1. the need for systemic transformational change in school districts  (Page 2/4)

One of the hallmark characteristics of the Information Age is a form of work called knowledge work, which has become the predominate form of work in our American Information Age society. Knowledge work, a term coined by Peter Drucker (1959), is a work process where a worker manipulates information or develops and uses knowledge in the workplace. Knowledge workers are now estimated to outnumber all other workers in North America by at least a four to one margin (Haag, Cummings, McCubbrey, Pinsonneault,&Donovan, 2006, p. 4).

Now that knowledge work predominates in our society, America needs a system of education that has as its purpose to ensure that every individual who enters public education leaves having mastered a variety of important knowledge and skills. To achieve this purpose, some thought-leaders in education believe that we need to transform the current profession-wide paradigm for teaching and learning to a new paradigm that is more closely aligned with the requirements of the Information Age. A paradigm of education that meets the requirements of the Information Age would not hold time constant, which forces achievement to vary; instead, it would hold achievement constant so that students can attain required learning standards. Within this new paradigm, each student would be given as much time as he or she needs to master mandated standards of learning. Further, to enrich their learning, students would benefit from having opportunities to select and study topics of their own choosing or to engage with others in community projects in which they would have opportunities to meet state-mandated standards of learning. The current reforms that predominate in education, however, fail to do this. Instead, these reforms leave the old education paradigm intact; therefore, these reforms cannot, and will not, meet the needs of our Information Age society. We must transform rather than reform our school systems.

I feel strongly that it is a moral imperative for federal and state education officials, school system leaders, school board members, and other key stakeholders for school systems to: a) understand the societal transformation is occurring; b) recognize that the design and functioning of most current school systems are incompatible with our transforming society; and, c) recognize the kinds of key organization design features that would make school systems compatible with our changing society—features such as those displayed in Table 2. I also think that individual state education agencies and local school systems must decide on what their transformed school districts should be like in response to the requirements of the Information Age; that is, there is not a single one-size-fits-all ideal organization design for school systems to replicate.

Paradigm change requires systemic transformation

Much has been written about the need for paradigm change in education (e.g., see Ackoff, 2001; Banathy, 1992; Bar-Yam, 2003; Branson, 1987; Darling-Hammond, 1990; Duffy, 2003; Duffy, Rogerson&Blick, 2000; Egol, 2003; Elmore, 2004; Emery, 1977; Fullan, 2004; Kaufman, 2000; Pasmore, 1988; Reigeluth, 1994; Schlechty, 2003; Senge, et al., 2000; Toffler, 1984; Tyack&Cuban, 1997). There is also a growing recognition that the Information Age, with its predominance of knowledge work replacing the Industrial Age’s predominance of manual labor, requires a shift from a standardized, sorting-focused paradigm of education to a customized, learner-centered paradigm.