Teacher Collective Mindfulness for Improving Instruction and Organizational Reliability

• In Event: Using Weick to Understand, Explore, and Sense-Make: Implications for School Organizations and the Development of Educational Leaders

Abstract

Pressure on educators to improve student outcomes has encouraged studies of district administration and fueled calls to transform these roles through engaging in work that develops a district-wide teaching and learning focus (Honig, 2008) and supports the professional learning of teachers (Gallucci, 2008). The study examines evidence gathered on the collective mindfulness (Weick and Roberts, 1993) of teachers and outlines implications for ways district leaders can approach their task of helping principals and teachers adopt strategies and align profession practice to better respond to various challenges to student and school performance.

It draws on research and theory on high reliability organizations (HROs) and educational leadership. Numerous district-level initiatives that cultivate the instructional repertoire of educators are present in the literature, including nurturing central office relationships with school staff around evidence-based decision-making (Corcoran, Fuhrman, & Belcher, 2001; Honig, 2012), creating linkages between district offices and schools around reform efforts (Johnson & Chrispeels, 2010), and providing coherent professional development.

An instrument was developed to measure collective teacher beliefs and practices concerned with instructional improvements. The survey included questions about behavior and attitude that used frequency and Likert responses about the proportion of teachers in a school that would agree or report engaging in identified instructional actions.

The study identifies and describes leader and teacher views on collective mindfulness of teachers for improving instruction in schools. The results show a consistent assessment of teacher collective mindfulness as reported by district leaders and faculty in these schools. Preoccupation with failure was found as the cognitive process most evident in school operations and reluctance to simplify the process present in these schools. While instructional improvement efforts comprise part of district leaders’ work in the past, increased accountability demands on central offices, combined with rigorous performance standards for principals and teachers, establishes the need for new knowledge and for leaders.



References

Bellamy, G.T., Crawford, L., (2005). The fail-safe schools challenge: Leadership possibilities from high reliability organizations. Educational Administration Quarterly.

Brown, K.W., Ryan, R.M., & Creswell, J.D. (2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry..

Copeland, M. (2003). Leadership of inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for school improvement. EEPA

Hede, A. (2010). The dynamics of mindfulness in managing emotions and stress. Journal of Management Development.

Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2), 144-156.

Langer, E. (2009). Mindfulness. Jackson, TN: Perseus Books.

Leithwood, K., & Mascall, B. (2008). Collective leadership effects on students achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 529-561.

Weick, K., & Putnam, T. (2006). Organizing for mindfulness: Eastern wisdom and Western knowledge. Journal of Management.

Weick, K. (2001). Managing the unexpected: Assuring high performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Weick, K.E. & Putnam, T. (2006). Organizing for mindfulness. Journal of Management Inquiry.

Weick, K.E., & Roberts, K. (1993) Collective mind and organizational reliability. Administrative Science Quarterly.

Authors

• Gordon S. Gates, Washington State University

• Sharon D. Kruse, Washington State University Vancouver

• Ken Russell, Ed. D., Mead School District