Moving from Uncertainty to Confidence

The student learning and achievement results for 2009-2010 can be summed up with two words – inconsistent implementation!

A year ago the results achieved reflected a more focused alignment. Much effort was made and continues to align standards, curriculum, essential vocabulary, pacing guides, and effective instructional practice. However the implementation of the alignment of these critical, essential components varies as evidenced by results.

Diving deeper into the data, however, does show growth and in many cases high growth of student learning and achievement. Yet, the failure to “make” annual yearly progress (AYP) is akin to bittersweet. Schools not making AYP each demonstrated 85% or higher in meeting or exceeding growth and high growth targets. In some cases schools not meeting AYP out performed schools that did but not in the areas included in the calculus of AYP.

Nonetheless, inconsistency of implementation is a chief obstacle in meeting or exceeding expected and desired student learning and achievement results not to mention increasing consistency. Teetering on the obvious, we can either increase consistency or continue with the inconsistency and hope to get different results.

We have for the most part lived a life of uncertainty resulting in little or no confidence in improving student learning and achievement. Truth be known, we know what doesn’t work. The dilemma or possible delusion that many staff face is simply “knowing what they know” and changing practice even with the reality that what is being done doesn’t work is, well, daunting to say the least.

However, we can’t afford to live in uncertainty.

We may not know all that works effectively but we do know enough that if we give ourselves permission to be what our students are – learners, we can move from uncertainty to confidence.

Therefore a first step in moving from uncertainty to confidence is accepting and acknowledging inconsistent and ineffective practice. We now have several tools to inform both teachers and learners of progress toward meeting or exceeding standard in real time. We no longer have to wait until EOG/EOC results are reported to assess whether or not a strategy, practice, or program was effective. We have invested heavily toward increasing our collective competence in moving data from information to knowledge to wisdom for decisions to improve teaching and learning.

A second step is making an unwavering commitment to implementation. Though it may sound draconian, we don’t have time for folks to make decisions as to whether they “like” or “believe” in this or that. If we know “this” or “that” works and consistently produces the expected or desired results than “we” do it. To ensure fidelity administration must be clear in our expectations, monitoring, feedback, and assessment of implementation.

There are several examples in our system where inconsistent results reflect inconsistent implementation. No other program typifies this practice as much as Make Your Day (MYD). MYD works effectively and efficiently. Without exception where MYD is deemed ineffective the root cause is implementation not the program.

When we introduced MYD to our system we left wide-open the option for any school to choose not to do MYD. The option remains today. In fact, principals will be provided the option to opt out given one very important reason – the lack of consistent implementation. The inconsistency in some classrooms with MYD has little if anything to do with students – the students get it. Sadly, ineffective instruction can be attributed to the same cause – inconsistent implementation.

Why?

Great question.

Fundamentally, the greatest challenge of implementation is our value and belief system. Thus, the test before us is whether our value and belief system - the purpose, intent, and mission of education is such that we will abandon ineffective practices to implement effective practice.
Maybe Forest was right – implementation is as implementation does!

Truth Telling is a Two-Sided Coin

When was the last time you seriously consider the brand – Anson County Schools? What is our brand? Moreover, what are our brand deliverables? Literally every product or service has a brand. Companies, businesses, non-profits, and even our government have brands. Millions if not more are spent each year on “branding and brand management. Brand deliverables along with the brand experience create customer loyalty resulting in repeat sales, profit, and of course, good will. There is of course a negative side – if your brand and the brand experience is not positive there are deep, enduring, and often severe consequences.

Schools and school systems are late into the brand and brand management thinking. This hits home for the Anson County Schools in at least two areas if not more. For example the number of parents that choose to educate their children elsewhere (South Stanley, Union County, private, or home school) is a symptom of negative branding and brand experience. Another example is supporting a new high school. As the conversation about a new high school increases in intensity the negative brand and brand experience of Anson High School also increases.

How do we change our brand and brand experience?

First, let’s start with our thinking -
When you think of the Anson County Schools, what comes to mind? Is it positive or negative?
When your friends think and talk about the Anson County Schools, what words do they use to describe their schools?
When you think about the school system’s deliverables what comes to mind? What do you expect? Require?

The concept of branding and managing the brand experience are critical. Interestingly enough, branding and brand management heavily depend on employees as well as customers (recipients of a product or service).

We have been engaged over the past 36 months in changing our brand and much of this has to do with managing a new brand – a brand based on performance, results, effectiveness, efficiency, and “all means all”. Yet, in spite of these things we have individuals in our community that prefer to hold fast to the old brand – the brand of failure, low expectations, mediocrity, and low performance.

One of our strategies has been that of “truth telling”. We have put our performance data out with an agenda of transparency. Performance data with respect to teaching and learning, discipline, suspensions, and budget. Our intention has been clear. That is, we want our community, our staff, our parents, and our students to know our current reality. Yet, in some cases reality is a matter of perspective in spite of the data.

A challenge to improvement is myopic sight. It is very difficult to see beyond ones’ own perspective or viewing point. I think this challenge is possibly greater than any other obstacle. I fear that the inability to look and see with new eyes will continue to limit the needed commitment for our vision to achieve our mission as well as to live out our convictions. It seems convictions are easily espoused but difficult for some to live.

We must not accept such a limited view of the outstanding effort, work, and accomplishments achieved this year as well as in years past. We need to pay attention to our brand and brand experience.

It starts with us. What words do we use to describe the Anson County Schools? In the name and practice of transparency we are obligated to tell the positives, successes, and improvements along with those areas needing improvement or areas that did not perform to our expectations. Truth telling is a two-sided coin. Yet, more often than not the negative is told and fixated upon.

If our brand is negative, I wonder why?

Pressing On

Thought, Comment, or Observation

For any who believe we need to take our foot off the accelerator or even put the brakes on to all we are doing to improve teaching, learning, and leadership need only to present evidence that we have achieved our mission. I will certainly yield to the data.

Our evidence – student performance data for 2009-2010 will soon become a matter of public record. It will be released to our students, staff, parents, community, and state. These results will tell a story – or at least a chapter in a story about convictions, commitment, courage, and character.

This chapter – 2009-2010 will include successes and disappointments. This chapter will show growth – growth in every area. We will see schools making Annual Yearly Progress in every target area and others achieving many but not all.

The data – numbers and statistics are devoid of faces, names, and all that is human. This data, at the end of the day will cause people to make judgments, draw conclusions, and affix blame. Lost in these translations is a reality that numbers simply do not capture the humanity underpinning teaching and learning.

In that vain, numbers cannot be easily dismissed either. We cannot offer excuses, justifications, or rationales for continued under performance or continued poor performance. We must use the data to unpack the deficiencies in an unwavering commitment to inform and improve our work – the work of teaching.

In the past 36 months and as detailed in previous chapters (2007-2008 and 2008-2009), we have done much to begin alignment of standards, curriculum, instruction, and assessment but must intensify our efforts to get this in place.

Similarly, we must intensify and accelerate the work with common formative assessment and the benchmark assessment work to ensure alignment of standards, curriculum and instruction.

The answer to how is yes! We must press on!