Revising a Dismissal Memo for a Confused Staff
Principal Hale sends a one-page memo to 60 staff members about revised dismissal procedures. The memo states: 'Teachers should not release students before 3:05 unless they have prior approval, which should be obtained from the office by 2:00, except on early release days when the schedule is different. All bus riders must be in the gym by 2:55; walkers are dismissed at 3:00; pick-up begins at 3:10.' Within one day, 12 staff members email questions: four ask who grants approval, three ask what happens on early release days, two ask whether walkers also report to the gym, and three ask whether the 3:05 rule applies to pick-up. Principal Hale has 15 minutes at the next staff meeting to clarify.
1. Identify the specific ambiguities in the memo and explain why each caused confusion.
Read the worked answer
1. 'Prior approval ... obtained from the office' does not name who approves or what form the approval takes. Four staff asked exactly this. Passive wording hides the agent.
2. 'Except on early release days when the schedule is different' names an exception without stating the alternate schedule. Three staff cannot act on 'different.'
3. 'Walkers are dismissed at 3:00' is not parallel with the bus-rider instruction, which specifies a location. Two staff reasonably wondered whether walkers also go to the gym.
4. The 3:05 rule versus 3:10 pick-up creates an apparent conflict: teachers are told not to release before 3:05, but pick-up begins at 3:10. Three staff asked which controls.
Why it failed: the memo mixes policy, exceptions, and logistics without a consistent structure. Readers must infer roles, locations, and precedence, so they fill gaps differently.
2. Revise the key sentences to remove the ambiguities. Explain the changes you made.
Read the worked answer
Revision: 'Teachers may release students at 3:05. To release a student earlier, the teacher must get approval from the assistant principal by 2:00. On early release days, follow the half-day schedule posted in the main office. Bus riders report to the gym by 2:55. Walkers are dismissed from their classrooms at 3:00. Pick-up students wait in the cafeteria until 3:10; teachers do not release them before 3:10.'
Changes and reasons:
- Active voice and a named approver remove the 'who' ambiguity.
- The early-release exception points to a specific posted document instead of saying 'different.'
- Parallel structure gives each group a time and location.
- The pick-up sentence resolves the apparent 3:05/3:10 conflict by stating the controlling time for that group.
Principle: operational memos should let a reader answer 'who, what, when, where' without asking.
3. What does the staff response reveal about audience awareness, and how should Principal Hale communicate the revision?
Read the worked answer
The 12 questions reveal that the memo was written from the administrator's mental model, not the staff's decision points. Staff need actionable specifics at the moment of dismissal: who approves, where students go, and which time controls. The memo supplied policy language but not operational answers.
Principal Hale should acknowledge the confusion briefly, present a one-page corrected table of times and locations, and state that the revision supersedes the earlier memo. Reading the memo aloud at the staff meeting is less useful than giving staff a chance to ask about edge cases. A short follow-up email with the table ensures the correction reaches everyone who may have deleted the original.