By Rick DuFour

Journal of Staff Development, Fall 2000 (Vol. 21, No. 4)

Copyright, National Staff Development Council, 2000. All rights reserved.

Robert Burns observed, "Nature’s mighty law is change." Indeed, change is in the air . . . and in virtually every professional journal and educational conference these days. A compelling case has been made that the forces are so powerful, change is inevitable. Benjamin Franklin’s observation, "in this world nothing is certain but death and taxes," must apparently be amended to read "death, taxes, and change."

There is no lack of information on predicting, responding to, managing, or leading change initiatives. In fact, the eagerness to embrace change is viewed by some as a litmus test of the willingness of educators to improve their schools. As a result, some administrators seem determined to go to great lengths to demonstrate their enthusiasm for change. Superintendents transfer all principals every three years, or principals routinely reassign teachers to new grade levels or courses just to "shake things up" and "avoid complacency." Staff developers welcome every education fad du jour. The underlying premise behind such moves seems to be that "change is good." Of course, this premise leads to the corollary tenet — those who oppose change represent the forces of evil.

But is change "good" in and of itself? Isn’t it more accurate to conclude that while change may be inevitable, it is morally neutral? And if change is morally neutral, doesn’t it make more sense to assess a particular change initiative in the larger context of our purpose, priorities, values, and overarching goals rather than embracing every proposal for change as positive?

I spoke to an energetic young principal recently who was quite proud that she had trained her staff in multiple intelligences, cooperative learning, assertive discipline, brain research, lesson design, and emotional intelligence. She was particularly proud that all this training had been provided that school year. And it was February.

This eagerness to pursue change and embrace every "new thing" results in what has been referred to as the "Christmas tree" school. Programs, training, and initiatives are simply "hung" on the existing structure and culture of the school like ornaments on a Christmas tree. Like ornaments, they never become truly organic or part of the tree. They dangle fragilely without ever being absorbed into the culture of the school.

The problem is not that schools are unwilling to innovate and change. Schools innovate and change all the time. The problem is that their change initiatives are so often fragmented, so typically focused on the margins of practice rather than the core purpose of improved learning, and are so rarely sustained. Schools need more than a willingness to try something new: they need a guiding context that helps them discriminate among the many possible change initiatives they might pursue at any point in time. They also need the persistence to pursue that initiative until it becomes embedded in the culture and structure of the school.

Adlai Stevenson High School in Lincolnshire, Illinois offers an excellent illustration of the sharper focus that comes with a clear context for school improvement. In the mid-1980s, the staff agreed it wanted Stevenson to become a school that promoted the success of every student. That decision led to a collective study of research and best practice as the Stevenson staff attempted to answer the question, "what are the characteristics of schools that help all students achieve at high levels?" As they discussed the school they wanted to become and the commitments they were prepared to make to turn their intentions into reality, differences of opinion emerged. Those differences led to the investigation of consensus building and conflict resolution strategies.

As the staff pursued the goal of learning for all, they soon confronted a practical question. Learn what? What did they want each student to know and be able to do as a result of each course? Thus, teachers began an investigation of writing standards-based curriculum. Once they were clear on what students were to learn, teachers faced another question — "How will we know students have mastered the intended outcomes?" That question led to training in test construction as teachers were called upon to develop common, comprehensive tests. As they found paper and pencil tests to be too limited, teachers began a collective inquiry into alternative forms of assessment. The data generated by all the assessments led to a new problem — interpretation of data and development of improvement plans based upon the information. Thus, another area of teacher training was launched.

Since the entire staff had been organized into teaching teams to grapple with these issues, the need to train teachers in collaborative processes became evident. Teachers who had spent their career working in isolation had to learn how to work together. And when it became evident that not all students were achieving the intended outcomes, the school had to begin to explore options for providing more time and support for students who needed extra help to be successful.

The pursuit of these questions has resulted in staff development initiatives that have continued for 15 years — so far. In assessing staff development priorities, Stevenson teachers had to consider the context of their overall school improvement initiative of success for every student, the questions that were most pressing in advancing that initiative, and the training that would enable them to answer those questions.

It’s important to emphasize that while Stevenson teachers were pursuing these initiatives, there were many other important and worthwhile programs that they did not pursue. And yet, the sustained focus of the school during that time has helped it become what the U.S. Department of Education described as "the most recognized and celebrated high school in America."

Good staff development is not dabbling in a little of this and a little of that. It is not embracing every new idea or program. The best staff development will represent a focused, results-oriented, sustained effort to build the collective capacity of a faculty to create a school in which all students achieve at high levels.

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.