"It was a Myth"

It is hard to believe that April is next week, finally. The speed of blur is the only way to summarize the past several weeks. We are feeling the effects of such a long period without breaks. Staff, students, and parents are each experiencing stress. The degree to which individuals cope, manage, respond or react to stress varies mostly by capacity.

Capacity is an interesting construct given that we would think that once capacity is built it remains forever. Well, we need only to consider literally the physical capacity of a twenty-two year old versus a fifty something. I actually have some experience with this – This past week I was speaking to one of my sons about being in “shape” – specifically cardiovascular. As I explained you simply cannot go out and run your best time in the 1600 meters (four times around the track) without running. You have to practice. You have to build muscular as well as “lung” capacity by actually running. You have to push yourself. You have to choose to run even when you don’t want to –.

It seemed to make sense. Did he go out and run? No, but he thought about it.

Speaking of thinking.

Mr. McLeod and I were discussing thinking and the barriers in the way of using ones’ mind well. We know from neuroscience that stress, chronic stress disrupts thinking. It can even have a cumulative negative impact on the habits of thinking that significantly inhibit, interfere, and prevent good, sound, rational, logical decision making.

As we were talking I recalled an opportunity in college to hear Jim Ryun, the runner who broke the world record for the mile at age 19 speak. He is a three-time U.S. Olympian in the 1,500-meters and held the world record in five events. He was the first high school age athlete to break four minutes in the mile run. He won three state mile run titles – the last a national record that still stands.

What was memorable from Ryun’s talk was his reference to Roger Bannister the former English athlete best known for running the first recorded mile in less than 4 minutes in 1954.

Ryun asked, “Why did it take so long to break the four-minute mile?” It simply was not thought possible.

“How long did it take after Bannister’s history making record for others to run a sub four-minute mile? Not long.

Once the sub four-minute mile was achieved, it was no longer thought impossible. In fact, Bannister’s time set in 1954 has been lowered by 17 seconds. The four-minute mile is now considered the standard for middle distance runners across the world. Bannister himself wrote later there was nothing mystical or magical about the four-minute barrier. “It was really more of a myth than anything physical”.

There it is!

Without question training, being in shape, practicing, were factors but it was the “thinking” that at the end of the day was the deciding factor.

Teetering on the obvious – stress impacts thinking.

Our challenge and possibly the challenge is building new capacities for responding, reacting to factors that create stress. One important fact about stress – it isn’t going away. Therefore, believing that stress can be removed or that one can remove oneself from stress is more a fallacy except in life threatening situations. Here’s why – it is how we respond or react that creates stress not an event, activity, circumstance or even a person or persons. It is more often or not our response or reaction.

So how do we train, get in shape, practice if you will, to think differently about stress and therefore shift or change how we respond or react? Great question!

The first step is accepting that stress is and will remain. The second step is becoming aware that how we respond, react is greatly determined by how and what we think.

What we think is heavily dependent upon our perception of control of the variable, events, circumstances, and etc.

Consider your recent reactions, responses to circumstances, events, or people for that matter, how much control do you really have over these variables?

Truth is – little or none.

What we do have control over is how we respond or react.

Hence, what and how we think determines how we behave.

The work of interacting, relating, and working with others involves so many variables outside our control. We need to understand this not as an excuse for helplessness or apathy. Rather, this understanding influences how we think – how we respond or react.

In many ways we create more stress by how we react and respond to stress.

One central strategy that experts agree we all can do to build capacity is rest, eat better, and exercise. Hmm … I guess I have to rethink my conversation with my son.

“Leading through voice, inspiring through trust and empathy”

In Managing People is Like Herding Cats (1999), author Warren Bennis penned, “The best leaders deal with this mercurial world by anticipating, looking not just down the road but around the corner; by seeing change as an opportunity rather than an obstacle; and by accepting it rather than resisting it” (Bennis, p. 111).

We have learned that effective leaders are not defined by title or position. Rather by action and most notably followership. As the late Reverend Dr. E.V. Hill stated, “If you think you are leading but no one is following, you are just out on a walk”. Followership is critical, essential, and without question central to the work of change – transformation if you will.

Followership exists in the classroom, school, and system. Followership requires humility. Followership is not however a position that is inferior to the leader(s). It’s complementary. Huh?

Consider, this excerpt comes from The Art of Followership posted by Workplace Insiders, “There are many definitions of followership. [From] the FBI Bulletin:

“Followership … represents an interaction that occurs when subordinates work concurrently with leaders toward a goal of the organization.”

Another from a 2006 article by a faculty member at Dalton State College:

“Followership is the willingness to cooperate in working towards the accomplishment of the organization’s goals and objectives, to demonstrate a high degree of teamwork and to build cohesion among the group.”

The idea that leadership and followership compliment one another is not new. In fact, good followership is a precursor for effective leadership.

We have for three and half years attempted to be “truth tellers” about our current reality as well as what it is going to take to break free from failure to learn.

We have introduced a new paradigm of accountability that relies heavily on each of us “taking responsibility and ownership of making, keeping and proactively answering for personal commitments as well as maintaining an attitude of continually asking what else can I do to rise above my circumstances and achieve the results I desire” to name just two components of the definition.

Leadership and followership are about respect, value, and worth. Simply, without followership there is no leadership. Without followership, little if anything, gets accomplished.

Imagine therefore, if leadership and followership were able to cooperatively and collaboratively work towards the goals, the expectations, and the requirements – our work of ensuring that each learner met or exceeded high standards – just what we would look like, feel like, and sound like.

The challenge before us is that we simply don’t have the critical mass just yet that believes and behaves in such a way to ensure that all learners can and will be successful.

In sharing with the middle school “leadership” and “followership” Monday, it is clear that we have some staff as is the case in all of our schools that really don’t want to empower students through the skills, knowledge, and experience of learning how to be responsible and accountable with the authority to monitor, measure, and report their performance in meeting academic and behavior expectations.

The mindset that we must control and force students to behave and therefore learn has to date failed to produce the results – the enduring habits of learning each individual desperately needs for life’s success – yet, there are many who believe just that – control them, force them and they will learn.

We know better – we must believe and behave better. By the way, our students know the difference!

"Dear Commissioners"

In this, my forth joint meeting I have participated in since becoming superintendent in July 2007, I would like to provide a quick overview of the work and how we are where we are, an update or status report of the work, as well as share those accomplishments, achievements, and recognitions the Anson County Schools staff and students have earned.

Though much has improved in the past three and half years, there are however, critical areas that remain challenging.

We have worked hard to raise awareness, understanding, and support for the initiatives undertaken to address both the failure to learn and failed learning.

We have put in motion comprehensive supplemental technology-based instructional programming to intentionally, specifically, and timely address students that have significant inexperience with foundational language and learning skills necessary to become successful readers and learners.

We have put in motion an ambitious expectation that all students will meet or exceed academic standards in Algebra before entering 9^th grade.

We have put in motion programming (AVID) at the middle and high school level to build capacity, resiliency, skills for success in college for those students that may not have those supports elsewhere. Though our high school AVID program will be undergoing a makeover, the middle level program has received regional and national recognition for excellence.

We have put in motion an alternative program operated by an Education Management Organization (Ombudsman) funded by a three-year $2.3 million dollar grant to authentically provide students access and opportunity to learn to meet or exceed college and career readiness skills, knowledge, and experience.

In addition to laptops, virtual learning, revisions and expansions to Career Technical Education (CTE) programming to create options and choices for all learners to name just a few of the initiatives to create value for teaching and learning are becoming firmly established.

The results indicate we are moving in the right direction. However, we should be – must be further along.

To address inconsistencies in performance, we are in the first full year of our formative assessment initiative where students and teachers look at teaching and learning performance every three-week to inform of and for improvement.

Though it may appear judgmental, our students can be, should be, and must be expected to perform to higher standards – academically and behaviorally.

In a like manner, our staff – all staff can be, should be, and must be expected to perform to higher standards.

Similarly, our parents, our community can be, should be, and must be expected to support teaching and learning to a higher standard.

The greatest threat to our work – the work of ensuring that each learner meet or exceed academic and behavioral standards is the tyranny of low expectations – we collectively expect too little.

No one is at fault - but all of us are at fault

No one is to blame – but we all share in the blame

A climate of high expectations for success will only come into existence by intentional thought, action, and commitment by all – not just the educators, the students, the parents, or the county – all means all!

Two truths that must be stated that if not embraced in a significant way will not allow us to move forward.

Truth #1

"The quality of an education system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers"

Truth #2

"The only way to improve learning outcomes is to improve instruction"

These truths form the basis of our human capital development initiative (see section titled RttT for more details).

Over the next three years we will make an unprecedented investment in the learning of our teachers and administrators to fulfill both the aforementioned truths.

Suffice it to say, we are pleased with our improvement but far from satisfied.

Respectfully,

Dr. Gregory A. Firn

"Awareness, Understanding, Support"

The dismantling of public education continues. The dismantling is not surprising. In fact, given the preoccupation with testing as the single measure of “effect” of teaching and learning is the result of several years, possibly decades of reducing the complexity of teaching and learning to a linear formula that if dedicated, caring, compassionate, and committed educators would simply follow, students would excel.

The only problem with such thinking is that teaching and learning is complex, dynamic, fluid, and full of uncertainties, attributes or factors that vary in the degree of influence or cause. The absence by policy makers to acknowledge that teaching and learning is all of the above is telling of a different agenda.

The agenda of ensuring all learners meet or exceed standards of literacy, numeracy, writing, and citizenship require a different mindset – arguably missing.

Required is a clear aim of and for education – one that includes reality and vision, more dreams than memories, solutions over excuses, and results rather than promises.

We have a plan.

Our plan is working.

What we have learned in working our plan is that three (3) requirements simultaneously interact and integrate. These are 1) awareness, 2) understanding, and 3) support. When these three are present, practiced ubiquitously the plan (a.k.a. Strategic Commitments) comes to life and is implemented yielding results.

We have results but they’re not consistent!

Our results are powerful but we are not there yet!

We did not become low performing – persistently or consistently low performing overnight. We also did not become low performing intentionally or with malice.

We will not, therefore, become high performing overnight.

The steps toward high performance requires a plan but the plan as we have learned has not fully or completely been implemented for one very powerful reason – culture.

The root cause of persistently or consistently low performing schools is not the students or the parents or the teachers or the administration or the community. Rather, it is culture.

What is it about our culture?

We have attempted for almost four years to bring to life seven correlates of high performing, effective schools. These correlates are the operating system producing high performing teachers and learners. These correlates will cause fidelity of implementation of our Strategic Commitments.

Looking at just one ...

A Climate of High Expectations for Success- Dr. Lezotte wrote:

“The First Generation: In the effective school there is a climate of expectation in which the staff believe and demonstrate that all students can attain mastery of the essential school skills, and the staff also believe that they have the capability to help all students achieve that mastery.

The Second Generation: In the second generation, the emphasis placed on high expectations for success will be broadened significantly. In the first generation, expectations were described in terms of attitudes and beliefs that suggested how the teacher should behave in the teaching-learning situation. Those descriptions sought to tell teachers how they should initially deliver the lesson. High expectations meant, for example, that the teacher should evenly distribute questions asked among all students and should provide each student with an equal opportunity to participate in the learning process. Unfortunately, this "equalization of opportunity," though beneficial, proved to be insufficient to assure mastery for many learners. Teachers found themselves in the difficult position of having had high expectations and having acted upon them—yet some students still did not learn.

In the second generation, the teachers will anticipate this and they will develop a broader array of responses. For example, teachers will implement additional strategies, such as reteaching and regrouping, to assure that all students do achieve mastery. Implementing this expanded concept of high expectations will require the school as an organization to reflect high expectations. Most of the useful strategies will require the cooperation of the school as a whole; teachers cannot implement most of these strategies working alone in isolated classrooms.

High expectations for success will be judged, not only by the initial staff beliefs and behaviors, but also by the organization’s response when some students do not learn. For example, if the teacher plans a lesson, delivers that lesson, assesses learning and finds that some students did not learn, and still goes on to the next lesson, then that teacher didn’t expect the students to learn in the first place. If the school condones through silence that teacher’s behavior, it apparently does not expect the students to learn, or the teacher to teach these students.

Several changes are called for in order to implement this expanded concept of high expectations successfully. First, teachers will have to come to recognize that high expectations for student success must be "launched" from a platform of teachers having high expectations for self. Then the school organization will have to be restructured to assure that teachers have access to more "tools" to help them achieve successful Learning for All. Third, schools, as cultural organizations, must recognize that schools must be transformed from institutions designed for "instruction" to institutions designed to assure "learning."

We would be well served – moreover, our community, parents, staff, students, and all that are interested in all students being successful now and in the future would be best served by creating and sustaining first, a climate of high expectations – for all!

"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.