So We Received Bad News, What Next?
(Notes From Meeting-11/08/99)

Participants:
Jim Morris, DESE
Brent Ghan, MSBA
Bruce Moe, MSTA
Mary Jo Burton, North Kansas City
Roberta Coker, Independence
David Clohessy, Riverview Gardens
Howard Jones, Project SUCCESS

In a recent meeting of several professionals who serve as school information/public relations specialists, the group grappled with the topic of releasing information that identifies areas of concern or problems in the district. The purpose of this paper is to highlight some of that discussion with the hope it will be of some use to local school administrators.

Whether the information to be released is the result of the district’s annual performance report, test results which revealed less than desired improvement, receipt of a letter from the Commissioner of Education stating the district would not be accredited if the MSIP review occurred at this time, or some other negative status report, how the district administration handles that information is critical to its impact. 

Ultimately, the goal is to use any data or information to inform decisions for improvement. In fact, we all recognize that specific "bad news" can assist a district significantly as it seeks to rally the support of the community in improving its schools. 

In a practical example, releasing a building inspector report that finds a school building structurally dangerous can serve as a vital wake up call to the patrons to support an upcoming bond issue. Likewise, student performance data can alert teachers, students, parents and the community at large that there is work to be done.

The process of releasing information should bring the district closer together and be constructive - not divisive, creating panic, blame, a litany of excuses, or despair. We need to get past the "shame syndrome" and promote the fact that as individuals we all need to improve. Our schools are no different. In fact, our community must create a culture of continuous improvement by their expectations and willingness to assume responsibility for playing a vital role in this improvement. Easier said than done? Probably, but school leaders can certainly play a vital role in the development of this climate.

In our discussion, we expressed the belief that the release of data/information is most effective when district leaders initiate that release in an open environment. Hidden data will often become inflated in value, be presented out of context, and create an air of suspicion. When the school initiates the release of information, administrators can strategically plan the timing and sequence of the release specifically for the audience. 

With regard to sequence, the Board of Education, administrators, teachers and other internal groups should have an opportunity to know before external publics are informed. Information can also be customized for each individual group relative to that group’s interest. 

For example, the message to parents might be packaged slightly different than the report to the Chamber of Commerce. Terminology becomes important. We discussed the value of framing the presentation to the business community using expressions such as "our focus on quality," "preparing our students to compete," "quantifying results," and "customer service." Another valuable asset in framing the release internally is that areas of strength and positive factors can be used to balance areas of challenge.

It seems obvious, but ongoing analysis and discussion at board meetings, at the school and in the public serves to minimize the sensationalism attached to the big story. If the board has discussed test results, attendance and drop out data, and/or the complete annual performance report at least annually, the story is old news when officially released. 

A clearly stated and frequently discussed comprehensive school improvement plan with scheduled status reports and a clear understanding of the standard we are trying to meet seems to be an important part of the ongoing effort to keep various publics informed and avoid overreaction to news.

In our discussion, we determined that both the content and the process of the release of information are important. Our way of looking at these factors in the context of MSIP and the annual performance report was to create two categories with considerations as follows:

Content Of Message

• This is the new reality "get over it".
• No excuses.
• Commit to continuous improvement.
• Be certain stakeholders understand the focus on student achievement.
• Consider the information as an opportunity to take positive action.
• Discuss community expectations.
• Solicit partners in addressing the challenge.
• Relate to CSIP
• It can be done - it is achievable.
• It is a worthwhile goal.
• Issue an invitation to participate in improvement initiative.
• Include anecdotes and case studies of improvement efforts.

Process Considerations

• Identify opinion leaders (in stakeholder groups) and communicate with them.
• Create ownership through engagement.
• Recognize "pain avoidance" as a motivator.
• Be proactive in addressing groups with information.
• Face to face presentation when possible.
• Have a dialogue, not just a speech.

This list is not intended to be an exhaustive list, but a starting place to stimulate thinking regarding the release of information. Please feel free to add and adapt where needed.

Close the Gap Consortium

Missouri Department of Elementary & Secondary Education          

Missouri Regional Professional Development Centers

For additional information contact: Howard Jones, Project SUCCESS Coordinator.

Project SUCCESS is sponsored by The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Please report site problems to Deanna Crocker