Improving Administrator Communication As A Factor Of Teacher Satisfaction

Shelley Popson Ardis

This dissertation in practice explored and intervened in the problem of teacher dissatisfaction at a state agency that functioned as a statewide public school for special education students in the southeastern United States. I used the Performance Improvement/Human Performance Technology (PI/HPT) and Appreciative Inquiry (AI) models in this study to guide all phases. The performance improvement practitioner uses the PI/HPT model to guide the processes to gather information and make decisions based on organizational (desired) performance, environmental (current) performance, identified and prioritized gaps, determination of root causes, intervention selection, development, and implementation, and evaluation and change management activities (Van Tiem et al., 2012). The AI model aligns with these phases; however, the methods seek to identify the strengths of the organization and honor the work that can be improved or expanded to bring an organization to its desired state (Hammond, 2013). The central research question was “How can factors of teacher dissatisfaction be addressed across the agency?” and subresearch questions were:RQ1: What factors of teacher dissatisfaction were identified across the agency? RQ2: What sources of information and support did teachers identify as valuable and essential to continue or expand? RQ3: Were factors teachers identified as valuable being implemented by their supervisors? RQ4: What interventions would address gap(s) and strength(s) prioritized and the root causes identified? RQ5: Did the intervention provide the desired outcome, address the gap, and move the agency to the desired future state? The problem of practice of this study focused on the trend of teacher dissatisfaction as evidenced by the results of the agency’s annual climate surveys from the years 2020 and 2021. I explored the problem at the agency after I determined it was urgent, actionable, strategic, and feasible (Perry et al., 2020). This problem also aligned closely with the newly approved agency strategic plan and targeted the academic departments specifically. I engaged with primary stakeholders who were classroom teachers and their direct supervisors. I also facilitated decision-making activities with key stakeholders, who were members of leadership committees. I used a combination of extant and elicited data to determine the reasons for teacher dissatisfaction and the factors of support identified by teachers as beneficial. Supervisors participated in a questionnaire and interview that provided evidence of practices they employed that aligned with those teachers indicated were valuable. I used the READ model to analyze documents as part of the front-end analysis and developed systems maps to illustrate processes (Dalglish et al., 2020). I modified Rothwell’s worksheet for solitary analysts to present a front-end analysis of positive and negative findings to the decision-making leadership team (Hammond, 2013; Rothwell, 2005; Van Tiem et al., 2012; Winiecki, 2015). I facilitated gap, strength, root cause, and path to the future analysis activities with the decision-making team using a gap priority matrix, Ishikawa fishbone diagram, and the five whys method (Hammond, 2013; Rothwell, 2005; Van Tiem et al., 2012; Watkins et al., 2012; Winiecki, 2015). Administrator communication issues were the root causes the decision-making leadership team identified to address. These issues aligned with the agency’s strategic plan, were within my scope of influence, and were urgent, feasible, strategic, and actionable (Perry et al., 2020). I facilitated a variety of activities to inform expert reviewers and decision-makers about possible interventions and I guided the intervention selection process (Hammond, 2013; Rothwell, 2005; Sanders & Thiagarajan, 2006; Van Tiem et al., 2012; Watkins & Leigh, 2009). After the decision-making team analyzed options, they selected an intervention set to include a knowledge management platform and performance support aids. I followed a knowledge management project management model described by Watkins and Leigh (2009), and I designed, developed, and implemented a prototype SharePoint site named the Academic Leadership Hub. Throughout my study, I added task and communication elements to a project management and communication plan to guide my efforts as a novice performance improvement practitioner (Rothwell, 2005). I followed the Dessinger and Moseley (2003) full-scope evaluation model and a participant-oriented approach to obtain feedback from stakeholders (Bakken, 2018). I obtained feedback on the prototype intervention through a pilot review that included subject matter experts (Bakken, 2018). I selected focus groups as the method to obtain formative and summative feedback from end-users and decision-makers (Bakken, 2018; Dessinger & Moseley, 2003). I planned a confirmative evaluation, and I plan to facilitate these activities after the intervention has been in place for 12 months. I conclude this dissertation in practice discussing the implications of this study, equity and social justice elements, and make suggestions for future research. I also explain my reflexivity and my personal growth and decision-making processes throughout this journey.

Improving Administrator Communication As A Factor Of Teacher Satisfaction

Metrics

Abstract

Files and links (1)

Details

Improving Administrator Communication As A Factor Of Teacher Satisfaction

Metrics

Abstract

Files and links (1)

Details

University of West Florida Social media