Winter 1998

QEDNEWS
In this issue Vol V, No. 1
Chairs message Division Chair, Henry Lindborg, describes the recent Michigan Governors Conference on Quality in Education ............................................................. 2 Book Review Deborah Hopen reviews the Mike Schmookers book, Results: The Key to Continuous School Improvement ..................................................................... 3 TC176 prepares to issue guidelines for training An excerpt from the October 15th issue of The Informed Outlook outlines the contents of the draft of ISO/DIS 10015, Quality Management Guidelines for Training ............................................................................................. 4 View from the trenches Jerry Brong proposes a radical idea about educational reformLet the educators do it ................................................................................................. 8 My point is Franklin Schargel questions whether our educational systems are as bad as they seem........................................................................................................ 10 Improving participation in a team environment Thomas Nelson provides some tips on how to improve team member participation .................................................................................................. 12 Hot links Interesting websites for information about education and training .......... 13 Officers/leaders directory Contact information for 1997-98 division officers and other leaders ....... 14 Special offer! How to order a copy of the new Z1.11 standard at a discount for division members only .................................................................................. 15

Visit our Website at www.asq.org/about/divtech/ed/

Mission Statement
To facilitate the identification, communication, and promotion of the use of quality principles, concepts, and technologies for continuous improvement in all aspects of education.

Chairs message
by Henry Lindborg The Michigan Governors Conference on Quality in Education was for me an exciting reaffirmation of the importance of both our Divisions mission and its commitment to collaboration. I was forcibly struck by the range, sophistication, and learning orientation of the presentations. Preaching to educators is out. Exploration of issues and action learning are in. The conference provided a forum for peers to share what they have learned in such areas as classroom applications, customer survey, strategic planning, partnership development, and systems thinking. As I attended sessions on

these topics, I was reminded that our Divisions success depends upon fostering a community of learners to improve the communities in which we live. Two dramatic examples of community-based collaborations presented at the conference are the Henry Ford Academy, whose formal dedication conference participants had the opportunity to attend, and the Celebration schools. Both are public schools developed through collaboration of school districts, American corporations (Ford Motor Company, Disney), and educational institutions. The Henry Ford Academy is housed on the grounds of the Henry Ford Museum and Greenfield Village in Dearborn; the Celebration schools are located in Celebration, Florida. Both have developed mechanisms for dissemination of exemplary practices. At Celebration, sharing will take place through the Celebration Teaching Academy, involving Disney, Stetson University, and the National Education Association. In serving their students, both schools will enhance our body of knowledge about school improvement. In serving our members and stakeholders, our Division also enhances the body of knowledge and

QEDNEWS is published three times a year for the members of the American Society for Qualitys Education division. The deadline for the Spring 1998 issue is March 15 , 1998. Authors wishing to submit articles for publication in QEDNEWS may send them in any word processing format on a PC or Macintosh diskette or by e-mail to Laura Gregg, 10445 NE 15th St, Bellevue, WA 98004, e-mail: laura.gregg@attws.com. Articles should be no longer than 1200 words. We are especially pleased to receive book reviews, essays on the topic of standards and assessment in education, and how-to articles describing the use of quality tools and principles in education and training institutions.

contributes to communities. Our VICA partnership and support of Koalaty Kid have been developed with these aims in mind, as has our promulgation of the Z1.11 standard. Craig Johnsons pre-conference tutorial on the standard was well received, and it is becoming increasingly clear that our Divisions expertise in standards is highly valued by educators. (As well, I might add, as by ASQ itself. The Societys national Education and Training Board is looking to the standard for guidance in improving its operations.) During the conference we explored key issues related to educational standards and assessment through focus groups conducted by Laura Gregg and Jerry Brong. Results from these and future groups will help us make better connections with educators, as will ongoing networking with other organizations. The Division was asked to present with the Association for Quality and Participation and the American Association of School Administrators Quality Network in a session called Collaborating Nationally to Connect Locally. There we listened to educators voice their needs for support in advancing systemwide quality for improved communities. Bob Kattman, Chair Elect, and I will be following up on this session to look for areas of possible collaboration in serving community needs. It is my hope that the Division will continue to have a significant
Winter 1998

QEDNEWS

presence at the annual Governors Conference on Quality in Education, sharing our vision and supporting educators in their work. For this conference, special thanks are due Governor John Engler; Linda Borsum and Chet Franke, Conference Cochairs and advocates of this Division; Conference Partners, the Michigan Quality Council and ASQ; and Sponsor, Ford Motor Company.

methods, and spent untold hours drawing up visions and mission statements. All had enormous promise. But these symbolic, highprofile initiatives du jour occurred in the near absence of any written or explicit intention to monitor, adjust, and thus palpably increase student learning or achievement. In the first chapter, Schmooker describes the traditions and organizational structures that promote teacher isolation rather than teamwork. Unlike many opponents from the business world who accuse teachers of avoiding teamwork so that they can perpetuate their personal domains in the classroom, he presents the view of an insider who acknowledges that staff meetings do not offer viable opportunities for collaboration. Fundamentally, the education system is designed in a way that thwarts teamwork, causing teachers to consciously and unconsciously work towards individual goals within the limitations of their personal knowledge and skills. He describes the benefits of team approaches and why they are not becoming more commonplace in schools, which he ascribes to the failure to collect appropriate data that demonstrates positive results.

Subsequent chapters dig into goal-setting and data collection and analysis issues. The discussion reinforces the need to move from fluff to substance, relying on measurable goals and high-impact parameters. Schmooker honestly deals with the fear of failure, acknowledging that the public does not encourage continuous learning for its educators; they are expected to succeed instantly in every circumstance. No wonder teachers are reluctant to try new approaches even if they seem quite promising!

Book Review
by Deborah Hopen Mike Schmooker, Results: The Key to Continuous School Improvement
Published in 1996 by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (703-549-9110), ISBN 0-87 120-260-3

This is a short but powerful book that addresses the frequent issue of how to balance process and results. Discussion focuses on three critical areas that schools need to address more effectively: teamwork, goals, and performance data. The author admonishes educators that Our concern with politics has caused us to overlook the most obvious onthe-ground concerns about our real purposesour goals. We have launched initiatives, provided loads of staff development in certain

Results compiles much relevant research to support its premises, so few will consider its contents earthshaking. On the other hand, it is written in an easy to read and understand style that encourages school staff to embrace the principles and practices of continuous improvement. For an investment of two hours, teachers and administrators can learn how to start the change process, and this paperback primer can guide them along the way.

Anyone who has passed through the regular gradations of a classical education, and is not made a fool by it, may consider himself as having had a very narrow escape.
William Hazlitt

Winter 1998

QEDNEWS

TC 176 prepares to issue guidelines for training

Closing the competence gap for ISO 9001/2/3 using ISO 10015
The following is excerpted from an article by Jim Mroz that appeared in the October 15th issue of The Informed Outlook.

bility of training providers either within a company or from an external organization. Johnson explained, Several countries have guideline standards for these training providers. The US national standard was published in January 1997 as ANSI/ASQC Z1.11: Quality Assurance Standards Guidelines for the Application of ANSI/ASQC Q9001 or Q9002 to Education and Training Institutions. The international guidelines in ISO 10015 and the national guidelines in Z1.11 can improve communications between a company with training needs and a training provider. ISO/DIS 10015 does not provide specific training-oriented answers to How does my company do it? questions, Johnson said. There is considerable literature and many consultants to provide those types of answers. ISO/DIS 10015 states: Customers are likely to value any organizations commitment to its human resources and its strategy to improve the competencies of its personnel [and] personnel at all levels should be trained to meet the organizations commitment to supply products of required quality, in a rapidly changing marketplace where customer requirements and expectations are increasing continuously. Johnson explained, A company that hires people with all the comWinter 1998

ISO 9001 Clause 4.18, Training, is one area where many companies either have what is required or need a great deal of help in satisfying a key quality requirementclosing the competence gap in human resources. A first draft of ISO/DIS 10015, Quality Management Guidelines for Training is now ready for balloting. This step will bring closer to publication a standard designed to provide guidance which can help an organization to identify and analyze the training needs, design and plan the training, provide for the training, evaluate training outcomes, monitor and improve the training process, in order to achieve its objectives, according to ISO/DIS 10015. Craig Johnson, Professor Emeritus at Florida State University, is the US TAGs Lead Expert for training and education as well as the standards representative for the ASQ Education Division. He said that ISO/DIS 10015 offers an effective explanation of its purpose when it states: This International Standard provides guidelines to assist organizations and their personnel when
QEDNEWS

addressing training which includes a commitment to continuous improvement. This International Standard may be applied whenever guidance is required to interpret references to education or training within the ISO 9000 quality assurance and quality management standards. Present expectations are that ISO 10015 will not be published until at least 1999, because the balloting will take six months and the FDIS process will take some time. However, if your company is implementing a quality assurance system to satisfy ISO 9001/2/3 and/or QS-9000or even if you are already registered ISO 10015 may guide you in ensuring the quality of your companys training and continuing education programs once the standard is published. The development of ISO/DIS 10015 Development of ISO/DIS 10015 was motivated by the need for companies that are registering to ISO 9001 to understand what is required to meet the requirements of Clause 4.18. ISO 10015 is not meant to be used to develop a training program. The training programthe provision of courses, course materials and examinationsis the responsi-

petence to meet all specifications has no competence gap. When additional competence is required and the process includes training to acquire it, then the process should be evaluated in terms of the quality requirements to determine if it is effective. Some indirect inferences about effectiveness measures might be drawn from annual surveys done in trade publications (e.g., Training Magazine) or research done by the US Department of Labor. Rob Foshay, Vice President for Instructional Design and Cognitive Learning at TRO Learning, Inc., and a member of the ASQ working group for ANSI/ASQC Z1.11, noted that a number of sources in the trade press have commented on the increased pressure on training departments for accountability, often defined as a requirement by senior management to demonstrate return on investment (ROI). The performancebased approach outlined in Z1.11 guidelines provides one basis for approaching the ROI question. ANSI/ASQC Z1.11 describes a process for analysis of performance improvement needs and their training components, explained Foshay. It also describes a systematic process for design, development and delivery of training solutions. Andperhaps most critical for a company implementing ISO 9001 it calls for assessment of the trainings effectiveness, not only in terms of learning, but in terms of
Winter 1998

improved performance. Thus, the standard makes training a closed loop process that begins and ends with the performance measures that are central to ISO 9000. This allows the organization implementing ISO 9000 to assure the relevance and cost-effectiveness of the training investment, while leaving to professionals the specification of content and training method. The standard can be used to define the role of any combination of internal and external training resources in a quality improvement process. What will ISO 10015 provide once published? Once published, ISO 10015 will be geared to satisfying the needs of all organizations, including private, public, profit and nonprofit organizations. The needs are generic needs to close competence gaps by training, said Johnson. If a gap exists, it may be because specific skills (e.g., the ability to blow glass to narrow specifications) or general education (e.g., report writing skills) are not present in the organizations personnel. ISO/DIS 10015 focuses on the following five most important issues:

The clear description and analysis of training needs that arise from competence gaps An appropriate design and plan for the training Cooperation between an organization requesting the training and its training provider Suitable and effective evaluation of training outcomes Monitoring of all aspects of training.

Individual organizations are encouraged to ensure these issues are covered by taking five actions: 1. Identify the competence required and the needs of the personnel to be trained 2. Developwith the training providervalid and reliable performance measures for #1 3. Specify the training approach, methods and outcomes (e.g., topics, hours, medium, price) 4. Evaluate training effectiveness primarily by use of the performance measures developed in #2 5. Integrate training and the expected performance following the training What benefits would a company gain using ISO 10015? Effectively implemented training can help a company meet its commitment to supply products of a specified quality when the company identifies a competence gap as a result of procedures the company

QEDNEWS

follows to satisfy Contract Review (Clause 4.4 of ISO 9001). A competence gap exists when a company finds that the human competence required to meet customer specifications does not exist within its organization, noted Johnson. Effective ways of closing this gap include hiring new people, outsourcing and training. When training is selected to close the competence gap within a company, then ISO 10015 will provide the following guidance: Specific topics and the relationship among these topics as a framework for evaluating approaches and methods proposed by training providers Consensus among quality experts on what should be included in discussions with training providers Reasonable expectations the company should have as it evaluates training providers (Subclause 4.6.2, Purchasing Evaluation of Subcontractors, of ISO 9001).

Internal vs. External Training Resources Many companies and other organizations try to determine whether they have the inhouse capability to provide for employee training and continuing education or whether they need to use outside trainers and consultants to meet their training needs. There are benefits to both approaches and the decision is often based on the organization and the type of training required. However, is ISO/DIS 10015 intended to provide guidance for training within a company or for training provided by an outside vendor? The simple answer is that ISO/DIS 10015 is written for both, explained Johnson. Whom the organization selects to close the competence gap is a business decision. The guidelines apply to any decision the company makes. However, the issue is not that simple. The unfortunate reality is that there simply can be no presumption that either internal nor external training functions can do the kind of

work specified by ISO/DIS 10015even those who deliver training relevant to implementation of ISO 9000 for their parent/client companies, remarked Foshay. When I first became interested in quality, I assumed the quality people and the training people within a company worked together on competence gap problems, recalled Johnson. I quickly learned that the quality professionals within a company usually did not know anyone in the training department. On one occasion, I gave a workshop on quality to several hundred trainers in a major oil company, but it turned out that these trainers did not train people to produce oil. I asked the chief operations officer of another major oil company how he would fill a gap in a competence needed to meet a customer specification. He replied, Our training people would not know how to do that. It seems to me that when the vital interests of a company are involved, the training department is not involved, and I

In addition, Foshay and Johnson identified a number of specific benefits related to use of ISO 10015, including: Greater likelihood that the investment in training will provide the required competence and lead to improved performance Fewer quality and cost/schedule overrun problems with training

QEDNEWS

Winter 1998

dont know why this is. One reason may be that there are not enough people like Rob Foshay and Walter Dick, member of the Z1.11 working group, in training departments within companies. Florida State has a doctoral program and prepares a few graduates, who would be able to train people to fill competence gaps, but they are not typical trainers. This issue is relevant for WG 4. We do not want to suggest that competence gaps should be addressed by the companys training department because this department may have low credibility. Nor do we want to suggest that the company has to go outside its organization because we would appear to be promoting consultants that may prove no better than the internal training department. Therefore, we recommend neither and leave it up to each company to choose what will be most effective in meeting its training needs. Furthermore, as Craig points out, internal training departments and external training

vendors often are not even in a position or role within a company to play a significant part in quality assurance, acknowledged Foshay. I am among those who view this situation as an admission of failure on the part of the employing companies and the training professionals involved, whether internal or external. But, as Craig says, it does mean that we can make no simple assumption about the role of internal vs. external trainersor even trainers vs. nontrainersin a quality assurance system. That is why the language of the guidelines standard is functionally based: the critical thing is for someone, somehow, to do the things described. We assume each company will find someone to close the gap, remarked Johnson. We dont say who and we dont say how. We do say what should be discussed between the organization and its training provider to increase the possibility of successful training results.

development projects, whether internal or external Reduced cost of training delivery/implementation due to more efficient and effective designs Increased ability to demonstrate ROI for the training investment Improved ability to select and purchase appropriate quality training services and products.

Steps to developing an effective training program ISO/DIS 10015 does not address the establishment of a training program. If a companys quality system is registered to ISO 9001/2/3, it must conform to the requirements of Clause 4.18, Training, of ISO 9001 and maintain training records. Should a company standardize training throughout its organization? Standardized training throughout an organization makes sense in those cases where the performance problemsand the accountability for solving themare central considerations, replied Foshay. Standardized training is common in regulated industries and industries experiencing rapid change, whether pushed by technology, the marketplace or other forces. In other cases, it may make sense to standardize certain training resources or specific solutions simply to gain an economy of scale. In the remaining cases, standardization of training and assessment should

Winter 1998

QEDNEWS

probably be concentrated on methodology and best practices, rather than specific training programs. Foshay identified defining and measuring the competence to be acquired by employees as the most difficult part of establishing an effective training program. In companies that have applied ISO 9001/ 2/3, its likely that meaningful measures of performance have been created and implemented for each key stage in the companys business processes. If this is the case, the performance measures are a major step forward in establishing effective training. Is the same type of training appropriate for all organizations? Nearly all performance improvement needs are best solved by an integrated intervention that includes some combination of strategies, only one of which is training, commented Foshay. Nearly all training needs are best met by some combination of training and performance support strategies, which in turn may be supported by a combination of training media/modes such as classroom training, handson experiential training, demonstrations, computer/video/book learning and teamwork mentoring and apprenticeships. Foshay recommended: Perhaps the best strategy for companies with limited resources for training is to: 1. Carefully prioritize and select performance problems by estimating ROI 2. Establish, measure and monitor the competence related to the specifications by using internal resources 3. Wherever possible, outsource development and delivery of training but hold providers accountable using the measures from step 2 4. Where outsourcing is not possible, develop and deliver the training using internal resources

View from the trenches

A radical idea about educational reformLet the educators do it by Gerald R. Brong Most educators have knowledge about human learning, teaching techniques, and curricular design processes. Most educators are skilled, trained, and have a comprehensive education so important in modern society. Educators can and do deliver results, guide necessary reforms, identify goals for learners, assess results, evaluate programs, and todays educators can play a key role in continuous improvement. Radical as it may sound to some reformers, educators can provide top-quality systems of education delivering to stakeholders substantial returns on investments. There are three issues to consider. First, deciding what is to be learned and by whom. Second, diversity in our systems of education needs to be accepted as a part of the education establishment. Included among the diverse systems of education are charter schools, home schooling, self-directed independent learning, private for-profit educational service organizations, and traditional public and private schools. Third, accepting continuous assessment, especially self-assessment, as a strategy for delivering quality results is essential. If continuous assessment

In a time of drastic change it is the learners who inherit the future. The learned usually find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists.
Eric Hoffer

QEDNEWS

Winter 1998

and evaluation are instituted, student competency examinations and traditional accreditation may be used to confirm in-process assessment and, should it be necessary, allow comparisons between institutions and programs. Our emphasis in this View from the Trenches is on continuous inprocess assessment, the third issue. Deciding essential learnings, the first issue, is a process very important to stakeholders served by the systems of education. Persons not accepting the diversity in our systems of education, the second issue, are out of touch with reality. Multiple systems exist, they compete for students, educational funding is being split more ways, and successes are being demonstrated by new players. Diversity in the systems of education and politics and processes of standards will be explored in future Views from the Trenches. Our attention here is on assessment and continuous improvement. Giving educators a primary responsibility for reform is recommended only if the educational establishment uses tested and proven quality systems. One such system is the Quality Performance Evaluation. The QPE is based on the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. The award process is proven to be successful. And the Baldrige award processes are being adapted to systems of education.

Continuous quality improvement in the delivery of learning support services can be structured around Baldrige award criteria. Processes are not burdensome. Processes are not imposed by outside authorities. The QPE becomes a part of normal routines. The Quality Performance Evaluation delivers a systemic assessment and feedback process allowing directly involved persons to make strategic decisions. Everyone shares in assessment and every assessment is focused on organizational results. Continuous improvement happens. Based on ten years of successes in government, manufacturing, health care, and education, the QPE approach has been embraced by line workers to policy setters because they discovered it works. Educators managing their own QPE work in seven strategic areas. These areas are basic to the Baldrige award process. First is leadership. Systems of education are complex systems. Leadership is shared and includes much more than management and administration. Systems of leadership and decision making lead into the second strategic area.

Second, everyone working to deliver results in a system of education does strategic planning. Levels of planning vary depending on tasks performed. Planning responsibilities are dynamic and will change as needs change. Planning is dependent on applicable knowledge of what customers and stakeholders expect and need. Focusing on results serving customers is the third strategic area. Customers are external to the system (parents, employers, and others) as well as internal (teachers served by administrators, learning resources specialists served by managers of central collections, lunchroom staff served by the warehouse, and so on). And of course, there is the student for whom the system was established. During planning and operation the system needs data and information and results from analysis of that information. The fourth strategic area is a hub around which all operations work. Information allows for decisions to be made about uses of assets, human resources, and processes making desired results possible. The fifth strategic area is human resources development and management. Three areas are important: people doing work delivering results; continuous education, training, and development of personnel; and the well-being and satisfaction of all employees. When the people
QEDNEWS

Winter 1998

10

are involved, trained, and working on accepted goals, the sixth strategic area can be seen in its relationship to all seven of the areas. Managing the processes of the system of education is the sixth strategic area. Management allows people to plan, do, assess results, and evaluate results. Management, like QPE, is a continuous process. Management removes obstacles and delivers resources. Quality Performance Evaluation happens. Management builds continuous improvement with levels of quality meeting, and possibly exceeding, expectations. Teaching, learning, building repair and maintenance, purchasing textbooks, organizing library collections, providing school nursing care, paying salaries, allowing continuing education for workers in the system, and meeting legal requirements have people active in the seventh strategic area, the measuring and analyzing of results. This seventh area provides information for use in all other areas. Area four (data analysis) relates to area three (customers). Area two (planning) relates to area seven (measuring and analyzing results). The Quality Performance Evaluation has strength like a stone arch where the strength of the arch comes from each stone supporting its weight. All stones are necessary in the arch. The QPE archway allows entry into the quality arena.
QEDNEWS

My point is
If they give us the blame, can we take the credit? by Franklin P. Schargel Quality in education is more important than reform. Reform implies failure and sudden change. Continuous improvement in our systems of education has been, still is, and always will be, necessary. Many things now in place work well. Successes in todays systems of education exist. Results have been confirmed. Continuous improvement is always necessary. As a result, the most radical idea may be to allow educators to be key players in the assessment and reform movement. And as opportunities for the future are considered, traditional evaluation and accreditation will be challenged. Radical, yes. Productive, you bet. Why not give it a try? Delivering quality is a way of life.
Jerry invites your response to this article. You can reach him by telephone at 509-962-8238 or by e-mail at gmbp@ellensburg.com.

Our Nation is at risk. Our once unchallenged preeminence in commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation is being overtaken by competitors throughout the worldthe educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people. What was unimaginable a generation ago has begun to occurtheirs are matching and surpassing our educational attainments. If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war. We have even squandered the gains in student achievement made in the wake of the Sputnik challenge. Moreover, we have dismantled essential support systems which helped make those gains possible. We have, in effect, been committing an act of unthinking, unilateral educational disarmament. Our society and its educational institutions seem to have lost sight of the basic purposes of schooling, and of the high expectations and disciplined effort needed to attain them. So begins A Nation At Risk: The Imperative for Education Reform, a

Teaching is not a lost art, but the regard for it is a lost tradition.
Jacques Barzun

Winter 1998

11

national study undertaken at the request of T. H. Bell, the Secretary of Education in the Eisenhower Administration. Issued in April 1983, it served as a clarion call to the nation to reform our nations schools. It also placed the failure of our economy, the nations space program, and invention firmly on the footsteps of our schools. Now that the economy is doing well; now that the stock market is at all-time high, can the schools take the credit? This question is one of many asked and answered annually by Gerald W. Bracey, a research psychologist and writer, in Kappan, a publication of Phi Delta Kappa. Mr. Braceys latest article entitled The Seventh Bracey Report on the Condition of Public Education appeared in October 1977. Mr. Bracey pointed out that the United States scored better on the TIMSS (Third International Mathematics and Science Study) as well as other test scores: The American College Test (ACT) scores rose for the third year in a row. The NAEP mathematics scores rose for the third assessment in a row. From 1981 to 1995, the proportion of students scoring above 650 [on the SAT mathematics section] grew by almost 75%, from 7.1% to 12.1%.

Mr. Bracey and others are correct in pointing out the flawed logic of a blanket condemnation of our schools. David Berliner and Bruce Biddle, in The Manufactured Crisis (Addison-Wesley, 1995) point out that a number of statistics used to condemn public schools are untrue. Mr. Berliner and Mr. Biddle believe that Americans are being misled about schools and their accomplishments and that powerful peoplewere pursing a political agenda designed to weaken the nations public schools, redistribute support for those schools so that privileged students are favored over needy students or even abolish those schools altogether. (p. xii) We need to acknowledge when our schools are doing well. However most districts do not have a systematic approach to improvement, a uniform deployment or a measured evaluation of increased, improving results. Our students can go from an excellent 2nd grade classroom to a fair 3rd grade class on the other side of the hall. Students, in the same district, attend different middle schools where there are widely varying results.

One of Dr. Demings greatest contributions was his emphasis on systemic change. Until we use systematic procedures to drive the change process we will have hills of success and valleys of failure. And as a nation, we can never achieve globally education success.
Mr. Schargel is interested in knowing your reaction to this article. He can be reached at franklin@schargel.com or www.schargel.com.

Quality Counts 98
The January 8, 1998 edition of Education Week on the Web reports on the progress or lack of it toward education reform in the 50 states during the past year. Quality Counts 98 also includes the first evaluation of how state standards in English and mathematics compare with national standards. Iowa is now the only state that is not developing statewide standards for what students should know and be able to do. But the rigor of state standards varies widely. To read the complete report, with state-by-state report cards, point your browser at www.edweek.org/ sreports/qc98. If you do not have access to the Web, call 1-800-3461834 to order a hard copy of the report. The cost is $10.00 and quantity discounts are available.
QEDNEWS

Winter 1998

12

Improving Participation on a Team Environment

by Timothy G. Wiedman Thomas Nelson Community College As a TQM trainer and facilitator since 1991, I am strongly committed to the team approach to continuous improvement. Yet even when using a trained, crossfunctional team (one that seemingly possessed the mix of technical skills required to solve the problem at hand), I began to wonder why some teams were so much more successful than others at developing workable, permanent solutions. I now believe that the difference between success and failure often lies in the quality of the participation that occurs within the group. If the team is not able to take advantage of the collective wisdom that the group possesses, the outcomes may well be suboptimal. I believe that each individuals natural (inborn) tendencies to contribute in a group setting will have a major impact on the success of the team. And while people can be encouraged to participate, their sociability patterns (especially for males) seem to be largely determined in early childhood (Schaeffer and Bayley, 1963). Thus, introverted group members may find it difficult to contributeeven when

they have good ideas and are being encouraged to voice them. The introvert/extrovert concept has its origins in the work of Carl Jung. He felt that introverts, while nonsocial, also tended to be imaginative, reflective, and interested in ideas. Extroverts, on the other hand, were likely to be sociable, confident, and outgoing, yet often venture forth with careless confidence into unknown situations (Jung, 1966). In more-recent research by Hayslip and Panek (1989), extroverts were found to be active and assertive, while exhibiting positive emotions. And that combination often makes them the driving force behind the group process (spontaneous, take-charge members of the group can be vital in getting the team organized and moving). On the other hand (as Jung described above), extroverts may also confidently charge off into the unknown; and that is a tendency that needs to be tempered lest the group waste time and resources chasing unproductive solutions. Here is where the introverts on the team can often make a critical contribution. The introverts reflective, scrutinizing tendencies (Jung, 1966) can

serve to counterbalance the spontaneity of the extroverts. Further, studies have shown that introverts are better than extroverts at tasks requiring sustained attention (Harkins and Green, 1975). Thus, while the extroverts may be vital in getting the project under way, the introverts may well be the force that sustains the team when it encounters tedious aspects of a long project. So getting participation from both types of personalities can be vital to the success of the team. However, assuming that you have a mix of introverts and extroverts on your team, how can you ensure the participation of the quiet, generally reserved introverts (Hergenhahn, 1990)? When faced with the need to equalize participation among group members in brainstorming, problem-solving, or decision-making situations, I often recommend a method called Nominal Group Technique (Scholtes, 1993). In using Nominal Group Technique (or NGT), each group member silently brainstorms (without interaction) and writes down individual ideas that relate to the problem at hand. Next, group members read one item at a time off of their individual lists (in a round-robin manner), and the ideas are recorded on a flip chart or white board for all to see. This process continues until all ideas have been recorded. No
Winter 1998

QEDNEWS

13

discussion is allowed during the recording phase. Next, after the recording is finished, members are allowed to ask for clarification concerning individual ideas. Once all members are satisfied that they understand everything on the list, team members cast secret ballots which are tallied to determine the sentiments of the group (see Scholtes, 1993, for more details on the voting procedure). NGT largely takes personalities out of the brainstorming process since individual lists of ideas are generated without interaction. And once each participant has a list of ideas, reading one item at a time to the recorder seems to work quite well (even when shy introverts are involved). Thus, this method seems to equalize the level of participation between introverts and extroverts. Finally, the secret ballot ensures that a dominant personality cannot talk the group into a course of action not supported by the majority. Thus, each team member (whether an introvert or an extrovert) has a relatively equal say in the teams course of action. This method is not fool-proof; but in my experience, it is an excellent way to generate increased participation from the introverts in a team setting. And that participation may well produce valuable ideas that are now going to waste.

Hot links
A short list of interesting and useful Websites related to education and training. References
Harkins, S., & Green, R. G. (1975). Discriminability and Criterion Differences Between Extraverts and Introverts During Vigilance. Journal of Research in Personality, 9, 335340. Hayslip, B., & Panek, P. E. (1989). Adult Development and Aging. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. Hergenhahn, B. R. (1990). An Introduction to Theories of Personalities. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Jung, C. G. (1966). The Collected Works of C.G. Jung. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Schaeffer, W. W., & Bayley, N. (1963). Maternal Behavior, Child Behavior and Their Interdependence from Infancy Through Adolescence. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 28, 1127. Scholtes, P. R. (1993). The Team Handbook. Madison, WI: Joiner Associates Inc. Professor Wiedman invites your response to this article. You can reach him by phone at 757-825-2737 or by e-mail at wiedman@tncc.cc.va.us.

www.funderstanding.com Here you will find summaries of different learning theories with each ones implications for curriculum development and learner evaluation. wastenot.gov/cted/index.html This is the home page for the Clearinghouse for Training, Education and Development. From this page there is a link to: www.osti.gov/html/techstds/ standards/standard.html Here you will find several downloadable and printable DOEApproved Guides to Good Practices relating to training and education. To do this youll need Acrobat Reader, also downloadable at this site, free of charge. www.astd.org/astd.htm This is the website for the American Society for Training and Development. The organizations training focus is often of interest to quality professionals. www.iso.ch/welcome.html This ISO 9000 Forum site has excellent information on ISO 9000 certification.
Correction: The last issue included a mistyped URL for the Transformation of Learning document. The correct URL is iitfcat.nist.gov:94/doc/education.html. QEDNEWS

Winter 1998

14

1997-98 officers and other leaders

Chair Henry Lindborg National Institute for Quality Improvement 17 Forest Avenue Fond du Lac, WI 54935 Work: 920-923-9600 Home: 920-922-8403 Fax: 920-921-8228 E-mail: niqi@aol.com Chair Elect Robert Kattman Glendale-River Hills Schools 2600 W Mill Rd Glendale, WI 53209 Work: 414-351-7170 Home: 414-962-9047 Fax: 414-351-7187 E-mail: rkattman@execpc.com Secretary Laura Gregg Wizard Textware 10445 NE 15th Street Bellevue, WA 98004 Work: 425-803-1259 Home: 425-453-7210 Fax: 425-453-7352 E-mail: laura.gregg@attws.com Treasurer Rashpal Ahluwalia West Virginia University Industrial Engineering Dept Morgantown, WV 26506 Work: 304-293-4607 x706 Home: 304-599-4722 Fax: 304-293-4970 E-mail: ahluwalia@cemr.wvu.edu
QEDNEWS

Vice ChairHigher Education Margaret Land Texas A&M Kingsville Campus Box 172 Kingsville, TX 78363 Work: 512-593-2235 Home: 512-595-1588 Fax: 512-593-3409 E-mail: mland@tamuk.edu Vice ChairBusiness, Industry, Consulting John Zavacki 2378 SR 345 NE New Lexington, OH 43764 Work: 614-342-3523 x338 Mobile: 740-653-3164 Fax: 614-342-2062 E-mail: j.zavacki@ittauto.com AQC Technical Session Gerald Brong GMB Associates 4530 Manastash Rd Ellensburg, WA 98926 Work/Home: 509-962-8238 Fax: 509-925-4566 E-mail: gmbp@ellensburg.com National Educational Quality Initiative Frank Caplan Quality Sciences Consultants 22531 SE 42nd Ct Issaquah, WA 98029 Home: 425-392-4006 Fax: 425-392-2621 E-mail: fcaplan@serv.net

Koalaty Kid Liaison Gordon Constable 7436 Eagle Creek Dr Centerville, OH 45459 Work: 937-885-2255 Home: 937-433-6750 Fax: 937-873-3545 E-mail: gconstab@discover.wright.edu ChairVocational Education Marshall Gartenlaub Fullerton College 1574 Rancho Hills Drive Chino Hills, CA 91709 Work: 714-695-1501x212 Home: 909-606-0909 Fax: 909-606-1496 E-mail: marshall@wavenet.com Membership Chair Rajinder Kapur 179 Pheasant Run Troy, MI 48098 Work: 810-296-0200 Fax: 810-296-0936 Immediate Past Chair Greg Hutchins Quality Process Engineering 4052 NE Couch Portland, OR 97232 Work: 503-233-1012 Home: 503-233-1012 Fax: 503-233-1410

Winter 1998

15

Special Offer for Division Members!

ANSI/ASQC Z1.11
Quality Assurance StandardsGuidelines for the Application of ANSI/ISO/ASQC Q9001 or Q9002 to Education and Training Institutions. This standard guides education and training institutions when using ANSI/ISO/ASQC Q9001 or Q9002. It covers instructional design, development, instruction delivery, assessment of students and support services. It also contains the full text of ANSI/ISO/ASQC Q9001-1994. Order yours for the special ASQ Education division members only price of 50% off the list price plus shipping and processing. To receive this special Members Only discount, please use priority code QP2A4A7 when placing your order. Need large quantities? Call or e-mail Rob Platt (800-248-1946, rplatt@asq.org) for information on how to obtain permission to photocopy the standard for distribution in your organization.

ORDER FORM
Item # T74 Quantity Title ANSI/ASQC Z1.11Guidelines for the Application of Q9001 or Q9002 to Education and Training Item Price $15.00 (special discount)
Shipping and processing SUBTOTAL Customers outside the U.S. and Canada add 25% of subtotal Canadian residents add 7% of adjusted total for Canadian goods and services tax Wisconsin residents add 5% of adjusted total for sales tax Milwaukee County residents add an additional 0.6% of adjusted total TOTAL

Total Price

Priority Code QP2A4A7 Ship to: (UPS cannot ship to P.O. boxes.) Please print. ASQ Member Number ___________________________ Name (Last) _____________________________ (First) ____________________ Company __________________________________________________________ Title _______________________________________________________________ Street ______________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _______________________________________________________ Province/Country ________________ Telephone ( ) ________________

Purchase order number ___________________

Make checks payable to ASQ.

Payments sent to ASQ must be in U.S. dollars and drawn on a U.S. financial institution. No foreign purchase orders.

Credit Card Information

___MasterCard

___Visa

___American Express

Account Number ____________________________________________________ Expiration Date ____________________ Cardholder name ___________________

(please print) Shipping and Processing Order Amount Up to $34.99 $35.00-99.99 $100.00 and over U.S. Charges $ 4.00 $ 6.25 $12.50 Canadian Charges $ 9.00 $11.25 $17.50

Signature _______________________
(required for credit card orders)

Address ____________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _______________________________________________________ CALL toll free 800-248-1946 to place your order. Allow one to two weeks FAX the order form to: ASQ at 414-272-1734. for delivery in the U.S. MAIL to: ASQ, P.O. Box 3066, Milwaukee, WI 53201-3066. and Canada.

If shipping and processing charges exceed $12.50 ($17.50 Canadian), ASQ will bill customer for the additional expense.

Winter 1998

QEDNEWS

EDUCATION DIVISION American Society for Quality 611 E Wisconsin Avenue P.O. Box 3005 Milwaukee, WI 53201-3005

Nonprofit Org. U.S. Postage PAID Permit No. 650702 Portland, OR

ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED Time dated material Please do not delay