LeaderTalk

The Best Advice I Received

During the past two weeks, I've been thinking, about this question, "What was the best advice I have received?:    I'll list three pieces of advice that I have found to be quite valuable and influencial to me in the post below.  However, believing in the power of the experience of others, I invite and ask you to submit a piece of advice that you found most valuable to you.  If you can, share what the advice was and why it was so powerful for you.

Here are my three

1-From Gene Chasin, a former manager and mentor to me (he was Asst Supt for Elementary Programs) who told me that it is important to work hard but that if you continually work 70-90 hours a week, you will burn yourself out.  He taught me the difference between working high value hours vs simply being at the office or working just to slog through some stuff.  I was working VERY hard to improve a historically struggling school and was putting in numerous long hours, some of which were important and high value, but more were simply hours and I was failing at balancing work with family.

2-From Rick Adamson, another former manager who remains a terrific friend-he coined "Rick's Rule of Three" which noted that if you receive an email to another person, you send response, and the person responds with another email (the third time), you should immediately stop, and either get on the phone or walk over to that person to resolve the question/issue.  Our work group had a bad habit of emailing and creating LONG threads which bogged all of us down.

3-From Daryl Powell and Jack McCall, former colleagues and mentors at the North Carolina Principal Executive Program who taught me the value of being a continual learner. Jack is now in his upper 80's but his wit and wisdom can be found at this link.  I've been able to learn from both of them to look at areas outside of what is traditionally education administration and see what parallels and ideas can be cross pollinated-I'm now doing the same in my current role where I am applying areas that school executives excel (motivating people when there is little or no monetary incentive) to my work in Executive Development.

Now it's your turn-what 's the best advice YOU have received?  I look forward to hearing from you.

Chris

Cell Phone Conundrum

In my position as an administrator, sometimes I feel adrift in a sea of information and an ever changing landscape of responsibilities and possibilities. I am already a day late with my post and I have at least  three topics which I want to explore but for now I will stick with two related topics that stood out in my recent reading.

 

The Cell phone conundrum. There is an article in the latest Technology and Learning which does not offer any real opinion but which exposes the wide disparity of policies. The most extreme example of allowing/encouraging cell phone use is:

 

“Three middle schools and three charter schools in Brooklyn New York, started a pilot program in direct opposition of New York City's public schools' cell-phone ban. The schools gave 2,500 free cell phones to students, preloaded with 130 minutes of talk time. Students will be rewarded with additional minutes in return for good behavior, attendance, homework, and test scores. Teachers, meanwhile, can send text messages to students to remind them of assignments or upcoming exams. The $2 million program was funded by private donors through the Fund for Public Schools.”

 

The reader survey, which accompanies this article, however shows almost 89% of the respondents ban cell phones on campus. Greg’s blog prints and excerpt from a New York Times blog on cell phone in the classroom. While most of the discussion centers on higher education there are some good points ( along with the usual fears, liability, responsibility, cheating, posting you tube videos etc).

 

At about the same time David Warlick posted the same example I have above but the primary context of his discussion was the development of acceptable use policies. This all comes together at a time when I am wondering about the application of cell phone technology at the Junior High level and wondering about how to help the students develop the maturity they need to responsibly use this tool ( having had my own minor you tube challenge).

 

I entered the conversation with the following comment which I am reprinting here because I think it is an important question and because I want to highlight David’s follow up post.

“Since both cell phone use and AUP are things I am thinking about let me raise a question that I have not seen addressed in the last year or so..

The givens: We talk about teaching students to use “all technology” in a responsible manner ..we see the potential of a whole variety of connectedness like cell phones

The question: Should we have a tiered AUP? That is should Junior High students have the same AUP as 9th graders? As 11th graders? What are realistic expectations based on maturity and responsibility?
(I work in a K-8 school)”

I have a host of questions about cell phone technology but for a moment I wish to diverge to explore the AUP issue. David posted again a couple of day later a link to a wiki to explore AUP policies and to give us an opportunity to collaborate on a tiered approach. The post and the wiki have some nice resources that are worth exploring but even more important in my opinion is the concept the AUP is much more than a set of rules . that it should be part of a technology policy statement.

Join in the conversation here or on the wiki.

Just a few of my other questions include: Is the cell phone a viable technology for the Junior High Classroom. If you have a one to one program is there a need to use cell phones? What are possible applications?

 

Photo by compujeramey

 

 

Make sure the greener pastures really are

If there is one positive to come out of the fact that I missed my posting day yesterday, it's that I got to take a look at a couple of recent blog posts highlighting teachers who are moving on and moving out. (Not that I'm glad they're leaving, but it did help me distill some thoughts about this attrition.) Will they return to a classroom somewhere else? Are they heading out to make their millions with an Internet IPO or on Wall Street? I can't help but wonder after reading these posts how many other, less vocal, teachers will be closing their classroom doors for the last time in the next few weeks. It's disappointing and disheartening. The wrong ones are leaving the profession.

As bad as it seems today, in this culture of standards-driven everything and drive-by district initiatives, are you really sure it's that much better somewhere else? Maybe I'm just on a downer after reading about how easily we lose the good ones and how hard it is to usher out the bad ones. From where I'm sitting, though, it's not all bad. As someone who taught and left after four years in the classroom only to come back two years later, I can say with some authority that the grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence.

Show me the money!

Sure, you may make more money. Maybe a lot more. But at what price? I worked for a (then) Big 5 accounting firm in their IT auditing and data analysis group. The work was challenging and I enjoyed it. The money was very nice after living on two teachers' salaries between my wife and I for the four prior years. But my time at home consisted of Friday afternoons through Sunday evenings. I was on the road constantly and for weeks on end making the thought of starting a family particularly difficult.

The Dilbert Factor

It's naive to think jerky, self-absorbed, incompetent bosses only exist in the world of education. You're just as likely to be micromanaged elsewhere. In fact, coming from a classroom where I had full and total autonomy to run things the way I chose, it was a tough adjustment to be micromanaged by a Senior Consultant who was three years younger than me and who made it her goal in life to show the "career-changing teacher guy" that he just was not cut out for the business world.

Tenure doesn't exist in the private sector, either, so you can lose your position at the drop of a hat. In this economy is that a safe gamble?

The Professionals

I'll be the last to argue that sometimes educators are looked down on; not treated as professionals by those on the outside and occasionally on the inside. And if your work conditions are oppressive and restrictive, by all means you should get out while you can. But let's keep it in perspective. If someone's day-to-day job satisfaction is affected by someone else's perception of what they do or how they do it, I'm not sure what job would be satisfactory. I respect public education as vital to our nation's future and I believe in what I am doing to contribute to a better school system for my own kids. If anyone wants to look down their nose at me or say that I'm not a "professional," then they are the ones who are in need of an attitude adjustment.

The Flip Side

This is a hard job. And it's a job that, sadly, many people perceive as easy seeing as we're all on our way home at 2:30 and spend June, July, and August with our feet up. A lot of administrators are ignorant, arrogant jerks who thrive on their power over people. But a lot of us are decent, hard-working people who believe in the system and in the work that teachers do in the classroom day in and day out. When I first started blogging, I had to constantly remind myself when writing not to make sweeping generalizations about lazy teachers content to teach class the same way for 30+ years. For the same reasons, don't lump every administrator, school, and district together if you've had a bad experience.

So there

I'm not saying you shouldn't leave if you're not enjoying yourself - life's too short. And surely don't stick around and continue to work for a principal that's on a power trip. But keep in mind that there are many of us "younger" administrators out there who are committed to making this school thing a whole lot better. And we'll be around long after the curmudgeons have retired. I've hired two teachers already for next year - one right out of college and one out of the private sector - and both of them are forward-thinking, bright individuals who are passionate about kids and learning. I take very seriously my responsibility to nurture them through their first few years and empower them with whatever they need not to fall into the teacher's lounge gossip or first-year burnout.

If you've made a choice to work in this profession, do it because you like it. You're not a martyr or a saint. It's not a "higher calling." It's a job. Sometimes it's a job where the only one pushing for excellence is you, but it's worth pursuing even if you're surrounded by mediocrity. Sure your friends and family may think you're crazy. Heck - sometimes I think I'm crazy. Do the job and do it well because you like it and because you can see the difference you're making with the kids in your school or classroom. If you don't want to do the job or don't like the job, by all means do the students a favor and find something that makes you excited to get out of bed in the morning. But look before you leap because the grass isn't always greener and you may end up neck-deep in manure.

Thick Skin and a Backbone

Last week in his post, Dr. McLeod shared information about less-than-stellar candidates who enter the colleges of education and eventually the ranks of teachers.  If Entrance Exams are to be held credible, and if the statistics are to be believed, then we have a situation of weaker candidates entering teacher preparation programs and the most capable teachers leaving the classroom after only a couple of years.  These trends will clearly have an impact on student outcomes.  If this trend continues, Dr. McLeod poses the question, “Now what?”

I would begin my answer with a rhetorical question: “Who ultimately controls the quality of the teaching that occurs on our campuses each day?”

If you do not agree that it is the Principal, quit reading now.

If the Principal is properly fulfilling their primary responsibilities of supervision and leader of instruction, then anything less than exemplary teaching is their fault.  Forget the consultants, the department heads, the personnel office, or even the superintendent.  The ONE person who should KNOW what is happening day-in and day-out on the campus is the principal.  And if a teacher doesn’t know their subject, isn’t planning effectively, can’t maintain discipline, and doesn’t relate to kids…in short, they just cannot teach, the principal should know it and should get rid of that teacher.

Maybe I cannot control many of the factors which cause weaker candidates to apply for entry into college education programs.  And maybe I cannot prevent the best from leaving for better pay elsewhere.  But I can control the quality of applicant I will interview and the quality of teaching I will allow to remain on my campus.

Without apologies, I will maintain that if a school has less than effective teaching, it has a less than effective principal.  And if the less than effective principal is allowed to stay, then the district has a less than effective superintendent.  Read the blogs.  Read the ASCD publications.  Read the literature out there.  There is nothing new. We KNOW what we should be doing.

Whether it is firing teachers, assigning them to areas where their strengths can best be applied, hiring alternatively certified staff, or watching the data to insure that each teacher is a value added to the process…The biggest problem we face in education today…the single largest obstacle to improving the quality of teaching is that we have way too many principals who – for whatever reason – are frozen in their tracks.

That’s right…I said it…We have way too many principals who talk the talk, can quote the research, can write erudite blogs, but who can’t lead a group of teachers in a straight line down a hallway.  Maybe I’m just tired and worn a little thin here at the end of the year.  But I’m tired of hearing my colleagues gnash their teeth, whine, and complain about issues which are screaming for action – and all of which are under their control.

As a principal, I am the first to admit that maybe the best thing I can do sometimes is to shut up and take action.

Stop making excuses.  If you have bad teachers, get rid of them.  Quit taking the path of least resistance.  Grow some thick skin and a backbone and start documenting your weak staff.  Have courageous conversations with you mediocre teachers.

One of the greatest ad slogans of all time truly applies here:

Just Do It!

The Three "E's"

This was cross-posted at edtechjourneys:

In a recent post I laid out a host of strategies that have been put forth by educators in an attempt to 'fix' whatever is ailing our schools. I asked, "What would you do?". I understand that we need to do more than one thing at a time; but one key area I'd change is our orientation to the three "E's" of public education

The first E is "Entertainment".

In this scenario the teacher is entertaining and fun and therefore the kids enjoy the class. The teacher is labeled 'cool". Everyone's happy. We've all had "cool" teachers like this.

The second E is "Engagement".

The teacher is still entertaining; but now he/she has stepped to the side a bit more and lets the kids get more involved and more active. There are more projects, more discoveries, more creativity, and more construction on the part of students. The teacher is still "cool" and entertaining; but the kids are doing more of the work. Many educators feel this is where we need to be...ed tech folks see that technology can play a big role in creating this environment...and it is a huge step from the traditional classroom.

...however.....

The problem that I see with both of these strategies...is that the teacher "Owns" the learning. The kids attend, and they may be entertained and engaged; but it's still the teacher's gig. When I look at videos of classrooms in turmoil (see Dangerously Irrelevant), I clearly see students who do not "Own" their own learning. They could care less. They have decided not to "play school" with us anymore, and that is frustrating for everyone...especially the teacher.

They might not be aware of it on a conscious level but their unconscious dialogue go something like this,

"You educators set up this stupid school, decided what you were going to teach without asking me, chose to put me in this class, and then told me to shut up and take notes. I may not have much power; but I can shut you and your dumb system out. You can't force me to learn. The stuff you're teaching me doesn't have any relevance to my life. As a matter of fact, acting out in school is the one place in my life where I can exert some power, even if I'm the one who loses out in the end."

A sad comment; but understandable for a disenfranchised and dis-empowered student.

That brings me to the third E, "Empowerment".

In this approach students are part of the system itself. They participate in decisions about what is taught, what they would like to learn, and what strategies and tools they would like to use in the learning process. Some may decide to work more independently, some in groups; but they are part of the process of deciding what goes on in their own learning.

This is a radical step forward from "Engagement" which seems to be the ed tech mantra right now..."Engage me or Enrage me." But students need more than engagement. They need to be empowered. They need to feel like they are not the just "bricks in the wall". They need to feel they are the architects, masons, (and yes) the laborers that are building the wall.

Educators don't need to feel threatened by this because we still maintain our own ownership and accountability; but to educate the disaffected, angry, and powerless students in many of our traditional classrooms, we must open the circle of power to include the learners themselves.

John Taylor Gatto says,

We have turned our students into parasites. It's an ugly word but absolutely true. By reserving them in school rooms and having them think that they have nothing to give back to the world for 18 years....We need to give them real responsibility. Doing your homework is a fake responsibility."

Empowering students is not a magic bullet. We will still need qualified teachers who know how to build trusting relationships with students and handle the many challenges that kids will present. We will need parents that are part of the empowerment circle and are involved with their children's education. We will need the best technology tools; and school facilities that show society's commitment to our children's futures. We need all these things....

But without taking steps to empower learners to "own" their own learning, we will continue to see classroom dynamics that doom us to failure and to continued classroom turmoil...

...and that serves no one.

pete

Is Teaching a Profession?

Today marks the beginning of Teacher Appreciation Week.  As I was writing a letter to my staff to tell them how much I appreciate all of their hard work this year, I found myself thanking them for their professionalism.  The use of the word "professionalism" reminded me of an opinion paper I was required to write in a philosophy of education class I took when I was working toward my Master's degree in educational administration.  The question I was asked to respond to was "Is teaching a profession?"  That was back in 1991, and I was teaching 5th grade at the time.

My first reaction to this question was "Of course teaching is a profession.  I am a teacher, and I am very professional in my daily work teaching children."  I had a college degree in elementary education which I received from a well-respected teacher preparatory program, and I was certified by the state of Illinois after passing two different exams.  Additionally, there is enough educational research published to fill a wing of the Library of Congress.  The data collected constitute a scientific knowledge base from which teachers and their students will benefit.  Teaching is a certainly a profession.

Then, as I thought about the question some more, I realized that there may be another side to the argument.  The fact that teachers are unionized is the most glaring argument that teaching is not a profession.  Teachers unions work hard to increase the salary and benefits of their members, and sometimes, they need to organize strikes or work slow-downs to get what they want.  Also, professionals are exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act which means they do not qualify for overtime. Conversely, non-exempt employees of a company typically do not require a college degree, and they receive overtime pay for hours worked in excess of their regular 40 hour week.  Under most teachers union contracts, administrators must pay teachers for their time after school or over the summer.  Try asking a teacher to stay after school or work through her duty-free lunch in order to complete a project.  You may get hit with a grievance.

Wikipedia considers teaching a profession.  The Merriam-Webster definition of profession is "a calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation b: a principal calling, vocation, or employment c: the whole body of persons engaged in a calling."  Most of us would agree that medicine, law, and accounting are professions.  But what about education?   I think school administration is a profession.  The questions I pose are: Is teaching is a profession?  and Is there a difference between "profession" and "professionalism?"  I often hear that teachers feel slighted because they do not receive the respect of other professions.  If teachers work toward changing public perceptions, then maybe these would be moot questions.

Low ability teachers, low ability students?

Here are some research findings for you…

Smart people leave teaching?

Of the teachers who had high college entrance exam scores, almost a fourth of them leave the profession within a decade. In contrast, only about 11% of the individuals with low scores leave the teaching profession within 10 years. Similarly, more than a third of the teachers with low college entrance exam scores are still teaching a decade after they started, while only 15% of the teachers with high scores are still teaching ten years after they began (Anderson & Carroll, 2008; see also Guarino, Santibanez, & Daley (2006), who note similar results for university selectiveness and certification exam scores). In other words, the percentage of teachers with lower academic ability increases in schools over time. The brightest go elsewhere.

Teacher smarts matter?

• Higher teacher ACT scores positively influences student reading scores (Ferguson & Ladd, 1996)
• Teachers’ verbal ability influences student performance (Greenwald, Hedges, & Laine, 1996)
• [S]tudents learn more from teachers with higher test scores. Test scores matter…” (Wayne & Youngs, 2003)
  

Discuss among yourselves

Let’s assume that, generally speaking, these studies are correct: 1) smart people are less likely to stay in teaching (thus resulting in a concentration of teachers with lower academic ability), and 2) the academic ability of teachers impacts student learning outcomes. Now what?

References

• Anderson, S. E., & Carroll, C. D. (2008). Teacher career choices: Timing of teacher careers among 1992-1993 Bachelor’s degree recipients (NCES 2008-153). Washington, DC: United States Department of Education.
• Ferguson, R.F., & Ladd, H.F. (1996). How and why money matters: An analysis of Alabama schools. In H.F. Ladd (Ed.), Holding schools accountable. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 265-298.
  
• Greenwald, R., Hedges, L.V., & Laine, R.D. (1996, Autumn). The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66(3), 361-396.
  
• Guarino, C. M., Santibanez, L., & Daley, G. A. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of the recent empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 173-208.
  
• Wayne, A. J., & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73(1), 89-122.