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.