ISLLC Standard 5: Ethics and Integrity

The ISLLC Standard 5, which speaks of ethical behavior, integrity, fairness and acting on behalf of students and improving their education, can seem stark or almost aloof when read in the course of a busy day. But a little reflection reveals that issues of integrity, fairness and authenticity to improved education can be found in all sorts of tasks, projects and moments of the educational milieu. A great example of this fact can be found in the March 1, 2006 Education Week (Vol. 25, No. 25) commentary on “reculturing” by Scott Thompson. The shared beliefs, history, assumptions, norms and values that manifest themselves in patterns of behavior are what are referred to as “organizational culture”. In short, it is “the way we do things around here”. While the article refers to two school systems where reculturing has been effective, it also is clear that reculturing does not consist of a set of neatly packaged, systematic steps. Rather, reculturing demands that basic attitudes and approaches have to change. Choices are then made that fundamentally alter an organizations way of doing things. At the very heart of reculturing is dealing with the culture of fear and distrust that seems to be a part of many school systems. The Sacramento, California public schools are a case in point. Student performance was lagging, buildings were in disrepair, morale of teachers and administrators was low and relations among district administrators, the school board and the teachers’ union were “acrimonious” according to the description by the author. The reculturing process began with studying the problems faced by the school system and political efforts to revitalize the school board. In time, the school board developed a series of “fireside chat” style listening sessions in schools. The tenor of the board was consciously one of listening and responding and not releasing information and announcing decisions. Eventually a newly designed accountability system and strategic plan was developed, and school employees and administrators were given time to become familiar with the proposed changes and give feedback. Finally, at a meeting of over 4,500 employees the revised proposal was presented and an overwhelming majority of those present signed a pledge of support for the new system. The changes and the process by which those changes were developed have lead to the development of a culture of trust and openness. The Norfolk, Virginia school has seen great improvement in studentachievement and narrowing of achievement gaps through a process of reculturing.

Some of the contributing factors in Norfolk were adoption of a “no excuses” philosophy that refuses to accept race or poverty as a justification for poor achievement, and the development of a widely owned philosophy of teaching and learning through dialogue about what would make the Norfolk schools “world class” by 2010. Reculturing required a concerted effort at dialogue that would lead to greater trust, as well as a shift in the central office from an attitude of compliance monitoring to active support of schools. Central office was restructured, moving money and people out from central administration and into schools. Efforts were also made to base decisions on data and not favoritism or politics, and an attitude of accountability that included all departments and levels was developed and implemented. Positive results are rewarded. Technology directors, food service directors and central office administrators as well as principals are expected to report on what they have done to improve student achievement. Collaborative efforts at continuing education and ongoing dialogue among the central office administrators have led to an atmosphere of greater cohesiveness. The article was a great reflection, especially if one’s approach to ethical behavior is making sure there is not cheating in the administration of proficiency tests. The effort to reculture a school system can be a way of keeping the well-being of students as a primary goal, and changing policies that are not consistent with sound educational goals. In the two cases cited in this article, innovation, dialogue and collaborative professional development were used to improve schools, teachers and administrators. These case studies are wonderful examples of how the (ISLLC) Standard 5 can be applied.

Back to top