THE INSTITUTE for Learning Centered Education NEWSLETTER

Edition #6  January 3, 2000

TOPIC: The Importance of MODELING (or, Practicing what we Preach by Not Preaching It)

I attended a conference, ten years ago, and spent two days listening to lectures on the need for teachers to be interactive in the classroom. We were told to utilize cooperative learning strategies and we were told not to make the learner a passive recipient of information.

Think about it: The strategy we were instructed not to use in the classroom (lecture) was the primary strategy modeled for us throughout our two days at the workshop.

I challenge you, no matter what your role in the field of education, to think about these questions:

If you are an administrator, do the workshops you offer for teachers model the strategies that teachers need to employ in a standards focused classroom? Or, are teachers asked to be passive recipients of knowledge?

Are your staff meetings conducted as you would like teachers to conduct classrooms?

If you are a consultant or a staff developer, do your workshops for Boards of Education and administrators, model the strategies you want these people to encourage their teachers to utilize?

If you are in the State Education Department, do most of the conferences and meetings you sponsor model the strategies the department is encouraging teachers to use in the classroom?

How many workshops either sponsored by State Ed., planned by administrators, or run by staff developers, begin by listing the standards and indicators they want met by the end of the workshop? Is this far fetched? If teachers should have specific standards and indicators in mind when they teach a lesson, shouldn¹t conference and workshop and meeting planners do the same thing? Wouldn¹t it help us all to learn how to use standards and indicators in the classroom, if we saw standards and indicators listed for workshops we attended?

What I am suggesting is difficult. I realize it is not easy to model, at a conference, the strategies we want teachers to use in the classroom.
When I attended the two days of lectures, ten years ago, I respected the workshop presenters. I did not come away critical of them for not modeling the cooperative learning practices they were encouraging. I came away recognizing that if these excellent presenters had to lecture on the need to be interactive in the classroom, it must be damned difficult to model it. 

But we must move in that direction. We learn through being immersed in the content we are expected to understand.

The point is finally being accepted (slowly) that the skills and strategies needed for a standards-based approach to student learning are not acquired, by a teacher, through participation in a one, two or three day workshop. A teacher may be excellent, but if he/she excels at lecturing, it  is not easy to become proficient with portfolios, cooperative learning, journals, reflective practices, parental involvement, addressing the needs of students with disabilities, or any of the other strategies that are required of a teacher who truly wants to address new State standards.

Ask any teacher who has gained proficiency with even one of the strategies referred to above, and they will tell you it was a multi-year journey of trial and error, workshops, collegial dialogue and research before they became comfortable with their ability to use the strategy with any degree of frequency.

We must recognize that nothing complex is learned at one lecture, in one sitting, at one workshop, or as the result of any single factor. If you are proficient at any of the aforementioned inter-active teaching strategies, chances are you would have difficulty citing all of the experiences that added up to the point at which you felt self confident with that strategy.

One of the best ways to augment the learning of all of us who are engaged in education reform is to immerse us in environments where we can observe (through modeling) the concepts and strategies we are expected to  adopt.

We will expedite the process of creating standards-focused classrooms if every meeting, every conference, and every workshop we attend highlights the standards and indicators to be addressed, and models the teaching strategies that we want utilized in our classrooms.

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at mesibov@northnet.org.

 ++++++++++Index++++++++++HOME++++++++++

 

THE INSTITUTE for Learning Centered Education NEWSLETTER

Edition # 7  January 10, 2000

TOPIC: A Simple Suggestion for Supporting Poorer Performing Schools through an Administrative Subsidy
Would anyone deny the importance of the building principal in bringing about systemic change?

As I reflect on over 200 schools I’ve worked with, in depth, over the past 12 years I have created two columns (for my graphic organizer): in the left column I’ve listed the schools in the order in which I perceive we’ve achieved some measure of systemic reform to improve student achievement. In the column on the right, I have listed the principals with whom I have worked in terms of their commitment to reform, their understanding of the strategies involved in standards-based education, and their leadership skills.

Would it surprise you if I indicated a direct correlation between the schools I rated the best, and the quality of support from the building administrator?

I know that few of you would disagree with my premise that the building principal is a key player in school reform initiatives.

Therefore, I would like to make a simple proposal to the State Education Department, the legislature, the Governor, or whoever is in a position to enact this proposal. I think there is one simple, do-able step that can be taken to equalize the opportunities for students in lower performing schools.

If we recognize the importance of the building administrator, hopefully we also recognize the irony that our poorer performing schools have greater difficulty attracting quality administrators than our better performing schools. Where the need is the greatest for quality leadership, the potential for attracting it is the least.

(Caveat: I recognize there are many educators who are doing outstanding work at poorer performing schools and we are fortunate for those of you who are willing and able to remain in such a situation. You are usually the people who explain to me, with frustration, the difficulty of attracting similarly able colleagues to administrative positions in your own district. So I know you recognize the problem and also realize that I am admiring you as the exception, not stereotyping you as a poor administrator. )

If ever we had a case of the rich getting richer, it is with administrative talent. Poorer performing schools are almost always in communities where the average educational and economic levels of the adults are lower. These districts have less money to attract able candidates and less community support for recognizing and attracting quality administrative candidates.

Poorer performing schools are often in areas which are perceived as less attractive by potential administrators.

If a district has less money to offer a potential candidate and, also, has a living environment candidates will not find as attractive as neighboring towns, how does it compete?

It doesn’t. It can’t. Unless it gets lucky and finds an individual with roots in the area who wants to stay, or finds that unique individual (like some of you who are reading this) who, for whatever reason, will remain with the district, it is forced to hire candidates that other districts will not accept. Or, it must gamble on someone who is inexperienced. If the inexperienced administrator doesn’t work out, the district has lost. If the inexperienced administrator turns out to be a gem, within a year or two the district often loses this administrator as he/she steps “up” to a position in a better paying community.

I admire the many steps being undertaken by the State to support schools with low performing students. Proposals in the Governor’s package to enable districts to hire teachers (with a subsidy), and proposals to fund the utilization of university students as tutors are also steps in the right direction. I agree with the intent behind these proposals and what I am about to suggest would be another key ingredient in the effort to equalize educational opportunities.

In my opinion, the most bang for the buck would come from a State subsidy to enable low performing schools to compete for quality administrators. In some cases, only $20,000, added to what a district can reasonably be expected to pay for a new administrator could make the difference for a school with poor performing students, located in an area that most candidates will not find attractive, and with an income level that makes it impossible for the community to offer salaries that would compete with other schools within driving distance.

If we take a look at how much money we already throw at schools in need, and we recognize that no single factor approaches the role of the building principal in terms of influencing the success of a school, we might better shift some of the monies we are already spending and utilize them as our primary means for supporting schools in need.

Perhaps, we should also make such subsidies available to schools, which have difficulty competing for administrative talent because of their economy and/or location even if student performance is satisfactory. Why should they be penalized because they meet minimum standards? Student standards all over could be raised if schools had more support in generating quality, consistent administrative leadership.

Please don’t look too literally at my suggestion for a $20,000 subsidy - that is just an example. The concept I am focused on is that some form of support is necessary to enable schools to compete on an equal footing for a diminishing supply of administrative talent. If my proposal is not acceptable, come up with an alternative. Perhaps potential administrators could be given a one-time bonus for taking a position and remaining for three years in a district that has been designated as being at a disadvantage in competing for administrative talent?

Unless you disagree with the importance of the administrator to a school’s success, and unless you disagree that under performing schools have difficulty competing for quality administrators, I would challenge us all to make it a priority to enable under performing schools to attract and retain high quality administrative talent.

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a message to Don Mesibov at mesibov@northnet.org.

Requests to be dropped from this list will also be honored.

Copyright (c) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All  rights reserved.

 ++++++++++Index++++++++++HOME++++++++++