Report from Tripartite Council 10/09/03

Executive Summary

In August 2003, a sub-committee of the Tripartite Council determined from their analysis of surveys of Council members that there were five strategic questions that need to be answered to guide the work of the network. During the Salt Lake meeting the Council first discussed current practices of the NNER using these strategic questions as organizers.

    1. How well does the NNER live the Agenda?
    2. How well are we sustaining the NNER’s vision, mission, and focus?
    3. How well does the NNER influence political policy, and at what levels?
    4. How adequate are current funding sources?
    5. How well does the NNER manage growth and membership?

Efficacy of Current Practices

The Tripartite Committee made a preliminary assessment of how well current NNER practices would serve during the next 6-7 years in light of the four scenarios also developed by the sub-committee. Those scenarios are listed below with a short description:

  • Sounds of Silence: Domestic and foreign tensions remain as is and life goes on as it is.
  • Bridge Over Troubled Waters: Domestic and foreign tensions heighten, government remains controlling, and the populations reacts with demonstrations and violence reminiscent of the late 1960’s.
  • Easy Street: Domestic and foreign tensions ease, the government reduces controls, but the population remains lethargic.
  • Brave New World: Domestic and foreign tensions ease, government becomes proactive, population supports push for social reform.

In summary, the council generally believed that continuing current practices as is would not be a strong way to deal with the various plausible futures as described by the scenarios. In general they were more optimistic about the likelihood that the NNER’s present practices would be successful in "living the agenda" and in dealing with membership and growth (except in relation to Bridge Over Troubled Waters).

Suggested New Practices and Their Efficacy

Later in the day, the Council used the scenarios as a jumping off place to help them identify strategies or practices that should be adopted in the future. Each of the 9 tables identified 4 priority actions from among the many they brainstormed. These 36 items were narrowed to a listing of the following 9 statements.
    1. NNER needs to diversify its sites, settings, and cadre of involved individuals.
    2. Develop a cohesive, coherent, longitudinal research agenda focused on student learning. (Rational—to provide PreK-20 R & D)
    3. Connect more effectively w/P-16 Agenda. Establish accountability for evaluation of student learning; enacting agenda; and expanding equitable access.
    4. Develop a cohesive, coherent, longitudinal research agenda that provides evidence for decisions that lead to continuous improved learner performance.
    5. Educate community groups to support excellent public education for all and for democratic purposes.
    6. Form a coalition that will identify and promote common goals for educational renewal through research, political activism and publicity.
    7. NNER should strategically collaborate with like-minded organizations.
    8. Establish a government relations committee to develop and communicate positions on public policy, develop the capacity of the membership to be active, lobby on local and national levels, and bring legislators into the conference.
    9. Strategically identify and align with other professional organizations that will embrace and promote the NNER mission.

As a final step the TC members evaluated these nine strategies in light of the four scenarios. In summary, of the nine new practices identified by the group’s as their number one priority, three (6, 7, and 9) call on the NNER to collaborate with other organizations, two (2 and 4) call for an expanded research agenda, and two (5 and 8) call for a more aggressive approach to influencing policy.

Generally the group’s rated these suggested practices as being strong or neutral across all scenarios. As might be expected they were less optimistic about the strength of the practices in the event of the Bridge Over Troubled Waters scenario. It should also be noted that some of the group’s acknowledged they were recording whether they were positive about the practice (ie, they liked it) rather than reflecting whether it would work in relation to a particular scenario.

RWC 12/02/03

[Close Window]

Copyright © 2005 National Network for Educational Renewal. All rights reserved.