Tipping Point: From Feckless Reform to Substantive Instructional Improvement

Author: Mike Schmoker
Publisher: Phi Delta Kappa
Publication Date: 2004, February
Journal: Phi Delta Kappan
Journal Volume: 85(6)
Pages: 424-432
Full text available online at: http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/k0402sch.htm

Abstract (written by WestEd)

Schmoker says that traditional comprehensive strategic plans have often not had the desired sustainable impact on student achievement; what he says is needed, rather, is a series of short-term successes fueled by ongoing professional development in which teachers collaboratively learn and solve problems.

Strategic planning encompasses needs assessments, vision statements, goal statements, action steps, objectives, persons responsible, resources needed, evaluation, and timelines. Schmoker's experience is that, invariably, schools commit to too many activities to implement or goals to evaluate, and those goals are not usually measurable statements linked to student aachievement. This is part of the reason that so little of what gets planned actually gets done.

The strategic planning processes he has seen have rarely led to improvements in the quality of teaching or student learning. The plans looked great on the surface but, on closer look, lacked coherent professional development that targeted classroom practices, as well as the time and ability to monitor so many activities. Also, the larger the plan, the harder the fall; teacher morale deflates when so much time and work goes into a plan that fails to deliver.

The results of meta-analytic studies indicate that one problem is that strategic plans typically undervalue thinking and overemphasize action. Rather than providing annual goals, an effective plan "promotes smart, short-term cycles of action, assessment, and adjustment." The plan should identify a series of connected, short-term actions in specific instructional areas and target struggling students.

According to Schmoker, comprehensive, systemic, and whole-school reforms typically fail because they overload and fragment initiatives and under-emphasize ongoing collaboration and reflection by teachers. Studies of whole-school reform programs have yielded disappointing results, largely because requirements exceeded the capacity of schools and districts to implement. Even the best research-based practices need teams of teachers to adapt them to fit a school's context and culture and then refine the curriculum in which they are embedded.

Staff development usually is evaluated by participation rates and satisfaction ratings rather than by changes in practice or improvements in student achievement. Rather than teachers listening to experts deliver knowledge, staff development should engage teachers in ongoing collaborative learning, implementation, reflection, and refinement of practices. In short, what is needed is for the school staff to function as a learning community.