"Great" School Diagram and G2G Update

At the March 25th meeting of the Exeter Region Cooperative School Board, I unveiled the "Great" Schools Diagram  which was developed through the work of CMS's Good to Great Committee (G2G).  

By way of reminder, CMS mobilized G2G as a response to Dr. John Cronin's analysis and reportof the NWEA results of CMS  students from 2004-2006.  On page 12 of his report, Dr. Cronin referred to CMS  as "a reasonably good school with aspirations to become a great one."  That statement, which he said several times during his November visit, led to the genesis of G2G.

As G2G reviewed the recommendations of Dr. Cronin, page 10 of his report gave us some insight as to our purpose. It reads:

The grouping arrangements in place today work substantively better for high achieving students than low achievers.  In reading and language usage, the flexible grouping arrangement produced better growth for high achievers than the ability grouping arrangements.  Low achieving students have shown poor growth in the flexible grouping arrangement, but did not show substantively better results in ability grouped situations.  In mathematics, the current course assignments produce excellent growth with high achieving students in grades seven and eight, although growth has slipped this past year.  This assignment system has produced poor results with low achieving students and these results have declined further during the most recent school year. 

This leads to the general conclusion that decisions about grouping per se may not have much to with the results produced by the middle school.  The school employes flexible grouping arrangements for reading and groups by achievement in mathematics.  These "conflicting" arrangements have both worked relatively well for high performers and both work very poorly for low performers.  Thus simply making a change in grouping arrangements, whether toward or away from ability grouping, without a constellation of changes that are targeted more directly at improving the quality of curriculum and instruction, is unlikely to make much difference.

With the declaration from Dr. Cronin that a change in grouping would not appear to have an effect on the performance of students at CMS, G2G focused on the "Constellation of Change" about which he wrote and spoke.  Our discussions, both with the committee proper and the faculty-at-large have led to a focus on three key domains:  Curriculum, The Holistic Well-being of Students (which includes the social, emotional, academic, and physical well-being of our students), and the Constancy of Purpose that Dr. Cronin spoke of so eloquently at his presentation (See the "Great" Schools Diagram to see how the three domains intersect). Moreover the G2G committee has come to the conclusion that in order to provided a high quality education for each student, the three domains must be acutely balanced.  Specifically, if any one of the three domains is deficient the ability of the school to deliver high quality education will be compromised. 

With the "Great" Schools Diagram model in mind, G2G is now involved in a couple of processes.  First, trying to determine how well each domain is currently woven into the fabric of the school.  Are we lacking in any of the three domains?  More than one?  All three?  Further, can specific reasons be determined as to why any one or some combination of the three domains are deficient?  Is there a domain (or 2?  or 3?) in which CMS is outstanding?  Why are we outstanding?  Is there a common trait between those areas in which we are outstanding that can be replicated?  Which leads to the second process.  Developing action plans to address deficient domains and replicate those that are outstanding.  More will come of this process on a later post.

What do we do on "Inservice Days"?

Often times, people come up to me and ask what goes on during those mysterious "inservice days". Well, Tuesday was one of those days and I thought it would be worth sharing  a bit about the program.

The entire SAU professional staff met at the high school for two presentations. Ray McNulty, Senior Vice President, International Center for Leadership in Education and Dr. Stephanie Spadorcia, from Lesley University both spoke to the group about literacy, specifically, 21st Century Literacy. After their presentations, all faculty returned to their respective schools, broke into small groups and discussed how what they learned in the morning could be applied to their classroom everyday.

I'd like to share my thoughts about what Ray and Stephanie shared with us, respectively.  I'll report some of the general remarks of the staff on a later post.

First, I'd like to comment on Dr. Spadorcia.  Her presentation focused on four current issues:  scientifically-based educational practices, response to intervention, high-stakes assessments, and the widening of the achievement gap.  More specifically, she addressed how effective reading instruction can address all four of those issues.  She made the argument that the "Whole-to-Part Model of Silent Reading Comprehension" can be one such strategy.  Ultimately, she said, the ability to read and comprehend silently is of vital importance to today's learner.  If you think about it, it makes sense.  How often do you read aloud and/or are read to once you reach high school and beyond (Although she does believe that all students should read aloud and just be read to not read aloud themselves at upper grades - it is actually more difficult to read aloud and comprehend as you increase in skills no matter the age.  Students need to hear words multiple times before they can pronounce it correctly - think of the first time your biology teacher wrote the work deoxyribonucleic acid or adenosine triphosphate on the board.  In fact, she specifically said, "Oral language, hearing others read aloud, and discussions are the most effective means of supporting vocabulary growth".  She credited www.nifl.gove/nifl/pfr.html for that research.)  She really punctuated the fact that students need to be skilled in the area of silent reading comprehension if they are to be literate in the 21st century.

Dr. Spadorcia broke silent reading comprehension into what she called the "three legs" of the reading table.  They were Word Identification, Language Comprehension, and Print Processing Beyond Word Identification.  She said that just like a table, if any one of these three parts are missing (or undeveloped) the ability of the student to read at grade level is unstable.  She then spoke of several practical strategies to increase proficiency in all three areas.  I would encourage all of you to review her presentation to learn more about those strategies.  Early feedback from the teacherswas that they were glad she shared strategies that could be used the following day in their classroom.

One of the most interesting things I learned from Dr. Spadorcia is the importance in blending strategies from both phonics and whole language instruction. In short, she said that neither way, in and of itself is the one right way to teach reading, that students need to employ both phonics and whole language strategies to be proficient readers.

Ray McNulty shared with the faculty his belief that education systems need to change to adapt to the needs of 21st century learners.  He spoke of the "false proxies" we have created to signify learning such as finishing a course or textbook, listening to a lecture or getting a high score on a standardized test.  He emphasized that teaching and learning are two separate entities and that learning should focus on meaning, engagement, inquiry, exploration, personalization, collaboration and trust.  Mostly, he stressed that educators need to become agents of change. Instead of reacting to change (i.e. NCLB & Standardized Assessment), educators need to be proactive and author and cultivate those changes that are needed to help students compete in a global economy.   He spoke passionately about the idea that what has worked in education in the past will not necessarily work today (or tomorrow).  The needs of society today are much different than they used to be.  For example, our students are immersed in what he called "millennial-oriented Technology" (blogs, wikis, tagging, IM, Myspace and Podcasts for example).  Many students talk of "powering down" when they enter a classroom and "powering up" when they leave. He distinguished between digital immigrants and digital natives.  Immigrants work at conventional speed, natives a twitch speed.  Immigrants like linear problem solving, natives like random.  Immigrants read text first, natives "read" graphics first.  Immigrants are "work" oriented, natives are "play" oriented.  Couple these observations with the fact that the skills needed in todays workforce are changing, that employers are looking for workers who can solve problems, communicated effectively and in diverse manners, apply technological skills to access, apply and create new information, are leaders, and who have a thirst for lifelong learning, self direction and renewal and schools, for the most part, are not only missing an opportunity to capture a fleeing school population, but also to prepare students for 21st century work opportunities, opportunities that are quickly going over seas.

In short, it was a thought-provoking, perhaps even thought-challenging lecture.  I encourage all readers to view his presentation and to visit the institute's website.

"It's the Economy Stupid."

James Carville first said it 15 years ago when he was a campaign manager for then Governor Bill Clinton.  His point was simple.  George Bush was beatable, despite the perception that he was unbeatable having just ended the cold war and been successful in pushing Iraq out of Kuwait in the Persian Gulf War.  Carville's point?  Bill Clinton was a better choice because while President Bush was gaining success overseas, he wasn't taking care of the U.S. economy. President Bush's presidency will always be notable.  It was when the Berlin Wall was torn down and America's presence in the Persian Gulf was intensified, but to folks in America at the time, jobs and a healthy economy were more important.

I bring this up because as CMS begins the process of moving from "Good to Great" it is important to always remember the singular power of an effective teacher practicing effective instructional practices.  It is the single most important determinant of children's success in school.  A single, caring teacher can have a greater positive impact on a student's life than any program, curriculum alignment, policy and/or federal mandate will ever have.  

The 2007 McKinsey Report (Which I first read about at Ewan McIntosh's edu.blogs.com) studied successful schools from around the world.  Their research identified three "things" that mattered most in those top schools that were identified as such.  They were:

1.  Getting the right people to become teachers

2.  Developing them into effective instructors

and

3.  Ensuring that the system is able to deliver the best possible instruction for every child.

In other words.   Education is a people business.  Successful schools hire high quality people and then provide the support needed for them to continue to develop their craft.  As CMS moves from "Good to Great" these three "things" that all successful schools have in common should be kept in the forefront of our minds.