My journey with faculty leadership and management.

Soon my school will venture down the path of performance planning for all staff.  It begins with a faculty review process conducted by the upline deputy principal in consultation with the Head of Department.  Following from that will be the development of a performance plan for the Heads of Department, then performance plans for teaching staff.  This has identified as critical the need for me to provide feedback to staff on performance.

This realises a fear I have held for a long time – providing corrective feedback where required.   I have had no problems doing this for pre-service teachers, yet when it comes to providing such feedback to practising teachers (and teachers I need to maintain a working relationship with) then I have been fearful to the extent that I withhold my professional opinions.  I generally attempt to modify practice by implementing various department strategies and expectations, but this is a roundabout method of achieving what I desire, and generally does not result in the change I see as reasonable.

So, its time to suck it up and do the hard yards.  Think back to those university lectures – feedback sandwich, congratulate before you criticise, correction over critical etc etc.

My plan is to begin with the teachers in my department who identify as beginning teachers.  They are keen for feedback and they will allow me to “practice” my provision of critical feedback.  At least I have the expectations and standards I’ve worked hard to promote to fall back on when basing feedback on a framework.  This should be no different when providing feedback on the performance of my teachers who identify themselves as established.

I think at its base, the fear is about disagreeing with a teacher on the perceived quality of their practice.  In other words they believe they are a better educator than I believe they are.  Confidence is a key ingredient in teaching, and my disruption of one’s confidence may ultimately impact heavily on their performance.  However, if I don’t disrupt them will they improve?  Don’t we all need some disruption to push us to improve?

This year performance feedback has become a significant component of my role at school. This has occurred for a number of reasons;

1. I have four new teachers to my department (one of which is still completing their final practicum, two are beginning teachers).
2. I have ex-students requesting to complete pre-service practicums with us.
3. Performance plans by all teachers are required as part of the current EB agreement.

These have caused me to think and plan purposely for feedback.  Whenever I think purposely about feedback I am drawn back to my readings by John Maxwell, in particular his book Developing the Leader Within You. In Chapter 10 he discussed what he considers the most important lesson of leadership – staff development.  As my feedback on performance should enable and encourage staff development it is important I consider this chapter within my context.  Upon revisiting this chapter, I am reminded of what Maxwell refers to as the seven sins.  These struck a chord with me, and I realised I may be committing some of these sins despite having good intentions for performance feedback.  These sins are;

• trying to be liked rather than respected
• not asking team members for advice and help
• emphasising rules rather than skills
• not keeping criticism constructive
• not developing a sense of responsibility in team members
• treating everyone equally
• failing to inform / communicate

Sins that I believe I have committed are emphasising rules rather than skills, treating everyone equally and failing to inform.  Why do I think this?

Emphasising rules rather than skills – I have focused the start of the year on behaviour and performance standards across the department. This includes uniform, management of non-participants, completion of calendars for planning and facility care.  Although these are very important to the cohesive and productive functioning of the department, they are not more important than the pedagogical skills being utilised within classes.   I have failed to provide feedback on pedagogy (except to my prac student whom I am supervising) to teachers, instead providing feedback on school and department rules.  I don’t currently have a plan to correct this, but I’ll need to engage colleagues in conversation to gather ideas.

Treating everyone equally – mainly due to my focus on my prac teacher, I have not been able to provide feedback across my staff.  Therefore it is possible that those who have received feedback may percieve I don’t have faith in their ability as they see others who have not yet received feedback.  (This brings to mind another problem that some teachers see receiving feedback as a negative interaction, regardless of the feedback).  I could come up with a plan and share it amongst the staff, or even involve experienced staff in providing feedback to developing staff.  I could then provide feedback to those senior staff.  In further consideration of equality, those that I consider developing and beginning would need opportunity to provide feedback on performance also.  Perhaps I could use a loop and allow them to choose someone to observe and provide feedback to.  If this occurs,I will need to have some monitoring of feedback to both ensure it is done effectively and appropriately.

Failing to inform / communicate – this is significant when a staff member has underperformed (according to my expectations.)  Previously I have been indirect in providing constructie feedback in these situations.  In the past couple of years this indirectness has resulted in further difficulty, so I need to make a conscious effort to productively express disappointment in staff performance where appropriate.  How to do this is critical, and I can draw guidance from feedback models alredy in existence.

One feedback model I like to use is W3 – What worked well? What didn’t work? What can we do differently?  This model is also known as the Success – Learn – Change model.  I like this model as it places first thought on positives, which assists in creating an apropriate frame of mind for dritical reflection.  Without this positive approach, all is lost.  My question nowis whether to formalise this into a form.  Do I ask them to write their responses to this, or is it more effective to have conversation and simply record the What I could do differently?

This process needs to be managed well, and this critical self-reflection encouraged.  Perhaps the formality should be reduced, and I can observe in passing then engage in conversation following.  Somehow I need to develop the idea that the feedback is for their benefit.  This equity (and perceived equity) across 22 teachers is going to be tricky!

At my first meeting of the year with my staff, I explicitly expressed to them that I am aware communication is a weakness in my performance as a leader and a manager. Seeking guidance and inspiration on this, I returned to some favourite books and notes I keep.

The first of these is Stephen Covey’s “Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.”. Within this book Covey refers to a circle of influence. This is at it’s simplest a recognition of what I have influence over when attempting to implement and maintain change. To successfully manage change I will need to identify aspects of my communication that fall within my circle of influence. Accompanying the circle of influence is the circle of concern. This represents factors that impact (in this case on my communication) yet I do not have direct influence over. A second book I take guidance from is John Maxwell’s “21 Laws of Leadership.”  One of these laws that I believe is pertinent to my goal of improved communication is #10: Connection.  Maxwell discussed that individual connections (even within team situations) is a key aspect of leadership.

There are a range of reasons that I have come to the conclusion that my communication requires attention, and what I need to do is determine what is within my circle of influence and which fall within the circle of concern.  A time for critical introspection.

But there is no change without defining the goal.  I have always used the SMART principle of goal setting.  So to more explicitly define my goal of improved communication –

Specific – I want to develop my ability to communicate the relevant information to those who believe they are relevant team members in an effective manner.  This is important as staff satisfaction is directly influenced by their relationship with me (amongst other things).  I plan to research and read information on communication methods within corporate teams to inform this.

Measurable – informal measures such as “are the task being completed” or “are the expectations being upheld” can be utilised.  Conversations required to “fix” misunderstandings is also a measure.  Ultimately I want to reduce staff dissatisfaction within the department.  I’ve also asked staff to report to me (can be anonymous) if my communications cause concern.

Attainable – I beleive so. There are not many dissatisfied currently, and this goal will assist in preventing any further problems.

Realistic – yes, I am after improvement.

Time Frame – a school year.

Recently my management and preparation was tested when our school held a swimming carnival for year 8 students. Due to the size of our school, this resulted in 13 of my staff being absent from their classes for the day. What exacerbates this, is the fact that year 8 and 9 HPE classes at our school are not allocated classrooms.

I knew this event was happening, and I knew prior to the date who was assisting and would therefore be absent. Fortunately there were systems in place that minimized the impact on our students.

First and foremost, it was important that I remain at school to assist covering teachers and deal with random issues that were bound to occur.

My teachers are required to submit calendars for their classes which indicate their known absences, and the work that can be completed in their absence. This calendaring has resulted in teachers preparing their classes for their absence. Due to the unknown qualifications and capabilities of the covering teachers, I require them to leave classroom work and I can make a judgement call on whether physical work can be completed.  This year I attempted to leave some “space” in HPE teachers timetables for situations such as these.  This space means they are eligible for internal relief, but it also means HPE classes might have a HPE teacher despite their class teacher being absent.  To some extent this has been impacted on the allocation of 4 extra classes within my department, but this could not be planned for.

To assist students in finding their class, a sheet is posted on our staffroom door where the teacher can enter the classroom or area the class will be held in.  This means lost students or those late to class have a method of quickly locating the class.

These measures ensured such a large absence of staff had a minimised impact on the remainder of the department.

The most important item to note, is that on a day such as this I need to be aware I will most likely not get any of my own work done.  By not settign a daily task list or goal for this day, I reduce stress levels that occur when you don’t complete what you have planned.  It is simply not feasible to think I can continue to operate as normal when 13 of my staff are absent.  Any work completed should be considered a bonus in this situation.