Curriculum Sources

Recently, I was meeting with a school board to provide some training on the practices of effective school districts. I was pointing out the providing teachers with a common scope of sequence is a leadership responsibility, and to not do so is a failure of leadership.  This board instantly understood the logic of this and one board member asked how her district was doing.  I said that they were on the right track, but they have made a critical misstep that was hampering implementation.  The error, they had four curriculum sources (or platforms). One for each content area. 

The subsequent questions were as follows: 1. How did this happen? 2. Why is this a problem?

First, how did this happened.  It happened because central office missed the critical distinction between theory and practice.  In identifying the what curriculum source to use, each group of content specialist searched for the best solution for their content area.  The four content areas found the four best solutions, for content areas in isolation.

Now, this leads to the second question, why is this problem?  In this district, it is a problem because each content curriculum is accessed and used a different way.   For the teacher that teaches just one content area, this is no problem at all.  But if you are a teacher responsible for multiple content areas (every elementary teacher and a large percentage of the secondary teachers in this district) or a campus administrator responsible for supervising and supporting teachers from multiple content area (every administrator in the district), you are in trouble.

The district had inadvertently created the following problem…  “Teachers we got you a different computer for each class that you teach.  For math, we got you an Apple. For science, we got to a PC. For ELA, we got you a Chromebook.  For social studies, we pulled an old Commodore 64 out of storage.  Now learn to use all of them at an expert level.  Why are you crying instead of thanking us?”

The answer, find a good curriculum source that spans all four content areas.  In this case, good is better than great.  And here is the dirty little truth that curriculum specialists just don’t understand.  It does matter how good the curriculum is, it is the mastery of the teacher that makes the curriculum come alive.  A great actor can read the back of a cereal box and make it riveting.  A great teacher can change the world with a good curriculum. 

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/Fundamental5 
• Upcoming Conference Presentations: The Fundamental 5 National Summit (Keynote) 
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation  and like Lead Your School on Facebook

Does Class Size Matter

School board members and superintendents often ask me my opinion on class size.  I have read the research and understand the theory behind the class size argument, but my answer is much more practical and is based on the situation.

Situation 1 (The Small School): In most small schools, class size really isn’t an issue. In many small schools, most of the classrooms have anywhere from 15 to 20 students in them at any given time.  This represents a considerable expense to the district.  The Superintendent realizes that class size can be increased to the range of 18-24, and all of a sudden the budget is balanced.  Then teachers and principals start screaming (understandably), and the Superintendent and the Board (understandably) get cold feet. 

My Answer: The measurable impact on adding six students to an already small class is negligible.  Increase the class size and spend the savings on raises for instructional staff, instructional tools and training.

Situation 2 (The Struggling School): The school is struggling, average class size is between 20 to 25, and leadership has to do something. The act of reducing class size will make a big splash. 

My Answer: If instruction is poor in a bigger class, reducing class size just means that there will be poor instruction in a smaller class.  But now it will costs more per student to deliver that poor instruction. Plus, if the reduced class size is still above 13, the reduction in class size is unlikely to make a measurable impact.  Instead, take the budget to be spent on hiring more teachers and spend that money on raises for instructional staff, instructional tools, and training.

Nine time out of ten, reducing class size is an empty exercise.

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/Fundamental5 
• Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Timer (Fundamental 5 Delivery Tool); PowerWalks CLC (Networked Formative Observation Tool) 
• Upcoming Presentations: LYS / TASSP Advanced Leadership Academy (Keynote); The 4^th Annual Fundamental 5 National Summit (Keynote) 
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation  and like Lead Your School on Facebook

A Reader Doesn't Like... Observations From the Perfect Dysfunctional Storm

In response to the series of posts, “Observations From the Perfect Storm,” a reader writes the following:

SC,

I am offended by many of your views of central office. In large districts, I have seen this as being an issue, but in the majority of districts, many in upper administration are there because we want to make the greatest impact on all students. We are not the lazy, teacher hating, student ignoring, money grubbing people you make us out to be. We work tirelessly to ensure that EVERY student has access to the best education our district can give him or her.

SC Response

First, thank you for your response. 

I will start my rebuttal with the following fact. I was a central office administrator for more years than I was a principal.

I’ve re-read the posts in question, looking for your specific critiques.  I don’t see them. We (neither the principal nor I) DID NOT cast central office administrators as:

A. Lazy – We both know this is not the case.

B. Teacher Hating – If anything we point out that central office will often side with complaining teachers over campus administration. That is not teacher hating. If I were to say the central office administrator hates anything, it would be conflict.

C. Money Grubbing – You are reading someone else’s material, not mine. I argue that all educators are underpaid, from classroom aide to assistant superintendent. And in most cases, I argue that most Superintendents are also underpaid. 

D. Student Ignoring – We didn’t argue this one way or the other. But if you believe that Central Office is as student centric as the campus, I would disagree.  Just the nature of the position forces the central office administrator to, at times, compromise student needs for the needs of the entire organization. This is not an indictment, just a fact.

I do see in Point #1, I point out that most schools fail due to failed leadership.  That is not a secret.  And I will add that Central Office leaders share in that blame, though they rarely share in the consequences of that failure.

In Point #4, the Principal and I agree that Central Office has little stomach for teacher complaints. And on top of that, most principals are evaluated by how “happy” their staff reports themselves to be.  I’ll stand by this truism and readily (in private) point out the districts where this practice is the law of the land.

In Point #5, the Principal and I agree that Central Office is motivated to intervene when campuses are rated unacceptable. And once a campus is acceptable the attention of Central Office wanes.   Again, I’ll stand by this truism and readily (in private) point out the districts where this is standard practice.

In this series of posts, specific to a real (but identity masked) dysfunctional campus in a dysfunctional district, every adult in the system is culpable, from the Board to the Teacher. The fact that this principal wanted to share lessons learned is commendable.  The fact that the posts were uncomfortable to read is a good thing.  We should never be comfortable when adults fail children.

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/Fundamental5
• Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Timer (Fundamental 5 Delivery Tool); PowerWalks CLC (Networked Formative Observation Tool) 
• Upcoming Presentations: Illinois ASCD Fall Conference (Multiple Presentations), Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors Association Fall AP Conference, The Fundamental 5 National Summit (Multiple Presentations) 
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation  and like Lead Your School on Facebook

A Superintendent Writes... Changing Tires Doing 75 m.p.h.

A LYS Superintendent shares the following:

I don’t think the changes to the Texas math standards are getting nearly enough attention. I have heard complaints from math teachers all year about how convoluted and confusing the entire situation is. If you are late to the game, let me catch you up.

Some high school math standards (TEKS) are going to middle school and some middle school math standards (TEKS) are going to elementary school. Now, we need to keep in mind that the TEKS are not a curriculum. The TEKS are a scope, but include no sequence, and certainly no resources. Districts are struggling to keep up with the changes, adapt their scope and sequence, and find appropriate instructional resources. This is a daunting task for a large district with a full time C&I department. For small districts, the situation is almost unmanageable, especially since the resources available in CSCOPE were removed. I find this situation analogous to attempting to change a flat tire on a car while doing 75 m.p.h. down the interstate. It’s just not a good idea. But there are other concerns more pressing than timing, adapting, and finding resources.

If a high school principal were short a math teacher and could only find a middle school certified math teacher that would essentially be a no-go. The teacher would not hold the proper certification, would likely not have the needed college course work, and would not be considered highly qualified in many cases. The principal would have to send notice to parents, corrective action plans would be put in place, etc.

Why?

Because the state has deemed a middle school certified teacher is not educated, certified, or qualified to teach the high school math TEKS. Should a middle school principal attempt to hire an elementary certified teacher to teach middle school, the same scenario would unfold, because once again the state has deemed an elementary certified teacher is not educated, certified, or qualified to teach middle school math TEKS. So, please explain to me, what is the difference if the state sends the TEKS to the teacher without the education, certification, and qualification to the teacher? In one scenario we were placing the teacher in a situation in which she would not be able to properly address the TEKS; in the other scenario the state moves the TEKS to teachers who are not properly able to address the TEKS. All of this as if the bureaucratic wave of a wand suddenly gives teachers the education, certification, and qualification to teach the more advanced TEKS. The net effect on the child is the same whether you move the teacher to the TEKS or the TEKS to the teacher: the child loses. I now have to find ways to teach my TEACHERS some of the math they need to know in order to be able to teach the children!

I would encourage all superintendents to bring their Boards up to speed on this issue quickly. We need to respond with Board resolutions directed to our SBOE and legislative representatives. Given that the next legislative session starts in a few weeks, the timing is perfect and the timing is now. I am more and more convinced that we are not witnessing the failure of Texas public education. Rather, we are witnessing the failure of Texas public education POLICY, and only our elected officials can remedy the situation.

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/Fundamental5 
• Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Timer (Fundamental 5 Delivery Tool); PowerWalks CLC (Networked Formative Observation Tool) 
• Upcoming Presentations: TMSA Winter Conference; ASCD Annual Conference; TEPSA Summer Conference 
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation  and like Lead Your School on Facebook

The Failure of Leadership

Last week’s post (9/17/14), “Treat the Symptoms Vs. Treat the Disease,” got me thinking about my real job when I was working for the state.  Yes, my title was “State Director of Innovative Redesign,” but the actual job was more along the lines of Plumber. 

When systems fail, there is either a broken component, a clog or a lack of flow.  What is true in plumbing is true in a school system.  My job was to identify the issue and correct it as quickly as possible.  But where others saw the fault as broke curriculum (component), ineffective teachers (clog), inadequate resources (flow), I recognized that these are all symptoms of the same disease, Failure of Leadership.  A no curriculum or a subpar curriculum is leadership failure. A mass of ineffective teachers is leadership failure.  Not providing adequate resources is leadership failure.  My job then was to identify at what level the leadership failure had manifested (Assistant Principal, Principal, Central Office, Superintendent or Board) and based on the severity of the disease either provide support or excise the problem.

In the case described last week (9/17/14) the leadership failure had manifested itself at the board level.  Staff can’t run off principal after principal if the Board is focused on student success and makes decisions based on that focus.  And here is what is truly sad about leadership failure at the highest level. Not only do students suffer (in terms of squandered performance driven opportunities), but at some point so will teachers when the only course action left is wholesale housecleaning and reorganization.

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/Fundamental5 
• Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Timer (Fundamental 5 Delivery Tool); Fun 5 Plans (Fundamental 5 Lesson Plan Tool) 
• Upcoming Presentations: TESPA Fall Conference; The Fundamental 5 National Summit (Keynote Presentation); ASCD Annual Conference 
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation  and like Lead Your School on Facebook

A Superintendent Writes... Treat the Symptoms vs. Treat the Disease

A LYS Superintendent submits the following:

LYS Nation,

Of course we know that not every disease has a cure.  If a patient is sick, then most certainly the ideal course of action is to cure the disease.  This can be done through surgery, or perhaps through antibiotics.  Of course there are some ailments that simply can't be cured.  In these cases physicians treat the symptoms: can you lower the fever; stop the bleeding?  You get the idea.  There may be no cure for the flu, but we can lower fever and manage symptoms until the body heals itself, which is a neat trick.  Too bad organizations can't spontaneously heal themselves.  

Now I am sure you are wondering where this is going.  You see, I was recently asked to interview in a larger district. In the interview I was asked a question about dealing with a principal who did not get along with his faculty.  I gave the Board the correct answer, but it was not the answer the Board was looking for.  Which means that particular Board failed in my interview of them (and it is safe to assume that the reverse is also true).

If you have discord on a campus between administration and faculty, it is prudent for the superintendent to cure the disease.  In my interview scenario the board obviously wanted to hear that the principal had to go.  They heard no such response from me.  My course of action would be to determine the source of discord: administration or faculty.  If the principal is a tyrant bent on abusing people, the principal has to go.  If the faculty has a general attitude of insubordination and doesn't want to do what the principal asks them to do, then a whole bunch of faculty needs to go.

The Board believed, and wanted me to confirm, that it would be easier to find a new principal rather than a whole bunch of new teachers.  Easier yes, but that is treating the symptoms, not the disease.  

If I take an utterly dysfunctional faculty and add another principal, guess what?  I sill have a dysfunctional faculty.  I cured nothing, and the symptom relief I get will be brief indeed.  I have seen campuses go through every type of principal possible before realizing some teachers had to go.  In the interim, the children suffered tremendously, a fact that the adults and leadership aggressively ignore.  

It is emotionally and intellectually satisfying to think replacing a principal is the best way to solve discord problems on a campus.  And certainly, it is numerically easier (and politically easier) to replace one principal rather than a bunch of teachers.  But unless the principal is the problem, you have cured nothing, the disease will still rage (although it may go dormant for a short time) and the children will suffer.  Be brave and take the high road.  Determine what the disease is, and act to cure it.  It will take decisive action, because unlike the body, your organization will not heal itself.

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/Fundamental5 
• Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “Look at Me: A Cautionary School Leadership Tale” Individual copies available on Amazon.com!  http://tinyurl.com/lookatmebook 
• Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Timer (Fundamental 5 Delivery Tool); Fun 5 Plans (Fundamental 5 Lesson Plan Tool); PW Lite (Basic PowerWalks Tool); PW Pro (Mid-level PowerWalks Tool) 
• Upcoming Presentations: The Fundamental 5 National Summit (Keynote Presentation) 
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation  and like Lead Your School on Facebook

A Reader Asks... A Little Career Advice

A LYS Principal asks the following:

SC,

I am currently at a career crossroads and would like you opinion on how I should move forward.

As you know, I am the High School Principal in a small urban/suburban district.  Our superintendent, a mentor and the person who hired me, is retiring and the Board is looking outside the district for her replacement.

There is a larger district that has approached me to take over a successful elementary school that currently has an opening.  The school is larger than my current school, the pay will be the same, and there would be room for advancement, both in salary and position.

My overall career aspiration is to be a Superintendent. Would it be damaging to my career to accept the position in the other district?  Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.

SC Response

There is not a clear-cut answer to this.

In general, when a Principal moves from High School to Elementary School it is considered a demotion.  Unless it is a bigger school, a better living situation, or more money.  And then you still have to explain it because on paper it is at least a yellow flag.

On the other hand, if you know that you won’t be on the new Superintendent’s team, then getting out early when you can pick where you land is always a good option. 

Here are the general rules:

Men typically get their first Superintendent job from either the high school principal position or a senior central office position.

Women typically get their first Superintendent job from either a secondary principal position or a central office position.

Here is what I would do in your position. If I do not know the new Superintendent, I would stay.  I would lead the best damn High School in the region and make my Superintendent look good. Then when the new Superintendent leaves in two to four years (which is about a 90% chance), I would be a, if not THE, logical internal candidate.  If the board doesn’t see it that way, I start applying for other assistant superintendent and superintendent positions in areas where my family would like to live.

Good luck!

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/Fundamental5 
• Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “Look at Me: A Cautionary School Leadership Tale” Individual copies available on Amazon.com!  http://tinyurl.com/lookatmebook 
• 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) 
• Upcoming Presentations: TASSP Summer Conference (Multiple Presentations); Texas ASCD Summer Conference; ESC 14 Sumer Conference (Keynote Presentation); ESC 11 Summer Conference (Keynote Presentation); NEASP National Conference; The Fundamental 5 National Summit (Keynote Presentation) 
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation  and like Lead Your School on Facebook