Developing a Learning Organization and Building Resiliency Through Action Research

         In relation to educational reform, a review of the literature addressing the concept of learning organizations will find most themes and theories were developed from 1990-1999.  In addition to Senge’s (1990, 2006) systems model, Steiner's (1998) case study of organizational dilemma as barriers to learning garnered a lot of attention.  As advanced by Senge (2006), the five primary disciplines of a learning organization are:

•          systems thinking,
•          personal mastery,
•          mental models,
•          shared vision and
•          team learning. 

 

By utilizing these disciplines, facilitating the learning of teachers and students, and transforming itself as part of a continuous improvement process, an inviting educational change leader would want the school to exhibit the essential features of a learning organization. In this regard, the educational change leader’s role and additional responsibilities would be to support staff transitions throughout the change process.  This is optimized by helping build resiliency during change. 

To create a learning organization, it may be necessary for the change leader to willingly destabilize the system to promote innovation and provide workplace balance.  While this would shift the educational leader’s focus, the creation of organizational structure that encourages a culture of learning (Senge, Kleinder, Roberts, Ross, and Smith, 1994) requires the right people become part of the organization.  Therefore, the role of an  educational change leader needs to be proactive, but also intentional, inclusive, trusting, trustworthy, and supportive.  Being proactive will mitigate reacting to or worrying about conditions over which there is little or no control. 

Apropos to this endeavor, Lavoie (1989) encouraged mitigating instructional environments that exacerbate frustration, anxiety, and tension (FAT). The intentionally inviting change leader therefore would want to eliminate such FAT from the system  and instead seek to create an optimal learning environment approaching nirvana (LEAN). As just demonstrated, acronyms and mnemonics are two psychological tools utilizing social interactions within an educational environment to effectively reduce neurological overload and increase learning of desired goals.

Learning overload prevents educators from helping students realize progress and achieve stated goals (Reason, 2010).  Crucially, learning overload also adversely impacts professional development. Reiterating previous research by Kennedy (2006) and Franklin (2005), Reason (2010) further noted, “We can’t alter the brain to hold more information, but we can change our approach to learning in ways that reduce overwhelm and prepare us to deal with institutional challenges more effectively” (p. 99).  The educational change leader helps to promote resiliency and the utilization of higher order thinking skills (HOTS) rather than mostly LOTS by seeking to mitigate learning overload. 

An effective approach for becoming a learning organization promoting organizational learning is to encourage action research as a process whereby educators systematically investigate instructional practices and techniques to improve their teaching and student learning.  As part of the action research process, the impact of a specific instructional practice on student learning is measured.  The results become the basis for educational planning, innovation, and effective decision-making.  By utilizing action research, the educational change leader increases development of the disciplines required to promote the learning organization.

Therefore, action research can also be utilized for promoting continual professional development and providing a direct route for systemic teaching and learning improvement (Calhoun, 2002).  Respective of the correlates of Effective Schools Research (Lezotte & Snyder, 2011) and tenets of Invitational Theory and Practice (Shaw, Siegel, & Schoenlein, 2013), using effective leadership to encourage action research with the collection and analysis of data to monitor and adjust programs, policies, people, places, and processes, facilitates school-wide change.  Thus, systemic action research offers the opportunity to transform the school’s climate and level of educational effectiveness. 

When the educational change leader begins to investigate the practicality of implementing action research school-wide, the following questions should be addressed:

• What does the disaggregated classroom data reflect about student and teacher learning?
• What do teachers need to learn in order to impact specific student learning needs?
• How is the school going to support teacher learning to ensure student achievement?
• How will teachers and the school evaluate classroom instruction and professional learning? 
• What evaluation tools will be used?
• How will teachers and the school use the information collected through the evaluation to make specific and targeted decisions regarding research-based instructional strategies?

           As an educational change leader intentionally invites her or his staff to move toward successful implementation, questions will continue to need answers and the level of understanding will continue to improve. To promote resiliency, it is important to support risk-taking and demonstrate the what, why, and how of action research.  In this way, FAT is reduced, learning  overload is mitigated, and action research results in effective professional development that improves student learning.

As a result, the proactive educational change leader is enabled to focus time and energy on what can be controlled.  The importance of allowing problems, challenges, and opportunities to fall into two areas--Circle of Concern and Circle of Influence was detailed by Covey (1989).  Proficiency in this area allows the educational change leader to attend to the appropriate details within his or her sphere (Senge et al., 1994).  Ideally, the result can then be a school that is a learning organization prepared to promote the learning for all mission!

 

To Cite:

Anderson, C.J. (May 30, 2022). Developing a learning organization and building resiliency 

    through action research. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

References

Calhoun, E. F. (2002). Action research for school improvement. ASCD. Retrieved from

https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/action-research-for-school-improvement

 

Covey, S. R. (1989). The 7 habits of highly effective people: Restoring the character ethic. Free

            Press

Lavoie, R. (1989) How difficult can this be? F.A.T. City--A learning disabilities workshop DVD            Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhzh9kt8z7c

 Lezotte, L. W., & Snyder, K. M. (2011). What effective schools do: Re-envisioning     the correlates. Solution Tree Press.

Purkey, W. (1992). An invitation to invitational theory. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 1(1), 5-15. 

Reason, C. (2010). Leading a learning organization: The science of working with others: Solution Tree Press. 

Senge, P.M. (1990). The fifth discipline. Century Business 

Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Currency. 

Senge, P. M., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., & Smith, B. J. (1994). The fifth discipline             fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization. Doubleday.

Shaw, D., Siegel, B., & Schoenlein, A. (2013). The basic tenets of invitational theory and practice: An invitational glossary. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 19, 30-42. 

Steiner L (1998) Organizational dilemmas as barriers to learning. The Learning Organization 5(4):193-201 DOI:10.1108/09696479810228577