DFS Week 7 Reaction

Directed Field Study Week 7 Reaction

This week I asked my mentor about her implementation of the Social Justice Leadership Institute initial cohort, and its obstacles before and after implementation. She also discussed the differences in the cohorts both intended and purely by happenstance.

What was your implementation plan? Timeline?

Social Justice Leadership Institute had no initial timeline. Based upon research during her dissertation work, Dr. Irey found that there were some significant gaps in the training and professional development of persons of underserved groups, particularly persons of color. On her own initiative and personal mission, Dr. Irey sought endorsements from other colleges and her president for support. She received support from three presidents including her own. They added the initiative to their agendas in June 2014. A month later the presidents asked her to implement the program immediately. She had a 1 ½ to disseminate information and to distribute and compile participant forms.

What were the obstacles prior to implementation?

Obstacle one was a transition from no timeline at the start to a short timeline once endorsements and approval for implementation were gained. Some presidents were supportive while others were not. Some potential participants may not have had an opportunity to apply to the initial SJLI cohort.

Obstacle two was being a trailblazer. No such program in the state. There are two leadership programs within the state, Leading from the Middle sponsored by the Washington State Board of Community and Technical Colleges and the Washington Executive Leadership Academy. These programs have some gaps and they do not adequately articulate the challenges facing people of underrepresented groups seeking advancement within higher education. Because of these gaps, the state board found the program refreshing and needed. As a result, the program received an endorsement from the state board after two successful cohorts.

What were the challenges following implementation?

Some challenges following implementations and two successful cohorts: the program is run by one person (Dr. Irey); the program is supported continuously by her home college with some support from a few presidents.

What was the makeup of the cohort?

Initial 20 participants (cohort 1) were chosen intuitively and they were a little older with a focus on African American leaders and staff and other persons of color and sexual orientation. I did not ask if gender was a focus, although most participants were female. Most institutions who participated only sent one person. Traditional email communication was the way of staying connected for this initial cohort. Tokenized applicants were declined.

Second group of 20 participants (cohort 2) were chosen with staff and leaders, greater focus on sexual orientation, and persons of Asian descent. Social media was more prevalent among this group. This cohort was a bit younger but that was by pure accident. More groups were sent in this cohort. Additionally, more schools participated after seeing the difference in the participants once they returned to their home institutions. Dr. Irey believes that groups benefit the students and the institution. The students are able to develop a support group within their institution. The institution gains more strength, courage, confidence, and competence within its workforce.

What is the next step? What is the overarching goal of the program?

The next step is transitioning the program to a self-run/self-support program. Dr. Irey would like to see the program grow from endorsements to adoption and remain a continuous professional development program for aspiring leaders of all distinctions.

Dr. Irey’s primary objective is to develop 100 SJLI graduates and have them permeate the Washington Community and Technical College system. The hope is that they will obtain position power and change the dynamic of school leadership and become more representative of the student population. Additionally, more persons of underserved groups will be drawn to school leadership.

Dr. Irey would like to see school leadership grow away from the tradition of white heterosexual approach to leadership as the only accepted leadership approach. She would like to see school leadership grow to appreciate the leadership approaches of persons of color, women, LBGTQ, and all of our other social distinctions. Moreover, she would like to see members of these underserved groups take the next step toward moving beyond survival and growing into thriving leaders.

What did I gain?

Dr. Irey found a passion and a cause. She has remained steadfast throughout. She admits that mistakes were made but she evaluated her program and self-assessed throughout. She has made adjustments with each cohort and she will install improvements for her next cohort. Dr. Irey had some early adopters. Once the other institutions who did not believe in the validity of the program saw the impact the program had on its participants, they began to participate and send participants in greater numbers. Finally, Dr. Irey has a “gut-smacking” goal, which a key concept from Heath’s and Heath’s (2010) Switch. That goal is to develop 100 potential change leaders within the community and technical college system. Her hope is that these 100 cohort members will form a network and ongoing support group. Additionally, they will have the tools, confidence, and courage to seek and enact change within their local contexts.

DFS Week 6 Reaction

Directed Field Student Week 6 Reaction

I did not have an hours this week with my mentor. However, I did gain some significant insights from my reading this week.

Turnaround Leadership for Higher Education by Michael Fullan and Geoff Scott

Chapter 3 – The new agenda

In chapter three of Turnaround Leadership, Fullan and Scott (2009) provide a four focus areas for best addressing the challenges facing today’s colleges and universities. The authors believe that is necessary to redefine the university in order to develop within its policies and personnel the capacity for innovative thinking, change implementation with sustainable outcomes, and change leadership at all levels. These four focus areas are: practical reasoning that combines analysis with application; teaching and learning at the center of the traditional trio research, teaching, and engagement and service; inquiry, quality reviews, and implementation, and change theory and leadership.

Practical Reasoning: Combining Analysis and Application

The authors assert that the key to universities achievement of their missions is to reconceive how knowledge is produced. First, it essential that critical analysis be conducted in action. These actions must be examined based upon their theoretical cause and the associated effect. In doing so, there will be improved knowledge and theory building, improved student preparation, better teaching, and a more substantial contribution to the community (Fullan & Scott, 2009).

Teaching and Learning at the Center

The success of this new agenda centers around knowledge generation and cultivation. Therefore, it is more appropriate to have teaching and learning at the center. If the trio of research, learning, and service and engagement are approached independently, research will almost certainly have a natural advantage. It is only when these elements are viewed together that leaders are able to achieve a aims of a knowledge-based integration framework. Focusing of teaching and learning will provide better support to more productive learning environments and student commitment, retention, and completion (Fullan & Scott, 2009).

Inquiry, Quality Reviews, and Implementation

Institutions must learn to behave like a learning organizations. This is a common practice in many revenue-generating businesses. Ironically, this is not a concept that is appreciated by many institutions of learning. Institutions must be able to collect data that articulate the practices and results of their operations. Next, they must be able to assess their current position objectively and determine mechanisms to for improvements. Finally, this work must be cyclical and not a one-time or short-term event (Fullan & Scott, 2009).

Change Theory and Leadership

The authors entreat change agents to first appreciate the current culture within the organization. Failure to do so may lead create opportunity for initiative overload, change-related chaos, and employee burnout and cynicism. Rather, change leaders should consider “change recombination”. This refers to identifying the multiple bright spots within the organization and redefining them or combining them as a start to a change innovation. Two key features of leading change within an organization are coherence and motivation. To achieve this, the authors illustrate six essential elements:

direction and engagement

capacity building with a focus on results

supportive infrastructure

leadership

managing distracters

continuous evaluation and inquiry

two-way communication

To achieve the ambitions of this approach, universities and colleges will need to engage in a substantial shift in their thinking with regard to leadership. In order to achieve the intended growth, there must be systematic leadership at each level. Rather than appointing the smartest people to leadership roles or earmarking the person available, universities and colleges will need to engage in intentional develop its leaders from within, a practice very similar to top preforming business organizations (Fullan & Scott, 2009).

Application to my practice

This applies to my practice with respect to our lack of professional development. Recently, my director emailed me with concerned over our district-wide need for onboarding, initial training, and professional development. I am in the early stages of creating such a program within my team. It is difficult to rein in all of the materials needed for successful onboarding but it is clear that it is a needed element. Everything that I have read throughout this term has revealed a need for a homegrown professional development program within my practice. This is also reinforced by the survey and interview I conducted during spring semester.  Our folks are asking for some professional development. I am planning to rethink my entire innovation following the term. Initially, I was unsure of what the professional development program would look. Therefore, I steered away from it. However, I continued to assess my practice. Resultantly, formal and informal feedback form the practice has told me what is needed. I am looking forward to the challenge and the opportunity.

Chapter 4 – Make it happen: building quality and capacity

In chapter 4, Fullan and Scott (2009) discuss the “how” of effective change management. The discussion centers around the deployment of change strategy according the new agenda outlined in the previous chapter. They look at empirical research to outline how institutions may build change capacity, thereby, leading to the implementation of the aforementioned strategy. The three key concepts that I would like to discuss here are: development of an agile and efficient operation, operating on evidence, not anecdote, and shifting from strategic planning to strategic thinking and doing (Fullan & Scott, 2009).

An agile and efficient operation

A key necessity of a change-capable culture is the management of “distractors” (Fullan & Scott, 2009, p. 79). Some distractors are meetings with scant purpose and no outcomes; needless travel to these meetings; poorly administered meetings; signoff systems that are more ritualistic than operationally required; fruitless micropolitics that do not contribute to improving the institutional experience of students (Fullan & Scott, 2009). The authors highlight universities who have taken an alternative approach to many of the aforementioned unproductive activities. First, they employ teleconferences were appropriate rather than having people to drive to in-person meetings. Chairs are trained to conduct successful meetings with coherent agendas and have been arranged with carefully consideration of its cost and outcomes. Finally, the meeting participants are productively engaged.   

Operating on evidence, not anecdote

Turnaround institutions appreciate consensus culture. However, rather than forming consensus around within the group, their focus is coming to a consensus around the data. An institutional culture where participants are focused on continuous assessment, investigation, and quality enhancement use evidence to ascertain the key features of the current measures that are working. They also identify the areas that need improvement. Here the institution has the eye on the future. Change leaders use data to determine the most advantageous and sustainable path into the future.

Shifting the focus from strategic planning to strategic thinking and doing

To develop strategic thinking, the change leader must use available performance evaluations and data trends along with strategic data gathered from other targeted sources. The sources of feedback include organization professionals, policy advisers, students, and close analysis of national data. Additionally, leaders may review key local, social, economic, environmental, and technological data in order to gain additional evidence. Strategic thinking is about determining the best path to the predetermined goal without developing a comprehensive plan (Fullan & Scott, 2009).

Application to my practice

Developing good meetings is key with me. I have that traveling to multiple meetings to only give minimal participation is not the most efficient use of resources. When our new director came on board, I asked that we have an agenda to our meetings and some outcomes. I got the agenda, but no outcomes. I am working to build this into my meetings. Typically, I arrange the meetings to be more of a discussion than a dictatorial exchange. I often find that many times my staff members will address some agenda items in these conversations and work the problems out for themselves. I attempt to guide the conversation with key talking points and I attempt to minimize the news bulletins as much as possible.

Shifting to strategic thinking is something that I have been toying with for some time. It is quite an interesting way to approach problems of practice. Leaders use varied forms of evidence, both qualitative and quantitative, to develop a way of thinking. The various pieces of data help shape the problem and it helps you develop a path. It also protects leaders and other team members from the propensity to spin their wheels when strategic plans are altered by environmental necessity. Using thoughtful and logical, people will be able to make the necessary adjustments and continue toward the established goal.

Fullan, M., & Scott, G. (2009). Turnaround leadership for higher education. San  Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

DFS Week 5 Reaction

Directed Field Student Week 5 Reaction

I did not have an hours this week with my mentor. However, I did gain some significant insights from my reading this week.

In the opening chapters of Fullan’s and Scott’s (2009) Turnaround Leadership for Higher Education, the authors discuss the challenges facing higher education and the failed strategies that have characterized change in higher education settings. Three key concepts that resonated with me are part of several factors that characterized a change averse culture. These factors are unclear accountability and acknowledgement systems, unaligned structure and processes, and poor leadership identification, focus, and support. 

Unclear accountability and acknowledgement systems

A key indicator of this characteristic is staff working around a noticeably poor performing worker and not be willing to confront them. Also, people in the environment avoid addressing unfavorable issues fearing they will upset social norms. Additionally, there is a failure to communicate clear expectations and hold staff accountable for failing to meet them. Often funding, performance, development, and rewards are misaligned with the strategic goals of change efforts. Finally, staff are who are performing well and meeting fulfilling established responsibilities are not adequately acknowledged. 

In my current context, we have not done enough to appreciate our strong workers. We have taken steps to address this through the presentation of an award to the staff member who presented the most positive attitude while executing their duties during that time. As supervisors, we have also begun to conduct more professional development check-ins. The requirement is to communicate expectations at the beginning of the annual professional development cycle and conduct an evaluation at the end of the cycle. However, we found that the staff required more formal and informal feedback. I conduct my check-ins every two to three months because I have staff members who have been with us for less than a year. It has been a good tool for reiterating expectations and clarifying individual goals.

Unaligned structure and processes

Management and decision-making structures may present strong support or significant opposition with regard to engagement, responsiveness, and implementation. In some higher education organizations where areas of leadership are decentralized, administrative and academic staff may operate in parallel without little to no collaboration. Also, position descriptions should align with organizational goals and should be complimentary to the other positions within its proximity. Also, too often, professional development workshops are given by individuals who are not familiar with the participant’s work situation. Professional development opportunities should be tailored to the context within which the participants work.

The us versus them mentality does exist in our institution. I have encouraged more explanation. I have found that leaders may often reduce staff members to children when the treat them as if they cannot grasp the “bigger picture.” I try as best I can to utilize every opportunity to teach and spread knowledge. I see it as preparation for the larger scale activities. I have found in my experience that spreading knowledge is a key factor in building trust with staff and helping others develop competence. Continuous professional development not only supports current work; it also prepares a person for a key role in the change that they may participate in in the future.

Poor leadership Identification, focus, and support

Many leaders at varying levels have experienced substantial difficulty leading change in organizations with impenetrable systems and approaches and a culture that is resistant to change. Moreover, very little time or effort is spent determining a leader candidates level of experience leading change in a complex environment. Further, most of the professional development tools that leaders need to improve their skills are supported by only a few higher education institutions. Finally, leader identification and development is a critical area that does not receive the attention needed to produce leaders of effective change.

It has been my experience that organizations do not actively support leader development or mentorship. It often feels as though many leaders are afraid such efforts will diminish them in their roles. Other times, it feels like there is a competition. I have seen many different forms of leadership. However, I have rarely seen wisdom. Higher education leaders and those who aspire to be leaders, need some form of ongoing professional development. I have found that so much time is lost waiting for a new administrator to gain an understanding of the organization and practice and begin to show signs of growth. At the very least, higher education institutions should work to develop a stronger onboarding process that provides leaders with a more coherent direction and helps them visualize the way ahead.

Fullan, M., & Scott, G. (2009). Turnaround leadership for higher education. San  Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

DFS Week 4 Reaction

Directed Field Student Week 4

This week I spent six hours with a my mentor at her Social Justice Leadership Institute reunion. SJLI is a series of educational leadership workshops for women, people of color, LBGTQ members, and other members of underserved groups. Its mission is to provide needed mentorship, network connections, and confidence to underserved populations serving in a multitude of roles within the Washington's 34 community and technical colleges.

I was one of the initial 20 members of the original cohort. Dr. Irey created this institute in response to research she completed during her doctoral studies. The research revealed an incredible amount of underutilized talent and she wanted to do something about it. This week's connections was a reunion of that initial group and introduction to the newest cohort who were completing their own serial of workshops.

In this week's culminating series, we discussed our journeys. The most recent cohort discuss her their lives had perspectives have been affected by their participation. We, the first year cohort, discuss our growth and where we the journey has taken us since we last met more than a year ago. From that point, we participated in a workshop discussing real-life case studies. We were to develop our thoughts from the frame of being the leader responding to these circumstances. The objective of the exercise was to develop within the participants an understanding of how politics impact our decision making in many educational settings. Additionally, we also discussed how perceptions may impact our judgement or the judgement of our colleagues and coworkers and contribute to a multitude of unfavorable outcomes.

I found the entire experience useful because I was able to expand my network of colleagues and I was able to participate in real leadership scenarios and capture a glimpse of my response in those situations. Finally, Dr. Irey also revealed some biases that may exist in our conversational approaches such as males dominating conversations and not valuing women in these exchanges, internal biases toward people of color in leadership, and heterosexual vs homosexual male conversation and discussion styles.

From this week's readings a key takeaway was the use of checklists to guide the Rider and motivate the Elephant. During my time at a Burger King in Alabama, we used checklists to ensure all tasks for opening and closing the restaurant were completed. We also used these checklists to guide our work throughout the day. It proved a very effective method to developing a solid work ethic in young workers with minimal to no experience and the development came rather quickly. I also used a number of checklists in the Army. These checklists supported leadership in making sure all of their direct reports were prepared to do a mission or perform a task to standard. This was critical because many of the tasks and missions we participate in must be completed with almost no margin for error.

In my current work, I had been reluctant to institute a checklist in the past. I have found that many civilian workers, including those who were former military members, find such checklists to be signs of wrongdoing. I implemented the checklist with my team of advisors and they immediately went down this path. I explained that the purpose of the checklist was to help make it easier to recall the series of tasks we need to complete throughout the day to successfully execute our mission of serving students. Once I explained the purpose, they agreed that the checklist would really help them better manage the day and reduce the pressure that they feel to remember every single step of every task. This is the first full week of the checklist. I plan to evaluate to its effectiveness over the next several weeks. I also plan to use the checklist to guide my work and develop a checklist for many of my personal tasks and projects to help me better manage my life outside of work.

DFS Week 3 Reaction

Directed Field Study Reaction - Week 3

This week I connected with Dr. Irey via phone. I emailed her the questions ahead of our meeting so that she could reflect and develop her answers. I then worked with her assistant to schedule a time for us to communicate. The purpose of these questions was to determine her approach to engaging stakeholders, gain insight into how she responds to the emotions and rationale of these stakeholders including students, and gain some tips for how best to approach sensitive subjects with intent of gaining buy in and ongoing support. The answers to those questions are listed below.

•  Have there been in changes to policy to address the students concerns?

Cabinet members met to decide how they would respond to students in the future regarding hate speech and other issues impacting student safety. They decided to provide safety information immediately. It has been there policy to do so. However, the practice has not been followed consistently. They are also looking at how and when they will answer questions to better respond to student needs. Dr. Irey's intent is to better educate students about cultural diversity, issues involving their safety, and encourage student responsibility with regard to free speech. She also works to educate the administration about the importance of understanding and responding to the needs of all students. Some policies won’t change. However, they are researching what is happening at other schools to determine some best practices that they may adopt. Some policies will take time and they will develop timelines. They are still working on their policies about racial discrimination. They are working on responding to students more quickly regarding safety issues. They are creating a poster against hate. They are providing some contact information so that students may contact someone immediately if they feel that their safety is in jeopardy. They also provide students with opportunities for meeting with Dr. Irey and other key cabinet members individually.

• What has been your approach to communicating the importance of giving specifics rather than blanket innocuous statements?

Dr. Irey gives them very specific information when meeting individually. However, when they are asking with more additional information, there are policies that dictate her response. She will share the speech that was used but not the specific student(s) who said it. She contacted a national Muslim group for guidance. The administration thought it best not to use the specific language in their campus-wide response. This is an effort not to celebrate the person for using discriminatory rhetoric. They also don’t communicate privacy information. They don’t give campus wide blanket information. Responses are dependent upon the questions. They can communicate how many hate crimes, but no specifics to the public. They also have to protect certain individuals especially if they are employees of the college. Dr. Irey admits that the school's communication to students has not been adequate. However, they now make sure all students, faculty and staff are reached when incidents occur. Dr. Irey's approach is to provide as much detail as possible while remaining cognizant of privacy laws. She states that not all vice presidents agree with her approach. Still, she believes in taking every opportunity to educate the student body. 

• What external agencies or persons have you reach out to for support? You spoke of a few. I was hoping you could elaborate.

Community organizations that Dr. Irey reached out to: Council of American Islamic Relations. She asked about the best way to address and educate students. She also contacts the Washington Attorney General's Office to ensure their communication does not violate law state and federal law. She also communicates with their board of trustees. She also connects with the City of Bellevue Police and Bellevue College Campus Safety for additional safety guidance. Finally, she engages with students to better understand their concerns and she take these concerns to her cabinet meetings. 

• What has been your observed reaction from the students affected by the comments? How have you addressed their concerns while showing sensitivity to their needs and representing the college?

Many of the students are really concerned. Those effected by the hate speech are concerned for their safety. However, their are those who are equally concerned about infringement upon their right to free speech. Recently, she sent campus-wide information about the start of Ramadan for student's education. However, she has received some negative reactions in response to the intended educational email. She was accused of violating student rights. Many students have stated that they can say something hateful because that’s a first amendment right. She replies to them individually and continues to use every interaction as an opportunity to advance their learning. Most don’t reply back.  Some asked her if she was going to acknowledge other holidays such as Easter. She responded to them indicating that she would acknowledge all holidays in an effort to educate, not celebrate. Her responses have more to with inclusion and diversity. Education is the primary focus. Even when she does not agree, she attempts to respond to them cordially with their continued learning and growth in mind.

• Finally, what are some tips that you can give to me when attempting to engage students, peers, and other leaders around key issues that are sensitive in nature?

Answer all emails and value all student points of view. She will often say that she needs to research and respond after. She also informs her president of what is going on so that he may weigh in on the issue(s). She also utilizes student leadership in supporting students and providing education. I gleaned  the following from her responses:

1. communicate consistently and value all student points of view
2. take the time to do research before giving an inadequate answer
3. communicate with knowledgeable others for support
4. engage other resources for support

The greatest gain from this week's interactions was flexibility and understanding. When I listened to Dr. Irey discuss her responses to student issues and her communications with the college cabinet, I heard her primary focus of student learning with regard to diversity and inclusion. I also gained an understanding for how she was able to adhere to multiple laws and college policy and still communicate her mission of educating the college community about the importance of diversity and inclusion. Her patience and understanding is also a skill that I can appreciate as I begin to develop my implementation plan for my PoP innovation.