ebook img

Analytic Processes for School Leaders PDF

146 Pages·2001·0.77 MB·English
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview Analytic Processes for School Leaders

a n a l y t i c C T. R YNTHIA ICHETTI AND B B. T ENJAMIN REGOE CYNTHIA T. RICHETTI AND BENJAMIN B. TREGOE Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Alexandria, Virginia USA ® Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development 1703 N. Beauregard St. • Alexandria, VA 22311-1714 USA Telephone: 1-800-933-2723 or 703-578-9600 • Fax: 703-575-5400 Web site: http://www.ascd.org • E-mail: [email protected] Copyright © 2001 by Kepner-Tregoe, Inc., and Tregoe Education Forum, Inc. All rights reserved. The material contained in this publication has been adapted, in part, from certain copyrighted works of Kepner-Tregoe, Inc., Princeton, New Jersey, and is used with the permission of Kepner-Tregoe, Inc. Certain figures contained herein have been reprinted with the permission of Kepner-Tregoe, Inc. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage-and-retrieval system, without permission from the copyright holders. ASCD publications present a variety of viewpoints. The views expressed or implied in this book should not be interpreted as official positions of the Association. netLibrary E-Book: ISBN 0-87120-728-1 Price: $22.95 Quality Paperback: ISBN 0-87120-516-5 ASCD product no. 101017 ASCD member price: $18.95 nonmember price: $22.95 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data (for paperback book) Richetti, Cynthia T. Analytic processes for school leaders / Cynthia T. Richetti and Benjamin B. Tregoe. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-87120-516-5 (alk. paper) 1. School management and organization—Decision making. 2. Thought and thinking. I. Tregoe, Benjamin B. II. Title. LB2806 R5554 2001 371.2—dc21 2001003270 A n a ly t i c P r o c e s s e s f o r S c h o o l L e a d e r s LIST OF FIGURES.........................................................iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS................................................vi INTRODUCTION............................................................1 1 RATIONAL THINKING AS A PROCESS ........................................................................................7 2 THINKING ABOUT QUESTIONS ......................................................................................19 3 DECISION ANALYSIS: WHAT’S OUR BEST CHOICE? ......................................................................................28 POTENTIAL PROBLEM ANALYSIS: 4 WHAT COULD GO WRONG? GUARDING AGAINST FUTURE TROUBLE ......................................................................................52 PROBLEM ANALYSIS: 5 WHY DID THIS HAPPEN? SOLVING PROBLEMS BY FINDING TRUE CAUSE ......................................................................................68 SITUATION APPRAISAL: 6 WHAT’S GOING ON? SORTING OUT COMPLEXITY ......................................................................................92 7 GETTING STARTED ....................................................................................110 APPENDIXES A. CONTRIBUTING EDUCATORS ....................................................................................126 B. COMPASSQUEST: MIDDLE SCHOOL/CORPORATE PROJECT .....................................................................................128 BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................130 REFERENCES.............................................................131 INDEX.........................................................................133 ABOUT THE AUTHORS............................................136 List of Figures 1.1 The Input-Process-Output Relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.2 The Rational-Thinking Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1.3 Four Types of Situations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.4 Types of Situations and Corresponding Analytic Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.1 Comparison of Process and Content Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3.1 Evaluating Alternatives in the College Decision Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 3.2 Decision Analysis Steps: Basic and Refinements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 3.3 Scoring Alternatives in the College Decision Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 3.4 Weighing Objectives in the Scheduling Decision Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3.5 1st Graders Evaluate Potential Pets for Franklin the Turtle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 4.1 Structure of a Potential Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.2 Applying Potential Problem Analysis in the Closed-Campus Example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 4.3 Using Potential Opportunity Analysis to Maximize Training Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 4.4 Using Potential Problem Analysis to Plan for a Difficult Meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 4.5 Using Potential Problem Analysis to Plan Thawing a Woolly Mammoth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 4.6 Addressing the Potential Problem of Fires and Explosions from Earthquakes. . . . . . . . . . . 66 5.1 Structure of a Problem and Possible Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 5.2 Is and Is Not Questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 5.3 Is and Is Not Questions Applied to the Math Lab Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 5.4 Narrowing Possible Causes in the Math Lab Example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 5.5 Problem Analysis Steps: Basic and Refinements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 5.6 Distinctions and Changes in the Math Lab Example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 5.7 Problem Specification in the LEAP Scores Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 iv List of Figures 5.8 Narrowing Possible Causes in the LEAP Scores Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 5.9 Problem Specification in the Disciplinary Referrals Example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 5.10 Is and Is Not Questions in the Pedestrian Safety Example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 5.11 Problem Specification in the Student Arrests Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 6.1 Situation Appraisal in the School Violence Example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 6.2 Assessing Priorities in the School Violence Example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 6.3 Situation Appraisal in the School Bus Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 6.4 Flexible Use of Situation Appraisal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 6.5 Situation Appraisal in the Substance Abuse Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 7.1 How the Analytic Processes Interconnect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 7.2 Three Ways to Use an Analytic Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 7.3 Athletic Director’s “Plan for Process Use” in the Budget Cut Decision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 7.4 Assistant Superintendent’s Plan for Improvement in the Effective Meetings Example . . . . 120 7.5 Identifying Where in the Curriculum an Analytic Process Might Apply. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 7.6 Health Teacher’s Lesson Plan in the Eating Disorders Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 v Acknowledgments T We are also indebted to our colleagues at his book is possible only because of the the Tregoe Education Forum, whose insights teachers, administrators, and students and suggestions have been invaluable—Bob of the schools and school districts with Brock, Rick Fonte, Shari Johnson, Cass Love, whom we have been fortunate enough to work. Jim Sheerin, Amy Stempel, and especially, Bob We are most grateful to them. (See Appendix A Klempen and Mike Roche, with whom we have for a listing.) had the opportunity to work for the past eight We are also indebted to Kepner-Tregoe, years. And we would not be able to pursue our Inc., for their support and to those Kepner- goals without those who have contributed fi- Tregoe clients who made available an important nancially and in other ways. We are grateful for member of their staff to work with a leadership their support. team from a local middle school as part of the Finally, we thank our editors, John O’Neil CompassQuest consortium, cosponsored by the and Margaret Oosterman, for their many helpful Association for Supervision and Curriculum suggestions, and Linda LePage and Carol Morello Development and the Tregoe Education Forum. of Kepner-Tregoe, for their painstaking prepara- (This project is described in Appendix B.) ASCD tion of the manuscript. has been supportive of the work we are doing, and we are most appreciative. vi Introduction T his book is about technology—but not rate of change is simultaneously breathtaking the kind of technology you might ex- and daunting. Yet human ingenuity and thinking pect. Billions of dollars are currently are still at the heart of all this advancement. spent to educate, upgrade, introduce, and famil- Why do we seem to take for granted our iarize students and educators with the technol- ability to think? Why do we neglect to enhance ogy of our day. Usually, such efforts mean high the natural thinking and reasoning capabilities technology, or computer-related information. that are bestowed upon us? It seems almost as if Surely, this type of education is important, given we look to technology as a replacement for the the present and future state of the world. need to think. Michael Bloomberg, founder of We cannot help, however, but be struck by a multimedia conglomerate that relies heavily the fact that the same enthusiasm and invest- on delivering information through technology, ment do not exist for helping people enhance asked recently, “Are we using technology as an the natural technology with which they are born. excuse not to teach how to think and work with We are witnessing incredible advancements others? . . . Some think computer expertise is within a lifetime (e.g., putting a man on the required for future success. I don’t. Thinking moon and mapping the human genome). The and interpersonal communications skills have 1 A n a l y t i c P r o c e s s e s f o r S c h o o l L e a d e r s been, are, and will be keys to survival” (Bloom- A Better Process berg, 1997, pp. 153, 190). for Decision Making As humans, we have the ability to reason through problems, challenges, and issues. We In the late 1950s, Benjamin Tregoe and Charles are not driven solely by instinct to react a cer- Kepner, two research scientists working for the tain way. We are capable of examination, reflec- RAND Corporation, were conducting research tion, and analysis—in short, thinking. And yet with radar station crews for the Air Defense we often seem to treat thinking as if it were in- Command. They began to notice that certain air stinctive. Indeed, the capacity to think may be force officers in their study consistently made innate, but the ability to think well is an ac- better decisions than others, even though all quired skill. Rational thinking is the ability to these officers had essentially the same training accurately assess the various elements of a situ- and experience and were presented with the ation or challenge and use information effec- same simulated air threats. Because the infor- tively to form a sound conclusion. mation the officers dealt with was the same, the When faced with problems, we typically difference in effectiveness had to lie in the pro- need to respond or take some type of action. For cess the decision makers used. Tregoe and Kep- many, taking action is not difficult. But how ner theorized that the better decision makers often is this action effective? How often do we followed a better process—that the process look at decisions that others have made and comprised a series of steps they followed to wonder, “What were they thinking?” What we make their decisions and that the better deci- need is not a greater proclivity for action, but sion makers were more aware of their decision- rather a greater incidence of rational action. Ra- making process. tional action is characterized by its appropriate- After they left RAND, Kepner and Tregoe ness to meeting the needs of the situation, its ef- continued their study of decision making. In fectiveness in resolving whatever was at issue, 1958, they founded Kepner-Tregoe, Inc., now its ability to be used, and its support from key an international management consulting firm stakeholders. based in Princeton, New Jersey. Further research Rational action requires rational thinking. showed that better decision makers did indeed Rational thinking doesn’t happen by accident. follow a better and more consistent process. How does one learn to develop effective solu- Better decision makers were as unaware of their tions and take meaningful action to address own process, however, as were the poor deci- life’s challenges? If you’re like most of us, you sion makers. Kepner and Tregoe conducted ex- learned through experience, trial and error, and tensive research and ultimately identified and osmosis. Even if you consider yourself an ef- codified four analytic processes: decision analy- fective problem solver, how much more effec- sis, potential problem analysis, problem analy- tive might you be with some fine-tuning? How sis, and situation appraisal. can you help others improve their abilities in In the last 40 years, more than 20 million this area? people have been trained in the Kepner-Tregoe® 2 Introduction problem-solving and decision-making pro- • Greater understanding of curriculum ma- cesses. Today these processes are widely used, terial. from the board room to the plant floor, in more • Improved ability to work in groups. than 1,400 of the world’s most influential or- For teachers ganizations, including Johnson & Johnson, • Increased student motivation and atten- Honda, IBM, NASA, Sony, and the World Bank. tion to lessons. These decision-making strategies have been • More effective use of longer class periods. used in 44 countries and taught in 14 lan- • A proven way to integrate higher-order guages. The range of organizations and cultures, thinking skills into existing curriculum. and the variety of issues to which these ideas have been applied, attest to their universality For administrators and broad applicability. • More effective resolution of critical school issues. • Shared approach for handling complex Bringing Critical-Thinking Skills issues and divergent opinions. to Education Purpose of the Book In 1993, Tregoe founded the nonprofit Tregoe Education Forum to bring these same critical- The purpose of this book is to show educators thinking skills to elementary, middle, and high how to apply the four rational-thinking ap- school students. The Tregoe Education Forum, proaches in an educational environment. It doesn’t under a license from Kepner-Tregoe, Inc., pro- matter whether we are a 5th grade student, a su- vides workshops and resource materials for perintendent of a major school district, or a spe- teachers and administrators and enables them to cial education teacher; if we need to make a de- provide K–12 students with the critical-thinking cision, the basic tenets of effective decision tools students need for personal development making remain consistent. It is only the content and success. The analytic processes have had a of the decision that changes. Once we know the demonstrated effect, as reported by administra- basic steps for effective issue resolution, we can tors and teachers, on elementary, middle, and apply those steps to almost any situation we face. high schools and their students in some 25 This book describes four step-by step ap- school districts across the country. Here are some proaches, or processes, for handling four com- reported benefits: mon types of situations: For students • When we need to make a choice. • Better questioning techniques to gather, • When we need to implement a change. organize, and evaluate information. • When something goes wrong. • Increased ability to resolve real-life prob- • When we need to better understand a lems. complex issue. 3

Description:
How do you make a decision? How do you know you=ve made a good one? Whether you=re a 7th grade student selecting a science fair project, or a school board choosing a superintendent, the basic requirements of decision making are the same. You need information and the ability to analyze that informati
See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.