Friday, April 20, 2012

A Reader Asks... So What's My Number?

A LYS Principal asks:

SC,

I keep hearing all these numbers about the number of walk-thru’s I should do? Instead of having yet another person who has never done a walk-thru tell me some number she pulled out of thin air, a figured I might as well ask a real expert.

SC Response

“Expert” may be a little bit of hyperbole. But I do believe that flattery is a skill that should be acknowledged, so thank you. I will admit that I do speak as an early adopter and focused practitioner on the use of frequent, formative classroom observation. The standard is 4 to 5 walk-thru’s a day, if you are on campus. Also the number is per day, not per week. Our business is instruction, as such, we must actively observe, monitor and support instruction every day. Otherwise, we are ignoring our business.

Now here is where most central office administrators miss the boat. They tell principals that they have to do 25 walk-thru’s a week. That means by their calculation, if I do zero walk-thru’s Monday to Thursday and 25 walk-thru’s on Friday, that’s OK. It is not. It also means that if central office takes a principal off campus for two days a week for central office meetings that the principal is still accountable for the weekly total. Again, that is incorrect thinking.

So what is the number? Anything over 600 documented walk-thru’s a year by campus administrator puts you in the top tier. Anything less than 400 puts you in the ranks of the also-rans. The Super Stars conduct around a 1,000 documented walk-thru’s a year.

But here are two things I want you to take away from this discussion.

1. The most important thing and the least important thing about walk-thru’s is the raw number. If you don’t do enough, you will not get the learning benefit. If all you care about is number, you are most likely missing the learning benefit.

2. It takes about 300 walk-thru’s to notice (and subsequently learn) something new. My question to campus administrators is do you want that learning of something new to occur every three months or every three years.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

  • Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies available on Amazon.com! http://tinyurl.com/4ydqd4t
  • Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation
  • Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Plans (Fundamental 5 Lesson Plan Tool); PW Lite (Basic PowerWalks Tool); PW Pro (Mid-level PowerWalks Tool)
  • Confirmed 2012 Presentations: NASB Conference; TASSP Conference (multiple sessions); Region 10 ESC Fall Leadership Conference (Keynote)

Thursday, April 19, 2012

The Big Easy Shares... Second Grade Math Exit Ticket

The Big Easy sent the following note and picture:

SC,

I was on an LYS campus last week and a second grade teacher shared some exit tickets that her students had just completed. I’ve included a picture of one of them.

Notice that the student had picked up on the power of the “We will...” and “I will...” statements.

Pretty awesome!

SC Response

More like Freaking Awesome! It’s obvious that the student is using the Lesson Frame. Also, great use by the teacher of an exit ticket. And think about this, this is critical writing in a math class, by a second grader!!!

Thanks for sharing and let the teacher and the principal know that they are doing us proud.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

  • Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies available on Amazon.com! http://tinyurl.com/4ydqd4t
  • Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation
  • Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Plans (Fundamental 5 Lesson Plan Tool); PW Lite (Basic PowerWalks Tool); PW Pro (Mid-level PowerWalks Tool)
  • Confirmed 2012 Presentations: NASB Conference; TASSP Conference (multiple sessions); Region 10 ESC Fall Leadership Conference (Keynote)

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Teacher Evaluations and Test Scores

It seems like every day I read where another school is using test scores to evaluate teachers. When I review these plans, almost every one of them has significant flaws in either design and/or planned implementation. Since I am a firm believer that student performance and measurable results should be reflected in educator evaluations (from teacher to superintendent), unlike most critics, instead of throwing stones I will share a draft of actionable solution.

A. It’s not about raw test scores, it’s about value-added. Sorry educators who work with affluent, GT, Honors, and AP students, you have to be on the hook also. You don’t get credit for the fact that these students are already performing at a level of comparative success. Your evaluation has to be based on what you were able to do with all of that raw talent.

B. I’ve yet to observe a district that has the internal focus and discipline to fairly evaluate teachers (based on value-added principles) who teach in non-tested grades and subjects. District developed end of course (EOC) exams could work. But, what district wants to show its public that along with struggling to meet the performance requirements of state mandated exams, that it is also has similar problems in grades and courses that no one has been watching?

C. If teachers are accountable for student performance, then campus support staff (AP, counselor, etc.) has to be accountable for teacher team performance. The Principal has to be accountable for campus performance and Central Office has to be accountable for district performance. Here is fan equitable way to set up such a system. Campus support staff are evaluated based on the performance of the weakest teacher on their team. The Principal is evaluated based on both that floor and ceiling of student performance. Central office staff is evaluated based on the results of the lowest performing campus in the district.

D. The critical variable in value-added evaluation is the performance of academically fragile student populations.

E. There must be the recognition by the organization that state rankings are not equal. Take two “Recognized” campuses. School A with a 4% at-risk population and School B with a 70% at-risk population. In this case, the overall accomplishment of School B and it’s staff would be greater than School A. There should be additional reward for School B.

F. Now for teachers, here is my simple value added performance evaluation.

  • Pass / Fail - Components of being a good employee (timely, reliable, professional, etc.) The teacher that can’t meet basic work expectations is a liability to the organization. Pass, continue the evaluation. Fail, terminate the employment relationship.
  • 20% - Components of being a good team member (participates, collaborates, communicates, etc.)
  • 20% - Components of being a good instructor (observable components of pedagogy, classroom environment, content expertise, data use, etc.)
  • 30% (or 0%, if prior year content area EOC is unavailable) - Improvement from the prior year content area EOC. District developed EOC is used in instances where state developed EOC is not administered.
  • 30% (or 60%, if prior year content area EOC is unavailable) - Performance on the EOC. District developed EOC is used in instances where state developed EOC is not administered.

Granted, the plan above isn’t perfect, but it is miles ahead of everything that I have reviewed. Mull it over for a while and then let me know what you think.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

  • Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies available on Amazon.com! http://tinyurl.com/4ydqd4t
  • Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation
  • Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Plans (Fundamental 5 Lesson Plan Tool); PW Lite (Basic PowerWalks Tool); PW Pro (Mid-level PowerWalks Tool)
  • Confirmed 2012 Presentations: NASB Conference; TASSP Conference (multiple sessions); Region 10 ESC Fall Leadership Conference (Keynote)

Tuesday, April 17, 2012

Superintendent's Corner: Three Legged Stools

Below is a submission from a LYS Superintendent:

I am reminded of the customer who enters an engine shop and wants a 1) high performance engine; 2) that is reliable enough to drive daily; and 3) is inexpensive to build. The old saying is pick any two of the three; the third is compromised. Inexpensive and fast will not be reliable. Inexpensive and reliable will not be fast. Reliable and fast will not be inexpensive. You get the idea.

I suspect such a relationship exists in public school finance. We have three competing priorities: efficiency, effectiveness, and equity. Each of these competing priorities are complex and subject to interpretation, but I will weigh in.

First, let’s address efficiency. Of the three it is the only priority required by the Texas Constitution. In the modern context many argue that the framers of the Texas Constitution meant for efficiency to be translated as equitable. I am not convinced, but I do know attorneys make a living in the intricacies of such language, and I am not an attorney. I think efficient, in the financial sense, means getting the most output from the money put into the system. There is friction in any system, and friction causes inefficiency. In organizations, friction almost always increases with organizational size and complexity. As more is demanded from an organization, size and complexity are almost sure to increase.

Second, we will discuss effectiveness. In the simplest terms I can think of, effectiveness is determined by the mandates and accountability standards required of schools. To be sure, adding mandates is likely to increase organizational size and complexity. And, as we have discussed, if organization size and complexity increases, “friction” increases, and the system is likely to be less efficient. In this example we are beginning to see the interdependence of efficiency, effectiveness, and equity.

Third, we have perhaps the most misunderstood American idea: equity, or it’s cousins, equality and fairness. I don’t care to get into a discussion of the historical context of equality or equity. Certainly I believe our current definition of equality does not match the definition of equality our country was founded upon, but that is a different discussion. In context of Texas school funding equity seems to be interpreted as fair and equal. Equity is the 800 pound gorilla in the room, because equity to one person may very well seem inequitable to another. People living in high property wealth districts think it is pretty inequitable that their tax dollars get redistributed to property poor districts across the state. People living in property poor districts want their children to have the same opportunities that other children have. In the end it becomes a question of how much equity, or inequity, will be tolerated. As one person’s equity is often another’s inequity, there has to be a balance, otherwise a revolt begins. I believe we are in the midst of such a revolt in Texas and perhaps across the nation. In order to fund property poor districts at a sufficient level, taxation and redistribution of taxation has reached a point deemed intolerable and inequitable by the people paying the bulk of taxes. That is a problem. On the other end, state demands for increased school effectiveness for all children creates a demand for an ever increasing stream of funding in order to create organizations that will meet the effectiveness requirements. As funding increases and organizations grow in size and complexity the organizations become less efficient. Clearly the imbalance is driven by ever increasing state demands for effectiveness, the need for taxation cash flow to pay for the effectiveness, and the amount of taxation and redistribution of taxation that will be tolerated. The question now is, how much effectiveness and equity can we afford?

So we get to the trifecta I suspect exists, a trifecta that is making it virtually impossible for Texan’s to resolve the school funding issue.

A system that is highly efficient and highly effective will not likely be highly equitable. The amount of funds needed and the redistribution of those funds will leave one group feeling disenfranchised.

A system that is highly efficient and highly equitable will likely not be highly effective. Some of the mandates and accountability standards would have to be relaxed, hence compromising effectiveness.

A system that is highly equitable and highly effective will not likely be highly efficient, as the cost to maintain the high effectiveness will require a tremendous amount of organizational structure and complexity.

So where does that leave us? Clearly the public has little stomach for more taxation. That limits the amount of effectiveness that can be squeezed out of the school system. We seem to be at a point where the State of Texas can not afford the level of effectiveness it wants from public schools. It also seems the amount of income redistribution that will be tolerated by the public has reached an imbalance in equity. One solution is:

Roll back mandates and accountability to a manageable, affordable level.
This will require less money and redistribution of money, which will likely ease the imbalance of equity.
This will also lead to a more efficient system as schools will need less organizational size and complexity.

Of course there are other solutions, but the point is a three legged stool can be balanced, if the legs are strategically placed.

Mike Seabolt

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

  • Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies available on Amazon.com! http://tinyurl.com/4ydqd4t
  • Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation
  • Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Plans (Fundamental 5 Lesson Plan Tool); PW Lite (Basic PowerWalks Tool); PW Pro (Mid-level PowerWalks Tool)
  • Confirmed 2012 Presentations: NASB Conference; TASSP Conference (multiple sessions); Region 10 ESC Fall Leadership Conference (Keynote)

Monday, April 16, 2012

Top LYS Tweets from the Week of April 8, 2012

Wake up, technophobes. I was recently reviewing some research conducted by some graduates students. In a survey of high school students, they found that those that frequently use computers in class, 55% reported that they felt challenged by their course work. Of those who did not regularly use computers in class, only 5% reported that they felt challenged.

Obviously, I would take this with a grain of salt. But it is an interesting factoid that reminds us that gap between the world that students live in and world that adults live in can differ dramatically. In most cases, it is our job as educators to help students transition successfully into our world. But in the case of technology, the transition to a new world is solely our own. Embracing bootleg technology is a critical step in our remaining relevant. We don’t want to end up being the next generation of beeper salespeople.

A number of you in the LYS Nation are now using your own bootleg technology devices to follow Twitter. If you haven’t done so yet, we want you to join us. To let you see what you are missing, here are the Top 10 LYS Tweets from the week of April 8, 2012.

1. School Improvement Demystified: 1 - Teach the right thing. 2 - Teach the right thing, longer. 3 - Teach the right thing, longer and better.

2. Coach Abernathy has 60 students in her PE Class. All 60 are on task (soccer drills). Four of the Fundamental 5 practices are in play. Awesome!

3. Strange how the teacher who gets frustrated when kids don't get it on the first try believes change that effects adults should be eased into.

4. BRILLIANT: People who read on digital devices are much more likely to increase, not decrease, how often they read. (By @anniemurphypaul)

5. When you have students discuss what they have read, with each other, Rigor and Relevance invariably increases. It works every time.

6. Teaching in a cluttered, messy or disorganized room is like running a 100-yard dash while wearing a 50-pound backpack.

7. Easiest teaching tip of the year. You can improve student performance by simply opening the blinds and letting in the sunlight.

8. The more I observe classrooms the more I believe that teacher personality is a primary factor in student discipline referrals.

9. Moneyball: "Old school baseball is asking all the wrong questions... and challenging that makes you an outcast". Note to self: Be the "outcast" (By @tlonganecker)

10. Texas ranks near the bottom in funding. Shock. (By @DrJerryBurkett)

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

  • Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies available on Amazon.com! http://tinyurl.com/4ydqd4t
  • Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation
  • Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Plans (Fundamental 5 Lesson Plan Tool); PW Lite (Basic PowerWalks Tool); PW Pro (Mid-level PowerWalks Tool)
  • Confirmed 2012 Presentations: NASB Conference; TASSP Conference (multiple sessions); Region 10 ESC Fall Leadership Conference (Keynote)