The New Working Definition of Great

A reader pointed out that I mention “Great Schools” a lot and asked how I defined “Great”. This is an excellent question because the definition of a great school used by me and my colleagues at the R4 Group differs from that used by most educators.

The original definition of a great school probably began with simply having a roof, a book, a chalk board and a teacher (1800’s)*.

The definition evolved to represent a school that was clean, orderly, offered a lot of activities and had some students who achieved at high levels (1960’s - present)*.

The next step in the evolution of the term was to define a great school as one with high raw test scores (1990’s - present)*.

As schools are being ranked publicly, the term great school, as it is used by most people, seems to be defined as, “the school I work at”, or “the school that my children attend” (2000’s)*.

However, when I talk about “great schools” I mean schools that either send a significant percentage of their graduates to college or schools that significantly outperform their peers. What do these to criteria look like? First, let’s consider schools that send a significant number of graduates to college.

This criterion is somewhat of a sliding scale. The variables of the scale include type of school, size of school, drop-out rate and demographics. For example, if your school is a small, high SES, early college high school that sends 99% of it’s graduates to college, good for you, but anything less and you failed. This definition of great doesn’t apply to you. On the other hand, if your school is a small, low SES compensatory high school with a decreasing drop-out rate and 83% of your graduates enroll in some sort of post-secondary institution, you are getting dangerously close to great territory.

Now let’s look at the second criteria, outperforming your peers. This criterion is fairly straight forward and brutally honest. Take your school and its demographic peers. Sort the critical performance measures. The schools in the top 10% are probably great. The schools in the next 30% are probably good. Everyone else isn’t getting the job done and the raw scores don’t matter. For example, if your peers are generally recognized and you are acceptable, you are not great. If your peers are generally unacceptable and you are acceptable, you may be great. The critical variable in this category is consistency.

So to sum up this discussion, when I use the term “great school”, I mean a school that either consistently sends a significant number of its graduates to college or consistently outperforms its peers. When I use the term “great principal”, I mean the principal of a great school.

* Note: Date and definition made up by author.

Your turn…

Improving Schools: Campus Based Degree of Difficulty

In my day job, I help districts and school improve performance, rapidly. By rapidly, I mean that we expect to see measurable results in one semester or less. And we have an extensive track record that shows that we are good at what we do. (For more information you can visit, www.r4group.org). I only mention my day job, to let you know that the following opinion is based on a lot of field experience in a lot of settings.

If you are a school leader that is trying to change adult practice on your campus to improve student performance, the current perceived performance of your campus can make your job easier or soul crushingly difficult. Here’s how it stacks up, in order of difficulty. I will use the Texas ranking system, only because it does a good job of creating distinct categories.

# 5 in Degree of Difficulty – The Unacceptable Campus: This campus is the easiest in which to effect change. There’s no question that it is broke and the staff realize that their jobs are at stake, so they are open to new ideas that show promise.

# 4 in Degree of Difficulty – The Campus That Just Had Its Rating Drop: This campus has pride on the line. Even if they are blaming the drop on external factors, the staff is generally open to trying something new.

# 3 in Degree of Difficulty – The Acceptable Campus: This campus isn’t considered broke, but the staff would like the breathing room and perks of being recognized.

# 2 in Degree of Difficulty – The Exemplary Campus: The top of the pyramid in Texas. The staff on this campus have a lot of pride, know how tenuous their position is and are generally willing to work to stay at the top of the heap.

# 1 in Degree of Difficulty – The Long Time Recognized Campus: This campus isn’t broke and the staff is generally very comfortable. This campus often engages in a lot of what I call “superstitious” activities. The staff doesn't know exactly what it is that they do that actually impacts their rating so they are unwilling to change anything. If the staff does believe in change, it usually revolves around some other teacher, grade or department changing, because they are obviously doing their part.

So there’s my list. What do you think?

Your turn…

Dual Credit Courses

I saw a headline that stated that the bad economy should increase the interest in dual credit classes. This is in-line with an on-going discussion that I have been having with E. Don Brown (The R4 Group) and some Texas high school principals. As much as we like AP and IB courses, it is getting harder and harder not to encourage enrollment in dual credit courses. This is especially true if the student plans on attending a state university.

In Texas, where I live, public universities have to accept the credit hours. This means that students are entering college with up to 30 credit hours. In fact, I have a nephew that entered Texas Tech as a sophomore. That’s equates to about a $12,000.00 savings for his parents.

So if you were not a proponent of the program before, this might be the time to re-think your position. Couple the economic situation that families are facing with the stimulus money that will be coming to campuses that can support distance learning and this becomes a chance to offer something life changing to your students.

Your turn…