A Reader Writes... (... Not Getting the Job Done)

In response to the post, “Who Really is Not Getting the Job Done,” a reader writes:

“Teachers want great leadership. However, we sometimes get so caught up in our daily routines that we forget what our job is about. As educators, we need to focus on what is best for the children and how can we make the staff we have the best they can be. We cannot stand by as we watch ineffective teachers educate our classrooms. We must take charge of the situation and find a solution. If after it is all said and done and the teacher does not improve replace that person.”

SC Response
Everybody craves leadership. And, we all function better when we trust leadership and believe that leadership is vested in our success. Key though, is how success is defined. Great leaders ensure that the definition of success is concrete and constantly communicated (examples: Take THAT hill; If it is not right for students, it is wrong; etc.). Struggling and poor leaders either do not know or cannot define organizational success; and/or do not regularly communicate their expectations. In that void, the organization devolves into an every man for himself (or every teacher in their own silo) situation.

Second, behind defining and communicating organizational success, is providing tools and training for staff. Great leaders prepare their staff to be successful. They ensure that a common scope and sequence is available. They ensure that the master schedule is logical and is conducive to quality instruction. They ensure that training is geared towards building critical skills (such as the Cain/Laird Fundamental Five). They ensure that staff receives critical information in a timely fashion. Poor leaders just throw their people into the meat grinder and hope for the best. The lucky (?) staff simply survives to fight another day.

Third, great leaders constantly monitor, support and enforce. In a school setting, they hyper-monitor, noting trends and responding to organizational strengths and weaknesses. They provide regular and timely support, specifically geared to allow staff to meet organizational goals. And, they enforce expectations. They understand that not working with the organization is the same as working against to organization. Poor and less effective leaders hide from classrooms and avoid the uncomfortable leadership tasks that are critical to protecting and improving the organization.

Finally, leadership does not just mean "Principal". Leadership encompasses lead and master teachers, department chairs, instructional coaches, assistant principals and a host of others. The Marines believe that whenever there are two or more Marines together, one is always the leader. So, Lead Your School Reader, who are you today? Who will you be tomorrow?

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

A Reader Writes... (A Fatal Flaw - Part 5)

In response to the post “A Fatal Flaw,” and the subsequent comments, a reader writes:

“…professional development is a necessary means to document that you have tried everything you can for an employee before showing them the door. Not to mention, if it is thoughtful and relevant, it can be very useful!

With my hyper-monitoring this year, our math scores went from acceptable to exemplary. Five teachers have been given the opportunity to explore other career options and student discipline has been given an extreme make-over.

This is what happens when a green, jar-head, rookie vice principal implements the Cain principles without exception. My military background says that you cannot do everything either, you have to delegate and have people you can trust around you, because they will make you shine, or blot out your sun…”

SC Response
I appreciate the props, but they are not solely my principles. It is basic, common sense leadership. Communicate your intent and expectations. Provide resources, monitoring, coaching and frequent feedback. Support those who are working to further organizational goals. Remediate and/or remove those that do not. Focus on student performance and remember that the “easy” kids will learn in spite of you, the tough ones learn because of you.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

A Reader Writes... (A Fatal Flaw - Part 3)

In response to the post and comment, “A Fatal Flaw – Past 2,” a reader writes:

“I think I agree with the poster, but caution is needed. I used to think that if I took care of teachers, teachers would take care of kids. I could not have been more wrong. Without hyper-monitoring and common assessments many teachers will not meet the needs of students. Professional development is OK and needed, but think about this: most teachers have read about and been exposed to the ideas of best practices. If they are not practicing them, they either don’t know how to go from theory to practice, or they want to do their own thing (or both).

This makes me wonder how effective continued professional development can be. If you can’t execute the fundamentals, why get training on advanced topics? If teachers don’t know how to go from theory to practice, that is where an awesome principal is required. As I have stated in previous comments, if you can’t give a teacher specific, efficient, and effective methods to improve instruction, you need to re-evaluate your ability as an instructional leader, and start making adjustments to your own practice. Don’t just tell teachers that rigor is low, anyone can spot that. Tell them with great detail how to fix it; not many principals can do this.

In my military days, I was taught to lead from the front, not the rear. This is what Cain is talking about when he writes about credibility and “every adult a teacher”. It boils down to the fact that almost every administrator can talk the talk, but few can walk the walk. Show me an ineffective campus and I will show you ineffective teachers, supported from the rear - by ineffective administration.

By the way, I have walked many students to class, virtually holding their hand. I frequent the life skills class to support the neediest of my students. I have taught students math who were sent out of class by teachers. I have disciplined students, even though I have assistant principals for that task. I counsel students, even though I have counselors for that task. I have rendered medical aide to students, even though I have a nurse for that task. So yes, the principal is supposed to “walk students to class by the hand”, so to speak, if that is what it takes to win. I don’t like losing.”

SC Response
The writer is spot on. His comments set up a big reveal that few in authority want to hear. Though the symptoms may manifest themselves in any number of ways, school failure always boils down to a failure in leadership. The leadership failure can occur as close to the classroom as the Department Chair and as removed from the classroom as the School Board. My job and skill set is to identify the leadership breakdown and provide the prescription that reinforces the systems that support teachers and students.

In this role, there are two facts that quickly become apparent. First, the higher up the leadership failure, the more critical it is for an outsider to identify and address it. If you don’t believe this, then feel free to go tell your Superintendent everything he or she is doing wrong. This generally is a very good career move – for the person who wants your job.

Second, the campus principal can correct the leadership failures at his or her level and below. And most importantly, for as long as he or she as the energy, the principal can overcome most of the failure of leadership above his or her level.

Unfortunately, if you are fighting the failures above your level, you won’t be appreciated and when you leave the results of your hard work will quickly fade away.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your Turn...

A Reader Writes... (Nesting, Part 3)

In response to the post and subsequent comments relating to, “Are You a Nester,” a reader writes:

“If nesting is your only administrative sin, you are not doing too bad. I have met hundreds of principals, and those that know a substantial amount about curriculum and instruction are few. Let me put it a different way. It is easy to sit in a football stand, watch a play go down, and then call it good or bad. Many times it is obvious; if the QB is nailed 15 yards behind the line of scrimmage, not so good. If the play results in a TD, awesome play.

The point is, everyone sitting in the stands can spot a good play or a bad one, but only a good coach can give the players realistic advice on what went wrong and how to fix it. Instruction is the same way. Almost any principal can quickly learn to spot good instruction from not so good instruction. But, can the principal provide the teacher with realistic, specific, and effective strategies to improve instruction? I don't mean telling the teacher that rigor is low and it needs to improve. I mean can you, as the principal, not only spot poor instruction but quickly and effectively coach it into a win? Can you analyze a specific lesson in math, science, English, and social studies and give specific (not the general education double-talk stuff) feedback that will certainly improve the instruction? I have met VERY few principals who can do this, yet this should be the bread and butter of instructional leadership in my view.”

SC Response
Now were cooking with gas! The type of instructional leadership your describe is rare. But it has the potential to become less so. Those instructional leaders who have adopted the Foundation Trinity on their campus, religiously conduct their 20 to 25 five walk-thru’s each week, and then maintain a regular and purposeful dialogue with instructional staff, based on both data and what they have observed, have a shot to make the leap. When I say a shot, it is in recognition of what Don Brown calls the art and science of leadership or what Micheal Fullan describes as the nuance of leadership. Just going through the motions puts you in the position to develop the insight necessary to move from hack, to technician, to artist. But, there is no guarantee. The advice the hack gives never evolves past work harder, faster and longer. The technician advises to work the plan, but cannot see beyond the plan. The artist makes minute changes to the instructional dynamic to change the future.

So I agree that the big picture goal is to become an exceptional instructional leader. I also recognize that in that pursuit, there are some fundamental practices that we cannot abandon. Two of those being the disciplined execution of the Foundation Trinity, and the purposeful manipulation of the educational environment in order to leverage effort.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

Are You a Nester

Lead Your School readers who are hyper-monitors will appreciate the following; it is the product of very pro-active assistant principal that I have worked with during the past couple of years.

“Are you a nester? You might be if any of the following are true:

A. You can’t see your desk!

B. You can’t sit at your desk because there is no place to put your legs because of the stacks of paper and books you have hidden!

C. Your bookshelves are not organized or junky!

D. Stacks of paper are piled to the ceiling!

E. Supplies are strewn everywhere!

If this is you, CLEAN AND ORGANIZE YOUR DESK AND CLASSROOM”

Just a friendly reminder from someone in the trenches.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

A Reader Writes... (Engaging Students)

In response to the post, "When Does Your School Start and End," a reader writes:

"The biggest problem my school has is that the faculty is disengaged from the students. It seems to be a hard problem to solve."

SC Response
This is a difficult issue on almost every campus. It's not that every teacher is disengaged from every student. It is the fact that teachers pick and choose both when they will engage and who they will engage with. What makes this insidious is that when you pick and choose when to engage, your mind thinks that you are engaged all the time. The result is that at any one time, significant numbers of students are left bobbing in the wake, like flotsam and jetsam.

So how do you combat this? I think there are a number of strategies. First, is awareness. Just as Hyper-monitoring holds a mirror to instructional practice, you need to hold a mirror to teacher / student relationships. You can do this through regular observation by the administrative staff and/or by using an external coach. My opinion is that the external coach would actually see the extent of the problem more clearly.

Second, talk about the issue. Leadership has to be a broken record in communicating the expectation that teachers engage with all students, all the time. I was recently on a campus that is dealing with this issue and the coaching framework we are using is Disney World. At Disney World, when the cast is above ground, in the park, they are always in character. No exceptions. In schools, as soon as we get out of our car in the morning, we have to be in character, until we get back in the car at night. We can't pick and choose when we will be in "teaching" mode during the day. Kids get regularly and frequently trampled when we operate in this way.

Third, use site visits. Take a team of your teacher to another campus and have them observe the student / staff interactions. It is easier to see our weakness in others than it is to see them in ourselves. And once we visualize the problem, we are in a better position to correct it.

Finally, you may just need to remove the staffer. Schools do not exist to provide steady paychecks to anyone who shows up. They exist to teach students and serve the community. If you are stubbornly hanging on to convenient habits that are detrimental to kids, then you have to go. As I remind everyone I work with, the only unforgivable sin is not being coachable.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

A Reader Writes... (Instructional Leadership)

In response to the post, “Instructional Leadership in Action,” a reader (and Brown Guy) writes:

“I have an alternate system that produced some fairly impressive gains in the success rate of students who were expected to fail (i.e. bubble kids). Our campus had experience with the round robin rotation method. We used it year after year without noticeable results (as a side note, we did not know how to use data, hyper-monitoring, or the foundation trinity, so of course it did not work). Anyway, I refused to allow my math and science teachers to continue with the same tried and true, unsuccessful plan (they were not happy with me).

I challenged them to develop an alternate plan and they just could not think of one. Given the absence of their alternate suggestion, we identified those students who might have a chance of passing, if they were given the proper support. Once we had those students identified (based on common assessment data), each teacher was assigned 6 students at random as their personal charge. As principal, I gave them complete freedom to work whenever they could with their students (before school, during lunch, after school, at night, on Saturdays, between classes, during electives). It was their task and challenge to figure it out how to make it work. I monitored the teachers to make sure huge complicated plans did not develop, we focused on simple and workable. In short, my charge to the teachers sounded something like this, “Bob, here are your 6 students, they must pass.”

No matter what they asked me after that, my only response was, “I understand, so, go figure it out.”

Understand, we had great teachers who really cared for the kids, and had always given 100%, but this method forced them to look at specific learning gaps for individual children, not collective masses of faceless students. They were responsible for flesh and blood children whose future hinged on their ability as a teacher to save them. I loved it, they grumbled and fussed a little, and then really went to work. It was amazing. The results were that 2 out of every 3 coached students passed the test 4 weeks later.

For many, it was the first time they had ever passed the math or science TAKS. As leaders, we sometimes sell our people short by insulting them by micromanaging. In this case, it certainly was not micromanaged.

Given what we have learned about common assessment data, and hyper-monitoring, with hindsight I wish we had used both systems, we just might have gotten that other 1/3 to pass. My suggestion: blend both methods. Your students will benefit.”

SC Response
What is key to this comment and my post is that re-teaching has to be different from original teaching. Just doing the same thing louder, watered down, or less interestingly won’t reach the students who need the most support.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

Instructional Leadership in Action

I was recently on a campus that I work with and I witnessed a package of leadership and teacher actions so out of ordinary, yet so sublimely easy and effective, that I have to share it.

This campus is preparing for the state accountability test. Based on their state test results from last year and their current common assessment results, they know that math is an area of concern (Action 1: Using Data).

Based on their data analysis, they are conducting a math concept review for their students. Each day, for 15 days, the math teachers are rotating through the math classes to re-teach 1 identified weak key concept (Action 2: Adjusting Practice Based on Results).

During the first day of the rotation, the administrators went and observed the teachers in action (Action 3: Hyper-monitoring).

After the administrators completed their observations, they met as a team to discuss what they observed and what feedback they should give the teachers (Action 4: Instructionally Focused Administrative Team Discussions).

Then at the end of the first day, the administrators met with the math teachers and provided the teachers with feedback. As a group, they discussed and determined what changes they would implement to make the review sessions even more effective (Action 5: Using Feedback – Improvement Loops).

This in a nutshell is how you systematically and purposefully get a little better each day. It was so awesome that I cried one lone tear.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

Hyper-monitoring

R4 Hyper-monitoring update:

In just the last calendar year, there have been 22,148 walk-thru observations entered into the R4 Aggregate system.

Do you hear that noise? That's the sound of improving instructional practices and increased classroom engagement. It's the sound of success

Did you do your 25 observations last week? What are you waiting for?

Your turn...

Blog Post: Public Schools Out Perform Private Schools (It's All About Instruction)

This post was inspired by:

Study: Teachers, curricula help public schools outscore private peers
Certified math teachers with ongoing professional development and more modern curricula help public-school students do better than their private-school counterparts in math, according to a new study. "Schools that hired more certified teachers and had a curriculum that de-emphasized learning by rote tended to do better on standardized math tests," said University of Illinois education professor Sarah Lubienski, a study co-author. "And public schools had more of both." ScienceDaily (2/25) http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090226093423.htm

I for one am not surprised by this. I have long held this opinion and actually have related evidence (somewhat validated by the study mentioned above) that justifies my belief. Here’s my case. In the past eight years, I have personally visited well over a thousand campuses and have observed thousands classrooms. I also have access to the data collected from over 40,000 R4 Hyper-monitoring observations. Here is what is painfully obvious from all this information:

Across settings, campuses, districts and regions, the quality of instruction in classrooms is very consistent. Unfortunately, it is consistently mediocre. The variable is the academic foundation of the students in the school. High SES students that receive mediocre instruction do OK on achievement tests and pass most of their classes. Low SES students that receive mediocre instruction generally do poorly on achievement tests and struggle in most of their classes.

What is powerful about this fact is that it makes improving schools very do-able. Just improve the overall quality of instruction in every class. When this occurs, low SES students do better on achievement tests and pass more of their courses. High SES students simply blow the roof off achievement tests. Or as one principal I work with stated with glee, “we destroyed the curve.”

So how does this relate to private schools? Well, we learned about the power of changing instruction, not at the high SES schools, but at the low SES schools. The high SES schools were comfortable doing the same things they had always done. On the other hand, increasing accountability standards are forcing low SES schools to change just to survive. In this case, the staffs of low SES campuses have taken the lead in illuminating best instructional practices that can no longer be ignored.

Who are the only schools with higher SES students than a high SES public school? The answer,of course, is private schools. Take high SES students, parents who are OK with paying for private tuition and tutors, small class sizes and non-certified teachers and what you have is the recipe for 1950’s quality instruction.

For all the flack that public schools and their staff face, I would blind draw a teacher from a “good” urban public school over a teacher from a “great” private school to join the staff on my campus any day of the week.

Your turn…

Blog Post: School Reform – Fact or Fiction?

Having fought in the trenches of the school improvement battle for a number of years now, I have observed that there is a formula for both success and failure in the effort to reform schools.

First, the basic formula for failure:

1. Be overly concerned with politics.
2. Spend a lot of time coming up with the perfect plan.
3. Have lots of moving parts in your perfect plan.
4. Have a long time window (at least 3 years).
5. Go slow.
6. Ignore the fundamental of quality instruction.
7. Pay attention to morale
8. Don’t upset anyone, if you do, immediately stop what you are doing.
9. Rely on plug and play programs to fix “those” kids.

These are the most common elements of failure and they doom most improvement initiatives. They are insidious because each element seems to either represent a logical, prudent and/or easy path to take. But in each case, the path of least resistance leads to ruin.

Fortunately, there is also a basic formula for success:

1. Do the opposite of the Failure Formula.
2. Train staff in the fundamentals of quality instruction, classroom management and school operations. Continuously review, revisit and re-train.
3. Hold everyone accountable for executing the fundamentals.
4. Provide a common scope and sequence.
5. Provide short-term common assessments.
6. Hyper-monitor instruction.
7. Provide external coaching.

That’s it, the executive summary of any successful school improvement plan. E-mail me if you want to discuss adapting this plan to your school or district.

So the answer to the title question, “school reform – fact or fiction,” is “yes”, depending on which formula you use.

Your turn…

Data Use

There are two basic types of data to work with in a school, student data and teacher data. Using student data is the first stage of data analysis and if you aren’t using data on your campus this is where to start. Student data will indicate where the low hanging fruit can be found. For example, I was working with a campus and in the midst of doing some item analysis, we discovered that students were overwhelmingly missing science questions that dealt with application. That problem was solved by getting students in the lab for more hands-on activities.

However, student data will only take you so far. The next stage of data use revolves around teacher data. It is the team analysis of this data that is the foundation of a truly vibrant professional learning community. To begin this process, leadership must provide teachers with three tools. The first is a common scope and sequence, the second is short-term, common assessments and the third is hyper-monitoring data. These three tools allow teachers to identify which teachers make the biggest and most consistent gains with the campus’ most academically fragile students and which components of pedagogy seems to make the biggest impact in the classrooms.

Armed with this information and time to plan, learn and adapt, an instructional staff can go from sub-par to extraordinary in less than a year.

Your turn…

Teacher Nests

This post inspired by the article:

Glendale schools ban teachers' personal coffeepots and fridges
By Raja Abdulrahim March 3, 2009
http://www.latimes.com/news/education/la-me-appliances3-2009mar03,0,3863348.story

"District officials say removing appliances such as microwaves and coffee makers will save $60,000 a year. The ban has upset some teachers who depend on the items to get through their day…"

"Sharon Schara, a teacher at Roosevelt Middle School in Glendale, poses with the fridge, microwave and stereo she keeps in her classroom…"

Those who have known me for a while have invariably heard me talk about the subject of “teacher nests”. What exactly is a “teacher nest”?

A "teacher nest" is where the teacher has created a comfortable haven for just her in the classroom. The classic nest generally includes a “wall” made up of the desk, computer and stacks of books and paper; lots of non-instructionally related knic-knacks; a comfortable chair brought from home; and a coffee pot, refrigerator and microwave. The teacher has created a home away from home, or in other words, a nest.

Are nests comfortable? Yes. Do nests make a long day more bearable? Yes. Are nests good for instruction? No.

Fooled you on that one, didn’t I? Stay with me on this, because I'm going to make my case.

This is why “teacher nests” are bad for instruction. The nest is comfortable and as humans we are drawn to comfort. Don’t believe me, what would you rather do? Run five miles or sit and watch your favorite TV show while eating your favorite dessert? The problem with having a comfortable spot in the classroom is that the teacher is drawn to it instead of being drawn to the teaching zone. As time in the teaching zone decreases, student on-task behavior decreases, engagement decreases and retention decreases. All instructionally bad things, just for the sake of teacher comfort. Remove the nest and teachers spend more time in the teaching zone and on-task behavior, engagement and retention all increase.

Still skeptical, analysis of over 30,000 R4 Hyper-Monitoring observations show a strong inverse correlation between teacher nests and time spent in the teaching zone. Despite initial teacher protests to the contrary, actions do speak louder than words.

Teacher nest were already expensive instructionally, now throw in the energy cost and case to actively seek them out and remove them gets even stronger.

And to Ms. Schara, the teacher in the article, in the short run your room will seem less hospitable to you, but quickly you will notice the improvement in your students and it will all be worth it.

Your turn…

Over Age Elementary Students - Programs and Solutions

Recently I was meeting with an Assistant Superintendent in a large urban district, who has been a long time acquaintance. The issue we were discussing was academic solutions for over age elementary students, specifically – did I have any?

The off the cuff answer was "no". I was not aware of an off the shelf program that could correct this situation in a rapid fashion. However, this is not my area of expertise, so the “no” is not definitive. But there are some general practices that I have observed that will correct the situation over a relatively short period of time. This was the list we discussed:

1) Create vertical teams that have internal accountability. This means that each grade has standards that have to be met and students progress in grades level within the team. That way the receiving teacher knows exactly who taught her students. This internal accountability also lends itself to better collaboration.

2) Ensure that teachers are executing the scope and sequence at full speed and at complete fidelity.

3) Use short-term common assessments.

4) Use data to adapt instruction.

5) Hyper-monitor instruction.

6) Provide on-going, relevant training.

7) Hold teachers accountable for changing their instructional practices.

8) Hold leaders accountable for the performance of academically fragile students on their campuses.

Does this work? As a package, absolutely. In isolation, less so.

Here’s a working example. I provide some consulting support to a large (900+ students) and poor (70%+ economically disadvantaged) elementary school. By implementing the practices listed above, this campus has dramatically improved student performance, reduced retention rates and has dramatically reduced the number of students who require special education services. This campus, as a whole, works smarter and harder than does its peers. As a result, its students are better off and the staff is more enthused.

Your turn…

Formative Assessment

The following post was inspired by the article:

Learning a click away in Danville High School class
By Noelle McGee
Saturday, February 14, 2009 7:00 AM CDT

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2009/02/14/learning_a_click_away_in_danville_high_school_class

Check out the article above. Bottom line, it is a story about a teacher who has an electronic tool that allows him to embed lots of formative assessment (checking for understanding) in his class. Since doing this, he has noticed that both student engagement and student performance has increased and based on those factors he is adapting his instruction more often and enjoying his job more.

Here’s what the story and the teacher missed. It’s not the tool, it’s the practice. Sure the tool helps. It’s new, it’s novel, it’s fun. But a teacher checking for understanding is a critical best practice that most teachers completely overlook. Not on purpose; but because they get rushed to cover material and become too task centric.

In the R4 Active Teaching Academy, a significant amount of time and practice is spent with teachers to train them on how to embed formative assessment in their lessons and how to do it frequently. The R4 Hyper-Monitoring protocol tracks how often teachers engage in formative assessment, giving teachers the frequent feedback they need to gauge the quality of their instruction.

Without tools, support, training and discussion a typical teacher is observed checking for understanding only about 20% of the time. With tools, support, training and discussion that increases to 70% to 80% of the time. The results? Just as reported in the article; increased student engagement, increased student performance, and increased enthusiasm by the teacher.

Now, thumbs up or thumbs down if this makes sense.

Your turn…

Campus Improvement: What Data Do You Need?

Managing Up, Part 5 of 5 – What Data Do You Need?

This is the last entry in this series. Part 1 and 2 were published on 2/16/09. Parts 3 and 4 were published on 2/17/09

I have a friend I’ve been working with for a couple of years now. He may be the one of the best principals in the business at rapidly turning around a campus. He sent me some questions that his assistant superintendent gave him to answer. Here are my answers to the fifth and final set of questions, his were similar.

Q: What data will you track to tell you whether you're making progress in solving this problem?

A: R4 Hyper-Monitoring data; short-term, common assessment data; short-term attendance data; short-term student discipline data; state assessment data; graduation rate data; master schedule; and budget.

Your turn…

Campus Improvement: What is Your Strategy

Managing Up, Part 2 of 5 - What is Your Strategy for Solving this Problem?

I have a friend I’ve been working with for a couple of years now. He may be one of the best principals in the business at rapidly turning around a campus. He sent me some questions that his assistant superintendent gave him to answer. Here are my answers to the second set of questions, his were similar.

Q: What is your strategy for solving this problem?

A: This principal has clearly defined his expectations for both staff and students. He mandated the use of a common scope and sequence in each core subject. He mandated the use of short-term common assessments in each core subject. He secured significant staff training for teachers and administrators. He hyper-monitors instructions. Walk-thru data and common assessment data are shared with staff on a frequent basis. Adjustments are made based on data and team planning.

Q: Why did you choose this strategy?

A: He chose the strategy because he knows it works. This principal is following a basic R4 rapid improvement plan that he used successfully at another struggling campus (he was hired by his new district, based on the success he had at his previous campus).

Q: What others did you consider?

A: None. He was hired to replicate his prior success in a similar fashion

Q: Can you clearly explain your "theory of action" i.e. how you think this strategy will solve the problem you've identified?

A: Yes. The greatest variable that affects student performance is adult practice. Since we control our practice, the pace at which we change dictates the speed at which student performance improves. On this campus, the luxury of leaving students behind to decrease the adult levels of discomfort that are caused by changes in adult instructional habits is no longer a viable action. This can be summed up with the following statement: “We change, they succeed. We don’t change, they fail. We won’t let them fail.”

Your turn…

Campus Improvement: What is the Problem You are Trying to Solve

Managing Up, Part 1 - What is the Problem You are Trying to Solve?

I have a friend I’ve been coaching and collaborating with for a couple of years now. He may be one of the best principals in the business at rapidly turning around a campus. He sent me some questions that his assistant superintendent gave him to answer. Here are my answers to the first set of questions, his were similar.

Q: What is the problem you are trying to solve?

A: The problem that this principal is trying to solve is to the bridge the chasm between best instructional practices and current campus instructional practices. This disconnect is reflected in student performance.

Q: What does this have to do with improving teaching and learning?

A: This has everything to do with improving teaching and learning. As adult practice improves, student performance improves. The correlation is that direct and is almost immediate.

Q: What data (qualitative & quantitative) have you used to understand the problem and create urgency for change?

A: This principal has primarily used R4 Hyper-monitoring data, short-term common assessment data, benchmark data, state assessment data and graduation rate data.

Your turn…