Wednesday, November 11, 2015

Journal Entry 3 ( November 4 - November 10)


Part 1: Worksite

Our institution is a Leader College for Achieving the Dream (ATD). ATD is an initiative that assists community colleges in evaluating the effectiveness of our student success model through the use of disaggregated data. These data are used to target specific achievement gaps within our institution and higher education as a whole. These data may also be used to assist key contributors in taking a closer look at the area in which we operate and direct us in creating programs and services that are more representative of our population’s needs. This week's worksite was at one of our district campuses. We discussed how to improve our ATD evaluation tool. The setting included faculty, staff, deans, presidents, the chancellor, and the ATD coaches. We were there to evaluate the tool and determine where improvements can be made to better serve our institutional needs.

Part 2: Observation

Monday, November 9, 2015, we convened in the multipurpose room of the college center. We were seated at seven different tables. Each table had a portion of the evaluation tool for the table members to review and score. The task of the participants was to move to different tables in a 3 round format and assess and score the portions of the tool located at the table. We intend to distribute the tool to all levels of the institution to determine how effective our ATD interventions have been and to assess how well we have gotten the word out about the project.

We learned that the institutional research staff is strong and responsive to institutional needs. We also learned that we have not done an adequate enough job creating a narrative around the data that will help the college at large understand and appreciate the data. We also learned that our policies might need more clarity. Additionally, we may have some contradictions between policy and practice. Also, we learned that the scale of the tool is too narrow and may need to be broadened to resemble a Likert scale. Finally, we will need to communicate and educate the college a little more before distributing this tool as several of the administrators and faculty in the room had minimal knowledge of certain questions being asked.

This was an educational setting because we were there to learn about ourselves as a leaning institution. We have some substantial work to do in closing the communication gaps within our organization before we can see the full potential of our achievement gaps interventions.

Part 3: Readings

This week's reading was from Sutton and Rao, chapter five. I can see where many of the suggested approaches may be useful within an educational setting. According to Sutton and Rao, hiring strong talent is not enough (pg. 146). Many educators leave colleges due to poor professional development and often express feelings of being under appreciated both existentially and intellectually. Cultivating that talent and creating a professionally nurturing environment is critical to moving forward with organizational objectives. Another area of appreciation was that of guilt-prone leaders. According to the authors, guilt-prone leaders are more likely to become effective leaders (pg. 159). These leaders tend to consider the consequences or their actions and the effect they may have on other people. As a result, these leaders tend to be more "action-oriented", and when mistakes are made, they take the necessary precautions to prevent future missteps (pg. 159). 

Some of the private sector examples such as Neflix and their hiring, retention, and termination approach would not fit in an educational setting, nor should it. Still, the underlying principles were there: know whom you need working within your organization, know how to recruit for that need, and know how to retain them as key stakeholders. 

Sutton, R. I., & Rao, H. (2014). Scaling up excellence: Getting to more without settling for less. Crown Business. 

Part 4: Integrations

My problem of practice revolves around improving professional development and employee engagement within my department. When I observe my institution, I see many positive interventions being created each year to improve the student experience. However, we have substantial turnover. Of course we have the usual yearly retirements after many years of dedicated service. We also have those who are following their career trajectory. However, we have a significant number of employees who are talented contributors to our organization but leave after just a few months. Many cite feelings of under appreciation for intellectual capacity, poor onboarding, and lack of professional development. I envision creating a more seamless and more comprehensive onboarding process. I also want to develop a professional development program that leaves our advisors engaged, empowered, and enthused.



No comments:

Post a Comment