text:
Servicios Personalizados
Links relacionados
- Citado por Google
- Similares en Google
South African Journal of Education
versión On-line ISSN 2076-3433
versión impresa ISSN 0256-0100
S. Afr. j. educ. vol.28 no.2 Pretoria may. 2008
School principals' perceptions of team management: a multiple case-study of secondary schools
Hennie van der MeschtI; Zakunzima TyalaII
IProfessor in the Education Department at Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa. He is active in the field of educational leadership and management and in reviewing teacher education programmes. His research interests include educational leadership and phenomenology. E-mail: email@example.com
IITeaches mathematics and isiXhosa at Graeme College, Grahamstown. He holds a Masters' degree in educational leadership and management and his continuing research interests include whole school development and evaluation
The notion of school management through teams (team management), though not a new phenomenon in South Africa, was formalized after the advent of democracy in 1994 and the subsequent reorganization of the education system. The concept was subsequently fleshed out in official documentation where the composition and roles of school management teams (SMTs) were elaborated upon. The notion of team management is rooted in theories that stress participation, notably site-based (school-based) management, teamwork, and distributed leadership. We report on a study in which the perceptions of secondary school principals, in Grahamstown, South Africa, of team management were explored. The study was interpretive in orientation, and utilized qualitative data gathering techniques in all (ten) of the state-aided secondary schools in Grahamstown in the Eastern Cape province. We found that, while team management was generally welcomed and even celebrated by principals, there were fundamental tensions surrounding principals' understanding of their leadership roles in a team context. We considers the implications of these findings for leadership development in the context of team management.
Keywords: educational leadership; educational management; leadership development; school management teams; team leadership
A significant development in the South African education system over the past decade has been the move towards site-based management and its associated management approaches, chiefly those that stress participation. The tendency to regard school principals as solely responsible for leadership and management of schools is gradually being replaced by the notion that leadership and management are the prerogative of many, if not all, stakeholders in education (Department of Education, 1996:19). This is evident in a range of policy documents, ranging from the South African Schools Act (1996) to the more recent Draft Policy Framework: Education Leadership and Management Development (undated). The Department of Education has also attempted to give substance to this purpose by providing manuals to guide educational managers in the implementation of decentralised management structures, such as the School Management Team (SMT), the Learners' Representative Council (LRC), and the School Governing Body (SGB).
The political/social imperative to democratize the system as well as the organisation (the school in this case) is strongly supported in literature. There is significant evidence to support the notion that hierarchical, top-down structures are not appropriate for school leadership and management. Owens (2001:327), for example, is of the view that the "... top down exercise of power and centralized control have demonstrably failed to produce the organisational results the advocates of traditional organisational theory claimed it would". Similarly, leadership theory has moved consistently and progressively away from the notion of the single, 'heroic' leader. While transformational leadership (Avolio & Bass, 2004) may still seem to be privileging the power of the individual over many, post-transformational approaches stress participation and teamwork. These developments have occurred within a different conceptualisation of 'organisation', where more rigid notions associated with bureaucracy have gradually given way to more flexible, 'intelligent' constructs, such as in the learning organisation (Jamali, Khoury & Sahyoun, 2006).
It was against this background that in this study we sought to explore secondary school principals' experiences and perceptions of team management, focusing on School Management Teams (SMTs) as the structural sites of participative management within schools.
Literature review
The gradual shift towards site-based (school-based) management in education systems has been a world-wide phenomenon, driven by the dual imperatives of changing societal values and the rate of change (Walker, 1994:38). Site- based management is seen as having the potential to reflect social values of democratic participation as well as to respond quickly and flexibly to contextual challenges (ibid.). The increased emphasis on participation in management has resulted in a renewed interest in teamwork, and in team management and leadership in particular.
Concurrent with this development has been the evolution of leadership approaches which de-emphasise the individual leader and stress group or team leadership. One of the most prominent of these is distributed leadership (MacBeath, 2005; Bauer & Bogotch, 2006). In this brief literature review we attempt to find conceptual and practical coherence among three inter-related concepts: site-based management, teamwork, and team leadership. The coherence thus established serves as a conceptual framework for the study of principals' perceptions of team leadership in the context of SMTs in secondary schools.
Site-based management
The devolution of decision-making in schools in South Africa advocated by official documents (from the Task Team Report on Educational Management Development (Department of Education (DoE), 1996) to the more recent (undated) Draft Policy Framework for Educational Management Development rests on an acceptance of site-based management (SBM). SBM is based on democratic principles. It enables broader participation by those 'on site' dealing directly with issues that need to be resolved, people who potentially have 'on site' expertise. It posits a view of the school as an organisation that is less locked into overhead control and authority, working against hierarchical models towards learning organisations (Jamali et al., 2006). But it also significantly problematises the notion of accountability. According to Cheun and Cheng (1996:6), SBM shifts the locus of accountability as "schools shift from external control management to active self-management". In a context of strong "external control management" accountability is relatively unproblematic: the school principal is clearly accountable to external authorities; the staff are accountable to the principal. In SBM, by contrast, lines and areas of accountability can become blurred since the expectation is that all organisation members will be accountable for their practice, to themselves, to each other, and to authority figures.
There is also little evidence to indicate whether SBM has any effect on teaching and learning and curricular practices, the core 'business' of schools. In fact, Bauer and Bogotch (2006:465), reporting on research findings, found that "the relationship of SBM to classroom practice was virtually non-existent."
SBM is, therefore, by no means as unproblematic as it may appear, and the next sections focus on some of the tensions and challenges inherent in the SBM-related concepts of teamwork and distributed leadership.
There is strong support for management through teamwork in literature (Everard & Morris, 1996:156; Hayes, 1997:28; Belbin, 2000:219; Drach- Zahavy & Somech, 2001:52; Sheard & Kakabadse, 2001:133), and in this sense the move towards formalizing team management in school contexts through establishing SMTs is justified.
The advantages of teamwork are also fully documented. Indeed, Stott and Walker (1999:51-52) suggest that "the advantages of teamwork are taken almost for granted, given the extensive coverage in recent education literature". The benefits they mention should be familiar to any student or practitioner interested in team management, including "collaboration, empowerment, co-operation and consultation" (Stott & Walker, 1999:51). They cite arguments that teamwork provides teachers with "a significant role in school decision making", "control over their work environment", and "opportunities to contribute to [a] range of professional roles" (Stott & Walker, 1999:52). Finally, they record the claims that teams can solve problems more creatively than individual leaders and that modern organisations need 'processing machines' to deal with the overwhelming flow of information (Stott & Walker, 1999:53).
More importantly, there is growing understanding of the conditions necessary for effective teamwork, and the characteristics of effective team functioning. These serve as important guidelines for managers who want to take seriously the sobering caution "that it is easy to form so-called teams and then claim that the school is structured 'collaboratively', but unless there are major shifts in thinking ... little real change will result" (Walker, 1994:38-39). These 'major shifts' involve the development of conditions necessary for teamwork, which may broadly be described as two-fold: structural and cultural. By 'structural' is meant the logistical arrangements and decisions that need to be made to accommodate teamwork in a school. 'Cultural' refers to the culture and climate of a school, the less visible norms and values that inform practice, and the resultant ethos that prevails. The argument is that teamwork needs favourable conditions of both a structural and cultural nature to flourish.
Structural support
Schools are by nature highly structured organisations, with (usually) clear lines of hierarchy and accountability (Bush, 2003:45). This feature is systemically linked to the self-evident reality that schools are complex organisations, peopled by complex individuals, often drawn from a range of cultures, all working towards the goal of effective teaching and learning. It would simply be impossible for schools to function without clear procedures, firm guidelines, and clear lines of accountability. This obvious truth is borne out whenever one chooses to visit a dysfunctional school, only to discover that the school is lacking in basic infrastructural and logistical needs, such as a working timetable, or that expectations of teachers and learners are either not spelled out or not taken seriously. Moving towards a 'flatter' structure is therefore a significant challenge, but it is a challenge that needs to be faced if team management is to succeed. A hierarchically rigid organisational structure will clearly work against important attributes of team management, such as flexibility, creativity, and risk-taking (Stott & Walker, 1999:53-56). This implies that organisational structure needs to accommodate teamwork. Walker (1994:39) argues that schools need to nurture "more organic organizational patterns". Organic here is taken to mean patterns that are dynamic, growing in response to needs and projects, as opposed to patterns previously determined and static. The term should, we think, refer not only to the formation and dissolution of teams (as in ad hoc project committees) but also to ways in which groups function. An organic pattern of functioning suggests a climate in which all team members feel free to participate, and conversation is shaped by interest and participation rather than rigid procedure.
A further structural condition is support. Nothing new flourishes without support, and teams are no different. Support here refers to more than but includes logistical and administrative support. Clearly teamwork needs an investment of time, space, even money. Less obviously teams need to have free and easy access to information they may need to tackle problems. But what teamwork needs from the organisation as a whole is clarity concerning their roles and structures, as well as how each team links with other teams and the organisation as a whole (Stott & Walker, 1999:53). Clarity of roles and functions can be difficult to attain. In the case of the SMTs in South Africa, the manuals issued by the DoE provide little assistance in this regard. Clearly these are issues that are expected to be resolved locally, 'on site', suggesting a strong need for principal leadership
Team composition is also viewed as a key structural element. Belbin's (online) work in this regard serves as a benchmark in the field, and his sophisticated model of role allocation to members of teams (co-ordinator, shaper, 'plant', monitor, implementer, teamworker, completer, resource investigator) is widely used and cited. It is on this basis that he argues for heterogeneity, and suggests that "The deliberate creation of homogeneity in a management team has the effect of unbalancing the occupational breakdown of the teams we compose" (Belbin, 1981:20). This argument finds support in Musaazi (1982:54), Bush (1995:49), and especially Drach-Zahavy and Somech (2001:44) who see the diversity in teams as the driving force for the achievement of results because people from different backgrounds bring with them different experiences and different knowledge bases.
But heterogeneity is perhaps a more complex issue in a South African school context where true heterogeneity would ideally include cultural and perhaps ethnic differences too, given the country's transformative agenda. This would be difficult to accomplish at this stage. Despite the democratic environment schools are operating under, most South African school staffs do not yet represent a cross-section of the population. Hence, while heterogeneity in terms of gender, experience, and expertise may be achieved, composing teams that are heterogeneous on cultural and linguistic grounds would hardly be possible. The teams reported on in this study were indeed non-heterogeneous in this sense. Heterogeneity in terms of formal 'seniority' or even experience, by contrast, may be more achievable, though here too it would be difficult given the nature and function of SMTs to manage composition in ways suggested above. It would be desirable, though, since it has the potential, if managed carefully, to work against competitiveness among teachers and foster a spirit of co-operation (Stott & Walker, 1999:56).
Cultural support
Cohesion is widely acknowledged as a key characteristic of effective teams (Stott & Walker, 1999:56; Dione & Yammarino, 2004:181; umanski & Kolenc, 2007:102). Cohesion refers to the extent to which team members 'cohere', feel that they belong and are happy to work together. It also refers to the extent to which team members agree on and identify with the work at hand, and clearly links with structural support in the sense that a team which knows its role in the organisational structure as a whole is more likely to feel a sense of belonging and purpose. Ultimately, though, cohesion is about relationships, and this simple fact raises issues of attitudes and leadership. Among the key values that underpin cohesion are trust, openness, and a willingness to participate (Stott & Walker, 1999:54; Joseph & Winston, 2005:6; Bauer & Bogotch, 2006:454). Stashevski and Kowlowski (2006:66) include "interpersonal attraction, task commitment, and group pride" as key values. These values point to the importance of interpersonal, social relationships in teams, and also highlight the role of the team leader (Belbin's "co-ordinator"). This is an element easily overlooked in teamwork, but it would be naïve to imagine that teams will simply continue to function in the absence of leadership. As Stashevski and Kowlowski (2006:64) put it: "even a team has a dominant person who, for our purposes, can be called a leader who may well play a central role in determining group performance." This leads to the third dimension we discuss, distributed leadership.
Team leadership
As mentioned earlier, the renewed interest in teamwork resonates with approaches to leadership that emphasise group rather than individual input. In terms of the 'task-person' dichotomy that characterises leadership theory, contemporary theories emphasise leadership as relational and 'constructivist' (Lambie, 1995), focused on 'service' (Russell, 2000), and 'distributed' (Macbeath, 2005). Distributed leadership, in particular, provides a useful lens to make sense of leadership in a teamwork context.
It must be noted at the outset that the notion of distributed leadership is different from delegation. Macbeath (2006:354) adopts Rogers' term "symbiosis" to clarify the difference:
Symbiosis is a term used to describe a form of reciprocal relationship in which there exists an implicit give and take and a level of mutual respect. This is by definition different from the concept of 'delegation', which underpins much of thinking about distributed leadership. While delegation is expressed in 'giving' responsibility to others or allowing responsibility by structural default, symbiosis has a more organic quality.
This suggests that leadership (as a construct and phenomenon) be reconsidered; rather than being a function of position and privilege, leadership is seen as an ever-present potential, available to any member of the organisation. Leadership is, in a sense, infused throughout the organisation. Culturally this presupposes high levels of mutual trust and willingness to accept others' leadership; structurally, distributing leadership would seem possible only in organisations that have moved away from traditional hierarchical models. Distributed leadership would seem to be an appropriate approach to follow in leading and managing an organisation in which teamwork is utilised.
Yet distributed leadership is also not unproblematic. Bauer and Bogotch (2006:446) warn that distributing leadership can have negative effects, arguing that "individual possessiveness and security become secondary to the needs of the school". In systems still geared towards rewarding members on an individual basis this could become problematic. A more significant threat seems to be the tension school heads may experience between "holding on and letting go" (Macbeath, 2005:354). This refers to a tension between a desire on the part of school heads to 'let go' and enable the distribution of significant responsibilities, and the opposing desire to 'hold on' for fear of losing control and perhaps being exposed in the event of team failure. Tensions like these are exacerbated by the apparently universal phenomenon of increased state control within an espoused climate of SBM (Gunter, 2004:29; Bush, 1999: 243; Glatter, 1999:254). This is certainly the case in South Africa, where demanding quality assurance measures such as the Integrated Quality Management System are expected to be applied in a 'developmental' way. Macbeath (2005) found significant levels of reservation surrounding distributed leadership in a study conducted in schools in England. One school head felt strongly that: "In the end I'm the one who is accountable, the one whose neck is on the line as it were. So I delegate much leadership but my intuitive style is somehow benevolent dictatorship" (Macbeath, 2005:353). And another claimed he was happy to distribute leadership "... provided I can assemble a staff that is skilled and efficient and trustworthy" (Macbeath, 2005:353). The implication for headship is that leading a school is a balancing act, distributing responsibility as far as possible but not to an extent where "the head becomes so removed from the school because [he or she is] not intervening" (Macbeath, 2005:354).
In closing this section we argue that the formalisation of team management in the form of SMTs in South African schools has rested on the adoption of SBM. The successful implementation of teamwork in a school is likely to require structural as well as cultural support. The most important change required is a shift in how leadership is perceived, and leadership practices that involve distribution of responsibility are more likely to succeed than those which cling to traditional 'heroic' leadership approaches. However, distributing leadership and devolving team-based management brings challenges and tensions, particularly in an era where significant overhead control continues to reinforce the principal's sense of accountability. Perhaps it is as Lucia (cited in Bauer & Bogotch, 2006:465) has argued, that
while mandated policies of accountability and formal leadership roles provided the initial thrust needed to launch ... the distributed cycle, it was within-school relationships based on structures and a collaborative culture that were significant to sustaining a focus on curricular and instructional issues.
Perhaps the most significant ingredient of effective team leadership is the ability to manage human interaction:
Understanding the needs of people for connection and belonging is a critical principle of effective high performing team leadership. People walk through the door to do the right thing each day. Individuals on the team have a significant or less significant degree of need for human interaction and involvement. Understanding the team members and their needs for involvement, contribution and overall social interaction of the team is of critical importance (Wing, 2005:11).
Research question
In this study we set out to explore education leaders' understanding of their roles in a team context. We report on findings of a multiple case study in secondary schools in Grahamstown in the Eastern Cape province in response to the question:
What are school principals' experiences and perceptions of team management in secondary schools in Grahamstown?
Research orientation
This research was situated in an interpretive orientation. Terre Blanche and Durrheim (1999) suggest that the interpretive researcher's purpose is to gain understanding of situations that are complex. According to Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2000:22) "... the central endeavour in the interpretive paradigm is to understand the subject of human experience". Working in this paradigm opens up the opportunity to find out how respondents understand the phenomenon of team management based on their lived experience rather than theoretical knowledge.
Research participants
This study included all the (10) government-aided secondary schools in Grahamstown. The choice of these schools was on the basis of "availability, accessibility and theoretical interest" (Schwandt, 1997:140-141), and also on the understanding that schools from different historical backgrounds may well have been experiencing team management in diverse ways. This diversity is, however, not explored here, since our intention is to present a broad picture across the sample as a whole.
This study was based on a bigger study which probed all SMT members' and teachers' perceptions of team management. Since reporting on all of the findings would exceed the scope of a single publication, the authors decided to report on data gathered from the principals of these schools only. It was felt that principals' perceptions would be especially significant given their perceived positions as the formal leaders of the schools.
Research tools
The first step in the data-collection process was a questionnaire administered to the SMT members of the schools, including the principals. Data from the questionnaires were used to inform follow-up interviews. The questionnaires included open-ended questions to invite honest, personal comments from the respondents (Cohen et al., 2000:255). These questions probed participants' experience and perceptions of their roles within SMTs in managing the school, and their understanding of the opportunities and challenges involved in team management.
Semi-structured interviews were the chief data-collection tools. These allowed for in-depth probing and extended responses. Questions focused on how respondents experienced and perceived team management, probing strengths and weaknesses in particular. The researchers made every effort to encourage respondents to refer to lived experience and narrate lived examples of the perceptions they shared.
To strengthen findings and provide the possibility of triangulation, overt observation of SMT meetings was undertaken where feasible and possible (Cohen et al., 2000:314). Observation was regarded as a supportive or supplementary technique to collect data that may complement or set in perspective data obtained from questionnaires and interviews (Robson, 1993:238). The object here was not to check for accuracy of data, but to help gain a picture of how participants lived what they believed, hence to enrich rather than confirm findings.
In presenting these findings, codes (P1P10) are used to distinguish the respondents. As already mentioned, only principals' responses are discussed. Qualitative data from both the questionnaires and interviews are presented, with references to observation data where appropriate. Findings are presented in three themes identified as significant, namely:
The benefits of team management;
The leadership tension; and
Threats to teamwork.
The benefits of team management
Sharing the load
Data from the questionnaires confirmed that the concept of team management was not regarded as a new phenomenon in schools. However, it emerged that the fomalisation of SMTs had enabled principals to spread the workload of managing schools among staff members, occasionally including post level one teachers in a co-opted capacity. In one of the meetings observed, the principal called in an 'expert' post-level one teacher to participate in deliberations. The idiom "many hands make light work" expressed by P4 captures the idea of sharing the load. Observations of SMT meetings confirmed that in most cases roles were clearly allocated to SMT members.
Empowerment and staff development
A strong benefit identified by respondents was the idea that teachers were empowered through teamwork. For several principals the SMT provided a platform for professional development. P5 told of how he used delegation to "build on people's strengths", for example, by allocating academic tasks to academically inclined teachers. For P3 distributing leadership helped to prepare teachers for when "they apply for senior posts, so wherever they go they don't feel unempowered". And P5 argued that opportunities to grow meant "they're going to become better managers or administrators". Principals also distributed duties such as chairing and finalizing the agenda among SMTs. At the SMT meetings observed it was clear that members had been given the responsibility of managing portfolios within the schools. In four of the schools investigated post-level one teachers who had the "know-how, skills and expertise of some kind" (P1) were included on the SMT. In one case the principal referred to the post level one teacher as an 'expert' when she was invited to participate in deliberations.
Site-based policy development
Another striking feature of some of the principals' leadership was the creative use of policy and official guidelines (such as the SMT Manual). P2 explained that his SMT had designed "additional guidelines" for their internal school policy. P3 argued that school problems were unique and the departmental guidelines were generic, and therefore "you then have to adjust policies and have your own (guidelines) which you can use in a particular school". In similar vein P4 had "formulated guidelines from the experience that we have" and he was also of the view that "HODs need to formulate departmental policy that is in line with the school policy".
The strongest theme to emerge from the data was the notion of participative management which was seen as the cornerstone of team management and the effective functioning of SMTs. Participants generally showed high levels of commitment to participative management. Three respondents P2, P4, and P5 stressed the importance of consultation. As P2 put it, "if I've got an idea I have to sell it so that it can be endorsed in the SMT meeting and then taken from that point to the teachers". P4 warned that unless you consulted "you will be seen as a dictator ... you will lose support". P3 enjoyed the "lovely debates" and said, "You've got to learn to see that difference (of opinions) as a strength rather than a problem". SMT meetings observed showed high levels of free and open debate within a participative climate
In summary, the general picture that emerged was favourably disposed to team management. However, there were also some significant tensions identified by respondents.
The leadership tension
A significant tension may be described as a tension between the leader's role in initiating and driving teamwork on the one hand, and being in control and accountable on the other.
On the one hand, principals saw themselves as team-workers and delegators. P2 and P5 believed that principals were initiators in their schools. P5 preferred to talk about "leadership rather than management" as he believed that leaders "emerge" while managers "are trained"; according to him "management is a structured thing; I like to use the term leadership because with leadership I have got to initiate changes management doesn't come with changes". P1 felt that leadership could "be prompted" in other SMT members. Leadership was therefore not necessarily positional. As leaders they also needed to delegate, though P4 warned, "when you give somebody responsibility, don't interfere, wait for the end result". As leaders, principals were free to exercise their discretion in certain circumstances. P3 felt that as a principal "there are decisions which you've got to take sometimes but it must not be your style of taking decisions alone all the time".
These views were by and large substantiated by observations of SMT meetings; there was considerable evidence that: SMT members participated freely in discussions; chairpersons (usually the principal, but not always) were careful to solicit input; participants' feelings were respected; and participation usually depended on individuals' areas of expertise.
However, running counter to this belief and practice was the inescapable sense that principals felt accountable to the authorities, and therefore sometimes acted independently of others' input. P5 acknowledged the assistance of SMT members, but stressed that "if something goes wrong it starts with me". When it came to accountability, P2 lamented, "really you have to account as an individual. It's not the whole SMT who accounts" and consequently could feel "embarrassed accounting on behalf of other people". P4 claimed that "some principals do everything themselves" because as a principal "You cannot abdicate responsibility give it away to somebody else". He argued that principals needed to:
Accept being accountable because somebody should be accountable ...it [accountability] comes with the package of being a school principal [laughs]. You are paid to take whatever comes and it's also to the position as the principal you have be accountable.
He argued that SMTs were to some extent restricted in their participation:
The principal represents the whole SMT when it comes to the district office ... whatever happens at school comes back to the principal ... it is almost like you are the guilty party you are the guilty person as the principal because you couldn't bring that person around or change his problem.
And he warned: "When there is a problem like a crisis it (the principalship) becomes a very lonely position".
In elaborating on principals' roles, the responses revealed a similar dual nature. Some of their roles seemed purely technical or bureaucratic, such as:
Ensuring that there is a meeting if there is a need for it; ensuring punctuality; accounting to whoever comes to school (such as parents and departmental officials); chairing meetings; monitoring staff; coordinating meetings; being in control; being responsible.
The questionnaire responses similarly emphasised the principal's key role in calling and chairing meetings; responses frequently referred to principals as "having the final say" and being "ultimately accountable".
On the other hand, some of the functions identified in the interviews and questionnaires indicated an acceptance of their roles as human resource developers, such as:
Giving guidance; making use of the staff's skills and talents; being very open and transparent; being involved; setting an example; listening to ideas coming from the SMT.
This tension highlights the fact that team management does not diminish the importance of leadership. Leadership seems even more important in a team environment, both in terms of its role in developing human potential, but also, significantly, in terms of leaders' acceptance of being ultimately accountable, almost on behalf of team members. Hence principals felt they needed to be authoritative at times. P5 remembered being coercive at times: "If I want the staff member to do something and he is not keen on it I'll say 'No, you've got to do it because it needs to be done'".
Threats to team management
One of the challenges that emerged was the realisation that a group of people were not necessarily a 'team'. P1 pointed to the challenge of forming a strong team. He argued that "More effort should be put towards building a team so that you really have a strong team ..." He felt little if any attention had been given to this aspect of teamwork. P3 highlighted personal clashes that arise:
Where people are involved there will always be difference of opinions and personality clashes... there might be problems emanating from staff to other staff ... there might be personal clashes which cannot be accommodated properly, there might be different agendas.
An interesting dimension of team management that emerged was the notion of acting in ways that arise from having to be 'politically correct' rather than truly participative. So for example, because of the political attitudes of some teachers, principals at times felt pressurised to consult more broadly than they wished to. On the question of whether post level one teachers should be included in the SMT, some of the principals took defensive positions. According to P1, if teachers were not included in the SMT:
They (the staff) will not accept it (the resolution) because they were not part and parcel of synthesizing the solution they will reject it; they would oppose the decision to ensure that the planning is done by them as well ... But if there are teachers in the SMT they readily accept whatever the SMT comes up with.
He added:
If I can call a staff meeting without having consulted the SMT members they would disagree vehemently to that; they might boycott the staff meeting because any staff meeting must be sanctioned by the SMT.
According to P5 "if you are working as a team, that team is going to convince the rest of the staff that what you are doing and the decisions you are making are the right decisions", but even he believes that including post level one teachers in the SMT "would create a problem with other post level one teachers because why are they left out?". Interestingly, the questionnaire data revealed that SMTs usually consist only of teachers in promotion posts; other teachers are occasionally 'co-opted' for their expertise, as reported earlier.
P2 also saw "Policies of the department" as threats to team management because they had to make sure that "whatever decision we take is not contrary to any of the policies of the department". Compliance with policy also emerged as an issue for P3 who claimed that "to manage the school on a daily basis based on the departmental policy" was a challenge team management was facing.
Principals also identified variable levels of competence among team members as a threat. P1 stressed that relying on other team members may mean that "You might not meet certain due dates and the major thing is to meet due dates by the department". P4 argued that some teachers were lazy: "You get teachers who would want to do the basic minimum, saying that's where my job description ends. You get teachers who are negative", which obviously threatens to derail attempts at team-building. According to P3: "Working in teams you rely on the weakest person" and "not every HOD is pulling his or her weight". This may lead to some members being overloaded, as P5 explained: "I do a lot of things myself because the staff is overloaded ... experience tells me when they are overloaded".
Disloyalty to the team was another issue that surfaced in the interviews. P2 referred to 'sabotage' as a threat to teamwork:
I would not say to 'sabotage' as it were but they (SMT members) would go around the corner and seem not to agree with you on what you agreed on as the SMT when they meet other colleague teachers and would view the same point in another way.
To P5 this could also occur when "... one or two people who were not part of the discussions go out and cause problems". A more deeply rooted cause of disloyalty may be, according to P3, that "You might not share the same vision and then you'll find disruptive elements within the team ... those are present dangers".
Some principals clearly found it difficult always to trust all team members. P5 believed that teamwork was difficult for the leader because "The job may not be done the way you would like it, you may not get that personal satisfaction". P4 took a similar view, suggesting that some members did not practise what they preached. He explained: "You get people who can tell you the most beautiful things in a meeting situation, the most beautiful ideas; but when it comes to reality it is not implemented". P4 pointed out another reason why some principals preferred to do everything themselves: he recalled his predecessor who kept back information because "He was almost afraid that if he showed somebody, that man will know more and will take over his position". It seemed that the need for personal satisfaction with a job well done could drive principals to tackle projects individually rather than delegate to team members. P5 explained:
The job may not be done the way you would like to do it. If I'm going to run the governing body elections I know how I would like to do it but I have delegated it to someone else he may not do it the same way I want to do it. You may not always have that personal satisfaction but if you trust whatever they do it's going to be fine.
Principals also felt that teamwork was time consuming. P3 argued:
Things are not done quickly enough because of the process of consultation and talking because sometimes it does take time to actually come to one opinion about something or to an acceptable opinion, and things that need urgent attention sometimes don't get it.
And according to P4:
Maybe you would like to do something today but now remember you have to consult with the team you have to call the team together and discuss. Based on the time factor again sometimes it is not easy to agree on something it takes hours and hours to debate and to ... I won't say argue, but to debate this thing, you go back and say let us go back again and come back in two or three days' time.
The overall picture that emerged was therefore overwhelmingly positive. Principals by and large welcomed and seemed to practise team management. They pointed to clear benefits. Points of tension and threats were, however, clearly identified, and these form the basis of the discussion that follows. We chose to focus on these since they had the potential to provide guidelines for practice and research, and were also in concurrence with Walker (cited earlier) that the benefits of teamwork are fairly obvious.
Discussion of findings
The tension between "holding on and letting go" (Macbeath, 2005:354) emerged strongly in this study and perhaps typifies the key difficulty of team management. That is to say, structural arrangements and support notwithstanding, a key to how well team management works seems to be the extent to which principals are able to 'let go'. We have cited examples of principals expressing their reservations about trusting all of their colleagues, and their fears about being let down. Behind these feelings lies an apparent buckling under the pressure of accountability, which "comes with the package of being a school principal." It is indeed, as Cheun and Cheng (1996:6) have suggested, that in site-based management accountability becomes more complex. It may be that in team environments, the official leaders' sense of formal accountability (upwards) may even be increased. But it would be simplistic to infer that these two forces the ability to trust team members and the sense of accountability exist in inverse proportion to each other. There are other complicating factors, not least of which is the sense that not all team members are deemed equally competent. One of the principals suggested that the team was only as strong as its weakest member. In these situations trust takes on a strategic character, and principals who are discriminatory about where and to what extent they apportion trust may simply be astute readers of followers' readiness and professional maturity, rather than overly conscious of accountability.
This points to a significant challenge for team leadership: leaders do, after all, need to ensure effective functioning of their schools, and distributing responsibilities to members who may not be competent is a clear threat to effectiveness. On the other hand, leadership is also about professional and human resource development, and it follows that the developmental virtue of teamwork identified as a benefit in this research is likely to be compromised when responsibilities are withheld from selected team members. Hence it is not only effectiveness that is threatened: the interpersonal, 'social' elements of teamworking (Stashevski & Kowlowski, 2006:66) are also affected, and it is likely that team cohesion will suffer. As mentioned earlier, cohesion is about relationships (Stott & Walker, 1999; Dione & Yammarino, 2004; umanski & Kolenc, 2007:102), and team participation is seen as a fundamentally human and social activity (Owens, 2001:284). But can a principal who does not have complete confidence in all team members be blamed for apportioning responsibility selectively, even at the risk of cohesion? This question becomes particularly pertinent in the current climate of policy preponderance in the name of quality assurance.
This perspective goes some way towards explaining why some of the principals in this study placed such a premium on policy, even to the extent where policy was regarded as a "stumbling block" to good practice. This leads into the second tension, that between mere compliance and creative leadership. Coupled with creativity is the notion of risk-taking, regarded by some as a key characteristic of team management (Stott & Walker, 1999:53). Creative, risk-taking leadership suggests an attitude which regards policy as guidelines rather than law, and in this view the notion of being constricted by policy would be anathema to any form of effective leadership. The sample included responses from principals who reported a more creative and pragmatic approach to policy (discussed earlier) which is indicative of an interpretation, rather than blind implementation of policy. This brings into focus the significant role of leadership in team management, and in particular the importance of intelligence in leadership. Clearly the ability to interpret policy (as well as contextual factors such as organisational culture) requires intelligence and recent studies have shown that intelligence is fundamentally related to effective leadership (Stavsheki & Stowlowksi, 2006:64).
Again, though, the situation is more complex than it seems, and it would be simplistic to suggest that leaders who merely comply lack intelligence. The findings also revealed instances of compliance with what was expected (by policy and what had become accepted practice) from the fear of possible criticism and even sabotage, rather than from personal commitment. We describe this as nervous leadership. Nervous leaders consult others lest these individuals cause trouble and oppose decisions. While this tendency is clearly a significant threat to teamwork which thrives on trust and mutual acceptance it is in many ways an understandable reaction to a school climate characterised by political and social tensions. And it may be possible to argue that leading in this way may be an 'intelligent' course of action, if sheer survival is at stake. But of course it is the survival and effectiveness of the group or team that is at stake and the challenge becomes one of social or emotional intelligence. Stott and Walker (1999:55) warn:
Teamwork effectiveness could be seriously impaired in schools that foster secrecy and suspicion. In such conditions, people play safe and pursue low-risk strategies. An absence of interdependence and the pressure of high levels of animosity between teams may affect overall organisational performance.
Stott and Walker (1999:55-56) argue that the leader's role in 'climate enhancement' is crucial, and we would argue that leaders require social or emotional intelligence to accomplish this.
Emotional intelligence has been strongly associated with participative forms of management and leadership (Singh, Manser & Mestry, 2007). Emotional intelligence is a key ingredient of building and nourishing relationships, and we argue that this skill lies at the heart of team management in politically and socially tense environments. We would add that the ability to recognise and confront 'secrecy and suspicion' requires courage and a strong sense of self.
The final tension is perhaps the most human and the most understandable. Literature reports comprehensively on how managers are torn between efficiency making quick decisions without consulting and real teamwork, i.e. taking the time to consult and really listen to others' views. Naturally, the 'quick fix' approach leads to what Bottery (1992:165) described as "pseudo" or even "non-participation." It is tempting to interpret this as merely a matter of not having the time to consult. Many respondents in this study referred to time as a serious threat to team management. But the problem is again more complex, and we argue that framing the challenge as simply a 'time' issue cloaks the real problem. While it is true that some decisions need to be made quickly and therefore can and should be taken by the principal, it is equally true that very few really important decisions cannot wait a day or two. Perhaps failing to consult and really use teams stems from a lack of real commitment to the process of decision-making, through which personal and professional growth is enhanced. We argue that leaders who insist on consultation and constantly look for ways of achieving group decisions are simply expressing their respect for their colleagues, and reinforcing their commitment to relationships and personal growth.
Based on questionnaire, interview, and observation data the study confirmed that team management through SMTs was generally in place in the ten schools investigated, and that the principals were committed to making it work. While the findings pointed to significant benefits of team management, the tensions and challenges discussed above in our opinion represent key challenges for educational leaders and managers in South Africa. To review briefly, there was the over-riding tension between holding on and letting go, and the concomitant challenge of trust, as key ingredient of building cohesion; there was a tension between mere compliance and creative, courageous leadership, and the associated challenge of social and emotional intelligence; and there was a tension between efficiency (getting the job done) and effectiveness (honouring a commitment to teamwork and personal growth).
The prevalence of these tensions and challenges in the findings suggests that team management is not yet entrenched in these schools. To use Walker's (1994) framework, while the structures may be in place and operational, it seems too that cultural support is lacking and that some of the schools have not yet developed the necessary climate for the effective functioning of teams. We have identified the values and attitudes required for the establishment and well-being of such a climate, and the question remains how such values and attitudes may be developed in school leaders.
What seems self-evident is that leadership development that focuses on skills and excludes attitudes and values can never suffice. Leadership training programmes and academic programmes in leadership and management should focus on teamwork and team management, not only as a theoretical issue though that is obviously important but also experientially. In other words, courses and programmes should integrate the pedagogy of teamwork and team learning. One way of achieving this would be through utilizing organisation development (OD) into course designs. OD principles are inherently aligned with those of participative management and teamwork.
Incorporating experiential learning is another strategy that is likely to yield results. In this regard it is encouraging to note that the new ACE in School Leadership is strongly rooted in experiential and practice-based learning. At the Department of Education (Educational Management and Leadership) Workshop held at Isando on 5 September 2005 the underlying philosophy of the ACE course was firmly established as being
based on the notion that professionals develop their practice most effectively by maximising their experiential learning through engaging in reflective processes ... the effectiveness of any learning experience lies in its influence on the formation, or modification, of concepts that guide the individual's basis for action (Reeves et al. cited in DoE, 2005).
This is a bold statement of intent followed through by assessment strategies that stress practice-based performance and reflexive practice (such as portfolios and site-based evaluations). In this way the ACE course has the potential to put practical flesh to theoretical framing. At the very least it promises to offer opportunities for the kind of professional learning and hence personal growth that seems so crucial for education leaders in South Africa.
But learning about teamwork and team management can clearly not be confined to externally organised courses and programmes, and the chief training ground for organisational learning remains the school itself. Some of the respondents in this study saw the role of team management as providing opportunities for personal growth and this is an attitude we feel should be encouraged. Schools need to be learning organisations and clearly one of the best ways of learning how to work together is through doing precisely that in teams and committees within the school structure. But, as has been shown, this requires cultural (social) support and a disposition on the part of the principal that places the development of human potential on at least the same level as getting the job done.
Avolio B & Bass B 2004. Multifactor leadership questionnaire: Manual and sampler set, 3rd edn. Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden. [ Links ]
Bauer SC & Bogotch IE 2006. Modeling site-based decision making: School practices in the age of accountability. Journal of Educational Administration, 44:446-470. Available at http://www.belbin.com . Accessed 22 August 2007. [ Links ]
Belbin RM 1981. Management teams: Why they succeed or fail. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. [ Links ]
Belbin RM 2000. Beyond the team. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann. [ Links ]
Bottery M 1992. The ethics of educational management. London: Cassell. [ Links ]
Bush T 1995. Theories of educational management. London: Paul Chapman. [ Links ]
Bush T 1999. Crisis or crossroads? The discipline of educational management in the late 1990s. Educational Management and Administration, 27:239-252. [ Links ]
Bush T 2003. Theories of educational leadership and management, 3rd edn. London: Sage. [ Links ]
Cheung WC & Cheng YC 1996. A multi-level framework for self-management in school. International Journal of Education Management, 10:17-29. [ Links ]
Cohen L, Manion L & Morrison K 2000. Research methods in education, 5th edn. London: Routledge Falmer. [ Links ]
Department of Education 1996. Changing management to manage change in education. Report of the Task Team on Education Management Development. Pretoria: Government Printer. [ Links ]
Department of Education. 2000. School management teams: Introductory guide. Pretoria: CTP Book Printers. [ Links ]
Department of Education 2005. Educational Management and Leadership Workshop, Isando, 5 September. [ Links ]
Dion DD & Yamarino FJ 2004. Transformational leadership and team performance. Journal of Organizational Change and Management, 17:177-193. [ Links ]
Drach-Zahavy A & Somech A 2000. Team heterogeneity and its relationship with the team support and team effectiveness. Haifa, Israel: MCP University Publishers. [ Links ]
Everard KB & Morris G 1996. Effective school management. London: Paul Chapman. [ Links ]
Glatter R 1999. From struggling to juggling. Towards a redefinition of the field of educational leadership and management. Educational Management and Administration, 27:253-266. [ Links ]
Gunter H 2004. The purposes and practices of intellectual work: A reply to Galbraith. Journal of Educational Administration, 42:29-42. [ Links ]
Jamali D, Khoury G & Sahyoun H 2006. From bureaucratic organizations to learning organizations: An evolutionary roadmap. The Learning Organisation, 13:337-351. [ Links ]
Joseph EE & Winston BE 2005. A correlation of servant leadership, leader trust, and organisational trust. Leadership & Organisation Development Journal, 26:6-22. [ Links ]
Lambert L et al. 1995. The constructivist leader. New York: Teachers College Press. [ Links ]
MacBeath J 2005. Leadership as distributed: A matter of practice. School Leadership and Management, 25:349-366. [ Links ]
Musaazi JCS 1982. The theory and practice of educational administration. London: MacMillan. [ Links ]
Owens RG 2001. Organizational behaviour in education: Instructional leadership and school reform, 7th edn. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. [ Links ]
Robson C 1993. Real world research: A resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. [ Links ]
Russell R 2001. The role of values in servant leadership. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 22:76-83. [ Links ]
Schwandt TA 1997. Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [ Links ]
Singh P, Manser P & Mestry R 2007. Importance of emotional intelligence in conceptualising collegial leadership in education. South African Journal of Education, 27:541-563. [ Links ]
Sheard AG & Kakabadse AP 2001. From loose groups to teams: The nine key factors of the team landscape. The Journal of Management Development, 21:133-151. [ Links ]
Stashevski S & Kowlowski M 2006. Leadership team cohesiveness and team performance. International Journal of Manpower, 27:63-74. [ Links ]
Stott K & Walker A 1999. Extending teamwork in schools: Support and organisational consistency. Team Performance Management, 5:50-59. [ Links ]
umanski MM & Kolenc I 2006. Teamwork and defining group structures. Team Performance Management, 13:102-116. [ Links ]
Terre Blanche M & Durrheim K (eds) 1999. Research in practice: Applied methods for social science. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press. [ Links ]
Walker A 1994. Teams in schools: Looking below the surface. International Journal of Educational Management, 8:38-44. [ Links ]
Wallace M & Hall V 1994. Inside the SMT: Teamwork in secondary school management. London: Paul Chapman. [ Links ]
Wing LS 2005. Leadership in high performance teams: A model for superior team performance. Team Performance Management, 11:4-11. [ Links ]


text:
LeBron James Wins AP Male Athlete of the Year
MIAMI (AP) — LeBron James of the Miami Heat is The Associated Press' 2013 Male Athlete of the Year, becoming the third basketball player to capture the award in its 83-year history.
James received 31 of the 96 votes cast in a polling of news organizations. Peyton Manning got 20 votes to finish second; Jimmie Johnson was third with seven. In all, 15 other athletes received at least one vote.
James joins Michael Jordan and Larry Bird as NBA players to win the award. Jordan won in 1991, 1992 and 1993. Bird won in 1986.
James led the Heat to their second straight NBA championship in 2013, winning his fourth MVP award and second NBA Finals MVP along the way.
Serena Williams was this year's Female Athlete of the Year, announced Wednesday.
Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
How to get an exciting job at an awesome startup in less than a month/
I take a ton of meetings with people asking me about opportunities in our portfolio. For a lot of people, I feel like I'm the one being asked to do the work of finding them something.
For a select few people, they understand that startups need a lot of help, and fall in love with the people who are motivated and show that they can offer help right off the bat.
On February 28th, I got a note from Megan Towe… She didn't feel like her current job (her first job out of school) was a good long term fit. Her roommate works at a startup and so she decided to research opportunities. She wrote:
"I recently came across your article "Building a Great Company Culture is Critical When You're a Startup" ....I found your article during my current search for business development and operations opportunities at young, non-corporate organizations...The article strongly resonated with me and I would love any guidance you may have on pursuing entry-level positions in the startup field"
I get a lot of these notes, and it just so happened that I was free for breakfast that Monday, so I agreed to meet. That's one aspect of this type of thing that can't be overlooked—timing. I'd love to meet with everyone that sends me these notes, but I can't. I need to prioritize my time for the entrepreneurs we backed and might backed (and family and such…) so it was kind of a little lucky that I happened to have a free spot, otherwise I probably wouldn't have been able to see her for like a month and a half b/c of travel.
The other thing that was important was that she had obviously taken the time to mention portfolio companies that we were involved in and why she thought they were interesting. If you're going to meet with me, it's not hard to figure out which companies we're involved with or that I've worked on specifically.
At breakfast, she mentioned something about exploring business development. I tossed out the idea that she should meet Alex Taub and see if he needed help with the BD event he was working on (which went awesomely, btw).
Here's where she nailed it—twice. At 10:48AM that day—just an hour or two after we got done with breakfast, I get a note from Alex:
"Megan reached out and I'm sitting down with her. She can help with organizing the event."
The funny thing is, I never introduced them. I think I maybe just tossed her a twitter account or an e-mail address. She didn't wait—she just reached out, said that we had met, and offered to help. That really struck me. Usually follow-ups involve work on my part. I've never had anyone just go find the person.
On top of that, the next day, this showed up at my office:
Classy. Just really super classy.
So, when Dave Hendricks from Live Intent, one of our portfolio companies that is really taking off, sent me this note, who do you think I sent him?
"We're looking to hire two inexperienced hard charging media sales account management types to supercharge our outbound efforts."
Yes, that's right. He wrote "inexperienced." So all of you who are worried about not having something to offer—realize that the best thing you have to offer, especially at a startup, is yourself. What he meant was that he was willing to get somebody in who didn't have huge comp expectations upfront (until they start killing it on the sales side), who was willing to work hard, get shown the ropes, and who would be willing to do a lot of the things at a startup that in a bigger company you might have someone else working under you do for you. It's what some people call hiring an "athlete." Someone who can just run fast and keep up—and Megan, in just a few interactions, gave me a lot of confidence that she was worth considering for that role. Will it work out? It's really up to her—and that's what a lot of new people in the field are looking for: an opportunity to show what they can do.
And that's what she got. On March 21st, less than a month after her first e-mail to me, I got this note:
"Today I gave my two weeks notice, and in two weeks I am going to start working at LiveIntent. I went to meet their team and visit the office, and I really fell in love with all of them. I am so excited for the experiences to come, and am ready to dive headfirst into their business.
Thank you so much for putting me and Dave in touch. I am going to continue to do me best to succeed and make sure I prove that the faith you put in me was worth it."
So there you have it. Was it luck? A little bit… but there are a couple of keys to this successful transition that students and new folks in the field can learn from:
Reach out: If she never took the time to write to me and meet up, none of this would have happened. 90% of success is just showing up.
Prove you're different: What can you do to show you're not like 99% of the other people who have asked me about jobs, waited for me to do work on my side to find them something, and looked like a million other candidates.
Be flexible: In my experience, most people aren't in the jobs that fit their personality best. Megan might never have sought out a job in sales, but her personality couldn't be a better fit. It may or may not be her long term aspiration, but to work with a great team and to get a change of scenery, she was willing to try something new that she wasn't planning on.
Offer value: Offering to help Alex get the word out on the BD event made me feel like she had the right "What can I do for you" mentality for a startup.
Return the favor: Every conversation I've had with her makes me feel confident that she understands the dynamic of a recommendation: I associate my name with someone when I send them to a portfolio company or a startup I know. We'll be linked for the duration of her time there and so if she succeeds, that's going to make me look good, and if she slacks off and doesn't put in the effort, that makes me look bad and makes my next intro less effective. A lot of people don't seem to realize that it's not just making the connection, it's risking social capital—and so her stated willingness to work hard clearly has that perspective in mind. I don't expect to hear that she's skipping out of the office at 5PM every day (unless it's to go meet potential business leads!).


text:
Men's Dri-Power® Fashion Performance Tee -
$18.00 $10.80
Men's Dri-Power® Fashion Performance Tee
$18.00 $10.80
Additional Information
DescriptionStay cool and dry as you sweat during your workout in this striated performance tee featuring moisture-wicking fabric and set-in sleeves.
Fabric100% Polyester
4.3 oz.
Men's Dri-Power® Fashion Performance Tee
Dri-Power® PerformanceThe Russell Athletic® Men's Fashion Performance Tee blends bold style with athletic quality. Constructed from smooth, lightweight, textured fabric, this T-shirt is built with our patented Dri-Power® moisture-wicking technology keeping you dry as you sweat. The set-in sleeves design ensures full range of motion. Add this fashion performance tee to your wardrobe for the best look and feel.
Wicks sweat away from your skin helping you stay dry
Comfort Stitching
Smooth seams for less irritation
Lightweight for mobility and comfort
Russell Athletic
Sign up for the newsletter


text:
Our newly approved regulae state that :
1. The Comitia may elect officers to act on its behalf to administer the Societas, its website and the fora of the Societas. The individual titles of the officers and their individual duties shall be established by the Comitia.
2. No less than three and no more than seven officers may hold office at any one time.
The duties of this board of officers were defined as follows :
3. The officers are to collectively manage and maintain the fora and the website for the Societas. They may appoint assistants as needed. They may remove, rearrange, or edit any material on the website, with the one exception that may not edit an essay submitted as a contribution by a sodalis without the author's permission.
4. Officers are to maintain decorum in the fora of the Societas, and thus may suspend, disbar or expel any and all subscribers to the fora, subject to each sodalis' right to provocatio.
5. The officers oversee elections held in the Comitia. They may appoint any assistants needed to conduct such elections.
6. The officers are to maintain a list of all current sodales of the Societas, and conduct a biennial census, registering sodales who wish to renew their membership. The officers may set any procedures needed to conduct the census. They may appoint any assistants to perform the census. The officers are charged with maintaining the privacy of the sodales of the Societas and the security of any information about its sodales, collectively or individually, collected by the officers for the internal use of the Societas.
7. The officers are authorized to establish administrative procedures to be used in the Societas and its Comitia, propose policies for the Societas, manage relations with persons and entities outside the Societas, and grant honorary titles to any sodalis and/or awards of recognition to its members or others. At the initiative of any sodalis, such decisions of the officers may be subject to approval or rejection by a vote of the Comitia
I suggest we now discuss how many officers we will need and what functions and titles we will grant them.
I would like to propose the following :
*1 officer responsible for the forum and the website (points 3 and 4 above). De facto what our aediles have been doing. I suggest that this officer must appoint two assistants, especially as moderators for the forum (having only one person in control of everything vital to our organisation seems rather against the democratic spirit of our new regulae, and it would put SVR in serious trouble if that one individual, for whatever reason, disappeared).
*1 officer responsible for overseeing the 'political' aspect of SVR in general (points 5 and 7 above) : organising elections, presiding debates, overseeing that everything is running smoothly and raising issues in the Comitia when trouble occurs. De facto what our consules have been doing, or what I have been doing as praetor since we no longer have any consules in function.
*1 officer responsible for everything mentioned under point 6. De facto what our censores have been doing.
I suggest that we start with these three officers only, and that those can appoint assistants as a need for them arises. As for names, I would suggest 'curator situs et fori' (1), 'curator rei publicae' (2) and 'curator sodalium (3).


text:
The website is a great public service. It is important to have a doctor who sorts through all of the studies. I think I remember it was said about 15,000 papers are published each year. The vast majority of which none of us ever see, hear or know about.
DESCRIPTION: Dr. Greger has scoured the world's scholarly literature on clinical nutrition and developed this brand-new live presentation on the latest in cutting-edge research on how a healthy diet can affect some of our most common medical conditions.


text:
The quote "What Is So Rare As A Day In June?" may be familiar to most readers (the sentiment certainly is!) but its source is fairly obscure. This line is but a snippet from the most famous work of the poet James Russell Lowell (1819-1891), a member of the gaggle of authors sometimes called the Fireside Poets or the Schoolroom Poets. Some of his more famous colleagues in this group include Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, John Greenleaf Whittier, and Oliver Wendell Holmes. The Vision of Sir Launfal is an impressively lengthy poem that tells the story of an Arthurian knight's search for the Holy Grail.
This work is very religious in tone overall, but Lowell does fit in some keen observations about the value of natural beauty. The following verse, from which the apt quote is taken, is a portion of the Prelude to Part First of a very lengthy poem.
Earth gets its price for what Earth gives us;
The beggar is taxed for a corner to die in,
The priest hath his fee who comes and shrives us,
We bargain for the graves we lie in;
At the Devil's booth are all things sold
Each ounce of dross costs its ounce of gold;
For a cap and bells our lives we pay,
Bubbles we earn with a whole soul's tasking:
'T is heaven alone that is given away,
'T is only God may be had for the asking;
There is no price set on the lavish summer,
And June may be had by the poorest comer.
And what is so rare as a day in June?
Then, if ever, come perfect days;
Then Heaven tries the earth if it be in tune,
And over it softly her warm ear lays:
Whether we look, or whether we listen,
We hear life murmur, or see it glisten;
Every clod feels a stir of might,
An instinct within it that reaches and towers,
And, grasping blindly above it for light,
Climbs to a soul in grass and flowers;
The flush of life may well be seen
Thrilling back over hills and valleys;
The cowslip startles in meadows green,
The buttercup catches the sun in its chalice,
And there 's never a leaf or a blade too mean
To be some happy creature's palace;
The little bird sits at his door in the sun,
Atilt like a blossom among the leaves,
And lets his illumined being o'errun
With the deluge of summer it receives;
His mate feels the eggs beneath her wings,
And the heart in her dumb breast flutters and sings;
He sings to the wide world, and she to her nest,–
If you liked this poem and would like to browse the entire archive of poetry posts on 10,000 Birds please check out our Bird Poems page.
So, Mike I typed the "what is so rare as a day in June" into Google and your site showed up and the rest of the poem. I love birds and poetry, so thank you.
I, too, typed in that familiar line "What is so rare…" and got your site. Thanks for providing it. As an English major, I should be ashamed for not knowing altho I suspected it could be a New England poet. Inspired by the exceptionally beautiful days this week, I've been repeating it as I walked along S. Main St. in Bluffton, Ohio, a half mile from home to or from work as I have often done the past 47 years.
I'm not a birder–with my color-blindness, I can just about tell a hummingbird from an eagle! Thanks again.
Richard Jordan, you may be interested to know that another of these New England poets, John Greenleaf Whittier, was colorblind. It might interest you to read "Snowbound" with that in mind.
Mike, thanks for providing the lovely setting for this citation.
David in Toledo: Thanks for mentioning Whittier's "Snowbound". Is that the one which begins "The sun that brief December day rose cheerless o'er hills of gray…"? I recall that much from my childhood–Mother liked to read poems to us six kids, from which at least some of us gained a lifelong appreciation for literature. I was also glad to get your message since I was born in Toledo where we lived until I was 12, then later worked there various times, and did special studies at TU. We've had relatives there for over a century.
Thanks to Mike, also, as host of this site.
Thanks for the fuill text of that poem with the quote, "And What is Rare As a Day in June" – I have been looking for it fo a while. I have used that quoate many times as my birthday is in June. It saved me a trip to the library for a search! LJR
"And what is so rare as a day in June?——-
He sings to the wide world, and she to her nest—
In the nice ear of Nature which song is the best?
I learned this selction you quoted from "The Vision of Sir Launfal" when I was in 8th grade English in Beaumont, Texas in the 1940s…You left off the last line of what I learned……I am now 74 years old and can still quote most of it from memory…Always a favorite of mine…Fun to find you quoting it as I was browsing the internet
I found your website after reading an entry into my Mom's diary. It was written in June, 1925 when she was fourteen years old. Old favorites are always favorites. Thanks for the treasure.
Thanks for the poem. I love poetry. I had googled "what is so rare…." to find the author…I will use it in my blog today as I write about an October day in the mountains…..
Dear mike
"What is so rare but a day in June" Ever sinceI can remember my sweet mother would recite this poem on a beutiful spring day. My mother learned this poem when she was in elementary school and never forgot it even when old age started to unravel her mind. The last time I heard her recite the poem was at my Dad's 88th birthday this past September. My sweet mother died this past December, she was 86 year old. My mother's memory can be captured by the beautiful words of the poem. As I mourn her death I thank Poet James Russel Lowe and her wonderful teachers at St Ignatius Loyola Elementary School for helping me keep my mother's memory alive.
Thank you Mike for making this poem so available.
I memorized this section of Lowell's poem in 7th or 8th grade. I love it, and it comes to mind almost every June. Now I teach English and require students to memorize poetry. They don't yet know how much it will enrich their lives, but some day they will understand.
The quotation "And what is so rare as a day in June?" figures in a short story of adventure and suspense by Robert Arthur, "The Mystery of the Three Blind Mice" which I recall reading more than 35 years ago. The story has nothing to do with rodents. Did not study J. R. Lowell in school, but looked him up after reading Arthur, still comes to mind at times. Now with the Internet, how beneficial to all of us with insight on this beautiful work.
The poem sticks in my memory every June. Thank you david, now i know the rest of the poem, its very beautiful. We had a teacher at Jones Junior, in toledo in the 1930s that had us memorize many poems. thanks for the memories.
Today is the first day of summer, the longest day of the year, as the 81 year old precious woman I live with has been reminding me was coming up for the past 10 days. She has quoted the first few verses, beginning with "What is so rare as a day in June…." every time. Today we lunched with 2 of her childhood, lifelong girl friends who knew the quote as well. One of the ladies even knew the author, but I don't think any of them understood it was from the Prelude to Part First of The Vision of Sir Launfal. I hope to find the poem in it's entirety at the library soon. What a wonderful and beautiful website you have created. Thank you for the opportunity to share. By the way, my friend was blown away that I could "
type on that thing and there it is…"
(1) QUESTION: What year did James Russell Lowell write "What is so rare as a day in June?"
(2) FYI: TWO NEAT BIRD POEMS to check out . . . :
(a) "Cardinal" by Bruce Weigl
Weigl, Bruce. A Romance. Pittsburgh: University Press, 1979, page 28.
(b) "At the Winter Feeder" by John R. Leax.
This poem at some websites is titled "Sacrament of Broken Seed," which is a phrase that appears in "At the Winter Feeder."
In response to Linda's first question, most sources indicate that this poem was first published in 1848, so it probably was written in the 1840s.
I too came upon your site after finding mention of the quote in some of my mother's papers as being her favorite poem. Ella Mae has passed on now but I was reading a book of memories she left for me and decided to find out more about her favorite poem. Thanks. I can see why she liked it so much. (Certainly she learned it in school as mentioned above by others.) Thanks.
At 17 , working at an icecream parlour , I met my husband of 62 years and he often quoted this poem which became a special time for me to share – it is heart warming to read of others who have this connectionto to the past , which we never seem to understand makes the presnet so much more meaningful .
The verse from the lengthy poem, a fav of my husband touchs a cord when I hear it. I was pleased to find more about it on the web, and now your site .
Am not ken to this lingo sorry about that [86]
Dear Mike:
Today in eastern Montana is one of the most beautiful that we have had. Always June provides some wonderful days, but today the sun is shining and the breezes barely blowing and it is green everywhere, with a fresh smell in the air. So what is as rare as a day in June? Thank you for presenting the poem in its entirety, I am going to use it in an piece in my small eastern Montana paper. Will give credits to you for presenting it, with just from 10,000 Birds, MIKE as I see no other name, unless you object. Please advise as to your credits if different than this. My 96 year old mother learned this as a child and kept it as a favorite like many of your other readers. janet
I can still recite this poem thanks to my high school English and Lit teacher, Mr. Davis. Thanks Mr. Davis.
I used this quote on my wedding program; alas, the marriage didn't last, but I still love the line and poem.
My mother is 99 and she still knows this poem by heart, which she learned at high school, and can recite it on request. It is wonderful to find the whole poem on your site.She can remember it after more than 85 years, yet she can't remember what she had for supper tonight!
Memory is selective. Can modern computers match this kind of selective memory?
My parents, Wilbur and Catherine Bull, were returning home from Detroit Audubon Society's Memorial Day Spring Campout, which Dad coordinated and which they had extended with a brief side-trip to Michigna's Uppper Peninsula. On the last leg of their journey at about 7 p.m. on June 1 they were hit head on by woman who went to sleep at the wheel. My dad was killed instantly. My mother was in ICU for almost two weeks with 14 broken ribs. When she was able to talk she told us that the last thing she remembered was she and Dad reciting this poem together in the car. Our minister found it (not so easy in the days before the internet) and read it at his memorial service. Each June 1, I think of this poem and them reciting it on what must have been a beautiful June day.
I googled the first line so I could download that poem and got your blog. I had no idea it was only a small part of a much longer poem about a knight of King Arthur's roundtable! Thanks for the addtional information.
By the way I now coordinate that Memorial Day Weekend Birding camp for Detroit Audubon Society and just got back from this year's campout on Monday.
By the way, my mother's quote ended with the two lines you left out as mentioned in an earlier post:
He sings to the wide world, and she to her nest—
In the nice ear of Nature which song is the best?
She said they had recited the whole thing, but in her debilitated state she could only remember the first couple lines and these last two lines. Our minister read the "whole" thing in the service.
I am now 80 years old, and I, too, memorized this poem in my 1949 senior English class. We got to choose what we would memorize and recite, and I've always been glad I chose this lively and invigorating poem that celebrates the beauty of nature, for every year in June it comes back to me……..While they still lived at home my children had to sit through yet another recitation! Now that they're grown and in their own homes, I just recite it to myself, and I'm once again an 18 year old girl thrilled with the loveliness of spring.
Lost a dear Aunt this month. We never got to say good-bye to her.
She was 97 yrs old and a very special lady. Was talking to her daughter-in-law today. She told me that the last day she had taken her out for a ride was the beginning of the month. As they were riding my aunt looked around and said "And what is so rare as a day in June". She loved that poem. I didn't know the whole poem – just that line. I googled it and got your site. So to remember her, I will memorize it so she stays in my memory in such a beautiful way. Thank you.
What is so rare as a day in June?
Well, how about a day in April?
Or September?
And don't get me started about February…
Like other commenters, I was curious as to the origin of the famous line, and your website came up *first* on Goodsearch. Thank you for providing the complete poem and background.
I am 95 years of age & can recall my mother reciting the lines for the rare days of June. she had s poem for each month such as October's bright blue weather, in the fall & host of daffodils in spring. beautiful memories. Recently I have chosen to use any sleepless night memorizing the Highwayman by Alfred Noyes with fond memories of fifth grade in 1931. I can still see vividly the road a ribbon of moonlight over the purple moors.
Thank you very much for the source as I enjoy a perfect June day in WNC observing the variety of birds nearby
While dancing yesterday my partner said, "And what is so rare as a day in June —–" I was able to recite the Poem and he said please make me a copy of it, and so I am. My English teacher asked the class to memorize it in the Forties. I am now 82 and Thank God my memory still works. Thank James Russell Lowell also for writing such a beautiful poem. It made my day!
© 2013 10,000 Birds. All words, images, and opinions are the property of their respective authors unless stated otherwise.


text:
TRACETEK transforms a cable certifier into a fiber optic troubleshooting tool at a fraction of the cost of an OTDR. Working in conjunction with either the single mode or multimode FIBERTEK module, the graphical display shows events such as connectors or bad splices as spikes. The amplitude and duration of those spikes gives the end user or contractor an indication of potential trouble spots. TRACETEK is a fiber accessory for LANTEK 6/7, the first cable certifier capable of testing up to 750MHz.
Ideal Industries Inc.
Hide comments


text:
No. 80,086
and MARY McDANIEL, R.N.,
1. Under K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 60-216(f), a trial court is not required to find a party acted in bad faith in failing to obey a pretrial order prior to assessing reasonable expenses and attorney fees.
2. Under K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 60-216(f), determination of the value of reasonable expenses and attorney fees rests within the sound discretion of the trial court.
Appeal from Lyon District Court; MERLIN G. WHEELER, judge, and MARION W. CHIPMAN, Senior Judge. Opinion filed January 21, 2000. Affirmed.
Reid F. Holbrook and Brent G. Wright, of Holbrook, Heaven & Osborn, P.A., of Kansas City, for appellant/cross-appellee Deborah Burns, D.O.
Wm. Scott Hesse, assistant attorney general, for appellants/cross-appellees Cynthia Taylor, R.N., and Mary McDaniel, R.N.
Daniel J. Strausbaugh, of Katz & Strausbaugh, L.C., of Kansas City, Missouri, for appellees/cross-appellants.
Before BRAZIL, C.J., JANICE D. RUSSELL, District Judge, assigned, and JOHN E. SANDERS, District Judge, assigned.
BRAZIL, C.J.: Joseph and Shirley Noll and the Estate of Anthony Noll (Plaintiffs) brought a medical malpractice action against Deborah Burns, D.O., Cynthia Taylor, R.N., and Mary McDaniel, R.N. (Defendants), alleging Defendants caused the death of their son Anthony Noll. Defendants appeal from the trial court's pretrial ruling that required them to pay Plaintiffs $22,277.05 in costs. Plaintiffs cross-appeal, claiming the trial court erred in failing to award them an amount of $87,865.41 as was requested in their motion for sanctions.
Finding no reversible error, we affirm.
Anthony Noll sought treatment from Dr. Weiner, an allergist practicing in Lawrence, Kansas, for his allergies and asthma. Dr. Weiner prescribed allergen injections that were to be administered to Anthony at certain intervals. While Anthony was attending Emporia State University, Dr. Weiner forwarded his medication to the university's health clinic where Defendants administered the injections. In 1993, after receiving an injection at the health clinic, Anthony suffered an anaphylactic reaction and subsequently died.
In March 1995, Plaintiffs filed wrongful death and survival actions alleging defendants were negligent in treating Anthony's asthma and in administering the allergin shots. The allegations implied the administration of the injections while Anthony showed apparent symptoms of asthma increased the risk of an anaphylactic reaction.
Plaintiffs alleged the following in their pretrial questionnaire: (1) Defendants failed to recognize and appreciate that Anthony's asthma was unstable; (2) Defendants failed to treat the cause of Anthony's unstable asthma; (3) Dr. Weiner's instructions were not followed by Defendants since the allergin shots were administered while Anthony showed symptoms of asthma and the doses were excessive; (4) Defendants were negligent in treating Anthony after he experienced the anaphylactic reaction.
Defendants asserted the following defenses in their joint pretrial questionnaire: (1) Defendants followed Dr. Weiner's instructions; (2) Defendants' actions were within the standard of care for the treatment of asthma and the administration of allergen injections; (3) Anthony's asthma was treated within the recognized standards of care for nurses and physicians; (4) Anthony's treatment after the anaphylactic reaction was within the recognized standards of care. Defendants also asserted the following defense:
"Defendants submit that anaphylaxis is a known risk associated with allergen injections, yet extremely rare. The causes of anaphylaxis are not sufficiently known so as to predict its occurrence. If the allergist believe [sic] any additional steps or equipment should have been employed for administration of allergens, this information was not provided to the ESU clinic by Dr. Weiner, an expert in the area of allergens and their injection, and/or was not provided in a clear enough form as to be understood and followed by the lesser trained nurses and doctors at the ESU Student Health Clinic."
In July 1996, the parties filed a pretrial order incorporating the factual contentions and legal theories set forth in the pretrial questionnaires. Subsequently, Plaintiffs filed a motion in limine seeking to prevent Defendants from admitting evidence that Plaintiffs or any other person contributed to cause Anthony's injuries since Defendants had not asserted the defense of comparative negligence. The trial court denied the motion, concluding it would handle any objections to the evidence at trial.
In the course of Defendants' opening statement to the jury, Plaintiffs objected on grounds Defendants were implying Dr. Weiner was at fault and the statement was not relevant to the issues of the case. The trial court overruled the objection. Defense counsel subsequently stated the following:
"[Anthony] goes on what they call a maintenance stage. Now at the maintenance stage, the allergist mixes the vials one vial at a time. They pull sixteen bottles out of the fridge, they fill up the vial and that's what they sent to the clinic. [Dr. Weiner] sent it to the clinic when [Anthony] has not even come back in for his appointment at the end of one year . . . .
"Now [Plaintiffs' counsel] is going to have more to say about parts of this order. Particularly Mr. Logback's going to discuss the dose that is shown on this to be administered. What I would just like to point out it says no more mix can be sent until he has an appointment. Because he had been past a year before Dr. Weiner had ever seen him. What happened? . . . .
. . . .
"And what's amazing, Dr. Weiner gave [Anthony] some instructions back when he first started on the allergin. He gave him an instruction sheet. Dr. Weiner, and this isn't a violation of the standard of care, folks, this is the way it's done. The instruction sheet that he -- was sent to [Anthony] was never sent to Dr. Burns or to ESU clinic, his medical records were never sent, there was no plan of asthma sent to the clinic. All that was sent to the clinic was a vial of allergins to be
Plaintiffs' counsel again objected and the trial court sustained the objection. Defense counsel subsequently stated:
"The Nolls then went to see Dr. Weiner [after Anthony's death]. And the evidence will be that Dr. Weiner when he saw them didn't say, hey, my instructions said that, that anaphylaxis is a risk of taking these shots that it can occur, didn't say that, didn't say, well, you know, under our policy we never saw him back for a year and he was overdue for an appointment and, you know."
Plaintiffs' counsel again objected and the trial court ruled defense counsel was prohibited from pointing to actions of Dr. Weiner which a person of ordinary intelligence might consider to be below a reasonable standard of care.
Following opening statements, Plaintiffs renewed their motion in limine. Defendants argued the following in response: (1) They had no reason to allege or evidence to support an allegation that either Dr. Weiner or Anthony owed a duty of care or were at fault; (2) causation and fault were separate issues in the case; and (3) they should be able to argue other events possibly caused the anaphylactic reaction.
Ultimately, the trial court summarized the situation as follows:
"What we have here is a situation of where the plaintiffs suggest the total fault lies with the three defendants. The defendants in response deny not only their liability but have suggested that there are other causes for the anaphylactic reaction suffered by the decedent that everybody agrees ultimately lead to his death. The defendants have in their pleadings and in the pretrial order . . . have steadfastly maintained that they did not believe that there was any deviation from a standard of care by other persons who dealt with the deceased. But at the same time they believe that there are other explanations or causes for the death which should -- they should -- are entitled to present to the jury. They do not believe that they have to prove that there was a deviation from the standard of care on the part of these phantom parties in order to be able to present evidence of the possibility that other acts caused the death of Anthony Noll."
The trial court then gave Defendants two options on how to proceed. It stated Defendants could either (1) proceed to trial without presenting evidence of causation, or (2) amend their pleadings, pay the costs incurred by Plaintiffs in preparing for trial, and schedule a new trial. Defendants chose to amend their pleadings, pay the costs, and schedule a new trial. Defendants and Plaintiffs objected to the trial court's ruling.
Plaintiffs subsequently filed a motion for sanctions and submitted an itemized claim for attorney fees and expenses in the amount of $87,865.41. Based on its prior ruling, the trial court issued an order awarding Plaintiffs $22,277.05 for attorney fees and expenses incurred in preparing for trial. In its order, the trial court provided a breakdown of the calculations it used to arrive at the sum. Following a hearing, the trial court denied the motion for sanctions and indicated in its journal entry that Defendants had not proceeded improperly or done anything wrong to warrant sanctions.
However, in the final pretrial order of the second trial, Defendants indicated they were not asserting negligence of any other person. The jury found Dr. Burns 50% at fault, Taylor 30% at fault, and McDaniel 20% at fault, and awarded Plaintiffs $129,500 in damages.
The Appeal
Defendants argue the trial court did not have the statutory authority to award costs in the amount of $22,277.05. They argue K.S.A. 60-2007 is the only statute which allowed an award of those "costs" imposed by the trial court. Defendants do not argue the trial court was specifically without authority to award attorney fees. Rather, their argument is that the trial court was without authority to award any of the costs and fees assessed against them.
The trial court indicated in its ruling that over half of the award was for attorney fees. However, it never indicated what statute it was relying on as authority for its action. At trial, the court initially stated it would not require Defendants to pay attorney fees. Following objections and arguments of trial counsel, the trial court asked Plaintiffs to prepare an itemized claim for costs, expenses, and attorney fees, and stated it would hold a hearing on the claim.
At the hearing, the trial court made clear it did not intend to impose sanctions for any wrongdoing by Defendants. However, it concluded Defendants' attempt to assert a comparative negligence defense did not comply with the pretrial order and stated it would award an amount for expenses and for time incurred by Plaintiffs@ counsel in preparing for trial.
K.S.A. 60-216(b), the statute in effect at the time of trial, provided:
"If a party or party's attorney fails to obey a pretrial order . . . the judge, upon motion or the judge's own initiative and after opportunity to be heard, may make such orders with regard thereto as are just . . . . In lieu of or in addition to any other sanction, the judge shall require the party or the party's attorney, or both, to pay the reasonable expenses incurred because of any noncompliance with this section, including attorney fees, unless the judge finds that the noncompliance was substantially justified or that other circumstances make an award of expenses unjust."
Defendants' attempt to assert a comparative negligence defense at trial was in violation of the pretrial order and K.S.A. 60-216. The trial court specifically found Defendants attempted to proceed in a manner contrary to the pretrial order. This ruling was memorialized in the trial court's journal entry denying sanctions in which the trial court reviewed its prior ruling, stating: "The Court determined that the Defendants could not present evidence of, or refer to, other possible causes without alleging fault based upon Wooderson v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp., 235 Kan. 387, [681 P.2d 1038] (1984)."
In their response to Plaintiffs' cross-appeal, Defendants argue K.S.A. 60-216 is not applicable since Plaintiffs did not contend the statute controlled when seeking attorney fees. They also argue sanctions were not proper because the trial court stated in its ruling denying sanctions that the parties had done nothing wrong and had not proceeded improperly.
As indicated, the trial court concluded Defendants had attempted to assert a defense not raised in their pretrial order. The trial court's statements that Defendants had not proceeded improperly nor done anything wrong refer to its finding Defendants had not acted in bad faith. Under K.S.A. 60-216(b), the trial court was permitted to enter any order it deemed to be just upon finding a party was in violation of the pretrial order. It was not required to make a finding of bad faith before assessing reasonable expenses and attorney fees against Defendants. The award of costs and attorney fees was authorized by the statute, and it was within the trial court's discretion to determine the value awarded. See City of Wichita v. B G Products, Inc., 252 Kan. 367, Syl. @ 3, 845 P.2d 649 (1993).
The Cross Appeal
In their cross-appeal, Plaintiffs maintain that Defendants acted in bad faith in an attempt to mislead the jury and that they incurred significant expenses as a result of the improper conduct. Plaintiffs allege that because Defendants violated the pretrial order and acted in bad faith, they are entitled to full compensation under K.S.A. 60-216 and K.S.A. 60-2007. They ask this court to find the trial court abused its discretion in failing to award them $87,865.41 as requested in their motion for sanctions.
As previously stated, K.S.A. 60-216(b) was the statute in effect at the time of trial. The language contained in K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 60-216(f) is identical to that of K.S.A. 60-216(b), stating that the trial court has the discretion to "make such
orders . . . as are just," upon a party's failure to obey a pretrial order. Under K.S.A. 60-2007(b), in effect at the time that costs were assessed, attorney fees and expenses may be assessed if (1) a claim asserted by a party is without a reasonable basis in fact, and (2) the claim was not asserted in good faith. Subway Restaurants, Inc. v. Kessler, 266 Kan. 433, 443, 970 P.2d 526 (1998).
At the hearing on Plaintiffs' motion in limine, Defendants thoroughly explained their position and their intent to present evidence relating to causation. The trial court stated it was not clear whether Defendants should be precluded from raising the possibility of other causes of death and concluded it would address Plaintiffs' concerns as needed at trial. Based on the trial court's ruling, it was reasonable for Defendants to believe they could properly pursue their intended line of defense at trial.
Nothing in the record supports Plaintiffs' contention that Defendants asserted their theory of defense in bad faith. The trial court thoroughly explained the method used for assessing costs, and its calculations are supported by the record. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Plaintiffs' motion for sanctions or in assessing costs.