Solving a "wicked" problem: knowledge management systems can create new educational environments where resources are expended on proactive activities, such as closing the achievement gap.

Closing the achievement gap is not just a goal. It is a mandate that calls us to redirect our systems to accelerate student achievement and dissolve the increasing gaps among a diverse student population.

This will mean doing things differently, letting go of some past practices, opening our minds and classroom doors to collaboration, considering new ideas and refining our repertoire of solutions that work. Knowledge-management systems can serve as organizers for making the shared collection of knowledge and solutions accessible to the community.

Have we been on the right track with our strategies in attempting to solve the achievement gap? The solution requires a research-based and collaborative response on the part of educators at all levels. A solution process, supported by the efforts of professional networks and development teams, creates a new educational environment where resources are expended on proactive activities rather than on fixing a problem that should never have grown to the point of even being named.

Closing the achievement gap is a wicked problem. Because of its dynamic and evolving nature, the solution remains elusive during the problem-solving process. "Wicked" problems are ones for which each attempt to create a solution changes the understanding of the problem. They cannot be solved in a traditional linear Fashion, because the problem definition evolves as new possible solutions are considered and/or implemented (Rittel and Webber, 1973). The research regarding this science of wicked problem-solving has application to our work of closing the achievement gap.

In order to confront wicked problems and avoid the "solution-of-the-month syndrome," new leadership is needed. Good leaders, at home with the ambiguities of a problem like closing the achievement gap, have the capacity to engage the educational community to flourish in a dynamic environment.

Leadership that manages knowledge

If knowledge is the capacity for effective action (Senge, 1990), and knowledge is temporary but learning is continuous, then we can identify the key attributes of leadership that manages knowledge as:

* Fostering continuous learning as part of professional work;

* Providing opportunities for educators to continually expand their repertoire;

* Communicating expectations for participation and contributions among educators;

* Establishing knowledge leadership groups to inform and refine the system by identifying priorities, needs and resources;

* Using technology to inform professional learning; and

* Facilitating the transformation of data and information into knowledge that can be applied to practice.

The knowledge leader who manages the integration of people, content and technology is a key element of a knowledge system. The knowledge leader confronts a wicked problem with the right people, who have the ability to lead and sustain a change commitment system-wide. As they begin the system-wide initiative, they move from working in independent silos into an arena of-collaboration.

This system-wide effort, in turn, supports more and more stakeholders in having equal access to what they need to do their work. All members of the professional community are invited and have access to the core knowledge that drives their work. They continually mine the research, resources and success models toward the goal of accelerating student and adult learning in schools. They construct new understandings as they convert knowledge rote action.

Content

Content, the second key element era knowledge system, is the initial deliverable. Content includes the collection of archives (research, tools, success models and other resources) formally held by individuals in the system. The work of establishing a structure and process aligned with a shared goal is what makes knowledge utilization possible. Establishing this structure and process supports the creation of a professional community that:

* Agrees on the content relevant to the problem;

* Continually refines and adjusts the content through collaborations:

* Reviews new information and results to assess progress: and

* Makes informed decisions to include new ideas and delete those no longer serving their purpose and goals.

Technology

Technology is the third key element. Most knowledge management systems are Web-based, interactive, iterative, intuitive and support knowledge utilization and professional networking. When designing or selecting a knowledge management system, knowledge leaders consider the level of readiness of their constituents to access technology Some basic considerations include:

* User friendly interface;

* Adequate bandwidth requirements:

* One to two clicks away from needed information:

* Support for people's transition from a print world process to a digital process: and

* A design that is scaleable to accommodate users' levels of readiness and changing needs.

Closing the gap in San Diego County

In 2002, members of the language arts team in the San Diego County Office of Education realized that their backpack was overheaded. They had too many well intentioned programs, initiatives and community efforts, many of which were not necessarily aligned with the newly adopted programs and the content standards.

Furthermore, they did not have the resources to sustain current programs and implement the new standards based reading programs mandated by the state. The task of teaching reading would be overburdened by too many great ideas and multiple purposes.

After much soul-searching, the team began to realize the implementation of. a Web-based delivery system for a standards based program gave them an opportunity to establish a common focus and set expectations for all students. They agreed to work together to build a common knowledge base that is rich in the research, concepts and best practices for reading instruction delivered online.

The language arts team identified a strategic goal to build a system guided by the language arts content standards. The system would reflect a common language and structure for implementing the adopted reading programs. They began by reviewing current programs and practices. They defined shared purposes. Programs and practices that were redundant or no longer aligned to their goal and purpose were phased out.

As team members worked through this process, they identified the most critical services, support and information needed in the county's 42 districts. This activity was undertaken with the intent to align the repertoire for teaching reading.

The team initiated actions to make reading and writing a cohesive priority for all students. A systems approach would result in a higher probability of accelerating student achievement with newly mandated processes. The Language Arts Standards Management System provides coherence for the structure, process and content For implementing standards based instruction.

Subsequently, other core content teams have engaged in the design and development of Standards Management Systems for mathematics, science and history-social studies. Each development team began by establishing priorities for its content area and aligning those priorities with key resources. The primary purpose of each system is to manage, inform and monitor standards-based instruction.

The Knowledge Leadership Team evolved out of this value-added county service. As county leadership began to look beyond content-area support, a companion need emerged from the Superintendent's Achievement Gap Task Force. Schools and districts needed the best practices distilled to focus deep systemic change, accelerate adult and student learning, and create a culture of continuous improvement to close the achievement gap.

Six effective practices

The Knowledge Leadership Team researched high-performing environments in business and education, identifying six effective practices. The practices represent what works in equitable, coherent and successful schools. These effective practices include:

* Aligning board, district and site instructional leadership;

* Providing standards based teaching and learning for all students:

* Establishing collaborative parent and community partnerships;

* Building effective culture, climate and communication;

* Offering high quality professional development; and

* Providing cohesive accountability and assessment systems.

These six practices a provided a research-based foundation and structure to organize and inform the work of the knowledge leadership team. These practices are the structure to organize the knowledge management system to close the achievement gap.

The knowledge management system provides a greater understanding of the metrics and impact of the achievement gap as well as tools to close the gap, including group process strategies, research, success models, networks and other resources.

The vision of a system-wide solution in San Diego County is emerging through the sponsorship of knowledge leaders converging people, content and technology. The knowledge management system shared digital file cabinet is becoming a common ground for study, review and refinement of practices. This beginning work is opening the door to more focused, coherent work aimed at the common goal of student achievement.

The team expects that as educators continue to meet over time, they will distill, refine and delete practices, creating a universal community collection that is dynamic and represents what works in current environments. They will continuously review lessons learned and easily incorporate the wisdom into their work.

Peter Drucker (1992) writes that "the largest and easiest gains in knowledge work come from redefining the task and eliminating what need not be done." Knowledge leaders convene professional learning communities to engage in this sorting and priority-setting process. Knowledge leaders optimize the dynamics of converging people, content and technology by using a knowledge management system as a "breakthrough tool."

Knowledge leaders are acutely aware that their stakeholders have varying levels of readiness for a technology-based solution. They plan their design, adjust their expectations and work to support those varying levels. The knowledge management system then serves participants at all levels as the knowledge leaders coach people in moving from one level to the next.

Historically, educators have invested resources in learning organizations professional learning communities and knowledge workers. In most instances we have viewed these investments as professional development techniques occurring at scheduled times.

A knowledge management system provides an on-demand venue and integrated structures for professional development leading to system-wide change. Because of the dynamic nature of the knowledge management system itself, methods to accelerate learning and close the achievement gap will continue to evolve as professional educators make new contributions to their self-nourishing system.

References

Applehans, W.; Globe, A. and Laugero, G. (1999). Managing Knowledge: A Practical Web-Based Approach. Addison Wesley: New York, NY.

Bailey, S. (1997). Changing Systems and Mindsets A System's Guide. Bailey Alliance: Vacaville, CA.

Brown. J. and Duguid, P. (2000). "The Social Life of Information." Harvard Business Review 76(4), 17-21: Boston, MA.

Corallo, C. and McDonald, D.H. (2004). What works with Low Performing Schools: A Review of the Research. (www.relnetwork.org/news/May(12/05AEL.html.)

Drucker, P.F. (1992). Managing for the future: The 1990s and beyond. Truman Talley Books: New York, NY.

Fullan, M. (2004). Leading in a Culture of Change: Personal Action Guide and Workbook. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

Grennon-Brooks, J. (2002). Schooling For life: Reclaiming the Essence of Learning. Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development: Alexandria, VA.

Horsley, D.L., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (Fall 1998). "Concerns-Based Adoption Model, CBAM Brings Order to the Tornado of Change." Journal of Staff Development. Vol. 19, No. 4.

Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translation research into action. ASCD: Alexandria, VA.

Petrides, L.A. & Guniney, S.Z. (December 2002). Knowledge Management for School Leaders: An Ecological Framework for Thinking Schools. Teachers College Press Record.

Reeves, D. (2000). The 90/90/90 Schools: A Case Study. Accountability in action: A blueprint for learning, organization. Advanced Learning Press: Englewood, CO.

Resnick, D.P., & Resnick, L.B. (1985). Standards, curriculum, and performance: A historical and comparative perspective. Educational Researcher, 14, 5-20. Abstract from www.lrdc.pitt.edu/research.htm.

Rittel, H. and Webber, M. (1973). "Dilemmas in a general theory of planning." Policy Science, 4, 155-69.

Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of Learning Organizations Doubleday: New York.

Wheatley, M.J. (April-June 2001). The real work of knowledge management. IHRIM Journal. Vol. 5, No. 2.

Wilson, T. D. (2002). "The nonsense of knowledge management." Information Research, 8(1), paper no. 144, (http://InformationR.net/ir/8-1/paper144.html).

Mary Dietz is a consultant ass/sting schools in building professional learning communities and Knowledge Management Systems. Nancy Giberson is assistant superintendent and Sheridan Barker is director of learning services for Learning Resources & Educational Technology, San Diego County Office of Education.