Site-based management is great
-- when it works! Today, Education World looks at research on SBM. We
talk with a prominent superintendent who leads a large school system in
which site-based management has garnered accolades. Learn what that superintendent
has to say about making SBM work!
Site-based management (SBM), or school-based management, as it's sometimes
called, has been hailed as the greatest invention since sliced bread and
condemned as a prescription for disaster. Definitions of SBM vary as much
as opinions about it, but all definitions emphasize delegating authority
to the school instead of the central office, a shared decision-making
model engaging various stakeholders and facilitative rather than directive
leadership.
"School-based decision making in our district is an approach that focuses
on decisions being made closest to where programming is provided for students,
at the school level," Dr. Emery Dosdall, superintendent of the
Edmonton Public Schools in Alberta, Canada, told Education World.
At the heart of the debate about the effectiveness of SBM is the question
of whether the approach improves student achievement. "We know that there
is no silver bullet. There is no single solution to improving student
achievement," Dosdall said. "School-based decision making provides us
with a useful framework to respond directly to the unique needs of each
school's student population."
Dosdall began as superintendent of schools in Edmonton five years ago,
when SBM had been implemented in the district for nearly 20 years. "I
have been able to focus school-based decision making more directly on
the goal of improving student achievement," he explained. "Within this
focus, principals play a fundamentally critical role. They provide leadership
in schools and work closely with school staffs and in consultation with
parents, students, and the community...."
Dosdall went on to point out documented improvements in student achievement
in the Edmonton school district. "Results from the 1998-1999 administration
of district achievement tests tell us that a higher percentage of students
in the district are reading at or above grade level in almost all grade
levels [than before]. Our provincial achievement test results are also
showing improvements at almost all grade levels." (A Canadian province
is in many ways comparable to a U.S. state.)
In 2000, the Edmonton school system had 80,368 students. All 206 principals
in the district report directly to Dosdall. "A significant majority of
students, parents, and community members are satisfied with the quality
of education provided by the Edmonton Public Schools," according to the
ASCD Education Bulletin of March 26,1999.
ORIGINS OF SBM
The philosophy supporting site-based management has its roots in industry
and business. In the last half of the 20th century, an industrial model
touting the benefits of empowering factory workers to change their work
roles gained widespread celebrity and credibility. Spurred by the economic
success and high quality achieved by Japanese car manufacturers that gave
factory workers greater latitude to manage their own teams, a number of
U.S. factories and businesses gave employees a greater role in decision
making in their jobs. Business gurus such as author Tom Peters praised
the results of these experiments in white-collar and blue-collar environments.
When the industrial and, later, business model was transplanted into
school systems, the approach was named site-based, or school-based, management.
One researcher found that between 1986 and 1990, approximately one-third
of all school districts in the United States had adopted some form of
the SBM process. Since that time, according to indicators, many more districts
have implemented the approach. At least five states -- Colorado, Florida,
Kentucky, North Carolina, and Texas -- have legislated some type of participatory
decision making at each school. Such large school districts as Chicago,
Miami, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Rochester (N.Y.) have moved in the
direction of site-based management. Although SBM seems to have flowered
in some venues, such as Edmonton and in the
Minneapolis Public Schools, in others it has withered for lack of
nourishment or run wild when left untended.
For additional information about site-based management in Minneapolis
schools, type site-based management into the school system's
search engine. One such resource is
Site-Based Management in Minneapolis Public Schools. Adobe Acrobat
is required to read this particular document, but not all site-based management
resources on the MPS Web site need the reader.
WHEN IT WORKS
Site-based management works when a school district puts in place "a
clearly articulated vision" and "through the work of administrators and
teachers who have adequate time and training to implement the process
fully," concludes an April 2000 Educational Leadership article,
The Promise and Pitfalls of Site-Based Management. Much of the research
done on how well site-based management works has determined that for the
approach to be effective, a school system must earmark sufficient time
not only for the initial learning of such skills as decision making but
also for the ongoing meetings of all stakeholders to achieve productive
decision making by consensus rather than fiat.
Schools where SBM works well and schools that struggle with it have
distinct differences in approaches. The research article "Making School-Based
Management Work," from Educational Leadership, February 1995,
cites the following hallmarks of successful site-based management:
Decision-makers at the school site champion and implement changes
that transform teaching and learning.
Power over budget, staffing, and curriculum is in the hands of site-based
decision-makers.
Power sharing pervades the school and its decision-making group(s).
Professional development is continuous and schoolwide.
All information is widely and thoroughly distributed throughout the
school and community. Many schools and districts employing SBM use Web
sites chock full of information and news conveying just about anything
anyone would ever want to know about them.
The principal is able to simultaneously lead and share power
and responsibility.
KEY PROBLEMS
School systems often fail to implement SBM completely or even consider
fully how best to make the change from an approach with more-centralized
power to a decentralized modus operandi. That conclusion comes from the
study "An Analysis of the Relationships between Site Council Resources,
Council Practices, and Outcomes" (S. Bauer and I. Bogotch, 1997). The
researchers arrived at or suggested the following conclusions in their
study:
Site-based teams in many districts set their own parameters for operation;
often the limits of their autonomy were unclear.
Leaving the issue of autonomy and its limits unclear may hamper a
team's effectiveness.
Principals need to stop telling others what to do and instead help
people develop the skills to become self-directing.
Accountability often stays with the superintendent and principals
involved in SBM, when it should devolve to the entire decision-making
group, typically composed of teachers, parents, and other community
representatives.
Decision-making groups too often become mired in power and housekeeping
matters.
HE'S BEEN THERE, DONE THAT
Dosdall can cite nitty-gritty facts that echo the above research. "The
district's priorities, planning, and budgeting process ... reflect the
focus on school-based decision making," he explained. "For example, for
2000-2001, the district has planned an expenditure of $500.4 million.
Ninety-two percent of available dollars is planned directly by the schools,
with input from staff, students, parents, and the community.
"Each school receives an allocation of dollars with which to plan numbers
of staff as well as the supplies, equipment, and services the staff needs
to provide the best possible programs for all students. The allocation
is based primarily on the number and categories of the students enrolled
in the school. The remaining 8 percent of the district's budget relates
to board and central services. This includes 3.5 percent for governance
and administration, 3 percent for instruction or instructional support,
0.5 percent for operations and maintenance, 0.5 percent for capital projects,
and 0.5 percent for external services."
Perhaps the high percentage of funds allocated for teachers, learning
tools, and services as opposed to "overhead" in the Edmonton Public Schools
stems partly from the district's commitment to site-based management.
If the Edmonton Public Schools' experience teaches a lesson about site-based
management, it may well be that the approach is time-consuming and not
easy to implement but, when done right, well worth the work.
ADDITIONAL ONLINE RESOURCES ABOUT SITE-BASED MANAGEMENT
Site-Based
Decision-Making An online book, written by Jamie McKenzie, spotlights
such aspects of SBM as "The Perils," "Appraisal: Assessing Organizational
Readiness," "Recruitment: Identifying a Positive Campus Council," and
"Invention: Adapting and Innovating to Match the School Site Context
and Reality."
School-Based Management An Education Week summary of what SBM is
and where it flourishes, the article also contains several links to
significant resources on the topic.
Assessment of School-Based Management The Department of Education
produced this take on SBM and its ramifications. The report includes
a section on how schools make site-based management work.
Site-Based
Management: Boon or Boondoggle?