Commitment to Continuous Improvement.

” Persistence, perseverance, and continuous improvement are the ingredients for forming a successful person.     –Debasish Mridha

A school is successful when it implements a collaborative and ongoing process for improvement that aligns the functions of the school with the expectations for student learning. Improvement efforts are sustained and the school demonstrates progress in improving student performance and school effectiveness. New improvement efforts are informed by the results of earlier efforts through reflection and assessment of the improvement process (Quality systems standards .p. 7).

Throughout history, people have used trial and error as an approach to improvement.  This approach is often defined as making a change and then seeing if anyone complains, or if something stops working because of the change.  The trial-and-error approach, which can be carried out with various degrees of sophistication, has sometimes been criticized as jumping to solutions without sufficient study both before and after trial.  All improvement will require a change, but not all change will result in improvement.  A primary aim of improvement is to increase the chance that a change will actually result in sustained improvement from the viewpoint of those affected by the change (Langley, K. Nolan, T. Nolan, Norman, & Provost, 2009).

William L. Boyd (2003) observed that America is in the midst of broad social, political, economic, and demographic transformations that portend crisis for public schools as we known. He sees schools as having entered a period of “trial” that will challenge them at their core. He argued that a “paradigm shift” has been developing in the United States since the 1980s: This shift is marked by a change in focus from inputs to the system to the outcomes and accountability of the system; by a shift in the attitudes of key constituency groups; and by a critical reexamination of what public education means and how it can or should be delivered (Boyd, 2003).

According to Smylie (2009) in his book Continuous School Improvement there are several areas in which changes are occurring that are especially relevant to schools. These include (a) jobs for which schools prepare students; (b) politics and control of education; (c) school funding; (d) the characteristics and conditions of children and youth; and (e) demands on schools for new learning, higher performance, and greater accountability.  Michael Fullan (2005) discusses in his book Leadership and sustainability: System thinkers in action how Leaders must become able not only to transform institutions in response to changing situations and requirements but must invest and develop institutions which act as “learning systems,” systems that are capable of bringing about their own continuing transformation.   Sustainability is defined as the capacity to support, maintain or endure (Dictionary, 2012).  Fullan defines sustainability as the capacity of a system to engage in the complexities of continuous improvement consistent with the deep values of human purpose.  Strategies that may have brought success to a school in the past might not bring success in the future or help a school achieve greater performance or outcomes.  It’s the development of the organizational system itself that can exhibit active sustainability.

Continuous improvement developed during the 1950’s and the 1960’s with management experts such as Deming, Juran, Philip B. Crosby, Armand Fiegenbaum, Kaoru Ishikawa, Genichi Taguchi, and others.  Their emphasis was on quality movement and quality management.  The emphasis on quality management declined in the 1970’s but reemerged in the 1980’s as Total Quality Management (TQM).  Continuous improvement is usually identified as one of TQM’s several “critical components”.  James Dean, Jr. and David Bowen (1994) understand continuous improvement in TQM as “a commitment to constant examination of technical and administrative processes in search of better methods” (p. 394). They see in it the belief that by improving processes, organizations can continue to meet the increasingly stringent expectations of their customers” (p. 394). Richard Hackman and Ruth Wageman (1995) also identify continuous improvement as one of several broad principles of TQM. They contend that behind the various models and practices of TQM is the idea that the long-term health of an organization depends on “treating quality improvement as a never-ending quest” (p. 312).As they view it, opportunities to develop better methods for carrying out work will always exist and organizational commitment to continuous improvement “ensures that people will never stop learning about the work they do”

Fullan (2005) lists the following examples as the few efforts to define continuous improvement in schools and school districts:

• James Detert, Karen Louis, and Roger Schroeder (2001) conceptualize continuous improvement as a cultural value of school organization. Consistent with that value, “Teachers and others in the school should devote time and energy to make things better. “This is a never-ending process” (p. 191).
• AdvancED (n.d.a, b), the umbrella organization for North Central Association and the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, names continuous improvement as one of its standards for school accreditation. It defines continuous improvement as a commitment of schools to “being better today than they were yesterday.” It is a “quality improvement process that yields results for students.” This process articulates a vision and purpose; maintains a “rich and current description” of students, their performance, school effectiveness and the school community; employs goals and interventions to improve student performance; and documents and uses the results to inform what happens next.
• The National Education Association (2012) defines continuous improvement as a means by which “organizations work in steady, systematic fashion to improve their results” (NEA, 2012). Change in effective schools is a constant. Continuous improvement focuses attention on discovering and implementing ways to achieve core goals related to student learning.
• Lawrence Lezotte and Kathleen McKee (2002) define continuous improvement as “a never-ending cycle of self-examination and adjustment” (p. ix). School improvement is an endless succession of incremental change. The effective school and school district will continually ask, “How are we doing? What can we do better? How can we better serve our students?” (p. ix). Continuous improvement is both “an attitude and a set of concepts and tools” (p. 35). “The underlying attitude,” they contend, “is that anything and everything can be improved” (p. 35). The process of continuous improvement is a cycle of action, evaluation, and reflection that should result in continuous adjustment of activities in response to changing environments, new research on practices, and the success or failure of present efforts.

All of these various definitions consider continuous improvement as something organizations do and strive to achieve.  The concept embodies the notion of continuously getting better, to achieve outcomes more effectively.  The concept also exemplifies ideas about processes that organizations approach to make sure desired outcomes are achieved.  Improvement requires change in the direction toward some valued objective.

Dr. Smylie (2009) identified eight common descriptive characteristics that bring some core of shared meaning to the concept of continuous improvement;(a)regular and ongoing;(b)oriented toward small incremental changes;(c)intentional and strategic;(d)proactive as well as reactive;(e)focused on the whole organization;(f)inclusive of all organizational members;(g)oriented toward the organization’s mission and core values;(h)integral to an organization’s mission, identity, design, and basic functions.  Finally, continuous improvement is central to what an organization is and what an organization does.

Continuous improvement is connected to the premise that change is no longer a choice for organizations, but a necessity.  Given a rapidly changing world, organizations will need to assess their surroundings and themselves continually and change accordingly. The issue is not whether to change; it is how to change and where to direct the change. Organizations will need to adapt, improve, and even transform on an ongoing basis. Organizations will need to change in small, incremental ways and in fundamental ways. Organizations will need to understand that any current condition or practice is or may soon be insufficient. This will require more than a flexible organization, but rather a strategic organization (Smylie, 2009).

Literature suggests firstly that the success of any continuous improvement process depends on the fidelity of its implementation.  And implementation depends on the framework in which it is performed.  Literature also suggests that that most organizations don’t adhere to only one model or set of strategies of continuous improvement.  Thirdly, literature indicates that it is wise to think about models and strategies in terms of equifinality, is a concept that means that the same goal can be attained from different starting points and by following different paths (Burke, 2008).  A fourth consideration found in the literature is the danger of goal displacement, is a phenomenon whereby an initial objective is replaced by another, typically when means become ends-in-themselves that displace the original goals.  A common instance of goal displacement is when the successful implementation of a policy or a practice becomes viewed as the end to be achieved rather than the objective that was to be achieved through the implementation of that policy or practice. In the classroom, goal displacement may occur when the completion of assignments becomes the goal rather than the student learning that is to be achieved through those assignments.  Finally, the literature on continuous improvement raises the issue of where to locate in the organization the process of continuous improvement.  Should the process of continuous improvement be at the top with management, should it be part of the core of the organization, or should it be part of the everyday activity of the organization (Smylie, 2009)?

For decades schools have been changing, but have they been improving?  Failing schools were at one time “good” schools, so why can’t they return to glory?  Our environment, our world is consistently changing, but our schools are holding on to the instructional practices that once made them good or adequate; those days are over.  For schools to survive and remain meaningful, they must continuously improve every day in order to keep up with our ever changing world.  Composer and lyricist, Irving Berlin, once said, “The toughest thing about being a success is that you’ve got to keep being a success.”  Success like this depends on continuously improving every day.

Boyd, W. L. (2003). Public education’s crisis of performance and legitimacy. In W. L. Boyd & D. Miretzky (Eds.), American educational governance on trial: Change and challenges. 102ndyearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (pp.1-19). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.

Detert, J. R., Louis, K. S., & Schroeder, R. G. (2001). A cultural framework for education: Defining quality values and their impact in U.S. high schools. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12, 183-212.

Fullan, M. (2005).Leadership and sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Langley, G. J., Moen, R., Nolan, K. M., Nolan, T. W., Norman, C. L., & Provost, L. P. (2009).The Improvement Guide: A Practical Approach to Enhancing Organizational Performance (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Lezotte, L. W., & McKee, K. M. (2002).Assembly required: A continuous school improvement system.  Okemos, MI: Effective Schools Products.

Quality systems standards. (2010, October 20). Retrieved from http://www.advanc-ed.org/districts

Smylie, M. A. (2009). Continuous School Improvement (New edition.). Corwin Press.