Last month’s post focused upon Schmidt’s
(2007) exploration
of the elements of Invitational
Education (IE) theory that holistically evaluates school climate. Schmidt’s
meta-analysis identified three sets of structure. The September 2014 post
explored how the first set formed a framework for evaluating inviting
practices. The Five Ps include “five powerful
factors–people, places, policies, programs, and processes…highly significant
for their separate and combined influence on Invitational Leadership” (Purkey & Siegel,
2013, p. 104). In combination,
“these five P’s offers an almost limitless number of opportunities for the Invitational
Leader, for they address the total culture or ecosystem of almost any
organization” (p. 104). Through
inclusion of the Five P’s the invitational leadership model becomes a unique
and holistic model of leadership (Stillion & Siegel, 2005).
This month we explore how the remaining
two sets work in concert with the Five Ps to create a framework for effective collaboration
among stakeholders. The second set
includes empowerment, encouragement,
enlistment, enjoyment, equity, and expectation-the Six E’s. Elements of this set guide the investigation
of the Five Ps in relation to different stakeholder groups. The third set identifies four
areas of invitation: “Inviting Oneself Personally, Inviting Oneself
Professionally, Inviting Others Personally, and Inviting Others Professionally”
(Schmidt,
2007, p. 16). Through holistic
utilization, Schmidt posits these three sets of structure provide an
understandable language based on useable concepts that explains school climate
based on Invitational Education Theory. Understandable
language promotes the clear communication essential for effectivecollaboration.
The development of systemic support
when seeking to promote a school culture that drives sustained school
improvement requires collaboration (Marzano &
Waters, 2009). Since “the public school establishment is one of the most
stubbornly intransigent forces on the planet” (Marzano
& Waters, 2009, p. 2), a positive cultural change needs new thinking,
willingness, humility, collaboration, and a collective vision grounded in a
clear Learning
for All mission. The
principal, teachers, and parents are all school leaders needing to be available
to shape a school’s non-negotiable culture (Peterson
& Deal, 1998).
Effective collaborative change
begins with recognition that although schools can be loosely coupled by design,
they can also be tightly coupled regarding non-negotiable goals and a culture that
promotes student learning. It is
therefore essential to promote a “defined autonomy” (Marzano & Waters,
2009, p. 8) by communicating a clear vision to both internal and external
stakeholders. Otherwise, change is slow
or nonexistent (Lezotte
& Snyder, 2011). However, school
leaders must effectively communicate to stakeholders the difference between a steady,
sustained approach compared to resistance or unwillingness to change.
The effectiveness of school leadership acts
remains contingent upon teacher acceptance (Matthews & Brown, 1976). Teachers’ attitudes and perceptions influence
positive or negative responses to initiatives (Rokeach, 1968). Teachers’ perception of respect and trust exhibited
by the principal correlates with both teachers’ and students’ morale,
commitment, and achievement (Ellis, 1988; Riner, 2003). However, when a school leader effectively
communicates a vision for success, models positive expectations, and utilizes
inviting leadership practices, teachers’ behaviors can be influenced (Asbill,
1994; Asbill & Gonzalez, 2000).
Invitational Education theory provides a
needed collaborative and holistic framework for school transformation. Rather than suggesting a quick-fix, the framework
encourages a metamorphosis, requiring years of vigilance before affirming
sustained change (Strahan & Purkey, 1992).
Vigilance is required because “transforming the way schools operate
means transforming people” (Asbill, 1994, p. 42). School reform requires systemic change, a metamorphosis,
based on systemic analysis of the people, places, policies, programs, and
processes (the Five Ps). Such analysis discerns
whether any part of the whole is disinviting (Strahan & Purkey, 1992).
Invitational Education provides “a
theory of practice that radiates into every relationship in the school setting”
(Asbill, 1994, p. 43). Actions and
interactions can be perceived as either inviting or disinviting (Purkey &
Novak, 2008). Therefore, actions or
interaction perceived as positive become “invitations that bid others to see
themselves as capable, valuable, and responsible and to behave accordingly”
(Asbill, 1994, p.43).
Burns
and Martin (2010) posit the Invitational Education theory creates a
leadership model providing the collaborative structure needed to guide
educational leaders through diverse and complex situations. Researchers believe this leadership model is comprehensive
in design (Burns & Martin, 2010; Egley, 2003). It is also inclusive of many of the elements
of transformational and servant leadership, considered essential for promoting
success in educational organizations.
Utilization of an
Invitational Education theory of practice can create and maintain safe and
successful schools by addressing the total culture of the educational
environment (Stanley, et al., 2004). Exploration of key
concepts, such as the transformation of communication skills, assessing the 5
Ps, and empowering group dynamics, will optimize the establishment of
benchmarks and action plans for achieving school goals. Purkey and Novak (2008) offered the starfish
analogy as a mental model for the intentionally inviting school culture: “Like the actions of a starfish, steady and
continuous pressure from a number of points can work to overcome the toughest
school challenges” (p. 19).
The
International Alliance for Invitational Education (IAIE) will hold its 32nd
Annual World Conference in Nashville, TN from October 29-November 1,
2014. This unique international gathering will focus upon how to use
Invitational Theory as a framework for creating positive climates. CLICK HERE to
download the complete IAIE Conference Brochure and Registration
Form. CLICK HERE for Online Registration and
additional information on the IAIE.
References:
Asbill,
K., & Gonzalez, M. L. (2000). Invitational leadership: Teacher perceptions
of inviting
Principal practices. Journal
of Invitational Theory and Practice, 7(1), 16-27. Retrieved
from:
http://www.invitationaleducation.net/pdfs/journalarchives/jitpv7n1.pdf
Burns, G., &
Martin, B. N. (2010). Examination of the effectiveness of male and female
educational leaders who made use
of the invitational leadership style of leadership.
Journal of Invitational Theory
and Practice, 16, 30-56.
Edmonds, R.
(1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37(10),
15-24.
Egley, R.
(2003). Invitational leadership: Does it make a difference? Journal of
Invitational
Theory and Practice, 9,
57-70.
Lezotte, L. W.,
& Snyder, K. M. (2011). What effective schools do: Re-envisioning the
correlates.
Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Marzano, R. (2003). What works in schools:
Translating research into action (first ed.).
Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Marzano, R. & Waters, T.(2009). District
leadership that works. Bloomington, In: Solution
Tree Press
Purkey, W.
(1992). An introduction to invitational theory. Journal of Invitational
Theory and
Practice,
1(1), 5-14.
Purkey, W.,
& Novak, J. (1996). Inviting school success: A self-concept approach to
teaching
and learning (3rd
ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Purkey,
W. W., & Siegel, B. L. (2013). Becoming an invitational leader: A new
approach to
professional and personal success.
Atlanta, GA: Humanics. Retrieved from:
Schmidt, J. J. (2007). Elements of
diversity in invitational practice and research. Journal of
Invitational
Theory & Practice, 13, 16-23. Retrieved from: http://www.invitationaleducation.net/pdfs/journalarchives/jitpv13.pdf
To
Cite:
Anderson, C.J. (October 17, 2014) Invitational education theory and a framework for effective
collaboration.
[Web
log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment