Mr Bass Online

Over the years I’ve invested a great deal of time and energy into using Delicious as an online bookmarking tool so that all of my online tools and projects can be accessed from one place. About 3 months ago I learned of a different tool that could be used similarly called Symbaloo. Originally is was a simple bookmarking site but organized differently. Instead of the list of links and descriptions, Symbaloo is organized using tabs that contain tiles of the bookmarks defined by the user.

After its launch, educators from around the world started using the site both personally and with their classes prompting the founders to create and educational version of the service called SymbalooEDU. It’s the same basic service, but now it’s billed as a “Personal Learning Environment” where teachers and students can create bookmarks to resources and sites as well as online projects and share them with classmates and students. The interface is simple but it brings the power of the web to your class. The following video is a testimonial from teachers who are using SymbalooEDU and share some ways that they are using it with their students.

Using Symbaloo as a part of your class encourages students to organize their own work and gives them a digital presence giving you the opportunity to continue conversations around being responsible online. SymbalooEDU is completely free for individual use and can give you and your students another online tool that can be used in this digital age.  One example of a powerful use for Symbaloo is to use it as an online portfolio where students collect their work and can share it to show their learning over time. Instead of simply bookmarks, students publish their work online and then keep the links in a tab. These could be used to show growth, for parent-teacher conferences, or even for class presentations as students share their learning with each other.

Symbaloo Resources

Symbaloo Users Guide
Symbaloo Forums

Google Docs is one of the many tools that I use almost daily for collaboration and composition of the various work that I do. Since I began using Google Docs almost 6 years ago, I have amassed quite a number of documents and sometimes I have trouble finding stuff. Don’t get me wrong, the search inside of Docs is great, as long as I know what I’m looking for. However, there are times that I know I need a document but, for the life of me, I don’t know which one or what even might be in it. While that might seem weird, I know most of you have done it. You’re looking in a folder on your computer and the title of a document makes the connection for you. Google Docs is no different.

To help with that, I’ve taken to organizing my documents (at least the ones that I know I want to keep together) using Google’s tagging system in the form of collections. Up until recently, organizing these documents could only be done from the document list either by dragging a document into a premade collection, or organizing it by clicking on the document options and selecting “Organize”. All of that was fine but it caused me to have to leave the document I was working on and go back to my documents list. This has long been a cause of angst for me because the time I want to organize my documents is typically when I’m in a document. At least that’s when I want the choice. It seems Google has gotten that message because in a recent update, they have added a folder by the title of a document. Clicking that will allow you to tag those documents and organize them into collections.

This functionality is going to be fantastic for those who use Docs heavily.

In her article, “Quantitative, Qualitative, and Quasitative Inquiries in Human Performance Technology,” Sharon Bender discusses the investigative approaches that HPT professionals use for data collection (2006). She recognizes that each of these techniques are widely used and have been adopted by many professionals, through this article she advocates for using them in together as a system where one approach informs the others rather than using them in isolation. Bender refers to this combination of inquiries and data collection as “Q3” throughout her article and makes the case for the using them as one systemic approach (2006).

Traditionally, quantitative analysis of performance improvement efforts deals with collecting data on efforts that have already happened. Because these efforts are based on past events, this usually means that the initiative is over and this is a post analysis to see whether “it” worked. According to Bender, this type of analysis is often designed before the effort begins and the results are typically numerical leading to generalized conclusions (2006). This approach reminds me of the Understanding by Design format of lesson planning where one begins with the end in mind. Determining what needs to be learned and designing the assessment before any of the activities and interventions occurs helps to create that quantitative data and approach. Bender does insinuate that this approach is efficient but often missed the contextual details that are needed to really be effective in analyzing the data (2006).

By contrast, qualitative analysis deals more with examining observable efforts that are currently in process. These efforts are usually measured through interviews and anecdotes rather than that of the quantitative methods which focus on the numerical (2006). Results of a qualitative inquiry are usually in the form of text and stories that show progress and reflection on the intervention. Bender states that, “this approach is robust but time consuming and less able to be generalized”… than that of the qualitative (2006).

The final inquiry approach that Bender addresses is that of quasitative. I had never heard of a quasitative approach to data collection before so I found it an interesting idea. Quasitative inquiry “has emerged as a means to address a mixed design, encompassing the quantitative and qualitative indices” (2006, p 10). In other words, quasitative inquiry attempts to predict future success based on the data gleaned from the qualitative and quantitative stages. In Bender’s words, “Collectivity is a tenant of quasitative inquiry, whereas objectivity is a tenet of quantitative inquiry, and subjectivity is a tenet of qualitative inquiry” (2006, p. 12). By combining all three of these approaches, objective, collective and subjective paradigms are all used in the evaluative process.

I think the benefits of combining these data collection approaches into one can certainly assist those involved in performance improvement initiatives. When data is collected in these ways, professionals have more opportunity to create analysis and interventions around the actual gap in performance than they would if they were reacting to or designing around one specific set of data. The more data one has, the more opportunity to “get it right” through the actions that arise from that data.

The Q3 approach has the ability to take into account the past, present and potential pieces of the instructional design process and could very well create more effective learning and performance opportunities. Each of these three approaches could happen on their own, but together they seem to take a broader look at the entire picture and can be worked into the systemic approach to performance improvement.

References

Bender, S., (2006). Quantitative, qualitative, and quasitative inquiries in human performance technology. Performance Improvement. 45(9), 640-664.

Any time I can use technology to make my life easier I try to. Today I want to tell you about a Google tool that lets you automate searches that you find yourself doing regularly. For instance, a few years ago I was doing research on using video in the classroom and I wanted to know if there as new information being published around how teachers are using video with students. Over the course of a week, I found that I had done exactly the same search with the same terms each day. Often, my search gave me the exact same results because nothing new had been published to the web during that 24 hour period. It was frustrating to do the same exact search daily and not get any new information.

Luckily, I knew that I could automate the process by using a tool called Google Alerts. By setting up an Alert, Google would do that search for me every day and, if there was new information, it would email me the results. To do this you must have a Google account and be signed in to be notified. (This video is older, but will help you sign up for a Google account.)

Setting up an alert

• Go to http://www.google.com/alerts
• Type in your search terms in the “Search query” box
• Result type – what type of information you want returned
  • Everything – searches all types of content on the web
  • News – only searches the Google News site
  • Blogs – searches blogs indexed on Google
  • Video – searches video from across the web including, but not limited to YouTube
  • Discussions – searches discussion boards
  • Books – searches Google Books
• How often – how many times do you want results to be delivered to you
  • As it happens – whenever there are new results you will immediately be notified
  • Once a day – you will be notified once a day if there are new results
  • Once a week – you will be notified once a week if there are new results
• How many – how many results do you want to get from google
  • Only the best results – will give you results that seem to be most relevant to your search limiting the results
  • All results – will give you everything on the web that matches your search term
• Deliver to – how do you want these results to be delivered to you
  • Email – results will be emailed to the address that you have in your Google profile
  • Feed – results will be included in an RSS feed that you can use with a feed reader such as Bloglines or Google Reader

As I began my current position as a Technology Integration Specialist five years ago, one of the first realizations that I had to deal with was my new role in helping teachers. After being in the classroom for twelve years, I was leaving the world of everyday teaching and entering into one where I was providing support for others. Technology was to be my tool, but in order to be effective, it wasn’t going to be enough to simply show others what to click on. I needed to be able to help them be their own support and teach them to see things a little bit differently. My task wasn’t to train teachers on specific hardware and software, rather, it was to help teachers to develop into technology users. To be successful, I needed to be a coach.

Marcia Hagen addresses the idea of coaching in the workplace in her 2010 article, “The wisdom of the coach: A review of managerial coaching in the Six Sigma context”. In the article, Hagen is making the case for incorporating managerial coaching into the workplace and training managers who are already involved in Six Sigma activities to serve in this coaching role (2010). She suggests that, “the concept of managers working as facilitative coaches has emerged in response to the flattening of organizations” (p. 791). As Anthony Marker points out in chapter 21 of our textbook, “simply flattening the organizational structure, without also aligning the culture, values and norms of the organization, is unlikely to lead to the necessary increases in efficiency and effectiveness” (2006, p. 500). Therefore by bringing coaching into a flattened organization, managers can have a more direct influence on their employees and by incorporating coaching techniques in their work.

Hagen points out that while many of these flattened organizations have found success with the Six Sigma activities and techniques, the Six Sigma approach focuses more on technical applications of performance improvement than on skills such as leadership and coaching (2010). Because of this, the six sigma approach has a tendency to be more calculated, data-driven approach that is focused on the process rather than the people. By incorporating coaching techniques into the Six Sigma activities, Hagen theorizes that organizational knowledge will improve allowing the organization to find solutions to problems for which they don’t have an answer (2010).

Citing the work of Makherjee, Lapre’ and Van Wassenhove (1998), Hagen suggests that these techniques will also expand the conceptual and operational learning that occur in organizations. Conceptual learning will help employees discover why and event occurs aiding in problem-solving, while operational learning will help employees implement and assess organizational changes. Through these two types of learning, “the learning rate of the entire organization is accelerated” (2010, p. 794). Combining that learning with the Communities of Practices structures outlined in chapter twenty-seven of our text, it seems that incorporating these already successful programs would make the workforce and the managerial staff even more effective (2006).

Hagen’s real point in her article is that adding coaching to the Six Sigma structures would ultimately offer a greater sense of sustainability of these performance improvement initiatives and further pull in the workforce as a partner in the initiatives instead of the subject (2010). She is quick to point out that many of the individuals incorporating the Six Sigma program are already using coaching skills because they are central to effective leadership. However, including training on these coaching skills for managers and leaders who are a part of the Six Sigma program has been overlooked and should be considered for future training endeavors.

Although I had heard about Six Sigma as a performance improvement technique, I was unfamiliar with the activities and programs that were included in the training. As I read more about it in our text and through this article, it did make me wonder why coaching isn’t an integral part of training programs for management. Three years ago I was fortunate to have the opportunity to participate in Cognitive Coaching development through my school district. While not specifically billed as a performance improvement initiative, it has certainly had that effect for me. Every conversation I have now is an opportunity for performance improvement because I’m looking for ways to enhance and further learning through questioning and other coaching techniques. While I’m not suggesting that Cognitive Coaching is the model that should be used in all business environments, I do think that managers would benefit from the techniques that are used in the various coaching models.

Approaching performance improvement initiatives as a coach could very well bring about a different level of effectiveness and understanding to the work of the Six Sigma managers. Additionally, it could ultimately improve the working environment and make cultural change more manageable. Truly, I believe that anyone who has the responsibility and opportunity to influence the work of others could benefit from training as a coach. I know that it has certainly helped me.

References

Barab, S., Warren, S. J., del Valle, R., Fang, F., (2006). Coming to terms with communities of practice: a definition and operational criteria. In J. Pershing (Ed.), Handbook of human performance technology (3rd ed.) (pp. 640-664). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Hagen, M., (2010). The wisdom of the coach: A review of managerial coaching in the Six Sigma context. Total Quality Management. 21(8), 791-798.
Marker, A. W., (2006). Shifting organizational alignment from behavior to values. In J. Pershing (Ed.), Handbook of human performance technology (3rd ed.) (pp. 498-515). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Mukherjee, A. S., Lapre’, M. A., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (1998). Knowledge driven quality improvement. Management Science, 44(11), 35-49.

Since it was launched in 2005, YouTube has made online video commonplace. When Google bought them in 2006 and began to incorporate it’s search engine in it, it became even more of a powerhouse. However, YouTube is far from the only game in town, it’s just easily the most well known at this point. This week I’d like to give you some other resources for using online video in the classroom.

• Discovery Streaming – Formerly United Streaming, Discovery Education acquired the United Streaming library a number of years ago. Since then they have expanded the catalog and added a number of tools such as assessments, assignments and lessons that you can use based on the videos that you find.
• SchoolTube – Much like YouTube, SchoolTube is a video sharing site that allows schools, students and teachers to upload and share videos. However, SchoolTube provides much more control over the content so you’re sure that there won’t be any inappropriate content.
• Snag Learning – Snag Learning provides professionally produced documentaries about a variety of subjects and categorized them into subject areas and grade levels for easy access to the content that you want for your classroom.
• NextVista – Next Vista for Learning is a non-profit organization based in California that focuses on helping teachers and students use and create content through digital media. The site highlights student work and gives students and teachers an audience for their creations.
• Parkway Digital – Although it’s behind a password, Parkway Digital has a great number of student and teacher created videos that are hosted on Parkway servers. You can post and share videos as well as embedding them in your website for others to see.
• YouTube for Teachers – As I wrote about a few weeks ago, YouTube for Teachers is a curated YouTube channel categorized by subject area and grade level and is constantly being updated.

While not every concept should be explained using video, the visual aspect as well as the connection students can make to content is not something that we should overlook. Posting those videos on a website for enrichment or review can be an important piece of helping students succeed. While this isn’t a complete list, it does offer some options other than the standard YouTube search or textbook videos.

Communities of practice can be referred to in many different ways. While there are subtle difference between definitions, CoP’s, Professional Learning Communities, Personal Learning Networks, to name a few, all have at their core the goal of participants in an organization or group learning from each other and sharing knowledge, strategies, resources or techniques. In their article, “Developing Communities of Practice around e-Learning and Project Management”, Ruth Laxton and Andrelyn Applebee examine eLearning and project management at the Australian Catholic University through a case study. Specifically they are looking at the use of a matrix organization around the project.

Interested in knowledge management and communities of practice, the authors inspected not only the product the group was building, but the process itself to determine if another approach may have been more in line with their needs ultimately creating a better product. They began with the work of Meredith and Mantel (2006), who defined three different kinds of organizational groups when working on such a project. The functional organization, where all work is originated and housed in a single area or department; the pure project organization, where all work in the company is around specific projects and where teams work on one project at a time; and the matrix organization, where members work on a project part time while still actively working in their primary roles.

As in most academic and public organizations, they chose the matrix approach bringing team members from a variety of departments to contribute to the project thus forming a community of practice around a specific topic. Although geographically these groups were not close, they came together in a hybrid fashion using video-conferencing, online environments and a variety on web tools to collaborate towards their common goal.

Once the group was established, the goal of creating resources to inform faculty about eLearning was defined. In the process a project manager (one of the authors) was employed for the task.  One of the challenges that they faced was that of university culture where a managerial approach to projects often is pushed aside for more collegial approaches. As such, there was a certain discomfort with the approach by team members initially because of their previous experiences with such projects. Thus, the interaction between the project manager and the team members became critical to the success of the project. By organizing the team using the matrix approach, team members were forced to communicate back and forth regularly to meet deadlines and create the deliverables needed for the project. The authors note that, “other ways of organizing the project would not have facilitated this continuous two-way exchange between the project and the various CoPs from which the team members were drawn” (2010).

Ultimately, the feedback received from the project was complimentary to both the project manager and the matrix organizational structure that was implemented. Team members felt supported and found the different perspectives beneficial to their own understanding of eLearning as a whole and that they benefited from the structures created by the project manager because of the respect and organization that she brought to the project.

After careful analysis, the authors determined five key recommendations based on what they learned from the project (2010).

1. Consider matrix organization of projects as a tool for knowledge sharing
2. Acknowledge the goal of knowledge sharing at the project initiation
3. Buy in project manager expertise when needed
4. Be mindful of the potential clash of cultures when using project management methodologies in a university setting
5. Actively seek to minimise the disadvantages of projects organized with a matrix structure.

In my experience in the world of education, most of the projects that I’ve worked on come in one of two forms: the functional and matrix organizational structures. When beginning a project, most educational institutions look inward and create projects that are collaborative in nature but sometimes are very collegial in nature. Writing curriculum is one example that almost every teacher does at some point in their careers. In those cases, content area teachers are often the writers which only brings in the knowledge held by that group of people who are largely self-motivated and, in turn, are often the ones called upon to do that work. Expanding the range of the communities of practice and bringing in a variety of people to include subject area experts as well as instructional design representatives will broaden the scope of those projects and possibly bring balance to curricular needs and ultimately students.

In regards to project management, I often wonder if teachers need more support in the way of managing projects outside their classroom. Not only are they juggling the classes they teach and the students in those classes, they are also on countless committees and other projects. Many times, they are thrown into these projects, that they often must ultimately manage, without the tools and support of a project manager that is specifically meant to help them navigate the work that they must do. Teachers have support in a myriad of ways, but focused support specific to a team on which they serve is less common.

References

Laxton, R. & Applebee, A.C.. (2010). Developing communities of practice around e-learning and project management. Journal of Distance Education, 24(1), 123-142.

Meredith, J. R., & Mantel, S.J.. (2006). Project management: A managerial approach. John Wiley & Sons.

Each time I have introduced an assignment to a group of students, there’s always a little question as to which of them will complete it, which will disregard it, and which will do just enough that I won’t make a big deal about it. Of course, I love it when my students successfully complete everything with no questions and to my exacting specifications. Not only does it make my job easier, but it shows what a good teacher I am. Right? In fact, this is far beyond the truth. I absolutely try to give my students the skills and knowledge to complete assignments, but under no circumstances do I assume that, despite trying to create a well-designed lesson and assignment, there will be no questions or that I have accounted for every possible wonder, choice or interpretation along the way.

In his article, “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: Evaluating Benefits and Drawbacks from College Instructors’ Perspectives”, Simon Lei explores the internal and external motivating factors that drive college students in their studies. Upon interviewing a number of college instructors, Lei attempts to outline both the benefits and downfalls of each type of motivation. While the laundry list of reasons for and against these motivations aren’t necessarily groundbreaking, it was interesting to read about most specifically about the drawbacks of intrinsic motivation.

To illustrate one of the benefits of intrinsic motivation, Lei brings forth the idea of “flow” as a state where students have reached optimal motivation, “when the level of skill or knowledge is matched to the challenge or difficulty of the academic task.” (2010) By reaching this optimal motivational level, students are finding academic success over time. However, the “flow” that students reach can also be detrimental to their work. Such intense intrinsic motivation can also result in students getting lost in a project, assignment or other task to the point where they ignore all other demands on their time.

Accordingly, Lei also discusses external motivation as a factor in the work of college students, specifically citing learning for recognition and competition as main advantages and disadvantages for the learners. Because of this, an instructors awareness of role-set theory can bring about important understandings of what does or does not motivate a given student in a given class with a given context.

As an English teacher, I have often talked and wondered about the benefit of student reading incentive programs. As a student, I remember participating in a program that was designed to get me to read. If I read so many books, I would earn a pizza. So I read my books, ate my pizza and went on with life. Did it motivate me? Of course. I liked pizza. Did it create in me a love for reading and learning. Nope. Luckily, my 5th grade teacher did. Not because she bribed me with pizza or some other extrinsic motivator that would only get me as far as the end of the program. Rather, she took the time to get to know me and my interests. She gave me books that would appeal to my inner sense of story and purpose. I got more pizzas, but the pizzas weren’t my motivating factor anymore. I longed for the stories. She helped me find that intrinsic motivation that the programs could not help me locate.

Lei ends his article with a realization that intrinsic and extrinsic motivations are not mutually exclusive. To a certain extent, these two types of motivators live in harmony with each other depending on the context and the task. It’s the instructors job to harness those and create an environment of understanding where students can achieve because of both internal and external motivating factors.  To a certain extent, part of me did read for pizza. It just so happens that I kept reading because of my teacher.

References

Lei, S. A.. (2010). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: evaluating benefits and drawbacks from college instructors’ perspectives. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 37(2), 153-160.

For decades sociologist have been studying the differences between generations and making generalizations about how they learn, what they value and how they co-exist. In their article, “Effective Training for Millennial Students,” Eric and Loredana Werth explore the what these differences might mean for the workplace and for effective performance improvement initiatives, specifically training. By breaking up the current workforce into three generational groups, Baby Boomers, Generations X and Millennials, the authors made overall generalizations about the learning characteristics of each. However, the purpose of the article really focused on the most recent of these groups; the Millennials.

Noting that there are becoming less and less Baby Boomers in the workplace and that Millennials are arriving in droves, there are implications for those who work with these younger learners either in the workplace or in more traditional educational settings. Though, as Werth states, “the question arises as to whether educators who are part of Generation X can develop training programs effective for Millennial leaners.” (2011) Generation X members (of which I am one) tend to depend on themselves to create meaning where as Millennials are “…characterized as group/social learners and are more networked and civic-minded than their predecessors.” (2011)

This topic is especially close to my own work as I try to help teachers think about education differently, however, I have often stopped to question my own advice wondering if my own experiences and biases and clouding my understanding of what needs these students actually have. While I am definitely very progressive in my thinking around education and practice, I do wonder if my own paradigm is getting in the way.

The article continues to discuss the needs of the Millennial learners by addressing the idea of limiting lecture-based instruction because it doesn’t meet the needs of students who need engagement and collaboration as opposed to “getting through the textbook”. It also addresses technology as a vehicle to meet the needs of these students. Mark Prensky coined the phrase “digital native” over ten years ago in his article, “Digital Native, Digital Immigrant”, (2001) which became the catch phrase for many educators who almost used it as an excuse to not learn technology. I’ve never been especially fond of the term, but I do understand the need to define the difference between those who see technology as something that is simply a part of their lives as the Millennials do, as opposed to those who knew a time before computers and the internet. It seems that right now this is the trend known as the “Flipped Classroom”, where, through the use of video, teachers can record their lectures and students can watch/listen to them at home and then do the higher order thinking activities at school under the watchful eye of the teacher. While this can be a good model, in many cases it’s still very lecture driven. It’s just that the lecture is delivered differently. This is not always the case and I know that there are plenty of success stories around this approach, but I can’t help but wonder if it’s actually better, or if it’s just different and so it’s gaining attention.

After citing a number of online and software based tools that could enhance a lesson and make it less lecture driven, the authors ultimately switched gears to make a case for the research behind adult learning and what the similarities between it and the approach that is being researched for Millennials. Creating self-directed, student-centered environments where the instructor is more facilitator of learning than teacher are adult learner strategies, but more and more it seems that these can be just as effective with the youngest generation. It’s no longer accurate to assume that students will learn in the traditional ways we educate. We must reevaluate and recognize the how we as a society and the members in it are changing and change our practice accordingly rather than assuming that the way we’ve always done it still works.

References

• Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9, Retrieved from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/prensky%20-%20digital%20natives,%20digital%20immigrants%20-%20part1.pdf
• Werth, E.P., Werth, L. (2011). Effective training for Millennial students. Adult Learning, 22, 12-19.

Cynthia Torppa and Keith Smith, in their article, “Organizational Change Management: A Test of the Effectiveness of a Communication Plan,” outline the process of a communications plan for a change management project of a large US organization. As I read the article, I was surprised that the language used to describe the process was almost identical to that of our textbook with Lewin’s stage model of unfreezing, changing, and refreezing (2006). While the article focused specifically on the change management communications plan, it is clear that much attention has be paid to the entire process but that this plan was the basis for getting buy-in from the organization’s management and workers.Their strategy was to created carefully and appropriately designed messages to manage change and prevent the discouragement associated with ongoing interventions in organizations (2011).

Departing from Lewin’s model, they instead choose to use Armenakis elements of a communication plan and Klein’s foundational communication principals because of Lewin’s “episodic approach to continuous change which can create change fatigue, apathy, or resistance to change efforts.” (2011) Most interesting about this is that they have theorized that approaching change management using these two models will create belief in and support for the change. Armenakis identifies five different types of information must be explained in the communications plan for it to be effective: discrepancy, appropriateness, efficacy, principal support and valence. (1999) If any of these are left out, doubt, apathy and resistance to the plan will most likely occur. Klein’s principals are equally important to way that the plan is communicated. They include: message redundancy, multiple media, multiple venues (including face-to-face and mediated), consistent message, and opinion leader support of the message. (1996)

By using these guiding premises of message and delivery, the organization delivered their message of change through the communications plan. To measure the effectiveness of the plan, a series of surveys was given including one created by Armenakis et al.(2007) called the “Organizational Change Recipients’ Belief Scale”. OCRBS measures beliefs based on the five different types of information that should be included in a communications plan as discussed earlier. They also used an instrument adapted by Frahm and Brown (2007) called the “Change in Organizational Culture” to determine receptivity of organizational members to change. Through these and a handful of other tools, the study showed that the communications plan was effective and supportive of the set goals and could be deemed successful in helping manage the organizational changes.

What struck me most about this article was the importance of controlling the communication so that a correct, consistent message is sent to all involved and so there is no ambiguity. I always looked at a “communications plan” as the responsibility of a public relations professional who chooses words carefully and gives great attention to the message. However, thinking about some of the projects of which I’ve been associated, anytime there was an announcement or communication that had to be published, we took great pains to be succinct, clear and choose our words very carefully to accentuate the message that we wanted to give. We were strategic in our approach so that we could control the message.

The same can be said for instructional situations. When designing a syllabus or an assignment with expectations, objectives and directions, it’s imperative to be clear in that message. When I moved my English class online, this became crystal clear for me very quickly. I poured over my words to make sure that they would be interpreted as I intended. The more time I spent, the less questions I had. I was controlling the message and that made all the difference.

Using evaluation tools, the authors were able to analyze their communications plan approach and show, through data, the correlations between the established goals and the desired communication results. I know that more and more often teachers are being asked to use data to analyze their student’s achievement on standardized tests and common assessments. However, I think there is little development for teachers around how to read and really use that data to improve performance. Maybe that trend makes the case for administrators to take a HPT class as a part of their degree.

References

• Armenakis, A., Bernerth, J.B., & Walker, H. J. (2007). Organizational Change Recipients’ Beliefs Scale: Development of an instrument. Journal of Applied Behavior Science, 43, 481-505.
• Armenakis, A., Harris, S. G., & Feild, H.S. (1999). Making change permanent: A model for institutionalizing change interventions. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 12, 97-128.
• Frahm, J., & Brown, K. (2007). First steps: Linking change communication to change receptivity. Journal of Organizational Change, 20, 370-387.
• Klein, S. M. (1996). A management communication strategy for change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 9, 32-46.
• Torppa, C. B., & Smith, K. L. (2011). Organizational change management: a test of the effectiveness of a communication plan. Communication Research Reports, 28(1), 62-73.