A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Staff and Leadership Development Issues

Unfortunately, due to substantial reductions, and in some instances elimination of research and development funds, the federal government is currently faced with considerable gaps in its own infrastructure to support curricula development, identification of best practice, and staff development support services. This lost of funds makes the challenge of helping to establish a standards driven education enterprise system clearly more difficult. This loss requires local, state and federal agencies to find new ways to get the job done.

The topics that need to be addressed include several "hot button" issues. Standards and assessments often conjure very negative responses on the part of teachers and school administrators. Anti-federal and state control flags are waved. Emotions run high within some minority communities that standards and assessments are just another way to discriminate. Animosities between academic and vocational educators arise. Reform weary educators believe another fad is upon them. Already noted is the concern of some vocal conservative groups that standards are mind control of children. Turf issues between agencies arise. The list can go on. Framers of professional development services will need to address such issues. Some can be addressed by quality materials that explain the whys, hows, and successful practices. The message carriers are important. While the federal government has a clear role in facilitating some of the professional development activities, they alone cannot carry the message. States, local school districts, national education support networks (e.g. HSTW, New Standards, NCRVE's Urban Schools, Accelerated Schools, national professional organizations, national skill standard organizations, and national membership organizations such as CCSSO, SHEEO and the American Association of School Administrators (AASA), and others) are all key actors in the professional development arena.

The whole education enterprise needs to be included in any such effort. This is especially true for the providers of second chance education and training services. They should no longer be ignored. These organizations are dealing with the needs of some of the most challenging youth and adults. They generally are working in conditions with substantial resource constraints and staff development opportunities are even more rare than those available to their counterparts in the publicly-funded education institutions. Many receive their core funding from the U.S. Department of Labor that long ago suffered reduced funding for professional development services. The few available resources for leadership and staff development need to be, at least in part, directed toward helping the large network of second chance providers become familiar with and use standards driven competency based curriculum and assessments. Lessons can be drawn from the work of the National Institute for Literacy. Their Equipped for the Future effort is explicitly a standards based strategy to improve adult literacy programs.

A logical beginning point is to consider how to maximize current leadership and staff development efforts across a wide range of stakeholder groups including, but not limited to, the following: teachers, school administrators, school districts policy makers postsecondary institutions, teacher education institutions, training providers, state administrators and policy makers in K-12, higher education, workforce development, statistical collection and analysis agencies, economic development organizations, local, state and national employer organizations, unions, national and state intermediary organizations such as representatives of public officials and educators, state consortia groups, national standards developers, national education and workforce development support organizations, parent advocacy organizations, and foundation funded leadership development organizations.

The span of responsibility and capacity to influence the ultimate outcomes varies widely within these aforementioned groups but each has a role. The listing does not assume equal treatment and attention to all of the groups. The need to understand the value of and how to develop and use standards related materials varies significantly among these different audiences. Yet, none should be ignored when considering leadership and staff development issues. From a federal and state perspective, a minimal but useful strategy would be to share information through materials targeted to a particular audience. For example, a state could prepare materials for economic development organizations about career clusters, priority occupations, and national occupational standards that have been selected for special emphasis.

Strategic allocation of current resources is the essential starting point. Federal facilitation leadership is essential, for without it the nation will not build a standards-driven education system. Three federal departments, Education, Labor, and Commerce through NIST, and the National Science Foundation are increasingly coordinating efforts. This is a logical area for more coordination. Leadership of these organizations need to champion and promote a standards driven system and assure their own agency's field staff development efforts are used to promote the overall activity.

Federal agencies can and do support leadership and staff development efforts through the work of research centers and regional laboratories, the framing of issues for competitive grants and contracts, funding of membership-based national organizations for technical assistance, and networking and intergovernmental meetings that occur in a variety of milieus. An example of a partnering approach using a peer network organization to help promote standards and integration of curriculum is the work of the California School Boards Association. A grant was given by the OVAE to this organization to provide school board members, superintendents and their districts with policy-level implementation strategies and effective policies necessary to integrate academic and vocational learning (CSBA,1996).

A strategic effort could begin at both the state and federal level by asking what is being done in all currently funded leadership and staff development efforts to promote:

• the use of standards across all levels of the education enterprise (K-12, postsecondary, and training);

• the integration of academic and occupational standards (where appropriate);

• the use of occupational/career clusters as tools for organizing workforce development services;

• the use of occupational/career clusters as tools for organizing competency-based curriculum development;

• the use of standards to promote development of programs of study that cross institutional boundaries;

• the use of assessments in classroom and beyond; and,

• the use of standards and assessments within the employer community.

This is not a complete listing of all the possible questions, nor does it need to be. The intent is to suggest that federal agencies need to take the first steps by looking across, down and around to ascertain that their professional development efforts are geared towards common goals.

If such an undertaking were to take place (it need not be an onerous one) the results will, no doubt, reveal limited crosscutting work being undertaken. This will probably be true even within the various operating divisions of a single department. The DofEd of has already established a cross-cutting professional development forum that has responsibility for coordination and it could be used to identify opportunities to improve professional development strategies to promote a standards driven system, but other departments and agencies need to be engaged in the overall effort.

Any undertaking to promote professional development materials for all of the different stakeholders will necessitate "pulling together" core materials addressing how the pieces fit together. It will also require listening to what the end users want, in what format(s), and in what milieu. National networks of institutions and peer membership organizations can inform the process and be part of the development of products and professional development opportunities for their membership. Beyond taking the lead in packaging information that knits the pieces together, the federal government can spur the expansion of professional development opportunities through its ongoing activities such as sponsoring or co-sponsoring seminars, conferences, and institutes. From these activities, materials tailored for different stakeholders that address "how to and where to go" would be of high utility. Several national skill standards pilot projects have developed quality materials that should be used.

A word of caution is in order. The standards movement will not be well-served if the information provided does not discuss and explore the full range of issues around standards development and use. The stakes are too high. No one organization has "on tap" the knowledge to cover all these issues. In certain areas developing training teams that cross cut traditional boundaries may be essential, (e.g., integrated curriculum for use in schools, training institutions and worksites). Many of the skill standards pilot projects have or are developing networks of experienced and "endorsed" providers of professional development services. This kind of approach with a network or consortia of providers working in teams may yield the deepest utility of standards.

The necessity for such work will be continuous and hopefully escalating in intensity and quality. Much of what needs to be done suggests either a redirection of current resources or simply including a standards focus in current efforts.
-###-

[Program Approval and Accreditation Process]

[Information Systems and Services]