Eighty-Second Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education

The 1983 NSS1E vearbook is particularlv timely in view of the current interest in educational excellence. The chapter authors present a balanced s-ien of theory and practice, supported by illustrative case studies. In the first chapter, Norman Sprinthall and Lois Thies-Sprinthall identify key traits of cognitive developmental theory as applied to adult learners. They present evidence that people who hace reached higher cognitive levels behave in more flexible ways, process alternatives more easily, and generate and test different hypotheses. Research in this area is new and relatively limited, but the concept of continuous adult capacity for growth, change, and flexibility gives staff development practitioners reason for enthusiasm. John Goodlad's chapter supports his position that the individual school is the most logical unit for improvement. tie insists that on-site staff development should deal with the "real" problems of the school-absenteeism, drugs and alcohol, parental dissatisfaction. iHe also points out what most staff developers know: few districts support site-based staff development focused on instructional matters, much less other problems identified as significant by a faculty group. His chapter has much appeal from an empirical point of view, but in these days when the economic and philosophical tide is running in a nearly diametrically opposed direction, it is hard not to shake one's head and mutter, "I agree completely, but . . ." Phillip Schlechty and Betty Lou Whitford continue to deal with the organizational context and functions of staff development, but from a somewhat different perspective than Goodlad. The factors that facilitate learning for adults, they claim, oppose the primary goal of improving learning for students. For example, released time for teachers for staff development mas take awsas from student learning time. And because continuing education is not directly linked to a "legitimizing" goal, such as student learning, resources are "highly problematic and subject to coutiullu negotiation." Thus, the rcsponsihbilih for continuing adult education is frequentlv delegated to higher education institutions, which do have legitimate authority, but which arc ncarls imnunice from influence by schools. The authors conclude that schools and uniiiersitics must join to form a new type of organization that unifies delivcr of servSices to students, conducts research and dc\clopment activities, and collaborates ill the professional preparation of teachers. Schlechty and Whitford *warn that staff development can enhance latent sources of conflict in schools; activate competitive actions between and among school buildings, departments, and administrative units; "drive an eVCl deeper wedge between groups in schools, and create negative as well as positive effect." This is not welcome information to those who perceive staff dcevelopmcint as a way of improving and enhancing human relationships and organizational functioning. However, recognizing the potential for negative effect may help to maximize the positive effect. The authors accurately point out that staff development supports both stability and change. This is a thought-prosoking perspective since most staff development people see themselves as change agents and are much more attuned to issues of change than they are to maintaining stability Staff devclopment should establish, enhance, and maintain.