Hawaii Business Magazine/May 2010 /
Best School System in North America/
Best School System in North America/
According to the publication Hawaii Business in its May 2010 issue titled “Best School System in North America” written by Beverly Creamer, a charter school like operational plan has achieved outstanding results. The magazine interviewed the architect of the process, the former Superintendent of Schools for Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
The story begins: “Mike Strembitsky launched an education revolution in the northern Alberta city of Edmonton in the 1960s and, today, many people consider it the best public school system in North America. It has inspired many districts across the United States to copy its reforms - especially giving financial and operating independence to individual schools.”
The story is one of decentralization of power right down to the individual school, who then compete with each other for students. Open enrollment with no district boundaries and complete school choice by the individual family. There is budgetary control at each school with strict oversight, but the choices are based on local conditions and are made to impact the schools objectives.
There is history In the story and many examples of challenges met along the way. To read the complete narrative go to the complete story and make a comparison with the North Carolina centralized system of funding, control and performance measurement.
The story begins: “Mike Strembitsky launched an education revolution in the northern Alberta city of Edmonton in the 1960s and, today, many people consider it the best public school system in North America. It has inspired many districts across the United States to copy its reforms - especially giving financial and operating independence to individual schools.”
The story is one of decentralization of power right down to the individual school, who then compete with each other for students. Open enrollment with no district boundaries and complete school choice by the individual family. There is budgetary control at each school with strict oversight, but the choices are based on local conditions and are made to impact the schools objectives.
There is history In the story and many examples of challenges met along the way. To read the complete narrative go to the complete story and make a comparison with the North Carolina centralized system of funding, control and performance measurement.
The article concludes:
“Change is difficult for many people. How did you get the people at the central office to give up control?”
"In bringing about change you have to look at getting a community of support. We didn’t do it by dictatorial order. Our unions were very strong and we had to make sure that what we did was work with unions, work with our people and get a high degree of buy-in. In working with the central office, one of the keys was communication and keeping everyone informed of what is being done. With the unions we told them everything we were doing. We did not ask them to approve it. We said, “We’re trying something and if it works, great. And if not, we’ll abandon it.” I’ve learned that when you’re going to make a change of this size, it’s very important that you honor the systems - the new one - and those working their buns off to make the current one work. So I felt if we guaranteed that everyone would have a job - though the jobs may change - that would lower the resistance. If it did, it didn’t feel any different. Most people are interested in: “What’s in it for me?” So you talk about what’s in it for them because people need to be reassured. Therefore, making them aware of the plans - and to stay ahead of the rumors - was important.”
“Change is difficult for many people. How did you get the people at the central office to give up control?”
"In bringing about change you have to look at getting a community of support. We didn’t do it by dictatorial order. Our unions were very strong and we had to make sure that what we did was work with unions, work with our people and get a high degree of buy-in. In working with the central office, one of the keys was communication and keeping everyone informed of what is being done. With the unions we told them everything we were doing. We did not ask them to approve it. We said, “We’re trying something and if it works, great. And if not, we’ll abandon it.” I’ve learned that when you’re going to make a change of this size, it’s very important that you honor the systems - the new one - and those working their buns off to make the current one work. So I felt if we guaranteed that everyone would have a job - though the jobs may change - that would lower the resistance. If it did, it didn’t feel any different. Most people are interested in: “What’s in it for me?” So you talk about what’s in it for them because people need to be reassured. Therefore, making them aware of the plans - and to stay ahead of the rumors - was important.”
 |
 |
 |
Time and time again when the tasks are given to an army of robots the success of the tasks are subpar. When innovation and creativity are substituted for rules, regulations and vague performance measurements the tasks are highly successful.
The slingshot sez: