Monday, December 31, 2012
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Sent out by Jay on 12/15/12
Just some thoughts on what kind of environment doesn't allow people to remain stuck in outmoded thinking. Happy Saturday morning.
Don and Sarah D.- this is a great blog for administrators.
Jay
At first glance, I would agree that the administrator does have the responsibility to address the issue of teachers using outdated practices. However, I think the real solution is a bit more complicated and can be captured with another question: How can a teacher engaged in outdated pedagogy and practice possibly exist in a true 21st century school? Should the school environment not be so innovative and challenging that such teaching is impossible? Perhaps the real problem is that we have been fooling ourselves into thinking our school is a "21st Century School" when it's not. Just maybe our school systemically allows teachers to continue do what they've always done and avoid growing personally and professionally.
As long as you have a school, school district, and school system that allows people to use "outdated methodology in instruction and educational practice" such practices are going to exist. In other fields such as medicine, obsolete practice is rooted out by a culture that values innovation and pushes out obsolescence. Why can't schools foster that same kind of culture?
What would a school or school district that has a culture that makes obsolete educational practice impossible look like? What are the operating principles? Here are some ideas to start with.
1. A strong expectation of personal and professional growth permeates the school and school district environment. Everyone, beginning with leadership, are lifelong learners, and their every action is focused to that end. There's an attitude of perpetual learning and professional development surrounding everything that is done.
2. The school and school district culture values risk-taking more than playing it safe. Valuing risk-taking takes courage from leadership and everyone else. It means accepting failure as part of learning. Leadership that values risk-taking can't ask others to take risks if they themselves aren't willing to do so.
3. Leadership in the school includes more than the principal. When the leadership includes strong teacher leadership, it is difficult for those not growing professionally to exist. Teacher leadership means there are peers pushing those teachers to develop professionally.
4. Collaboration among staff is the norm. When issues and problems and challenges are viewed as "our issues/problems/challenges" then everyone is expected to be a part of the solution. This means those who are hanging on to outdated practice find it more difficult to do so. Their colleagues are pushing them to take ownership of the school's future and they can't continue to exist in their tiny isolated compartment within the school.
5. There's a strong sense of entrepreneurship among staff regarding the school. They feel that it is "their school." Staff who feel this aren't just provided a token opportunity to give feedback on School Improvement Plans. They have a say in the direction and focus of the school because it is genuinely their school too. Teachers engaged in obsolete practice can't continue to operate in an obsolete manner because colleagues push them to do better.
So, in answer to last night's #edchat question, "How should teachers deal with colleagues who are comfortable with 19th century methods and punitive measures for non-compliant students?" I submit that the answer isn't just a question of what the teacher should do or what the principal should do. It is a systemic problem that can only be addressed by creating places that make obsolete educational practices impossible. It's a question addressed by creating a school or school district culture that will not tolerate obsolete educational practice.
Don and Sarah D.- this is a great blog for administrators.
Jay
Sent to you by Jay via Google Reader:
via The 21st Century Principal by J. Robinson on 11/28/12
Last night, the #edchat topic was, "How should teachers deal with colleagues who are comfortable with 19th century and punitive measures for non-compliant students?" Judging by the responses, many teachers either felt they could gently prod this colleague to changing his or her practice. Others did not see this their responsibility at all. They saw it as the responsibility of the administrator.At first glance, I would agree that the administrator does have the responsibility to address the issue of teachers using outdated practices. However, I think the real solution is a bit more complicated and can be captured with another question: How can a teacher engaged in outdated pedagogy and practice possibly exist in a true 21st century school? Should the school environment not be so innovative and challenging that such teaching is impossible? Perhaps the real problem is that we have been fooling ourselves into thinking our school is a "21st Century School" when it's not. Just maybe our school systemically allows teachers to continue do what they've always done and avoid growing personally and professionally.
As long as you have a school, school district, and school system that allows people to use "outdated methodology in instruction and educational practice" such practices are going to exist. In other fields such as medicine, obsolete practice is rooted out by a culture that values innovation and pushes out obsolescence. Why can't schools foster that same kind of culture?
What would a school or school district that has a culture that makes obsolete educational practice impossible look like? What are the operating principles? Here are some ideas to start with.
1. A strong expectation of personal and professional growth permeates the school and school district environment. Everyone, beginning with leadership, are lifelong learners, and their every action is focused to that end. There's an attitude of perpetual learning and professional development surrounding everything that is done.
2. The school and school district culture values risk-taking more than playing it safe. Valuing risk-taking takes courage from leadership and everyone else. It means accepting failure as part of learning. Leadership that values risk-taking can't ask others to take risks if they themselves aren't willing to do so.
3. Leadership in the school includes more than the principal. When the leadership includes strong teacher leadership, it is difficult for those not growing professionally to exist. Teacher leadership means there are peers pushing those teachers to develop professionally.
4. Collaboration among staff is the norm. When issues and problems and challenges are viewed as "our issues/problems/challenges" then everyone is expected to be a part of the solution. This means those who are hanging on to outdated practice find it more difficult to do so. Their colleagues are pushing them to take ownership of the school's future and they can't continue to exist in their tiny isolated compartment within the school.
5. There's a strong sense of entrepreneurship among staff regarding the school. They feel that it is "their school." Staff who feel this aren't just provided a token opportunity to give feedback on School Improvement Plans. They have a say in the direction and focus of the school because it is genuinely their school too. Teachers engaged in obsolete practice can't continue to operate in an obsolete manner because colleagues push them to do better.
So, in answer to last night's #edchat question, "How should teachers deal with colleagues who are comfortable with 19th century methods and punitive measures for non-compliant students?" I submit that the answer isn't just a question of what the teacher should do or what the principal should do. It is a systemic problem that can only be addressed by creating places that make obsolete educational practices impossible. It's a question addressed by creating a school or school district culture that will not tolerate obsolete educational practice.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to The 21st Century Principal using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Friday, December 14, 2012
Friday, 12/14/12, 4th hour, library conference table
In attendance: Jay, Sarah D, Paul, Sarah Z, Jim LeFebvre
- Jim H and Jess--world lit/world history
- how often do we just check of a box to meet a requirement but it doesn't actually fulfill the need for our school?
- new directions in PE/fitness
- we need a genetically engineered predator to keep us sharp
- "zombies! we need zombies!" (PB)
- "we're making them! have you seen the 9th graders?" (JS)
- what about life science and health science at the same time?
- but how do we get to places where we can really make some changes? we get so stuck in the way we have always done it.
- e.g., the calendar conversation yesterday--we really should have talked more about the comment coming from Paul's table--why first semester finals anyhow?
- why not something totally different that would be more balanced and more lined up with our world now?
- how many of our students need time to bring in the harvest?
- e.g., changing the policy around turning in work with unexcused absences
- the issue was that there were teachers in the district refusing to work with students, which is a different issue
- data show that students are successful when they attend 95% of the time (building skills that they need to be successful in college)
- "so let me get this straight, if you're not in class, you're not as successful?" (PB)
- at FHS, about 1700 of our students are already hitting that attendance rate
- a lot of what we do here is getting students ready for the next step (college)
- Jay: when you frame my job as preparing them for college, it moves my job away from focusing on who students are and what they need
- Jim LF: what does that do with our Latino population?
- Jay: frame it instead to maximize learning for every kid who comes into my class, on what each student needs--keeps me focused on what I can actually do. Keeps me honest. A lot of our institutional structure burns a lot of time toward that college goal (letters of rec, feeding IC, etc.)
- need a balance w/ IC--parents need a way to see how students are doing
- but as we use IC, are we just giving parents something they think they need that they don't actually need
- if we reframe our goal to engagement (rather than getting them into college), that really changes our job (for the better)
- you have that kid who's not engaged in English class, then you need to change what happens in English class
- how do we handle the parents with grading, special ed, eligibility?
- we can use IC to keep track of what students are doing or not doing--that's easy
- we have taught parents to talk about grades, so that's what we seem to talk with them about
- Jay's example--stopped talking about grades and started talking about students--more qualitative feedback
- need to train teachers how to take control of P/T conferences to focus the conversation on what matters most, not the grade
- do we need to train parents once FHS figures out where we stand on grades?
- why are we feeding the grade beast? why are we peppering IC with stuff? it's a feeding frenzy. we made IC, now we're feeding it, what are we doing? what is it all about? (Sarah D)
- we thought it was great to begin with, but now a few years later we're seeing how this is affecting our students. we just didn't know then; and now we get to think about it
- Sarah D is looking for efficiencies in the system
- why do kids get two grades for a year-long class (the semester division/finals are arbitrary)
- we have to feed with grades
- parents
- post-grad center
- kids
- we are doing something indefensible in school
- can feed everyone with first semester grade being merely a progress grade...
- could we just put in the semester grade and then at the end of the year replace the grade with whatever the student got at the end of the year
Friday, November 30, 2012
Where it all started
On Friday, November 30, 2012, Sarah Z and Jay set up a meeting with Sarah D to share what they learned from a conference presentation at the recent NCTE conference in Las Vegas.
It was the story of a school that decided enough was enough--they would no longer chase after the requirements coming at them from above that forced them to focus as a school on things that did not serve the needs of their students. Rather than focusing on student test score data, they focused on teacher quality--for example.
Their packet is included here, so you can read more. But Jay and I wanted to share it with Sarah D and start a conversation to happen regularly, with whoever in the school wants to join us, to imagine what more we could do here at FHS to best serve the needs of our students as human beings.
It was the story of a school that decided enough was enough--they would no longer chase after the requirements coming at them from above that forced them to focus as a school on things that did not serve the needs of their students. Rather than focusing on student test score data, they focused on teacher quality--for example.
Their packet is included here, so you can read more. But Jay and I wanted to share it with Sarah D and start a conversation to happen regularly, with whoever in the school wants to join us, to imagine what more we could do here at FHS to best serve the needs of our students as human beings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)