Failure to Communicate

 In 2017 I was introduced to a new communication framework called the Grapevine Model. At the time I was serving as headmaster of Christian Community School in White House, Tennessee.  Two consultants came to help us facilitate the plan. It was designed to build collaboration toward the goal of excellence in education. The model consisted of four steps: Up, Out, Down, and Around. It was presented to our faculty advisory team and readily adopted as our model for future communications. 

Learning about this new pattern of communication caused me to reflect on a certain unsuccessful attempt I had made when I was an administrator. I remembered particularly the events that led to the "welding fiasco" at Adamsville High School in the mid-1990s. I had been principal of AHS for approximately fifteen years. We had an outstanding welding instructor, Jerry Sweat, who was in a career-ending truck accident in a January ice storm. It was very difficult to find a qualified and capable replacement. During the next four months we used two substitute teachers who rotated days of teaching in welding until the end of the school year.  It wasn't ideal but it was the best we could do. 

In the summer of that year we hired a first-year instructor as the replacement. I was hoping that we had solved our problem. Mr. Sweat had always been on top of the program in proper safety measures, skill development, and discipline. His students had followed his lead. But as school started that August, the program began to disintegrate before our very eyes. The classes lacked structure and order and the new teacher, though a good man, did not have the skill to handle the situation.

After exploring solutions for several months, I decided that the best thing to do was to finish the term and then discontinue it for the spring semester. With the classes spiraling out of control, something had to be done to get the attention of the students. Welding is a class that requires procedures which teach skills while ensuring safety and organization. Attempts had been made to get the attention of the students. We simply had hired the wrong man for the job.

In view of this, I approached the superintendent of schools and suggested that we discontinue the program for the spring semester. I also communicated to our school board member who represented our district. I even discussed this proposed plan with the superintendent a second time. He agreed with me that this could be done. I was convinced that we could not continue our program with the current instructor and that it should be abolished temporarily. Both the superintendent and board member agreed with this plan. After receiving the green light for this action, I then began to share the plan with faculty and students.

Little did I know that I had created a storm. Students and parents were upset. In hindsight I believe that some of the vocational teachers were working silently trying to overturn my decision. Although only one parent called me about his concerns, students and their parents were circling the wagons, so to speak. They were addressing their frustrations with the other board members and packed the courthouse at the next regular school board meeting.

I was asked to attend the meeting and address the problem, which I did, but to no avail. The school board voted 3-2 to continue the class for the spring semester, overthrowing my decision. Two board members who would have probably supported me were absent, but even a 4-3 vote is not a platform for progressive movement.

So where did I fail to pass along information according to the aforementioned Up, Out, Down, and Around model? I believe I communicated Up when I, on more than one occasion, presented the proposed plan to my boss and our District 2 school board member. Although I conveyed the plan to my two assistant principals, I failed to get input from others who were affected by this decision such as faculty members who were part of the vocational department. Also, I could have brought it up to the principal's advisory committee, faculty advisory committee, and even our student council. Bottom line, I did not adequately communicate Out before going Down (to those "under" my care, the students) and Around (to the parents and community). I wish I had know this model then.

Through my lack of wisdom, I didn't explain my vision well to all concerned. Because of this, the reactions of many became a personal attack on me with accusations that I did not value vocational education. My message got highjacked by others. It was not their fault. Through my overly confident approach I created this fiasco. What a disruption it caused! The Grapevine Model would have been very helpful to us all during that time, but it would be years before I understood it.

Now you are probably thinking--how did this fiasco end? Well, it ended in a positive way for each group. I knew that if students and parents could overturn an administrator's decisions that easily by going to the school board, I could not continue as the administrator of AHS. So I decided to resign at the end of the school year and seek employment at another school. A group of parents heard about my intentions and filled the courtroom at a special called meeting in protest. It was now parents and students against each other. Fred Carroll, Assistant Principal, worked with the superintendent and reached a compromise proposal to which I agreed. It included the stipulations that allowed us to hire a new instructor and furthermore to require all students in the welding class to make application to enroll in the spring semester if they so desired and were approved. It was the solution that pulled us back together as a school and community.

What a journey because of my failure to communicate well. Sometimes it takes years to understand what happens along the way. Let me recommend the Grapevine Model. Leaders understand the value of effective and timely communication.

 Remember, I believe we are all leaders regardless of our position.