In the era of big data, it can be easy to forget the importance of the human connection in certain enterprises, including the education of children. School reformers have set up funding programs that are competitive rather than collaborative, and evaluation systems dont pay attention to collaboration and school culture. In the face of all of this, here is a post that talks about the importance of relationships between teachers and between teachers and administrators. After all, these connections are really what hold a school together. <\/p>\n
This post was written by Carrie R. Leana, a management professor at the University of Pittsburgh as well as director of the Center for Health and Care Work at the University of Pittsburgh, and Frits K. Pil, a business administrator professor and research scientist at the Learning Research and Development Center at the University of Pittsburgh. This piece is part of The Social Side of Reform Shanker Blog series, which explores the idea that relationships, social capital, and social networks matter in lasting, systemic educational improvement. For more on this series, clickhere. The Shanker Blog is the voice of the Albert Shanker Institute, a nonprofit organization established in 1998 to honor the life and legacy of the late president of the American Federation of Teachers. <\/p>\n
By Carrie R. Leana and Frits K. Pil <\/p>\n
Most current models of school reform focus on teacher accountability for student performance measured via standardized tests, improved curricula, and what economists label human capital e.g., factors such as teacher experience, subject knowledge and pedagogical skills. But our research over many years in several large school districts suggests that if students are to show real and sustained learning, schools must also foster what sociologists label social capital the value embedded in relations among teachers, and between teachers and school administrators. Social capital is the glue that holds a school together. It complements teacher skill, it enhances teachers individual classroom efforts, and it enables collective commitment to bring about school-wide change. <\/p>\n
We are professors at a leading Business School who have conducted research in a broad array of settings, ranging from steel mills and auto plants to insurance offices, banks, and even nursing homes. We examine how formal and informal work practices enhance organizational learning and performance. What we have found over and over again is that, regardless of context, organizational success rarely stems from the latest technology or a few exemplary individuals. <\/p>\n
Rather, it is derived from: systematic practices aimed at enhancing trust among employees; information sharing and openness about both problems and opportunities for improvement; and a collective sense of purpose. Over a decade ago, we were asked by a colleague in the School of Education about how our research might be applied to improving public schools. Since then, weve spent a good deal of time trying to answer that question through several large-scale research studies. <\/p>\n
One thing we noticed immediately in our work with schools was the intense focus on the individual educator. This is prevalent not just among school reformers but in the larger culture as well, as evidenced in popular movies ranging from To Sir with Love in the 1960s to Waiting for Superman nearly 50 years later. And every self-respecting school district has a version of the Teacher of the Year award, which has now risen to state and even national levels of competition. In recent years, however, we have also witnessed a darker side to accountability, as districts around the country publicly shame teachers who do not fare well on the accountability scorecards. <\/p>\n
Accountability models find their roots in the discipline of economics rather than education, and are exemplified in the value-added metrics used to evaluate teacher performance. These metrics assess annual increments in each students learning derived from standardized tests in subject areas like math and reading. These are then aggregated to arrive at a score for each teacher her value added to students learning. Anyone with access to the internet can find teacher rankings based on these scores in many districts across the country. <\/p>\n
Needless to say, many teachers, and the unions that represent them, argue that value-added measures of student performance fail to capture the complex factors that go into teaching and learning. At the same time, reliance on such metrics may undermine the collaboration, trust, and information exchange that make up social capital and, in this regard, do far more harm than good. <\/p>\n
What is Social Capital? <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
See more here: In the era of big data, it can be easy to forget the importance of the human connection in certain enterprises, including the education of children. School reformers have set up funding programs that are competitive rather than collaborative, and evaluation systems dont pay attention to collaboration and school culture Continue reading
\nStrauss: The glue that really holds a school together and that reformers ignore<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"