Posts
In response to the post, "A Reader Submits... Talking to Students”, a reader writes:
“The characteristics of a LYS campus and its staff:
1. Model expectations rather than dictate them.
2. Improve instruction rather than focusing on programs. When students are successful, instruction is successful.
3. Hold everyone in the organization accountable for improving, beginning with (and especially) leadership. Personal example: I refuse to hold anyone accountable for an outcome for which I can't help provide solutions.
These are among the fundamentals, and according to Brezina, we should strive to become experts at executing the fundamentals. Know it. Love it. Live it.”
SC Response
There are two things that I would add, one from Brown and one from me.
Brown: “If the science of improvement isn’t in place, the art doesn’t matter.” This is a wake up call for all of us, especially the “naturals” who get by through ad-libbing and/or strength of personality. Keep ignoring the fundamentals and you are living on borrowed time.
Cain: Helping to provide solutions, does not mean I actually provide the solution. As a leader, I add value by creating and supporting an infrastructure that leverages the combined brain power of the organization to produce timely and effective solutions. Obviously, in the initial stages of change before there has been time to build focused capacity, more solutions will be directly attributable to me. But over time this balance must shift. The longer the organization stays one brain centric, the more that one brain becomes the limit to performance.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Showing posts with label Programs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Programs. Show all posts
Monday, May 31, 2010
Sunday, March 21, 2010
A Reader Writes... (Teacher Stress - Part 3)
In response to the posts relating to, “Teacher Stress,” a reader writes:
“As SC pointed out, it is hard to comment without knowing the specifics of your district. But, from what you wrote I get a mental picture of your school (which may be totally wrong).
Your school probably has student achievement problems. As Cain pointed out, administration will blame teachers. And that's O.K., because teachers are a part of the problem. The first thing that sticks out is 9 programs. That smells of an administrative knee jerk reaction. I have yet to see a school program itself to success. Administration sees the programs as a way to make up for poor curriculum and/or poor instruction. If one program is good, 9 must be great in their view. It sounds a bit like your administration doesn't really know what to do, so they reach for programs.
Here's the catch, what if administration is right, and teachers are the problem? If teachers won't teach effectively, what makes you think they will implement some $100,000 program effectively? Improving curriculum and instruction are the keys to success. Quality programs can enhance curriculum and instruction, but certainly will not replace them. As Cain said, not all stress is bad. If your administration can't figure out which direction to go, I suggest finding a job in a LYS school.
SC Response
The old school LYS principals just don’t mince a lot of words. So I too will be brief.
First, before anyone gets upset (or vindicated) because the writer points out that it is OK to blame the teachers, do know that he recognizes that leadership shoulders most of the blame. He is famous for being on the job for about two weeks and being called in to give an assessment of the school he took over. He told the superintendent that the horrific situation at the campus was due to years of leadership neglect. The superintendent agreed saying that the former principal was ineffective. This LYS principal said he wasn’t singling out the former principal. This was a case where the blame started at the board and worked it’s way down from there. Present company included.
Second, the writer is correct when he states that programs are not the answer. Improved first line instruction is the answer. If your central office is trying to figure out how to circumvent teachers instead of improving teachers, you are on a sinking ship.
Third, the writer makes another excellent point. If the teachers are the problem (again, when a district is overrun with ineffective teachers, that really is a leadership problem), their ability to effectively run the new program is immediately suspect. Why waste money on a pipe dream?
Finally, working in tough settings is a chicken salad / chicken feathers proposition. With the right leadership and right instructional staff, the newest and most effective innovations in our field are currently being developed. After all, necessity is the mother of invention. Unfortunately, with the wrong leadership and the wrong teachers, futures are being squandered daily.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
“As SC pointed out, it is hard to comment without knowing the specifics of your district. But, from what you wrote I get a mental picture of your school (which may be totally wrong).
Your school probably has student achievement problems. As Cain pointed out, administration will blame teachers. And that's O.K., because teachers are a part of the problem. The first thing that sticks out is 9 programs. That smells of an administrative knee jerk reaction. I have yet to see a school program itself to success. Administration sees the programs as a way to make up for poor curriculum and/or poor instruction. If one program is good, 9 must be great in their view. It sounds a bit like your administration doesn't really know what to do, so they reach for programs.
Here's the catch, what if administration is right, and teachers are the problem? If teachers won't teach effectively, what makes you think they will implement some $100,000 program effectively? Improving curriculum and instruction are the keys to success. Quality programs can enhance curriculum and instruction, but certainly will not replace them. As Cain said, not all stress is bad. If your administration can't figure out which direction to go, I suggest finding a job in a LYS school.
SC Response
The old school LYS principals just don’t mince a lot of words. So I too will be brief.
First, before anyone gets upset (or vindicated) because the writer points out that it is OK to blame the teachers, do know that he recognizes that leadership shoulders most of the blame. He is famous for being on the job for about two weeks and being called in to give an assessment of the school he took over. He told the superintendent that the horrific situation at the campus was due to years of leadership neglect. The superintendent agreed saying that the former principal was ineffective. This LYS principal said he wasn’t singling out the former principal. This was a case where the blame started at the board and worked it’s way down from there. Present company included.
Second, the writer is correct when he states that programs are not the answer. Improved first line instruction is the answer. If your central office is trying to figure out how to circumvent teachers instead of improving teachers, you are on a sinking ship.
Third, the writer makes another excellent point. If the teachers are the problem (again, when a district is overrun with ineffective teachers, that really is a leadership problem), their ability to effectively run the new program is immediately suspect. Why waste money on a pipe dream?
Finally, working in tough settings is a chicken salad / chicken feathers proposition. With the right leadership and right instructional staff, the newest and most effective innovations in our field are currently being developed. After all, necessity is the mother of invention. Unfortunately, with the wrong leadership and the wrong teachers, futures are being squandered daily.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
A Reader Writes... (Teacher Stress - Part 1)
In response to the post, “Teacher Stress,” a reader writes:
“I have been teaching for 10 years. But I have never experienced more bullying from central office than I have in the past three years. There is now more meanness in principals’ attitudes toward their teachers and more disrespect toward teachers from central office administrators.
Just this year alone I have trained for 9 new mandated programs. I feel overwhelmed, disappointed and burned out. I am considering another profession. As a teacher, I am used to working long hours at school, but this is extreme, to say the least.”
SC Response
Thank you for joining the conversation. Unfortunately, since I don’t know what district you are in, I cannot address specifics. But I can respond in broad terms.
The fact that you are feeling more pressure is not unique. The accountability expectations of the state are making everyone feel the heat. The pressure you are facing has been around for a while. Those who felt it first were our most at-risk campuses. As the standards have increased, each year more schools reach the point where doing what they have always done will no longer suffice. Then everyone goes into panic mode. The old saying, “If it’s not broke, don’t fix it,” is the perfect recipe for system meltdown.
Then, when the system starts to meltdown the easiest people to blame are those closest to the problem, in this case, school-based staff. What compounds this is that the typical central office staffer or administrator has a skewed view of the current realities of campus operations. This has occured because accountability standards have changed so rapidly. The instructional practices that made me a successful teacher in the early 90’s would now be considered sub-par, at best. I am aware of this, because I continue to spend a significant portion of my month, in classrooms, observing and coaching teachers. As you well know, this is not typical central office behavior. Once you get to central office, most people become too “busy” to visit schools and classrooms on a regular and frequent basis. Thus, they have not experienced the tempo and constant high quality execution of fundamental practices now neccessary to just keep your head above water.
However, if you think central office is tough on you, sit in the principal’s chair. The principal must deal directly with central office on almost a daily basis. They catch the heat on everything: performance, budget, personnel and community relations. If there is a problem, rest assured someone will soon be calling. Thus, as the pressure on the principal is increased, it is natural (and at times, unfortunate) that some of the pressure is directed towards the staff.
As for training on all the new programs, believe me, I am empathetic. I am a proponent of going slower in order to speed up implementation (but I can promise you that my definition of slow is quite different from that of the typical educator). And trust me, there are a number of Superintendents and Assistant Superintendents that are getting tired of me pointing out that they are training their staff to the point that they are unable to teach. On the other hand, there are some districts that we are working with who have done so little to stay current with the best practices of our field, that they are now trying to fix everything at once. In that case, all I can say is do your best to get a little better each day and at some point the learning curve will seem less steep.
Finally, when it comes to burn-out, you always have to ask yourself why you are doing the job. If you are just doing it for the money, the money isn’t good enough. If you are just doing it for the holiday schedule, that ship sailed years ago. If you are doing it because you get a charge out of your students learning and succeeding under your tutelage, then stick it out. Adversity builds character and capacity. Plus, you read the blog. That means that you are actively scanning the horizon in search of better practices and solutions. That puts you at least one step ahead of both your peers and most administrators.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
“I have been teaching for 10 years. But I have never experienced more bullying from central office than I have in the past three years. There is now more meanness in principals’ attitudes toward their teachers and more disrespect toward teachers from central office administrators.
Just this year alone I have trained for 9 new mandated programs. I feel overwhelmed, disappointed and burned out. I am considering another profession. As a teacher, I am used to working long hours at school, but this is extreme, to say the least.”
SC Response
Thank you for joining the conversation. Unfortunately, since I don’t know what district you are in, I cannot address specifics. But I can respond in broad terms.
The fact that you are feeling more pressure is not unique. The accountability expectations of the state are making everyone feel the heat. The pressure you are facing has been around for a while. Those who felt it first were our most at-risk campuses. As the standards have increased, each year more schools reach the point where doing what they have always done will no longer suffice. Then everyone goes into panic mode. The old saying, “If it’s not broke, don’t fix it,” is the perfect recipe for system meltdown.
Then, when the system starts to meltdown the easiest people to blame are those closest to the problem, in this case, school-based staff. What compounds this is that the typical central office staffer or administrator has a skewed view of the current realities of campus operations. This has occured because accountability standards have changed so rapidly. The instructional practices that made me a successful teacher in the early 90’s would now be considered sub-par, at best. I am aware of this, because I continue to spend a significant portion of my month, in classrooms, observing and coaching teachers. As you well know, this is not typical central office behavior. Once you get to central office, most people become too “busy” to visit schools and classrooms on a regular and frequent basis. Thus, they have not experienced the tempo and constant high quality execution of fundamental practices now neccessary to just keep your head above water.
However, if you think central office is tough on you, sit in the principal’s chair. The principal must deal directly with central office on almost a daily basis. They catch the heat on everything: performance, budget, personnel and community relations. If there is a problem, rest assured someone will soon be calling. Thus, as the pressure on the principal is increased, it is natural (and at times, unfortunate) that some of the pressure is directed towards the staff.
As for training on all the new programs, believe me, I am empathetic. I am a proponent of going slower in order to speed up implementation (but I can promise you that my definition of slow is quite different from that of the typical educator). And trust me, there are a number of Superintendents and Assistant Superintendents that are getting tired of me pointing out that they are training their staff to the point that they are unable to teach. On the other hand, there are some districts that we are working with who have done so little to stay current with the best practices of our field, that they are now trying to fix everything at once. In that case, all I can say is do your best to get a little better each day and at some point the learning curve will seem less steep.
Finally, when it comes to burn-out, you always have to ask yourself why you are doing the job. If you are just doing it for the money, the money isn’t good enough. If you are just doing it for the holiday schedule, that ship sailed years ago. If you are doing it because you get a charge out of your students learning and succeeding under your tutelage, then stick it out. Adversity builds character and capacity. Plus, you read the blog. That means that you are actively scanning the horizon in search of better practices and solutions. That puts you at least one step ahead of both your peers and most administrators.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
A Reader Writes... (The Problem with Programs - Part 7)
In response to the discussion on “Programs,” a reader writes:
“I agree programs are not the answer to solving a school's problems and that leadership which insures effective teaching is what a school really needs. However, I do hope that people do not equate working with highly qualified consultants as the same thing as programs.
My school works with 3 consultants on an on-going basis that have provided both the teachers and the administration with training that has led our school to outperform most of the schools in our district. As with most professions, teachers and administrators need on-going training to improve their skills in order to be most effective, and training provided by consultants is not the same as a program. By providing our staff the opportunity to work with these consultants, our staff has grown tremendously in their knowledge in best teaching practices and how children learn best. None of these consultants are selling a "boxed-program" or a "product", but they are providing us with research, data, and training to be the best in our field.
Of course, it is the school's leadership that must make sure that the training is implemented, so as always, school success is based on leadership."
SC Response
Great comment and excellent points. I’m familiar with this school. In terms of value added performance it is always in the top three in its district. A Title 1 school, they may be poor, but they are scrappy, out performing many of the surrounding, more affluent, schools.
There is a difference between coaching, tools and plug-in programs. For example, consider Read 180, an excellent tool. With the proper teacher training and appropriately selected student, the program is very successful. However, when the tool is used inappropriately (as a program), usually by administrative mandate, it diminishes the capacity of the teacher and can slow down the progress of students.
My rule of thumb is this, if the tool makes better use of teacher time – considered it. If coaching makes staff more effective – consider it. If a program fits a specific and narrow niche of students – consider it.
But if you are taking action in order to succeed in spite of teachers, you are wasting your money. If you are buying a program because working with a certain segment of students is hard and/or uncomfortable, shame on you. And if you are buying a program because you believed the sale people when they told you that it would solve all your problems, let me know how that works for you. Or you could just…
Think. Work. Achieve
Your turn...
“I agree programs are not the answer to solving a school's problems and that leadership which insures effective teaching is what a school really needs. However, I do hope that people do not equate working with highly qualified consultants as the same thing as programs.
My school works with 3 consultants on an on-going basis that have provided both the teachers and the administration with training that has led our school to outperform most of the schools in our district. As with most professions, teachers and administrators need on-going training to improve their skills in order to be most effective, and training provided by consultants is not the same as a program. By providing our staff the opportunity to work with these consultants, our staff has grown tremendously in their knowledge in best teaching practices and how children learn best. None of these consultants are selling a "boxed-program" or a "product", but they are providing us with research, data, and training to be the best in our field.
Of course, it is the school's leadership that must make sure that the training is implemented, so as always, school success is based on leadership."
SC Response
Great comment and excellent points. I’m familiar with this school. In terms of value added performance it is always in the top three in its district. A Title 1 school, they may be poor, but they are scrappy, out performing many of the surrounding, more affluent, schools.
There is a difference between coaching, tools and plug-in programs. For example, consider Read 180, an excellent tool. With the proper teacher training and appropriately selected student, the program is very successful. However, when the tool is used inappropriately (as a program), usually by administrative mandate, it diminishes the capacity of the teacher and can slow down the progress of students.
My rule of thumb is this, if the tool makes better use of teacher time – considered it. If coaching makes staff more effective – consider it. If a program fits a specific and narrow niche of students – consider it.
But if you are taking action in order to succeed in spite of teachers, you are wasting your money. If you are buying a program because working with a certain segment of students is hard and/or uncomfortable, shame on you. And if you are buying a program because you believed the sale people when they told you that it would solve all your problems, let me know how that works for you. Or you could just…
Think. Work. Achieve
Your turn...
Sunday, September 6, 2009
A Reader Writes... (The Problem with Programs - Part 6)
In response to the discussion on “Programs,” a reader writes:
“Often it is not the program itself that makes it difficult or unsuccessful. Class sizes and the number of different programs we are being asked to use make it impossible.”
SC Response
Class size is less of an issue than most people think. However, the number of programs has the potential to be a much more critical issue. Bob Brezina (retired Superintendent and retired Green Bay Packer) still reminds me that Lombardi only had 6 plays. It was the execution of those plays that separated the Packers from the rest of the league.
Teachers have to be experts, but they cannot be experts in everything. The only chance that teachers have to develop true expertise is for leadership to be very protective of what goes on their plate. When leadership keeps piling stuff on, it actually decreases teacher effectiveness.
Simplify, simplify, simplify. The Foundation Trinity, the Fundamental Five, carefully selected tools and purposeful work and analysis. These are the building blocks of instructional expertise. Until these are executed at a high level, staff can work harder, faster and longer, but they are generally not working smarter.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
“Often it is not the program itself that makes it difficult or unsuccessful. Class sizes and the number of different programs we are being asked to use make it impossible.”
SC Response
Class size is less of an issue than most people think. However, the number of programs has the potential to be a much more critical issue. Bob Brezina (retired Superintendent and retired Green Bay Packer) still reminds me that Lombardi only had 6 plays. It was the execution of those plays that separated the Packers from the rest of the league.
Teachers have to be experts, but they cannot be experts in everything. The only chance that teachers have to develop true expertise is for leadership to be very protective of what goes on their plate. When leadership keeps piling stuff on, it actually decreases teacher effectiveness.
Simplify, simplify, simplify. The Foundation Trinity, the Fundamental Five, carefully selected tools and purposeful work and analysis. These are the building blocks of instructional expertise. Until these are executed at a high level, staff can work harder, faster and longer, but they are generally not working smarter.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Saturday, September 5, 2009
A Reader Writes... (The Problem with Programs - Part 5)
In response to the discussion on “Programs,” a reader writes:
“OMG, who is the “Quit entertaining programs and start leading” writer? What a wake-up call. I’m taping that quote to my computer.”
SC Response
He’s a “Brown” guy, who is on my list of the “Top 10” assistant principals in Texas. Students love him, teachers admire him, and the competition fears him. All qualities I looked for in my staff.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
“OMG, who is the “Quit entertaining programs and start leading” writer? What a wake-up call. I’m taping that quote to my computer.”
SC Response
He’s a “Brown” guy, who is on my list of the “Top 10” assistant principals in Texas. Students love him, teachers admire him, and the competition fears him. All qualities I looked for in my staff.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Friday, September 4, 2009
A Reader Writes... (The Problem with Programs - Part 5)
In response to the discussion on “Programs,” a reader writes:
“I don't disagree with this reader at all. However, I still contend that big gains, perhaps the biggest gains, occur when we focus on improving the quality of instruction in the classrooms. Endless programs implementation takes our eyes off of that prize. Without quality instruction in the classrooms, I contend you are attempting to put icing on a cake that isn't even baked yet.”
SC Response
Let me solidify your response. Improved student performance and improved front line teaching are directly correlated. As you are well aware, the first trick to improving a campus is the recognition that bad instruction is better than no instruction. Then replace bad instruction with better, and so on and so on….
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
“I don't disagree with this reader at all. However, I still contend that big gains, perhaps the biggest gains, occur when we focus on improving the quality of instruction in the classrooms. Endless programs implementation takes our eyes off of that prize. Without quality instruction in the classrooms, I contend you are attempting to put icing on a cake that isn't even baked yet.”
SC Response
Let me solidify your response. Improved student performance and improved front line teaching are directly correlated. As you are well aware, the first trick to improving a campus is the recognition that bad instruction is better than no instruction. Then replace bad instruction with better, and so on and so on….
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Thursday, September 3, 2009
A Reader Writes... The Problem with Programs - Part 3)
In response to the discussion on “Programs,” a reader writes:
“The biggest problem with programs is that we are talking about them! The point is we give too much credence to programs hence, this endless string of posts to this devastatingly boring and useless topic. LYS philosophy is about building strong teachers, supporting them, and leading them to victory - period. We get off task when we even entertain the world of programs. Shut up and start leading! Said with 'fidelity.' Respond if you dare.”
SC Response
I understand this reader’s frustration. I sit in on too many meetings where the discussion is how to succeed in spite of teachers (the selling point of many programs). The key is front line teaching.
Leadership must provide both induction and on-going advanced training for teachers. Leadership must provide necessary tools and resources to teachers. Leadership must ensure that teachers implement the training and use the tools and resources. And, leadership must remediate or remove consistently ineffective teachers. This can only be done if leadership is engaged with teachers and instruction on a daily basis.
When you find yourself trying to figure out how to overcome teachers, as opposed to how to improve the effectiveness of teachers, the issue is the system. System failure is leadership failure. Or as the reader so delicately wrote, “Quit entertaining programs and start leading.”
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
“The biggest problem with programs is that we are talking about them! The point is we give too much credence to programs hence, this endless string of posts to this devastatingly boring and useless topic. LYS philosophy is about building strong teachers, supporting them, and leading them to victory - period. We get off task when we even entertain the world of programs. Shut up and start leading! Said with 'fidelity.' Respond if you dare.”
SC Response
I understand this reader’s frustration. I sit in on too many meetings where the discussion is how to succeed in spite of teachers (the selling point of many programs). The key is front line teaching.
Leadership must provide both induction and on-going advanced training for teachers. Leadership must provide necessary tools and resources to teachers. Leadership must ensure that teachers implement the training and use the tools and resources. And, leadership must remediate or remove consistently ineffective teachers. This can only be done if leadership is engaged with teachers and instruction on a daily basis.
When you find yourself trying to figure out how to overcome teachers, as opposed to how to improve the effectiveness of teachers, the issue is the system. System failure is leadership failure. Or as the reader so delicately wrote, “Quit entertaining programs and start leading.”
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
A Reader Writes... (The Problem with Programs - Part 2)
Continuing the conversation on “The Problem with Programs,” a reader writes:
“Programs are only effective if implemented with fidelity. Including training for teachers and follow through by teacher leaders monitoring the implementation, reviewing the data and acting on the data.”
SC Response
Amen. There are a couple of posts to be written on what you just touched on.
1. Fidelity. A program half implemented is not a program. It is a jumbled mess with little chance for success.
2. On-going support. If you believe that someone can replicate a procedure or practice perfectly, the first time, then you have not been paying attention.
3. Implementation. This is the responsibility of leadership.
Discussion to follow.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
“Programs are only effective if implemented with fidelity. Including training for teachers and follow through by teacher leaders monitoring the implementation, reviewing the data and acting on the data.”
SC Response
Amen. There are a couple of posts to be written on what you just touched on.
1. Fidelity. A program half implemented is not a program. It is a jumbled mess with little chance for success.
2. On-going support. If you believe that someone can replicate a procedure or practice perfectly, the first time, then you have not been paying attention.
3. Implementation. This is the responsibility of leadership.
Discussion to follow.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Saturday, August 29, 2009
A Reader Writes... (The Problem with Programs)
We got a little side tracked with the start of school (duh…), so let’s circle back to a conversation that started last week, but didn’t get finished. A reader follows up with this comment to, “The Problem with Programs.”
“This is an interesting post because I actually discuss this issue in a piece I am working on.
I have never seen a school “program” itself to success. I have seen successful schools with programs, but the programs are not the cause of the success. The idea that mimicking the programs of a successful school will make your school successful is ridiculous, but that is exactly how programs are marketed.
As Cain says, a common reason for programs is to prop up a weak system. I suspect that the reason administrators want to prop up weak systems rather than to fix them is either due to ignorance or a lack of courage to take on tough tasks. If the problem is lack of courage, you need some new administrators. If the issue is ignorance, keep working with Lead Your School.”
SC Response
I was having a conversation earlier this week with a friend, that also touched on this issue. Both of us want our teachers and our students to have cutting edge tools and technology in order to create exciting and engaging instruction and classrooms. But we are both painfully aware that “sizzle” does not create critical thinkers on a massive scale. Creating huge numbers of students who are critical thinkers requires the “steak” of quality, first line instruction – day in and day out.
The model I believe in and work to build in LYS campuses and districts is grounded in Marine Corp doctrine. The Marine Corp operates under the tenet that every marine is a rifleman. This means that every high tech tool and weapon that they purchase must improve the effectiveness of the rifleman. But most importantly, they all keep training as riflemen. That way, as equipment fails or is unavailable, the individual marine is still formidable and effective.
The school version of Marine Corp doctrine is that every education professional is a teacher. We are all trained in and practice the fundamentals of instruction. Every tool and program should be evaluated in terms of how it improves the quality of instruction. But we can not abandon our core. If a computer crashes, the power goes out, or the text book does not arrive, we have to step up to the chalk board and teach with passion, skill, and effectiveness. The student should not even be aware that we are operating under "Plan B."
The day the program replaces the teacher is the day we no longer need teachers. The day we no longer need teachers is the day we no longer need schools. If that day occurs, shame on us.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
“This is an interesting post because I actually discuss this issue in a piece I am working on.
I have never seen a school “program” itself to success. I have seen successful schools with programs, but the programs are not the cause of the success. The idea that mimicking the programs of a successful school will make your school successful is ridiculous, but that is exactly how programs are marketed.
As Cain says, a common reason for programs is to prop up a weak system. I suspect that the reason administrators want to prop up weak systems rather than to fix them is either due to ignorance or a lack of courage to take on tough tasks. If the problem is lack of courage, you need some new administrators. If the issue is ignorance, keep working with Lead Your School.”
SC Response
I was having a conversation earlier this week with a friend, that also touched on this issue. Both of us want our teachers and our students to have cutting edge tools and technology in order to create exciting and engaging instruction and classrooms. But we are both painfully aware that “sizzle” does not create critical thinkers on a massive scale. Creating huge numbers of students who are critical thinkers requires the “steak” of quality, first line instruction – day in and day out.
The model I believe in and work to build in LYS campuses and districts is grounded in Marine Corp doctrine. The Marine Corp operates under the tenet that every marine is a rifleman. This means that every high tech tool and weapon that they purchase must improve the effectiveness of the rifleman. But most importantly, they all keep training as riflemen. That way, as equipment fails or is unavailable, the individual marine is still formidable and effective.
The school version of Marine Corp doctrine is that every education professional is a teacher. We are all trained in and practice the fundamentals of instruction. Every tool and program should be evaluated in terms of how it improves the quality of instruction. But we can not abandon our core. If a computer crashes, the power goes out, or the text book does not arrive, we have to step up to the chalk board and teach with passion, skill, and effectiveness. The student should not even be aware that we are operating under "Plan B."
The day the program replaces the teacher is the day we no longer need teachers. The day we no longer need teachers is the day we no longer need schools. If that day occurs, shame on us.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Saturday, August 22, 2009
The Problem with Programs
This post is not an attack on programs. Programs work. Instead, this is a post about seeing the forest from the trees.
I was recently asked by a superintendent to sit in on a central office planning session in a large urban district. The district instructional specialists were presenting the programs they were bringing in to meet the needs of the students who were falling through the cracks. Each content area had their program of choice.
In this district, there are more students falling thru the cracks than there are those who are successful. This is not a crack. This is a broken system with a handful of students who are able to overcome their learning environment.
Specific programs were championed because they worked in spite of the staff. The root cause of the problem, initial teaching, was never discussed.
The answer is not programs; the answer is better initial first teaching. Quality initial first teaching reduces the reliance on programs, reduces special education referrals, reduces the need for tutoring, and increases the performance of every student.
So you have to ask yourself, how are you using your programs? Are the programs tools that increase the effectiveness of quality instruction? If so, invest. Or are the programs a crutch to hold up poor instruction? If so, ditch the programs and fix instruction and instructional leadership.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
I was recently asked by a superintendent to sit in on a central office planning session in a large urban district. The district instructional specialists were presenting the programs they were bringing in to meet the needs of the students who were falling through the cracks. Each content area had their program of choice.
In this district, there are more students falling thru the cracks than there are those who are successful. This is not a crack. This is a broken system with a handful of students who are able to overcome their learning environment.
Specific programs were championed because they worked in spite of the staff. The root cause of the problem, initial teaching, was never discussed.
The answer is not programs; the answer is better initial first teaching. Quality initial first teaching reduces the reliance on programs, reduces special education referrals, reduces the need for tutoring, and increases the performance of every student.
So you have to ask yourself, how are you using your programs? Are the programs tools that increase the effectiveness of quality instruction? If so, invest. Or are the programs a crutch to hold up poor instruction? If so, ditch the programs and fix instruction and instructional leadership.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)