ED 061 991

AUTHORTITLEINSTITUTIONPUB DATENOTEAVAILABLE FROM

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

IDENTIFIERS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

LI 003 662

Ward, Joe H Jr.; And OtherThe Educational Catalyst: An ImperaLve for Today.Phi Delta Kappa, Bloomington, Inc.Jul 7153p.;(51 References); Occasional Paper 10Research Service Center, Phi Delta Kappa,International Headquarters Bldg., Eighth & UnionBloomington, Indiana 47401 (HC $1.00)

MF-$0.65 HC Not Available from EDRS.*Change Agents; *Educational Improvement;*Educational Innovation; *Educational Research;Information Dissemination*Educational Catalyst Organization

This paper describes a method for acceleratingeducational improvements nation-wide through the activities of one orore catalyst organizations, which would stimulate interaction

between educational systems personnel and promising new ideas. Ithighlights measures to correct present shortcomings, which existbecause there is no strong linkage between the educational researcherand the practitioner. The.paper discusses the nature of aneducational system, the reasons why innovations in this fieldfrequently tail, the necessary components of an educational catalystorganization, and the various activities which can be projected forsuch an organization. It synthesizes findings on change andinnovation to posit guidelines tor training, for personnelmanagement, and for support functions within a catalyst organizationand it urges assumption of the catalyst role by the extant RegionalLaboratories or some other innovative structure. The paperacknowledges that much research has been done in this generalsubstantive area, but indicates that little specific action has beentaken as a result. It thus recommends that such action be taken atthis time. (Author)

-PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS COPY-RIGHTED MATERIAL BY MICROFICHE ONLyHAS BEEN GRANTED BY

PALTO ERIC AND ORGANIZATIONS OPERATINGUNDER AGREEMENTS WITH THE U 5 OFFICEOF EDUCATION FURTHER REPRODUCTIONOUTSIDE 7HE ERIC SYSTEM REQUIRES PER-MISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNER

THE EDUCATIONAL CATALYST:AN IMPERATIVE FOR TODAY

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.EDUCATION & WELFAREOFFICE OF EDUCATION

THIS DOCUMENT HAS REEH REPRO-DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIG-INATING IT. POINTS OF VIEW OR OPIN.IONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILYREPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDO-'.:-;ATION POSITION OR POLICY.

by

Joe H. Ward, Jr.Reeve Love

George M. Higginson

Southwest Educational Development LaboratorAustin, Texas

July 1971

A Publication of Phi Delta Kappa's Research Service Center

INTRODUCTION

One of the purposes of the Phi Delta Kappa Re3earch ServiceCenter is the improvement of understanding of tr,e researchprocess on the part of members of Phi Delta Kappa and otherinterested persons. Among the activities engaged in to achieve thispurpose is the publication ef the OCCASIONAL PAPER series.The series serves as a vehicle whereby writings on or related to theresearch process may be made generally available. Of particularinterest are manuscripts which journals are not likely to publishdue to length.

Ward, Love, and Higgison are involved in efforts to improvethe 'operation of educational institutions. Their experiences inthis work delineate the need for educational catalysts to effectinstitutional change. This paper documents that need and suggestsways of meeting it.

William .L.GephartDirector of Research Services

Phi Delta Kappa

Dr. Ward (16F, San Antonio Chapter) was a senior systemsanalyst for the Southwest Educational Development Laboratoryin Austin, Texas, and is presently with the Air Force HumanResources Laboratory at Brooks Air Force Base, Texas; Mr.Higgi ison is the Director of the Division of Contest Analysis andPlanning at the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory,and Miss Love is a technical writer/editor there.

The opinions expressed in this paper are those of theauthors. They do not necessarily reflect the views,policies, or opinions of the Southwest EducationalDevelopment Laboratory or of its basic fundingsource, Elementary and Secondary Education Act,Title IV, U.S. Office of Education, or its otherfunding sources, nor of the Human ResourcesLaboratory.

ABSTRACT

This paper describes a method for accelerating educationalimprovements nation-wide through the activities of one or morecatalyst organizations, which would stimulate interactionbetween educational systems personnol and promising new ideas.It highlights measures to correct p ient shortcomings, whichexist because there is no strong linkage between the educationalresearcher and the practitioner. The paper discusses the nature ofan educational system, the reasons why innovations in this fieldfrequently fail, the necessary components of an educationalcatalyst organization, and the various activities which r!an beprojected for such an organization. It synthesizes findings onchange and innovation to posit guidelines for training, forpersonnel management, and for support functions within acatalyst organization, and it urges assumption of tly!, catalyst roleby the extant Regional Laboratories or some other innovativestructure. The paper acknowledges that much research has beendone in this general substantive area, but indicates that littlespecific action has been taken as a result. It thus recommendsthat such action be taken at this time.

EDUCATIONAL CATALYSTKNOWLEDGE FLOW AND PRECIPITANT LINKAGE

SYSTEM

EDUCATIONALRESOURCESYSTEMS

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction 1

II. Today's Educational SystemHI. Why Innovations Fail 9

IV. Components of an EducationalCatalyst Organization 14

V. What Should a Catalyst Do? 18

VI. How an E.C.O. Works 24VII. Implications for Regional

Educational Laboratories .VIII. Summary and Conclusions 36

References 40Appendices 44

I. Introduction

Consider the changes, for better and for worse, that have comeabout in our world in the last century, or even in the last decade.Man has walked on the moon. Surgeons are transplanting humanhearts. In many countries, the megalopolis has become a reality,and attention has turned to the unique lifeways and the peculiarstresses of the city. Population growth has become a threat ratherthan a goal. Ecology, and the belated attention that must be givenit if we are to continue on this planet at all, are vital and globalconcerns.

Changes have occurred at such an accelerating rate that it ishard for the individual to adjust to them all. The only way forhim to learn to make these adjustments is through an educationthat is responsive to change, that incorporates improvement; andeducation today is not improving as fast as it might. Of our areasof endeavor, it has received the least updating.

Research has shown that it takes a generation at best for aneducational innovation to enjoy widespread use. If this is indeedthe case, then our schools are only now receiving the benefits ofwhat was deemed innovative in 1930. What can be done to makeeducation more meaningful for the 1970's and beyond? How canwe bring about optimum changes and make the greatest improve-ments? And how can we get the human beings who mustimplement these changes and improvements to accelerate theprocess?

According to Chase, the principal problem involves bridgingthe gap between theory and practice.

The building of organizational links to facilitate the flow ofknowledge into educational practice is going forward slowlybut persistently. Education not only suffers from in-adequate knowledge-producing resources, but also from thelack of closely linked agencies for moving knowledgethrough essential processes and phases to widespread andeffective use.1

2Among the "knowledge-moving" agencies that do exist are the

United States Office of Education sponsored Research andDevelopment Centers and Regional Laboratories. Chase sum-marizes his observations about these organizations in this way:

. the centers and laboratories are beginning to makecontributions to such processes as (1) elaboration to revealimplications of research findings, (2) codification to showrelationships among empirical and other data, (3) applica-tion to problems entountered in practice, (4) incorporationinto products and technologies for educational use, (5)reconciliation of the new processes and products toretained elements (or other approaches to compatiblefunctioning), (6) testing to demonstrate effects under avariety of control!ed et closely observed conditions, and (7)continuing infusion of new knowledge and modification ofproducts and processes to meet newly identified needs.2

He goes on to describe the problem of bridging the gapbetween the conception of good ideas for improving educationalsystems and the operational use of these ideas in a real-worldeducational setting.3 ft is this problem of iniusion of innovativeideas, or acceleration of educational improvements, that is theprimary concern of this paper, and it is here that our tgeatestdifficulties have been.

Perhaps, the state of affairs relative to the origination,legitimation and communication ef innovations in educa-tion is illustrated by the state of knowledge and validatedpractice in the teaching of reading by Barton and Wilder - -They conclude that an ideal model for originating, dis-seminating, and validating innovations in reading wouldinclude:

1. Highly trained researchers making su tained efforts tosolve basic problems in the field

2. High interaction between these researchers and thosein basic sciences which might aid them

3. Research findings which are cumulative4. Changes in materials and methods based on these

findings5_ Feedback aboUt special problems from teachers to

researchers and publishers, leading to further research andchanges in materials and in methods

Instead they found that:

I . Reading researchers are largely unt ained, and aredoing part-time one-shot research.

2. Contact with other disciplines is infrequent.3. Research is voluminous, but of poor quality and

noncumu lative.4. Materials are largely uniform, unchanged and

influenced by new research since the 1930's.5. Teachers depend largely on published materials, and

though ideologically committed to professional behavior,are unable to practice it as traditionally defined.4

A great deal of knowledge concerning appropriate strategies andprocesses for effecting desirable educational change is readilyavailable; what is needed now is the motivation and impetus toactually bring about such change.

If the infusion of ideas is visualized as a process similar to achemical process, it becomes apparent that this is a process whichrequires a catalyst for optimum results. While an educationalcommunity may have available to it any number of good ideaseffective instmctional systems (products), new educationalmanagement techniques, principles of good instruction, etc. itis still necessary to create within the community the properatmosphere for ensuring the implementation of these ideas. Someelement must be introduced into the system which will createsuch an atmosphere, and which will cause accelerated educationalimprovement. This element would be, in effect, an educationalcatalyst, and would stimulate the interaction between educationalsystems personnel and new ideas to produce the more rapidimprovement desired.

Professional catalysts, or change agents, have been used withconsiderable success in a number of fields. Over the past fewdecades agricultural agents have brought about drastic changes,and vast improvements, in methods of farming around the world,with particularly spectacular and measurable results in the UnitedStates. Missionaries in the Middle East have contributed greatly tothe modernization of the Arab countries and to the& utilizationof their rich oil resources. In the area of preventive medicine,

4planned campaigns have led to widespread immunization againstnumerous diseases and to the control of such potential healthhazards as the anopheles mosquito. Surely similarly great im-provements can be anticipated in education if equal thought andeffort are given to implementing and optimizing the changeprocess, and to effecting the shifts in attitude that are necessaryto bring about lasting improvements.

The act of planning and implementing a change in aneducational system can be a simple or a complex process. Moststudents of this behavior use the word "practice" to describe thprocess, and organize the practices into categories according totheir complexity.

Beal and Bohlen5 delineate four categories, the simplest ofwhich is a change in materials andlor equipment. A change intextbooks or in specific curriculum content would be a typicalcase.

The second category is an improved practice, which involves achange in techniques or methodology. Using filmstrip instead ofchalkboard, with no change of content, is an illustration.

The third category of complexity is an innovation. Thiscategory involves not only a change in materials, but also asequence of changes in their use. The introduction of computer-assisted instruction in the classroom would probably bestillustrate this practice.

Finally, the fourth category is a change in enterprise, whichinvolves several innovations. The introduction of early childhoodeducation in a school that previously started with the first gradewould be an example of a change in enterprise.

The differences in their meanings notwiths anding, the termsexplained above are used loosely in this paper. In most instanceswe refer to change, to innovation, or io techniques and methodsin a general way, and do not try to make distMctions among thefour categories of complexity.

The organization which, in the role of educational catalyst,undertakes to stimulate improvements of any nature must studycarefully the particular environment in which it will work, andmust bring into this environment a wide range of information. Itcannot be committed to a single idea, or a single set of ideas, butmust seek to bring together the right people and the relevantideas at the right place and time.

At present, some of the Research and Development Centersand the Regional Laboratories are performing catalytic activities,but in a rathe i. limited manner. If any of these organizations, orany other organization, were to focus its attention specifically onsuch activities, acting as a conscious agent for desirable change, itcould bring about dramatic and stirring educational improve-ments within its area. The rest of this paper will discuss thecatalytic role in education, and the various courses an organiza-tion may take when it opts to assume this role.

II. Today's Educational System

To ensure that communications are good and that there is nomisunderstanding about this paPer's recommendations, it isdesirable at this point to describe briefly .the authors' conceptionof the present educational system. The description will treat onlythe most relevant components, without details.

The following paragraphs refer to Figure I, which is T.' pictorialrepresentation of an educational system. (See also Appendix Afer a schematic representation with greater detail.)

Elements. The elements comprise learners, teachers, adminis-trators, parents, and the books, buildings, films, and othermaterials pertaining to the educational system. Thtt elements arethe people and materials (resources) about which decisions mustbe made, and which are involved in activities that produceoutcomes.

Activities. The activities consist of all the relevant, describableactions in which elements can engage. Such activities as reading,

FIGU

RE

1

CO

MPO

NE

NT

S OF A

N E

DU

CA

TIO

NA

L SY

STE

M

-Funding Om

=,1=

EX

TE

RN

AL

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NT

Othil Svatm

i IINA

Intact tNem

Edutam

itmal Sw

am

EL

EM

EN

TS

AC

TIV

IITIU

IMPR

OV

EM

EN

T

SO C

rum E

dimm

ionalZ

onal MA

IN

ISN A

XE

& L

WIli thym

ic mim

malitm

of visyM

mi.1

7writing, inquiring, discussing, etc. are car led out by the elements.

Desired Outcomes (or Objectives). The educational system hasobjectives which it endeavors to attain. When the elements engagein activities, the results are outcomes which may or may notmatch the specific objectives_ The objectives may vary fromfuzzily described goals such as "obtain optimum individualdevelopment" or "attain social competence" to clearly describedbehaviors in reading, writing, computing, etc. The more clearlythe objectives are described, the easier it is to determine theextent to which the outcomes meet the objectives.

Information Processing. The information processing com-ponents involve the vast subsystem for storage, retrieval andanalysis of information that is the heart of the educationalsystem. This subsystem includes the predictions that are requiredto estimate the effects of alternative activities, the considerationof constraints under which decisions must be made, and thechoices to be made from many alternatives (decision-making). Italso includes the comparison of actual outcomes with desired andpredicted outcomes to provide the feedback required for con-trolling the system and for improving it. The arrows leading inand out of this component represent the information flow amongall components as well as the information flow to and from theenvironment.

External Environment. The external environment, both physi-cal and attitudinal, is shown outside of the educational system. Itcomprises everythMg that inflUences or interacts with theeducational system, including funding sources, consultants, R &D Centers, Regional Laboxatories, pressure groups and otherindividuals and organizations both inside and outside the field ofeducation.

Improvement. The improvement of an educational system isextremely important and probably is the most neglected of all itscomponents_ It is represented as both an internal and an externalfactor in the depiction of the system. Improvement may begenerated by employees, students or other members of the

8system, Or it may come through pressure from an outside agencyor group. Thus, the educational system has a built-in improve-ment component. Typical improvement activities are: reorganiza-tion of the elements and activities, cost-benefit analysis, stafftraining, updating the desired outcomes, improving prediction,modifying the activities of the system, etc.

Some difficulties with the improvement component may arisethrough the fuzziness of educational objectives, the inadequacyof feedback information on predicted and observed situations,and the general tendency to equate suggestions for improvementwith negative criticism of the system. Improvement must becontinuously solicited and considered, so that the occurrence oftraumatic events can be avoided. The improvement componentshould be reco&nized as both a necessary and a desirable featureof any system.

Educational Catalyst. The educational catalyst must causeinteraction between the human elements of the operationalsystem, its improvement component, and the external environ-ment, in order to accelerate the improvement of education. Thecatalyst function may be performed by one person interacting inseveral different ways or by several persons focusing on a specificsituation.

Catalytic actions toward improvement can occur in manyways. A catalyst can be a consultant from the external environ-ment, a teacher within the operational system, a supervisor

ancentrating on educational improvement, or even a parent whohappens to stimulate something good in the schools.

The study of how past improvements have been made shouldbe used as a starting point for defining catalytic activities. Studiessuch as those being done hy the Kettering Institute for theDevelopment of Educational Activities (I/D/E/A) might hehelpful in clarifying the description of the catalyst organization.But it is not sufficient shnply to study the ways in which changeshave taken place. Further actions are needed. Educationalcatalysts must be identified, nurtured, and infused into educa-

9tional systems to eatly accelerate the improvement of educa-tion.

If an Educational Catalyst Organization is to attain maximumsuccess, it is necessary to describe at the outset the elements,activities and objectives and the related information processingfunctions. In discussang the systems development role of theRegional Laboratories, Chase has specified the importance ofhaving goals, strategies, and built-in processes and mechanisms forthe contimuing evaluation, modification, and adaptation ofproducts and systems.6 Any effective system must have built-infeedback to Lnsure desired results, and an organization designedto promote linkage activities should follow Chase's approach toinsure the necessary evaluation, modification, and improvementof these activities. The specific components and functions of acatalyst organization will be discussed in greater detail later Lnthis paper.

III. Why Innovations Fail

In the late 1960's the United States was spending more oneducation about $70 to $75 billion a year total than ondefense. There are now over 61 million Americans involved ineducation. Teachers are the largest single occupational group ofthe American labor force. By virtue of these facts, and others,education is undoubtedly the largest U.S. industry, and it isforecast to account for one half the Gross National Product bythe late 1970's.1 Yet this giant is slow-moving: while the lastdecades have produced unbelievable advances in technology,economics, science, enineeting and other fields, the improve-ments in education have been negligible. Why?

It is somewhat paradoxical that faith in education is at anall-time high, if we may judge by the miracles it is asked toperform; while confidence in the schools may be at anall-time low, if we may take at face value the protests ofstudents, minority groups, and teachers, or the criticismswhich deluge the professional as well as the popular media.Another paradox is the chorus of acclaim for new tech-

10nologies and other innovations and the accompanying wailsof disillus.onment as one innovation after another fallsshort of realizing the hopes built upon it.5

Too many schools have storerooms chock full of textbooks,machines, films, and gadgets which were once thought of as theultimate in technology, and which were going to solve all theschools' problems. Each of these had a purpose, each had ameaning, each should have made an improvement, and, forreasons not well understood, each failed. Could the industrialcomplex that produced these wonders be so wrong? Probablynot. Given reasonable opportunity to succeed and allotted thecorrect proportions of time, energy, and other resources, most ofthese innovations would have caused some improvement in thelearning process and would have been retained as part of the'curriculum.

If random contacts were made with personnel from elemen-tary schools around the country, many of them would present afavorable impression in conversing about innovation. They knowabout and understand innovative things and, in fact, will explainthat their own philosophy is to be innovative and to foster newand improved ideas and practices. However, an examination ofthe curricula and actual teaching methods in most of theseschools will show the same old thing: adults who compare theschool situation, overtly or covertly, to that of their ownchildhood, and large classrooms of children who progress in alock-step manner, who don't like- school, and who find it anentirely different world from their own real-life worlds.

Seers of bygone decades occasior ally asked whether ourschools had outlived their usefulness = and we laughed. Thequestion is no longer funny. The schools are conspicuouslyill-suited to the needs of at least 30 per cent of their presentclientele: the large number of children from minorigroups who live in harsh environments; the tens ofthousands who suffer from crippling mental, physical, andemotional haildicans; and a few whoge rare gifts separatethem sharply from their peers. But the lack of "fit"between school and client extends into other realms untilone is forced to ask whether our educational system serves

1 1

even 50 per cent of its clientele in reasonably satisfyingways.9

Part of the problem created by technology and innovation isthat the merchants of these products frequently tend to oversellthem. The innovations are described as having been field testedwhen, in fact, the economics of marketing do.not permit time forproper field testing, and the direct results or the side effects ofthe products may be far from anything known or even anythingdesirable. Furthermore, these same products are generally report-ed usable for many more purposes, or in many more situations,than will actually be the case_ In short, if the products'shortcomings were known in advance, and if their use wasplanned in proper proportion to that of other learning systems,the results would probably be considerably more successful.

Another cause for rejection of innovations is their disruptionof the orderly, not to say fossilized, pattern of ongoing classroomactivities, especially if the innovations are themselves less struc-tured than these activities. It appears that, regardless of anythingelse, control must be maintained.

Because adults take the schools so much for gjanted, theyfail to appreciate what grim, joyless places most Americanschools are, how oppressive and petty are the rules bywhich they are governed, how intellectually sterile andaesthetically barren the atmosphere, what an appalling lackof civility obtains on the part of the teachers and principals,what contempt they unconsciously display for children aschildren. .The solution mu§t lie in infusing the variouseducating institutions with purpose; more important, withthought about purpose, and about the ways in whichtechniques, content, and organization fulfill or alter pur-pose. _Students need to learn far more than the basicskills. Jbut] The most important chacteristic thatnearly all schools share is a preoccupation with order andcontrol.1 0

The result of this preoccupation is that a major part of theteacher's time and energy is devoted to keeping records, acting astraffic manager, and time koeping. And a further result is that ale

I 2children's time is wasted in standingchores, and becoming increasingly bored.

ine, doing needless

Still another reason for failure in educational innovation isthat educators frequently are not good planners, and they oftenfail to consider the "systems problems" in planning or program-ming new curricula, methods, or facilities. A new procedure,book, or piece of equipment may require extensive teacher andadministrative staff .orientadon, some parental training, com-munity understanding, and probably considerable explanation tothe student. But this is only the beginning of the problem. Therewill also be questions about when these people are to be involved,how much they should be involved, the cost of their involvement,and the need for general scheduling and inter-meshing of all thesefactors cfn a t me table and budget sheet.

Jthe new educational R & D operations] reflect aconviction that significant gains in the quality of educationusually require the development of compatible systems inwhich all elements work together for the desfred effects.11

This is another way of saying that if reasonably progressive stepsare to be taken, change doesn't just happen; it requires organiz-ing. It must be planned by people who are trained and expertin all aspects of planning for improvement. It-has to be studiedbeforehand with regard to the environment in which it is:to takeplace, so that the planning can be tailored to the local situation.Improvements, and the rationale behind them, haVe to be sold tomany people on an individualized basis, since any ehange createsconflict within and around a school. An innovation must beexplained to the people who will be involved with it both directlyand indirectly; it must be tried out in a pilot stage; and it mayhave to be reshaped and- re-explained before it is finally carriedout in full. No innovation .can be implemented sue ,ssfullywithout a widespread understanding of the attitudes related to itand of the psychological impact it may have.

Education .is a process of producing change in individuals.Schooling usually seeks rather specific changes. Perhaps themost significant contribution to be made by a science of

1 3

education would be to reveal the relative weights to beaccorded various factors contributing to educationalchange.1 2

Thus, piece-meal change and one-step innovation are likely to betreated as a brush fire, and put down. The only route to asuccessful kindling of far-reaching improvement is through theprofessional catalytic agent who knows how to plan fo-r andimplement a total effect.

dhange Orientation. The most popular starting point ofthose seeking educational improvement has been withpeople, not with products. Education is considered adistinctly human enterprise, therefore, the route to educa-tiona improvement is to change human relationships. Ifone starts here, he finds a corpus of psychological andsociologicaL research relevant to what is referred to asplanned organizational change

The key elements of the process are the conditionssurrounding the relationship and the nature of the operableknowledge the change agent can draw upon. The conditionswhich should be met are summarized by Bennis as follows:

(a) a joint effort that involves mutual det-rmination ofgoals;

(b) a 'spirit of inquiry' a relationship that is governed bydata publicly shared;

(c) a relationship growing out of the mutual interaction ofthe client and the change agent;

(d) a voluntary relationship between change agent andclient, with either free to terminate the relationshipafter joint consideration.

(e) a relationship where each party has equal opportunitiesto influence the other.13

Personnel involved in linkage activities should be aware of thenecessity for meeting these conditions, and of the kinds ofproblems they are likely to encounter, so that their change effortscan be as fruitful as possible.

14IV. Components of an Educational Catalyst Organization

The function of a successful educational change agent, orcatalyst, is to bring about acceleration of improvements in thefield of education. Any organization concerned with performingthis particular function can thus be termed an EducationalCatalyst Organization (E.C.O.), operating as an open systemwhich interacts with other educational systems.

Change creates conflict within and arGund a school.Initially, such conflict between principal and his schoolboard or superintendent, between principal and teachers.between gjoups of teachers, and between school andcommunity is unavoidable and may even be desirable.Ultimately, however, the principal must learn to translatethe energies of these conflicts into a constructive force.14

Here, the E.C.O. can be of considerable help to the schools.Improvement, and the necessity to adapt to the changes it entails,create considerable stress and conflict within an individual or anorganization, and for this reason the instigation of improvementmust be approached with psychology and tact. However, fewpositive actions are accomplished without the application of acertain amount of stress. The role of the catalyst organization isto strike a balance between that degree of pressure which starts toset things in motion and that degree which renders the recipientall but catatonic. In each situation, therefore, the catalyticfunction will be performed somewhat differently, and eachE.C.O. will evolve its own elements and activities and inter-relations between them.

The E.C.O. structure will be essentially the same as that of anyother educational system. It is appropriate here to define only thefundamental properties of an E.C.O. ard avoid "over-prescription" of the organization. The following paragraphs referto the components of a catalyst syszem as depicted in Figure 2.(See also Appendix B for a more detailed, schematic representa-tion.)**H should be noted that catalysts will be operant within the E.C.O_ itselfas they are within any educational system. To avoid unnecessary confusion,however, the catalyst components have been omitted from the depictionsof the E.C.O.

FIG

UR

E 2

CO

MPO

NE

NT

S O

F A

N E

DU

CA

TIO

NA

L C

AT

AL

YST

OR

GA

NIM

TIO

N I

ON

SY

STE

M)

11.-

- E

XT

ER

NA

L 'E

NV

MO

NN

E:N

T.1

EJc

iriQ

ii S

ymm

s-W

enO

ther

51,

'ten

,"

Voi

trl C

arta

llyv

argi

arav

on

(ME

M

OU

TC

OM

ES

%le

App

endi

x it

page

46y

.to

r ed

ema*

asp

reis

ntal

kom

of a

cat

ilyst

ayst

inn3

1 6

Elements. The catalyst personnel assigned to work with educa-tional systems for acceleration of improvement ill be drawnfrom teachers, administrators, parents, and others, and will have awide range of talents. There will be generalists with broad liberalarts backgrounds and wide experience in education, and there will

pecialists in administration, curriculum, evaluation, dataprocessing, etc. The demand for particular talents will varyaccording to the real-life situations within wh[ch the E.C.O.operates, and personnel requirements can be better defined as theorganization's experiences are recorded and analyzed by itsinformation processing system. Special job title6 should not beassigned until a considerable backlog of experience has beenaccquired. Titles can have a significant impact on morale, and theearly adoption of incorrect titles would be unfortun2.te.

Other personnel will be required to provide financial, market-ing and information processing capabilities for the E.C.O.

The materials used by the catalyst organization will includebooks, films, audiotapes and videotapes, and other media asappropriate. Demonstration schools should also be available foruse as innovative materials and techniques are presented topotential users. The E.C.O. must have a continuing supply ofinformation about instructional systems M general, educationalmanagement techniques, and any new developments in the fieldof education, so that it can draw upon the appropriate resourcesfor all situations.

Activities. The activities of the E.C.O. will involve its inter-action with learners, with teachers, with parents, with gchoolboards, and with its total environment. The catalyst organizationmust identify those kinds of activities which will promoteeducational improvement -id perform them to the satisfaction ofall the parties involved. Its functions will include listerthig,talking, studying, observing, planning, assisting, motivating,structuring new situations to accelerate improvement, anddemonstrating new ideas that are relevant to the educationalsystems with which it works. Specific examples of possibleactivities are presented in Section V, with illustrative discussions

1 7

in Appendixes C, D, and E.

Outcomes. The anticipated outcomes of the E.0 0.'s activitiesare educational improvements which are recognized as such, bothby the catalyst organization itself and by the personnel from theother systems involved. Favorable outcomes should result in acontinued demand for the catalyst's activities. As this demandincreases, the function of the catalyst will be propagatedthroughout the educational community.

Information Processing. The information subsystem is centralto the entire catalytic system. If the E.C.O. is to act quickly andeffectively in the various situations in which it finds itself, it musthave the information collecting and processing capabilities neces-sary for considering constraints, making predictions, choosingamong alternatives, and comparing the outcomes with those -predicted or desired. Only in this way can it bring the newest andbest of educational developments to bear upon the problems ofits clients.

The feedback of the results, both positive and negative, of theorganization's catalytic activities is the major activity of theinformation component, and leads to a continuing and compre-hensive evaluation of the various catalyst functions. Any newenterprise must be able to evaluate its own experiences in orderto profit quickly from them; it must utilize continuing contextevaluation to remain sensitive and responsive to the changingneeds of consumers; and it must be ready to re-educate itspersonnel and modify its activities . accordingly, in order tomaximize its effectiveness.

Extevnal Environment. The external environment consists ofall the other systems with which the E.C.O. can interact. Itincludes the educational systems which are the clients of thecatalyst organization, Regional Educational Laboratories, R & DCenters, federal and state education agencies, and all developersof educational products or learning systems. The E.C.O. musttrain itself to consider all ideas or instructional systern extant init environment as potentially Useful to its clients. The catalyst

1 8

organization may identify requirements for innovative ideas andmaterials, but does not engage in product development itselfunless this is essential to its catalytic function.

Improvement The improvement component is as vital to theE.C.O. as it is to any educational system. If the catalystorganization cannot make effective use of its own improvementcomponent, it will have difficulty in stimulating other organiza-tions toward improvement.

As mentioned earlier, the key to continuing improvement ismaintaining accurate feedback comparing the actual results ofactivities with the desired results. This allows both for modifica-tion of personnel assignments to relevant activities and foridentification of new ldnds of activities that will lead to moreconsistent attainment of thos6 outcomes desired. An evolutionaryoperating Procedure, utilizing information processing, feedback,and evaluation as appropriate, will minimize the chances of thecatalyst organization's continuing on some self-defeating strategy,from which it may not recover.

V. What Should a Catalyst Do?

The preceding has been a relaWely objective analysis of thecurrent state of educational affafrs and of the componentsessential to an educational catalyst organization. At this point, itmay be difficult for the reader to visualize exactly the kinds ofthings that an E.C.0. or that an individual catalyst mightaccomplish. Since few agencies are actually performing catalyticactivities, few people really know all those that could beperformed.

It is doubtful that any E.C.0. will be as efficient or asenterprisinfi as we would like to think. Such constraints as fundshortage, skill shortage, time shortage, and human nature willtake their toll. Furthermore, each catalyst organization will bedifferent from the others, and the exact nature of each, willbecome apparent only as it evolves. But the objectivets a all theseorganizations will be similar, and thefr general methodologies will

9be parallel. The determination is necessarily a subjective one, andwe call also on your imagination to design activities tailored toremedy the "unnovative" situations which you yourselves haveexperienced.

The following is a summary description of many of theactivities that appear ideally suited to a catalyst organization(they all relate to the need to make improvements happen insteadof waiting for accidents to happen). These activities are not listedin chronological order or in any order of priority.

O Continually studying the physical and attitudinal com-ponents of the environment and the local situation.

O Continually upgrading knowledge about technological ad-vances, changes, innovations, and research findings.

q Communicating frequently with school staff, teachers,parents, school board, comnrunity members, PTA, andstudents in order to understand their feelings and to gaMtheir confidence.

0 Assisting the school staff in defining and clarifying ob-jectives. (See Appendix C for illustrative example.)

O interacting with school personnel to develop descriptions ofstrategies for educational improvement which can serve ascommunication devices.

O Assisting the school staff in determining the proper schoolorganization.

0 Directing the school staff, parents, students, and com-munity toward the recognition of the improvement com-ponent in their educational system. (See Appendix D forillustrative example.)

0 Identifying the most promising avenues for instigatingdesirable change.

200 Considering the technique of "performance contracting" as

a possible solution to some of the problems.

. . the Office of Economic Opportunity (0E0)[has] announced a more extensive experimentalprogram aimed at t.olving the learning problems of thedisadvantaged through... "performance contract-ing"...The 0E0 has contracted with six private film'sto work with 27,000 students in eighteen schooldistricts across the country...payment to the educa-tion firms will be contingent upon their success inimproving student academic skills... Clearly, the con-tinuing failure of the schools to deal adequately withthe learning problems of the nation's poor provides apowerful stimulus for experiment and innovation....And the resourcefulness of American business insolving complex problems offers an enticing modelfor schools in trouble... Fortunately, we ha- /a promiseof a number of different laboratories in which to testthe hypothesis that private educational agencies cansucceed where the schools have failed.] 5

0 Capitalizing on innovative successez by spreading the word,and putting models of the innovations in front of thoseothers who could also use them_ (See Appendix E forillustrative example.)

O Showing the school staff how to get additional ass stance,and when it is needed.

O Providing feedback so that the later selection and trainingof catalysts will be improved.

0 Involving teachers, administrators, parents, and students, onas equal a basis as possible, so that they all take an interestfrom the start and none is likely to be a detractor.] 6

O Indoctrinating the school staff in the skills of decision-making, and relating timeliness to accuracy.

At the present time teachers seldom have proceduresas guidelines for decision-making.

24

21

All data relative to an issue are riever available, andthere is a practical point at which decisionc must bemade.' 7

0 Staying particularly sensitive to the factor oi cost ofimprovement, particularly where the locale involved is oneof austerity or poverty.

0 Accumulating expertise in the field of human relations anddirecting these skills into the realm of motivation of others_

0 Assisting school staffs in planning new and imprOvedfacilities and plants. To avoid waste, these not only must betailored for today's routines, but must be flexible enoughto anticipate and-accommodate tomorrow's change.

0 Assisting in detailed and systematic planning for improve-ment, so that it can be accomplished comfortably andenthusiastically without frustrating upheaval.

Attempts to impose change upon the school fromwithout from the district level will probably nottake root, while attempts to nourish change fromwithin at the classroom level will probably bestifled by the greater weight of school routine. Ifchange is to be brought about in American education .therefore, it must be brought about within the schoolas a total agency with a shared life.i 8

0 Assisting the schools in attaining an open climate, acondition deemed more conducive to effecting improve-ments.

...the data indicated that highIy innovative schoolshad open climates while less innovative schools hadclosed climates. 9

0 Devoting particular attention to motivating the principalwho 'he prime influence on attitudes and on moving intoinnovation.

22The notion* of the school as the b sic organism of theeducational structure leads to the second majorhypothesis: change in education will become a way ofprofessional life rather than an exception to the ruleonly if the official in charge of the individual schoolpermits it. The principal is the key agent of change. 2 0

0 Obtaining an understanding of the variables, factors andcharacteristics involved in social change, in technologicalchange, in organizational change, in curriculum contentchange, in teacher responsibility change, and in change offinal objectives.

A knowledge of individual factors affecting changecannot take us far toward understanding the changeprocess or stimulating useful change in schools.Relationships among factors of change must bediscovered and interdependences among variablesmust be identified to make more gen-se of the changeprocess.2 1

0 Being such an advocate of desirable change that the catalysthimself can readily change goals, processes, or activities toachieve improvements in the least time.

...so many of the present change strategies availableseem to have so little evidence of actual accomplish-ment to support their claims. Even if this were nottrue, these strategies; whether they are labeled power-coercive, client centered, or ratio 4ai ;:npirical; haveeither never gotten into the blood-stream of theschool system or if they have, and this is probably_nom true of power-coercive strategies, have notcured the system of its ailments.

[There] is another way of conceptualizing the changeagent role in school systems...Jand there] are newways of conceiving of the relationships of outsideeducational agencies to school systems so that thechange agent can have the support, working condi-tions and status to be effective while working fromwithin_ This agent can be most effective in enlargingand modifying expectations for change; introducingnew elements into the system; sponsoring changes

23himself, and, as a result, influencing both decisionsand the decision-making process. While limits to thechange agent's independence and freedom [exist], onbalance, the role is believed worthy of continuedstudy.2 2

0 Preventing the random adoption of innovations, and foster-ing, instead, a systematic organized approach_ related tosuitable context analysis.

Context evaluation is necessary in identifying and-ignMg priorities to needs and in identifying and

assessing alternative courses of action.23

0 Educating the school staff, parents, community, schoolboard, and students to anticipate, encourage and espousecontMuing innovation rather than resist it.

0 Providing for continual innovation, lest the expecta ion ofimprovement be lost or diverted.

The only way to keep from falling into the trap ofinstitutionally fossilizing innovative programs is tobuild a provision for continual application intochange mechanisms.2 4

0 Taking steps to create disequilibrium, and thus to instigateimprovement. (School systems have two characteristicswith regard to making changes: (1) the tendency tomaintain themselves in equilibrium, and (2) the tendency ofindividuals in the system to resist change.)

Studies of educational change thow that it am takedecades for proven innovations to be adopted byschools. This is understandable in light of the school'sfunction as a social institution. As such, it tends to dowhat it has been established to do and to hold itselfstable, resisting attempts at restructuring. In "sys-tems" language, it maintains itself M, a state ofequilibrium and formalizes and routinizes its struc-tures, processes, and the behavior of its members.

24We are beginning to evolve strategies which can beemployed to create disequilibrium and bring aboutplanned change. Some of the most promising strat-egies approach the system from the outside bycreating temporary new systems that cause peoplewithin the system to look outward for new ideas. Weare also beginning to realize that strategies can bedesigned within the permanent system itself forcreating disequilibrium.

Creating disequilibrium is similar to many otheractivities a little bit goes a long way. A state ofextreme disequilibrium within a system e., conflictbetween subsystems) impedes planned change asmuch as does a state of equilibrium.2 5

0 Encouraging schools to emulate the catalyst's processes, sothat they develop a capacity for problem-solving, becoming,to some eXtent, their own agents of improvement, and sothat the catalyst can move on to other areas.

We can think of still more catalytic activities, and no doubtthe reader can, also. But the picture is clear: the. individualcatalyst is a person who can walk on water. If he can't, he'dbetter learn how!

Where does such a person come from? How is he trained? Howis his assignment engineered? Who pays him? These questions areeasy to ask, and impossible to answer accurately. But we do havesome thoughts on how they might be answemj by an EducationalCatalyst Organization, as well as some thoughts about theproblems that will need to be solved enroute. To the extent thatwe can verbalize these thoughts, they are covered in succeedingsections.

VI. How an EC.O. Works

Applications of recent educatiomal findings or innovative ideascan involve either

...problems in search of a solution, or solutions in search of

25appr6priate problems. In the former case the sequenceappears somewhat as follows:

(1) Motivation in the form of some want or problem to besolved; (2) Conception and development of an idea tosatisfy the want or meet the problem, preferably withpracticable levels of resources; (3) Critical revieW, tryoutand evaluation leading to either extinction or strategies fordissemination to different kinds of identified potentialadopters in ways likely to induce receptivity as well asawareness; (4) Modification to transfer demonstration froma nurtured environment to non-nurtured environments,thereby leading to continuity, spread, spin-off, spillover...orextinction; (5) Further assessment and continued search forimprovement or adaptation to changing circumstances.

When solutions seek problems, the steps of the sequenceappear more like the following:

(1) Identification of a superior innovation, invention,improvement or solution to a problem, with seemingpotential for wider application or at least broader tryout;(2) Identification of the market or potential users of the

. innovation; (3) Changeagent linkage between the innovatorsystem and the client or potential user system to facilitatecritical review, tryout and evaluation in ways likely toinduce receptivity as well as awareness; (4) M-odification,refinement and study of what may be needed to transferdemonstration from _a nurtured environment to non-nurtured environments, thereby leading to continuispread, spin-off, spill-over...or extinction; (5) Furtherassessment and continued search for improvement oradaptatiL,a to changing circumstances.2 6

The educational catalyst organization, in its dealings with itsclients, will run across a number of problems looking forsolutions. However, as it will possess the latest information onways to accelerate educational ;-nprovement, it will most fre-quently find itself in the pohition of having solutions andidentifying the problems to which to apply them. Identificationof potential users for its Mnovative ic'eas will thus provide it withits clients, and the individual catalyst will provide the change-agent linkage between its clients and the E.C.O. Continuingmodification and search for improvement, thiough the feedback

26received on the E.C.O.'s activities, wi..1 assure the continuing lifeof the organizktion as an instrument of innovation and advance.

The actual implementation of an E.C.O. posits certain require-ments, some few of which will be discussed below. Suchconsiderations as specific organizational structure and supportfunctions are also necessary but will not be treated in detail inthis paper.

Background. Some valuable research has already been doneon the instigation of educational improvement.

...It appears highly likely that means can be developed forpredicting and affecting the diffusion of innovations. Morespecifically, it appears possible to identify, and perhapsdevelop, groups and individuals who are more likely thanothers to be effective in the transmission and adoption ofinnovations resulting from research programs. It appearspossible to identify, and perhaps to affect, contextualvariables which enhance or inhibit .the transmission andadoption of the innovation resultin0,- from research pro-grams. It appears possible to identify the characteristics ofinformation systems which might play a role in enhancingor inhibiting the adoption of innovations. It also appearspossible to identify those characteristics of innovationswhich enhance or inhibit their adoption.2

These opinions are corroborated by the findings of a studyundertaken by a member of the staff of the SouthwestEducational Development Laboratory.2 8

Prior to ir tiating its own operations, a catalyst organizationshould study the experiences of those persons and organizationsalready engaged in catalytic activities. These would includeeducational consultants, supervisors in schools, IntermediateService Centers to Schools, state education agencies, RegionalEducational Laboratories, and such organizations as I/DIE/A, theNational Institute for the Study of Educational Change (NISEC),the Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administra-tion (CASEA), and the Cooperative Project for EducationalDevelopment (COPED). With the information thus gathered, a

27new E.C.O. should be able to determine qualifications forprospective pethonnel and identify the kinds of activities in whichthey will be engaged and the kinds of improvements they may beinstigating.

It is important to recognize that a catalyst organization canstart out on a very small scale, expanding as the demand forpersonnel, and their availability, increases. The organizationshould be able at all times to expand and contract quite easily, aswill t.2 s;plained in the discussion of the personnel managemertsystem.

Training. Personnel entering the E.C.O. should be &Nenappropriate training to ensure that they understand the conceptsbasic to the catalytic function. All individual cafalysls should begiven a common operating model for the function they are toperform, which will be augmented as experience is gained in thefield and fed back thto the organization's thformation sYstem.The basic trathing package created for catalyst personnel shouldyield such outcomes as:

0 Recognition of the importance of providing a conceptacimodel for all personnel of educational systems, to aid inaccelerating improvement.

0 Ability to describe the componentssystem.

an educational

0 Ability to aid another person who is developing a relevantdescription (model) of an educational system.

0 Knowledge of the importance of allowing fordegrees of clarity in educational objectives.

0 Knowledge of the importance of increasing clarity ofobjectives as a prerequisite for educational improvement.

O Understanding that one instructional method is not alwaysthe best for all learners. The individual catalyst cannot be

committed to any particular learning system.

0 Realization that the principles of modifying the behavior ofstudents (young learners) are also useful for teachers,parents, administrators, and other adults. The improvementof education for the students is accelerated throughimproving the capabilities of the adult members of theeducational system.

0 Ability to use effectively the principles of behavior that arevaluable in personnel interaction.

This very fragmentary list should be extended and updatedcontinuously as the catalyst training package continues todevelop and evolve. The specific activities of the individualcatalysts will differ, but the overall morlus operandi of theorganization should be.based on well-established fundamentals.

Personnel Management. A personnel management system isessential to a catalyst organization, and is the organization's mostcritical function involving people. To remain responsive to itsexperiences, an E.C.O. must develop effective ways of (1)identifying and training quality personnel; (2) discovering anddelineating new activities to be performed; (3) maintaining acontinuing flow of information between the individual catalystsand the external environment; and (4) analyzing the effectivenessof the personnel and of their actions. Thus, the managementsystem must be implemented and must meet certain require-ments.

Personnel in a responsive catalyst organization cannot bejob-typed, hired, and pigeonholed as in a production-orientedoperation. While the jobs of the support personnel (clerks,typists, computer operators, etc.) may be easily specified andmay remain static, those of the catalyst personnel must be viewedin a different light. Catalyst personnel will be selected from thetotality of innovative and change-agent types available to theorganization, and given their assignments for the sole purpose ofMproving educational systems. Consequently, they will comprise

29many different types of people university faculty members,master teachers, computer specialists, management experts,nance specialists, etc. Some of them will work with the E.C.O.full-time, and some will perform varying amounts of part-timeactivity.

Personnel-Characteristics Information is rctqufred for anydecisions concerning the assignment of personnel to specificcatalytic activities. This information should include a person'shome location, the percentage of time he is available, his otheraffiliations and commitments, his educational background andareas of expertise, his public speaking abilities, his flvency in anyforeign language, and any other items deemed significant to thepersonnel assignment system. (Probably personality characteris-tics will also be an _important element.) The data array should beadequate, but should not contain information which is irrelevantto required personnel decisions. The information will be updPatedas new personnel become available and existing personnelcharacteristics are modified through traLning experience andcontinuing information flow.

Activities-Properties Information must also be collectea, in-dicating the catalytic activities to be undertaken and theproperties that are relevant to assignments of personnel to eachactivity. These properties should correlate insofar as possible withthe categories established for Personnel-Characteristics Informa-tion, so that the matching of personnel to activities can beperformed quickly and expediently by computer. The Activities-Properties Information, too, will be updated as new activities areidentified and new information is obtained about the existingactivities.

It should be noted at this point that computerized assignmentof activities will only be effective if tempered with commonsense. Some personnel characteristics, as well as some propertiesof activities, are intangible, and an effort should be exerted to seethat the catalyst personnel are basically compatible with, and atease in, the educational milieu into which they are sent.

3 0An Effec iveness Indicator should be used to determine

whether the functioning of the E.C.O. is resulting in anacceleration in educatianal improvement, recognized by both thecatalysts and the clients. To make this determination, and toestimate the extent of any acceleration, the effectiveness of theE.C.O.'s activities as performed by its personnel must bemeasured in some manner. A simple rating scale (for example,one to five) could serve to indicate both the predicted and theobserved effectiveness of each individual catalyst in each activityin which he engages, or another means of measurement could beused. A comprehensive evaluation system is essential to providecontinuing feedback on the overall Performance of the organiza-tion, but no system should be allowed to become so complicatedthat it is abandoned.

The ultimate goal of assigning individual catalysts to particularactivities is to Tiaximize the effectiveness of the entire E.C.O. Tothis end, new people with desired characteristics are hired;personnel already in the system are informed of new ideas andtrained a their implementation, thereby modifying their charac-teristics; new catalytic activities are identified; and the propertiesof the new activities are analyzed and defined: it is essential tothe survival of the E.C.O. that precisely the right person be placedin a particular situation, and all its hiring and training proceduresshould be directed toward that end. This is why the personnelmanagement function is the most vital of all the organization'sfunctions, and why it should be activated by the best and mostcurrent .information available on the nromotion of educationalimprovement.

Support Functions. While the ,isual support functions (fi-nance, supply, etc.) are required in an E.C.O., the primarysupport element for the organization is the information system,with particular emphasis on new ideas and new educationalproducts. The information retrieval personnel should be closelylinked with the operational personnel, since information is one ofthe main requirements of individual catalysts in the field. Here,again, continuing feedback on the ongoing activities is of extremeimportance.

3 I

Not only should information be made available, but specifictraining should be given as necessary for updating the capabilitiesof the catalyst personnel. If IPI,_ for example, or the CEMRELmathematics program is potentially relevant to future catalyticactivities, then training in these areas should be provided toselected personnel. Continuing information and training are morevital to catalysts than to personnel engaged in product develop-ment. Product developers work on a particular product over anextended period of time, and can afford to concentrate all theirefforts on the product in question. Catalysts, however, must beaware of a wide variety of products and ideas which might beuseful to their clients.

Personnel services involving payroll, social security, insurance,etc. should be separated from the personnel development andinformation flow functions in a catalyst organization.

Attainment of Objectives. How does a catalyst organizationrecognize the extent of attainment of its objectives theimprovement ef educational systems? The E.C.O. is similar insome respects to a managemei_ onsulting organization (exceptthat its clients will have less money). It is promoting anythingthat will facilitate educational improvement ideas, products,management techniques, etc., and its positive effects must berecognized and promoted by its clients as well as by its ownpersonnel in order to insure continued demand for its services.

Recognition of the value of services performed generallycomes more easily if something is paid for those services. If twodifferent groups engage in an activity with a client, one paid andone unpaid, then any good results of the activity are likely tobecome identified with the group to whom the client has madepayment. While an E.C.O. will probably have other sources offunds, it should make some direct charge, even if a nominal one,to its clients for the services it performs for them.

Non-monetary recognition is also very important for manypeople, and it is certainly necessary for broadening the demandfor catalyst activities. The work of the E.C.O. is such that its

32clients will generally receive the credit for implemen ing theinnovations it introduces, and some attention must be given topromoting its own resources and the capabilities of its personnel.

This is an extremely important problem and it is the key tothe ultimate survival of a catalyst organization. The problem iscomplicated when federal funds are involved and the source ofpayment is far removed from the clients with whom theorganization actually works. All possible efforts should be madeto obtain public recognition for the E.C.O.'s activities, using allthe contacts and all the avenues available to it in the educationalworld. Clients must be persuaded to endorse and to recommendthe organization, and its own public relations function must beactive and sophisticated. Instructional advertising and the sub-mission of articles to various educational journals will be helpful,but the continuing creation of goodwill through comprehensiveand effective services is the most essential concern of the E.C.O.

A conference on Educational Change Agent Training, heldMay 25-27, 1970, in Clinton, Michigan, was attended by one ofthe authors of this paper. Materials from this conference, whichtreat the subject more extensively, are included in the list ofsupplementary references. These references include discussions ofall aspects of change-agent concepts and activities.

VII. Implications for Regional Educational Laboratories

We need to build a secure base for the linker, a permanentinstitution which includes a mix of interdependent com-plementary linking roles....We must make certain that theseroles arc not only included but are coordinated by adirector who appreciates the need and importance of eachrole and is motivated to work hard at bringing themtoge ther.

This linking institution could be based in a university or aschool system but neither of these alternatives is entirelysatisfactory. An independent base not identified with eitherthe research world or the practice world is probablypreferable. In any case the institution will be expensive tooperate if it is to be an effective linker and will, therefore,

require federal support either direct y or indirectly throughcontracts and grants to universities, school systems, andcommercial firms....Eventually, in the not too distantfuture, the government should come up with an overall planfor an educational extension service which includes well-defined linking roles at various levels. Furthermore, itshould not shy away from coordination of state andregional services to reduce redundancy of effort and toinsure that knowledge packages and programs developed inone area are effectively diffused throughout the nationalextension system.2 9

Recently, there have been organized efforts to promotecatalytic activities on the part of such groups as Title HI Centers,state departments of education, and university faculties. Amongthe Regional Laboratories as well, there has been some attempt toassist educational institutions to adopt improved practices anduse them effectively. "Several Laboratory programs are lesseningthe need for each school to 'reinvent the wheel' and reducing thecosts of implementing innovation."3 0 Laboratories currentlyfunctioning to some extent in a change-agent capacity in,Aude theCenter for Urban Education in New York City, the Far WestRegional Educational Laboratory in Berkeley, the SouthwestRegional Laboratory in Los Angeles, the Regional EducationalLaboratory for the Carolinas and Virginia in Durham, TheNorthwest Regional Educational Laboratory in Portland, theEastern Regional institute for Education in Syracuse, Researchfor Better Schools, Inc. in Philadelphia, arid the EducationalDevelopment Center in Newton, Massachusetts. For example, theEducational Development Center cites as its mission:

To create improved systems of inservice education in urbanschools through:

Instructional Resource Teams, trained in social and educa-tional change, that provide background for educators,parents, and community groups in sensitivity, curriculumdevelopment, teaching techniques, child development, ad-ministration and supervision, and efficient distribution ofteaching materials.3

34To accelerate the adoption of improved educational practices

from all sources, intensive catalytic activities should be under-taken by some of the Regional Laboratories. Such an undertakingcould be facilitated by the proposed National Institute ofEducation.

...the NIE...would train researchers through fellowships andtraineeships; sL,ve as a focus for research throughout thegovernment; and "build on and add strength to the presentnational system of educational Laboratories and R & DCenters."32

Research conducted by the NIE could yield findings to beimplemented by the Laboratories, and by other catalyst organiza-tions, in their pursuit of educational knprovement.

While the problem focus of some of the Laboratories is purelyregional, that of others is nation-wide. Still others divide theirefforts between local and national educational affairs. It will beeasier for the Laboratories with at least some regional focus todevelop catalyst components, since they will be able to observetheir potential clients more closely and more constantly, and willhave a more intimate understanding of thefr particular problems.If a Laboratory has already established itself as being primarily acatalyst organization, it should continue with this endeavor andincrease its efforts. A Laboratory which incorporates catalystactivities will have an especially strong base from which tooperate within its regJon, since these activities will render it moreresponsive to its environment.

Some Laboratories may choose to continue devoting theft- fulltime to the development of instructional products, or learningsystems, and to concentrate their diffusion efforts on their ownproducts. This strategy will ensure the continuing availability ofimproved products to the catalyst organizations and to the entireeducational community.

Several of the Regional Laboratories may wish to engage Lnboth product development and catalyst activities. This is a logicalcombination, since the contacts made through product testing'

35will be useful in marketing catalyst services and, conversely, aLaboratory that develops a catalyst component increases theopportunity for exposure of its own products. It is important tokeep the development and catalyst operations separate, evenwhile sharing standard support functions. This separation isnecessary because a catalyst component of a particular Labora-tory should receive input not only from the product developmentcomponent of that Laboratory, but also from numerous othersources.

Another reason for separation of the product development andcatalyst activities is that the mode of operation of the catalystpersonnel will be quitn different from that of the productdevelopers. The latter may be required to keep aloof from theLaboratory's field operations, but the catalysts must continuallyintroduce themselves into potentially hostile educational systems,and the same people may or may not be effective in bothcapacities.

A catalyst function within a Regional Laboratory can beevolved with a relatively small financial outlay, and feedback onthe effectiveness of the function will begin immediately. As thedemand for catalysts increases, the supply of full-time orpart-time catalyst personnel can be cultivated accordingly.Product development, on the other hand, requires more full-timepersonnel, more money, and longer periods of time for the resultsto manifest themselves. Substantive feedback can scarcely beobtained in less than three years, and if the product does not sellit is very difficult to divert efforts to the development of anotherproduct. It is trite that the results of catalyst activities may bemore difficult to sell than tangible products, but their payoff toschools is potentially far greater than that of product develop-ment. In time, the catalyst services of a Laboratory could becomeas valuable as its products, if not more so. The Laboratoriesshould thus make initial contact with all the actual or potentialinnovators and change agents of thek respective regions andascertain what these people, or organizations, will be able tocontribute to the catalytic function. They may consider employ-ing some of these people, or using them as consultants, but they

39

36should know all the capabilities available to them and maintainrecords on these capabilities through their personnel managementsystems.

It must be remembered that the Regional Laboratories are incompetition with one another; they must cooperate to survive,but they must also compete to survive. The optimum mix ofcooperation and competition will have to be maintained incatalyst activities as well as in product development. If severalLaboratories develop catalyst organizations, the resultant com-petition should improve ,the efficiency of all these organizationsand accelerate improvement of education. The growing concernwith dissemination and diffusion will be applied to cataly5tservices in additkdi to products, and the efforts of the varioucLaboratories in this direction can be consolidated to develop acomprehensive and effective system for promoting the best ofeducational innovations throughout the country.

It is now time for some of the Regional Laboratories toinstigate the process of catalytic diffusion. Such an action will beof inestimable value both to the other Laboratories and toeducation nation-wide, and the Laboratories performing it willbecome the focus of development of the whole improvement andchange process. These Laboratories could well be the catalyst thatimproves American education significantly.

VIII. Sum __ary and Conclusions

We have tried to indicate that good and useful research is beingdone throug_hout the educational domain, but that a large part ofthe good things learned in this research are not brought to thefore, and certainly are not being adopted at what would seem tobe an appropriate rate. The main problem, then, in getting thingsmoving in education appears to be providing calculated measuresto bridge the gap between the conception of good ideas and theirinstallation where they will be most useful.

3 7

The fact that good, innovative products are being turned outby the R. & D Centers, by the Regional Laboratories, and bymany other development organizations does not in itself guaran-tee any adoption or any use of these products. We have identifiedsome of the diffusion methods that have been tried, haveexamined them briefly, and have discovered built-in short-comings. Other endeavors, in this country and elsewhere, thathave used the change agent method have produced enviableresults, and the logical conclusion is that a well-organized andwell-directed change agent or catalytic) effort would be equallysuccessful in education.

Repeated and time-worn efforts to disseminate educationalimprovements in a general manner have more often than notresulted in general failure. The fact of the matter is that routinedissemination and even high-powered diffusion frequently pro-duce but meager results and certainly do not relate the correctsolutions to the existing problems.

One of the key factors M facilitating educational improve-ments is introducing the right solution at the rig,ht time andproviding systematic planning that is adequate to solve theproblems at hand. Many changes are being instigated where noproblem exists and many solutions are being provided that arewrong for the problem in question.

In their haste to appear innovative and to keep things moving,many responsible administrators are mgking changes just for thesake of change. Certainly there is an advantage in promotingcontinuMg progress and in acclimating the whole environment tothe process of change. But considering the many specificproblems that currently exist, it should be possible to findmprovements for these problems rather than making random

changes.

The change agent technique has proven successful in several ofour country's .najor endeavors, both within our borders andoverseas. Not unexpectedly, the change agent teclmique ineducation has usually proven successful, when it has been used at

38all. It follows, then, that a well organized, well trained, andproperly supported educational change agent organization couldprove to be the missing link for which so many professionals havebeen looking for so long.

The processes of obtaining, training and developing, andplacing the educational catalyst need to be developed, tried out,and then implemented on an appropriate scale. There are manyunknowns in these processes, and the only way to pinpoint themand solve them is to start down the road and let the organizationand process evolve.

The operation of an educational catalyst organiion probab-ly requires a special mixture of skills and techniques. While theend objective is to attain optimum improvements in education,the training and skills necessary to accomplish this are notentirely educational in nature. Personnel management is probablythe most crucial function of an E.C.O., followed closely by thatof information processing. The information function may beaccomplished manually or partly by machine, but not allinformation processing of this type can be computerized.

With the establishment of the National Institute of Education,it would seem that the work of the R. & 13 Centers will,appropriately, be focused on matters that need further study.This would make the Regional Laboratories the most .likelystructures to involve themselves deeply and comprehensively withthe catalyst function.

There are other university sponsored arid commercial organiza-tions doing work similar to that of the Laboratories, and theseorganizations could also be important in developing catalyticprocedures and methodology.

There is sufficient evidence that some form of catalyst orchange agent organization will be the precipitant that will getthings moving in American education. There is no need to waitlonger to determine if, or how, or where, or why this should be

39done. Educational Catalyst Organizations should be established,now.

It is not simply that we do not know which goals topursue....The trouble lies deeper. For accelerating changehas made obsolete the methods by which we arrive at socialgoals.3 3

We can no longer afford to approach the longer-rangefuture haphazardly. As the pace of change accelerates, theprocesS of change becomes more complex. Yet at the sametime, an extraordinary array of tools and techniques hasbeen developed by which it becomes increasingly possibleto project future trends and thus to make the kind ofinformed choices which are necessary if we are to establishmastery over the process of change.34

40REFERENCES

I. Francis S. Chase, "R & D in the Remodeling of Education," Phi DeltaKappan, Vol. LI, No. 6 (February 1970), p. 302.

2. Ibid.

3. Thid., pp. 302-5.

4. Allen H. Barton and David E. Wilder, Research and Practice in theTeaching of Reading: A Progtess Repor Innovation in Education,ed. Matthew B. Miles (New York: bureau of Publications, TeachersCollege, Columbia University, 1964), pp. 376-77. Quoted by HerbertF. Lionberger, "Diffusion of Innovations in Agricultural Research andin Schools," Strategy for curolculum change, Papers from the ASCDSeminar on Strategy for Curriculum Change, January 1965, NewOrleans, Louisiana, ed. Robert R. Leeper (Washington, D.C.: Associa-tion for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1965), p. 40.

S. George M. Beal and Joe M. Bohlen, -The Diffusion Process," SpecialReport No. 18, Reprint (Ames, Iowa: Cooperative Extension Service,Iowa State University of Science and Technology, and the UnitedStates Department of Agriculture, 1967).

6. Chase, op. cit., p. 303.

7 Peter F. Drucker, The Age of Discontinuity: Guidelines to OurChanging Society (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1969),passim.

8. Chase, op. cit., p. 299.

9. John 1. Goodlad, "The Schools vs. Education," Saturday Review(April 19, 1969), p. 61.

10. Charles E. Silberman, -Murder in the Schoolroo The Atlantic(June 1970), pp. 83-84.

11. Chase, op. cit., p. 302.

12. John I. Goodlad, Do we Learn?", Saturday Review (June 21,1969), p. 85.

. Richard E. Schutz, "The Nature of Educational Dev lopment,Journal of Research and Development in Education, Vol. III, No. 2(Winter 1970), p. 51.

14. Institute for Development of Educational Activities, Inc., "Study ofEducational Change," IIDIEIA Annual Report (Melbourne Florida:1969), p. 12.

44

41es Cass, "Profit and Loss in Education," Saturday Review, Vol.No. 33 (August 15, 1970), pp. 39-40.

16. See Frank Gerhardt, "A Strategy for Involving Teachers in PlanningInnovations," SEC Newsletter, Vol. II, No. 1 (Columbus, Ohio: OhioState University, October 1967), p. 4.

17. Donald A. Myers, "The Art of Decision-Making," The Principal andthe Challenge of Change, ed. Jerrold M. Novotney (Dayton, Ohio:I/DIE/A, 1968), pp. 51-58.

18. Institute for Development of Educational Activities, Inc., op. cit., PP.10-11.

19. Homer M. Johnson and R. Laverne Marcum, "Organizational Climateand the Adoption of Educational Innovations, " Presented at theAERA 1969 Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, California, February 5-8,1969 (Logan, Utah: Utah State University, Department Of EducationalAdministration, 1969), p. 5.

20. Institute for Development of Educational Activities Inc11.

21. Egon G. Guba and David L. Clark, "Understanding Social Change,"SEC Newsletter, Vol. I, No. 2 (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University,October 1965), p. 1.

22. Allen S. Hartman, 'Working from Within: One Strategy for ChangingSchools," Paper presented to the AERA Convention at Minneapolis(Syracuse, New York: Eastern Regional Institute for Education, March5, 1970), p. 13.

23. Blaine R. Worthen, "The Innovation Dilemma," SEC Newsletter, Vol.1, No. 10 (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, December 1966), p.4.

24. Ibid.

25. Kenneth A. rye, "Creating Disequilibrium," The Principal and theChallenge of Change, ed. Jerrold M. Novotney (Dayton, Ohio:I/D/E/A, 1968), pp. 10-22 passim.

26. U. S. Department of Labor, Manpower Administration, PuttingResearch Experimental and Demonstration Findings to Use, No. I(Washington, D.C.: Superintendent of Documents, United StatesGovernment Printing Office, June 1967), pp. 13-14.

27. Albert Shapero, "Diffusion of Innovations Resulting from Research:Implications for Research Program Management," Research ProgramEffecdveness, Proceedings of the Conference Sponsored by the Officeof Naval Research, Washington, D.C., July 27-29, 1965, ed. M. C.

42Yovits, D. M_ Gilford, R. H. Wilcox, E. Stave ly, and H. D. Lerner (NewYork: Gordon and Breach, Science Publishers, Inc., 1966), chap. xvii,p. 381.

28_ Vance C. Littleton, Jr., A Srudy of rhe i7actors contributing to thePredisposition of Elementary Principals to Try Selected Innovations.Unpublished doctoral dissertation (Austin, Texas: The University ofTexas, 1970).

29_ Ro...Aid G. Havelock (in collaboration with Alan Gruskin, MarkFreshman, Mary Havelock. Marjorie Hill. and Janet Huber), Planningfor Innovation: .A Comparative Srucly of the Literature on theDissemination and Utilization of Scientific Knowledge, Final Report,Project Nb. 7-0028, Contract No. (DEC-3-7-070028-2143, ED No_029191, U. S. Department of Health, Edncation and Welfare, Office ofEducation, Bureau of Research (Ann Arbor, Michigan: Center forResearch on Utilization of Scentific Knowledge, Institute for SocialResearch, The University of Michigan, July 1969), pp. 7-38.

30_ Frank A_ Schmidtlein, The Programs of the EU/teen RezionalLaboratories," Journal of Research and Development in Education.Vol_ III, No. 2 (Winter 1970). pp. 26-27.

31_ Ibid., p. 34.32- Education Daily. Vol_ III, No. 32 (February 17, 1970), p. 3- (Quotes

from speet_h by Assistant HEW Secretary for Education James E. Allen,to American Association of r-hool Administrators convention meetingin Atlantic City, New Jersey_)

33_ Alvin Toff ler. Future Shock (New York: Random House, 1970), p_404-

34. Richard M. Nixon, Statement Upon Announcing the Establishment ofthe U. S. National Goals Research Staff Within the White House, July13, 1969. Quoted in Toward Etaionced Growth: Quantity with Quality,Report of the U. S. National Goals Research Staff (Washingtora,U_ S. Government Printing Office. July 1970), p. 99.

SELECTED ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

This brief list of additional sources contains works by, or bibliographicdata from, those authors who comprise the authorities on this subject_ Allthe volumes listed contain bibliographies; all are recommended for furtherstudy.

Havelock, Ronald G. A Guide to innovation in Education. Ann Arb r,Michigan: Center for Research on Utilization of Scientific Tknowl-edge, Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan,1970.

46

43Havelock, Ronald G_, Huber, Janet C., and Zimmerman, Shaindel

(compilers). Major Works on Change in Education: An AnnotatedBibliography with Author and Subject Indices. Ann Arbor, Michi-gan: Center for Research on Utilization of Scientific Knowledge,Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan, October1969,

Havelock, Ronald G. (in collaboratio,-- with Alan Guskin, MarkFrohman, Mary Havelock, Marjorie Hill, and Janet Huber). Planningfor Innovation: A Comparative Study of the Literature on theDissemination and Utilization of Scientific Knowledge. (FinalReport, Project No. 7-0028, Contract No_ OEC-3-7-070028-2143,ED No. 029171, U. S. Department of Health, Education, andWelfare, Office of Education. Bureau of Research.) Ann Arbor,Michigan: Center for Research on Utilization of Scientific Knowl-edge, Institute for So.:iat Research, The University of t'ichigan, July1969- (This source is also listed in footnote 29.)

Rogers, Everett M_, and Svenning, Lynne. Managing Change. (Writtenin connection with OPERATION PEP: A State-wide Project toPrepare Educational Planners for California_) Burlingarne, Califor-nia: San Mateo County Board of Education, September 1969.

Suljak, Nedjelku D. Administration in a World of Change: AnAnnotated, Multi-disciplinary Eibliogrphy (Monographs from 1960to 1969). Davis, California: Institute of Governmental Affairs,University of California, April 1970.

44APPENDIX^

COMPONENTS OF AN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

IMPROVEMENTPeople Engaged InActivities to IMProwsVie EducationalSystem

INFORMATION PROCESSING

-Consider Constraints-Make Predictions4::hoose Among Alternatives-Compare Actual. Desired. and Predicted Outcomes-Acquire and Orcpnize Relevant Information-Other

EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENTOther Systems that Interact withEducational Syetern

leuu Figura 1 papa I.p ic to r at eepretented.m dtan education& &imam.)

APPENDIX

COMPONENTS OF AN EDUCATIONAL CATALYST ORGANIZATION (OR SYSTEM)

IMPROVEMENTPeople Engaged inActivities to improvethe Citaly%Organization

EducationCotaly.0Adfninistrari-InttrtiCtiOn-EvaluationA:idlers

INFORMATION PROCE_ I G

-Integrate Feedback-Consider Constraints-Make Predictions-Choose Among Alternatives-Compare Actual, Desired, and Predicted Outcomes-Acquire and Organize Relevant Information-Other

InferTIkin

-61ffren1Zn,-01:arrvi-Planning"'-Intenelawin-At °Wing

EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENTOther Systems that Intsractwith Catalyst Organization

49

(Soo Figaro 2, poet 15, fatpictorial rortootantition ofestalyt1 Piston.)

4 5

46APPENDIX C

Illustrative example of activity described on Page 19.

0 Assisting the school staff in defining and clarifyingobjectives_

One of the problems encountered in the definit on and clarifica-tion of objectives of the educational system is the commonassumption by school personnel that each and every objectivemust be specified in equally clear and measurable terms. Cei-tainlythey should all be as clear as possible, but in some cases completeclarity may not be feasible. Since there are some fields in whichdesired outcomes are affective and therefore are difficult tomeasure (attitudes, appreciation etc.), these objectives must bedefined in "fuzzy" terms.

The catalyst can help school personnel recognize the dual natureof objectives, and can help them understand that (1) it is moreimportant to define clearly and in behavioral terms objectivesthat are essential prerequisites to other outcomes; (2) someobjectives are easier to define than others; (3) some objectives inthe affective domain cannot be clearly defined or measured; (4)there is nothing wrong with having -fuzzy" objectives mixed inwith clear ones; and (5) acceptance of the desirability ofcl ifying objectives will aid in the effort to describe the fuzzierones as clearly as possible.

47APPENDIX D

Illustrative example of activity described on Page 19.

0 Directing the school staff, parents, students, and com-munity toward the recognition of the improvement corn-ponent in their educational system.

Teachers, parents, learners and administrators usual y take actionto change an educational system only when things get bad. Suchchanges frequently result in traumatic effects on the system. Thissituation occurs because systems improvement has not beenrecognized as a necessary component in education. A teahcer, orparent, or learner who dares make a suggestion about changingsome aspect of the system usually receives some form ofpunishment in an effort to extinguish the suggestion behavior.

Effective organizations in any field must adopt a philosophy ofimprovement as a way of life in order to survive and to extendtheir influence. The catalyst must cre,te within the educationalcommunity the attitude that continued modification and im-provement are both good and essential to the schools. The sourceof impetus for improvement can be internal, external, or bzith.

48APPENDIX E

Illustrative example of activity described on Page 20.

0 Capitalizing on innovative successes by spreading the word,and putting models of the innovations in front of thoseothers who could also use them.

School district X has developed an adequate description model)of its own educational system, and has begun to pursue some newapproaches to its problems. At this time, it seems appropriate toexamine the strategies of another, exemplary school system. Aneducational catalyst helps school district X personnel to identifya junior high school por;sessing the properties of the junior highsystem desired by school district X. School district X then sendsstudents, teachers, parents, administrators, and school boardmembers to "Live" in the model school for two days. Thestudents and teachers from school district X are matched withsimilar students and teachers in the model school, while theparents, administrators and school board members engage invarious relevant activities throughout the two days.

The result of this visit is to give all personnel elements of schooldistrict X a common model for some of the educationalimprovements to which they aspire. If only the teachers, or onlythe administrators, in a school district have such experienees,then there is little change for interaction to occur tluslughout thedistrict because there is no common model to serve as acommunication medium.

50 OCCASIONAL PAPERS *

1. THE PROBLEM AND PROBLEM DELINEATION TECHNIQUESWilliam J. Gephart, Phi Delta Kappa. Presented at the Second NationalSymposium for Professors of Educational Research, sponsored by PhiDelta Kappa, Boulder, Colorado, November 21,1968.

2 A REVIEW OF INSTRUMENTS DEVELOPED TO BE USED IN THEEVALUATION OF THE ADEQUACY OF REPORTED RESEARCH

Bruce B. Bartos, Phi Delta Kappa & Indiana University. Presented atthe Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Associa-tion, February-1969, Los Angeles, California.

3. PROFILING EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH William J. Gephart, PhiDelta Kappa, January 1969.

4. APPLICATION OF THE CONVERGENCE TECHNIQUE TO READ-ING William J. Gephart, Phi Delta Kappa, January 1969.

S. THE CONVERGENCE TECHNIQUE AND READING: A PROGRESSREPORT William J. Gephart, Phi Delta Kappa. Presented at theAnnual Meeting of the International Reading Association, May 2,1969, Kansas City, Missouri.

6. THE EIGHT GENERAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES: A FACETANALYSIS OF THE RESEARCH PROCESS William J. Gephart,Phi Delta Kappa, July 14, 1969.

7. PROFILING INSTRUCTIONAL PACKAGE illiam 3. GephaxtBruce B. Bartos, Phi Delta Kappa, August, 1969..

8. EDUCATIONAL KNOWLEDGE USE Gene V Glass, Laboratory ofEducational Research, University of Colorado.

9, MEASUREMENT AND RESEARCH IN THE SERVICE OF EDUCA-TION Warren G. Findley, Research and Development Center inEducational Stimulation, University of Georgia.

11. DISSERTATION YOU MAY WANT TO SEE William J.Phi Delta Kappa, 1970.

12. THE DOCTORATE IN EDUCATION IN CANADA Neville L.Robertson, Commission on Higher Education, Phi Delta Kappa, 1971.

*Price list available upon request.