This is quite a milestone article for two reasons:
It is the first time I have written a “Part 2” which is motivated by another first, being, publicly responding to an educator’s opinion.
“Any publicity is good publicity” and if someone takes the time to offer their opinion, then I feel it prudent that I acknowledge their efforts.
A previous article was titled “Subtraction before Addition” looking at the desire to add another program, system, process to fix a problem without subtracting the equivalent “time and effort” program, system or process first. This is how overwhelming creeps in. An example was used to illustrate the point of a school that reduced assemblies to one per term equaling four per year.
This prompted an educator to respond as follows:
“Interesting and insightful as always, Luke. Personally, I worry about schools who stop assemblies as a 'workload reduction' initiative. While there should definitely parameters to stop them becoming bigger than Ben Hur, I feel schools lose sight of the benefits of a regular event that sells school culture, initiatives and pride. Almost every parent attends their child's assembly, so it's a great community building exercise and stops mistruths/secret business being presumed. For most schools, assemblies are a once-a-year event for each class. However, parent emails, staffing shortages, compliance, documented plans, evolving curriculum- those are a daily challenge.” Dave (not real name)
Thank you and I agree within context.
A principal told me that their assemblies are sacrosanct, and they are well attended by the community. They are revered for all the ways Dave outlined. Any decision to “subtract” is based on the purpose and Return on Investment of time and energy. Any decision should be made in consultation with stakeholders who understand the debits and credits of the consequences of change.
It comes back to the worst argument rebuttal, “we have always done it this way.”
This may be the case, but has anyone stopped to think of the current benefits of “this way?’
What I do like about Dave’s comment is the challenges educators face on a daily basis. - parent emails, staffing shortages, compliance, documented plans, evolving curriculum. Agreed Dave, wholeheartedly. But they can come under scrutiny for some subtraction or not.
I would divide these into three categories:
1. Direct Control: Parent email response – create a communication statement that outlines the response time and subject matter. Settlers Primary School will respond within 48 hours of all emails. This has reduced the reminders from people.
Documented Plans – is there a uniform minimum template that addresses the factors that improve student progress? Sometimes educators without clear direction can spend too much time and effort pleasing shadows.
2. Indirect Control: Compliance is a big subject and difficult to navigate, but is all compliance made the same? I say not. Curiosity and logistics could reduce the time and energy spent in this space. “Will doing it improve student learning?” A question that could be asked of the person requiring the compliance.
3. No Control: No subtraction here.
Staffing shortages.
Evolving curriculum.
At the end of the day, I ask on behalf of all overwhelmed, good working educators, to discuss the subtraction in parallel with the addition.
Subtraction is in the conversation which promotes investigation into programs, systems or process so assemblies are not an addition but a celebration.
Comments