1. Can each stakeholder articulate the vision/mission of that building, campus, or corporation? How do you know? Do they own it? Do they believe it?
Pierre Moran stakeholders cannot articulate the vision/mission of our building. There is a mission statement at the bottom of the school’s website, but that was created by former building leaders over 15 years ago. Starting last year before I arrived at Pierre Moran they were evaluated by AdvancED and this year I was to look at standard one in their review and provide evidence of these items in the building. One of the items was the mission statement. My partner and I talked about the mission statement and a school improvement plan from years ago that has since been removed from the site …show more content…
Since this mission statement is not recognized by the administration and staff in the building the vision does not guide how decisions are made at each level. What I do know is that our current principal is trying to make sure that all stakeholder are represented in this turn-around of sorts we are doing this year to make our building a school of choice. Pierre Moran once was the middle school to attend and now it has a less than par reputation because of the student population. I personally like the challenge of the student personnel that we serve.
3. Are there specific goals & plans related to the vision that promote organizational learning? Do people in this school talk about these goals or plans? If so, how often and in what context? What evidence do you see that the plans are being …show more content…
Yet, she has help and input from the office staff and the SLT and it is happening on a regular basis. The office staff meets every Tuesday morning and the SLT meets every third Thursday to discuss what we did in the previous week/month and where we want to go from here. I believe the process is working to promote continuous and sustainable improvement, but as I stated earlier the buy-in is lacking. You also have what AdvancED called ‘the poison in the water’, which is a group of teachers so negative that they just really need to go. They are toxic to our building and the willingness to get other teachers to accept change. I think it’s really sad for an organization to come in and something like that. Twenty-five percent of the staff is poison. Another twenty-five percent is awesome, and the remaining fifty percent could go either way. So, we are working on our fifty percent hoping we can get them to join us and leave the poison
Pierre Moran stakeholders cannot articulate the vision/mission of our building. There is a mission statement at the bottom of the school’s website, but that was created by former building leaders over 15 years ago. Starting last year before I arrived at Pierre Moran they were evaluated by AdvancED and this year I was to look at standard one in their review and provide evidence of these items in the building. One of the items was the mission statement. My partner and I talked about the mission statement and a school improvement plan from years ago that has since been removed from the site …show more content…
Since this mission statement is not recognized by the administration and staff in the building the vision does not guide how decisions are made at each level. What I do know is that our current principal is trying to make sure that all stakeholder are represented in this turn-around of sorts we are doing this year to make our building a school of choice. Pierre Moran once was the middle school to attend and now it has a less than par reputation because of the student population. I personally like the challenge of the student personnel that we serve.
3. Are there specific goals & plans related to the vision that promote organizational learning? Do people in this school talk about these goals or plans? If so, how often and in what context? What evidence do you see that the plans are being …show more content…
Yet, she has help and input from the office staff and the SLT and it is happening on a regular basis. The office staff meets every Tuesday morning and the SLT meets every third Thursday to discuss what we did in the previous week/month and where we want to go from here. I believe the process is working to promote continuous and sustainable improvement, but as I stated earlier the buy-in is lacking. You also have what AdvancED called ‘the poison in the water’, which is a group of teachers so negative that they just really need to go. They are toxic to our building and the willingness to get other teachers to accept change. I think it’s really sad for an organization to come in and something like that. Twenty-five percent of the staff is poison. Another twenty-five percent is awesome, and the remaining fifty percent could go either way. So, we are working on our fifty percent hoping we can get them to join us and leave the poison