can use to help mitigate the negatives factors so they can be more productive. Each step forward in school reform assists in the abilities of all involved.