Affirmation in the Churning Whitewater of Educational Reform

Before finalizing a purchase, stock investors conduct what is known as due diligence. They evaluate a company’s products and services against its competitors, study its balance sheet, and look at various charts and ratios to decide if it is an investment worthy of their hard-earned dollars. Not necessarily so for teachers and principals in public education. Instead, policy makers in concert with experts at all levels, conduct the due diligence to write regulations that educators and administrators are then required to follow. In the recent case of the Common Core State Standards, Data Driven Instruction, and Evidence-Based Observations through Race to the Top, that has been a good thing (not so sure about tying teacher and principal performance to student state assessment results, however). The really good news is all stakeholders are working hard to implement the change, even if they weren’t privy to the due diligence work. One only needs to spend time with P-20 educators to see the hard work happening across the state.

Fortunately for me, I get to see great educators and leaders at work frequently in my job, and last week was particularly favorable for such observations.

Tuesday, AM: High School Presentation on Understanding by Design and Lesson Planning using Backwards Design.

Tuesday, PM: SUNY Plattsburgh at Queensbury Seminar Series for Student Teachers on Common Core Instructional Shifts in Literacy

Wednesday, Full Day: edTPA in New York Implementation Conference

Thursday, AM: Principals as Instructional Leaders Seminar Series (SUNY Plattsburgh at Queensbury and WSWHE BOCES Partnership Project)

Thursday, PM: New York Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Reception and Dinner

Friday, AM: Teachers as Instructional Leaders Seminar Series (SUNY Plattsburgh at Queensbury and WSWHE BOCES Partnership Project)

Granted, I wear rose-colored glasses, but the events of this past work week clearly show significant progress in our efforts to raise student achievement. On Monday, I visited a small rural high school in upstate New York and was greeted by an audience of teachers in black t-shirts sporting a Wordle design celebrating their roles as teachers. Their solidarity spoke volumes of the dedication to each other and the children they teach, and our review of UBD led to a spirited discussion on  daily lesson planning and student achievement. The teachers greatest concern was writing detailed lesson plans while learning and implementing new curriculum modules and data driven instruction. There is plenty on their proverbial plates. Later that afternoon, I met with 25 student teachers and field supervisors to discuss and model some of the Common Core Instructional Shifts for Literacy. We covered each shift, but practiced text-based answers, academic vocabulary, and building knowledge in the disciplines. Ending the day with young, ambitious future teachers was very nice indeed.

Lest we forget the stressors on the higher ed community, on Wednesday I joined 250 other university and college professors and administrators to learn how best to roll out the edTPA. As we know, future teachers will be required to pass more rigorous exams and complete performance assessments that ask for descriptive, analytic, and reflective thinking and writing on their videotaped lessons. The edTPA demonstrates the value of assessing teachers’ capacities to thoughtfully process their pedagogy against standards of effective teaching. The complexities of rolling out edTPA can not be understated. However, at the edTPA in New York Implementation Conference, my colleagues and I got to see first hand the success stories of early edTPA pilots in colleges and universities spanning the state. It’s working! It’s hard, and it’s messy. However, if you are a fan of authentic, clinically rich self-assessments, then you do what’s necessary to make edTPA work. Another great day.

On Thursday, SUNY Plattsburgh at Queensbury launched the Principals as Instructional Leaders Seminar Series in partnership with WSWHE BOCES. 17 school administrators showed up for the first of a yearlong series of seminars and group research studies that focus on developing instructional leadership skills. Despite their frenetic schedules, these busy school administrators joined together to seek strategies and supports as instructional leaders, and we’re hopeful the content of our seminars and the research each group will conduct around data-driven instruction, common core instructional shifts and standards, and cultivating teacher leadership will meet their needs. Most importantly, we expect the seminars will provide opportunity for sharing ideas, asking questions, problem solving, and networking that otherwise would be unavailable to busy school administrators. Later that evening, I joined other invited members of the Professional Standards and Practices Board for a NYACTE Reception and Dinner, highlighted with Presentation of the New York State Teacher of the Year Award to Ashli Skura Dreher.  The evening ended with an uplifting presentation by Ashli on her deeply held and success-proven convictions that all students will learn. Another great ending.

Friday brought together a small group of seven teachers chosen by their superintendents to participate in the SUNY Plattsburgh at Queensbury Teachers as Instructional Leaders Seminar Series in partnership with WSWHE BOCES. The teachers began arriving at noon, though we weren’t officially scheduled to start till 12:30. What energy these folks have! As with the principals who participated in Thursdays seminar, these folks signed up for the series in spite of their workloads and lack of time. Most interestingly, when asked what their greatest fear was as instructional leaders, their concern was that the Common Core Standards would change. It wasn’t things like, “I’m worried about credibility from my colleagues,” or “I don’t know if I have the skills and understandings to be an instructional leader.” Instead, they simply hope there are no more changes. They want to get Common Core, DDI, and Evidence Based Observations right! Hopefully, this seminar series will help them realize their goals. And so ended a very busy, exciting, affirming week.

P-20 educators understand all too well the “churning waters” analogy as the weight of omnipresent forces impact teachers, principals, teacher assistants, superintendents, higher ed faculty, deans of education, student teachers, and most importantly, our children. Despite the chaotic nature of reform and the fact that few were invited to do the due diligence and “sign up” for the changes, most are committed to the Common Core State Standards and concomitant instructional shifts, data-driven instruction, and evidence-based observations. However, most are also frantically clawing to keep their heads above water as they grapple to adapt to the new and seemingly ever-changing landscape.  And they don’t want to “Wait five years till something new is in place.” To my P-20 colleagues, I say “Hang on.” “Don’t let go.” It’s extremely challenging, and at times imperfect, work. Still, steady progress is being made which will ultimately best serve our students and this great nation.

“Tickets” to Meaningful Teacher-Principal Discussions on Instruction

Neil Young, Willie Nelson, John Mellancamp, Dave Matthews,….. Wow! Farm Aid is coming to Saratoga Springs! We got the tickets months ago, and today we’ll be going with a group of 12 family members and friends. The tickets will get us in the venue along with 24,998 other folks, all of whom will attend for the same reasons: to enjoy the music, celebrate local farmers, and chill for an afternoon. There is no hierarchy among the mass of people. Age, gender, occupation, musical preference, food choices, etc… matter not. Everyone who purchased their ticket to access the event will come to hear good music and support a good cause.

Having a ticket levels the playing field, allowing the ticket holder to cross boundaries. In the case of the concert, the boundary is the entrance gate. But what about schools? How do principals cross boundaries with teachers to gain access to deep, meaningful discussions on instructional issues? How does the building leader cast aside their supervisory role as lead evaluator to get at the level of instruction? Just what are the tickets that allow principals to cross the boundary separating them from their staff to have relevant discussions regarding classroom instruction and student learning?

“Tickets” are boundary objects which Wenger (1998) defines as “Artifacts, documents, terms, concepts, and other forms of reification around which communities of practice can organize their interconnections” (p. 105). Boundary object are tangible items individuals use to cross boundaries between groups. For building principals, boundary objects are relevant items which promote professional conversations with teachers about curriculum, instruction and student learning. Star and Griesemer (1989) define boundary objects as “objects of interest.” Objects of interest for teachers include student writing folders, student work samples, assessment results, best practices, and curriculum maps, and savvy principals know their value in engaging meaningful discussions with teachers.

Years ago I used to hold weekly meetings with grade level teams at Glens Falls Middle School, and I remember the most significant and worthwhile sessions were those involving student work samples, curriculum maps, assessment results, best practices, and book discussions. During those meetings everyone got fully engrossed in the material. Rather than bemoaning the required time with their curriculum coordinator, the team and I talked about student learning. Those were the meetings that ended too quickly, the “where did the time go?” meetings which built value and credibility for the team time and my role as curriculum coordinator.

As we progress deeper into the 2013-14 school year, now is the time to bring greater conversation into principal-teacher meetings. It is time to firm up the calendar so meetings are scheduled well in advance, and it is time to identify the boundary objects to be used in such meetings. Whether the “ticket” is a common core instructional shift best practice, inventory assessment results and action planning template, student work, curriculum map with tier 1, 2, and 3 vocabulary identified, or an example of a teaching best practice, it’s imperative that everyone has a ticket to the venue.

Peace.

Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387-387-420. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/61062484?accountid=13645

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.

2012/2013 Was A School Year Like No Other. Now What?

What a year! New job. New colleagues. New divisions. New classes to teach. New protocols for hiring, creating budgets, evaluations,……  New terminology, acronyms, and policies. New internal and external politics. New networks. New knowledge, skills, and expectations. All in all, it was a whirlwind of change packed into 12 months, and only now am I catching my breath. In fact, yesterday was the first time in 12 months I made the time to delve into the growing pile of files and folders scattered in different areas of my office. What a glorious feeling to churn through the materials, sorting some into new and glossy folders complete with typed labels, while discarding others in the recycling bin, thinking through the process, “I survived.” I know the job better now. I understand the expectations and the resources I have at my disposal. I’ve worked hard, earned respect, made mistakes, and tried to make a difference to the institution. Always looking through the lens of P-12 education, I appreciate the similarities of my first year experience with those of every P-12 educator and administrator who grappled with a state-wide reform agenda.

Public education was at times crazed this past year with new expectations, new curricula, new assessments, new ways of evaluating teachers and principals, new observation protocols, new performance management systems, new resources, and the list goes on. Teacher and principals had to write Student Learning Objectives, understand the HEDI Scale, implement Common Core Standards and concomitant Instructional Shifts, ready students for higher stakes state tests, use new inventory and progress monitoring assessments, conduct classroom evaluations, implement DASA, and do many other “new” things associated with Race to the Top. The challenges were at times overwhelming for building principals and teachers, but through the process, the status quo was turned on its head–and that’s not a bad thing.

With the year under our proverbial belts, it’s time to step back and reflect on all we’ve accomplished and plan what’s next in the cycle. For me, it will be to expand on the skills I just learned this previous year, and to make better those that require fixing. My classes will certainly be more structured and coherent as I repackage the syllabi and improve the embedded authentic tasks. Understanding more about how the system works, including development of budgets, evaluation tools, and the intricacies of SUNY-SED communications, I’m looking forward to expanding the visibility of our programs and Branch Campus culture (Which is pretty darn good already). We’ll also grow new partnerships, extend our services to the region, and fulfill our vision and mission statement. To do my best work, I’ll use the SUNY Plattsburgh Campus Plan 2018 for guidance and direction.

For public school educators, this is the year to fully assimilate Data-Driven Instruction into the regular school routine. It will be a year to refine common core curricula, implement the EngageNY curriculum modules, stay sharp doing evidence-based observations through inter-rater reliability training, create quality SLOs, and so on. This can also be a year to cultivate career ladders that promote teacher and principal leadership. Meanwhile, to stay focused on what matters and to find the best resources, educators would be wise to access the New York State Metrics & Expectations for 2013-2014 resource. The document defines what district superintendents, principals, network teams, and local superintendents should be doing in the areas of Curriculum, Instruction & Feedback, Data-Driven Instruction, APPR Implementation, and Culture of Safety & Development. People do better when they know better, and kudos to NYSED for clearly articulating what needs to be done and where to find the tools to do good work. Now it’s simply a matter of using the document to continue successfully along the path of school reform.

Peace.

Looking for Landmarks During Times of Change

Open water swimming is a joy for those who regularly swim in pools. No lanes to share. No chlorine or salt to taste. No fluorescent din, and no stale, steamy air. Okay, it’s not quite that bad, but pool swimming can not begin to compare with that of open water. The one significant challenge when swimming out in nature is staying the course–particularly when there is no lifeguard monitoring your safety.  In a pool, lane buoys and painted lines keep you in your lane and prevent swimmers from straying off course. Not so in open water. Swim as you do in the pool with head in water except when taking in a breath and you will end up “who knows where.” In some ways, school reform is analogous to swimming in open water, with vast possibilities as one goes beyond the safe, structured setting of public education into an unknown, and potentially uncomfortable environment of innumerable opportunities.  Getting to a desired destination, the tricky part,  requires faith, knowledge, skills, due diligence, and attention to where you’re headed.

It’s easy to get caught up in the change process and neglect to check one’s position. In open water, the conditioned habits of pool swimming can lead to a circuitous rather than direct path, resulting in greater fatigue and other potential issues. For that reason, experienced open water swimmers regularly lift their heads to sight every 5-9 strokes, looking forward with head out of water to a distant landmark. Each time the head is raised, the landmark is targeted. If off course, subtle changes in stroke direction quickly remedy the swimmer’s path. Failure to sight is analogous to working with blinders on, clueless to changes around us, and inevitably leaving one far off track (Not a good thing whether swimming in a lake or implementing new assessments, curricula, or professional performance review protocols in a school building). For whatever reason, be it fear, perceived or real lack of time, old habits, or other challenges, getting lost in the churn of change is easily done.

Back to the open water swim, it’s relatively easy for the swimmer to monitor and adjust his or her path. Other than occasional chop in the water, keeping track of your landmark is easy. However, for the educator, the process is much, much more complicated and dependent on team work and good leadership. First of all, everyone needs to know what the landmarks are in the action plan process. What are the goals in the reform effort? Secondly, people need the skills, knowledge, and incentives to target those landmarks. Open water swimmers don’t venture beyond shoreline without good technique and aerobic capacity. Unfortunately, the same can’t always be said for educators ill prepared to grapple with complex change required in the reform effort. Last but not least, educators need time. Time to lift their heads and check out their surroundings. Time to perfect their technique and capacity, and time to celebrate the progress being made in their concerted efforts.

As school winds down, summer is the perfect season to create purposeful action plans that clearly identify desired results (landmarks), ensure sustained quality professional development (technique and capacity), and build in regularly scheduled times to monitor and adjust progress (sighting on landmarks). Oh, and it’s also a great time to get out to the water for a refreshing swim.

Data-Driven Instruction and The Stories Data Tell

There is a wonderful video by Hans Rosling that tells a richly informative and entertaining story about global health growth over the past 200 years. The video is so good that I use it as a hook whenever I do a session on data-driven instruction. In his video, Rosling used 100,000 data points to show how lifespans in various countries have changed over time in response to improving economies, industrialization, world wars, pandemics, and other global events. It’s a fascinating four-minute presentation that vividly shows how data can be used to tell a story. That’s right, the data told a story. In Rosling’s case, the story was about global health. But what about the data stories within school systems? Are we using our district, school, or classroom data to tell stories people need to hear?

Data-Driven Instruction is one of Race to the Top’s “Big Three” deliverables in New York State, combining with Teacher and Principal Effectiveness and Common Core State Standards to shape students’ College and Career Readiness. Data-Driven Instruction (DDI) could easily be reworded, Data-Driven Action, for that is what DDI calls us to do: take action based on the data. It seems so simple. Gather data from the district, school or classroom level. Study the data. Talk with others about the data. Ask “Why” and “How” questions from the analyses. Look deeper at the data. Make action plans to address what the data tells us. Have smart and skilled people monitor the action plans. Go back and look at more data after a set amount of time. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.

Of the three deliverables, DDI has yet to gain traction in New York schools. As one Race to the Top Network Team member told me recently regarding DDI, “Most schools are assessing. Some schools are analyzing. Few schools are acting.” Given the breakneck speed of the Regents Reform Agenda and its concomitant pressures on school districts, educators and administrators have had to prioritize their efforts. Teacher and principal observation protocols, Common Core Standards, creation of Annual Professional Performance Review Plans, and development of Student Learning Objectives have all but consumed people’s time and energy, leaving DDI as the little white elephant in the room waiting for its turn.

I’m extremely hopeful for next year as we draw the 2012/2013 school year to a close. We’ve had many bumps along the road. Tears have been shed, and fear mongering and politicking have at times exacerbated the legitimate struggles of school reform. However, next year will be different. We now know how to (and how not to) write Student Learning Objectives. We’ve learned how to conduct more objective, evidence-based observations. We understand better what the common core instructional shifts look like, and we’re rewriting assessments to better measure student progress in our brave new world. Next year will be better. Best of all, we will have the time and skills to look deeply at our data and tell the stories we all need to hear for the longterm success of our children and communities. People do better when they know better, and so it goes with Data-Driven Instruction.

Rethinking Student State Assessments as Measures of Teacher/Principal Effectiveness

I don’t think you’ll find many opposing high accountability for teachers and principals. Public school education is just too important for our nation’s future to do otherwise. However, the devil is in the details. How does one go about finding valid and reliable measures that are fool-proof? Evidence based observations of teachers and principals by calibrated evaluators are important components to a robust Annual Professional Performance Review process, but can we say the same about student achievement on state measures? Depends on who you speak with, but for a small but growing group of parents, the answer may be a resounding “No.”

The notion of parents choosing to opt out of state tests hit the press in our region of New York recently, and regardless of the legality of such actions, the movement has raised some interesting points. Some parents complain their children are stressed out by tests used to rate teachers as highly effective, effective, developing and ineffective, and a few are threatening to move their children to private schools. Others cite the lost instructional time and resources to prepare, conduct, and grade the assessments, and would rather have their children learning during those days. It’s all so very complicated and makes one wonder if there exists a better way to keep standards high for our educators and administrators while maximizing the quality of instruction and programs for students.

Here’s a thought. What if instead of using student test scores to evaluate teacher and principal effectiveness, we were to use teacher and principal test scores and evidence binders? In so doing, we’d relieve the at times intense focus and pressure on students for success on state assessments. Think of the savings in time and resources. There would be more time for quality instruction, and more monies for student intervention programs, professional development, curriculum work, data-driven instruction systems, and the necessary staff to support such efforts. Rather than test students, we’d ask teachers and principals every five years to take a rigorous test and submit evidence that they remain effective and viable in the classroom or building they work in. No more isolated cheating scandals. No more confounding elements of behavioral responses to Value-Added high stakes testing (See footnote 1).  We’d still keep evidence-based observation systems going in our schools because we know they work, but we’d take out the pressure laden focus on student achievement tied to the Annual Professional Performance Review. There still would be a need for rigorous common-core aligned summative assessments, but with a much different focus (The old model tied student achievement to school success).

Basically, what we’re talking about is renewable tenure. Tenure is a time-honored recognition by school boards of teacher and principal competency and professionalism, and is earned through hard work, perseverance, and demonstration of knowledge and skills. It is essentially a life-time contract between institution and individual. Having a system that honors tenure while ensuring every professional maintains their knowledge and skills over time through rigorous assessments would do much for the profession. Perhaps more so than tying professional performance to student tests. By asking educators and principals to maintain their tenure through five-year testing and evidence-based artifacts, we take the burden of proof off students and place it on the backs of our adult professionals. If a teacher has demonstrated strong content knowledge, literacy skills, and awareness of student development and various learning needs, and if that teacher has been consistently deemed effective in the classroom by a calibrated evaluator, than what more evidence is necessary to assure everyone that the teacher has the skills and understandings to teach? The same rules and logic would apply to principals. Who knows? It just might work. At the very least, it takes the pressure off students.

“I Teach Science Through Reading and Writing.” Yes, But…

With a greater focus on rigor and depth over breadth, the Common Core State Standards have transformed what gets taught in this great nation’s schools. In Race to the Top states, nowadays you can not attend a professional development workshop, conference, or webinar without coming across the terms, “literacy,” “fluency,” “next generation assessments,” or “Annual Professional Performance Review.” Unfortunately, such an important yet at times myopic focus has its casualties. Have we “Thrown the baby out with the bath water,” particularly when it comes to inquiry-based elementary science?

In a former life I served as a District Science Coordinator, working closely with all teachers of science, particularly elementary teachers who sometimes saw science as threatening and bothersome. Threatening due to a lack of content knowledge by the teacher, and bothersome for the required preparation of materials and subsequent cleanup following science laboratory activities. For some of our teachers, other than the traditional butterfly metamorphosis unit or beans in the ziplock bag taped to the glass windows, science was something you had students read or write about with books. These problems are only being exacerbated in some Race to the Top states today.

With a laser-like focus on literacy and the high stakes nature of assessments and teacher Annual Professional Performance Reviews, I am fearful scientific inquiry is going the way of the dodo bird. At the expense of having children analyze, inquire, and design, we are instead having students closely read text, write from multiple sources, develop mathematical fluency, and ready themselves for next generation assessments. I’m a big-time fan of the common core instructional shifts, and teachers can and must practice them regularly, but not completely at the expense of inquiry-based science. Fortunately, there are some outstanding resources available to maintain fidelity to the common core shifts while honoring children’s naturally inquiring minds about the scientific world.

Back to my former work as a Science Director, to address the threatening and bothersome aspects of elementary science instruction, our district adopted the National Resources Council’s Science and Technology for Children (STC) Program. The constructive, literacy-embedded nature of STC kits ensured students the opportunity to analyze, inquire and design experiments while also developing their reading, writing, and speaking skills. Teachers had a nicely contained set of plastic boxes containing all necessary materials and equipment (For our students, kit arrival day was like Santa Claus coming down the chimney. They were so excited!). Most importantly, each teacher got a fully articulated teacher’s guide along with a full day of professional development on how to use the kit. Remarkably, within three years, our K-6 teachers were doing three kits a year (Each kit had 16 lessons) and a service through BOCES that replenished all materials!

There are other kit programs out there for educators to use. A colleague recently told me about the Engineering is Elementary Program that embeds engineering and technology into engaging elementary science activities. I’ve also heard good things about the Full Option Science System (FOSS) curriculum and Great Explorations in Math and Science (GEMS) kits. There are others as well. The point is our children deserve the chance to learn and study the natural and physical world through activity, and though a balanced approach to literature and informational text has added science content to the elementary classroom, children still need to act and play the role of scientist. Children learn in so many ways when left to their own devices to study scientific phenomena, whether it be forces (wind, elastic, gravitational) that propel a Lego sports car or factors that promote growth of Wisconsin Fast Plants. So, though I’m thankful you teach science through reading and writing, please be sure students have weekly opportunities for scientific inquiry. You won’t be disappointed with the results.

Staying Dry in the Churning Waters of School Reform

I enjoy paddling the waters of the Adirondack Mountains in my 17-foot Wenonah canoe. The serenity and peacefulness of a quiet mountain lake are unparalleled, and it’s easy to get lost in the moment. Years ago I enjoyed a faster pace on the white waters of the Hudson and Sacandaga Rivers, but even then great joy could be found in the lazier stretches where white water yields to quiet pools and eddies. It’s comfortable going with the flow, letting the slower currents pull you along towards your final destination as you relish the placidness of your surroundings. No sense of urgency. No stress. Just easy as you go. Deep breath in, deep breath out. You don’t get anywhere fast, but the journey is spectacular. Alas, today such moments are fleeting and sparsely spaced around long weekends and planned vacation time. And in the world of education and Race to the Top (RttT), the pace is anything but slow and steady.

After a whirlwind year of professional development around Common Core Learning Standards, Annual Professional Performance Reviews, and Data-Driven Instruction, school are now in full-fledged implementation of the Regents Reform Agenda. With CCLS-aligned state assessments scheduled for release this coming spring, it’s fair to say teachers and administrators alike are caught in the choppy whitewaters of change. We are riding class three rapids in an open canoe, trying to avoid the rocks and standing waves that threaten to throw us out into the cold, wild waters of low-end HEDI ratings. Getting through the rapids in one piece to the quieter waters that lie ahead will take skill, hard work, and perseverance.

Whether or not one bought into this wild ride ten, twenty, or even thirty years ago in their career, it’s safe to say the Regents Reform Agenda has radically transformed how we do education in New York State. RttT has created an extremely choppy environment that demands a retooling of skill sets and understandings about instructional leadership, curriculum, instruction, and assessment. It requires a focus on doing a few things extremely well, and as evidenced by the rigor of sample test items released by the New York State Department of Education (NYSED) this week, that focus may best be directed towards understanding and practicing the Common Core Learning Standards Instructional Shifts.

Just as immersing the paddle blade fully when employing a powerful J or draw stroke through whitewater are timeless strategies for successfully whitewater paddling, the Instructional Shifts may indeed prove to be the timeless strategies for raising student achievement in this new era of rigor, relevance, and accountability. So tie down your gear, scan your surroundings, work together with your colleagues, stay dry, and remember those “Shifts” as you proceed along.

Race to the Top Goes Post-Secondary

This past week I joined approximately 200 other Campus-Teacher Education Network Team (C-TEN) educators and administrators for a State University of New York (SUNY) sponsored discussion on school reform and clinically rich teacher and principal preparation programs. More specifically, my colleagues and I went to hear first hand inspirational thoughts and ideas for managing the ripples of school reform now lapping on the shores of higher education. Titled Advancing the Future of Teacher and School Leader Education at the State University of New York (SUNY) Launch Event: A Convening of the SUNY Statewide Teacher and Leader Education Network (S-TEN), the full-day conference could be considered the official introduction or coming out party of the Regents Reform Agenda to higher education. With Race to the Top now pervading every aspect of public P-12 education and a new teacher certification system called EdTPA ready for implementation in New York State, the rules and stakes of teacher and principal preparation have gone up significantly.

The lineup of distinguished speakers included SUNY Chancellor, Nancy Zimpher; John King, New York State Commissioner of Education; Linda Darling-Hammond, Stanford University; Merryl Tisch, Chancellor of the Board of Regents; and Sharon Robinson, President of the American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education. Though they all wear varied hats in the world of education, each is very familiar with reform, particularly in the areas of Race to the Top and teacher/principal education. In a nutshell, the message was higher Ed is now being pushed to transform itself in the areas of teacher and principal preparation to ready the next generation of educators and leaders. To do this important work, Campus-Teacher Education Network Teams (C-TEN) have been formed across the SUNY system to help disseminate knowledge and skills to colleagues in the areas of curriculum revision, resource development, partnership building, and new practice piloting.

Much like how RTTT was rolled out to the K-12 community through Network Teams, RTTT and edTPA will be expanded across SUNY via C-TENs. The work promises to be exciting, and at times, intimidating. As with K-12 systems, the stakes could never be higher. Teacher programs will be monitored through the P-20 data system that will measure, among other things, how teacher candidates’ K-12 students perform relative to other teacher candidates’ students.  Other criteria include how successfully teacher candidates can find work and how well they hold onto their jobs. Ultimately, these data will be tied back to the teacher preparation schools for potential actions (?) yet to be revealed at this conference.

Higher Ed has a tremendous opportunity to think differently about itself and how it goes about readying students for teaching and leading. We desperately need competent new teachers and administrators fluent and savvy in the areas of Common Core State Standards, Data-Driven Instruction, Teaching Standards and Evidence-Based Observations, Student Learning Objectives, and Annual Professional Performance Review protocols. Such levels of competencies will require programs with clinically rich experiences and cornerstone, job embedded performance tasks. We do a disservice to the field to send out graduates with anything less than the best to hit the ground running in the P-12 educational arena. Perhaps along the way, people will think differently about education, and adapt a new mindset that echoes Linda Darling Hammond’s session ending thought:  “Those who can teach. Those who can’t go into a different line of work.”

The Powerful Message of Teacher Leadership: “Help Me, Help You”

I love the line in Jerry Maguire where Jerry (sports agent) and Rod Tidwell (football star) are in the locker room and Jerry’s imploring Rod to work with him. Jerry pleads during the emotional exchange, “Help me… help you. Help me, help you.”, and in another exchange, “I am out here for you. You don’t know what it’s like to be ME out here for YOU. It is an up-at-dawn, pride-swallowing siege that I will never fully tell you about, ok?” Great movie.  Great energy. Great lessons. Great segway into the challenges of teacher leadership.

Education is an interesting business. It’s costly and doesn’t directly generate revenues. However, it indirectly dictates the trajectory of our nation’s Gross Domestic Product, unemployment rates, price of commodities, happiness, infant mortality rates, and the list goes on. Education matters. Period. Given the deep and broad impact education has on society, it’s amazing how we respond to leadership within our ranks. Outside the hierarchical leadership structure of school and central office, leadership among teachers is often silently absent and primarily informal.

We know the master teachers and quiet leaders who people seek out in times of stress. They are the folks who offer sage advice on everything from classroom management strategies and designing new curricula, to accessing resources and using data to make good decisions. However, they do their leadership work without fanfare. Lest they upset the apple cart and draw the ire of less able, less confident instructors, these quiet leaders do their work primarily in isolation.But what happens when a school decides to target teacher leaders and stipend them to do the important work of instructional leadership? Can the system accept these newly “badged” teacher leaders complete with job descriptions and title?

How do the new teacher leaders stay within the ranks of teachers while also breaking ranks to push the system forward? How do these risk-takers garner the respect and willing participation of their colleagues? Stepping out and taking on instructional leadership is not easy. Ultimately, teacher leadership success hinges on how well they get Jerry Maguire’s message out to staff. Namely, “Help me, help you.” With the urgency of Race to the Top on every educator and principal’s mind, newly minted teacher leaders have a leveraged moment to demonstrate the service they can provide colleagues. Whether wading through Student Learning Objectives, Teacher Evaluation Rubrics, or Common Core Learning Standards Instructional Shifts, teachers desperately need the leadership support of their colleagues.

Teacher leadership can and will work when school systems recognize the value in helping teacher leaders help others. By surveying teacher needs, differentiating professional development based on data, and providing time for the important work of teacher leadership, schools can indeed cultivate an environment where teacher leadership thrives. We’re not talking about making photocopies or filling out purchase orders, but about systemic changes in instruction, curriculum, assessment, and most importantly, views on instructional leadership. It’s time to redefine leadership in schools and fully utilize our greatest resources: intellectual and social capital.