A Reader Writes... (Vouchers - It's Only Choice - Part 1)

In response to the 5/19/11 post “Vouchers - It's Only Choice,” a reader writes:

Interesting commentary…

SC Response

There is no question that I am a school reformer. But I am not in the camp that now labels themselves as such. I believe we have a duty to the taxpayer to efficiently and effectively use their funds. I believe we have a duty to our country to educate all children to the highest level within our means. I believe we have a duty to our staff to put them in the best possible situation to be successful. I believe we should diligently look for ways to improve the delivery of instruction. I believe the model for education designed for previous generations may not be the best model for this generation.

That being said, I think the solutions that will address my beliefs won’t be found hidden within political agendas and corporate earnings reports. At one time I worked with (not for) a major national reform initiative. Their belief system was a follows, “There are some great charter schools, so all charter schools are great. There are some bad traditional public schools, so all traditional public schools are bad.”

When I pointed out that by their logic, I could state, “There are some bad charter schools, so all charter schools are bad. There are some great traditional public schools, so all traditional public schools are great.” Their response was, “You are being contrary. Everyone knows that is not true. Public schools are beyond repair.”

Needless to say, it did not take long for us to part company.

Here is what I know:

1. There are some great charter schools. What they do well should be studied and replicated. There are some bad charter schools. They should be closed down.

2. There are some great traditional public schools. What they do well should be studied and replicated. There are some bad traditional public schools. They should be closed down.

3. With charter schools, there is an inverse relationship between quality of service provided to students and profit motive of the charter holder.

4. Vouchers are simply a tool to further the agenda of those who want to dismantle public schools. The fact that some good, but misguided, people think that they are a good idea does not change this fact.

5. Unions play right into the hands of the anti-school faction by fighting for every hill. When the teacher sound bites are all about adults, the general public believes that we have abandoned educating students as our mission.

I don’t know what the education environment will look like in ten to fifteen years. But I do know that if it is in the hands of the private and corporate sectors the gap between the “haves” and “have-nots” will only grow. That is not what I believe in.

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

A Reader Writes... (Teacher Stress - Part 16)

In response to the post, “Teacher Stress – Part 13,” a reader writes:

Quoting from the post, “…those teachers that felt that administrators were bullying them were teachers that were having "issues" in their practice.”

“This is not always the situation. The rest of your response made me feel that some good people are still out there.”

SC Response
A couple of years ago, I began to notice a trend that was emerging as I was working with struggling and/or stagnant schools and districts. But it took the perfect storm of working with a large dysfunctional urban district with entrenched inept leadership and a well organized union to drive home the following truth.

1. Teachers in general don’t like change. As a group, we are risk-adverse. This is not an indictment, it is simply a fact.

2. Teachers that are doing the least, gripe and complain the loudest when change and accountability are introduced. After all, they have the most to lose when they are exposed.

3. Hard working, effective teachers get sucked into the manipulations of weaker teachers. This is because they (the effective ones) are working their tails off and assume that everyone else is doing the same. They don’t have the luxury of time to visit the effective classroom and the ineffective classroom on a frequent and regular basis.

4. Unions want poor teachers to raise a stink, because then they have a public fight where they can flex their muscle and tell the hard working teachers, “This could have been you.” When in actuality that will never be the case because hard working, effective teachers take care of their business.

5. Inept leadership uses teacher complaints and union push-back as the excuse to do nothing except to collect their paychecks and fiddle as the collective future opportunities of their students’ burn to the ground.

So there is the truth and the reason why from a system standpoint, I am a teacher advocate (which interestingly surprises a lot of people). Poor teachers and unions are not the root of the problem. Scared, lazy, inept and/or “me” centered leaders who use poor teachers and unions as the excuse for their lack of meaningful action are the problem. The bottom line is this: If leadership provides a compelling vision, creates and supports a value-adding system, models expectations, monitors expectations, and objectively enforces expectations, labor becomes an engaged partner. When leadership does not do the things I just described, they deserve all the grief that labor dishes out.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

A Reader Submits... Instructional Discussions

The following was submitted by a veteran LYS principal who is leading her third significant turn around of a struggling school (this one a large high school).

“We had a union meeting last Friday. Teachers met with union reps to discuss their gripes and concerns. I received feedback this morning from some friendly teachers.

To put this into context, I have probably written close to 100 directives this year. Most of the directives are for policy violations, failure to follow established procedures, or no instruction in the classroom. Real black and white issues, but the volume is disappointingly high. I really thought that the majority teacher complaints would come from the sudden increase in directives being written, but this is not a real sore spot.

The biggest gripe seems to be stemming from the increase in instructional conversations. I have instructional coaches that do almost all of the instructional conversations and they are getting the blunt end of the teacher attacks. What makes this particularly interesting is that the instructional coaches are technically teachers, and are in fact union members themselves. Also, there are four of them, so this isn't a personality issue with just one person.

I have noticed that here, as in my previous two schools, that the real heat starts when the instructional conversations begin. Most teachers don't seem to fight the black and white directives, but they come unglued when the instructional conversations begin. I have witnessed close to twenty assistant principals and instructional coaches engage in instructional conversations. That is a lot of different people, with a lot of different approaches and personalities, all receiving negative reactions from teachers when the instructional conversations begin.

There has to be something to learn here.”

SC Response
A very interesting observation and one that I too have seen on multiple campuses. I think the issue boils down to the difference between “fact” versus “opinion,” or as E. Don Brown reminds us, the “objective” versus the “subjective.”

Consider “speeding.” When I speed, I recognize the risk / reward proposition. If I don’t get caught or have a wreck (the risk), I get to my destination faster (the reward). If by chance I do get a ticket or have a wreck, I don’t like it, but I only have myself to blame. Plus, I can’t complain about it much, because there is not much sympathy given when you are the cause of your own grief. This is similar to my cutting a procedural corner at work. I finally get caught coming in late, not following the appearance code, or not turning in my lesson plans, I have no one to blame but myself. My peers may empathize, but they are not going to come to my defense. As you stated, it is all very cut and dried, very objective.

Now let’s say I’m at home mowing the yard like I always do and a county inspector comes up and tells me that I’m mowing wrong. Even worse, he says if I don’t mow in a more aesthetically pleasing manner, I will be fined. Needless to say, we are going to have an argument and my friends will give me a friendly ear and quite possibly will come to my assistance. What I just described is obviously arbitrary and subjective.

Now here’s the rub, teachers believe the assessment of their craft is subjective, and rightfully so. When there are no objective standards, no objective expectations and infrequent observation, then the evaluation of the teacher is the simply the subjective masquerading as the objective. So any feedback remotely negative results in an understandably defensive response.

But as an experiences LYS leader, you have changed the rules. By implementing the “science” of instruction (the Foundation Trinity and the Fundamental Five), you have transformed the subjective into the objective. Unfortunately, teacher perception does not change nearly as fast. So the first time teachers are faced with truly objective feedback, they want to kill the messenger. Stay the course. Given enough time your teachers will come around. But blink and you are sunk.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

A Reader Writes... (DAEP - Part 3)

In response to the post, “And Your Point Is,” a reader writes:

“Outstanding Statement! The Brown/Brezina/Cain systems do one thing unique from the rest of the weak and feeble intervention programs that schools try to implement: They work. Their systems produce accelerated growth and results campus wide in every area that data can reach. The trick is getting a buy in from a majority of the staff.

Public education has been looked at for so long as a ministry and not a job. Those days have gone the way of the Dodo Bird. Campus staff need a great awakening into the world of "hard work." This is where the buy in is tough. Many teachers want to do the bare minimum, no thanks to worthless, liberal unions. Not on my watch! I am already planning next year's professional development and teacher orientation, and it will be nothing short of a bootcamp. They are going to learn from the word "go" that there is never an off day of teaching.

We cannot relax. If I relaxed on firewatch I would wake up with my throat cut. This is a serious business we are in. Lives are at stake. Education needs to be addressed and framed in this way. Complainers can take a hike. I have a hidden agenda as a new administrator; it is to eradicate any cancerous, complaining adult on my campus.”

SC Response
I would be lying if I didn’t say that this reader is one of my favorite guys. He was an outstanding teacher who taught in a tough, urban high school, and as you can tell, he is an aggressive, young administrator. A former Marine non-com, he only has two speeds: full sprint and sleep. In the course of throwing gas on the fire, he touches on a couple of key points.

1. Education is a serious profession. Those of us who don’t take it seriously, do a grave disservice to our students and discredit the profession.

2. Teaching done correctly is work. If you’re not tired at the end of the day, you are cutting corners that shouldn’t be cut.

3. The time to plan next year’s staff development is now.

4. If as a leader, you are not clear on what you want to achieve, then at best, all you will get is more of the same. At worst, you will be replaced.

I do think he demonizes unions a little too much. It is my experience and belief that leaders who are clear in their expectations and walk the walk, don’t have union issues. “Leaders” who don’t communicate and play the “do as I say, not as I do” game deserve every bit of hell that unions give them.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

Evil Unions?

I work in a number of districts that have active teacher associations. In these districts, it is generally accepted that the associations are the reason that nothing ever changes. It becomes everyone’s excuse of choice. For example, your will hear,

“We would do that, but the Association would fight it,” or

“The Association won’t let us get rid of bad teachers,” or

“The Association doesn’t care about kids.”

What is interesting about the above excuses is that when change effects the way leadership has to conduct its business, the concerns about a contrary Association are bandied about more, not less. The local teacher association becomes the crutch of the weak and ineffective school leader.

The pattern I am observing more and more is that teacher associations are used by all parties as the reason to maintain the status quo and not feel guilty about it. For the record, I believe that teacher associations are dangerously close to having outlived their usefulness. They exist solely to advocate for the needs of adults in a system that must be (though still is not) focused on students first, second and always. But in my experience, schools failures are leadership failures not teacher failures.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

The Truth is Stranger than Fiction Alert

Bill would stop schools from paying union leaders
By Lisa Schencker, The Salt Lake Tribune
http://www.sltrib.com/education/ci_11770116
“In this time of budget cuts, Utah school districts should not spend money on local teacher union leaders, says one lawmaker…”




Really? This is standard practice? It seems that Utah school districts contribute to the salaries of teacher union leaders who no longer teach and do not work for the district. If I was a Utah taxpayer this would be the stick I would use to beat districts with every time the question of a tax increase came up.



Though I am not a proponent of unions, I am not opposed to them. But they exist to advocate for their members, and as such should be funded by members. Even more incredulously, a local union president defends the practice.



After reading the article, the wisdom of E. Don Brown once again rings true, “the only pure advocate in the system for students is the building principal. At even given time, everyone else in the system has a vested interest that can easily outweigh the needs of the kids.”


Your turn…