Community: Data put a face on shared vision
by Rick DuFour
Journal of Staff Development, Winter 2000 (Vol. 21, No. 1)
A fundamental cornerstone of any learning organization is a shared vision of what that organization might become. As Peter Senge wrote, "You cannot have a learning organization without shared vision."
The significance of the "vision thing," as George Bush described it, has become so widely recognized that developing vision statements has become standard practice in most schools. Schools and school districts across North America have paid heed to Stephen Covey’s admonition to "begin with the end in mind" and have made the effort to describe a realistic, credible, attractive future for the organization that is so compelling that people would be motivated to work toward that better future.
Schools can develop a good, serviceable vision statement that people will endorse when school personnel:
- Base their discussions on a collective investigation of research on best practice rather than just pooling opinions;
- Focus on meaningful, credible improvements rather than generating a wish list; and
- Take time to share their thoughts and hopes as they work toward consensus.
The greater obstacle confronting a school is translating its vision statement into a format that fosters the results orientation critical to a learning community. Developing a collective sense of what the school might become is an essential step on the journey to becoming a learning community, but it is not sufficient. Schools also must be willing to assess their current reality with total candor and honesty, and then describe the specific, measurable results they expect to see as a result of achieving their vision. Using data is the most effective strategy for translating the good intentions described in a vision statement into meaningful school improvement targets.
Bob Eaker, co-author of Professional Learning Communities at Work, (Bloomington, Ind.: National Educational Service, 1998) has identified an effective strategy for helping the schools with which he works to begin to focus on results. First, Eaker asks the staff to paint a picture of the current conditions of the school using nothing but data. While some data (for example, demographics, number of students on free and reduced lunch, etc.) are beyond the control of the school, faculties typically have little trouble identifying a long list of indicators that they hope to impact through their school improvement efforts. These might include:
Achievement data
- Mean scores on nationally normed tests.
- Percentage of students demonstrating proficiency on state tests.
- Grade distributions/failure rates.
- Mean scores and/or percentage of students demonstrating mastery on locally-developed proficiency tests.
- Percentage of students performing at satisfactory levels on locally-developed performance rubrics.
- Mean scores and percentage of students earning honor grades on Advanced Placement exams.
- Percentage of students graduating.
- Percentage of students receiving positive progress reports.
Student behavior data
- Number of discipline referrals.
- Number of suspensions.
- Number of expulsions.
- Drop-out rates.
- Attendance rates.
Satisfaction surveys
- Faculty and staff.
- Students.
- Parents.
- Alumni one year after graduation.
- Alumni five years after graduation.
Student participation
- Number of students participating in athletic, fine arts, clubs, school, and community service.
- Number of students electing rigorous curriculum.
- Number of students assigned to remedial programs.
Staff activities
- Number of staff engaged in action research.
- Amount of time devoted to working in collaborative teams.
- Number of staff participating in peer observation and/or mentoring.
When the faculty has gathered the data to answer these questions (and thus describe the current reality in their school), Eaker asks them to review the school’s vision statement. He then poses an intriguing question: "If, within the next five years, you achieve everything that you describe in your vision, what changes would you expect to see in the data?" When a faculty begins to struggle with that question, they begin to develop the results orientation of a learning community.
Educators often opt for sweeping esoteric goals. For example, I recently asked a team of 3rd grade teachers to identify their most important priority for that year. They were proud that they had reached consensus and could proclaim that their agreed-upon priority was to "help all of our students become lifelong learners." Although I applauded the sentiment behind that focus, I pointed out that it would take 60 years to determine whether they had accomplished their goal. I then suggested their students would be well served if the team could simply identify what every 3rd grade student should know and be able to do in order to become a lifelong learner, and then develop processes to monitor each student’s acquisition of the prescribed knowledge and skills.
The tendency to avoid specific, measurable goals applies to schools as well as individual teachers or teams. It is not unusual for a school’s vision statement to describe a school in which "the needs of all children are being met by dedicated professionals working together to promote the success of every student." It is unusual to find a staff that articulates how the effort to create that school will impact data.
Many educators are attracted to the professional learning communities model because of its emphasis on shared vision, collective commitments, and collaborative and collegial relationships. They must not lose sight of the fact, however, that the very reason for becoming a learning community is to become more effective in helping all students achieve higher levels of learning. If they stay true to that purpose, they will use data to focus on results.
About the author
Rick DuFour is superintendent of Adlai Stevenson High School District 125, Two Stevenson Drive, Lincolnshire, IL 60069, (847) 634-4000, ext. 268, fax (847) 634-0239, e-mail:
rdufour@district125.k12.il.us
Click for NSDC Home Page