In Part 1 we learned about a school that made some big changes, and then saw their failures turn to successes. We also read about what it takes to have "Whole System Change." When responding this week think about any parallels you saw between Brockton High School and our school, or our district. Do you see any of the "components of success" for "whole system change" in our school? What do these parallels make you think or feel?
OR,
What stuck out for you? Use the "Book-Head-Heart" strategy to share what you were thinking and feeling as you read Part 1.
As I read the chapter this week my heart said, "Wow! Amazing work Brockton!" It is exciting to hear of schools turning things around for staff and kids. I also felt hopeful because even though I know they did a lot of hard work, it didn't feel as overwhelming as I thought. Of course, our little school is not failing like Brockton. I found similarities between their work with data - digging to find student needs - and the work we do with iReady, SCRs, CMAS, and other data sources. The biggest difference I see, and the one that concerns me the most, is that we are working with three different "programs" and I think that might be a big obstacle to overcome. As I think on creating unity (as Brockton did) I wonder about revising rubrics from SuperKids, ReadyGen, and Lucy Caulkins to create a rubric that we could use school wide. Is there a way that we could look vertically to see how the programs overlap and where we can make changes to make sure writing is a united front at Hopkins. I also wonder about the need for a systematic approach to conventions/grammars that we could implement school wide so that each year we continue to grow and build in kids' skills. Somehow we need to find a way to mesh three programs into a "common process, (with) common vocabulary and a common assessment" p. 38.
ReplyDeleteFinally I wondered about a next step for our SCR work of having a time once a month (like the current SIT process) to look at SCRs across grade levels to provide feedback and next steps. This could definitely be part of our PLC, but it is so helpful to have cross grade level discussions.
Libby,
DeleteYou have some great points. It is challenging to work with and mesh together 3 different programs so there is still common expectations and vocabulary. As I learn more about SK and ReadyGEN I am seeing ways of doing this, and how we can make sure they build off each other, along with Lucy Caulkins. The key is teacher knowledge; although I understand learning about different programs when time is already stretched does feel stressful and daunting.
I think we have made some good first steps by looking at SCR rubrics, and the discussions that have come out of that in regards to conventions. The work the TLCs are doing with creating rubrics will also transfer over to meshing things among programs. Having vertical discussions with these rubrics in front of us will be very valuable.
I am glad you felt hopeful. If we keep in mind that change takes time, and we do not have to do this all at once - or even by next year - it does seem less overwhelming. One step at a time.
My thoughts for Part 1 Chapter 1- Brockton - I appreciated the idea that Improvement was not about students, but about the adults- that providing equity for students should not be hampered by which teacher a student has. That to me, means a collaborative teaching environment where everyone is focused on the same thing and willing to share ideas and strategies that work. I think we have a good basis for that at Hopkins. I think the work we have done to develop the SCR rubric grade by grade is a good example of that. I think the 4/5 math SCR - Race form is another good example of standardizing expectations across content.
ReplyDeleteI do feel we have more work to do in this regard with respect to longer pieces of writing, and as Libby mentioned the conventions/grammar work. I think we will need to take a systematic look at the progression of rubrics especially as you mentioned from the 3 different programs we use.
In the Recap of Chapter 1 it mentions Monitoring, Monitoring, Monitoring - for student progress. I think we have been doing this, however, it gets more challenging as we try to focus on too many things.
For me the take aways are:
1. school wide implementation
2. across content areas
3.focus on writing- writing is thinking
4.common language throughout school
5. common rubrics
Part 1 Chapter 2 The Path to Equity
This chapter seemed like a lot of generalities and less specifics to me. The things that stood out were:
a. to make change happen it has to happen everywhere
b. keep it simple, focus on the fewest most efficacious factors
c. Collaborative cultures
d. decisions based on evidence
e. Use data as a force for improvement not judgement - not punitive
I think Hopkins is positioned well with regard to these things. but we should not rest there. I think our focus, at times, is diluted with too many things to focus on.
Mary,
DeleteI loved what you said about keeping it simple and focus on the most efficient strategies so we can get the biggest bang for our buck! When we are trying to do too many things at once we aren't going to do anything well. Personally I find it is helpful to focus on one thing and really practice it until it becomes habit before I move on to other things!
There were some parts of chapters 1 and 2 that made me feel like Hopkins is in a really good place! Like Brockton High, we definitely have a focus on literacy, as I think about incorporating SCRs into all subjects from math to social studies to reading. I think we have a good start at PLCs, examining how we know if students are learning something and by looking at student work together (two things Brockton did as well). Also, as chapter 2 mentions, there’s a learning culture where “student and teacher learning is a two- way street” (50). I feel that there’s definitely a positive culture at Hopkins around learning and growth. We all seem eager to improve our practice, try new things, learn from each other, etc. I love that about Hopkins!
ReplyDeleteHowever, like Libby and Mary, I think implementing a common process, common vocab, and common assessment is daunting. I think about the PLC earlier this year when we just tried to narrow our focus to the essential standards of writing conventions and develop a vertical alignment...even looking at that one small piece of the writing puzzle felt difficult. We’re definitely moving in the right direction in terms of talking about school-wide rubrics, and I know 3-5 have done lots of work with SCR rubrics for reading and math, but it still feels overwhelming at times. Even within literacy, there can be too many goals to try to tackle at once, like Ch. 1 said: “too often school improvement efforts embrace too many goals, include lofty educational jargon, and shift from year to year” (42). But Sara, I like how you reminded us that we just gotta take it one step at a time! As chapter 2 stated, it’s important to “take a developmental approach to change (change takes time; select a few complementary strategies and stay focused year after year)” (52).
I wonder how we can find the line between goals “shifting from year to year” and creating “developmental approach to change” where we layer in and build on each previous year’s goals.
Excellent points, Sydney! I concur with your observation of teaching and learning being a two-way street. That is how I frame each day with the kids, that we will all be teaching and learning together. I am not the keeper of all the knowledge, we work as a team.
DeleteYour last paragraph brings up an excellent question. Hopefully our leadership team can help with streamlining our goals and creating a vision to sustain over years.
I want to begin with some non-parallels, or rather “perpendiculars”, between my teaching experiences from California to Colorado in the scope of components for success. When I began working in elementary classrooms I was 18 and had very little background on good v. bad practices. What I did know was how I felt in each of the different classrooms I worked in over the years. Reading the introduction and about Brockton HIgh school reminded me of some of the things that have stuck with me as I have evolved as an educator. Like Brockton High School, most of the schools I worked within had highly diverse demographics and were deemed low-performing in the eyes of the NCLB act that had just been passed the year I entered my teaching program. These schools were scrambling to attach to a quick solution to this new directive that their scores had to go up or the already extremely limited funding would go down. Each school had a different approach and a rapidly decreasing teacher morale. Of course, I want to preface this with none of the people I encountered were necessarily uncaring or incapable of great teaching, but were stuck in the overwhelming expectation shift of “do more with less” (support, resources, direction, etc.). One school decided to only teach language arts and math...all day everyday. Gone were the enriching activities that brought teaching to life and in its place were walls of anchor charts and worksheets because teachers were being told they had to increase rigor and teach more skills to get better results. I hated it. I dreaded going into the 3rd grade class and sitting in the staff lounge at lunch. The staff and student conversations were always variations of the same thing, “we can only do so much”. Everyone was burnt out and no one felt great about the end result. Scores weren’t changing and behaviors weren’t better simply because they taught more each day.
ReplyDeleteAnother school still valued teaching all subjects, but the teachers didn’t communicate with each other and many were secluded off in portable classrooms due to overcrowding. It was like walking into a small city where no one spoke the same language. My student teaching was more of the same...overcrowding, low morale, lack of communication and the view that there was just no room for joy in the classroom any longer. I specifically remember teaching a solar system unit in 5th grade and all I had observed was the teacher reading to the class from an old textbook regardless of the subject. I decided I was going to create a visual model for the kids and involve a few hands-on activities. As soon as I brought in the construction paper planets with strings and all the things (I still have them today in remembrance) my supervising teacher told me what a waste of time it had been to create it all and that there was no time to “play around” if I were to stay on track for the next subject. Cue deflated balloons and sad trumpet sound. If that was how I felt I could only imagine what the kids felt coming everyday and being expected to care when they weren’t shown the same commitment. I complied and read from the textbook. I built no relationships, and saw very little engagement. Then it happened. A classroom with life and learning. This teacher had the same barriers as everyone else, but she refused to accept that her students couldn’t learn AND care about their learning at the same time. I did everything I could to soak up all of her practices and strategies and I have carried many of them with me to this day. I finally understood that it wasn’t this student population it was the system, or lack thereof, that was failing.
I am sorry your supervising teacher deflated you. I am glad you found a teacher that believed in relationships and doing engaging things. It is amazing how much you can impact students just by letting them know you care about them and their learning.
DeleteI spent years moving around districts with good experiences and some not so great, and what they all had in common was more of an individual or disjointed focus on change. A quote that resonated with some of these experiences, “One of the biggest blocks to change is that people do not know what to do or how to do it” (47). Boy, did I see that over and over again. All of the pressure was placed on the shoulders of the teacher or the individual schools. The main mentality at the time was if you were able to get into a more affluent district then you might just be ok. As addressed in chapter 2, “if you want to change the system you have to declare that it is the whole system that is implicated in getting better-not the bottom 5% or 20%, but all of the schools.”
ReplyDeleteNow I can talk about the positive parallels! When I came to Colorado I knew there would be differences, but was pleasantly surprised with some of them. Speaking for my time at a previous school and now at Hopkins I am so proud of the work we do centered around data collection and taking time to actually analyze it and implement changes. It may not seem that out of the ordinary, but it is not always common practice for teachers, let alone administrators, to collaborate so closely. I love how it was broken down into just a few factors or components of success in both chapters. “A whole system perspective (everyone is implicated), simplexity (a small number of factors that everyone can grasp), and the dynamics of push and pull (innovation and ownership) are necessary for fundamentally addressing equity-driven performance” (46). I believe Hopkins is on the right track with “simplexity” and “push and pull” tactics. Creating vertically aligned rubrics and common language across grade-levels and content areas are just a few examples of the good work that is being done to better ensure the success of all students. Coming together to have multiple in-depth conversations about the “how” and “why” we do things is a major piece to the puzzle. I am confident that we will continue to support each other to grow as educators and as a school. Next steps would be to further implement the idea that, “districts that expect and develop collaborative cultures within schools, that use network strategies for schools to learn from each other, and that form two-way partnerships between schools and the central district are in effect mobilizing the power and identity of districtwide engagement” (48).
Brittany, I'm so glad you ended up in LPS! Seems to be a great fit for you, especially at Hopkins. We certainly do have a collaborative culture and strive to support one another in our teaching and learning endeavors. I truly believe we have what the author's call a learning culture. (p. 47)
DeleteI think our next step is what the authors call simplexity. "Simplexity is the process of identifying the smallest number of key factors that will make a difference (typically 6-8)--this is the simple part; and then orchestrating those factors to work in interaction--that is the complex part." (p. 46) I think 6-8 key factors sounds like a lot!!
ReplyDeleteAfter working in other districts in CO, I have seen many situations where there is little collaboration and systems thinking among teachers, schools, and even districts. Hopkins as a part of LPS, however, is very collaborative from my perspective. I believe like it says on page 52 that we already "ground our decision in evidence and build shared commitments and relationships to sustain change." We have worked hard to have a whole school approach in areas such as habits of discussion and SCR. What makes us successful is our willingness to dive in to student data and use that to drive our decisions, discussion and instruction.
ReplyDeleteI have been thinking about areas of growth as well. I think it is important to begin conversations around identifying and bridging the gap between super kids, ready gen and 4/5 now that we are more knowledgeable about each of the programs.
After reading about Brockton and Garden Grove it feels like we have a lot of these pieces in place. We spend time during our PLC times and planning days as well as TLCs, leadership etc, working on standards across classrooms and grade levels. Now, it would be nice to spend some time with vertical collaborative planning to see how all of our pieces fit together and how we can make it better. We need time to use real data to figure out where we are going and how best to get there.
ReplyDelete- 2nd grade team
I agree that vertical planning is important. How often do you feel that vertical conversations should happen in order to successfully move forward with next steps? What data would be most useful in these conversations? (SuperKids, ReadyGen, i-Ready, CFAs, etc)
DeleteBrockton "Rocked it"! We feel like we have a lot of similar pieces in place here, at Hopkins, and in LPS, which is so exciting! We do so much work in backwards planning and looking forward in our PLCs, TLCs, Leadership, and Collaborative planning, that we're in a good spot to move forward with meeting the individual needs. One thing that stuck out to us is on page 48, "The data have to be positioned primarily as a force for improvement, not judgement". Use the real data, not just the stuff that makes us look good :)
ReplyDelete-Kindergarten Team
I often think of a similar quote or idea of "data is friendly, used it to improve, not to judge". It is so important to share the real data so we can do the real work that will help students improve. It is scary to put your data out there though. I am glad we have a good culture here, and there is so much trust among our staff.
DeleteI've been in many different schools around the Denver area. I've had good experiences and not so good. The successes I've been a part of is when teachers were trained and processes determined for full school implementation. It takes an enormous amount of time and dedication to implement something well into a building. I think one of the best things is training teachers to understand the process, teachers need to understand the "why". Regardless if teachers agree or not, understand "why" will help create a school wide momentum for implementation.
ReplyDelete