The Expectations of stakeholders

Recently, I have been working on a program for the senior school and it is interesting to reflect on this. The first point of reflection is the “why” question. Why do we want to incorperate technology into the program, and this isn’t just a technology program it is actually about any form of change.

I believe that this is directed from 5 different sets of stakeholders who will influence to greater of lesser extent the change in schools. Each brings with them a bias and a unique perspective to the process of change. For some the change is on a macro level and for others on a micro scale.

They are:

• The government, school district or legislative body over seeing the school
• The school board
• The community
• the teaching staff
• the students

Arching above all, is the legislative body responcible for education. These have a huge influence and often as not, they set direction for  education. They can provide clarity and purpose, focus and support.

Unfortuantely, these are usually political appointments and while often done with best of intents, are reactionary, popularist and frequently uninformed. Am I being harsh? Yes, perhaps I am but realistically, politicians are making decisions from their lofty view point which is poles apart from the perspective of the classroom teacher or the young learner in the classroom. Most politicians and administrators at a senior level have never been in a classroom or if they have it was years prior and in a 19th Century paradigm. We only need to look at well intentioned but nightmarish programmes like NCLB or national standards which have failed in so many countries to see this.

School boards provide the financial control for the school. They help shape direction of the school. They make appointments, approve projects and ally shape the environment of learning.

Usually, containing elected members of the community, they are meant to be the peoples voice, and indeed many are. But like politicans, the experience of most board members is harkening back to their own school days. Many will see the integration of Technology as important and will feel that more computers is a good thing, but the mechanics in a classroom? The oneof the things that oncerns me about school boards is the tendency for them to attract crusaders. Those on a mission to become elected, to bring in their agenda or ideas, to right percieved wrongs. How often do we see a very limited selection of nominees for school boards, and those who do nominate themselves having an often worthy agenda but with a limited perspective or holistic overview?

The communities influence is often a quieter one, the average parent who does not have time to be a board member as they are working to put food on the table. And as such does not have a great deal of influence except in the carpark as they talk amongst themselves or when they vote with their feet.

Parents want their children to succeed. They want them to be engaged and motivated and enjoying school. They too are influenced by their own educational experiences and this often temers their view of what happens in the classroom. The classic “it  worked for me and look how I turned out.” comments. If the only mode of education you have experienced is teacher centric, chalk and talk, rote learning; the dynamic, flexible and sometimes seemlingly chaotic world of students centric differentitated learning can be disconcerting. So the community to brings in its bias.

Teachers are the catalysts of change. Like a chemical reaction depended on a catalyst you can bring the reagents together, foster an optimal environment, but without the catalyst the reaction is painfully slow often to the point of being immeasurably tiny. Add the catalyst and the reaction proceeds at pace.

In a chemical reaction, the catalyst is often not used up or effected. In the classroom, teachers are always effected and to frequently are changed or just worn out. So we must have a supply of new catalysts – this places an onus of responcibility on pre-service educators.

The quietest of voices and alas the least influencial of stakeholders is the students themselves. Those on whom we are bestowing our educational wisdom, our hope and future, have the least say in direction. This is a hard balance to make how much influence should a student have on their learning? They can lack the wisdom (wisdom = Knowledge + experience) to be able to plot a learning course. They are often living in the now rather than considering the future. They struggle to scaffold and conceptualise why we proceed as we do in the classroom.

BUT does this mean they should not have an input, they should not be involved in shaping the direction of their learning? No they are vital, we must have their buy in, but unfortunately we can actually and do survive with out this.

So where does this leave us?

The shape of any program or change within a school is shaped by the degree of influence of these 5 stakeholders.  For collaborative, sustainable change to occur the expectations of all the groups must be considered and balanced.

Change is  influenced by the expectations and drivers of each of these groups. Sustainable change will see the expectations of each group considered, valued and balanced. The overall goals and objectives are derived from this.