"To support or not to support is NOT the question"

A funny thing happened on the way to school today, change! It is not surprise that change happens although our reaction or response to change often runs the gambit of emotions. Nonetheless, change is.

Over the past several years we have introduced several initiatives especially in the area of literacy to address failed learning as well as the failure to learn. Where they have been fully embraced, unprecedented results have been realized. Where there has been reluctance, mixed results. Where little or no attempt to implement exists, little or no success has been realized. What is common in all three scenarios is a judgment about the initiative; either it works, kind of works, or doesn’t work.

Herein lies our dilemma.

The key to results is implementation. The key to implementation is the clear understanding of what is expected, why it is expected, and how to is to be accomplished. The problem however, is that more often or not, the “what” and the “why” never fully integrate into the “how”. Simply, implementation requires support – full support.

What baffles me as well as others, is that if we introduce a solution to a problem - a the solution that has yielded results (ones we desperately desire) – and it is cost effective and cost efficient, we have individuals that choose not to fully implement. Even when others in the same grade level, same school serving the same families, same community are getting results – we still have those that choose not to implement. Further still, individuals know full well that what they are currently doing has not worked for all students, never did and never will – they still don’t implement.

The quick response to implementation fidelity is to replace those that don’t support the initiative. Private sector is far less reluctant to take such action. In fact, private sector does not tolerate those that don’t support, don’t implement.

Query, if I am directed to implement an initiative and don’t fully or completely support it, but don’t fully or completely implement it, how can I possibly make any judgment or conclusion about the initiative? Isn’t this more or less a matter of integrity? Character?

It would seem that we do, indeed have a conundrum.

From my perspective, the course of action I choose to take, the course that maintains my integrity, is to fully implement leaving no doubt that I gave it my very best effort and if the results are not achieved, I can than make the judgment, the conclusion that it didn’t work.

Last year, as a member of the National Advisory Board for Scholastic I made the bold statement that we could if we wanted to, eradicate illiteracy in three years. We already know more than we need to do this –

In fact, we have everything in place in Anson County to do just that – eradicate illiteracy. We only need to have the integrity to implement the initiatives most of which are supplemental technology based instructional programs.

Headsprout Early Reading (HER) guarantees student reading at the end of completing 80 lessons. If we had each kindergartner completing those 80 lessons prior to first grade or at the very latest each 1^st grader finishing the 80 lessons we would have students at or above grade level no later than the beginning of second grade. Yet, we are hit or miss as to whether students have access or opportunity to complete Headsprout.

The effect of Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant – we have experienced incredible growth from students that have high frequency and completion of these products.

What part of the results don’t folks get? If students participate and complete they grow. Yet, access and opportunity to Fast ForWord/Reading Assistant in many cases is a matter of convenience not urgency.

Then there is Learning Together – the cross age tutoring program in Reading and Mathematics that some in our system conclude to be ineffective. Well, my only question is did they implement with commitment? The sad truth is that they haven’t.

These supplemental programs are complimentary to classroom instruction – not in place of or in competition with. They require constant and consistent use.

They do something that the classroom teacher cannot do – the ultimate in customizing and personalizing learning – learning that many teachers may be able to do if they had the time and expertise.

Simply, the question is not whether to support or not support these initiatives. Leadership must commit and fully support by first embracing a harsh reality. That is we won’t get different results by doing what we’ve always done.

Not sure why, at this point, with all the data we have of effect, that there remains a lack of support, full support of these programs. I just don’t get it.

If fully supported and the results aren’t what we desired or expected – we abandon it.

Have we not learned anything from past educational reform efforts? We must abandon what doesn’t work not dig in and hope it will work. In the aforementioned examples, we have results. Now, if we can individually as well as collectively fully support each we will know without question if they work or not. It is not a guess for me to say – they do and they will we just need to support them with a sense of urgency.

"The Aim"

What is our aim?

What are we trying to become?

With public education under unprecedented attack, what are we really trying to get done here?

For the past three and half years we have worked hard to create and communicate a compelling vision, a value proposition if you will, for pubic education. The vision, a preferred future for our school system – each learner, each staff, and each parent is informed by the school effects research emergent from the research conducted to refute the Coleman Report (see section on page 2)

These “effects” or correlates have over the past four decades been validated over and over again. These “effects” paint a picture of what a classroom, school, and school system look like, sound like, and feel like when they are consistently and constantly present and practiced. For quick review, the “effects” are:

A Climate of High Expectations

A Safe and Orderly Environment

Clear Instructional Focus

Frequent Monitoring of Student Learning/Effective Use of Data

Time on Task and Opportunity to learn

Strong Home/School Partnership

Clearly Understood Mission

When each are unpacked, they provide, what I believe, is the ultimate picture of the “what”, “why” and “how” of our work. Additionally, I think these correlates also create an aim for our school system. Before authentically moving toward achieving the more lofty aims or purposes of public education, we must have a clear picture of what our system must look like to accomplish the mission.

A key to seeing this vision is the integration of each correlate into a comprehensive picture. Though each individual correlate is powerful, it is when they are all present, all practiced – ubiquitous if you will, that the vision comes to life.

Imagine, for example, what the educational experiences of teachers and learners alike would be if a climate of high expectations for both academic and behavior were pervasive. Imagine if you can what our system would look, feel, and sound like with a clearly understood mission. Imagine still, a safe and orderly environment where not only inappropriate, interfering, or distracting behaviors were eliminated but also the behaviors that build confidence, capacity to risk, trust, and esteem in both teacher and learner were encouraged and supported. Wouldn’t that be powerful?

Unlike the oft associated definition of vision – something that is ideal or future orientated, the school effects research and each correlate do, in fact exist.

Schools matter. Teachers matter. Principals matter. Parents matter. Moreover, learning matters. Yet, we don’t believe collectively that we control the variables that most influence, impact student learning.

The fact that this research was and continues to be evident speaks to their utility and import. Yet, we don’t believe the evidence. Rather, we quickly dismiss the findings. Why?

I was saddened as I watched and listened to an ensemble of very talented high school students perform. My sadness was informed by a reality that we have the same level of talent in Anson County but … That’s right! What are the … preventing our students from developing or performing their talents and gifts?

My response to that question is anchored, in part, is the wrong response to accountability, learners failing to learn, and in many cases the inability to think differently about the problem, the cause, and solution.

A colleague shared with me this week that we must resist the temptation to fight backwards. We must also resist at all cost the tendency to revert to practices that we know don’t work and if truth be known, never worked.

We must fight forward on behalf of our students, staff, parents, and community. To do so requires an agenda that relentlessly pursues creating a new reality from a vision that has proven effective – almost 40 years of evidence. By the by, this aim benefits all children, all staff, and parents.

“When the facts change, I change my mind"

Recently I began reading Diane Ravitch’s (2010) Death and Life of the Great America School System: How Testing and Choice are Undermining Education. I am thoroughly enthralled with her observations, honesty, candor, self-disclosure, and recommendations. One such aw-haw moment comes in chapter one where she draws upon John Maynard Keynes the famous economists response to why he had changed his position on an economic theory, principle, or practice. When asked why he changed his position, he stated, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”

Ravitch herself has changed her position on accountability for several reasons. Let me be extremely clear, she has not dismissed accountability. Rather, “Accountability makes no sense when it undermines the larger goals of education.”

This statement certainly begs the question what are the goals or aim of education. Moreover, what are the essentials, the non-negotiables of education? As she unpacks these essentials, she contextualizes each with the accountability movement as well as the testing and choice emphasis of the past 10 years.

Here are Ravitch’s essentials of education:

1. We must make sure that our schools have a strong, coherent, explicit curriculum that is grounded in the liberal arts and sciences, with plenty of opportunity for children to engage in activities and projects that make learning lively.

2. We must ensure that students gain the knowledge they need to understand political debates, scientific phenomena, and the world they live in.

3. We must be sure that students are prepared for the responsibilities of democratic citizenship in a complex society.

4. We must take care that our teachers are well educated, not just well trained.

5. We must make sure that schools have the authority to maintain both standards of learning and standards of behavior.

Quite a list – the challenge however, is how do we accomplish these while simultaneously meeting testing and accountability requirements? As you surmise, the aim of education is not synonymous with testing and accountability. In fact, it is becoming clearer that the testing and accountability movement has actually worked against the very aim we desire to achieve.

I have and will continue to voice that the End of Grade and End of Course assessments will take care of themselves if, I do mean if, we focus on learning – not test taking. We have become numb in many ways to improving instruction for purpose of improving learning not improving test performance.

This is absolutely key – improving instruction for improving learning.

We must focus on improving instruction. The assessments and tests will take care of themselves.

As I pen my thoughts, comments, and observations this week, I would be disingenuousness if I didn’t disclose that I am troubled by the reality that we cannot escape testing and accountability as it is presently defined.

However, if we will accept and act that this reality does not and will not prohibit or obstruct a relentless pursuit of improving instruction to improve learning our students will not learn and achieve.

We know they can and will – our data is too compelling, too convincing, too encouraging. We, however, must change our minds to act – act with conviction, commitment, and courage.

The behaviors of commitment are different than those of compliance. The behaviors of conviction are different than those of condemnation. The behaviors of courage are different than those of status quo.

Yes, we have challenges.

The value proposition for learning is quite different than a grade or diploma for that matter. We, now more than ever, must assist or in some cases make the connection between learning and life for learners. We can’t assume that our learners, all learners make these connections or value learning.

I am reminded that if we will focus on those factors or variables we control our learners will learn. They are curriculum, instruction, and the learning environment.

These three combine to drive learning. This must be, therefore, what we focus on to fulfill the aim of education – learning.

This is why in the months ahead; we will work feverously to focus these three levers as the centerpiece of our human capital development initiative.

“The questions we ask, not the answers we give reveal our vision”

Effective leaders ask penetrating, thought provoking questions. As such, effective leaders seek to create experiences that connect, stretch, challenge, and produce different thinking. Seldom, if ever do effective leaders asked questions for any other reason. Rather, they ask with the intent of pro-action. That is, causing proactive thought not defensive, reactive thinking.

In the work of transforming our school system from one where significant numbers of learners fail to learners meeting or exceeding academic as well as behavioral performance expectations requires different questions.

Simply, we will not break ineffective behaviors, antiquated practices, and low expectations by asking questions that simply are not and cannot improve the work of teaching and learning.

Currently our Board of Education is reading the National School Boards Association (NSBA) publication, The Key Work of School Boards. This work is framed around eight areas that inform the work boards of education irrespective of system size, location, or demographics do and do well. The eight areas are: Vision, Standards, Assessment, Accountability, Alignment, Climate, Collaborative Relationships, and Continuous Improvement.

A chief reason for reading this book at this time is to build capacity in asking questions of and for the Board, the superintendent, and community. It is about focusing the work of transforming a school system and its’ elected governing board, administration, and community on just that, the key work.

Interestingly enough, the motivation for writing and publishing this work was to provide a tool for board members to best fulfill their leadership role. To that end, the NSBA identified the key components from effective and successful school board practice to create a tool that at its’ core is about asking questions – questions that cause authentic, transparent, and candid conversations creating a climate for continuous improvement.

The answers to the questions aren’t easy. Rather, they are penetrating and require sincere reflection both of self and the system. The questions also reveal something extremely important that is not in any way to be construed as a negative. These questions assist in identifying what we don’t know, don’t understand, or haven’t thought about.

A significant revelation of the past several years is that leaders don’t know it all and can’t do it alone. We all, and I do mean all; including myself have much to learn about transformation.

With no disrespect, had past leadership known what to do would we be working as hard as we have these past three and half years? Of course not, but knowing what to do is all about asking the “right” questions – questions that are proactive not reactive, questions focused on improving governance, leadership, instruction, and ultimately student learning and achievement.

To avoid, therefore, repeating the past, we need to ask better questions.

I would be remiss if I didn’t connect the questions we ask with the vision we desire to achieve. “Strategic vision involves connecting the realty of the present to the possibilities of the future”. The questions we ask, not the answers we give reveal our vision.

Transformational work is about vision – strategic vision. We must remind ourselves that the vision, that preferred future where all students meet or exceed local, state, and national academic standards begins with the questions we ask.

I can think of no better place to start than to use this powerful tool and framework to ask and discuss what has led to improved governance and system performance across public education.