"More than ..."

I was struck by the term “civic capacity” as it relates to addressing the realities of an under performing school system.

What truly is the capacity of our citizens to not simply point out what isn’t working or needs to be improved but to authentically become part of the strategy and action to meet or exceed their expectations for high performing school system?

Within the context of “civic capacity”, the challenge for the school system is “truth telling” not excuse or explanation provider. We need to build stronger trust relationships with our parents and community by being honest about performance – especially classroom performance.

Consider report cards as one example. How accurate are the classroom‐based grades?

Nowhere is the integrity of our educators challenged more than when the End of Grade and End of Course test data reveal disconnects between a score and a grade. We can argumentatively take issue with the tests themselves but all students take them. We can offer myriad other explanations as well. But, at the end of the day the test score does not line up with the classroom grade.

It would seem that a student that “earns” and “A” in their class should score no less than a “4” on their

EOG/EOC test. It would also stand to reason that if a student scores a “4” they should also have earned an “A” in their course work. Unfortunately, these two don’t align.

We have a problem.

To build capacity with our citizenry to assist us with this work we need to not be afraid of acknowledging, accepting, and seeking assistance in those areas we have, to date, been unsuccessful.

Grading practices is but one of several areas that need to be addressed.

Our ability to communicate in such a manner that invites dialogue is equally a challenge. Two‐way conversations require engagement. Engagement requires action.

It also requires a mindset akin to what Stephen Covey wrote, “Seeking to understand before being understood”. Engagement is not telling. We often confuse engagement with involvement or participation. The prerequisite for involvement and participation is engagement.

We don’t listen well either. Consequently, many of our parents and community members choose not to share openly with us their thoughts, opinions, or possible solutions. We create further divisions within and throughout our community by earnestly not listening. More often or not, this is not intentional. Rather, the divisions continue often getting worse by our collective inability and thus capacity to communicate effectively.

We have a problem.

To build capacity for two‐way dialogue requires an unprecedented effort by all. It was and continues to be our intention to build trust through transparency.

Transparency requires humility and honesty about all aspects of operation. We have work to do.

Building “civic capacity” is not entirely the school systems responsibility. Yet, before we can expect differently from others – we must model and be the change we want in others.

We must do better. Doing better will require thinking and acting differently.

“Civic capacity” building is a challenge. We have worked to lay the groundwork through soliciting feedback, community forums, publishing quarterly newsletters, and etc. However, these have mostly been one‐way not two‐way conversations.

To that end, the 2011‐2012 public engagement plan will look, feel, and be different.

At the center is an intentional step towards building greater capacity for all that has an interest in the success of each learner in the Anson County Schools.

The Advance

The 2011-2012 Leadership Advance took place last week. The highlights of the Advance include a new planning protocol for schools and departments that mirror the district planning process. Each school and department will identify their “commitments” akin to the District’s Strategic Commitments.

The timing of this work is informed by the findings from both the Organizational Assessment and Comprehensive Needs Assessment that our school administration, staff along with the department heads and staff are not fully aware and therefore committed to the strategic direction of the system.

With commitments identified and written into all aspects of planning, the sense making necessary to create as well as ensure alignment of effort, resources, and effective practice will be tighter than ever before.

In addition to creating and using commitments for planning, implementation – deep implementation and monitoring is unequivocally the focus for 2011-2012.

To ensure deep implementation and monitoring, school and department leadership will use their commitments to drive their annual planning tables to address strategic and operational objectives resulting in performance improvement in each area of our system.

Leadership took the first steps in developing their planning tables by reviewing and reflecting upon student performance data and their comprehensive needs assessment data.

Leadership will continue to work on their annual planning table preparing to work with their staff in August to finalize strategies and actions steps. In the future, annual planning tables will be completed and submitted for approval in June to ensure additional time for implementation fidelity.

Principals were introduced to the concept of “playbook”. The playbook will be a monthly guide to assist in the facilitation of performance monitoring and progress to ensure implementation is effective.

The “advance” provided an overview of the “common core” for English and Mathematics that will replace the North Carolina Standard Course of Study (NCSCOS) in 2012. In July, principals with selected staff will begin the process of converting from NCSCOS to common core. The work will continue throughout the 2011-2012 school year.

Lastly, Leadership was formally introduced to the Learning Development Center (LDC) strategy to increase capacity for all staff. Principals were informed of the expectations for their participation with staff as well as training they will receive in July.

The format for the LDC is taking shape as three of the four leadership positions have been filled. The fourth will be filled shortly. Once filled, LDC leadership will engage in intensive training designed for adult learning.

The purpose of the LDC is first and foremost to develop awareness, understanding, and application of effective practice, develop common language, common purpose, and alignment.

In total, the Leadership Advance set the stage for work in July and August as well as the months of September through June 2012.

With little reservation, Leadership was clearly made aware of the expectations for implementation and monitoring of the work necessary to drive improvement – their responsibility for implementing and monitoring.

Further, it was clearly communicated that implementation and monitoring is not an option.

Though I will accept compliance we need commitment to the work. I illustrated this point with the assistance of Major Shaw (US Army, Retired). Using the giving, receiving, and execution of an order, I asked if receiving and executing an order was in any part, optional – open for discussion, debate?

Absurd? Absolutely!

An order given is expected to be carried out without question, compromise, or excuse.

There is a difference however between taking and carrying out an order as a matter of compliance or commitment.

Compliance is out of a sense of duty.

Commitment is out of a sense of ownership, responsibility, and accountability.

Though the result or outcome of an order is expected to be the same irrespective of compliance or commitment there is a difference – big difference!

Compliance is a “have to” whereas commitment is a “want to”.

Commitment is again, about ownership. It is seeing it, owning it, solving it, doing it. Compliance falls short. Commitment is the attitude, enthusiasm, motivation, and enduring effort to rise above our circumstances to achieve the results we desire.

Are we committed?

"Graduation"

The commencement exercises for the Class of 2011 are this Saturday. What is unique this year is that commencement is not just one school. Rather, it is a county commencement with four schools participating together.

The purpose behind a united countywide commencement is that for nine (9) of their thirteen (13) years the students we celebrate as meeting or exceeding graduation requirements were together. It is fitting, therefore, that they conclude together their public school experience.

The separation at high school although with the best of intentions has created division, confusion, inequities, additional costs, and myriad pressure points of, by, and for students, parents, staff, and the community.

Our societal propensity to compare in the name of competition is ubiquitous. The need to determine a winner – loser, who is superior – inferior, stronger – weaker, better – worse relationship has never served the aim or purpose of education – especially now.

The numbers I shared last week with respect to the Class of 2015 clearly demonstrate that the playing field is not level. In fact, it is significantly uneven.

I have spent several hours leading to long days considering what we can, what we should, and what we must do.

The obvious is “fixing” the K – 8 to ensure that each rising 9^th grader legitimately and authentically has access to any program, school for grades 9 – 12.

This is our aim. This answers, in a significant way, why we have put so much emphasis on technology based supplemental instructional programs, human capital development, systems alignment, and assessment literacy initiatives.

However, we have created or at best exacerbated the competition between high schools by not truly making them separate. Though argumentative, one way to achieve what other school systems are doing to ensure that schools like Early College or New Technology are indeed unique, separate, and successful in achieving what they were intended to accomplish is students attend those schools – attend just those schools. They don’t participate in athletics, activities, or even classes at their comprehensive high schools.

To achieve what our Early College and New Technology are envisioned to do, we cannot continue to send conflicting and confusing messages – go to another school but participate in co-curricular athletics at Anson High.

Interpretation?

“I don’t want to attend Anson High but do I want to play sports.” Anson is the only LEA in the state that allows this to happen. I think it is something we need to seriously review.

Again, knowing this, too, will be argumentative – the numbers I shared last week about proficiency percentages, ethnicity, and economically disadvantaged students and their placement works against the very aim we desire to achieve.

To that end, the smaller learning environments, the use of different instructional methodologies, and etc. are exactly what many of the students described by the aforementioned demographics need.

These comments are in no way meant to slight or minimize the accomplishments of our present students. Rather, it is fact that many if not all of the students graduating from Early College or New Tech would have been successful irrespective of what school they attended.

Alas, Saturday we set aside or attempt to set aside these differences, these issues. But we must not be deceived, the comparisons – right or wrong, good or bad, real or perceived – will take place.

Until we can improve the quality of, for, and by all students to ensure that they do, in fact, have choice about high school, we will continue to compare, continue to compete, and continue to have conflict.

For the moment, we must take a step back and celebrate the successes and accomplishments from members of the Class of 2011 no matter what high school they attended.

As we look forward, we must envision what our system could become for all students when we reach the point that all schools are choice schools where students, all students do in fact have choice, opportunity and access to attend.

Our work continues next week at the Leadership Advance – but this Saturday we celebrate our graduates – Congratulations to all –

"Owning comes before Doing"

The drama we call the end of the school year is unfolding minute by minute. Anxiety, angst, elation, relief, and all points in between are emotions students, staff, and parents experience. End of Grade, End of Course, Elements, Advanced Placement, Promotion, Selection, Graduation, Retirement, and general uncertainty converge to create a lot of stress for a lot of people. Add the war and rumor of war about budget and we have what many are predicting is the “perfect storm”.

None of us are immune. Each of us works through the circumstances differently. In the end, however, we are confronted with the same challenge – what did we do with what we were given.

Risking redundancy, I return to the definition of Accountability by Connors, Smith & Hickman from their work The Oz Principle (1994; page 65): “Accountability is an attitude of continually asking, what else can I do to rise above my circumstances and achieve the results I desire? It is the process of “seeing it, owning it, solving it, and doing it. It requires a level of ownership that includes making, keeping, and proactively answering for personal commitments. It is a perspective that embraces both current and future efforts rather than reactive and historical explanations.”

I am, again, including this definition of accountability as a reminder to us all.

We have a choice.

We really do.

There is an erroneous belief that circumstances can be controlled. I remember asking one of my son’s how tall he would like to be.

He responded, “My goal is to be 6’5”.

I then asked, “How many of the factors or circumstances do you control to meet or exceed your goal?”

He said, “Hmm … none”

I said, “Rather than height, your goal should be to become the best basketball player irrespective of your height.”

And that is exactly what he has done ‐

The one factor always within our control is our attitude. In fact, I would argue it is the only thing completely within our control.

We choose how we respond to circumstances.

What I appreciate most about this definition is the proactive rather than reactive mindset. I also appreciate the continual challenge of the process of seeing, owning, solving, and doing.

It is easy for many to simply see problems, issues, areas needing improvement, and the like. It is quite a different matter all together to own it especially when you probably had little, if any, role in creating the problem.

This, to me, is where the proverbial rubber meets the road. Owning it combined with a proactive mindset leads to the solving and doing action. I love this – However, breakdowns occur between the solving and doing.

Just as we have a number of individuals accomplished in seeing problems, we have just as many that have solutions. Seldom, if any, do these individuals actually take action to solve the problem.

Those individuals that fail or choose not to own the problem are generally the ones that never do.

Interesting isn’t it.

Failure to own leads to failure to do.

The challenge is not seeing the problem or even solving it. The heart of the matter is literally owning

and doing.

Seeing a problem changes when we own it.

Solving a problem changes when we own it.

Implementing a solution changes when we own it.

As established, this time of year can be overwhelming. Yet, attitude with the application of a process that allows us to rise above circumstances is not only timely but also critical for each individual and the system.

Imagine if you will, navigating through our circumstances proactively rather than reactively.

Imagine, if you will, each of us applying the process of seeing, owning, solving, and doing.

The process is not a quick fix or easy path – we must own our circumstances before we can solve and do.

We must own to move forward.