Educators Mindset May Be the Key to Improving Teaching and Learning

This week the LAUSD Board of Education is opening up the new schools to the best school developers that they can find, if the Board resolution is passed. The new school developers might be the LAUSD district, a group of educators who work for LAUSD, charter organizations, a group of parents, university leaders or management companies. All of this is in the hopes that someone or some group can find a way to really improve the academic achievement of all students in LAUSD.

There was a former superintendent who looked for silver bullets to change the educational outcomes for kids by believing that scripting the work of the classroom teacher was necessary. He came to believe that although there were some strong teachers within the system, there were too many who could or would not learn to teach in a research-based way. Unfortunately, as I have shared in my earlier blog entries, there is no way to change practice everywhere in such a big system without those implementing buying-in and understanding the reason for program or plan to be implemented. This minor step in the process of change is almost always overlooked in school districts. There are some reasons for its being overlooked but without this critical step, change to the level necessary to support our students will not occur.

A change in the mindset of the classroom teacher is the key to any successful change. The reason is simple, it is at the point of contact between the teacher and student where real teaching and learning occurs. So, what has to happen to change the teacher's mindset? Teachers must be clear as to why they are being asked to change. We look at data regularly within our schools, but most of it is “Public Data” and used mostly to compare schools to other schools, and to show change in gross test scores within a school over time. I do believe that there is a place for this type of accountability. However, I also believe that most of this type of “Public Data” is meant for the public, not for the classroom teacher and school-based administrator to really make a difference in their practice.

I have many educator friends in many school districts and I speak with them regularly about the value that they see in the periodic assessments that they are mandated to give to their students. I do believe that periodic assessments are a tool that is especially beneficial to improving student achievement and can help teachers dramatically if used with the right mindset in place.

The answers that I get from these secondary teachers range from: “they help me to know where my students are understanding and where they are not.” to “ I am glad that these have been given to us, we now have common unit and final exams.” to “I wish that I didn't have to give these, I don't have time the way things are to cover all of the necessary materials. Besides, I only give them because I have to and I don't want to get into any trouble.” I have found that some teachers in some schools actually use this data to change their instructional practice, and I am glad to hear that, but I am not sure that the use of periodic assessments in this way is yet the norm. Yes, they are being given, no they aren't being effectively used by all.

Once again, it is the mindset of our school personnel that will determine whether data such as this has value. No matter what structure we put into place, we have to begin with providing the necessary leadership, professional development for understanding, and modeling for success if we want to change practice. Changing practice is a matter of the classroom teacher believing that the change will make the learning of the student better and the life of the classroom teacher more satisfying.

How do we get to this point? First, I would encourage our training institutions (universities) to reflect deeply on their own teacher preparation efforts. Are they still preparing teachers to go into their own classrooms using 20th century strategies with 21st century kids? I would allow for professional development time that leads our educators through structured conversations about the teaching of students within their own community using the most personal data a school staff has available. We need leadership to guide these teachers who know the students best to connect what they know about their students with the research-based delivery models that are now available. We need to give our teachers information to work with their colleagues in a collaborative model as much as possible. Teaching and learning should not be a free for all where anything goes, but it can't be forced upon good educators if they don't see the value of the change.

Finally, I believe that creating personalized learning environments at all educational levels will benefit kids because they will be well known by adults and not fall between the cracks. But just as important, the necessary teacher conversations can occur around specific kids needs, because the group of teachers holding the conversations share the same group of students over an extended period of time. It gives our teachers and administrators more purpose for agreeing to change and sharing in the changes. They have greater control of their own environment, and hopefully share a common ownership for the academic outcomes of their students.
I don't believe that there is a single right answer for improving academic achievement for all students, but I do know that by working together and by sharing information, research, and personal knowledge, we can continue to increase the number of students being reached. Will it make a difference what structures our new school developers offer? It will only make a difference if the teaching and learning focus is the basis for what they put into place, and the silver bullet approach is avoided.

I look forward to hearing your opinion on this and other educational topics.

"Implementation with Fidelity", I Have a Problem!

I keep hearing from some national and local educational leaders and educational program developers that if you bring a specific program to a district, it can fix student achievement. Almost always it is then followed with a caveat, "If it is implemented with fidelity". Have you heard the expression, "implementation with fidelity" in your school or district? This is a very troubling expression to me, and hopefully to all of us.

I understand that when a research-based practice is well researched, a lot is learned about how to help kids achieve. However, what happens when a program is brought to a district and for many reasons, it is not implemented with fidelity? Do we blame the implementers, teachers and school-based administrators? Or do we look to the researchers and district leaders who only offer success if the perfect format for perfect implementation is followed?

The reality of my world that I have lived in for over 38 years is that we can never have perfect implementation of any program, no matter how hard we try. Perfect implementation requires that more than sufficient professional development is provided. You and I know that we fight for every professional development second we can find, and then it isn't enough for all that we need to learn as educators. Perfect implementation requires expert modeling of the program model, but this is a high cost item. Although we have had coaches in our schools for several years, they were not experts in every area that they needed to have expertise in. Perfect implementation requires a long term commitment with measurement of success over several years, not in one year. Our grading system, at the state and federal level, preclude us from having several years to measure whether we are moving in the right direction or not. Finally, perfect implementation requires that each teacher and administrator is in agreement that this program model will be better than whatever is currently in place in our schools. I am absolutely sure that we never take the upfront time to gain buy-in from our implementors. The result is that the teachers and administrators see each new program as a passing fad that will be moving on shortly, so why put much effort into supporting or learning it now.

The root of the matter is that without the teachers and school-based administrators buying into any program or plan for a school, it is likely to be implemented with less than the required level of fidelity. I am bothered because we don't work to alter the mindset of our educators before bringing in new programs. I am further disturbed because of the way we bring in these programs, they do not lead to the promised levels of success and some kids are further damaged by the educational system.

I cannot accept "implementation with fidelity" as a statement from educational leaders. We need to find ways to work with kids, educate kids, and support kids whether we have fidelity of implementation or not. We need to all believe that our job makes a difference to our students and to our society. We cannot settle for less than our best. We cannot settle for expecting less than their best of our students. We don't need perfectly implemented programs, we will never get them, but we do need well thought out, researched based programs that are explained to our educators, and given time to succeed. If they don't succeed, we need to figure out how to tweak the program so that we can continually help more children to achieve at higher levels.

The cop out of "implementation with fidelity" allows for educational leaders, educational researchers, administrators, and teachers to have an excuse for why these new programs have not reached a level of success that was expected. I want these researchers to keep researching, we need them. I want our district leaders to keep searching for the best fit our schools, we need them to. I want teachers and school-based administrators to continue to find ways to motivate and engage our students. But I want implementation to be about more than just "fidelity". I want these programs to figure out how to work when they are offered to schools that have many challenges facing them, and need much more than to be told "implement with fidelity".

If you agree or disagree, I would love to hear your comments.