TransformingSchool(2.0)

The South Plains Collaborative School Network (SPCSN) is a group of schools in the Lubbock, Texas, area which have banded together to collectively pursue school improvement and engage in transformative practice.  To that end, Lubbock Cooper ISD (LCISD) invited the SPCSN School Transformation Pod to visit the campus of Laura Bush Middle School (LBMS) last Friday.  About 12-15 school districts sent administrators to this event to learn about the strategies being deployed at LBMS in the interest of creating a world class learning environment for its students.

LBMS principal Edna Parr and assistant principal Kyle Hendrix provided an overview of the deployments and underlying philosophies driving that work.  They and several other LCISD folks then led classroom “power walks” on the campus, to provide us an on-the-ground view of their efforts.

Some powerful learning, takeaways, and notices for me:

• Instructional improvement at LBMS is centered on The Fundamental 5 (Cain & Laird, 2012): 1) Frame the lesson, 2) Work in the power zone, 3) Frequent small group purposeful talk, 4) Recognize and reinforce, and 5) Write critically.
• A deep commitment to “intentional practice” is embedded into LBMS daily processes.
• Persistent attention to the quality of relationships between and among ALL stakeholders is a top priority.
• Deep learning and critical thinking are more highly valued than a pathological pursuit of superficial content coverage.
• Formative assessments of learning are a constant focus, through the small group purposeful talks, the daily writing synthesis of learning, the “exit tickets” on which students summarize learning, effective use of inquiry, etc.
• A marrow-deep commitment to continuous improvement seems to pervade the culture of both LCISD and LBMS.

Wouldn't it be nice if every child could attend a school like LBMS, in which student-centeredness and an intense focus on quality learning are relentlessly and intentionally pursued?  Schools like that just feel right.    

The sharing and cross-pollination of transformative undertakings like the school visit described above are part of a bigger movement afoot in Texas, driven largely by the Texas Association of School Administrators School Transformation Network. 

Good stuff!  Very good stuff!  Thanks for the invite, Dr. Macy Satterwhite.  Thanks for the hospitality, Ms. Parr and Mr. Hendrix.

AtEase

Over the years I’ve read extensively on the topic of leadership.  Two words that have become clear indicators of effective leadership for me are these:

Transparency and Vulnerability

I had the great fortune to get to observe and know an exceptional leader who exhibited both in exemplary fashion  (I’ll call him Pat).  Pat had the most remarkable ability to make people feel comfortable within moments of engaging with him.  Pat had the power to put folks "at ease." 

After much reflection on how Pat could emanate that kind of presence, it became clearer to me that he managed to manifest those two qualities  -  transparency and vulnerability. 

Through his words, 

                       his attire, 

                              his demeanor, 

                                     his posture, 

                                           his questions, 

                                                  his eye contact, 

                                                         his tone of voice, 

                                                                his responses, 

Pat effectively made others feel valued, important, heard, elevated.  

No wonder others enjoyed his leadership and prospered under it.  

No wonder the organization he led performed so well.  

No wonder the people that worked with Pat were so endeared to him.  

No wonder...

I've got some learning to do from Pat about how to put others at ease.

HowToTreatBulls

While principal of a large high school several years ago I was confronted by one of our students (I’ll call him Doug) in the hall one day.  Doug asked for a moment of my time in order to lodge a complaint.  I am a strong believer in student voice, so I was more than happy to hear Doug’s concerns. 

Doug told me that he had a real problem with Officer Smith (not his real name), one of the school resource officers assigned to our campus.  Doug felt that Officer Smith was too gruff.  He objected to Officer Smith’s brusk and dismissive personality.  And, Doug told me that he didn’t like it when Officer Smith told him what, or what not, to do.

After hearing Doug out, I asked if he had ever lived on a farm.  

“No, sir.”  

I asked if he had ever been on a ranch, or around cattle.  

“No, sir.”  

I asked Doug if he had ever had any dealings with bulls.  

“No, sir,” was again his reply.

I then shared with Doug a strongly held personal belief of mine, which has evolved from numerous painful experiences.  That belief is that the best way to deal with bulls is to give them all the room they want.  Bulls, for the most part, don’t much bother humans unless/until humans start getting in their “space.”  Trouble occurs when we humans start trying to get bulls to do, or not do, something (almost, anything, in fact) they are disinclined to do.  Actually, bulls respond best to gentle invitations and enticements (like the feed bucket).

The lesson I was trying to teach Doug is an important one.  It is usually best to NOT incite those who have an inordinate amount of power over us (whatever the source of that power may be).  Officers of the law fit into that category.  And, it is almost always better to deal with that powerful other from a basis of respectfulness, not confrontation or aggressive brashness.

Peace officers have a very tough job.  We should be deferential to them unless they are acting in unethical or illegal ways.   Picking a fight with a lawman (or a bull) will rarely pay positive dividends.   

I think Doug was listening (but, he was a sophomore, so I can’t be sure).

Marginalized

Much of the press you read about public schools these days is negative.  However, the fact is that public schools are performing better now than they ever have, with much more challenging clientele than they have ever served.  Diane Ravitch makes this point superbly, supported with data, in her recent book, Reign of Error.

Many children show up for their very first day of school compromised due to their social and economic conditions at home.  Without going into lengthy descriptions and causes of those conditions, let it suffice to say that those children are at a disadvantage from day one of their formal educational experience.  They are disadvantaged through no fault of their own.  Neither is it the fault of the public schools those children attend.

Sadly, when systems of accountability, built primarily on high-stakes testing data, consistently drive schools toward a pathological fixation on test preparation and test performance, the achievement gaps that are painfully evident between those children and the ones who were raised in more privileged environments is constantly, publicly, painfully accentuated.

Those children are marginalized.  
Repeatedly.  

They are marginalized as the result of their home environment.  

They are marginalized by being brow-beaten toward better high-stakes test performance.  

They are marginalized when their schools, their teachers, and their communities are excoriated for not doing “enough.”  

They are marginalized when important and enjoyable aspects of school curricula are taken from them (e.g., fine arts, physical education, elective classes, etc.), in order to “catch them up.” 

They are marginalized at the hands of misguided public policy.  

An awful cycle of blame and recrimination becomes a persistent drumbeat in the psyche of these children.  For many of these children, school is the brightest spot in their lives because it is filled with adults who love them and seek to actualize their very best futures. 

Shame on us if we toxify that nurturing environment.  
We can do better.  
It’s time we should.  

TwiceBuilt

When I was pretending to be a wood shop teacher about 20 years ago I required my students to build a series of self-selected wood projects.   For each, they were expected to do the following:

1. Research the project for plans, needed materials, tools required, etc.
2. Plan the project from start to finish, with a rough estimate of timelines.
3. Procure the needed materials and tools.  Learn just-in-time knowledge/skills about both the materials and tools.
4. Build Version #1 of the project from start to completion.
5. Converse with me about the completed project, engaging in reflection and self-assessment about their processes and the product.
6. Build Version #2 of the exact same project.
7. Converse with me about completed Version #2, engaging in reflection and self-assessment about their processes and the product, AND the revisions/differences from those used in building Version #1.
8. Give Away, Sell, or Keep the project.  Regardless of which choice the students made here, their product was on display for some “audience” other than themselves and me. 

Invariably, many students would ask if they could build Version #1 and Version #2 concurrently, as they deemed it to be more efficient, on multiple levels.  My answer to that question was always the same - “No”!  During the entire period of project building, I observed, commented, advised, and facilitated the building process.  Students were also free to learn from each other.  Cheating was not only allowed, but encouraged (if it meant peeking at other students' work and learning from it)!

While each step I outlined above provided some rich learning experiences for the students, the deepest learning consistently emerged from the building and completion of Version #2.  It was in Steps 6 and 7 that the students gained the deepest understanding of the materials, the tools, and the processes needed to bring a quality piece of craftsmanship to fruition.  The debrief with the student about barriers, glitches, successes, tool craft, and lessons learned was always the most satisfying experience for me.  It was in this conversation (not a test, not an essay) that I could get the most complete grasp of the real learning experienced by each student.  

And invariably, the learning of each student was DIFFERENT in some way from the learning of all the other students.

In fact, that is the very nature of authentic LEARNING – it is individualized, customized, personal.

Could I have given the students a multiple-choice test over this content?  Absolutely.   Would it have been easier on them and on me?  Probably.  But, it would have told me virtually nothing about how much the student truly understood about the content.  I wanted to know what and how much they truly understood, not how good they were at guessing for right answers, or eliminating bad ones.

The same pedagogical approach can be used with ANY content, academic or otherwise.  
Why wouldn't we?

NecessaryEndings

I recently read Necessary Endings by Henry Cloud (2010).  It is the first book I’ve read that was fully focused on how to bring things to an end, whether they be relationships, practices, agreements, or businesses.  Cloud uses the analogy of pruning to make the point that growth only occurs when unproductive resource suckers, the sickly or underperforming, or the long since dead are removed from the mix.

Cloud asserts that endings are, in fact, a normal part of life. Yet, as humans, we seem to have a fear of endings. He discusses a set of dynamics that exists within us that inhibit our willingness to separate from the useless, the sick, or the dead (metaphorically speaking, of course).  Cloud insists that we must get to a place of “hopelessness” before we let ourselves fully consider, then affect, a needed ending.

In discussing how to come to terms with necessary endings, Cloud advises that we ask ourselves a powerful set of questions regarding the status of the current relationship or situation:

“What has the performance been so far?  
Is it good enough?  
Is there anything in place that would make it different?  
If not, am I willing to sign up for more of the same?” 

In examining relationships that may need to end, Cloud asserts that past performance and dynamics are the truest indicators of what the future will look like and that no amount of promising or recommitments will make a difference. 

Cloud believes there are only three kinds of people: Wise, Foolish, and Evil.  And, he provides detailed descriptions of the psyche and behavioral norms of each.  This portion of the book was particularly interesting to me, since my professional life is spent working with and serving large numbers of people.  At the end of the day, Cloud says we must deal with each group in these general ways:

• “With wise people, talk to them, give them resources, and you will get a return."
• "With foolish people, stop talking to them about problems; they are not listening. And stop supplying resources; they squander them. Instead, give them limits and consequences."
• "With evil people, …you have to go into protection mode, not helping mode...”

In discussing the psychological barriers to bringing things to a necessary end, Cloud says that we can best do so when we are not married to a particular outcome.  In other words, when we can let ourselves consider and accept a range of reasonable outcomes (rather than just one my-way-or-no-way option), we set the stage for affecting some necessary endings, without high degrees of animus.

I love it when authors introduce me to words I don't know. In this book I learned two new ones: “Cathexis is the investment of mental or emotional energy in a person, an object, or an idea. So decathexis is the process of taking it back.”   I’ve gotta learn to use those two puppies.

I found Necessary Endings to be both interesting and helpful.  Glad I read it.

Thanks for the recommendation, WB.