Confessions of a Former Site Director

By: Nancy Remington
Date: July 11, 2007

Summary: Nancy Remington, former director of the Great Basin Writing Project in Nevada, describes what happens when the founding leader must move on from a site that is only a couple of years old. A strong leadership team and a year of working alongside the new director eased the transition.

In the fall of 1999, when I received the call from NWP Executive Director Richard Sterling saying that our new-site application had been accepted and that the Great Basin Writing Project (GBWP) was officially part of the National Writing Project network, I was thrilled, of course, but I was tempted to say, "Gosh thanks, but I really don't think we're ready, yet. Can we apply again in a couple of years?"

However, as writing project site leaders, we all know that many opportunities, and almost all challenges, come before we think we're ready, and I jumped in to direct the new site. But in 2001, just a couple of years later, my husband took a new job in another community. The problem was that I was not ready to leave Great Basin College and certainly I was not ready to leave as director of this new site. The Great Basin Writing Project didn't feel ready for a change in leadership.

In 1999, soon after our first summer institute, we had established a leadership team charged with envisioning the site. When the time came to project a new budget, about seven of us—two co-directors and I along with other teacher-consultant leaders—sat around my dining room table and created a document that helped tell the story of the site we imagined. Knowing that money is seen as power, I wanted leadership decisions, even budgetary ones, to be transparent. In retrospect, it's clear that this transparency contributed to the ease of our leadership transition when it came.

I learned the hard way that, like a successful chess player, a writing project director needs to think two moves ahead.

But in 2001 I did something else to ease the transition. Much to my husband's dismay, I stayed on another year and prepared for my departure. Although it was a difficult year for me personally, having a transitional year benefited the site, I believe; it assuaged our anxieties and gave us the time we needed for new leadership to take hold. Robert McGinty, having been a co-director from the beginning, filled the director's role with grace, and the site continued to function successfully after my departure.

Successful Preparation

During this year of transition we did everything we could to keep the site up and active. When I left the directorship, the things I felt most comfortable about were these:

• The site has a solid vision with teachers at the center. From the beginning, the site has operated with a leadership team, composed of directors and teacher-leaders, planning and implementing the vision for Great Basin Writing Project. (Note the dining room table scene described above.) The structure is slightly more formal now, but this attitude—that the site belongs to the teachers it serves—has continued. Teacher-consultants take on leadership roles as the site's capacity grows; they travel to the Annual and Spring Meetings, and represent the site at the Rural Sites Network conferences and in other NWP programs and initiatives.


• The new director had experience with the site—particularly with budget, the funding application, and the direction of the summer institute. He and I had conducted four summer institutes together and we had always collaborated on the continued funding application—in fact, he was the primary author from the beginning. We had transition time together (we even coauthored a monograph during that time); because we had a year to think about the site change, we were able to make a conscious effort to work transparently.


• The leadership team remained the same, with many teacher-consultants participating. One co-director became the director, the other, Vicki Rossolo, remained as co-director; and the teacher-consultants who served on the leadership team continued in those roles.


• We had the beginning of a state network and good support from the NWP. The directors from the two other sites in Nevada were close colleagues. We initially garnered additional state funding, and we worked together well. The Great Basin Writing Project had been asked to create a program for the Rural Voices Radio series and to document our Project Outreach work in a monograph. Because the two co-directors had traveled with me to NWP events, they felt comfortable within the network, where they had many colleagues.

Unforeseen Problems

However, as proud as I feel about most of the transition, change is never easy. From a more objective distance of space and time, I see these problems or concerns we didn't foresee or weren't able to address. I document some of them here in hope that others can learn from my missteps.

I depended too heavily on relationships with people—for instance in the state department—who are now gone. In the beginning, I could pick up the phone and call colleagues in the Nevada Department of Education for information or connections. We relied on personal relationships with people in the state department, in the Nevada System of Higher Education, and within other bureaucratic and professional entities. But people retire and leave their jobs. New people don't often have the same knowledge or perspective. That's why it's important for a writing project site to build credibility that does not rely solely on the support of individuals. Agreements and documentation are important.

I learned the hard way that, like a successful chess player, a writing project director needs to think two moves ahead. One example: GBWP is struggling with inservice and partnerships with schools because of another state-funded regional professional development entity that I helped put into place. The 1999 Nevada legislature set up four Regional Professional Development Programs that have been generously funded since that time.

Naturally, those of us in professional development wanted the best teachers to serve in those positions. The state looks to these programs to fill its professional development needs and schools receive the professional development from these programs at no cost. The three Nevada writing project directors all work for the Regional Professional Development Programs and their sites benefit from part of their salaries being a part of the required match.

However, because the directors are paid by these programs, they often feel they are "blurring of the lines" with paid partnerships with schools. Also, the writing project work seems submerged under the regional programs. These were results I had not anticipated.

In retrospect, I should have put more on paper: more formal agreements in writing, a clearer paper trail concerning money, and a strategic plan for working with other professional development entities and higher education. It's hard to think of everything!

Despite these glitches, however, because I stayed on for a year and because our site had new leadership in place, the transition at Great Basin to has gone relatively smoothly. I've learned some difficult lessons, and I like to think that the current leaders at our site have gained wisdom from sharing our sometimes rocky growth.