Encouragement for Small Schools

Learning about collaborative work in large schools is inspiring, but small school educators can be left with lots of tough questions. Reality prohibits elementary grade level teams and secondary departmental teams. Much of the discussion of common assessments does not translate. Teachers may get discouraged. Administrators may be tempted to create another beast that can't be fed. 

However, there is great power in elementary vertical teams and secondary interdisciplinary teams. It is in the best interests of students to support and leverage the power of these teams.

Teachers in elementary vertical teams and secondary interdisciplinary teams can....

1. Hold each other accountable for honoring priority standards in assessments.

2. Work to create and maintain times and spaces for students to be matched with their needs.

3. Research best practices for assessment and instruction.

4. Provide mentoring that is so necessary in small schools dealing with turnover.

Collaboration will look different in small schools, but our students deserve to have teachers who make it work. 

What Our School Learned From Teacher Walk Through

At the 2015 Powerful Learning Conference our leadership team was introduced to the concept of teacher walk through by the Excelsior Springs Middle School team. Over the course of the next year, our six core teachers completed fifty peer observations. The observations provided great data on the learning and teaching that was taking place in our school. More importantly the process helped create a more collegial atmosphere. 

While our staff is still learning how to best leverage the value of teachers observing each other, there are several reasons why the practice has been worth the time.

Promotes Teamwork
We had to come together as a staff to implement peer observation. Classes were covered by an administrator who still missed teaching, so teachers could visit classrooms without giving up plan time. Teachers took on a bit of a different role and provided non-threatening feedback to each other.

Provides Opportunities for Informal Coaching
Because teachers were able to see students in different settings and see the talents of their peers, additional fuel was available for conversations at lunch, staff meetings, and PLC meetings.

Promotes A Growth Mindset
Our leadership team set a goal for the number of peer observations, which helped us gravitate to towards a culture that was focused more on specific and measurable outcomes. Also, as we became more comfortable with the process we tweaked our form. In PLC teams we studied how to use compare and contrast structures to promote critical thinking skills. In our PBIS work we studied the importance of positive feedback. Two additional questions were added to our walk through form to assess the level of implementation of staff learning in classrooms.

Provides Valuable Data
Our staff now has a better picture of what teaching and learning looks like throughout the building. We have data to tell us how varied the "learning diet" is for our students. We know how often they are being asked to complete various tasks. We know the answers to the following questions:
What is the teacher doing?
What are the students doing?
What is the task?
How many positive comments are being made?
How often are students asked to compare and contrast?

Our Process:
-After the conference the leadership team created the form.
-Shortly after walk throughs began.
-Walk throughs were not scheduled but occurred irregularly as the flow of school life permitted; however, goals for the number of walk throughs were set.
-Walk throughs were conducted the principal, covered a teachers' class. The teacher using an i pad filled in a google form. Sometimes the teachers visited several classrooms. Sometimes the teacher stayed for a longer period of time in one room.
-The google form automatically populated a spreadsheet and created charts summarizing the data.

Putnam's Our Kids: Takeaways for Educators

Our Kids: The American Dream in Crisis by Harvard professor Robert Putnam was not written for educators, but there is much here for those working in America's schools. In the book Putnam observes that Americans often gravitate to the lone cowboy as a symbol, in the rugged individualist tradition. A symbol just as accurate, and more needed in our current culture, Putnam argues, is the symbol of the wagon train. In the wagon train, cooperation was as valuable as independence and each member had an interest in looking out for the others. By telling the stories of families across the country, and by comparing his hometown in the fifties with its current reality, Putnam argues that our society has been increasingly divided along class lines, and our children our paying the price. Putnam's book is intended to be call to all Americans to reclaim a tradition of collective responsibility for our country's children. 

Below are three important concepts for educators to take from the book. 

1.) Two Worlds

As much as anytime in our country's history, our students are being raised in distinctly different environments, according to their parent's income and education. In Putnam's hometown, like many communities, it was not uncommon for blue collar and white collar families to live near each other and associate at schools an churches. Then the gap in income between education levels was not as great as it is today. Today, due mostly to residential segregation along class lines, Americans with means often live separated from families in poverty. The geographic gaps often correlate with opportunity gaps. Through numerous scissor charts, Putnam details the differences in outcomes that children of wealth and children of poverty experience. Educators must be aware of the effects of these gaps on their students. 

2.) Investments with the Highest Returns

While Putnam goes to great lengths to prove that schools are sites, not causes, of inequity, he does offer some suggestions to educators for minimizing the effects of the economic gaps. Extra curricular activities receive special attention for the positive impact they have on students in poverty. Putnam asserts that these activities provide students the opportunities to build soft skills and make social connections that are so vital for success after graduation. Putnam is a sharp critic of "pay for play" (activity fees) policies that have become common in cash strapped districts. Putnam also advocates for high quality early childhood programs.

3.) Personal Connections

Putnam acknowledges the efforts educators make in their professional lives on behalf of their students. However, throughout the book Putnam argues that the gaps in educational and career outcomes between rich and poor kids have much more to do with their lives outside of school than inside. One of Putnam's key claims is that in earlier decades, when our culture was not as divided along class lines, poor kids were in a better position to be mentored by successful professionals. Informal mentoring relationships, mostly formed outside of schools, are spaces for kids to "understand the institutions that stand astride the paths to opportunity and to make those institutions work for them." Churches have been, and still are, important places for these connections to form. Putnam observes that church participation rates of poorer families are declining faster than those of their peers, which leads to less access to mentors. In the vignettes of actual families that Putnam shares, youth pastors, more often than coaches or teachers, appear as heroes. Educators looking to make the biggest difference in kid's lives will most likely have the greatest impact in informal mentoring relationships that extend beyond the school day, formed in churches or otherwise. 

This is the message educators should work to teach to their friends and families who work outside of education. Our country will be stronger when more adults find ways to invest in the lives of kids across class lines. 

Evaluating Missouri's Proposed Standards

Like many Missouri educators, I've been slogging my way through the nearly 500 pages of proposed standards produced by work groups last year. Overall, I would say the proposed standards match closely with current standards. However, there are enough subtle differences to disrupt the curriculum work of educators. Elementary teachers will face major challenges in trying to realign their curriculum in all four core subjects in one year. Ideally if new standards were to be adopted, teachers would only be asked to implement new curriculum for one subject a year.

While there are areas where the new standards represent improvements, I personally do not find the improvements to be worth the level of disruption that will be caused by adopting so many new standards so quickly. Small schools, lacking subject area curriculum directors, will be at a disadvantage compared to larger districts who have specialized personnel to analyze and align curriculum. Some leaders will inevitably choose to risk having their students learn a curriculum that is not fully aligned to new standards (and the accompanying tests), rather than make unreasonable demands on teachers who may be experiencing their third set of standards in five years.

Below are a few notes I made while comparing the proposed standards to the current standards.

English Language Arts:
-The proposed ELA standards do not use the same strands in grades K-5 as they do in grades 6-12. The K-5 strands are language, reading, writing, and speaking and listening. In 6-12 the strands are reading literature, reading informational texts, writing, and speaking and listening. Unnecessary complexity, particularly in grammar and punctuation instruction, could result.
-Because grammar and punctuation are lumped into writing in the 6-12 standards, the standards lack the specificity found in the K-5 language standards. "Conventions of standard English" for "commas, verb tense, and unclear pronouns," seems to be used too often as a catch all. At which grade should using a colon to introduce a list be taught? At which grade should the use of semi-colons in a list be taught? At which grade would these concepts begin appearing on a state test?
-Many similarities between current standards and proposed standards can be found. For example the current standard, MSL LA 4.RI.9, "integrate information from two texts," is very similar to the proposed standard, Reading 1CB, "explain relevant connections between text to text." Current standard MSL LA 6RI 1" cite textual evidence to support analysis" is identical to  proposed standard, RL.1, "cite textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says."
-In spite of the similarities, many changes exists. The k-5 crosswalk includes the phrase "not in current standards" over 100 times. "Not in proposed standards" appears over 70 times. For example, "writes legibly" is a proposed second grade standard and "produces simple, compound, and complex sentences" has been removed from third grade standards.
-Much of the criticism of the common core standards seemed to stem from a baseless belief that the standards included a political agenda, so it surprised me to see that the proposed standards included language in the 6-12 grade standards requiring the analysis of "historical and cultural context of texts."

Mathematics
-Overall the crosswalk between proposed and existing standards matches up more closely than in ELA.
-The crosswalk does show 19 "new standards," and changes exist. For example, the current elementary standard of "measure to determine how much longer one object is than another" is out, but " describe time shown on a digital clock to the same time on an analog clock" is in, as well as "find a combination of coins that equal a given amount." While current standards had language similar to these new standards, the proposed standards relating to money and time are much more specific.
-Algebra I standards are identified separately, which will help instructors preparing for the Algebra 1 EOC.

Science
-Unlike the mathematics standards, the science writers did not write specific standards for Biology I, which has its own EOC. Biology standards will have to be pulled from the Life Sciences strand, which contains 26 standards, ten fewer than the current Biology I course level expectations. Biology teachers will have to sort this out.
-Secondary science standards have "assessment thresholds" which should help clarify limits of what students should be expected to learn. This is especially helpful because most textbooks contain much more information than is appropriate for students to learn in a year.
-Seemingly influenced by Next Generation, most standards are built on verbs such as model, construct, and predict. If this leads to science classes that are more hands on, then an improvement has been made; however one wonders if test writers can construct items that match the standards.
-Unlike ELA standards, the science standards use the same strands though out the grade levels: LS (life sciences), PS (physical sciences), and ES (earth science). However, the work is not formatted in the same way, which will add some complexity for curriculum leaders.

Social Studies
-The proposed elementary standards are much more robust than current standards. Over 49 pages of standards were written for kindergarten through fifth grade.
-Over 60 new standards for elementary students have been written.
-Unlike science work groups, the social studies writers chose to write specific standards for American Government, which will be helpful for students preparing for the American Government EOC. 34 standards for American Government were written. The writers made a special effort to write the standards in a way that promotes higher levels thinking skills over simple recall. Most standards are built around verbs such as compare, predict, evaluate, and analyze.

Drop In: Online PD

Online PD presentation slides for the Fall 2015 MASSP conference. 

Providing flexibility and choice are two ways to respect teachers as professionals. Honoring digital opportunities is one way to bring choice and flexibility to PD.

In my work in leading PD efforts, I've dabbled with online options. My wife has much more experience. I don't know how many will appreciate the '80's skateboarding reference, but compared to her I'm a poser and she's a thrasher. 

What we've learned is that teachers appreciate being able to bank an occasional PD hour on their own time, perhaps in their  PJ's. Taking PD online has other advantages as well. Gauging the level of engagement is often easier than the typical large group face to face session, and it also provides some teachers, who have been passively watching their colleagues enjoy the half pipe of technology, a less threatening way to drop in.

Overcoming Challenges: Small Schools and PLC's

Anyone who properly uses the noun, "gymocafetorjum" automatically gains credibility with small school educators like myself who are used to wearing many hats and being creative to meet the needs of students. Aaron Hanson, former National Model School Principal and author of How to Develop PLCs for Singletons and Small Schools, understands the challenges of using collaborative models in small settings.

His book provides practical tips and examples for educators whose journey through the collaborative process gets stuck at the question: How do my students receive the value of common assessments when I don't have anyone with whom to collaborate on assessments because I'm the only one teaching this in my district? 

Hanson details several strategies including interdisciplinary teams, singletons who support, and virtual teams, but the strategy that seems to offer the most benefit to students in my setting is the effective use of vertical teams.

Hansen argues that the most important tasks vertical teams can take on are identifying essential skills and agreeing to the level of rigor necessary to demonstrate proficiency. He offers straightforward protocols for beginning these discussions.

I'll break from Hansen and offer two specific examples of how these discussions could play out. Consider the first image below. Suppose the Algebra I instructor in a district defined proficiency as the ability to answer the questions at the top of the image and mastery as the ability to answer the questions at the bottom. If the teachers in the grade levels below and above held different visions of profficiency, confusion could result. Similarly in the second image we find objectives for a biology course. If one teacher defines proficiency as the ability to compare and contrast animal and plant cells using six of the terms listed correctly, students would be challenged differently than if the instructors below or above believed proficiency should be gauged by the ability to provide textbook definitions for all the terms present.

Students in small schools deserve to have teachers who engage in these conversations. Hansen shows us how to begin.

Borrowed from SLPCSchools

DESE's Biology CLE's

Three Things I Want 3rd-8th Grade Teachers To Know About Testing In2015-16

Earlier this summer I posted notes from a meeting with a DESE official regarding state testing in Missouri. At the administrator's conference in July, I attended a session led by DESE's Michael Muenks and Shaun Bates. Below are three key points from both sessions. Overall, I believe teachers should have less anxiety regarding the administration of the tests this year.

1.) The technology used to deliver the tests this year will be similar to last year's. e Direct will be the portal, and tests will be administered by Insight. Teachers and students won't have to navigate a dramatically different system to take the test. We were successful in administering the tests last year, and I'm sure we will be able to do it again.

2.) The content and structure will be the same. This year's test is based on the same standards as last year. Although test items have been created by non-SBAC affiliated companies (in compliance with legislation), the tests will have a similar number of items and a similar ratio of constructed response to selected response.

3.) DESE worked to create tests that are less frustrating to administer. Resetting tests for students who are inadvertently logged out will be easier.  Classroom activities will not be a part of the tests this year.

In my opinion DESE has done as much as they can to provide stability, given the current political climate. I realize teachers, for good reason, worry about the interpretation of test results. I want the teachers with whom I work to know that, while I recognize the importance of test results, I find formal and informal observations, effective lesson and assessment design, and evidence of healthy relationships as more important marks of strong teaching than state test scores. When I see those in place, I am more than willing to support teachers when explaining test results to stakeholders.