This minimag is an overview of the topics covered in the 2015- AECT Conference for the Division on Systems Thinking and Change. In this PDF you will see division conference details, get information on the name change and policy brief, and meet some of the people involved.

1. NOVEMBER 2015 AECT ACCELERATE LEARNING: RACING INTO THE FUTURE
NAME CHANGE
MESSAGE FROM THE
PRESIDENT & HISTORY
POLICY BRIEF
BACKSTORY FROM
REIGELUTH
MEET THE PEOPLE
WHO’S INVOLVED?
CONFERENCE
RACING TO THOUGHTFUL
CHANGE
What is our purpose?
Provide a space where people connect with others in order to…
• Disseminate research and evidence-based practices
• Produce practical and scholarly arguments about change
and innovation
• Engage people in understanding the scholarship and
practices on change
• Promote meaningful innovation in organizations
SYSTEMS THINKING
& CHANGE
Plan for Vegas 2016
Join ST&C
1. Join
AECT
at
www.aect.org
2. Select
Systems
Thinking
&
Change
3. Or,
email
Dr.
Beth
Sockman
bsockman@esu.edu
ST&C
-­‐Membership
Meeting
Fri.
Nov
6@
9:15
-­‐
Hyatt
Regency
-­‐2
Concept
A
Group: Systems
Thinking, Design &
Change in Education
http://tinyurl.com/STC-
Facebook

2. NOVEMBER 2015 RACING INTO THE FUTURE
!1
Systems
Thinking
&
Change
Conference
Highlights
The
only
thing
certain
is
change.
Systemic
Thinking
and
Change
is
there
to
help
you
get
out
in
front
of
change
and
not
fall.
We
probe
one
another
to
use
systems
thinking
to
encourage
meaningful
innovation
and
transformation.
This
year’s
conference
embraces
systems
thinking
about
innovations
through
emerging
technologies,
health
care,
education
and
theory.
In
sessions,
you
have
the
opportunity
to
probe
speci?ic
applications
or
discuss
the
theoretical
evolution
toward
strong
research.
Change
is
a
messy
process.
As
a
community
of
scholars
and
practitioners,
we
aim
to
demystify
it
through
our
collaborative
work.
Provoking
Joint
Panel
Sessions
We
have
three
joint
panel
sessions
that
will
have
insightful
discussions.
The
stellar
panelists
will
focus
on
particular
innovations
and
the
systems
in?luences
within
different
?ields.
TED-­‐ST&C
Panel:
Taking
a
Systems
look
at
Teacher
Educa@on
for
21st
Century
Needs
Panelists:
Ross
Perkins,
Drew
Polly,
Luis
Camillo
Almeida,
Charles
Morgan
Reigeluth;
Jennifer
Karnopp
&
Jody
Underwood
Wed,
Nov
4,
1:00
to
2:00pm,
Hya4
Regency,
2,
Theory
A
ST&C
and
D&D
Panel
Address
the
Elephant:
Using
Systems
Thinking
to
address
MOOCs
and
Social
Media
in
Design
&
Development
Panelists:
Kyle
Peck,
William
Watson,
M.David
Merrill,
Darryl
Draper
Wed,
Nov
4,
2:15
to
3:15pm,
Hya4
Regency,
3rd,
Cosmopolitan
B
ST&C
and
CLT
Panel
-­‐A
Systems
Perspec@ve
on
the
Cultural
Influence
of
Technology
with
Represented
and
Underrepresented
Groups
Panelists:
Deepak
Prem
Subramony;
Roberto
Joseph,
Camille
Dickson-­‐Deane,
Sunnie
Watson,
Eugene
Kowch
Thu,
Nov
5,
1:00
to
2:00pm,
Hya4
Regency,
2,
Theory
A
Poster
Session
and
Roundtables
The
health
care
*ield
has
been
besieged
with
innovations.
Discuss
how
change
theory
is
applied.
Thu,
Nov
5,
10:30
to
11:30am,
Indy
ConvenFon
Center,
Indy
ConvenFon
Ctr
(Rm
231)
-­‐
Posters
Bracing
for
the
Impact
of
Mobile
ICTs
in
Ubiquitous
Health
Sciences
Libraries
Deborah
M.
Taylor
Thu,
Nov
5,
10:30
to
11:30am,
Indy
ConvenFon
Center,
Indy
ConvenFon
Ctr
(Rm
231)
–
Roundtables
Aligning
Change
Theory
to
a
Process
Model
for
Assis@ng
Asthma@c
Pa@ent
Self-­‐Iden@fica@on
Thomas
Watson
Lamey
&
Gayle
V.
Davidson-­‐Shivers
Managing
Healthcare
IT
Projects:
Barriers
to
Implemen@ng
a
Project
Management
Office
(PMO)
Sco<
Lilley

3. NOVEMBER 2015 RACING INTO THE FUTURE
!2
Join Us in Vegas 2016!
People wonder why technology ideas, designs and projects sometimes disappear within a ‘system’, or
why innovation and the best ideas don’t translate into wider changes in thinking or practice. In ST&C,
we wonder too but look for answers. Present your answers and findings in VEGAS!
We look forward to your proposal in 2016!
General
Membership
Meeting:
Fri.
Nov
6@
9:15
-­‐
Hyatt
Regency
1/27/16 @ 1pm EST Educational Systems Change and Personalized Instruction:
How Learning Technology Broadly and Digital Badges with William Watson
Concurrent
Sessions
The
concurrent
sessions
address
the
theory
and
practical
applications
of
systems
thinking
and
change
in
the
educational
facets
of
international
education,
k-­‐12
education
through
higher
education.
Adjus@ng
the
Suspension
in
K-­‐12
Schools:
Systemic
change
outcomes
Fri,
Nov
6,
8:00
to
9:00am,
Hyaa
Regency,
2,
Concept
A
• An
educa?onal
reform
to
improve
classroom
technology
in
Turkey:
FATIH
Project
Hoyet
Hemphill,
Erkan
Caliskan
&
Leaunda
Hemphill
• The
Tea
Party's
Poten?al
Influence
on
a
Texas
School
District's
Educa?onal
and
Instruc?onal
Policies
Steven
Robert
Watkins
Higher
Educa@on
and
Designing
High-­‐Performance
Change
Fri,
Nov
6,
10:30
to
11:30am,
Hyaa
Regency,
2,
Concept
A
• Accelera?ng
E-­‐learning
Development:
From
the
Passenger
to
the
Driver’s
Seat
Jeff
Boehm,
Dana
Ruggiero,
Susana
Romans-­‐Roca
&
Neil
Glen
• Piecing
Together
The
Puzzle
Of
Higher
Educa?on:
Debundling
Educa?on
with
Digital
Badges
and
Micro-­‐
courses
for
Customized,
Competency-­‐based
Learning
William
Watson,
Sunnie
Watson
&
Tim
Newby
Be
in
the
Lead
by
Driving
the
Change
Fri,
Nov
6,
1:00
to
2:00pm,
Hyaa
Regency,
2,
Concept
A
• PuVng
a
Stake
in
the
Ground:
Ins?tu?onalizing
a
University
and
School
Partnership
Beth
Rajan
Sockman,
Grant
Rauch,
Zhaoyuan
Guo
• Toward
a
Peri-­‐Instruc?onal
Design
Tradi?on
in
Educa?on
Elizabeth
Bro4
Beese
Know
the
Terrain
and
Read
Signs
for
Transforma@on
Fri,
Nov
6,
2:15
to
3:15pm,
Hyaa
Regency,
2,
Concept
A
• Educology
for
Systemic
Change
Ted
Frick
&
Kenneth
Thompson
Tuning
up
Instruc@on
through
Change
Fri,
Nov
6,
3:30
to
4:30pm,
Hyaa
Regency,
2,
Concept
A
• Redesigning
the
conversa?on
on
educa?onal
reform:
A
call
for
agency
William
Watson
&
Sunnie
Watson
• FASTEN
YOUR
SEATBELTS!
Five
Prac?cal
Leadership
Principles
to
Turbocharge
Your
Career
Eugene
Kowch
JOIN US!

4. NOVEMBER 2015 RACING INTO THE FUTURE
!3
M E E T U S
We are a group of people who want to shape change by
thinking through the process together.
Sunnie
Lee
Watson
Title:
Professor,
Purdue
University
Posi@on:
Board
Member
About
Me:
CriFcal
Systems
Thinker,
Humane
Educator,
Learning
Design
and
Technology
Professor,
Animal
Rights
Advocate.
Anthony
Chow,
Ph.D.
Title:
Associate
Professor,University
of
North
Carolina
at
Greensboro
Posi@ons:
Past
President
About
Me:
Systems
Thinker,
InformaFon
ScienFst,
Professor,
Husband,
Father,
Strategic
Planner
and
OpFmist.
Ashley
Gouger
Title:
Learning
Strategist,
Clear
Point
Learning
Posi@on:
Graduate
Student
RepresentaFve
About
Me:
Learning
strategist,
Thoughbul
researcher,
Hopeful
life-­‐long
learner,
Believer
in
and
seeker
of
change
in
educaFon.
Genevieve
Gallant
Title:
President,
GG
Consultants
Limited
Posi@on:
Board
Member
About
Me:
Avid
believer
in
Systems
Approach
to
implement
Change,
Manager
of
technology
implementaFon
as
a
method
for
educaFonal
change,
InstrucFonal
Designer,
Professor/Researcher
for
Change.
Charles
M.
Reigeluth
Title:
Professor
Emeritus,
Indiana
University
Posi@on:
Founding
President,
Board
Member
About
Me:
Advancing
knowledge
about
paradigm
change,
what
the
new
paradigm
should
be,
and
how
to
help
educaFonal
systems
transform
into
the
new
paradigm.
William
R.
Watson
Title:
Associate
Professor,
Purdue
University
Posi@on:
Board
Member
About
Me:
Learner
-­‐
Visioneer
-­‐
Gamer
-­‐
AcFvist.
Hoyet
H.
Hemphill,
Ph.D.
Title:
Department
Chair,
Professor,
Western
Illinois
University
Previous
Posi@ons:
President
About
Me:
Published
and
presented
on:
Assessing
Engagement
in
Online
Discourse,
InternaFonal
programs
for
systemic
change.

5. NOVEMBER 2015 RACING INTO THE FUTURE
!4
Minkyoung
Kim
Title:
Doctoral
Candidate,
Indiana
University
Posi@on:
Secretary-­‐Treasurer
About
Me:
Lifelong
learner,
InstrucFonal
Designer
pursuing
learner-­‐centered
educaFon,
Former
Business
Consultant,
Ph.D
Candidate
in
InstrucFonal
Technology,
and
Semi-­‐Pro
Ballet
Dancer.
Dr.
Francis
Duffy
Title:
Professor,
Gallaudet
University
Posi@on:
Board
of
directors,
president
About
Me:
Focuses
on
leadership
and
organizaFonal
change,
Speaker,
Author
of
Systemic
Change
wriFngs,
co-­‐director
of
“Future
Minds”
for
transforming
schools.
Monica
Sulecio
de
Alvarez,
M.A.Ed.
Title:
Distance
Learning
Experience
Designer
in
Central
America
Posi@on:
Board
Member
About
Me:
Non-­‐stopping
learner,
complex-­‐meaningful
learning
driven,
distance
learning
experience
designer/coach,
holisFc
life
pracFFoner,
peace-­‐nature-­‐sFllness
lover.
Aaron
Bond
Title:
Director
Networked
Learning
IniFaFve
Posi@on:
AECT
Board
RepresentaFve
About
Me:
Faculty
Development
Professional,
Technology-­‐enhanced
Learner/Teacher,
Social
ConstrucFvist,
Community
Builder,
Using
Technology
and
Community
to
Bring
Change
to
EducaFon.
KenPrest
Title:
Consultant,
KW
Prest
&
Associates
Posi@on:
Board
member
About
Me:
Passionate
about
energizing
a
broad-­‐ranging
conversaFon
on
the
future
of
educaFon,
deliberately
-­‐
catalyzing
membership
experience,
and,
ulFmately,
making
educaFon
more
relevant,
effecFve,
and
a
be4er
investment.
Dr.
Eugene
G.
Kowch
Title:
Associate
Professor,
University
of
Calgary
Posi@on:
AECT
Board
RepresentaFve
About
Me:
Preparing
next-­‐generaFon
educaFonal
leaders
and
policy
makers
by
combining
good
learning
environment
design
with
cuhng
edge
organizaFon
design,
Former
Corporate
development
engineer
(petroleum),
Teacher,
Principal
&
Deputy
Superintendent.
Beth
Rajan
Sockman
Ph.D.
Title:
Associate
Professor
Posi@on:
President
Elect;
CommunicaFons
Officer
About
Me:
Systems-­‐Thinker,
Grateful-­‐Learner,
InstrucFonal-­‐Technology-­‐Professor,
Striving
for
a
Win-­‐Win
society
with
Peace
through
Understanding.

6. A Rationale
for Changing the AECT Division Name from
‘Systemic Change’ to ‘Systems Thinking and
Change’ in 2015
Dr. E. Kowch, Ph.D. (AECT Board, 2015)
MESSAGE FROM ST&C PRESIDENT
Systems
thinking
has
evolved
primarily
from
its
roots
in
management
contexts
(Ackoff,
1972).
The
scholarly
work
has
been
a
response
to
deBicits
found
among
less
systemic,
more
structural
mindsets
about
leading
organizations
effectively
so
that
they
are
nimble
enough
to
change.
Systems
thinking
is
a
purposeful
response
by
global
members
who
subscribe
to
a
conceptual
view
of
society,
organizations
and
institutions
as
highly
interdependent
entities
of
organization.
Ackoff
(1971)’s
ideas
on
organizations
as
systems
has
evolved
into
thinking
about
a
‘design’
approach
to
types
of
systems
where
people
try
to
create
a
feasible
whole
from
infeasible
parts.
Historically,
the
founders
of
AECT’s
Systemic
Change
division
have
similarly
combined
holistic
thinking
about
learning
situations
(primarily
in
school
settings)
to
evolve
a
beautiful
design
for
conceptualizing
changes
in
education
systems
(organizations).
The
work
of
AECT’s
FutureMinds
(Reigeluth
&
Duffy,
2009)
for
example
is
based
on
principles
of
interactive
learning
and,
implicitly,
interactive
learning
leadership
(Reigeluth,
2015).
This
is
the
very
Bine
bedrock
of
our
thinking
in
the
Division
about
Systemic
Change.
However
we
have
realized
that
our
historical
conceptualization
of
Systemic
Change
integrates
the
entire
process
of
systems
thinking
along
with
its
implicit
design,
development
and
system
leadership
outcomes
to
represent
change.
That
can
be
confusing
for
some
members
because
the
Birst
change
required
of
anyone
or
any
education
system,
by
our
account,
is
a
paradigm
change
(Reigeluth
&
Duffy,
2008)
which
some
argue
is
actually
an
outcome
of
a
recursive
learning
process
enacted
by
nested,
co-­‐dependent
networks
of
people
(systems)
learning
(Schlechty,
2011).
Uniquely
in
the
world,
our
AECT
Division
has
evolved
systems
thinking
with
a
design
ideal
to
create
change
that
impacts
all
parts
of
a
system
(in
schools,
primarily
for
learning
and
instruction).
This
is
a
tremendous
leap
forward
from
literature
brought
about
to
consider
organizations
and
leadership
dynamics
independently
of
the
idea
that
co-­‐connected
people
can
learn
their
ways
forward
(Ackoff,
1972;
Senge,
1995).
Designers
choose
to
seek
the
future,
rather
than
to
predict
it.
In
the
Figure
1
below
(Gharajedaghi,
2011)
design
thinking
is
compared
to
other
inBluential,
interconnected
systems
thinking
frameworks,
where
we
have
found
that
trying
to
predict
system
outcomes
just
doesn’t
work
in
the
complex
reality
of
our
constant-­‐Blux,
co-­‐dependent
world
of
nested
systems
(inclusive
of,
but
extending
well
beyond
‘the
school’).
Today,
our
concept
of
a
system
is
more
open,
and
it
is
expanding
to
include
temporal,
shifting
nested
systems
that
impact
each
other
in
complex,
nested
and
interconnected
ecosystems
that
are
constantly
in
Blux.
For
many
years
our
Division
has
been
known
as
Systemic
Change.
Last
year,
our
Executive
Committee
gave
serious
consideration
to
changing
the
name
of
the
division.
The
reason
for
this
was
twofold.
1.
We
felt
that
systemic
thinking
was
a
critical
process
that
could
be
applied
to
any
learning
system
and
organization.
While
change
might
indeed
be
an
outcome
of
this
process,
the
application
of
systems
thinking
was
an
important
contribution
to
the
efBicacy
and
goal
achievement
for
a
learning
system,
environment,
and
organization.
2.
We
wanted
to
recognize
that
change
and
transformation
can
occur
at
both
a
micro
and
macro
level
within
a
learning
environment.
Understanding
and
celebrating
successful
change
should
be
part
of
the
Division's
mission.
The
Executive
Committee
therefore
voted
on
changing
the
Division
name
to
Systems
Thinking
and
Change
to
reBlect
a
more
inclusive
role
for
the
Division's
membership
and
their
own
range
of
endeavors
to
apply
systems
thinking
and
to
implement
change.
Hoyet H. Hemphill, Ph.D.

7. What
is
signiBicant
in
this
evolution
of
systems
thinking,
particularly
in
the
education
context
is
a
similar
and
parallel
change
in
the
evolution
of
change
thinking
in
education.
That,
too
has
evolved
from
principles
about
holistic,
mechanical
change
(Simon,
1967)
to
holistic
change
in
schools
and
school
communities
(Fullan,
1998;
Hargreaves
&
Shirley,
2011).
The
language
of
‘transformation’
is
a
rhetorical
move
to
suggest
an
expanding
concept
of
school
and
district
level
educational
change
(Gronn,
2002).
So
systems
thinking
and
change
thinking
have
evolved
in
parallel
to
help
us
contemplate
the
design
of
better
education
systems
in
our
changing
world.
Most
of
it
is
based
on
excellent
research
done
by
bounding
the
‘system’
as
one
within
a
classroom,
a
school
or
a
district,
not
as
nested
systems
where
the
very
way
we
conceptualize
it
all
matters
as
well.
While
educational
leadership
disciplines
have
classically
embedded
this
kind
of
change
thought,
we
realize
that
a
design
approach
to
both
learning
and
change
leadership
require
a
design
sensibility
and
an
ecosystemic
perspective
on
learning
and
organization
design
in
the
knowledge
era
(Kowch,
2013).
This
Binding
emanates
from
a
special
edition
of
TechTrends
created
by
Division
members
in
2013.
Separating
‘change’
thinking
(and
output,
really,
in
our
current
discourse)
from
‘systems
thinking’
helps
us
consider
the
wider
space
of
the
possible
when
we
contemplate
contributing,
in
a
high-­‐impact
way
to
the
design
of
new
organizations,
leaders
and
learning
situations
where
technology
is
deeply,
purposefully
embedded
with
a
new
paradigm
for
..
(What
the
organization
does).
Considering
our
professional
‘home’
in
AECT
as
a
space
for
“Systems
Thinking
and
Change”
opens
up
a
wider
space
for
research,
practice
and
discourse.
Our
idea
is
to
be
more
inclusive
because
when
we
think
about
these
nested
systems
spanning
organizational
bounds
we
have
studied
(i.e.
schools),
we
can
include
wider
concepts
of
integrated
communities,
governments,
stakeholders,
histories,
economics
and
social
pulses
in
our
research.
We
include
other
organization
frames
as
well,
such
as
universities
and
corporations
–
bridging
and
integrating,
perhaps
with
the
heavy
work
in
leadership,
administration,
public
administration,
business
and
organization
as
well
as
social
justice,
distributed
learning
and
design
theory
for
example,
perhaps
from
settings
inclusive
of
hospitals,
government
agencies,
the
military,
R&D
and
other
institutional
contexts
(Clegg
et
al.,
2011).
So
our
gesture
for
changing
our
AECT
Division
name
is
to
be
more
academically
and
pragmatically
inclusive
and
cohesive
in
terms
of
involving
people
who
love
designing
learning
and
leading
nested,
well
led
and
changing
interconnected
systems.
We
can
do
this
without
thinking
quite
as
much
about
the
implicit
‘change’
cause-­‐effect
relationship
implied
from
traditional
‘systems’
thinking
(systemic
change).
So
by
separating
the
‘change’
from
the
‘systemic
(thinking)’,
we
can
consider
the
systemic
thinking
going
on
with
less
of
an
eye
to
speciBic
utilities
or
outcomes
from
it.
This
is
a
liberating
idea,
yet
it
is
daunting.
The
proposed
name
change
“Systems
Thinking
and
Change”
reBlects
a
less
instrumental,
more
exploratory
paradigm
for
examining
the
possible
results
of
our
designs
–
a
paradigm
that
is
less
bound
by,
but
yet
inclusive
of
institutional
boundaries
(i.e.
schools)
or
by
the
predictive
results
from
idea
sets
about
evolving
systems
from
A
to
B
states
(systemic
change).
For
example,
if
we
can
imagine
a
learning
setting
that
spans
well
beyond
time
or
mastery
boundaries
in
schools
to
include
university
or
corporate
settings,
we
must
think
about
the
results
of
my
systems
thinking
in
different
terms
-­‐
terms
that
again
involve
more
of
an
ecosystem
change
possibility.
Government
budgets
pegged
on
$120
barrel
oil
and
the
impact
on
any
21st
century
high-­‐cost
tech-­‐embedded
learning
system
are
examples
of
the
need
to
conceptualize
systems
thinking
with
change
thinking
for
speciBic,
more
adaptable
designs
for
example.
In
sum,
the
rationale
for
changing
our
Division
names
comes
from
its
very
strong
roots
which
are
growing
to
expand
our
design
thinking.
Here
we
include
more
‘space’
for
designing
well
beyond
organizational
and
disciplinary
contexts
–
including
the
necessary
domains
of
leadership
(for
change)
as
well
as
learning
situations,
IT,
economics,
history
and
politics,
for
example.
Systems
Thinking
and
Change
builds
upon,
rather
than
replaces
the
visionary
work
of
our
collective
to
open
up
inclusive
conversation
and
joint
research
aimed
at
expanding,
not
limiting
our
thinking
about
system
mental
models
and
ecologies
of
learning
in
the
context
of
technologies
(Cabrera,
2009).
It
invites
change,
systems,
technology,
learning
and
leadership
scholars
together
in
AECT.
References
Cabrera,
D.
(2009).
Systems
thinking:
Four
universal
patterns
of
thinking.
Saarbrucken,
DE.
VDM.
Ackoff,
R.
L.
(1971).
Towards
a
system
of
systems
concepts.
Management
Science,
17,
11.
661-­‐671.
Ackoff,
R.
L.,
&
Emery,
F.
E.
(1972).
On
purposeful
systems:
An
interdisciplinary
analysis
of
individual
and
social
behavior
as
a
system
of
purposeful
events.
Chicago,
IL.
Atherton.
Cabrera,
D.
(2009).
Systems
Thinking:
Four
universal
patterns
of
thinking.
Saarbrucken,
DE.
Verlag
Dr
Mueller.
Kowch,
E.
G.
(2013).
Wither
thee,
Educational
Technology?
Suggesting
a
critical
expansion
of
our
epistemology
for
emerging
leaders.
TechTrends,
57,
5,
11-­‐27.
Reigeluth,
C.
M.
(2015
in
press).
Systemic
change
for
schools.
AECT
Policy
Brief
Retrieved
online
at:
http://aect.site-­‐ym.com/forums/Posts.aspx?
topic=1070472
Reigeluth,
C.M.,
&
Duffy,
F.M.
(2008).
The
AECT
FutureMinds
initiative:
Transforming
America’s
school
systems.
Educational
Technology,
48
(3),
45-­‐49.
Also
published
as
Reigeluth,
C.M.,
&
Duffy,
F.M.
(2010).
The
AECT
FutureMinds
initiative.
In
F.
M.
Duffy
(Ed.)
(2010),
Dream!
create!
sustain!:
Mastering
the
art
&
science
of
transforming
school
systems
(pp.
352-­‐361).
Leading
Systemic
School
Improvement
Series.
Lanham,
MD:
Rowman
&
LittleBield
Education.
Gharajedaghi,
J.
(2011).
Systems
thinking
(3rd
Ed.)
New
York,
NY:
Kaufmann.
Clegg,
S.,
Harris,
M.,
and
HopBl,
H.
Managing
Modernity.
Oxford:
Oxford
University
Press.
Senge,
P.
M.
(1990).
The
Bifth
discipline.
New
York,
NY:
Doubleday.

8. SUMMARY OF POLICY BRIEF-
SYSTEMIC CHANGE FOR SCHOOLS
Backstory from the Author
For many years I have pushed AECT to adopt advocacy statements. I chaired the AECT Advocacy
Committee in 2004 to put the mechanism in place, but it was not adopted then. So I was delighted to
find out that the Policy Briefs were established last year. I believe such statements are an important
responsibility of both individual scholars and their professional associations. As scholars, we owe it to
those who pay our salaries to not only advance knowledge, but also to help others benefit from that
knowledge.
I have a strong conviction that systemic transformation of education (paradigm change) can
significantly improve the lives of millions of people, so I felt strongly that AECT should do what it can
to help make it happen. Hence, this policy statement.
Charlie Reigeluth
Charles M. Reigeluth prepared the Policy Brief, Systemic Change for Schools.
A summary of this Policy Brief is provided here. The complete Brief can be found at
the Systemic Thinking and Change web site - landing pages: http://aect.site-ym.com/
members/group.aspx?id=79885
The
AECT
Policy
Brief,
states
that
advocates
for
school
district
change
should
engage
in
a
process
of
transformation
from
standardized,
time-­‐based,
teacher-­‐centric
instruction
to
customized,
attainment-­‐based,
learning-­‐centered
instruction,
using
technology
throughout
school
operation,
particularly
in
instructional
settings.
Reigeluth
states,
“We
cannot
and
should
not
expect
a
system
designed
for
the
Industrial
Age
to
serve
the
needs
of
Informational
Age
communities.”
The
Brief
calls
for
“systemic
change”
of
educational
organizations.
This
new
paradigm
requires
a
complete
change
in
the
roles
of
parents,
teachers,
administrators
and
technologies.
Students
need
to
change
from
passive,
teacher-­‐directed
learners
into
active,
self-­‐directed
learners.
Teachers
must
become
designers
and
facilitators
of
student
work
and
mentors.
Parents
must
become
partners
in
their
children’s
learning;
and,
technology
must
facilitate
planning,
instruction
and
assessment
for
student
learning.
In
the
paradigm-­‐change
process,
the
‘unit
of
change’
could
be
a
charter
school
or
a
school
district,
which
should
encompass
all
stakeholders,
organizational
levels,
with
administration
and
governance
systems.
There
are
five
actions
that
must
occur
in
the
change
process
within
“a
culture
of
developmental
or
transformational
leadership
that
empowers
all
stakeholders
to
be
leaders.”
It
is
recommended
that
educators,
policymakers,
and
union
leaders
become
active
players
in
initiating
and
carrying
through
systemic
changes
in
schools.