Posts
In response to the post, “Using Rewards,” and the subsequent comment, a reader writes:
“I don't think any teacher would condone "false flattery" to promote a child academically. It's the idea that a teacher is actually looking for the good and acknowledging the student's progress.”
SC Response
Let me re-post the line from my comment so I can present it in better context. I wrote, “…I think that it is “achieving goals” that is the critical concept. False flattery and unearned praise does not lead to the sense of accomplishment and pride that drives significant behavior change.”
By false flattery, I was really addressing two issues. First, I don’t believe in the practice of “everyone always gets an award.” If everyone always gets an award, no one has to work for anything. I (the student) know when I didn’t get the job done, if you lie to me and tell me I did, I’m never going to trust you and I’m never going to equate effort with reward.
On the other hand, I’m (me again) a firm believer in shaping behavior. If as an adult, I know that you have no chance of achieving the big goal, I should break the big goal down into smaller objectives and coach and reward as those objectives are achieved.
Second, the concept of false flattery lends itself to the practice of generic or unspecific praise. Random “good jobs,” are much less powerful than, “I really appreciate your comment. It shows that you are really thinking about this assignment and it allowed me to clarify some information for the entire class. Good job.”
Finally, I have seen all types, adults who don’t believe in shaping behavior, adults who believe in shielding students from all accountability and adults who try to effectively use any tool that will lead their students to success in the classroom and beyond.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
A Reader Writes... (... Not Getting the Job Done)
In response to the post, “Who Really is Not Getting the Job Done,” a reader writes:
“Teachers want great leadership. However, we sometimes get so caught up in our daily routines that we forget what our job is about. As educators, we need to focus on what is best for the children and how can we make the staff we have the best they can be. We cannot stand by as we watch ineffective teachers educate our classrooms. We must take charge of the situation and find a solution. If after it is all said and done and the teacher does not improve replace that person.”
SC Response
Everybody craves leadership. And, we all function better when we trust leadership and believe that leadership is vested in our success. Key though, is how success is defined. Great leaders ensure that the definition of success is concrete and constantly communicated (examples: Take THAT hill; If it is not right for students, it is wrong; etc.). Struggling and poor leaders either do not know or cannot define organizational success; and/or do not regularly communicate their expectations. In that void, the organization devolves into an every man for himself (or every teacher in their own silo) situation.
Second, behind defining and communicating organizational success, is providing tools and training for staff. Great leaders prepare their staff to be successful. They ensure that a common scope and sequence is available. They ensure that the master schedule is logical and is conducive to quality instruction. They ensure that training is geared towards building critical skills (such as the Cain/Laird Fundamental Five). They ensure that staff receives critical information in a timely fashion. Poor leaders just throw their people into the meat grinder and hope for the best. The lucky (?) staff simply survives to fight another day.
Third, great leaders constantly monitor, support and enforce. In a school setting, they hyper-monitor, noting trends and responding to organizational strengths and weaknesses. They provide regular and timely support, specifically geared to allow staff to meet organizational goals. And, they enforce expectations. They understand that not working with the organization is the same as working against to organization. Poor and less effective leaders hide from classrooms and avoid the uncomfortable leadership tasks that are critical to protecting and improving the organization.
Finally, leadership does not just mean "Principal". Leadership encompasses lead and master teachers, department chairs, instructional coaches, assistant principals and a host of others. The Marines believe that whenever there are two or more Marines together, one is always the leader. So, Lead Your School Reader, who are you today? Who will you be tomorrow?
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
“Teachers want great leadership. However, we sometimes get so caught up in our daily routines that we forget what our job is about. As educators, we need to focus on what is best for the children and how can we make the staff we have the best they can be. We cannot stand by as we watch ineffective teachers educate our classrooms. We must take charge of the situation and find a solution. If after it is all said and done and the teacher does not improve replace that person.”
SC Response
Everybody craves leadership. And, we all function better when we trust leadership and believe that leadership is vested in our success. Key though, is how success is defined. Great leaders ensure that the definition of success is concrete and constantly communicated (examples: Take THAT hill; If it is not right for students, it is wrong; etc.). Struggling and poor leaders either do not know or cannot define organizational success; and/or do not regularly communicate their expectations. In that void, the organization devolves into an every man for himself (or every teacher in their own silo) situation.
Second, behind defining and communicating organizational success, is providing tools and training for staff. Great leaders prepare their staff to be successful. They ensure that a common scope and sequence is available. They ensure that the master schedule is logical and is conducive to quality instruction. They ensure that training is geared towards building critical skills (such as the Cain/Laird Fundamental Five). They ensure that staff receives critical information in a timely fashion. Poor leaders just throw their people into the meat grinder and hope for the best. The lucky (?) staff simply survives to fight another day.
Third, great leaders constantly monitor, support and enforce. In a school setting, they hyper-monitor, noting trends and responding to organizational strengths and weaknesses. They provide regular and timely support, specifically geared to allow staff to meet organizational goals. And, they enforce expectations. They understand that not working with the organization is the same as working against to organization. Poor and less effective leaders hide from classrooms and avoid the uncomfortable leadership tasks that are critical to protecting and improving the organization.
Finally, leadership does not just mean "Principal". Leadership encompasses lead and master teachers, department chairs, instructional coaches, assistant principals and a host of others. The Marines believe that whenever there are two or more Marines together, one is always the leader. So, Lead Your School Reader, who are you today? Who will you be tomorrow?
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
A Reader Writes... (Using Rewards)
In response to the post, “Using Rewards,” a reader writes:
“In my 18 years of experience in education, I have yet to witness someone not react positively to being rewarded for achieving their goals. I have seen students and teachers blossom merely from receiving a few kind words of acknowledgement for their efforts. It goes along with the idea of shaping behavior through building relationships. Someone recently introduced me to the idea of “2 by 10”…spending 2 minutes engaging in positive conversations with someone for 10 days will change one’s behavior. Try it, it works.”
SC Response
In one short paragraph, the reader hits on some key points that should be highlighted. First, people do respond positively to rewards and acknowledgement for achieving goals. However, I think that it is “achieving goals” that is the critical concept. False flattery and unearned praise does not lead to the sense of accomplishment and pride that drives significant behavior change.
Second, I like the “2 by 10” idea. This practice could easily be adapted and used by classroom teachers, counselors and administrators. The idea seems highly correlated to Marzano’s strategies of “Providing Recognition and Reinforcing Effort.” The bottom line, as the reader points out, is that shaping behavior by proactive and positive means is much more effective than using intimidation and negative feedback.
Reader, this was a great addition to the original post, thank you.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
“In my 18 years of experience in education, I have yet to witness someone not react positively to being rewarded for achieving their goals. I have seen students and teachers blossom merely from receiving a few kind words of acknowledgement for their efforts. It goes along with the idea of shaping behavior through building relationships. Someone recently introduced me to the idea of “2 by 10”…spending 2 minutes engaging in positive conversations with someone for 10 days will change one’s behavior. Try it, it works.”
SC Response
In one short paragraph, the reader hits on some key points that should be highlighted. First, people do respond positively to rewards and acknowledgement for achieving goals. However, I think that it is “achieving goals” that is the critical concept. False flattery and unearned praise does not lead to the sense of accomplishment and pride that drives significant behavior change.
Second, I like the “2 by 10” idea. This practice could easily be adapted and used by classroom teachers, counselors and administrators. The idea seems highly correlated to Marzano’s strategies of “Providing Recognition and Reinforcing Effort.” The bottom line, as the reader points out, is that shaping behavior by proactive and positive means is much more effective than using intimidation and negative feedback.
Reader, this was a great addition to the original post, thank you.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
Monday, May 18, 2009
I Predicted This One
Dateline Texas: Another teacher merit pay plan bites the dust.
Texas is canceling the Texas Educator Excellence Grant (TEEG) program and is shifting some of the funds to another incentive program. The TEEG program rewarded individual teachers at poor schools for individual performance. Surprisingly, to the State and the sponsoring politicians, the program was not successful.
Lead Your School Readers, I was there when this plan was hatched. When the project was assigned to TEA, I was called to give them my ideas on how to best implement the plan. Here’s what I told them:
1. The plan must award teams of teachers. When teachers are awarded individually, it quickly creates a “pie” mentality. If you get a piece of pie, then my piece of pie becomes smaller. In effect, this “pie” mentality reinforces teachers working in isolation, instead of breaking down the practice. Now, I have a financial incentive not to help other teachers. Instead, reward teams of teachers for reaching team goals. Now, I have an incentive to help my team, because if we lose – I lose.
2. The metrics must be based on the concept of value added. Otherwise, there is a disincentive to work with the most difficult students.
3. Get an expert to help craft the basic plan. Building an incentive plan is only easy at a surface level. There are lots of moving parts and it requires a lot of attention. Letting busy, but well-meaning amateurs create their own local plans from scratch is a recipe for disaster. As an aside, Ed Rogers, of the Penicle Group (www.peniclegroup.com) is an excellent resource if you are considering implementing an incentive pay plan.
By the time I finished point 3, it was obvious that they were irritated with my advice. So, I told them good luck and that I hoped that they would prove me wrong. After four years and $100 million, they didn’t.
In summary, I do think that the way that we approach compensation in education needs to be addressed. Raw experience should not be the sole determinant of salary. But, when people think that incentive plans can replace leadership and collaboration, failure is assured.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
Texas is canceling the Texas Educator Excellence Grant (TEEG) program and is shifting some of the funds to another incentive program. The TEEG program rewarded individual teachers at poor schools for individual performance. Surprisingly, to the State and the sponsoring politicians, the program was not successful.
Lead Your School Readers, I was there when this plan was hatched. When the project was assigned to TEA, I was called to give them my ideas on how to best implement the plan. Here’s what I told them:
1. The plan must award teams of teachers. When teachers are awarded individually, it quickly creates a “pie” mentality. If you get a piece of pie, then my piece of pie becomes smaller. In effect, this “pie” mentality reinforces teachers working in isolation, instead of breaking down the practice. Now, I have a financial incentive not to help other teachers. Instead, reward teams of teachers for reaching team goals. Now, I have an incentive to help my team, because if we lose – I lose.
2. The metrics must be based on the concept of value added. Otherwise, there is a disincentive to work with the most difficult students.
3. Get an expert to help craft the basic plan. Building an incentive plan is only easy at a surface level. There are lots of moving parts and it requires a lot of attention. Letting busy, but well-meaning amateurs create their own local plans from scratch is a recipe for disaster. As an aside, Ed Rogers, of the Penicle Group (www.peniclegroup.com) is an excellent resource if you are considering implementing an incentive pay plan.
By the time I finished point 3, it was obvious that they were irritated with my advice. So, I told them good luck and that I hoped that they would prove me wrong. After four years and $100 million, they didn’t.
In summary, I do think that the way that we approach compensation in education needs to be addressed. Raw experience should not be the sole determinant of salary. But, when people think that incentive plans can replace leadership and collaboration, failure is assured.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
Who Really Is Not Getting The Job Done?
Right now it is very news worthy to talk about bad teachers. I guess it shows how tough and no-nonsense that you are. It also show how little time that person actually spends on campuses. Here is the dirty little secret about bad teaching… It generally is the visible symptom of bad leadership.
Let me explain. First, are their bad teachers in schools today? Absolutely. Second, should they be removed? Faster than the speed of light! But, one or two bad teachers is a personnel issue. You re-train them; you coach them; and if they don’t or can’t respond, you fire them. However, most schools don’t just have one or two teachers who are ineffective, they have numerous less than effective teachers. And that readers, is system failure. And who is responsible for the system? Leadership!
Leadership is responsible for providing teachers with the tools and training they need to be successful. Leadership is responsible for procedures, facilities, supplies and logistics. Leadership is responsible for hiring, monitoring, and coaching. Leadership is responsible for the success of the system. A lone teacher cannot significantly impact any one of the things that I have just listed, but they can and do serve as a convenient scapegoat.
When I was the State Director of Innovative School Redesign, I would get panicked calls from central office types as they were getting ready to submit the redesign plans for their academically unacceptable campuses. Often the question was this, “We’re going to make all the teachers re-apply for their jobs, and we don’t plan on hiring all of them back, do you think that is a good idea?”
To which, my response was always this, “It’s a great idea, provided of course that the principal and assistant principals that drove the school in the ditch have to re-apply. And that the Curriculum and Training departments that didn’t respond fast enough have to re-apply. And the HR department that hired and didn’t fire in an effective manner has to re-apply. And the Assistant Superintendent for the feeder pattern that took years to produce the unacceptable campus has to re-apply. That is in the plan, isn’t it?”
I never received any answer other than stunned silence.
In summary, if one or two teachers are struggling on your campus, that is a personnel issue. If lots of teachers are struggling, that is a system issue. One bad classroom, blame the teacher. One bad school, blame the principal. Multiple bad schools (a bad system), blame senior and support leadership.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
Let me explain. First, are their bad teachers in schools today? Absolutely. Second, should they be removed? Faster than the speed of light! But, one or two bad teachers is a personnel issue. You re-train them; you coach them; and if they don’t or can’t respond, you fire them. However, most schools don’t just have one or two teachers who are ineffective, they have numerous less than effective teachers. And that readers, is system failure. And who is responsible for the system? Leadership!
Leadership is responsible for providing teachers with the tools and training they need to be successful. Leadership is responsible for procedures, facilities, supplies and logistics. Leadership is responsible for hiring, monitoring, and coaching. Leadership is responsible for the success of the system. A lone teacher cannot significantly impact any one of the things that I have just listed, but they can and do serve as a convenient scapegoat.
When I was the State Director of Innovative School Redesign, I would get panicked calls from central office types as they were getting ready to submit the redesign plans for their academically unacceptable campuses. Often the question was this, “We’re going to make all the teachers re-apply for their jobs, and we don’t plan on hiring all of them back, do you think that is a good idea?”
To which, my response was always this, “It’s a great idea, provided of course that the principal and assistant principals that drove the school in the ditch have to re-apply. And that the Curriculum and Training departments that didn’t respond fast enough have to re-apply. And the HR department that hired and didn’t fire in an effective manner has to re-apply. And the Assistant Superintendent for the feeder pattern that took years to produce the unacceptable campus has to re-apply. That is in the plan, isn’t it?”
I never received any answer other than stunned silence.
In summary, if one or two teachers are struggling on your campus, that is a personnel issue. If lots of teachers are struggling, that is a system issue. One bad classroom, blame the teacher. One bad school, blame the principal. Multiple bad schools (a bad system), blame senior and support leadership.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Weird Advise - An Almost Boss
Years ago, I was at a crossroads in my career. I had interviewed for two jobs, the one I wanted and a safe one. The safe job called first and I went to the final (just a formality) interview with the deputy superintendent. In the course of the meeting, the Deputy tells me (with all seriousness) that I should always remember that…
“The difference between ‘Fail’ and ‘Fall,’ is one letter.”
I have to admit, that statement threw me. She wasn’t even my boss yet and I was already confused. I thanked the very nice woman, told her I had one last loose end to tie up, and I would let her know what I would do within 24 hours.
I left her office, called the district where I wanted the job and told them that I had another job on the table that I had to commit to within the day. Three hours later, I went to work for Bob Brezina.
And, I still have no idea what the advice means.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
“The difference between ‘Fail’ and ‘Fall,’ is one letter.”
I have to admit, that statement threw me. She wasn’t even my boss yet and I was already confused. I thanked the very nice woman, told her I had one last loose end to tie up, and I would let her know what I would do within 24 hours.
I left her office, called the district where I wanted the job and told them that I had another job on the table that I had to commit to within the day. Three hours later, I went to work for Bob Brezina.
And, I still have no idea what the advice means.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)