|
Yes, many teachers over the years have individually
worked to invent new activities, new methods, new
strategies, and/or new technologies to enhance learning
for their students. These teachers were often singled
out as being creative. Many were considered special.
Sometimes, without an accurate understanding of the
work, they were called entrepreneurial. On occasion they
received positive recognition. Often they and their
efforts were ignored. And, only too often, they found
themselves in trouble with their peers, their
administrations and/or the parents and the
community.
At least three problems exist for these creative
teachers. One, they frequently find themselves at odds
with the school's and the community's general
expectations. They find that what they believe to be
important and consistent with their personal beliefs and
values about education and learning are in fact in
conflict with others who have equally strong beliefs and
values. They find that the best way to improve their
standing in their chosen profession is to leave the
classroom and become administrators, college professors,
or move to private enterprise.
The second problem is that even if there is little or
no friction between the various parties involved in the
school and home, the creative teacher's
contributions can all too easily stand-alone. If there
is no preparation and or no follow through then the
teacher's energy and effort are at least diminished,
if not wasted. To be of continuing value to the learner
there must be opportunity to build, develop, and grow
with whatever the creative teacher presents. There must
be a sense of continuity. Learning is a process that
needs many occasions for practice and reflection. A
teacher's "great idea" without first
having a foundation for it developed over time in the
lives of students or the opportunity for student
application and internalization in ensuing semesters and
years can be a waste of time. Without consistency, there
is the opportunity for confusion and bewilderment on the
part of students. In the long run the "great
idea" can be lost if it occurs only in the
classroom of the creative teacher and does not become an
ongoing part of the total school program.
A third problem is that often the creative teacher
forgets about the individual student. A creative teacher
can become so involved in what he or she is creating
that the needs, interests, and learning styles of
individual students are ignored. It is possible that the
teacher is so positive about the merits of the new
program or product that the student and/or the
expectations of the community are forgotten. Without
careful, thoughtful and consistent assessment and
evaluation the creation becomes the end instead of the
means to improve learning for all.
The perplexity of the situation, which the creative
teacher faces, is two fold. First of all, problems
frequently arise as a result of mistakenly thinking that
creativity is simply an activity. The successful
creative teacher recognizes that there is much more to
the act of creating than merely "doing." It is
much more. Creativity is a process. That process must
include at least four (4) categories of behavior: DATA
COLLECTION (data about what is, who the students are,
what are the expectations of the school and community
etc.) DATA ORGANIZING (comparing, contrasting,
prioritizing, looking for similarities and differences
etc.) IDEA BUILDING AND USING (generalizing, model
building, inventing, designing, applying, trying out
etc.) EVALUATION (critiquing, assessing results,
determining strengths and weaknesses, retracing steps
etc.) And, while those four categories are listed above
in what appears to be linearly, they are in fact used
cyclically. This is especially true when one recognizes
that as a result of assessment and evaluation, there is
automatically new data generated, which will start the
cycle again. The unsuccessful teacher frequently focuses
on "idea building and using", and ignores the
interrelationship that exists with the other four
categories. (See #1)
THE CREATIVE
PROCESS
(The Creative Cycle for Teachers)
|
|
EVALUATION /
REFLECTION
Student Portfolios
Student Interviews
Student Post Surveys
Post Grades and Attendance
Records
Time Records
Retracing Steps
|
|
DATA COLLECTING
Observing
Reading and Discussing
Asking Questions
Who are the Students?
What Materials / Strategies
Exist?
What are the Expectations?
What are the Needs?
|
 |
 |
 |
IDEA BUILDING / USING
Creating Models
Inventing, Designing,
developing
Writing Papers, Reviews,
Explanations, etc
Predicting Results
Hypothesizing
Trying out Ideas
Testing Knowledge, Understanding etc
Keeping track of results |
|
DATA ORGANIZING
Comparing - what is with
what could be
Looking for Similarities and
differences
Checking usage
Prioritizing
Determining strengths and
weaknesses
Clarifying Specific Problems
and Needs |
 |
The second difficulty, already alluded to, is the
very real possibility that the teacher is forced to work
alone. While the "system" says it respects and
wants creativity, more often than not, it does nothing
to encourage or support it. The creative teacher often
has to literally fight for time, money, recourses,
and/or equipment necessary to truly create and become
involved in all aspects of the creative process. The
"system" makes it difficult for teachers to
share ideas, plan mutual activities, and build upon each
other's strengths and interests. While some of the
creative process can and does take place in private, in
a social institution such as a school, those processes
must also be public. Without that public involvement and
review, the products, programs and/or technologies
created can easily become misunderstood, ignored, or
even divisive. Instead of bringing new possibilities to
learning to all they become cause celebres - bringing
confusion, anger, and frustration to the creative
teacher as well as to other teachers who feel left
out.
As to the notion of the "entrepreneurial
teacher", by definition, it is impossible. Yes,
teachers might have an entrepreneurial "style"
in that they are willing to take a risk and try out new
ideas without prior approval. Or, they might participate
in what looks like an entrepreneurial
"activity", in that they are introducing
something new to the classroom. In either case, they are
not entrepreneurs. And, they won't be until they
risk their own time, energy and money to create a
product, program, service, or technology that will stand
alone and be self supportive.
During the 1960's and 1970's some creative
teachers were able to leave the classroom, and with the
help of government and private grants, develop some
exciting new teaching and learning strategies. They
successfully brought about programs for such varied
interests and needs as critical thinking, new math,
innovative assessment, individualized reading, inquiry
training, and cooperative learning. They certainly
appeared to be entrepreneurial in what they were
creating. And, in a way they were entrepreneurial in
that they were actively engaged in "finding"
money, even if it wasn't their own. But, except for
losing a grant, or running out of funding sources, the
personal financial risks were minimal.
Some people reading this might disagree with the very
narrow definition of entrepreneur used in this paper.
Through misusage, many people have disregarded the fact
that the original use of the word was related to
business and did require the risk of using one's own
money in the creation of that business. Regardless, the
true entrepreneur is independent. His product must
stand-alone. Entrepreneurs cooperate, work with others,
seek help, and often share ideas. But they are
autonomous and self-reliant. And, most importantly to be
truly successful, they must engage in a process. That
process is similar to the "Creative Process"
described earlier in that it is cycular, it never
finished.
The ENTREPRENEURIAL PROCESS, like the Creative
Process has four categories of activity: RESEARCH AND
PLANNING (determining needs, checking the industry,
identifying resources, preparing a business plan etc.)
DEVELOPMENT (developing prototype, testing prototype,
selecting staff, developing product etc.) MARKETING AND
DISTRIBUTION (advertising, publicity, storage and
warehousing, billing and collection etc.) ASSESSMENT AND
EVALUATION (surveys, profit and loss statements,
customer comments, sales projections vs. sales) (See
#2)
THE
ENTREPRENEURIAL PROCESS
(A Cycle for Creating a Business)
|
|
ASSESSMENT /
EVALUATION
Satisfaction Surveys
Profit & Loss Statements
Sales Projections vs. Sales
Customer Comments
Staff Surveys
|
|
RESEARCH /
PLANNING
Determine Needs
Check Industry
Determine Skills
Identify Resources
Research Government
Regulations
Prepare Business Plan
Determine Organ.
Structure
|
 |
 |
 |
MARKETING / DISTRIBUTION
Advertising
Publicity
Transportation
Billing & Collections
Storage & Warehousing
Training User's Staff
|
|
DEVELOPMENT
Develop Prototype
Develop Product
Test Prototype
Select / Assign Staff
Identifying Time Lines
Identifying Sales Strategy |
 |
With very little thought, it becomes immediately
obvious that this process is impossible for use in the
existing education system. In reality, the only way a
truly entrepreneurial teacher can function is by leaving
the system he or she wants to positively influence. It
is not the teacher's fault. It is the system itself
which has become so politicized and overly regulated
that is at fault. Practically every decision as to what
the public schools should be doing and how they should
be doing it comes from the state - not the school or the
teacher. With the exception of a few teachers, just a
few administrators, and very few schools everything is
designed to bring change into the system from the
outside that system. Creative teachers are ignored and
discouraged. What could at least be an entrepreneurial
attitude is impossible to maintain in the current
environment. That is why so many teachers leave the
profession.
Where does that leave us?
As stated, we have a quandary. Like with any real
problem the answer is not an easy one. This paper will
not provide "the" answer. In fact, it will not
even provide "an" answer. Instead, hopefully
at least, it will offer a few questions that need to be
asked. Also, it will provide an idea or two about what
we must do if we are truly interested in releasing the
creative energy of those special teachers who want to
bring about a dramatic change as to how teaching and
learning can best be institutionalized. And, most of
all, it will describe a process that will make it
possible for creative teachers to remain within the
system. That process can be identified. That process can
provide a structure for determining what changes must
occur throughout the organization if that organization
does ultimately live up to the goal of supporting the
creativity of its teachers. Creativity can be exciting
and rewarding in and of itself. It can keep teachers
inspired, stimulated and energized. While these are all
worthwhile outcomes, they alone do not justify putting
the necessary commitment into the task of what amounts
to a systematic change. The only justifiable reason for
that commitment is the improvement of learning for all
students.
Some of the first questions we must ask ourselves
are; what is education? What role does training have?
What are the differences between education and
"going to school?" Who should be educated?
How? What do we do about differences in students'
abilities, needs, interests and goals? Where can
education best take place? Who decides what is taught
and how should it be measured? What role does
"choice" have in organizing learning
environments? How can understanding and creative be
assessed and evaluated? How should education be
financed? How are decisions made for individual students
and families? These and many other similar fundamental
questions need to be asked and their answers publicly
agreed upon. As of this moment in time, there are as
many answers as there are people answering them. That
condition is one of the main reasons why creative
teachers are frustrated, angry, and disillusioned. They
are forced to either act alone, in secrecy or to somehow
put undue attention on "winning support" from
administrators and the public instead of on teaching and
learning. Today, the creative teacher is all too
frequently put in the position of "us against
them."
One possible way to bring a dramatic change to
"what is", is to think in terms of "what
might be." And, what might be is a system that is
purposely designed to support the creativity and
autonomy of all those teachers who have an
entrepreneurial bent.
The true entrepreneur functions in a free market. The
public schools are not and never will be in and of
themselves a free market institution. So long as they
are entirely dependent upon governmental financial
support they will be dependent upon political forces,
not market forces. While public schools in the United
States hopefully are, and should be, a reflection of
free enterprise, that is all they are. They merely, and
that term is not used pejoratively, mirror the goals and
objectives of the society that sponsors them.
What is needed is a new construct, a new paradigm for
the organization of any school system. That new
organizational structure will be one that is purposely
designed to support, and make public; a system
established to unleash the power of the creative
teacher. It will be conceived with a firm understanding
of and belief in the energy and force inherent in the
act of entrepreneurship. It will combine the elements of
the Creative Process and the Entrepreneurial Process, in
that it respects and pays attention to both. That
process is the INTRAPRENEURIAL PROCESS.
The INTRAPRENEURIAL PROCESS, like the CREATIVE
PROCESS and the ENTREPRENEURIAL PROCESS, has four
distinct categories of activity: PREPARING (recognizing
needs, collecting community data, identifying funding
requirements, researching existing programs), DEVELOPING
(identifying purposes, formalizing goals and objectives,
sequencing activities, trying out segments etc.)
IMPLEMENTING (field testing, finalizing funding
requirements, disseminating materials, collecting
ongoing assessment data) CONFIRMING (analyzing
assessment data, identifying successes and problems,
reporting, disseminating results)(See #3)
THE EDUCATIONAL
INTRAPRENEURIAL PROCESS
(The INTRAPRENEURIAL CYCLE)
|
|
CONFIRMING
Analyzing and evaluating
- Portfolios
- Tests
- User Surveys
- Observations
- Anecdotal records
- Follow-up activities
Identifying successes
and problems
Recording and reporting all
analyses, successes and
failures
Disseminating results
Identifying new users, clients,
and/or markets
|
|
PREPARING
Recognizing problems and
concerns
Researching existing materials
and strategies
Preparing specific needs
assessments
Identifying obstacles and
support systems
Identifying related laws, rules,
regulations and policies
Collecting community data
Identifying potential users
Recognizing cultural
differences
Identifying hypotheses for
testing
Identifying funding
requirements
|
 |
 |
 |
IMPLEMENTING
Field testing of material /
strategies
Training project staff
Identifying necessary
interventions
Contacting potential users
and settings
Implementing materials and
strategies
Disseminating strategies and
materials
Training user's staff
Institutionalizing materials /
strategies
Establishing funding
guidelines and payment
schedules
Collecting on-going
assessment data
|
|
DEVELOPING
Identifying purposes and
limits
Formalizing goals and
objectives
Sequencing materials,
activities and strategies
Trying out and chronicling
possible activities
Finalizing funding
requirements
Forming implementation plans
and schedules
Publishing necessary materials
and appropriate usage
guidelines
|
 |
Again, these four categories are listed lineally,
however they are applied cyclically. Obviously, truly
creative people and/or entrepreneurial ones are never
finished. Their joy comes from engaging in the process,
not in the finished product alone. As of this time in
history, there is little or no recognizable support for
the Intrapreneurial Process to function in the schools.
In fact, there is much to prevent it.
How would education be different if the
Intrapreneurial Process was used to help make decisions
about such important organizational issues as teacher
preparation and certification, teacher pay, teacher
scheduling, administrator responsibility, teacher
assignment, school board responsibility, administrative
structure, teacher support, and teacher evaluation?
As stated earlier, this paper does not have the
answer. The only real answer can come from hard work and
confidence in the possibility that a public institution
can benefit from a thorough and continuing look at the
potential power inherent in the concept of the
"INTRAPRENEUR." The entrepreneur can only
function in a free society. Similarly, the intrapreneur
can only function within a private or public
institution. That institution must have in place a
recognized structure calculated to utilize the
creativity of human beings who make up that institution.
The focus must be on the change and improvement of the
organization; its' products and services. In case of
schools, the focus must be on the improvement of
teaching and learning for all. Obviously, there must be
a systematic change in how schools are organized and
administrated as, by definition, intrapreneurism takes
place within an institution. That change, if it occurs,
will only occur as a result of a conscious resolve and
commitment to establishment and maintenance of a system
that subscribes to the belief in the human capacity of
the individual in free society. That new system will be
designed to insure the implementation of the
INTRAPRENEURIAL PROCESS. Then, creative teachers will
stay. Students and communities will benefit.
|