The Superintendent's Corner... C-Scope

A LYS Superintendent addresses some concerns about C-Scope (note: C-Scope is an vertically aligned scope and sequence used by hundreds of school districts).

I was recently asked a question concerning C-SCOPE and admittedly, gave a poor response.  Luckily, because of the blog, I get a re-do, so here goes...

Most professions have sub-specialties within the field.  For example, in medicine you don't go to a neurologist for a heart problem.  In law, attorneys that handle personal injury law are generally not experts in criminal law defense.  The profession of education is no different.

In broad categories education has at least three sub-specialties:

1. Operations/Finance/Policy

2. Instruction

3. Curriculum & Assessment

Each of these sub-specialties can further be subdivided.  For example, Instruction can be general, special education, deaf education, and others.  The problem is many educators consider themselves experts in many if not all of these areas.  In reality, an exceptional educator will be proficient or better in one expertise and familiar with the others.  Of course many politicians and wonks outside the field of education are without a doubt experts in all areas of education, which is fortunate for those of us who have devoted our lives and careers to the field.

In Texas, the area of curriculum and assessment is being dominated by C-Scope, which has been controversial since the day it was created.  The reasons for the controversy are many, but here are some factors:

1. Instructional leaders (principals, superintendents) have poor understanding of curriculum and have mismanaged the implementation of C-SCOPE.  This usually involves unrealistic mandates concerning the use of C-SCOPE by teachers.

2. Some teachers simply don't like being told what to teach and when to teach it.  The concept of horizontal and vertical alignment is lost to these teachers, or worse, they just don’t care.

3. Too many people expect perfection out of a curriculum.  Every error or inconsistency in C-SCOPE was deemed as "proof" that CSCOPE was worthless.  Newsflash: There is no perfect curriculum. 

The problem of C-SCOPE efficacy is beginning to boil over.  Some districts have taken the approach of having teachers writing curriculum for the district.  The problem with this approach is that virtually 100% of teachers (and administrators) have 0% expertise in curriculum development.  Teachers should have expertise in instructional design and delivery.  Most teachers need only be familiar with curriculum, generally to the implementation level, but certainly not to the curriculum design and evaluation level.  To be clearer: administrators and teachers, we must have a curriculum, and it is very, very unlikely that very many administrators and teachers know very much about curriculum design at all; it is a separate specialty in education. 

The C-SCOPE boil over prompted SBOE member Thomas Ratliff to release the following:

http://www.texasisd.com/article_132994.shtml

I think Thomas Ratliff nailed it, yet problems persist.  For example, there has been a rumor floating around since October that Pearson has acquired C-SCOPE. This is not true, but there are those convinced none the less.  This falls into the "conspiracy theory" section that Ratliff  refers to.  The problem is, there is too much truth to the Pearson "conspiracy" overall, so every time educators hear anything about Pearson, it is assumed true. I don't think Pearson has some evil conspiracy in mind at all.  Nor do I think Pearson has the best interest of children in mind.  I simply think Pearson is trying to make money.  In many ways Pearson and its supportive legislatures are the "heart of the vampire" Robert Scott was referring to just a year ago.

Still, the winds of politics are ever changing.  The ultra-conservative politicians that Texans now seem to favor would love to get the TESCCC out of the curriculum business and turn it over to a private entity, such as Pearson, for example.  No conspiracy here either, we keep electing those that are clear with their agenda.  We just seem to be surprised that they really are acting on that agenda.

And with this legislative session, those who have axes to grind against C-SCOPE see an opportunity to piggy-back on the less government, more charter school, less public school funding, voucher coat tails.  That is a shame, because in districts that have fully and effectively implement C-SCOPE, I have never seen anything but good results for kids.

Some suggestions for TESCCC:

1.  Your user agreement was obviously written by lawyers to protect a product.  I get that, but many people will read the user agreement and see hidden agendas, secrecy, skullduggery, and conspiracy.  I would recommend going to a Linux model of curriculum delivery: open source.  Put everything out there and get rid of the pay wall. 

You don't need to worry nearly as much about user agreements when you are open source.  Very few private companies can compete against what is given as free.  This is the model both Android and Linux use, and it is very, very effective.  If you don't believe it install Linux Mint 13 Mate on your PC. You will never use another Microsoft product after you do.

2.  The exemplar lessons are a huge source of contention.  I would remove exemplar lessons from C-SCOPE as an official part of the product.  I would use some other forum for teachers to create and share specific lessons that are organized to the C-SCOPE framework.  Perhaps that platform already exists under Project Share?  Well-intended but controversial lessons will be picked up from the battlefield and promptly fired back at TESCCC, with effect.

3.  Simplify, simplify, simplify.  Go to a scope and sequence aligned to the tested TEKS.  That's it.  Do it at no cost to districts.  Besides, administrators forcing teachers to teach at the C-SCOPE lesson level are part of the problem.  Those administrators are using their positions and power to force a well intended but misguided approach to C-SCOPE implementation.  That too is battlefield pick-up being fired at TESCCC with effect. 

I am a big fan of CSCOPE, and I would rather see it simplified, free, and open sourced rather than lose it for any reason.

SC Response

First, everyone should click on the link and read SBOE Member Ratliff’s short history lesson on C-Scope. His two-page summary eviscerates the anti C-Scope conspiracy theory.

Second, I agree with over 90% of what you have written. In Texas, the use of C-Scope is really a no-brainer.  The Foundation Trinity is built on the implementation of a decent, vertically aligned, and accountability test correlated scope and sequence.  Not only does C-Scope fit the bill, it is a much better tool than any individual teacher can now create.  Those that argue otherwise only prove their ignorance of the purpose, role and quality of the tool.

As for the Pearson/C-Scope rumors, I think that began last session when our elected leaders who are friendly with Pearson openly questioned whether the ESC’s should be building C-Scope for districts.  Our Republican legislators have taken the position that Pearson is “better qualified” to develop the curriculum that our teachers use. Because as we all know, outsourcing every component of public education to multi-national corporations is what is best for children. Or, is that what is best for contributions to re-election campaigns? As a professional educator, I easily get confused.

I agree with the open source model in theory, if the state would fund C-Scope development, maintenance, improvement and delivery.  But that is not going to happen. Our current political leadership simply refuses to fund education at an adequate level.  So in the absence of enlightened leadership, a co-op, pay-for-use model is the most practical solution.

I agree that the exemplar lessons have been a significant source of contention and an on-going work in progress.  And if the state hadn’t switched from TAKS to STAAR, I too would recommend ignoring them (which I did).  However, I am also aware that the practice of collaborative instructional planning is almost as rare as unicorn sightings.  With STAAR, the exemplar lesson is no longer a luxury.  Though not perfect (far form it), they do give teachers a starting point for creating and providing aligned and paced instruction.  Teachers and administrators must come to the realization that we have to play the game we are in, not the game we wish we were in.  As you mention above, it’s what we have been consistently voting for over the last 15 years.

Finally, I completely agree that C-Scope biggest failing is poor leadership and poor implementation by those in the field. Honestly, how simple can you make a curriculum tool designed for ever-changing high stakes accountability and have it still be effective? Maybe C-Scope should come with the following warning label: Warning –Poor leadership and lazy practice will result in significant pain and pushback.     

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 Assistant Principals’ Workshop (Featured Speaker), American Association of School Administrators Conference (Multiple Presentations), National Association of Secondary School Principals Conference (Multiple Presentations), Texas Association of Secondary School Principals Conference (Multiple Presentations)
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation and like LYS on Facebook

Top LYS Tweets From the Week of January 7, 2013

Though the blog went on hiatus for the Christmas Holidays, the LYS Nation Twitter Feed just kept on going.  Today’s post is the last highlight review, so now we are caught up. Here are the Top 10 LYS Tweets from the week of January 7, 2013.

1. Congratulations to LYSer, Dewitt Smith! He is the new Superintendent for Wink-Loving CISD. Who will be next?

2. Today, I will have more technology in my pocket than put men on the moon. Yet most schools won't let me learn using it. (By @thomascmurray)

3. Vouchers are not designed for kids in poverty, kids with special needs, or kids who don't speak English. (By @DrJerryRBurkett)

4. Houston taxpayers now pay 83% of cost of education after the Texas Legislature cut $5.4B last session. With $9B surplus, will state now pay its share? (By @harvinmoore)

5. Where is taking the first week of the second semester to review the first semester in C-Scope?

6. If you are still working on the warm-up 20 minutes into class, it's NOT a warm-up.

7. Copying vocabulary from the back of the book is instructional malpractice.

8. It doesn't seem to matter if it is an early start school or a late start school, most of the kids and staff sleepwalk thru the 1st period.

9. I don’t have a problem with accountability. Just make it make sense. It also doesn’t need to be so punitive. (By @ONeilCHSprincip)

10. PowerWalks now has an ELPS report! Early data indicates that classrooms aren't very ELPS friendly. Easier to fix this when you can see it.

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: North Dakota Principals Association Conference (Keynote Speaker), TASSP Assistant Principals’ Workshop (Featured Speaker), American Association of School Administrators Conference (Multiple Presentations), National Association of Secondary School Principals Conference (Multiple Presentations), Texas Association of Secondary School Principals Conference (Multiple Presentations) 
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation

Top LYS Tweets From the Week of November 11, 2012

And we’re back...

I hope everyone had a safe and restful Thanksgiving Holiday. Before we roll into the posts we’ll catch up on LYS Tweets, which continued during the break.  If you don’t follow @LYSNation, here are the Top 10 LYS Tweets from the week of November 11, 2012.

1. If your students repeatedly can't, that is a sign that you should try something different.

2. A Fundamental Law of Performance: If you don't work the plan, the plan won't work.

3. Push back is just another form of feedback. Don't let it frustrate you; use it as a learning tool. (By @DCulberhouse)

4. How much time do elementary school students spend reading informational texts? Only 3.6 minutes a day. (By @anniemurphypaul)

5. Teachers constantly bust their tails to get monosyllable responses from individuals. Instead, embed Frequent Small Group Purposeful Talk to make kids engage in the content.

6. So where is, "The kids have worked hard for the past two days, so this is their catch-up time..." in C-Scope?

7. Training without follow up cueing, monitoring and support is, at best, just a session that presents suggested practices.

8. Increased testing rigor, less funding, and overhauled accountability system, it's hard to argue that public education isn't being set to fail. (By @DrJerryRBurkett)

9. Hey SC! Saw a guy here at the University of North Texas Education Leadership Conference drinking from an LYS tumbler... Love the LYS influence!! (By @drstevenwurtz)

10. To anyone who wants to secede from the U.S. Tell that to a marine or anyone else who bled for this country. (By @TitusNation)

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 Assistant Principals’ Workshop (Featured Speaker), American Association of School Administrators Conference (Multiple Presentations), National Association of Secondary School Principals Conference (Multiple Presentations)
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation

A Superintendent Submits... The Common Assessment Process

An LYS Superintendent shares the following:

SC, 

A superintendent and a teacher asked me essentially the same set of questions yesterday - two different districts, two different roles, but the same dilemma. Both districts have just completed a testing cycle of "curriculum based assessments” with seemingly poor results. The following are my thoughts.

1. Great job doing common assessments!  I will add that waiting 6 to 9 weeks is too long. You are now finding out 9 weeks into the school year that your instructional practices are maybe, and I add MAYBE, not as effective as you thought they were.  You could have known that with a short assessment 6 weeks ago, after only 3 weeks of instruction had passed.  Teachers, if your district persists in doing 6 weeks and 9 weeks assessments, it falls to you to make 3 weeks assessments, in the same format as the district's common assessments.  These can and should be less than 10 questions long, and should not take an entire class period.  You can and should spiral questions from identified holes onto these assessments. In other words, follow the Cain model.

2. Both districts are implementing C-Scope for the first time this year.  Now it must be made clear to everyone that this is NOT the first year both of these districts made C-Scope available to the staff, it is merely the first year both districts have become concerned enough to mandate and monitor the implementation of the curriculum. Leaders, you may want to sit down, because this may sting.  What you have done as leaders, by not making an aligned curriculum mandatory, is an egregious leadership failure. You KNEW you needed a curriculum, which is why you bought it, yet you failed to lead the implementation of the curriculum.  Your responsibility to implement best practices, including curriculum implementation, does not end simply because you sent teachers to C-Scope training. Enough said, now don't beat yourself up over it, let's fix it.  Also, don't beat the teachers up either, as this situation is mostly a result of your leadership failure, not teaching failure.

3. Early testing results in both districts were, to be generous, poor. Neither of these testing results should be a surprise.  That is, I would bet a copy of the Fundamental 5 (Cain & Laird) that neither district had TEACHERS conduct a focused analysis of their student's deficiencies AND develope a viable plan to fill in holes.  Every teacher in my district was required to identify the most failed objectives from last year.  Once that was conducted, we remembered our Schmoker: we concentrate on the deepest hole and begin filling it weekly.  Schmoker tells us that if we try to fill all learning holes, we fill nothing. However, learning is a complex interconnected web. If we begin by filling in the deepest hole, we will address some learning gaps and misconceptions that are likely to partially or completely fill in other holes.  Once the deepest hole is filled, and that may take a while, start on the next one.  The catch here is two-fold.  One, your students have not been in an aligned scope and sequence, so there are certainly holes in the learning.  This will create low common assessment scores.  Two, this phenomenon of low scores was totally predictable had you put some thought to the problem early on.  This reflects back to point one: MAYBE the instruction was ineffective, or MAYBE it was effective but there are just too many unidentified and un-addressed learning holes.

4. The first year of common assessment implementation is likely to be chaotic.  Again, leadership created this chaos; so don't panic in the face of your creation!  Scores will be low, holes need to be identified, and strategies need to be developed to fill in the holes, one at a time.  The process is not as slow as it sounds, but don't be surprised when your common assessment scores remain in the tank all year long.  The trick is to look at next year's common assessment scores.  Are the scores moving up, overall?  If so, your system is beginning to add value to children, congratulations! Keep the word "system" in mind. You are now in the first stages of creating a system approach to educating children. Before you were simply treating symptoms. System work will be much harder.  Keep in mind too that it is likely you do not fully understand instructional systems at this point.  I started using an instructional system approach in 2006. It was not until 2009 that I would have called myself actually competent, three years.  The 10,000-hour rule as described by Gladwell is in full play here.

5. Common assessment data is valuable in the following ways: A. It puts a numerical value on the health of your instructional systems. B. It verifies if instructional strategies and deficit filling are occurring, over time. C. And this is a distant third, it is student performance data.  We seem to get common assessment data and then want to come up with student interventions, which is the LEAST valuable data from common assessments.  Student interventions are symptom treating, and that is OK as long as the main thrust is to treat the disease.  In our case, the disease is an ineffective instructional system.  I see teachers spending hours doing tutorials after school: symptom treating.  I see almost ZERO time spent anywhere trying to create a better instructional system.  Those priorities are 180 degrees out of synch.

In closing, don't panic in the face of common assessment scores.  Use the scores to improve your systems.  It took Lesa Cain three years of faithful and relentless systems building in order to produce an exceedingly high performing school with a student body consisting almost entirely of low SES students. Not to mention that Lesa had access to an incredible support network that too many of us don't have (but you can).  Just understand that system building is work.  Work this process diligently for several years and reap the rewards.  Leadership should concern themselves only with teachers who refuse to implement the curriculum, refuse to adjust instructional practices, and refuse to fill in student learning gaps. For teachers who are on board, pat them on the back and a give them a little cover and a little time.

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 Assistant Principals’ Workshop (Featured Speaker), American Association of School Administrators Conference (Multiple Presentations), National Association of Secondary School Principals Conference (Multiple Presentations)
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation

Top LYS Tweets From the Week of August 12, 2012

Here’s a shocker... students are using bootleg technology to cheat on assignments.  Oh, the horror. Quick, ban the cell phones and throw the bootleggers into ISS. 

I may be making to light of this, but students have been finding ways to cheat since the first test was administered at the first school in human existence.  If a teacher is to counteract this, we must first consider the reasons why students cheat.

A. They do not value the assignment (I don’t care)

B. They know that they do not have the requisite skills to complete the task at an adequate level (I can’t do it).

C. The fear of not succeeding is greater than the fear of getting caught (I’m desperate).

D. It’s exciting or challenging (I got over on the man).

Second, we must consider how teachers can prevent cheating.

A. Create interesting assignments.

B.  Provide supports for students with deficits in skill and understanding.

C.  Provide grading rubrics and scaffold competency targets.

D. Be more alert in the classroom.

Notice that not one of our considerations is actually compounded by use of bootleg technology in the classroom.  In fact, upon further examination, the reasoned and appropriate use of bootleg technology may actually be a factor in the reduction of student cheating.

The point being, if I don’t want to do something I can point to an endless list of reasons why I shouldn’t, most of which won’t stand up to leadership due diligence and objective scrutiny.  

A number of you in the LYS Nation are now using your own bootleg technology devices to follow Twitter.  If you haven’t done so yet, we want you to join us.  To let you see what you are missing, here are the Top 10 LYS Tweets from the week of August 12, 2012.

1. Repeat after me: If we are not teaching the right thing, how we teach does not matter.

2. You have to read the book, Fundamental 5, it will make total sense. It's making great teaching... and learning... a habit... (By @jenniferzsch)

3. It seems unreasonable to expect teachers to teach bell to bell when their administrators are consistently late to meetings.

4. I’m tired of listening to people who've never run a school district, or even been in a public school, tell public school how to run. (By @DrJerryRBurkett)

5. Fundamental Five + O.C. Taylor = Another fantastic year! (By @principalkinney)

6. Cain out at Comal ISD yesterday. Really challenged by your presentation. Thanks for coming out. (By MES_Principal)

7. Most opposition I hear about C-Scope is actually opposition to teaching state standards. Show me a better comprehensive product, and I'll be quiet. (By @tlonganecker)

8. So many talented organizations are thwarted by talentless leadership. (By @tlonganecker)

9. Sadly, when you wear socks with sandals, you have failed the basic aptitude test.

10. Right now, The Fundamental 5 (Cain and Laird), is the #4 best selling education theory book on Kindle! Thank you, LYS Nation!

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: Canadian ISD Staff Kickoff, Highland Park ISD Staff Kickoff, Sunray ISD Staff Kickoff, Region 10 ESC Fall Leadership Conference (Keynote), Advancing Improvement in Education Conference (Multiple Presentations), TASSP Assistant Principals’ Workshop (Featured Speaker), American Association of School Administrators Conference (Multiple Presentations)
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation

Top LYS Tweets From the Week of November 6, 2011

In regards to bootleg technology I often get the question, “Where should we start?”

Here’s an idea: Ask some students.  If there are expert bootleg technology users on your campus the odds are that they are students, even at the elementary level.  So create a ‘Principal’s Emerging Technology Advisory Committee.’  Populate the committee with students who are handpicked and volunteers.   Then have the committee answer the following questions:

1.     What bootleg technology tools do students use?

2.     How do students use bootleg technology tools

3.     Where do students use bootleg technology tools?

4.     Which common bootleg technology could be used in class?

5.     How can identified bootleg technology tools be used in class?

6.     What should be the rules for using bootleg technology?

7.     What should be the consequences for using bootleg technology inappropriately?

My guess is through the process of answering these questions your students will create a reasonable and actionable bootleg technology plan that will be the envy of your district.

A number of you in the LYS Nation are now using your own bootleg technology devices to follow Twitter.  If you haven’t done so yet, we want you to join us.  To let you see what you are missing, here are the Top 10 LYS Tweets from the week of November 6, 2011, as tabulated by the accountants at Price Waterhouse. 

1. We are still our own worst enemy. A teacher union quote, "Closing empty schools won't impact the overall budget much." Blatant inefficiency steals from kids and taxpayers.

2. How can you not have one documented teacher observation at this time in the year and look yourself the mirror, much less call yourself a school leader?

3. There are 205 school days in South Korea's calendar - 25 more than in the U.S. Over an academic career, they spend 2 more years in class. (@FareedZakaria)

4. "Studies suggest students should be praised for effort..." LYS'ers are surprised by how many are surprised by this.

5. Just because the standard is hard to achieve doesn't make the standard wrong. And a try and a miss still equals a miss. So try again.

6. I’m about to lead teams of teachers on some classroom observations. Always an exciting day. This is the first real step in creating an action oriented PLC.

7. Here's the goal. Morning announcements - 2 minutes or LESS. Every extra second of instruction is valuable.

8. It is time to pull back the curtain of truth. Teachers who do not want to improve should never be considered master teachers. (@CabidaCain)

9. If you haven't read Marzano (or Schmoker, Fullan, etc.), you don't get to debate the interpretation of Marzano (or Schmoker, Fullan, etc.).

10. Can anyone show me where the weekly spelling test is in C-Scope? So how come I keep seeing spelling tests being administered?

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies available on Amazon.com!  http://tinyurl.com/4ydqd4t

Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation

Confirmed 2012 Presentations: NASSP Conference; NASB Conference

A Reader Asks... Maintaining the Course

A long time LYS’er asks:

SC ,

I am having some struggles getting my new principal on board with a few LYS strategies because they don't jive with AVID, which is her major push. I think AVID is great for college readiness for struggling and disadvantaged students but I do not think it addresses school improvement issues as a whole.

I can report that we have made some significant gains the over the past year, which has come with focused disaggregation and instructional targeting with C-SCOPE and test data. Unfortunately, we did not make enough gains to change our rating. How do I convince my new principal that we are on the right track?

SC Response

I would agree that AVID is not a holistic school improvement program. AVID would fall under the umbrella of instructional delivery / teacher craft. Or the “Art” of instruction. The initial and primary focus of LYS is the infrastructure of instructional machine. And as E. Don Brown constantly reminds us, it the infrastructure isn’t there, the “Art” will not save you.

But the good news is that AVID does focus on improving options for academically fragile students. Meaning that philosophically, LYS and AVID are in the same ballpark. I think that it should be fairly easy to demonstrate that the LYS practice of using the performance data of the AFS to leverage sustained campus is valid and prudent. There is nothing that compares to the clarity of measuring success by those who succeed because of you, not in spite of you.

P.S. Send me your current contact information, I’m often in your neck of the woods and want to stop by and see you in action.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies available on Amazon.com! http://tinyurl.com/4ydqd4t

Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation

Come visit us at the LYS Booth at the TASA/TASB Fall Conference on 9/30/11 and 10/1/11

Attend the LYS presentations at the Texas School Improvement Conference on 10/26/11 and 10/27/11

A Reader Writes... (Curriculum Myth - Part 2)

In response to the 12/10/2010 post, “Curriculum Myth,” a LYS Principal writes:

Sean did a good job of fielding this one. Let's look at your opening statement:

Shouldn't curriculum, instruction and assessment all be standards-oriented, research-based and data driven?

The answer to this question is "YES"

From a curriculum theory standpoint, you have the taught curriculum, the prescribed curriculum, and the learned curriculum.

Curriculum begins with standards. In Texas, the State Board of Education (SBOE) determines these standards. Standards should be research based with input from society, experts, and anticipation on the needs of students in a changing future, etc. TEA uses the SBOE standards (TEKS) and builds assessment of those standards (TAKS, STAAR). Pearson uses a whole lot of experts (and money) to develop assessments. These assessments are research based and to paraphrase Willard Daggett, “For a standardized test, TAKS is pretty good."

You have no control of the tested standards. And there is NO need for YOU to research them. The research has been professionally conducted and the assessment is what it is. Are those standards research based? Maybe, maybe not. You really have to follow the buffoonery that is SBOE deliberations to answer this question and if you do follow the buffoonery, you know the answer.

Once we know the tested standards, we work on the prescribed curriculum. We select a curriculum that we trust is aligned to tested standards. Again, no need to do the research, it has been done for you when the standards were determined, just align your prescribed curriculum to the tested standards.

Next you have the taught curriculum, what happens in the classroom, and the learned curriculum, which also happens in the classroom. This is where PowerWalks, the Fundamental Five and common assessments come in. We use frequent common assessments (which are probably not research based) to verify that the taught and learned curriculum is aligned with the prescribed curriculum.

From top to bottom it looks like this:

1. Standards (partially research based, partially politically and ideologically motivated) developed/approved by the SBOE.

2. Tested standards based upon SBOE standards (TEKS). Tested standards are developed by TEA (TAKS, STAAR). The tested standards are definitely research based, but not by you. You can conduct your own research, but the State is not interested in the results of your research.

3. Your district chooses a curriculum (C-Scope, C-CAP, et al.) that is aligned to the tested standards. Again, no research required, just verify the prescribed curriculum addresses the needs of the tested standards, which is a scope and sequence issue, not a research issue. At this step, we are looking for alignment, not validity and reliability.

4. Verify that the taught and learned curriculums are tightly aligned to the prescribed curriculum.

So yes, curriculum is in theory, research based. But in our case no research is required. BTW, you get an A+ and get to go to the head of the class if you can analyze the process described in steps 1-4, find the weaknesses, and create practical solutions to address those weaknesses. The process will require no research.

I have a lot of principals and central office types ask me how to respond to teachers who are attacking C-Scope, claiming C-Scope is not research based. I hope here I have made it clear C-Scope has no need to be research based, it just needs to align to the tested standards, and it is.

SC Response

If I did a good job with my response, you did a great job with yours.

All I will add is this. I want teachers to be experts. But to create a staff of experts I have to narrow the focus, not expand it. So to create a staff of experts in the delivery of instruction (the art of teaching), I have to take something off their plate. Outsource the “what to teach” (constant research) and the “when to teach it” (constant evaluation) issues to other experts. Translation: Leadership must bring an aligned scope and sequence to the instructional staff so they can focus their time and brainpower on becoming expert teachers.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

Follow Sean Cain at www.Twitter.com/LYSNation

Attend the LYS Presentations at the TASB Winter Legal Conference (Today)

Visit the LYS Booth at the NASSP Conference (2/24 - 2/26)

Attend the LYS Presentation at the Texas Middle School Association Conference (2/26/2011)

A Reader Writes... (Urban School Myth - Part 2)

In response to the posts relating to, “Urban School Myth,” an old school LYS Principal writes:

“It is always good when Brezina likes a post.

Of course, I know there are scores of problems that make the job of education exceedingly difficult. I also believe that many of those problems are self inflicted. In rural schools, we talk about not having the resources needed to compete with those big city schools. In the big schools, both urban and suburban, we look around and ask ourselves, "What resources are they talking about?"

The urban school myth is but one of a collection of excuses I have noted that educators use to explain away the lack of student success. While working in a large urban district, I made the mistake of discussing my thoughts concerning this particular myth with an assistant superintendent who hid behind the urban school mantra. After presenting the case and laying out the facts, you would not believe her response. She looked at me and said, "Well, you do understand we are not a true urban school. We are an inner city school."

What? That’s the best you can come up with? If you can't logic your wait out of a corner, just restate the excuse using synonyms? At that point, I realized that my skill set in this particular non-LYS district was a waste of their money and my time."

SC Response
Let me start with your “self-inflicted” observations. During my career as “school-district-state plumber,” the sad truth was in most cases the problem is easy to pinpoint, all you had to do was hold up a mirror. That’s both bad news and good news. The bad news being that we are at fault, but the good news is that we can do something about it. If we work, at full speed, on the things that we can control, the uncontrollable (myth) problems solve themselves.

Up until the mid-2000’s, the resource issue was a valid excuse. The rural schools had no infrastructure support. Not because they didn’t want it, but because it didn’t exist. Now you can buy infrastructure (scope and sequence, data processing, etc), and it becomes more affordable every year. If you are in Texas, you need to thank two people for making this possible, Dr. Shirley Neely (Commissioner of Education) and Dr. Nadine Kujawa (Aldine ISD Superintendent). Nadine and Aldine ISD stepped up and gave a cohort of struggling rural school, their scope and sequence, for essentially free. Or as the Aldine leadership team told me, “Let them know, as far as we’re concerned, they are Aldine now.”

Shirley used Aldine and the subsequent success of rural school cohort as the lever to force the ESC’s to step up and better fulfill their purpose. Jump to 2010 and now you have C-Scope and C-Cap, two excellent and evolving curriculum sources that weren’t worth the paper that were then printed on, just six years ago.

Now that tools are readily available, at every campus in every setting, the critical variables are the adults and the quality of leadership (or lack thereof). One of the Maxwell’s Fundamental Laws of Leadership states that a subordinate leader will not work for a leader of inferior skills (in the long run). When you can’t attract good leadership candidates from the outside, nor retain good internal candidates, you have to seek out and address the root cause. This brings us back to the mirror.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...