Quality Education-Changing a whole system Changing an education system needs “different” thinking Dr Brian Metters - 20 March 2016
Synopsis This paper describes and introduces the concept of systems thinking as a technique for organisational change to a whole education system. Theoretical aspects are shown from a number of globally recognised models including Galbraith’s Star System, the McKinsey 7S, the Burke-Litwin model of organisational change, and David Nadler’s Congruence model. From a practical viewpoint we have created a specific Transformation Model for changing a whole education system in developing countries which is based on our 9 years experience of working to improve the quality of education in 200 primary schools in Nepal. A number of tools are also described which have been introduced in earlier papers in this series including the NSA Framework of Quality Education, The Quality Education Perception Test, and a Pedagogy Observation Tool.
www.qualityeducationglobal.org
1
The Scale of the Problem Reforming education systems in most developing countries has been driven by recent mandates from the UN about Sustainable Development Goals, and this has led to much activity especially meetings to form committees, seeking mega aid grants from the developed countries, and creating new strategies to meet a wide range of targets and indicators. But mostly it's the same old faces involved who failed with the previous Millennium Development Goals and who leap into individual and unconnected solutions without really understanding the problem. For example, do you live in a country where your education system suffers from any of the following issues: •
A teaching workforce which is undertrained and unmotivated
•
Poor implementation of new teaching methods post training
•
A culture of politicisation and unionisation
•
Teaching pedagogies which focus more on the teacher than the child
•
A completely outmoded curriculum with no elements of moral or social education
•
Assessment
strategies
based
purely
on
“remembering”
at
the
expense
of
“understanding and applying” •
Physical school environments which are often unsafe, unhygienic and unfriendly for young children
•
A complete lack of resources for use in the classroom
•
A closed system of teacher appointments as opposed to one which is open and competitive
•
Heads and Principals with no training in basic management, governance, staff development or educational leadership
•
No opportunities for young, motivated, newly trained teachers
The list could be two or three times longer than this, and will continue to grow unless someone takes a stand and pulls the whole SYSTEM together. Look carefully at the list of problems above, is it just a list or are there connections between some of them? Are there inter-dependencies? Is one problem causing another? The answer is “yes” there ARE connections because this is the nature of all systems; components interact all the time and a system will never be changed by working on one or two components only. The WHOLE system has to be addressed with a clear transformation strategy. But how?
www.qualityeducationglobal.org
2
Some Essential Tools Before we examine the nature of systems generally and education systems specifically we will introduce three tools we assert to be essential to this discussion. 1. Quality Education Framework This was introduced in our first paper in this series and shows the 13 components we believe describe and are essential to any programme developing the quality of education at any level. It can be used to determine the current state of a system, become the goal of an improved system, and provide direction for transition states in between the two. 2. Quality Education Index This was introduced in our second paper in the series and is a “measure� of progress in improving a system or school against the framework shown above. The QEI is a number on a scale of 1-100 and is determined using the Quality Education Perception Test (QEPT) which is a questionnaire given to students to complete on their perceptions of their education. 3. Pedagogy Assessment Pedagogy, or teaching method/style is a vital component of the Quality Education Framework and contributes significantly to improvements in the QEI. There must be clear definitions of the current teaching style and the desired style expressed as observable behaviours. These behaviours are then written into an observation document that can be used objectively to evaluate implementation or changes made by teachers in the classroom. This tool was also described in our second research paper.
Each of these tools can be freely downloaded from our website with links as follows: Quality Education Framework: {http://bit.ly/1Rw2AVF} Quality Education Index: {http://bit.ly/1PlL19D} Pedagogy Assessment: {http://bit.ly/1UeNVp1} You can also learn more about their development and place in education development from our online learning website {www.qualityeducationglobal.org}
www.qualityeducationglobal.org
3
Systems Thinking This section is to introduce the concept of systems thinking, the approach that is essential if whole education systems are to be transformed. There is no better way to begin it than with a quote from Frank Betts, “How Systems Thinking Applies to Education”: “Currently, the call for systemic change in education is becoming increasingly strident. Unfortunately, the word system has been popularised without a fundamental understanding of its implications, to the point where everything is a system but nothing really is treated as one. Many people say they are using a systems approach, but almost no one really is. Furthermore, popular interpretations of systems tend to use inappropriate mechanical models and metaphors. Decision makers need to fully understand why our current approaches won't work and what is different about the systems approach.” He lists 5 reasons why efforts to change education systems have met with little success: •
the piecemeal, or incremental, approach to change;
•
failure to integrate solution ideas;
•
a discipline-by-discipline study of education;
•
a reductionist orientation;
•
staying within the boundaries of the existing system (not thinking out of the box).
Here is a link to the article by Betts: How Systems Thinking Applies To Education So, a failure to transform education systems is caused by a lack of understanding of systems and how they work! So let’s define “system” generally before moving on, and again use some of the terms from the excellent article by Betts: A system is a set of elements that function as a whole to achieve a common purpose • An element is a necessary but not self-sufficient component of a system. That is, the system cannot achieve its purpose without the element, and the element by itself cannot replicate the system's functions • Systems are characterised by synergy—the whole (system) is greater than the sum of its parts (elements), because the relationship among the elements adds value to the system. • The relationship among the elements is maintained by an exchange of energy; for example, money in a banking system, heat in a thermodynamic system, or information in a learning system Now we have some simple definitions let’s look at some useful models and frameworks that can be used to describe systems and their elements. Click on the heading for references. •
www.qualityeducationglobal.org
4
1. The McKinsey 7S This is one of the best known systems models and describes any organisational system as comprising 7 elements all mediated through a set of shared values. The model depicts the interdependence of the 7 elements with some defined as “hard elements”, Strategy, Systems, Structure, and the remainder as “soft elements”. The soft elements are often the most difficult to transform and it is Shared Values in the centre that is the most essential and critical to the development of the rest.
2. The Galbraith Star A similar model to the McKinsey 7S as it clearly defines elements and shows the interdependence of them. It doesn't show any cultural aspects of an organisational system however such as the Shared Values element in McKinsey 7S. Galbraith also stated however that Strategy drives everything and is the first step in the transformation process
3. The Burke-Litwin Causal Model
A more complex model showing more elements to the system and a causal relationship with the external environment. Three elements are also highlighted as being essential for full transformation of the system, notably Strategy, Leadership and the Culture within the system or organisation to be developed. This model demonstrates that system change is also a process with a “flow” or movement towards the goal of improved performance.
www.qualityeducationglobal.org
5
The Congruence Model of System Change I am devoting a complete section to this model for a number of different reasons. It was developed by the late David Nadler who I respected and learned from greatly, albeit from a distance until I spoke with him about my own adaptation of his model in 2003. Our exchange gave me confidence that his original model and my adaptation would work in any type of system, from financial organisations where I worked the most, to the education system in Nepal which is still in dire need of some clear systems thinking. I dedicate this paper to David and thank him again posthumously for all I learned.
The Nadler Congruence Model
The critical first step in designing and leading successful large-scale change is to fully understand the dynamics and performance of the organisation itself. It’s simply impossible to prescribe the appropriate remedy without first diagnosing the nature and intensity of an organisation’s problems. Yet, all too often especially as we have seen in education in Nepal leaders react precipitously to a presenting set of symptoms. This model from David Nadler suggests a starting point for large-scale change. It has proven to be useful in so many widely varying situations because it meets the test of any successful model: It simplifies what is inherently complicated, reduces the complexity of organisational dynamics to manageable proportions, and helps leaders not only to understand, but also to actually predict, the most important patterns of organisational behaviour and performance.
www.qualityeducationglobal.org
6
The central part of the Congruence Model contains 4 elements that are defined by Nadler as follows: 1. The Formal Organisation is made up of the structures, systems and processes inside the organisation system which groups and coordinates people and their activities to achieve the strategic objectives. 2. The Informal Organisation is often made up of the unwritten guidelines exerting a powerful influence on people’s commitment and behaviour. This includes relationships, beliefs, values, and behavioural norms. Most appropriately Nadler says that these “informal aspects” often supplant or are more powerful than items included in the Formal Organisation. 3. The People is fairly straightforward and encompasses the numbers, types, expectations, knowledge and skill sets required by the organisation. 4. The Work is the general term used by Nadler to describe the core activities of the organisation system, the tasks, work flow patterns, etc. Inputs are concerned with mostly the current situation the system finds itself in, such as the environment in which it has to operate, the resources available to it as well as it’s history which can often be described as its “baggage”! Outputs are outlined at three levels resulting from strategy implementation, whole system level, unit level such as a single school in an education system, and individual level such as a teacher in a school. To conclude this section here are all three of Nadler’s papers on system change which ARE complex, but well worth the effort to read if you are serious about understanding the nature of systems and how to change them. They are especially relevant if you want to find a practical and well proven methodology for transforming an education system, but you will need to make the effort to adapt and flex the process to fit your own situation. 1. The Congruence Model of Organisational Change 2. Managing The Dynamics of Change 3. Transition Leadership In the next section I will begin to adapt Nadler’s processes for the transformation of an education system.
www.qualityeducationglobal.org
7
A Transformation Model For Education Systems In this section I will outline an adapted version of the Congruence Model for education system change. You will need to make two “leaps of faith” with this, the first being an acceptance of the model itself, and the second being its applicability to education systems.
Here are the key features in relation to Nadler’s model: 1. It has four central components which are all dependent on each other 2. Strategy is incorporated into the system, making it slightly different from Nadler, but with the same elements of goals/mission/plans and also including the Work component which Nadler had as a separate component. The purpose of Strategy in the system is to give it direction, to be the beacon or guiding light. 3. Culture is equivalent to Nadler’s Informal Organisation and is identical in all respects. Its purpose is relatively intangible, but it is the basis of commitment in any organisation and often lacking in education systems in developing countries. 4. Structure is equivalent to Nadler’s Formal Organisation and includes processes, procedures, systems, rules, standards and architecture (structure chart) of the organisation. Its overall purpose is the control of everything, not necessarily in a bureaucratic way, but developmentally too such as having a fair performance management system, a clear pedagogy process. 5. People is a self evident component of all systems and includes numbers and types of people needed to implement the strategy, the knowledge and skills required, and the roles that must be filled. It is through people implementing the strategy, applying
www.qualityeducationglobal.org
8
processes, committing to the norms and values of the system that the essential capability for effectiveness is provided. Transforming The Education System For Quality Now we arrive at the big question. How can we use this model to develop the quality of education in our system? The first part of the answer to this question MUST be to define and understand the expression “quality education�, something we have said and written about many times. If you have no definition of quality then you have no means to evaluate the current system, no goal or destination of the improved system, and obviously no roadmap to move from one to the other. So the first step is to use a framework of quality education preferred for your own system, and we have researched this one with 13 elements and described in a previous paper which you can access again here: Quality Education Framework The second part of the answer is to distribute the elements from your quality framework across or into the system model, and I have done that here with a few examples:
www.qualityeducationglobal.org
9
These four components are not only related but completely connected for ANY system, they are regulated too just like a central heating system with its thermostat! Change one element inside one component and you can bet that it will cause a reaction or change somewhere else. The trick (or skill) is to plan the whole change to the whole system and to anticipate and plan for systemic adaption as you proceed. We realise at this stage it can all sound a bit theoretical, especially with no examples given as to how such an approach would work, or typical examples of educational elements inside the four components. But this is where the educational and organisational experts come together to design a WORKING system which is funded, planned and delivered in a systemic manner. So, here are a few examples of some elements for each of the four main components which need implementing simultaneously: 1. Strategy: •
Adopt or create a universal model or framework of Quality Education and make it the mission of the system change
•
Set clear goals against each element of the Quality Education framework
•
Adopt a coordinated approach aimed at complete transformation with NO piecemeal donors or projects sanctioned
2. Culture: •
Create a meritocracy with performance management for Principals and Teachers to reward excellence
•
Depoliticise the teaching profession
•
Create a culture of continuous development and improvement
•
Enable a values-based approach in every school
3. People: •
Identify the types and numbers of teachers to deliver the new system
•
Assess and appraise all existing teachers for competence and either retain, retrain, or retire
•
Recruit/appoint fresh, young, well trained teachers into the gaps
•
Retrain teachers as necessary via short intensive courses to bring everyone up to the same standard
•
Implement professional continuous improvement programmes regionally and in-school
•
Run educational leadership programmes for all Principals and Head Teachers
www.qualityeducationglobal.org
10
4. Structure: •
Create a national structure for policy and strategic development of the Primary Sector
•
Set up national grades and pay scales to reflect the importance of change and improvement within a performance management system
•
Introduce a policy of open and competitive appointment of teachers
•
Assess every primary school against standards of safety, hygiene, space etc.
•
Completely revamp the primary education curriculum
This is only a sample, and an education expert would no doubt fill pages and pages under each heading, but the organisational expert would work to unify the system with elements that compliment each other. He would also ensure that the people implementing the change to the system created a set of transition stages which are described in lots of detail in Nadler’s paper mentioned earlier which conceptually looks like this:
This diagram shows 3 transitions which are like the stages of building a house. Transition 1 might simply be the creation of the house foundations to a set of standards such as depth etc., whereas Transition 2 is with walls built on the foundations according to architect drawing, and Transition 4 is the roof completion. But in a complex education system whether teacher training comes before performance management, or teacher assessment before training, or at what stage the curriculum is redesigned. There WILL be a natural sequence! www.qualityeducationglobal.org
11
Conclusions & Recommendations In conclusion, a variation of Nadler’s Congruence Model is proposed for education system change. When used together with our Quality Education Framework they provide a powerful approach to analysing the current system and defining the future system. Transition states also need defining as part of the journey and must take account of the interdependence of all the system components. Our recommendations from this can be summarised as follows: 1. Systems models and frameworks are essential for changing education systems 2. A clear definition of quality education is needed for transformation and transition states 3. This approach should be used to inform strategy for education system change 4. An Organisational Psychologist should be on all strategy groups and committees
References All references used in this paper have been provided with links to find the relevant items on the internet as they are used in the document. If you have any problems locating them on the web please contact the author as below.
The Author Brian Metters, BA (Psychol.), MSc., PhD, is the Chairman of Nepal Schools Aid, a UK registered charity working to develop the quality of education in Kathmandu primary schools. Now retired from business, Brian is an organisational psychologist and specialised in change management mostly within the financial services industry of the UK. He has been involved in charitable fundraising for Cancer Research, The Big Issue (for the homeless) and disadvantaged children in Nepal. {www.nepalschoolsaid.org}. His latest venture is in releasing all the materials used in education development in Nepal online at www.qualityeducationglobal.org where you can use the contact form if required.
www.qualityeducationglobal.org
12