\doc\web\98\03\tqm.txt From: Redyarrow@aol.com Date sent: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 14:51:56 EST Subject: The role TQm has played in St. Charles education I found an article on the effectiveness of TQM in education which uses my St. Charles School District as a model example. After reading this article, I couldn't help but think back to a few weeks ago when Elaine asked for opinions about why schools of today didn't seem to be responding to the pressure of dissatisfied middle class parents - pressure that has always seemed to be effective in the past. At the time, I was going to (but never got around to it) write about how much more effective school district administrators have become at stonewalling parental demands by applying group dynamic techniques that they have learned from businesses. For the past six or seven years, I noticed the proliferation of educational workshops on TQM (total quality management) and felt hopeful that perhaps the adaption of these methods of problem solving would lead to school improvement. As a principal, I went through training in Quality Circles and hoped that TQM would be more effective than that fiasco. I had no idea that educators would take the tools of TQM (the very tools that helped make my reliable Taurus that just hit 100,000 miles) and subvert them to stifle any and all opposition. Watching the educational community subvert TQM and consensus building techniques has left me shaking my head. If Dilbert's creator, Scott Adams, ever runs out of ideas, he can begin applying his scenarios to school settings. As you read this article, realize that our school system threw out the curriculum around 1989 and began whole language and "teacher as facilitator" model just as they were adopting TQM. I have a hunch that common sense parental pressure and teacher opposition would have reversed the changes within a short time. Following the TQM model, provided the school administration with the tools to thwart all opposition and instead of valid, rigorous problem solving, we ended up with blind consensus. found at website http://www.wp.com/george_and_marie/tqm_art.html The Impact of the Total Quality Management/Continuous Quality Improvement Movement on Preservice Teacher Education Programs Following World War II, Japanese industrial leaders sought out and implemented the principles of quality management theorized by W. Edwards Deming. The success of the Japanese industries has been investigated by many U.S. companies, and Deming's principles have since been adopted by many of them. These 14 principles of Total Quality Management (TQM) are now being applied in educational settings. Several state departments of education and a number of colleges and universities have adopted these principles, and workshops about Total Quality Management (TQM) can be found at many meetings and conferences. In addition, the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award which is based upon these criteria will be open to educational institutions in 1996, with a pilot process being tested in 1995. In those states in which a state level equivalent to this exists, the award was opened to educational institutions as early as 1994. There is documented evidence that educational institutions at the K-12 and higher education levels have applied for the state level awards, and are contemplating making application for the national award when appropriate. While the movement to this paradigm has been widely accepted in a number of arenas, there has been little research concerning its effectiveness in educational settings. In part this appears to be due to the complexity of the education setting where many participants hold the dual role of both "supplier" and "customer." Therefore, this research is being conducted to explore teacher educators' perspectives of the impact of TQM/CQI is having teacher education programs. Statement of the Problem To what extent are TQM/CQI principles being integrated into preservice teacher education programs. Definition Since the emphasis has been on quality improvement and the terminology has shifted from management to improvement, the use of the terms Total Quality Management, Total Quality Improvement (TQI) and Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) have become synonymous. For the purposes of this paper, the term Total Quality Management/Continuous Quality Improvement (TQM/CQI) will be used. Limitations/Delimitations/Assumptions The results of this study are delimited to the membership of the American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (AACTE). Since surveys were sent to the deans/heads of the schools/colleges/departments of education (SCDE), it is assumed that they were the respondents. Finally, those limitations inherent in a study of this nature, such as the researcher designed survey and the potential of researcher bias, may have affected the results of the study. Review of the Literature Education has often sought models from other fields of study to use in creating change in the way schools are run. Those who enter the field of school administration are bombarded with various leadership and management theories, for example Hersey and Blanchard's situational leadership, the Guba/Getzel social systems theory, etc. However, little did educators realize the impact that a statistician hired by japan to implement his theory of quality production would have on education in the mid-1990's. Besides creating a major paradigm shift in how schools are operated, this phenomenon is also a prime example of the effects of chaos theory. The basis premise of the work of W. Edwards Deming is his belief that the responsibility for quality does not lie with the individual, it lies with the system, but it takes individuals to create quality (Schmoker and Wilson, 1993). This philosophy is based upon 14 points: 1. Create constancy of purpose toward improvement of product and service. 2. Adopt the new philosophy. 3. Cease dependence on mass inspection. 4. End the practice of awarding business on the basis of price tag alone. 5. Improve constantly and forever the system of production and service. 6. Institute training. 7. Institute leadership. 8. Drive out fear. 9. Break down barriers between staff areas. 10. Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the workforce. 11. Eliminate numerical quotas or targets for the workforce. 12. Remove barriers to pride of workmanship. 13. Encourage education and self-improvement for everyone. 14. Put everybody in the company to work to accomplish the transformation. The transformation is everybody's job. Covey (1991) developed a theory based upon what are called the seven habits of highly effective people. Covey applied these seven habits to the 14 principles of Deming and somewhat simplified the TQM/CQI paradigm. These habits are: 1. Be proactive 2. Begin with the end in mind 3. Put first things first 4. Think win-win 5. Seek first to understand before being understood 6. Synergize 7. Sharpen the saw Covey further applied this theory to education, with the student at the center of the system. Basic to all forms of TQM/CQI is the use of a system, and the consideration that the system is what generates quality. Tribus (1995) presented this model to describe education as a system based upon quality improvement (figure 1). Tribus placed learning as the basic process of the school, with education as the outcome. The primary customer is the student, however, other customers can be defined as employers, colleges, the community, etc. The suppliers are earlier grades, another school, another teacher, etc. The supplies are the teachers, books, texts, etc. The supplies are used in the learning process resulting in outcomes for the customer. Feedback is obtained from the outcomes and customers through classroom research, which in turn assists in establishing the aim of the system. The improvement process applies then to the supplies, the process and the outcomes. The cycle then continues with further improvement. Blankstein and Swain (1994) listed the reasons why TQM/CQI should not work in schools. The authors describe how Kate Sullivan Elementary School in Tallahassee, Florida, challenged these barriers by using W Edwards Deming's quality principles The article looked at eight reasons why it could not work and described how one school overcame these obstacles by implementing Deming's quality principles The eight reasons are: (1) People do not like to change, (2) Leaders are supposed to take charge, (3) People are lazy, (4) We just don't let go of grades, (5) We don't value knowledge and training enough to pay for it, (6) We don't use data to improve systems, (7) State mandates get in the way and (8) Using TQM/CQI will fail where high quality will succeed. Bond and Woodall (1993) argued in favor of using TQM/CQI in schools. While they admitted that education is different from manufacturing, they also argued that educators must face the basic issues which those in business face. The authors pointed out that each school leader must work out his/her own approach to TQM/CQI, and that schools can do the same. They stated that schools need to redesign five areas of school operation if TQM/CQI is to work in the school environment. The five areas are: staff development, use of student test data, system-wide standards of student performance, district employees' accountability to different constituencies, and consumer satisfaction. Holt (1993) argued that Deming's concepts are perfectly applicable to education, and Holt extended some of these principles to school policies. Holt indicated that excellence is produced by the way people work together. Holt further stated that the collegiality which results from shared common assumptions is of greatest importance not grades and rewards which have no intrinsic meaning. Competition must give way to cooperation, to avoid being at war with each other. The author concluded with Deming's educational vision , that teaching and learning are important components. Rappaport (1993) described the steps used at George Washington Vocational and Technical High School in Brooklyn, New York used to initiate a successful quality improvement process. Rappaport cited that quality improvement is not a quick fix, or fad. Quality improvement is best described as continual improvement process. Quality improvement starts with a commitment on the part of the administration. Reading quality literature is the next step. Then ongoing training of personnel involved in the process. Rappaport stated, that for TQM/CQI to succeed, these along with the fact that the process is to be customer driven, and must include customer input. The quality process must also provide ongoing training and team building. The strategy comes from within and a successful total quality program, is a realistic and achievable goal. Weller, Hartley and Brown (1994) stated that the most difficult step for those planning to implement TQM/CQI and achieve quality was developing a vision statement. When asked to define the purpose of education, responses varied from teachers to those of students, parents, principals and school board members. Because of the difference in opinions it is important to have a shared vision that will be owned by all and embraces the hopes of each of these groups associated with the school. In order to develop this vision statement it is important for the principal to adopt a model that is built on participation and fosters commitment with its roots in collegiality. The authors listed the seven steps involved with their model as: (1) Group Selection and Representation, (2) Vision-Building Orientation, (3) Identifying Core Values, (4) Writing Micro- Mission Statements, (5) writing the Macro- Mission Statement, (6) Writing Goals, and (7) Writing a Vision Statement. Kohn (1993) was in favor of TQM/CQI but has strong feelings about it's appropriateness in the educational setting. Kohn believes that educators do not understand the basic principles. Even if they did understand they do not fit the educational context. Kohn further believes that educators would be better served if they looked to Dewey instead of the corporate model. In Illinois, St. Charles School District began incorporating TQM/CQI in 1989 as an outgrowth of change that was taking place within the district. The first thing they did was to develop a mission statement. In response to this each school also developed a vision statement. This statement was reflective of both student and adult input. This involvement of all parties was another step closer to achieving new outcomes for the district. The district is still in the process of refining and trying to meet their present goals They are looking forward to the goals that they haven't envisioned, believing that they now have a system that will help them to attain their goals (Koski, 1993). Methodology A survey instrument was designed to measure the perceptions of deans/heads of schools/colleges/departments of education (SCDE) regarding the impact of TQM/CQI on preservice teacher education programs. This survey used a Likert type scale for four content statements, and checklist items for three responses. The survey was piloted using faculty at Northwest Missouri State University. Using the directory of the American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (AACTE), a sample was drawn using a systemic selection of every third member institution after the starting point was randomly selected. Surveys were sent to the dean/head of the SCDE with a return envelope and separate postcard to determine the source of responses while maintaining the confidentiality of respondents. A qualitative aspect of this continuing study is planned using the postcards as a source of respondents for telephone interviews as indicated in the cover letter. A total of 232 surveys were mailed. Results Responses were returned by 123 respondents with 121 valid surveys for a 52% return with no follow-up. Public institutions comprised 63.64% of the respondents, and 45.5% of the respondents listed the masters degree as the highest degree awarded in an education field, 11.6% indicated the bachelor degree, 17.4% the educational specialists, and 25.6% the doctorate. Respondents were asked whether the concepts of TQM/CQI should be included in the preservice teacher education curriculum. The responses indicated that 51.69% at least agreed, and 27.12% disagreed or strongly disagreed. Whether the teacher education unit should model the concepts of TQM/CQI resulted in 67.8% of respondents agreeing or strongly agreeing and 13.56% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. When asked whether the concepts of TQM/CQI were being taught in at least one course, 44.92% indicated that it was not being taught, and 32.2% did not know. In a similar question, respondents were asked if the institution was practicing the concepts of TQM/CQI, 49.15% indicated that they were not and 33.9% were practicing the concepts of TQM/CQI. The respondents were asked to indicate which course or group of courses should be used as the vehicle for teaching TQM/CQI if it is to be included in the curriculum. Four choices were offered, a specialty area/departmental methods course; a professional education foundations course; a professional education general methods course; a separate course in the professional education program. The professional education foundations course was selected by 51.02% of the respondents with 21.41% selecting the specialty area methods course, 17.35% the professional education general methods course, and 11.22% indicating a separate course should be used. Conclusions Based upon these data, it would appear that while a strong majority of the deans/heads modeled TQM/CQI practices, and a majority of the dean/heads believed that they should be taught, that TQM/CQI principles were not being taught in the preservice programs. However, the literature indicates that there is a strong movement to implement many of the concepts of TQM/CQI in the K-12 school systems. Therefore, the teacher education units may be considered by some to be followers rather than visionaries in terms of this movement. It should be noted that the two invalid surveys had notes attached which indicated that the respondents were either not cognizant of the TQM/CQI movement, or did not know what was meant by TQM/CQI. The deans/heads were clear that if TQM/CQI is included in a preservice teacher education program, that it should be included as a part of a professional education foundations course. This may be indicative of the perception that teacher education graduates need to have a broad based background foundations which includes several paradigms in which schools operate. It is interesting to note that many schools and individuals who are not professional educators appear to have embraced the concepts of TQM/CQI as they apply to the educational system. At the same time, a priori investigation indicates that many of these same non-educators are opposed to an outcome based process. Based upon what is known about both, there appears to be an inner conflict since both TQM/CQI and OBE embrace many of the same principles. Perhaps if those who are advocates of OBE in areas in which it is vigorously opposed used a TQM/CQI approach, the same end could be accomplished, without the conflict. To answer the basic question of this research project, it appears that TQM/CQI is having an impact on preservice teacher education programs. It also appears that the impact is one of including the concept somewhere in the program, and preparing future teacher for the paradigm as they move into the world of practice. It is recommended that this research continue with its qualitative aspect to seek answers to those questions that this research has raised. References Blankstein, A. M. and Swain, H. (February, 1994). ls TQM right for schools? The Executive Educator , pp.51-54 Bond, J. M. and Woodall, M. V.(December, 1993). The quality conundrum. The American School Board Journal , pp. 26-28. Covey, S. (1991). Principle centered leadership. New York: Simon and Schuster. Holt, M. (December 1993). Deming on education: A view from the seminar. Phi Delta Kappan, pp. 329-330. Kohn, A. (September 1993). Turning learning Into a business: Concerns about total quality. Educational Leadership, pp.SB-61. Koski, M. (September, 1993). Change from the grassroots up. Educational Leadership, pp. 51-52. Rappaport, L. A. (September 1993). A school-based quality improvement program. NASSP Bulletin, pp. 16-20. Schmoker, M.J. and Wilson, R.B. (1993). Total quality education: Profiles of schools that demonstrate the power of Deming's management principles. Bloomington, Indiana: Phi Delta Kappa. Tribus, M. (January, 1995) Presentation to the faculty at Northwest Missouri State University, Maryville, MO. Weller, Jr. ,D., Hartley, S. H., and Brown, C. L, (May/June 1994). Principals and TQM: Developing vision. The Clearing House, .pp. 298-301. The Impact of the Total Quality Management/Continuous Quality Improvement Movement on Preservice Teacher Education Programs George J. Fero, Ed.D. Associate Professor of Educational Administration Coordinator of Teacher Education Student Services Northwest Missouri State University Joseph Marafino, Ed.D. Assistant Professor of Education State University of New York at Brockport Marie A. Fero, Ed.D. Assistant Professor of Education Chair, Department of Education Benedictine College Paper Presented at Association of Teacher Educators Annual Meeting Detroit, Michigan February 19-22, 1995