A Reader Writes... Another Cainism

Another reader shares one of his favorite “Cainism’s."

“Here is my favorite Cainism….

At the time, I am a new AP in the audience when he is speaking to large group of misinformed teachers on a low performing campus about the urgency of getting the school fixed. He said,

'You are basically in ICU and on life-support. TEA is waiting to pull the plug.'

That really woke up our teachers and the entire school. We had to do something and we had to do it now. It worked, and what they (the district, the teachers, the regional service center, and other “experts”) said would take three years was accomplished in 10 months.

Putting things in perspective in a way that people can understand is a great Cain characteristic. Everyday that we wait is another day that we cheat kids.”

SC Response
That is what is so frustrating about our profession. As a group, our expectations are too low and we are our own worst enemy. Mike Schmoker goes as far to say that we are the non-professional profession. The reason why I’m not that cynical yet, is that instead of having the life sucked out of me by the self-satisfied, self absorbed, and cowardly; I draw my strength from the teachers, AP’s, Principal’s, Superintendents and Boards that are still willing to step up and fight the good fight.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

Congratulations Splendora ISD

The awards and recognition just keeps coming in for the little district that could. The Splendora ISD School Board was just named School Board of the Year for their region. It just goes to show you what a lot of hard work and a little Lead Your School will get you.

Think. Work. Achieve

Your turn...

A Reader Writes... Spoke Too Soon (part 2)

In response to my comments on the post “Spoke Too Soon,” a reader writes:

“One of the Cainism’s I love involves students and times. I once heard a school board ask Cain if it was possible to go slower in order to give adults time to adjust to best practices. Cain's response was great. Cain argument goes like this:

‘Sure, you can go slower. But understand this. Teachers are educated, trained professionals. They have contracted with your district to provide a service. They have cashed their checks. Now you want to give them time to either get used to, or to decide if they want to, do the services you have contracted and paid them for. That’s OK if that’s what you want to do, but understand that while the teachers are burning time trying to decide whether or not they want to do their jobs, the students pay the price. Every day you wait to implement the best practices that you have already contracted and paid for, understand that it is the students who buy you that time.’

This is a very powerful argument. Recently, I have used this same line of reasoning with a board president, in a private conversation. She told me she wanted to do what was right for kids, but was not sure she could take the heat from the teachers and community if she did so. That is the bottom line.

Districts that take five plus years to get it right for kids are not committed to kids; they are committed to the whims of adults. Actually, I know for a fact, as Cain pointed out, that significant progress can be made in a single year if the students are the focus of the district and not adults. The question comes down to the issue of courage. Does the Board, the Superintendent, the Principal, the Faculty, and the community have the courage to do what is right for kids even if it makes contracted and remunerated adults uncomfortable? Now we are back to the issue of district DNA.”

SC Response:
Cainism?

What the writer begins to illustrate with my comments to that board, is that systems fail students because leadership fails the system. Teachers, as a group, do what the system expects of them. If the system is OK with subpar instruction, the system will produce subpar instruction. The challenge for a leader then is to demand more from your part of the system. The weaker your system, the more you have to lead “up” and well as lead “down.” Again, this why the principalship is the second most important position in a school district.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn

A Reader Writes... (Spoke To Soon)

In response to my comments on the post “Spoke Too Soon,” a reader writes:

“We may be Brezina and Brown guys and gals, but we also know that we are running Cain’s game plan. I can go harder because I know that no matter what I get into, Cain can get me out of it.”

SC Response
Thank you! I just make suggestions - you (the teachers, the AP’s, the Principals, and the Superintendents) do all the heavy lifting.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

A Reader Writes... Characteristics

To add to the discussion that has revolved around Brezina and Brown (their respective “rules” and advice), a reader writes:

“Yes, there are many types of principals out there, no doubt. What I was trying to tease out is that the only type of principal that counts is the effective principal. If we distill this idea, then perhaps we get these characteristics; the Effective Principal is:

• Is the ultimate and final advocate for the student;
  
• Engages the faculty, students, parents, and community;
  
• Is a leader of leaders. By this we mean the principal builds capacity in others and expects them to be engaged;
  
• Is the biggest cheerleader of, and for, the faculty when they are engaged; and
  
• Is aware of his district’s and school’s DNA and tempers (not compromises) approaches with patience and tactics.

I am sure I have missed something, but out of all of this Brezina and Brown wisdom, it would be useful to distill the characteristics. At least we would have a guide for self-reflection and discovery.”

SC Response
This is a pretty good start on the list. I have had discussions like this with a number of Principals and Superintendents and Brezina and Brown. I actually have a piece written on “Great Principals,” that I’ll post soon. But, here are two ideas that I have been pondering recently.

1. A critical characteristic of the "greats" versus the "others" is the search for ideas. The first filter is, “Are you actively searching for them?” If you aren’t, you may be a hard worker, but you aren’t on the path to being great. The second filter is, “Where are you looking for them?” The Great Principals look both inside and outside the system for ideas. They are self-sufficient shoppers of the world. Good principals seem to look for answers in just one place, either internally or externally.

2. The 10,000 hour rule (or why there does not seem to be as many great ones). The 10,000 hour rule has been discussed for a while now, most recently by Malcolm Gladwell in the book, “Outliers.” The idea is that it takes 10,000 hours of intense reflection, focused practice and work to develop the insight and experience package to be great. Greatness, it seems, is built by purposeful grinding. From a school year perspective, it would take a minimum of seven years to hit 10,000 hours. But, in reality, due to the mundane elements of work, the minimum time to reach the "great" level (think top-tier professional athlete) is probably around 10 to 12 years. So this answers part of the question, why aren’t there more great ones; there aren’t as many principals that are staying in the position for at least 10 years. But, that doesn’t answer the entire question. Here is what I think. I believe that the external factors can re-set the clock. When the rules change, for example – dramatically increased accountability, it backs everyone up. It may not wipe out all the hours of expertise that was built up, but it takes a big chunk of them. Think of Michael Jordan switching to baseball - gifted athlete, mediocre baseball player.

The clock was re-set and the principals that got their jobs right at the time of the re-set are the ones that are the furthest on the path on the new “great.” They have a head start on the new hires and they were building new skills while the older principals were still trying to adapt old skills (it takes a while to realize that what worked before, now doesn't work as well). Again, just some ideas I have been pondering.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

An Audience Member Asks...

An audience member from a recent “Be the Shepherd: What Every School Leader Should Know about Leading Change,” presentation that I gave, asks:

“Sean, I attended your "Be the Shepherd," workshop and appreciated the insights and rubrics you put before us. I am a bit confused on one point and hope that it is just because I missed a key part of the puzzle somewhere before, during, or after your presentation...as follows:

I originally decided to attend your workshop because of the title itself and my particular vested interest in "shepherding" as a key and critical model for successful leadership. I have taught from that perspective in the classroom, for non-profit organizations, and for administrator certification courses. I was hoping to broaden and deepen my understanding of this model. Strange that I only heard in the last minute of the presentation the urging to "be the shepherd."

As a communications instructor in my past, I know that the ear focuses on what the mind expects. If the ear doesn't hear the expectation the mind either becomes critical or absent. I was neither. However, can you explain the intent of the title as it related specifically to the presentation and is there another workshop that you offer which more specifically deals with the shepherding model as one for successful leadership?"

SC Response
I don't think that you missed anything. The presentation was meant as an introduction to the coaching and leadership practices and beliefs of the Lead Your School organization. We believe that there is a moral obligation that we have to fulfill, if and when we assume leadership roles. Or in other words, “Be the Shepherd.”

I also have been taught that when you present you should lead with your second best material and end with your best material. For the presentation that you attended, I wanted the audience to leave with at-least the awareness that their leadership is bigger that just their self interest, again, “Be the Shepherd.”

I think we are on the same page with the understanding that non-profit leadership can be significantly different from for profit and para-military leadership. John Maxwell does an excellent job of describing this when he talks of "Church Leadership." Coercion can only take you so far, or to paraphrase Covey, "volunteers" are more productive than "employees."

As far as your question of follow-up; every group training and individual coaching session that we lead focuses on the need to place the needs of others above self. For us it is as simple as this - that is what coaches and shepherds do.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...