LeaderTalk

No One Cares How Long You Work

I hate when people have to somehow work into every conversation how busy they are. I have colleagues who start every conversation with a statement along the lines of, "You wouldn't believe how busy I've been..." or "I get to my office every morning at 6 ayem (that's Texan for a.m.) and still cannot get all my work done..." or "I work until 10 pm every night"....

It's like they're bragging or playing some game of I'm Better Than You Because I Work Harder Than You.

I have close administrator friends who brag about being at work from before sun-up until long after sun-down and go in on weekends to "get caught up". They make it sound like they are running cattle from Fort Worth to Kansas City...what a hardship out here on the trail, sleeping in the rain and eating nothing but burnt beans...

Hey, if you're a workaholic - and you love impressing folks by telling them how many hours you worked last week...good for you. Now pipe down, will ya please?

You really want to know what I think when friends tell me over and over how hard they work and what long hours they keep? I seriously think, "So you have no clue how to manage your time? And you expect what? Sympathy?"

It's not how hard you work, it's how smart you work. It's not how long you work, it's how much you get done at work.

My observation is that folks who ROUTINELY work more than a standard work week:

* Have poor time management skills; or
* They don't know how to delegate; or
* They cannot prioritize [HINT: Family comes first!]; or
* They are Wannabe Martyrs.

[OMG!, did he really just say that?]

Listen? I hear eggshells being stepped on.

Look, if you're a school administrator and you consider football games, plays, concerts, academic and athletic events to be WORK, you're in the wrong career.

Sure, I'm "on duty" while at those events, but I'm also having FUN! I see fellow admintypes so worried and uptight about the lighting systems, sound systems, crowd control, etc. that they completely miss a 98 yard punt return for a score. Or they don't really HEAR that subtle oboe melody played perfectly during a student concert.

Kenny sings about knowing when to hold 'em and knowing when to fold 'em. Effective - and the most healthy - school administrators know when to be vigilant, focused, and when to let go and just enjoy the moment. Take the informal Walk Through Observation. I have seen colleagues so intent on working through their checklist, they completely miss the sheer joy on a kid's face who just caught on to reducing 2/4 to 1/2. ("I get it Mr. Jones! I finally get it!") Any administrator who witnesses such an event and doesn't walk over and give the kid a high-five is just an empty suit pretending to be an educator.

I've been asked how I will know when it's time to retire.

Easy.

When going into my office, walking the halls, visiting a classroom, spending time with great teachers and super students becomes a "job", it will be time for me to leave.

When I look at my watch and mentally calculate how much longer I have to stay at work, it will be time for me to quit.

When I start telling everyone how hard I work, how many hours I spent at the school, and how busy I am...it will time for me to retire.

The Nutritional Value of a Diploma...or Doughnuts for Dropouts

Can a bureaucracy fix itself?

They say a doctor who treats himself has a fool for a patient.

...So I am focused this year on recovering students who have dropped out.  I am trying to accomplish this from within the very bureaucracy that created the environment from which the students escaped.  It has been interesting so far, and we're only two months into the year.  So far, I have had three Ah Ha Moments...

Ah Ha # 1: Closed Systems Prevent Creative Input from New Sources

For starters, when the state initially proposed a dropout recovery program which would be encouraged to try innovative approaches, it was open to both private and public entities.  Public school representatives sued in an effort to keep everything contained within the public system.  The argument, I guess, being that only The Bureaucracy itself was qualified to fix whatever was wrong.  This was an instance in which the State Agency had the correct idea, but the teacher arm of The Bureaucracy took exception and wanted no outside interference.  God forbid any public funds go to private entities to help find solutions to a national problem.  Aside from blatant territorialism, we need to wake up to the fact that what we are doing is not solving the problem.  Input from as many sources as possible should be encouraged, not chased away by self-protecting, near-sighted teacher organizations.

Ah Ha #2: Bureaucracies Often Promote Proper Procedural Protocol over Creative Problem Solving

The issue: many of the dropouts we are working with have not passed a state-mandated test.  If they pass it, they can still receive their diploma.  But the test is at the end of this month.  We do not have any time to waste. I needed to expedite the purchase of materials.  I told a teacher to buy them and we would reimburse him.  The Bureaucracy didn't like this.  I was told to send the materials back to the company, cancel the order, and then re-order the materials with a purchase order.  This would mean that the materials the kids needed would probably not be in their hands before the test.  I argued my point and eventually The Bureaucracy used a procedure for a check requisition, the teacher was paid, and the books were in the hands of students with plenty of lead time.  With a PO I would still be waiting.  Correct purchasing procedures are certainly necessary.  But the system must be willing to use other creative (and often built-in) expedited methods when called for. Established protocols may be the most convenient to The Bureaucracy, but with enough pushing, other, perfectly legal procedures are often discovered and grudgingly made available.

Ah Ha #3: Political Correctness Doesn't Put Butts in the Seats

I was providing Chick-fil-A sandwiches and doughnuts to the kids who came on Saturdays for tutoring and lessons.  All Saturday sessions are purely voluntary in nature - that is, they are not used as detention or make-up time.  Our free Saturday sessions are for any student needing help passing the upcoming state mandated tests.  I received an email from The Bureaucracy informing me that I could not purchase doughnuts because they are not on the nutritionally approved list of foods allowed in school.  Doughnuts are not "politically correct" and they are against the Dept of Agriculture's guidelines.  I face a sanction because my 18-21 year old volunteer students want doughnuts on Saturday morning.  Is it my fault they won't come for sugar free yogurt granola bars?

I hope my recovered dropouts are learning as much about the upcoming state mandated tests as I am about how The Bureaucracy needs to change if we are ever going to become flexible enough to stem the flood of students leaving school before they earn their diplomas.

Technorati Tags: dropout_recovery dropout_prevention bureaucracy dropouts

Dropped Out or Pushed Out?

Every nine seconds a student becomes a drop-out [1].

Of those who graduate from high school, the completion rate is 72% for females and 64% for males [2].

Among ethnic groups: African-Americans have a 50% graduation rate; Latinos - 53%; Asian/Pacific Islanders - 77%; and Whites - 75% [3].

Students from low-income families drop-out at six times the rate of higher-income families [4].

75% of inmates in state prisons are drop-outs.  59% of inmates in Federal prisons are drop-outs [5].

55% of drop-outs are employed [6].

The U.S. death rate for people with less than 12 years of education is 2.5 times higher than those with 13 or more years of education [7].

The cost to the public for crime and welfare involving drop-outs is $24 BILLION annually [8].

There are 3.5 million drop-outs between the ages of 16 - 25 [9].

Total combined loss of income and taxes in one year due to drop-outs equals $192 BILLION (1.6% of the Gross Domestic Product) [10].

Arguments about our pluralistic attempt to educate all children notwithstanding - graduations rates around the world include the following: Denmark - 96%; Japan - 93%; Poland - 92%; Italy 79%; and the U.S. - 70% [11].

                                                                 * * * * * * * * * * *

The Starfish Story, by Loren Eisley:

"One day a man was walking along the beach when he noticed a boy picking something up and gently throwing it into the ocean.  Approaching the boy, he asked, 'What are you doing?'

The youth replied, 'Throwing starfish back into the ocean.  The surf is up and the tide is going out.  If I don't throw them back, they'll die.'

'Son,' the man said, 'don't you realize there are miles and miles of beach and hundreds of starfish? You can't make a difference!'

After listening politely, the boy bent down, picked up another starfish, and threw it back into the surf.  Then smiling at the man, he said, 'I made a difference for that one.' "

                                                                  * * * * * * * * * *

You are no doubt familiar with the basic statistics.  And many of you no doubt have used the Starfish Story at some point in a faculty meeting.  I re-visit both the statistics and the story merely to remind us of the staggering task facing us as educators, and a renewed challenge to continue our efforts in saving students one at a time.

The alternative school where I am principal has always had a strong emphasis and focus on drop-out prevention.  This year we are expanding our efforts to include greater attempts and success at drop-out recovery.

                     

                                                           The current sign on our marquee

Our plans are to expand our operations into new territory and implement practices designed to break down traditional barriers.  We are starting with "tearing down the walls and throwing away the clocks".  We are implementing after-hours and weekend tutorials, on-line courses (which includes providing students with lap-tops), assigning mentors, and making it possible to "attend school" 24/7.  I will write more on our progress in future posts. For now I want to focus on how we are identifying program participants and a bothersome discovery.

The most profound effect on staff so far has been putting faces with the numbers.  We can so easily be staggered - even intimidated and frozen into inaction - by the sheer numbers.  How can I possibly have an impact on a drop-out rate growing by one new "casualty" every nine seconds?  Our campus plan is to have each  mentor save one student a year.  I cannot help but wonder, "How many more will drop-out while I work with my one "adopted" student?"

That's why I included the Starfish Story.

As we search the lists of drop-outs, run transcripts, identify students, and interview them for the program, we cannot help but be impacted by each student as an individual.  We have already clearly established and become huge proponents of what Bill Milliken, in his wonderful book The Last Dropout - Stop the Epidemic [12], titles his first chapter: It All Starts with Relationships.  Upon entry into the program, each student is assigned a mentor.

We are using several sources of information to identify drop-outs.  For our project we use the term drop-outs although we are including students also labeled "leavers" and "non-completers".  One source was a combined list of students from the high schools who did not graduate due to failing a portion on the state-mandated TAKS test.  Approximately 6% of the class of 2008 did not graduate - and were counted as dropouts because of failing a portion of TAKS.  I am also discovering that a fairly significant  number of dropouts have been labeled as such solely because they cannot pass one or more sections of the TAKS.

This is affecting our global view of "dropouts" because it is difficult to view a student as a "deliberate leaver" when it really wasn't a choice they made.  The traditional view of students who became frustrated with the academics, fell behind, followed peers who had left, or allowed family or other outside pressures to convince them to leave school is fast becoming out-dated.

We must now widen our perspective to included drop-outs who have every desire to finish school but cannot because they are unable to pass a state-mandated exit exam.

For many students, they are not dropping out, they are being pushed out by a rigid system that does not allow alternative routes to a diploma.

As I wrote in a previous post:

Without meaning to over-simplify a very complicated picture, I consistently hear four typical stories when I interview students:

1. They have fallen behind because of poor attendance or failing classes. Regardless of the cause, be it lack of motivation, poor health, frustration with the way material is being taught, academic ability, or a mismatch of learning style with typical lesson delivery; these students miss too much school and/or fail classes. Their friends are moving ahead. For many of them, most of their peer group graduates on time, leaving those who have fallen behind feeling frustrated, alone, and inadequate.
2. This is also the time when many start to work part-time jobs. Many of the students I interview have no choice. Their family's economic situation requires them to work. (And when I say part-time, that is really inaccurate - I have students working 35 hours a week, often with outrageous hours that allows them to finally get home and in bed by 1 or 2 am.)
3. Add to this that many students are getting their first driver's license, and you have a set-up for a spiraling disintegration from skipping a class, to failing the class, to skipping longer periods, to not turning in work, to skipping whole days, to eventually falling behind to the point that the student sees no point in finishing the semester … then the year …then high school altogether.
4. Another issue that I encounter (increasingly) is that the students have become frustrated with the testing and State law that requires passing all four sections (math, lang arts, science, and social studies) of the TAKS test before they can receive their diploma. Over 85% of the students enrolled each quarter for the past few quarters have failed at least one part of the test. There is absolutely no question that the high stakes testing required by the State and NCLB is pushing students out of school. Frankly, I have never seen one act of the Federal government leave as many kids behind as does No Child Left Behind.

Obviously, the importance of the negative effect of high-stakes testing is that we must include in our program design a significant emphasis on test preparation and remediation.  When did this become a required and extremely critical (not to mention time-consuming) goal of education?  (James Popham addresses the issue of the impact of NCLB and high-stakes testing in his book, America's "Failing" Schools.  Must reading for all educators.) 

I believe that high-stakes testing is pushing students out of school because we have allowed a phenomenon referred to as "mission creep".  That is, as public schools have assumed {been forced to accept?} more and more areas of responsibility, our initial mission has become blurred.  We continue to add health services, parental responsibilities, mandates to cover "date rape"and "prevention of bullying"and blood born pathogens, CPR, etc etc. We are charged with too many goals and we end up addressing all of them but not actually meeting any of them all that well. As Brian Crosby writes in his book Smart Kids, Bad Schools:

What is the goal [mission] of public education?

• Is it for all kids to get college degrees? Many don't.
• Is it for all kids to go to college? Some don't.
• Is it for all kids to get A's? Several don't.
• Is it for all kids to take AP courses? Most don't.
• Is it to socialize kids? Not very well.
• Is it to excite kids about the world? Few programs do.
• Is it to ignite a desire to learn? Fewer do.
• Is it to prepare them for life? Not enough.[13]

As our mission expands, we lose focus as our horizon of responsibilities literally extends beyond our peripheral vision.

The good news is that virtually all of the students who have stopped-out and come in for a second chance are successful. For many students the time away from school has actually been good for them. Most students who stop-out do not turn to drugs and crime or a life of complete hopelessness. The students who have stopped out are for the most part working, taking care of family, or simply searching alternatives such as GED or jobs with apprenticeships. Invariably, they discover many things about themselves, the economy, and how no one ever said life was fair. When they come in to re-start their education, there is generally a new maturity and new inner-motivation to complete school.

And so we are set to begin our drop out recovery program.  We have identified a cadre of students, we have identified the reasons they are labeled "drop outs".  It is time to set all the arguments and blame aside and focus on the best practices to help every non-completer return to the fold and receive their diploma.

This will be an on-going program and we are anxious to share with and receive input from as many sources as possible.  If you are engaged in any type of drop-out recovery/prevention efforts and would care to join a network, please email me at [email protected]

At this point I should probably add this disclaimer: as I write about our drop-out recovery efforts it is important to remember that my observations will be anecdotal and not empirical in nature.  I am working with a student population isolated to the demographics of seven communities north of Fort Worth.  I do not presume that the data I share in this and future posts has applicability or will be consistent with data taken from other schools and districts in other regions of the country.  Nonetheless, I feel our work is worth sharing and possibly pooling with similar projects taking place in other areas.  Together we might begin to stem the tidal wave of drop-outs across the entire country.  One starfish at a time.

                                                    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

[1] Lehr, C.A., Essential tools: Increasing rates of school completion. Nat'l Cntr on Secondary Education and Transition, Minneapolis, MN, 2004

[2] [3] Orfield, G, Losing Our Future: How Minority Youth are Being Left Behind by the Graduation Rate Crisis, Cambridge, Mass, The Civil Rights Project at Harvard, 2004

[4] US Dept of Ed, Nat'l Cntr for Education Statistics, 2004

[5] Harlow, CW, Education and Correctional Populations, Washington DC - US Dept of Justice, 2003

[6] Sum, A, Left Behind in the Labor Market: Labor Market Problems of the Out-of-School Young Adult Populations, Chicago, Il Alternative Schools Network, 2001

[7] Alliance for Excellent Education, fact Sheet: The Impact of Education on Health and Well-Being, Washington DC, 2003

[8] Thostensen, B., If You Build It, They Will Come: Investing in Public Education, 2005

[9] Bridgeland, D., The Silent Epidemic: Perspectives of High School Dropouts; Gates Foundation, 2006

[10] Milliken, Bill, The Last Dropout - Stop the Epidemic, Hay House, 2007

[11] Education At A Glance 2003, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

[12] Milliken, Bill, The Last Dropout - Stop the Epidemic, Hay House, 2007

[13] Crosby, Brian, Smart Kids, Bad Schools, St Martins Press, 2008

RESOURCES

America's "Failing" Schools, by James Popham.  Taylor and Francis Group, 2005

Smart Kids, Bad Schools, by Brian Crosby.  St Martin's Press, 2008

The Global Achievement Gap, by Tony Wagner.  Perseus, 2008

The Last Dropout - Stop the Epidemic, by Bill Milliken.  Hay House, 2007

Whatever It Takes - How Twelve Communities Are Reconnecting Out-of-School Youth, by Nancy Martin and Sam Halperin. American Youth Policy Forum. www.apyf.org

Technorati Tags: dropouts dropout-recovery dropout-prevention James-Popham TAKS high-stakes-testing Bill-Milliken

Nine Minutes

Dr. Michael Hinojosa, Supt. of Dallas ISD does the intro.  The keynote speaker does the rest.  Worth all nine minutes.

THIS is why we do what we do!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAMLOnSNwzA

Meaningful Revolution - A New Manifesto Which Must Be Heard

It is reported that when John Adams first saw John Trumball's famous painting of the signing of the Declaration of Independence he remarked that the picture was not at all how things really looked. The painting makes it appear as though the process of writing the document was a rather routine and tranquil group effort.  In fact, the process that led to the formation, writing, and acceptance of the Declaration was a partisan and contentious battle of arguments and clashing philosophies.

Yet somehow, from that crucible of mixed beliefs, disparate philosophies, and vested political interests a document of profound clarity of purpose and philosophy emerged that has withstood the challenges of time and politics for over 200 years and created what can arguably be called the greatest democracy in history.

A similar process has been repeating itself here in Texas.  Granted, this process will not impact the world to the extent of the Declaration of Independence, but it certainly has the potential of giving birth to a meaningful revolution of a different sort.

Thirty-five superintendents have been gathering and debating the state of education in Texas.  Calling themselves The Public Education Visioning Institute, they have engaged in what one participant called "truly courageous conversations".  These leaders of districts - which combined represent over 1.2 million students - have met to discuss, argue, debate, challenge, and begin a push for changes of historical magnitude in the educational system of Texas.

The Visioning Institute was initially conceptualized by Keith Sockwell, past Superintendent of Northwest ISD and now with Plano ISD, just north of Dallas.  The Institute eventually gathered support and co-sponsorships with the Texas Association of School Administrators, the Texas Leadership Center, and the SHW Group [1].

They have been meeting for nearly two years, but their work has not been widely heard about, published, or disseminated until very recently.  They have now published what might best be termed a manifesto...a call to action which in some ways can be compared to a declaration of independence from over-regulation by state (and federal) entities.  In fact, on page seven of the document they quote Thomas Jefferson's statement about the writing of the Declaration of Independence:

[A Moral Imperative: Why We as Public Education Leaders Must Speak and Act Now]..."not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before; but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take.  Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion."

The document's title is: Creating as New Vision for Public Education in Texas - A Work in Progress for Conversation and Further Development.

And setting the tone right from the beginning, immediately below the title you see:

"Respectfully Offered by Superintendent Participants in the Public Education Visioning Institute."

A free pdf download of the document is available from the TASA website or from www.tasanet.org/files/visioning/visioningfinal.pdf.

In many ways these thirty-five superintendents are not dissimilar from our country's forefathers in the courage they model by publishing their work. Superintendents work in a highly charged political arena and most go to great lengths to keep their personal opinions hidden from view and their politics close to their vests.  There is nothing inflammatory within the forty-two pages, but there is also nothing safe about this document.  It is a powerful statement from a group of educational leaders which may not sit well with certain power brokers.  It is not unreasonable to say that this document could be a risk to the careers of each superintendent who signed-off on the final published product [2].  But, as one superintendent told me, there is no longer any time to waste.  The "moral imperative" of doing what is right for the children of Texas demands that changes be made at the highest levels of educational governance and influence.

Again, quoting from page seven:

"The framers of the Declaration of Independence provided inspiration for this monumental task we have felt compelled to undertake.  While making no claim that this work is in any way comparable to their epic accomplishment, we have used what they did to inspire us, as a metaphor to frame our own efforts, and to reflect our deeply held belief in the assertion of Thomas Jefferson that learning is essential to liberty.  So in that sense, we, like them, find that we can no longer keep quiet and to continue the injustices the present bureaucratic school system is imposing on our youth and their future."

The true beauty of the document is that it does not dodge, run from, or argue against the continued need for accountability and testing.  The document does not call for an end to monitoring student achievement and holding staffs, schools, and districts accountable for results.  It is how these results are defined and the means of accomplishing them which are the targets for change outlined in the forty-two page publication.

The Visioning Institute's "Declaration" consists of Six Articles.  Under each Article, profound and positive changes to the educational system are outline and specific actions are recommended.  Many of the objectives and actions will take significant effort and time to implement.  Many will require a re-evaluation and new approach to issues at the upper levels of state governance.

The Six Articles are:

• Article I:    The New Digital Learning Environment
• Article II:  The New Learning Standards
• Article III:   Assessments for Learning
• Article IV:  Accountability for Learning
• Article V:   Organizational Transformation
• Article VI:  A More Balanced and Reinvigorated State/Local Partnership

Some of the goals set within these Articles will conflict with vested interests.  Others will run counter to traditional bureaucratic thinking.  But each has been well-considered, debated, negotiated, mediated, and ultimately agreed to by group consensus.

The purpose of this post is simply to urge all educators (and other visitors to LeaderTalk) to read the document.  Then ask yourself what you can do to promote the ideas (and ideals) outlined under the Six Articles.  The thirty-five superintendents have done their job.  While the Visioning Institute will continue meeting, the real responsibility for implementing their manifesto now shifts to the trenches.

Our forefathers wrote the Declaration of Independence, but it was the average colonial citizen who fought for its ultimate acceptance, defense, and application.  Parents, school staffs, PTAs, Lions Clubs, Rotary Clubs, Chambers of Commerce, churches, educational associations...as much of the public as possible must now learn of the publication and become familiar with the Visioning Institute's work and begin spreading the word and lobbying for its implementation.

There are FOUR ACTIONS we can take at this point:

1. Urge your school staff to download and read the document;
2. Promote the dissemination and reading of the publication to as wide an audience as possible through word-of-mouth, blogs, emails, phone calls, and other means;
3. Provide your input to the Institute (you will see how within the document itself); and
4. Begin a meaningful dialog with as many people as you can...working toward the implementation of the Institute's work at the local and state levels.

To the extent which each individual can, we should assist in meeting the challenge issued by the Institute's authors on page one of the document:

"Educators and parents have vital contributions to make and their insights and commitments should be utilized.  We knew it was time to begin a new and different kind of dialog.  We also felt that the only meaningful way to address the issues and challenge underlying assumptions was to define and express a vision, based on relevant beliefs, principles, and premises.

Our urgent desire is that this document be used to begin disciplined dialog, stimulate questions, identify problems, and frame issues that will eventually lead to strategic actions at the local level and in governmental capitols."

The collective talent and experience pool of the readers of LeaderTalk is tremendous.  The input that each of you could provide to this "disciplined dialog" would be invaluable to the Visioning Institute's effort. For the best way to participate, do not leave comments here, rather, follow the suggestions provided within the document itself.  As noted at the front of the publication:

"This edition reflects a revised document format from the initial printing, specifically including space for reader reflections, questions and recommended revisions or additions.  Comments may be submitted to any of the contacts listed on the acknowledgment page."

I know the majority of us agree that the time has come to challenge the status quo and the arbitrary mandates (funded and unfunded), laws, policies, and practices which have blurred the vision and derailed the mission of American Education.  This may be the opportunity many of us have been waiting for...

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world.  Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."  --  Margaret Mead

.

.

.

[1] Disclosure: The SHW Group continues to provide financial support of the Visioning Institute, but they neither seek - nor have - any input or influence regarding the content of any work products coming forward from the Institute.

[2] Disclosure: I have had professional working relationships with four members of the Institute, including one which is a personal friendship of over thirty years.

Turn Off and Tune Out

                  

I am currently sitting in a 40 year old cabin located at 9,800 feet at the base of Wheeler Peak - the highest point in New Mexico.  I wasn't going to do much in the way of blogging for a few weeks, but responsibilities and obligations do continue...and when I discovered that I have access to wifi even here in the Kit Carson National Forest, I had no excuse not to submit my post.

To read more about the technology that I have access to even while on vacation, you might like to read a post I wrote over on The Faculty Room.

In the meantime - and certainly not unaware of the irony, I am writing to remind us (or maybe just myself) that from time to time we need to shut it all down.  Walk away from the technology.  Turn it all off and just tune out for awhile.

Re-Fresh.  Re-New.  Re-Create.  Ourselves.  Naturally.

I saw a t-shirt that said, "SpellCheck cannot fix stupid".  It reminded me that we CAN become over-reliant on the tools of the digital age.  And as much as I'd love to send everyone a Powerpoint full of music and pictures from this beautiful wilderness, it could never take the place of encouraging you to take a drive out to the country and observe the scenery first-hand.

You can watch all the fishing shows you want on the Outdoor Channel - or you can pick up that old rod and reel and head out to your favorite stream, river, or lake.

You can watch all the golf you want on TV this weekend - or you can pick up those clubs collecting dust in the garage and head out to your favorite course.

I can continue to write this post, or I can assume I have made my point and send it in, turn off my laptop, put my iPod, PDA, and cellphone in the drawer and go take a long hike into the beautiful mountains.

Hmmmm, not much choice there.

See y'all when I return to my office in a few weeks!

The humming noise of All Things Technological will now be replaced solely with a totally different and totally natural humming...

                     

Who Is Interviewing Whom?

I remember my high school prom.  I had asked several girls if they would go with me.  They each said they’d love to, but “could they let me know later?”  I wasn’t the brightest crayon in the box, but I knew they were really saying, “I’m waiting to see if Bob (or Bill, or Joe, or Steve…) invites me.”

That’s why I ended up going to the prom with my best friend and “wing man”, JAMES.

A statement that Dan Meyer made in one of his blogs caught my attention.  He is beginning a search for a new job.  He wrote, “Moreover, due to an admixture of experience and arrogance, for the first time in my employment history, I will be interviewing my employers.”

As I thought about that statement I realized that Dan is not being arrogant at all.  In fact, he’s simply openly admitting a growing trend among teachers looking for jobs.   I remember when I would interview a candidate and if I called to offer a job, they were excited, thankful, and accepted the offer on the spot.  Nowadays, it is not uncommon at all for candidates to say “thank you for the offer, but”… (wait for it)…."could they let me know later?”….(ooooh! Shades of my prom!)

There is an understandable shift in the Education Job Market due to three factors: 1) a huge number of educators are either retiring or are eligible for retirement; 2) 35% of teachers leave the career after 5 years; and 3) there is a shortage of certain fields – specifically Math and Science – in which income opportunities are higher in the private marketplace.

As the pool of HIGHLY QUALIFIED applicants shrinks and demand rises, we have a situation straight out of Basic Economics 101.  There are more open jobs than there are qualified applicants.  The competition for hiring is now taking place between districts, not applicants.  What benefits do we offer?  How does our pay compare?  What is the condition of our buildings?

We have a question on our on-line application which asks applicants:  What three things would you most want to know about the students with whom you will work? I logged into the applicant bank and randomly read how 63 applicants answered this question.  It gave an interesting snapshot of what applicants might be using as their criteria for choosing a position.

The most common answer was that they wanted to know about socioeconomic make-up and past test scores.  The third most common response was about the level of parental involvement.

I’m fairly sure that many of us still end our interviews with some type of question such as, “So do you have any questions for us?”  There was a time when the vast majority of applicants would smile and shake their heads “no”.  Or they MIGHT ask timidly, in a voice shaking with apprehension and anxiety, “When do you anticipate filling the position?”   Those days are long gone.  I had an interview last year and when I asked if the applicants had any questions, they ALL did, but one applicant pulled out a LIST and we spent another hour answering her inquiries.

Colleagues, we are in competition for the best teachers.  And Dan is 100% correct: WE are the ones being interviewed by the applicants.

So…

I thought it would be enlightening, beneficial – and fun – to interview Dan Meyer.  I wanted to see how our interviewing styles would meet both of our expectations.

For role-playing purposes, imagine that Dan and I have been interviewing for about 20 minutes.  I’ve already reviewed the basics – resume, application, past education and employment…the small talk is out of the way…and here’s where we pick up….

[Actual Transcript - Interview via Email Q&A.]

Mr. Farr:  Mr. Meyer, what has brought you to this point in your career?

Mr. Meyer:  Over one great high school, one good high school, and a great teacher education program, I've determined the kind of environment I need to do my best work as a teacher  I'm here to find if yours is that environment and if I'm the guy to do that work for you.

Mr. Farr:  Well, that's an honest statement.  Sounds like we are both on a mission to find the best.  I know the basics from your application, but tell me, if you had your pick, which specific classes and at what level would you choose to teach?

Mr. Meyer:  I'm most interested in remedial level Algebra and Geometry.

Mr. Farr:  Tell me, how are you defining remedial?  Special education qualified?  Failed past classes?  Failed past mandated testing?

Mr. Meyer:  I'd like to work with students for whom traditional instruction and first measures have proven unsuccessful.  That could mean special education but mostly I'd like the challenge of students who, for whatever reason, are repeating the class.

Mr. Farr:  This being an alternative high school, I appreciate that you understand that "traditional" instruction doesn't work for everyone.  In your opinion, what causes most of these students to struggle or fail the first time around?  And based on that observation, what modifications, accommodations, or alternative methods have you found effective?

Mr. Meyer: It was important for me to realize that the way we traditionally assess math students is broken.  We build towards large tests which every student but the indoctrinated either stresses over, schedules absences around, or cheats on, and then, after that grade has been assigned, we move on.  Assessment needs to flex to and remain current with a learner's understanding of the course, not stand with its arms crossed in the way of it.  I also noticed very recently that the extra time I put into engaging activities, interesting problems, and real-world relevance came back to me ten-fold with fewer disciplinary problems and a happier class.  That realization has taken me 90% of the way to becoming the teacher I want to be.

Mr. Farr:  Cynical, but true.  So why assess at all?  Can you describe a form of assessment that you have used in your classroom that meets your expectations for feedback about the student's comprehension?  And most important to me, what do you do with the results of the assessments?

Mr. Meyer:  I've divided my courses into discrete skills.  I rank my students along a four point scale for each skill.  I keep a loose grip on those rankings.  My students can always improve them and I use them to direct my remediation, to tell me where to focus my efforts.

Mr. Farr:  Dan, I have followed you on your blog, and I've read your application and resume.  I sense that you would be an excellent addition to this staff, but I want to go back to your opening statement, what you said about determining if this environment is where you want to work.  What are looking for?  And I'd appreciate you being very specific…is it the facility?...the demographics?...your potential co-horts?...me?...  What are you looking at and for?

Mr. Meyers:  I have a long list of preferences, wants, and needs, some more pressing than others, all of which I've posted, stupidly probably, on my blog.  The most important of these is that my district believes that a teacher's work can and should be assessed meaningfully, that the culture there offers few excuses for the failure of its students, and that I find there a long menu of professional development options — seminars, speakers, and collaboration days.

Mr. Farr:  We are huge on the professional development issue.  So far our district has 58 professional development sessions available to sign up for this summer and into the Fall.  This doesn’t include a whole book of opportunities available through the Educational Service Center which is a ten minute drive from my office.  We have had Phillip Schlechty, Gary Gordon, and Doug Reeves here for training, and next month we have Dr. Marzano spending time with us. 

We have a program called Action Learning Teams – ALTs – which are teams of teachers who are given 5 days each year to meet and work together in collaboration with teachers from other disciplines, grade levels, or schools.

I think you'd fit here.  I think I'd like to work with you.  What about you?  Would you take the job if it was offered?

Mr. Meyers: It sounds like our values align closely, which is great, and really encouraging.  I'd like to spend an hour touring a few math classrooms, speaking to your math department head, and talking to a student or two.   After that, let's talk about how soon I can get a place in your faculty parking lot.

--------------------------------------------*-----------------------------------------

What I found was that the interview worked better as a conversation.  I also took a more pro-active role in trying to conduct the interview in an effort to communicate the fact that I did consider this a two-way interview.  I tried to communicate and allow for the fact that I realized HE was interviewing ME as much I was interviewing him.

I am embarrassed to admit it.  Working for a district considered among the best, I may have been guilty of a cocky attitude with applicants at times.  I admit I might have taken a condescending attitude toward applicants…“Sit down and impress me.  Why should I hire YOU?”  “You’ll be lucky if we honor you by inviting you to work here.”  [Harrumph!  Such nerve in my younger days!  I apologize to all within reading distance for this...]

As applicants are in a position to “shop schools” and students are being given more and more of a choice of moving between schools depending on the school’s rating, we find ourselves in a new role.  No longer can we just sit back and expect teachers and students to come to us regardless of how clean our buildings are, how well the grounds are kept, or what neighborhood we’re located in.

The marketplace has changed.  If we, as potential employers, are not aware of the fact that the rules have changed, we will not attract and keep the best teachers.  We have to sell our districts, our schools, and even ourselves to potential candidates.  If we don’t, the best and brightest will interview at the next district on their list.

Although I really think my interview skills are much more polite and even – shall we say – more politically correct now, I want to thank Dan Meyer for driving the final nail home.  He’s right on the target.  I will approach all interviews from now on from a totally different perspective.

Interviews are no longer One-Way-Impress-Me-Sessions after which we offer someone a job and expect them to act like they won the lottery.

Today’s interviews must be two-way conversations in which BOTH parties have a great deal at stake: putting the right people in the right places for the right reasons.

The ultimate goal of every interview, job offer and eventual hiring must always be offering the very best instruction to all students in all schools.

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!

Allow Me A Rebuttal Please

Having just been complimented by being told that my last post might be among the most stupid education ideas ever heard (and that's high praise indeed considering some of the really idiotic ideas of our educational system!)…I would like to be given the opportunity to reply with a second post and ask that others join in. Am I truly that far out on a limb that I have no supporters on this issue?

In a quick 2 punch combination, two comments were posted to my last post. I ask to be allowed a second post to hopefully draw the debate out of the back channels of comments and into the light of a full post.

For the first comment by Scott, if by “desired state” you meant a objective target as an IDEAL GOAL with no negative consequences attached if missed, I might agree with you. Unfortunately, the reality will become that any student who doesn’t complete high school in 48 months will be labeled a drop-out. That will certainly become one more factor to discourage a “stop-out” from returning. Where did we ever get the notion that all the learning needed to qualify for a diploma should be crammed into a 4 year period?

As far as schools that “aren’t doing a very good job” of getting all students to learn everything within a tight time constraint…what are we judging really?...the quality of the teaching or the speed at which we can push students through the system? Are you being true and consistent to the “timelessness” of Web 2.0 – wherein learning becomes a life-long endeavor? I thought we had agreed through informal consensus long ago within the posts of Leadertalk that learning should no longer be tied to constraints such as books, walls, and clocks.

Pursuing education in today’s world should make the entire idea of “dropping out” a meaningless term. Surrounded by opportunities to learn and acquire knowledge in a unique-tear-down-the-school-walls environment should mean that we don’t drop-out until we drop-dead.

As to the second comment...Fred: first of all, your statement of a birth-to-burial plan is one of the best summaries of precisely what I think learning and acquiring knowledge SHOULD become! Perhaps graduation HAS become an outdated concept when we define learning as a “lifelong endeavor”. However, you miss one important point, yes, I do feel learning should be TIMELESS, but I never said optional....Although, in reality, the concept of a K-12 education HAS become optional. Depending on which state you live in, you CAN quit at 16, 17, or 18 years of age…you CAN quit before you actually receive a diploma. That makes a diploma by definition "optional"

What I am arguing for is a redefinition of learning and a hard second look at ever putting any type of “END POINT” on the act of learning. If this is a truly stupid idea, then I need to re-evaluate years of working with at-risk youth who become tremendously successful learners after 4, 5, 6, 7…..YEARS of starting, stopping, starting, stopping...

Learning should never be held to the arbitrary constraints of clocks or calendars. I thought we had moved far beyond restricting the learning process to such restraints.

Receiving A Diploma Should Be A Non-Timed Event

[Some portions of this post were originally published on The Faculty Room and Farbucks]

The world of drop-out prevention (in which I've spent my career) is about to become even more murky, complicated, and down right unfair if Secretary Spelling’s definition of a drop-out becomes the official standard within NCLB.

For those who are tracking the progress of various committees, summits, legislation, and assorted proposals, it has pretty much boiled down to an Accepted-By-Consensus definition of a drop-out being anyone who starts school in September of their freshman year and does not graduate by May four years later.

Stop and think about that.

The implications are huge. We are no longer really talking about drop-outs with a terminology that makes sense to me. We are now on the verge of defining drop-outs as students who cannot complete a prescribed series of classes and credits within a 48 month window. If – as it is in many states – students have been allowed to remain eligible for public education until the age of 21, wouldn’t it make sense to define a true drop-out as anyone who hasn’t graduated by that age? Yes, that gives a student up to 7 years to complete a diploma. Is that a problem?

As I recently discussed in a post to The Big Idea: When I break down the numbers, as I do for every quarter, every year, I consistently find the following: the point at which students stop-out is at an average of 15 credits. (This is on a 24 credit plan. Fifteen credits equates to a point in their first semester of their Junior year.) The age at which students apply to the alternative program averages out as 17.5 years of age. It is consistently the last two years of high school when students who have been hanging on as best they can suddenly hit the brick wall.

Without meaning to over-simplify a very complicated picture, I consistently hear four typical stories when I interview students:

1. They have fallen behind because of poor attendance or failing classes. Regardless of the cause, be it lack of motivation, poor health, frustration with the way material is being taught, academic ability, or a mismatch of learning style with typical lesson delivery; these students miss too much school and/or fail classes. Their friends are moving ahead. For many of them, most of their peer group graduates on time, leaving those who have fallen behind feeling frustrated, alone, and inadequate.
2. This is also the time when many start to work part-time jobs. Many of the students I interview have no choice. Their family's economic situation requires them to work. (And when I say part-time, that is really inaccurate - I have students working 35 hours a week, often with outrageous hours that allows them to finally get home and in bed by 1 or 2 am.)
3. Add to this that many students are getting their first driver's license, and you have a set-up for a spiraling disintegration from skipping a class, to failing the class, to skipping longer periods, to not turning in work, to skipping whole days, to eventually falling behind to the point that the student sees no point in finishing the semester … then the year …then high school altogether.
4. Another issue that I encounter (increasingly) is that the students have become frustrated with the testing and State law that requires passing all four sections (math, lang arts, science, and social studies) of the TAKS test before they can receive their diploma. Over 85% of the students enrolled each quarter for the past few quarters have failed at least one part of the test. There is absolutely no question that the high stakes testing required by the State and NCLB is pushing students out of school. Frankly, I have never seen one act of the Federal government leave as many kids behind as does No Child Left Behind!

The good news is that virtually all of the students who have stopped-out and come in for a second chance are successful. For many students the time away from school has actually been good for them. Most students who stop-out do not turn to drugs and crime or a life of complete hopelessness. The students who have stopped out are for the most part working, taking care of family, or simply searching alternatives such as GED or jobs with apprenticeships. Invariably, they discover many things about themselves, the economy, and how no one ever said life was fair. When they come in to re-start their education, there is generally a new maturity and new inner-motivation to complete school.

So why not somehow formalize this process and eliminate the stigma of stopping-out of school for a year or two? One of the most effective ways to reduce the "drop-out rate" is to really look at the individual situations many of today's students find themselves dealing with. Many students simply need more than 4 years to obtain a diploma. Start using the term "stop-out" and build within the educational system a safe haven which allows students to come in and out, stop and restart as their circumstances allow.

Forcing EVERY student to earn a diploma in 4 years denies the reality of the world in which today's adolescent lives.  Some students simply need more time to master the competencies expected.  Earning a diploma should be a non-timed event.