Page 35

Journal of Texas School Women Executives, Volume I, Issue 1 2012 plan anticipates administrative vacancies and develops a pool of qualified candidates in advance of critical need‖ (p. 2). A central office administrator commented on staff development from a district-wide perspective. And this year, they’ll be a very focused [staff development program] one because we have four new principals. I had a retirement and I had one guy leave and two guys and two other ladies got promoted. So I have four new principals. And our staff development director has already met with the various assistant superintendents to determine what they believe are the key learnings that need to happen before school starts. And then what can be shared after school starts. And then we’re going to have a new principals’ academy that will occur for this entire year. We also set them up with mentors and then we are also you know [as I] explained the way it didn’t work for us but we are not now going to have an administrator-in-training [program]. And I don’t know what he [administrator’s name] is going to call it yet but it will be for those that we think have potential, you apply for it and you have to be accepted. And they will receive much of the training we have given our administrators because it would be great if you could put an assistant principal in place that had all the training that you already wanted. (CNTRL7, 2094-2125) Succession, Style and Change One perspective for analyzing the superintendents’ actions is Fullan’s (2007) stages of the change process; it is important to note that while both were directly involved in building capacity across the district, the processes and tools used to produce outcomes were different under each administration. The first superintendent, Dr. Ravinia, initiated and implemented an improvement process that focused on the development of a professional learning community. Dr. Self continued the implementation and sustainability of the improvement process by creating ―a structure that supports the district to improve and change their current practices‖, that is, an ―implementation bridge‖ (Hord & Hall, 2006, p. 9). The implementation bridge in WCISD was the district-wide use of the continuous improvement model and its tools that moved and supported the sustainability of the changes initiated from implementation to institutionalization. As successor, Dr. Self expressed in words and actions values that mirrored those held by Dr. Ravinia. However, she focused her role on being developer and institutionalizer. Through Dr. Self’s leadership, WCISD sustained its district-wide professional learning community. Dr. Ravinia appeared to have responded to McAdams’ (2007) admonishment that superintendents should act in the best interest of the district and minimize the disruption of a leadership change. She worked with the WCISD Board and educational community to develop a profile of her successor. Dr. Ravinia seems to have cared about the legacy she had begun to build and wanted her successor to continue and improve upon the work she had begun (McAdams, 2007). Thus, Dr. Self believed Dr. Ravinia created the cognitive dissonance required to move the district forward in terms of accepting and managing change. Thus ―continuous improvement‖ served as a strong enhancer to sustaining a Professional Learning Community (PLC) at WCISD. As a result, continuous improvement was a major process used by the district to move the organization forward as well as to sustain dimensions of a PLC.

- 24 -

Profile for Texas Association of School Administrators

JTWSE—Volume 1  

JTWSE—Volume 1  

Profile for tasanet