Schools

Three Synodal Priorities for Catholic School Boards

August 29, 2024

In Meitler’s work across the country, we find some unique elements in each of the schools, parishes, or dioceses we partner with, but we also see many commonalities or trends. One trend we encounter in multiple locations around the country is a desire to explore different governance models for Catholic schools. The traditional parochial school governance model works well in some places but not all. Some pastors have little knowledge about education, and their strengths are more spiritual than administrative. In addition, pastors usually have many responsibilities and demands on their time, and it can be hard for them to prioritize school governance. In those situations, the traditional parochial school governance model does not serve either the school or the pastor well.

One way to shift the burden off the pastor and strengthen the school’s ability to carry out its mission is to create a strong and effective board for the school. Most Catholic schools have a board of some type (79.5%, according to the most recent data from the National Catholic Education Association). Not all of them, though, are strong and effective. They may not have received much training on best practices. They may approach their work as if “advisory” means “passive,” – or they may take the opposite approach and try to claim more authority than they actually have. They may not have conducted strategic recruiting to ensure that board members have relevant skills and experiences. When a board is strong and effective, however, it can significantly impact the school’s success.

There exists a profound connection between the work of Catholic school boards and the processes of consultation and discernment associated with the Vatican’s Synod on Synodality. This connection is not just a theoretical one, but it can directly influence the priorities of Catholic school boards. The insights that emerge from the Synod on Synodality, with its theme of “For a Synodal Church: Communion, Participation, and Mission,” provide a deeper understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the board members.

Mission: The “journeying together” that synodality calls us to is not a self-focused journey but a journey toward mission. The point of establishing a board is to strengthen a school’s ability to carry out its mission, and each conversation that a board has needs to stay focused on its mission. Sometimes, board members need to grow in their commitment to that mission. As a school principal, I remember that some parents would join the board to strengthen the school for their children. Over time, they would begin to care not just about their 4^th grader but the entire 4^th grade, and then gradually for the entire school. Some of them also needed to grow in appreciating not just the mission of the school but also the mission of the whole parish and even the broader church. Board orientations should make clear to new members that they are called to have that expanded vision. Each board member is a valuable part of the school's mission, and their contributions are integral to the school's success.
Communion: In its very nature, our church is a communion – a community of people in communion with one another and in communion with God. Boards should strive to reflect that communion and include diverse members. While engaging all the people of God, synodality is not grounded in the model of politics but instead the model of communion. Politics often sinks into conflict and competition as people seek their interests. On the other hand, Communion calls us to set aside our own interests as we care for one another and listen together for the will of the Holy Spirit. The prayer that opens each board meeting can remind us of that communion and prepare us for that shared listening.
Participation: Synodality reminds us that all of the faithful share in the mission of the church and that the Holy Spirit has given all of the faithful spiritual gifts in baptism – gifts that they are called to share for the good of the Church and the world, and that the church is called to recognize and promote. Councils allow schools to tap into an expanded pool of people’s gifts to support the school’s mission, and they should be attentive to people’s gifts when they seek members. The expectation at each board meeting should be the board members' full participation. I have told board members in the past that they should assess their participation after each meeting. Did they provide some information? Did they share a perspective? Did they ask a question? Did they leave with a task to accomplish? A board that functions in a way that facilitates that kind of participation is a board that honors the presence of the Holy Spirit in all of its members, guiding and inspiring their work.

We are all learning how to better “journey together” in a synodal way as a Church. A school board that prioritizes communion, participation, and mission will make real progress toward being faithful and effective. This journey is not without its challenges, but it is in overcoming these challenges that we grow and learn, becoming more effective in our roles.

Michael Taylor

New Synodal Models for Parish Pastoral Councils

August 26, 2024

The gathering of representatives from around the world to the 2023 Synod on Synodality suggested that parish pastoral councils should, like parish finance councils, be mandatory in canon law rather than elective as they currently are. Now, it is up to the local bishop in consultation with the presbyteral council to choose pastoral councils and to establish guidelines for their functioning. A revision of canon law will address that question.

In the United States, the over half a century experience with pastoral councils has been mixed. Some bishops and pastors alike have either struggled with the notion of consulting the laity on pastoral matters or have minimized the council’s role. Unlike the members of finance councils who are chosen because of their knowledge of financial matters, there are sentiments that pastoral council members “know little about the mission of the church and parish ministries” or “are chosen more for their popularity than any expertise.” In short, some feel that pastoral council members mean well but accomplish little.

Actually, good lay leadership is essential in any effective parish today. Perhaps the affirmation of pastoral councils by the Synod is an opportunity to take a closer look at the models which have been used rather than blame the bishops, pastors, or laity for the shortcomings of pastoral councils.

When most Americans heard the word “council” in the 1960’s, the predominant image that people had was of a “city council.” Residents could run for this office and represented a certain geographical area. One of the council members was even elected as president. Most of the city councils operated under Robert’s Rules of Order. This city council model was adopted by most dioceses for council use. Over the years, dioceses have done their best to baptize the model or to make improvements. Whether to involve the laity in planning pastoral activity is not the issue. How we involve them is. When we hear “council,” rather than looking to local examples, we should be looking to the Acts of the Apostles.

In the Acts of the Apostles, gathering disciples together to discern new direction or address important issues was how the early church functioned. Over time, these gatherings were restricted to clergy and bishops. The Second Vatican Council called for a re-introduction of this function, especially on the local level in dioceses and parishes. Trying to consult with 12 people rather than hundreds or even thousands at a time seemed more practical. The Synod experience suggests how effectively models patterned after it might work.

What might these synodal models look like?

The synodal model will focus on one or two gatherings per year of parishioners, over a day-long or multiple evening format. All parishioners are welcome to be involved in the process in a few ways.

Topics for the parish council or synod meeting can be surfaced from staff and ministry team members and then refined through a parish survey.
The council or synod gathering is then held to discuss a slate of topics and to determine which topics should be addressed by ministry teams. In some cases, new ministry teams may need to be established to address new ministry needs. The gathering can be one day or more, two separate days or over multiple evenings. The activities of discussing topics and determining those which will be acted upon can be separated.
Existing or new ministry teams, with staff assistance, can be directed to develop a strategy to put the new ministry needs in place.
The parish leadership team – a group of parish leaders, usually the pastor and pastoral staff – can help with the organization and oversight of the process. If desired, one staff member can coordinate the council or synod, but the logistics will involve many people, depending on how simple or elaborate a parish may want the experience to be.

What are the advantages of a new model for pastoral councils?

Every parishioner can provide ideas and thoughts through a survey. Surveys can be online, conducted in the pew, sent via email or snail mail or any combination of options to reach as many participants as possible.
The actual council or synod gathering allows parishioners to talk with one another about faith, ministry, and care for others. The format should allow for as much conversation, listening, and reflection as possible.
The whole council or synod process is directly aligned to other parish organizations, such as the leadership team, pastoral staff, and ministry teams. All of them, including the finance council, have a setting to pray, share, and act together.
The model is designed to engage the Spirit to guide parishioners to surface new direction or address issues and to lead to action. The phrase “do-nothing-councils” could disappear from our lexicons.
Diocesan pastoral councils can also be organized around the parish models by collecting the ministry plans from the parish gatherings and discerning how the diocese can support and enhance them throughout the diocese. The model could create a closer relationship between diocese and local parishes.

Like the introduction of any new model, more detail and best practices will be needed before a comfort level is achieved. Thanks to the Synod on Synodality, a new parish pastoral council model does look very promising.

The “How” of Professional Learning

July 15, 2024

(Part one in a two-part series)

When searching for information on professional development and what works for teachers, an inquiry will surface titles such as “effective professional development in 5 easy steps…” or “strategies for effective professional development…” These beg the question, “Would I want to offer ineffective professional development to teachers?” Yet, those of us who have worked in education recognize the challenge of finding professional development opportunities that meet the needs of the myriad of professionals working in schools with a broad range of expertise, knowledge and skills. Coupling this goal of meeting the professional learning needs of the many differently skilled faculty members with an equal desire to have all PD have a direct impact on student learning adds to the challenge.

One of the sources I recently discovered that provided well researched insight into this topic came from the Research Partnership for Professional Learning (PL) in October of 2022. The report, titled Building Better PL: How to Strengthen Teacher Learning, attracted me to it as the introduction notes the recent advancements in PL that are focused on improving teacher practice and student learning. According to their research, the two key components to PL are the “how” and the “what.” This information aligns well with my experience of working with 50+ schools and hearing from teachers as to what works and what doesn’t work and seeing firsthand the direct correlation between good PL and improved student outcomes. A school administrative team can offer the best content but, if not delivered in a manner that resonates with best practice, the PL can fall flat. Similarly, the best process without good content has the potential to be viewed as a waste of precious time. In this two-part series, part one will focus on the “how” and part two will focus on the “what.”

The research done by Heather Hill and John Papay identifies well-structured collaboration as a key component to good PL. The key to this lies in the phrase “well-structured,” as loosely formed PLCs and teacher-to-teacher partnerships don’t always equate with improved teaching and learning opportunities. Late start school days meant to provide time each week to faculty professional learning are only effective if the time spent is focused on an identified common purpose. Collaborative practices, like most change oriented opportunities, must be directly linked to shared specific goals.

The other “how” identified by Hill and Papay is the 1:1 coaching model focused on improving instructional practice. While many schools employ instructional coaches, it appears as if this is money well spent particularly if the role of coach isn’t a split duty administrative role and allows the coach to do the necessary pre-work, locate essential resources, and support the instruction that will directly impact student learning. In this time of teacher shortages, the role of coach becomes even more essential as the research on strategic staffing suggests schools need to find more innovative ways to support teachers in doing the work of educating students. Lastly, we must not forget the follow up meetings that accompany successful professional learning opportunities. Providing teachers with set aside time to ask follow up questions, share feedback, improve practice, or challenge assumptions is critical to success. And, as Hill and Papay note, “follow up sessions may serve as a powerful accountability level…” (p. 8).

While there is no one size fits all professional learning program for schools on the market today, we can work to improve our offerings to teachers so they in turn can continue to do the difficult yet rewarding work of educating young people for our future.

Dr. Jackie Lichter

A Living Faith – Part Two

July 9, 2024

This post is part of a series that reflects on how the idea of a living faith can help us look at the challenges of faith formation of faculty and staff in Catholic schools in new and productive ways. Part One explored the insight that a living adult faith is developed more than it is received. This post reflects on how a growth mindset can inform our approach to faculty and staff faith formation.

In terms of academic learning, our perspectives on achievement, growth, and abilities have grown significantly in recent decades. We have come to realize that sometimes students with high test scores may be coasting and not actually growing much over the course of a year, while students with lower test scores may still be learning a great deal and making good progress. This has shifted not only our perspective but also our practices of assessment, with greater use of standardized tests that can measure growth throughout the school year.

In addition, Carol Dweck’s concept of mindset has influenced how we think about student learning. What are the consequences of thinking that intelligence and ability are things that can grow and develop, rather than things that are fixed? A fixed mindset can view challenges as threatening and failure as shameful, while a growth mindset can view challenges as natural and failure as productive. A growth mindset can help us as educators to accept that our students have different starting points and to see all students as capable of meaningful growth – not just the “smart” kids.

How can a focus on growth and the concept of mindset add to the idea of a living faith, especially when it comes to formation of faculty and staff? Do the statements in the previous two paragraphs have some parallels when it comes to faith? Perhaps.

Considering the distinction between achievement and growth: it may be that a teacher who knows and affirms all the teachings of the church may not currently be growing in their faith, while another teacher who doesn’t know as much and who disagrees with some teachings may actually be growing in their faith a great deal. Perhaps we should celebrate the growth of the second teacher as much as we do the knowledge of the first teacher.

Considering mindset: it may be that a fixed mindset in terms of faith leads us to believe that some people just have it and some people just don’t, or to see questions as threatening and doubt as shameful – whereas a growth mindset can help us accept that all faculty and staff have different starting points when it comes to faith, and can help us see questions as productive and doubt as natural.

Accepting that our faculty and staff have different starting points when it comes to faith doesn’t mean that it isn’t a challenge, though. A principal who responded to a Meitler survey wrote that “most often teachers are at varying levels of faith development, and need different supports, so even if you find a high-quality book, speaker series, or retreat, it’s not the right fit for everyone.”

It’s a challenge that we can embrace, though. Just as we strive to differentiate our academic instruction to help learners of varying abilities succeed, we can also differentiate our approach to faith formation of faculty and staff. And we can create a climate that sets an expectation for everyone to grow in their faith without criticizing those with less knowledge or more questions. So applying a growth mindset to a living adult faith suggests this insight.

Insight Two: Growth in faith is to be supported and affirmed, regardless of the starting point.

Michael Taylor

A Living Faith – Part One

June 3, 2024

Faith is at the heart of the mission of Catholic schools. We know that. We also know that the key to making faith the anchor of school culture and the lifeblood of school relationships is to have faculty and staff who themselves are well-formed and filled with faith. Forming faculty and staff in faith, though, entails many challenges. In a recent survey of Catholic school leaders conducted by Meitler, 51% of respondents – and 73% of superintendents who responded – indicated that faith formation of faculty and staff would be a bigger challenge in the coming year than the academic professional development of faculty.

One superintendent who was surveyed expressed that “you might be paddling upstream with formation.” Through their teacher preparation programs, teachers are often more prepared in the areas of curriculum, instruction, and assessment than they are in the areas of faith, mission, and Catholic identity.

Twenty-five years ago the Catholic bishops of the United States published an excellent document on adult faith formation called Our Hearts Were Burning Within Us.

In that document, the bishops looked at important aspects of adult faith, beginning with the statement that a mature adult faith is a living faith. Using that idea of a living faith as a lens will help us with the challenges of faith formation of faculty and staff in Catholic schools. It won’t erase those challenges, but it will help us look at them in new and productive ways.

Insight One: A living adult faith is developed more than received.

One of my previous jobs was at a lay ministry formation center where we were working on developing a faith formation program for faculty and staff. We had a group of people working diligently on outlining the curriculum for the program. We were focused on content – what did we need to teach them about Scripture, what did we need to teach them about doctrine, what did we need to teach them about morality and sacrament and church history?

We were treating faith as a set of building blocks (which we had, and most of the faculty and staff didn’t). If we just gave each of them the building blocks of our course offerings, then the pieces would add up to faith.

After we had completed our curriculum and had begun implementing the faith formation program, though, I had an epiphany. This epiphany came through the words of a young adult woman on a panel at a workshop that our Archdiocese sponsored. This young adult woman said that she was still an active Catholic primarily because of the youth ministry program she had experienced in her parish – more so than the religious education program at that same parish. She said, “In the religious ed program they focused on the knowledge that we didn’t have, but in the youth ministry program they focused on the faith that we did have and worked to help us grow that faith.”

Around that same time, I was reading Our Hearts Were Burning Within Us, and reflecting on passages like this: “Faith is living and active, sharing many of the qualities of living things: it grows and develops over time; it learns from experience. … Adults need to question, probe, and critically reflect on the meaning of God's revelation in their unique lives in order to grow closer to God.”

The statement from the young woman and the statement from the bishops’ document helped me realize that I had been forgetting that an adult is an active participant in their own faith formation, not a passive recipient. I had been focused on the content rather than on the person and the process.

That process needs to be one that prompts the faculty member or staff member to “question, probe, and critically reflect.” They do need content, so that they have something to reflect on, but the content is the starting point, not the ending point. Once some content is presented, there needs to be an opportunity for them to reflect on how they can connect that bit of content to their own faith, to their life, and to their work. Over time, your faculty and staff will be more deeply formed because they will have developed an extensive web of connections between faith and life. In the words of one of my colleagues here at Meitler, forming faculty and staff for mission is not only about what you pour into them but even more about what you draw out of them.

Faith formation will still be a challenge, but if we remember that a living adult faith is developed more than received and that our processes need to honor the fact that adults are active participants in their own faith development, our faith formation programs for faculty and staff are likely to have greater buy-in and greater impact.

(Read next: part two of this blog post, which looks at a living faith and a growth mindset.)

Michael Taylor

Schools

meitler