I never wanted to change the system, or buck the system, or become any kind of reformer. All I wanted was to get a K-12 Reading Specialist endorsement on my teaching certificate. I wanted to do a better job teaching and advance on the pay scale. I went to graduate school and got a dose of the latest literacy research. But there’s a downside to the bleeding edge. Making changes in the classroom has been problematic: Schedules don’t work for projects; kids get pulled out of the class for remedial help that is antithetical to my view of literacy; parents are mystified by project rubrics; the report card demands numbers that describe complex achievements; curriculum assumes lockstep progress through a skills-based agenda for age-grouped students with vast ability and motivation differences. And then there’s the government…

Education bloggers hammer on this subject all the time. School reform. How do we “fix” education? We’ve got to get people to understand…(your choice). I’m as caught up in the discourse as anyone. I found a transcript of a 1995 interview with Kevin Kelly, author of Out of Control. I hadn’t heard of him before, but I’m now a new Kevin Kelly fan. The interview transcript is called The Structure of Organized Change. It offered an ecological model for understanding organizational evolution.

Out of Control
Kelly described organizations as evolving organisms. He used the metaphor of evolution to analyze processes of change. He didn’t specifically address change in education systems, (he used health care systems for his examples) but the relevance to schools was there for me. According to Kelly, “an organization is a set of relationships that persist over time.” As such, an organization tries to anticipate changes in the environment so that it can successfully adapt. Those of us who advocate reform believe that schools are not doing this very well. Of course, there are conflicting views of what kinds of changes are needed, and those views are based on differing assumptions about the proper role of schools in society. Regardless of the ends to which education processes are directed, it’s useful to think about how adaptation works at an organizational level.

Under the heading, “The Limits of Adaptability” Kelly said

It’s generally much easier to kill an organization than to change it substantially. Organisms by their design are not made to adapt too far. They have only a limited ability to adapt beyond a certain point. And beyond that point it’s much easier to kill them off and start a new one than it is to change them….Species go extinct because there are historical contraints built into a given body or a given design.

That’s where we are now with schools. We’re asking them to do what they were never designed to do. We probably need to let them die in order to move forward. The situatedness of schools in a world that is globally networked makes schooling anachronistic. Who can’t see this? Kids know it. The real problem is that we haven’t yet arrived at consensus for what kids should be doing while their parents are at work. We don’t have a replacement vision.

According to Kelly, what we need to do is give up control and get comfortable with influence.

We don’t drive systems, we shepherd them. The sheep are doing their own thing, eating the grass, finding their own water, producing the wool. We have some guard dogs that are keeping them in line. The shepherd keeps the flock in the right general area, and harvests the results. This is the kind of systems, and the kind of management of systems, towards which we are headed.

I’m at a loss for a better suggestion. I’ve said before that I think teaching is like herding goats. Letting go of old notions of control is hard, but if we’re going to move forward successfully, we need to accurately read the landscape we’re trying to navigate. Giving up control has not been part of the discourse of reform. I’m not fixing anything. I’m herding goats. I understand how they think and I can care about them. I don’t know anything about reforming a system.