"It Continues!"

The now not so uncommon adage that “anything can and will be made political” rings loud and clear – again in public education.  The controversy over Common Core State Standards (CCSS) is a prime example.  It continues to amaze me how such a very simple concept accompanied by an incredible amount of thoughtful organizational, theoretical, and practical construction of content, skill, knowledge, and application culminating in a minimum, common standard for learners across the nation would be categorized as “Satan in carnate”.

We only need to look at the inconsistency of state accountability models and assessments to see why “common standards” are absolutely necessary if the goal is to raise the quality, import, and utility of education for all students irrespective of their geographical location.  A big “if” to be sure!

Common Core was not and is not a manifestation of the current administration in Washington.  It has little to do with the US Department of Education as well. 

My angst over the debate is the level of ignorance associated with demonizing the “core”.  Whether or not a state adopts or succumbs to political pressure to abandon their previous commitment to adopt or not is and should be a state decision.  Yet, make it an informed discussion and debate not a “conspiracy” or federal government overreach – we lived the unprecedented federal intrusion in 2002 with the renewal of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (aka No Child Left Behind).

Sadly, public education is once again a political Ping-Pong ball.  I just don’t get it!  Why we as a nation allow political leaders, pundits and wonks to use children, their future – our future to leverage self-serving agendas that have little to do with moving forward and almost everything to do with going backwards is very discouraging and disappointing.  Yet, we have let this happen.

It did take the ESEA reauthorization in 2002 to make legal what should have always been the ethical and morally good, right, and true aim or purpose for public education.  History will show that NCLB shed a glaring light on the inequities of access, opportunity and achievement of sub populations of students in our nation’s schools.  Further, NCLB literally forced schools and school systems to address the “normalized acceptance” of chronically underperforming and underachieving students. 

Common Core in my estimation is about the evidence of student learning – the application of skills and knowledge – the evidence of learning not being condensed to a multiple choice test.  Rather, application, analysis, synthesis, and creation of new knowledge – the authentic use of skills and knowledge to solve problems and create solutions that are meaningful not perfunctory.

Core is also about unprecedented collaboration of, for, and by educators.  The design of Core was and remains heavily dependent upon educators engaging in ongoing dialogue, conversation, planning, reflection, monitoring, and examination of effective practice and yes, actual cause and effect of teaching and learning.  However, this is a daunting challenge given the illegitimate definition and practice of narrowly defined accountability measures – aka test scores.

I am sorry – test scores are not the “golden ring”.  Rather, learning is and this is as it should be!

Two steps absolutely necessary for implementation fidelity that to date prevent Common Core or new standards to make inroads to “different”.  They are:

1) Granting Permission and

2) Creating New Policy

Permission to change, innovate, and create has not been authentically given to our educators.  I attribute the lack of permission to the absence of policy change at all levels of governance.  Until policy reflects all manner of permission to do different including suspending or changing instructional time constraints (daily as well as calendar year configurations), age based groupings and grade configurations, seat time and Carnegie Unit formulas, as well as required subject or content matter on all sorts of special interest topics added to public schools over the past 100+ years, and the redefinition of accountability to name several, there is really little hope that the intent and best hopes of Common Core will be realized irrespective of good intentions.

Thus, controversy will continue! 

Further polarization and discourse will be ideology driven. 

The victims?

Our students, our learners, and our future!   

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: We All Win!

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: We All Win!: With the testing season just around the corner, the “race” to equip students with the skills as well as knowledge to b...

We All Win!

With the testing season just around the corner, the “race” to equip students with the skills as well as knowledge to be successful on end of grade or end of course tests will go into overdrive.  The last minute "cram" or "review" for those students on grade level will hopefully "do no harm".  For students whom need a full year of instruction will, in all likelihood, not fair so well!

Teetering on the obvious, students entering a grade level behind their peers or who may have barely passed their previous years end of grade assessments are at the greatest risk.  Students significantly behind are already significantly disadvantaged and unless we have the courage to radically shift our approach to address failed learning as well as the failure to learn, those students will not advance towards standard.  Please note; this is not about closing the performance distance with their peers.  Rather, this is all about each learner meeting or exceeding standards.

The goal, our goal is to have each student, each learner "summit".  Irrespective of how long it takes, the route they take, or order in which they arrive, the goal must be mastery of the standards.

While speaking at SXSWedu two weeks ago, I make the comment that one of our greatest attributes, as a nation is also one of our greatest liabilities - competition.  Competition is part of the American DNA.  We are competitive.  We want to win.  We want to be first.  As the great sports prophet Ricky Bobby stated, "If you ain't first, you're last!"

Competition has served our nation well.  Yet, it has also been a disservice with respect to education.  We know that competition results in "winners" and "losers".  However, this mindset works against the very goal we desire to achieve in education.  Simply put, we can't afford losers as a result of our education system.  We must have winners - all winners.

Lest you think this is idealistic socialistic babble, please consider that a fundamental tenet of education is to raise individually and collectively the quality of life, the quality of community, and the quality of our nation.  We all benefit from an educated society - hence the commitment to providing a free and public education for all.  

Education has been used to "sort and select" individuals or groups of people with respect to "station in life".  I get this.  I've benefited from education.  My children have benefited as well.  However, I do not believe that I have benefited at the expense of others.  My point, our point!  An educate society benefits each of us not at the expense of any of us.

We continue to confuse the issue and therefore are woefully ineffective in addressing the root causes of failure.  We continue to make way too many erroneous assumptions about the causes of failed learning and the failure to learn.  Consequently, we have and will continue to treat the symptoms and wonder why students are not progressing towards meeting or exceeding standards.

I am convinced that until we make this shift in our thinking we will not make the critical, necessary, and essential shifts in our behavior as well as practice for each learner to benefit from the promises of an education.

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: Success or Failure? You Choose

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: Success or Failure? You Choose: I was recently honored to participate on a panel at SXSW (South by South West) in Austin, TX.   The panel's purpose...

Success or Failure? You Choose

I was recently honored to participate on a panel at SXSW (South by South West) in Austin, TX.  The panel's purpose was to articulate the power, success, and necessity of private-public partnerships especially as it relates to ubiquitous broadband connectivity, access to rich, interactive digital content and tools, and the most obvious - a "learning for all - whatever it takes" mission for learning.

My role was easy - drive home the reality that we already know more than we need to "get this done".   The "game changer" is leadership.  A key component to leadership is vision.  I firmly believe and practice that vision is more than an ability to articulate a picture of the future, an ideal state, or what the work looks like completed.  Vision must be compelling, motivating, captivating, and most of all the vision must be clear.

When President John F. Kennedy challenge our nation with the mission of sending to, landing on and returning safely to earth a man within a decade, he casted a vision that no one had ever done before.  There was no "best practice", "research base", "expert consultants", or "model" to replicate.  Rather, the vision inspired a sense of imagination, curiosity, creativity, and innovation.  The vision certainly had critics and those who questioned the cost, but the vision created unprecedented opportunities for learning.  This more than anything was and remains today, “mission” critical.

The learning from what didn't work was more important than what did work.  

Before I leave the 1960s and the vision of President Kennedy, I turn to his brother's paraphrase of George Bernard Shaw's quote to affirm the role of leadership especially as it relates to what is desperately needed to realized the power, the promise, and the vision of universal connectivity, access, and results of, for, and by digital learning.  Robert Kennedy said,

"Some me see things as they are and ask, 'why'. 

I dream things that never were and ask, 'why not'."

Being critical, the landscape of digital implementation initiatives has more failed examples than successful.  There are several reasons for the failure of these initiatives to meet or exceed their promises or "best hopes".  First, most schools and school systems started with the wrong questions.  What device do we want?  What can we afford? 

These are important, but they aren't where you start.  The most important question is centered on student learning.  What do we want students to know and be able to do as a result of teaching and learning?

Schools and school systems have failed to adequately address this question.   Those that have are much further along and are the success stories that are being told.  This is as it should be.  However, too many school and school system leaders are not addressing what they should. 

In what can only be called a "race" to keep up with the "Jones", the acquisition of devices without first addressing and therefore thoughtfully, intentionally, and deliberatively planning the following will result in failing to transform teaching and learning.  Ultimately, wasting resources, trust, and the future of our young people.

Too critical, possibly? 

Here's what must be addressed before device select and deployment.

1.     Assess infrastructure and ensure bandwidth, Wi-Fi density, and etc. are not just adequate but able to ensure the assumption you will have 100% of your users using uninterrupted - any time and in any space. 

2.     Assess and address the capacity, competence, confidence and capability of the instructional staff to integrate, convert, and transform teaching and learning with digital tools, interactive digital content, instructional methodologies, and clear learning outcomes. 

3.     Assess and address community awareness, understanding, and support.  Work with community officials to assist with the learning initiative especially as it relates to ubiquitous connectivity and its power to educate all irrespective of the age of the learner.

4.     Adapt, adjust, or amend local policy to include constant, consistent digital literacy, digital citizenship, parental responsibility, the district's role in monitoring not just acceptable use but public domain social media and etc. to ensure safe, responsible, and productive teaching and learning.

5.     Identify, plan, and implement a learning management system to integrate or support transformative teaching and learning, digital tools, interactive content, on and off line learning, social media, and other collaborative teaching and learning tools.

6.     Lastly, device selection – what device will drive, leverage your learning initiative producing the results you and your community desire?

Above all else, assess your position on innovation. Do you want to be successful?  Of course you do, we do!  Decrease the opportunity for failure by addressing the aforementioned.

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: Are you Teachable?

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: Are you Teachable?: John C. Maxwell challenges us with three statements to reflect upon daily - Everyone has something to teach me. Every day I have somethin...

Are you Teachable?

John C. Maxwell challenges us with three statements to reflect upon daily -

1. Everyone has something to teach me.
2. Every day I have something to learn.
3. Every time I learn something, I benefit.

I appreciate his ability to get to the point - He defines "teachability" as "possessing the intentional attitude and behavior to keep learning and growing throughout life" -

Are you learning? 

Are you growing?

If not, check your humility meter. 

One of the keys to teachability is humility -  being intentional about our attitude!

The modern day definition of a leader is "one that does not know it all and one that cannot do it alone".  I've learned this and have the scars to prove it. 

How about you?

What is your definition of leadership?  What do you most admire in those you follow?  Is "teachability" one of those traits or characteristics?  If not, why not?

Just something to think about -

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: "So how do we get it done?"

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: "So how do we get it done?": What is it about education that either frustrates or disappoints you?   Possibly there’s another verb that better captures your feelings or...

"So how do we get it done?"

What is it about education that either frustrates or disappoints you?  Possibly there’s another verb that better captures your feelings or emotions?  For me, “anger” is probably the word that best describes what I am feeling especially when it comes to universal literacy.  Simply put, it angers me that we have not achieved universal literacy!

We already know more than we need to achieve universal literacy.  The question as Dr. Ron Edmonds put it, has more to do with “how we feel about the fact that we haven’t”

As I stated, it makes me angry.

If we really wanted to make universal literacy a reality – we would!

Let’s “think for a change” rather than react.  Let’s put aside all the excuses, justifications, or rationale used to defend failure.  Let’s suspend the political rhetoric, international comparisons, and the like that suggest that teachers don’t care or are not interested in each student being successful.

Rather, let’s think about how we get this done.  We have to by the way.  Failure is too expensive.  The cost of remediation is exponentially more expensive than getting “it” right the first time.

So how do we get it done?

The first step is rather simple, not easy.  Every one and I do mean everyone must say “yes”.  “Yes” is the first step to “how” as Peter Block reminds us.  “Yes” is proactive.  It is empowering.  By saying “yes” we are not waiting for someone else to address it.  This is our time and on our watch.

Second step – again simple not easy.  We need to give permission to our educators to “do whatever it takes” with respect to time albeit the instructional day, week, or year.  We need to give permission (as if it is needed) to teach literacy in all things and in all ways – day in and day out.  We’re going to have think and act differently about grade configurations, age, and etc.  We will have to finally put to rest the erroneous assumption and practice that if a student isn’t ready for the next grade we promote anyway and hope they not only learn what they didn’t learn the previous year but also will learn what they can’t learn in the present year – and the research says, “it hasn’t worked yet!”

Third step – there must be an unprecedented monitoring of instruction with continuous mentoring, coaching, and instructional support – support isn’t providing interventionists or specialists.  Rather support must be providing feedback, input to lesson design, instructional methodologies, and evidence of student learning.  Simultaneously, there must be accountability that is SMART (specific, measurable, actionable, relevant, and timely) not punitive – accountability that informs rather than makes judgments.

Lastly and probably the most important step is that we must individually and collectively shift from the “winning now” mindset to “it’s not how we start but how we finish” mindset.  The latter is about growth irrespective of where a learner begins the literacy journey.

We have all been indoctrinated with the theory of normal distribution (Bell curve) with respect to the distribution of learning, intelligence, income and etc.   Many have used and continue to use this theory to rationalize, justify and defend why “all” students are not successful.  However, in direct conflict with the longed believed, as “true” theory of normal distribution is a new construct– the “J-curve”.

Though the J-curve is associated with the distribution of achievement, I think it appropriate to apply it to literacy and the acquisition of content or subject mastery. I equate the mastery of content and subject matter as resembling a “J” - flat, dipping, and then ascending commensurate with literacy capacity, competence, and confidence.

What we must understand and practice is that without literacy no subject matter or content mastery will be fully realized.  In fact, a close look at leading indicators of success in almost every subject area is – literacy followed closely by writing.

The J-curve effect applied to literacy demonstrates the utility and import of literacy skills with the relationship of mastery of subject content. There it is – until literacy is mastered, we will not see mastery of other subjects or content.  As simple as this is, we don’t embrace this.  In fact, the oft-misused and misapplied theory of normal distribution (Bell Curve) too often drives our practice –

  I have intentionally stayed away from “how” we teach literacy.  In a like manner, I have stayed away from any specific program.  My point, universal literacy must be more than a pithy or trite sound byte.  We can and we must make it our nation’s foremost commitment. 

As Edmond stated,

“We can whenever, and wherever we choose, successfully teach all children whose schooling is of interest to us. We already know more than we need, in order to do this. Whether we do it must finally depend on how we feel about the fact that we haven’t so far.”

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: News Flash! America Eradicates Illiteracy!

Thoughts, Comments, and Observations: News Flash! America Eradicates Illiteracy!: “The vision of universal literacy has been realized” “The bold, oft-controversial commitment of ensuring literacy for every child has bee...

News Flash! America Eradicates Illiteracy!

“The vision of universal literacy has been realized”

“The bold, oft-controversial commitment of ensuring literacy for every child has been achieved.  American schools have for the past 36 months embarked on a relentless, unapologetic crusade to defeat illiteracy.  The “whatever it takes” strategy included the early and aggressive identification of learner skill, knowledge, and experience with language leading to individualized learning plans, repurposing of time, resources, and effective use of technology based supplemental programming.  The key however has been the commitment, conviction, and courage of educators to do what they have always known needed to be done.  No silver bullet and no short cut.  Teachers provided laser like, focused instruction to meet the needs of each learner.”

Fantasy? Fictional? Absurd?

Let me ask you, how serious are we about eradicating illiteracy?

Isn’t about time that we move from the politically correct “yes” we agree all learners should be literate to “yes” take no prisoners - whatever it takes to get it done action? 

What do you think?

Dr. Ron Edmonds stated so poignantly in “Some Schools Work and more Can” (1978),

“We can whenever, and wherever we choose, successfully teach all children whose schooling is of interest to us. We already know more than we need, in order to do this. Whether we do it must finally depend on how we feel about the fact that we haven’t so far.”

These words should set off bells and alarms.  They should cause each of us to pause, reflect, and ponder where we are in the year 2014 with educating each child.

To some these words serve as an indictment of the content of our character, challenge our convictions and commitment to each learner, and question both individual and corporate courage.  To others these words are pithy or trite and have little or no effect.  For the majority I fear, these words are met with quick opposition or dismissal based more by deeply held opinions and attitudes that teachers irrespective of how hard they work, how much they care will never successfully teach all children to be literate.   Oft-cited poverty, home, gender, ethnicity, or some other demographic characteristic are generally inferred or implied.  The reality of barriers or obstacles has been proven over and over again to be challenging but not insurmountable with respect to literacy.      

So, why haven’t we eradicated illiteracy in this country! 

John F. Kennedy challenged this great nation to “send a man to the moon and return him safely to the earth”.  What did we do? 

We assembled the “brightest and best”, the “dreamer and doers”, and … “mission accomplished” within a decade.  We thought differently to achieve different.  We were challenged to lead the world and we rose to that occasion.  Often forgotten was Sputnik and how embarrassed we were as a nation.  Are we not embarrassed now?

So, I ask again, why haven’t we eradicated illiteracy?

As Edmond penned, “we know more that we need, in order to do this”.  We really do! 

The advent of new technologies and the authentic integration of learning theory and learning science are but two factors that make literacy, universal literacy realistic.

If we know what works, what is in the way?  Money?  Time?  Attitude?

I suggest our challenge is that we have not made this priority one!  We give achieving literacy lip service but unlike Kennedy’s vision, we are not compelled to achieve it.

Two reasons stand out as to why we haven’t achieved “literacy for all”.  First, the instructional day and instructional calendar were designed to serve a different purpose.  We have organized, operated, and rewarded schools from a paradigm of control, order, and predict.  We made attendance compulsory rather than learning.  This, in part, explains why over the past 20 years there has been so much push back on student performance accountability.  It’s the system not the people.

The public school system was never designed to ensure each student learns to high standards let alone achieve universal literacy.  If we did, the school day and school year for that matter would be fundamentally different.  Let me be clear, I am not saying that “make the day longer” or “make the school year longer” will eradicate literacy.  Rather, I am saying we must configure and use time differently.  To do so will require a seismic shift in what we know and what we do in several areas – most of which are made much more complicated and complex than they actually are. 

Next week I will elaborate more on reconfigured time as well as spend time on the second obstacle to “eradicating illiteracy” – one much more controversial.

Leadership - Management: Is there a difference?

Last week I was challenged to revisit my thinking about “leadership” versus “management”.  I'm not so sure that the two constructs, concepts or theories are necessary opposed to one another.  I do believe, however, they are different.  

As I pondered my experiences in leadership including all the books I’ve read, theories I’ve studied, individuals I’ve observed and worked for and with, and the myriad discussions, conversations, as well as opinions debated, I realized something, I’m not sure if we haven’t confused the two.

I recalled the oft-cited Peter Drucker’s proclamation, “Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things”.  I remembered how great that sounded at the time!  But, I have learned that there’s much more to both management and leadership.

Management or managing people requires “doing the right thing” as well as “doing things right”.  Limitations and constraints abound if you’re in a position of leadership but when you really examine the tasks, responsibilities, and role you play, how many of them are actually managing rather than leading?

To answer the aforementioned question requires a clear understanding of what is managing and what is leading.

There are generally six accepted principles of management.  They are planning, organizing, staffing, directing, controlling, and evaluating.  These principles or functions and accompanying practices are more or less focused on getting others to do something that they would not normally choose to do or now how to do.  Possibly over simplifying, managing is getting things done through others.

Leading others is different than managing them.  For me the defining difference between managing and leading is vision – not just having one but living it, breathing, it.  I’ve learned that vision is far greater than just articulating a better place - a preferred future.  It is pointing, showing, motivating, encouraging, capturing, and compelling others to see and begin a journey to “different”. 

Concisely, I believe leadership is taking people to a place they never imagined going, staying longer that they planned to stay, and investing more of themself than they thought possible. 

I have experienced the power of vision as a means to accomplish transformation.   Transformation does not take place from the outside in.  Rather, it is an inside out proposition.  Presenting a compelling vision alone will not in and of itself cause transformation.  There must be qualities, traits, or behaviors that create followership.

What qualities come to mind?

Integrity? Action? Selflessness? Candor? Preparation? Learning and Teaching? Fairness? Vision? Caring?

This list comes from the leadership qualities defined by General George C. Marshall.  For an expanded description of these take a look at Jack Uldrich’s book, Soldier Statesman Peacemaker: Leadership Lessons from George C. Marshall (2005).

General Marshall’s influence on military leadership remains in place today.  If you look at the any of the braches of the United States Armed Forces you’ll find Marshall’s fingerprints on leadership principles and expected behaviors.  They remain essential to the development of our military leaders.

Another quality that underpins Marshall’s leadership principles is loyalty.  Loyalty to the mission, loyalty to the vision, and loyalty to the guiding principles that underpin leadership.  These were paramount to Marshall's brand of leadership and followership.

Knowing leadership traits, qualities and virtues is far different than being them.  Argumentatively, you can't rush leadership.  Experience requires time, wisdom from both successes and setbacks, and the constant presences of humility. 

As I wrapped up my week of review and reflection of leadership and management, I really don't have any new revelations or insights.  I do have one conclusion, however.  That is, both leadership and management require a commitment to continuous learning.  A learning that is genuine, sincere, and without any motivation other than to increase ones' competence, confidence, and capacity to influence, develop and serve others.

Vision - the power to take action!

I was reminded the other day of this story about the power of vision albeit personal or professional.

"little El Capitan"

by Stu Weber

      "I recall climbing energetically toward the summit of a magnificent pass in the Eagle Cap Wilderness.  The late Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas called this area in the northeast corner of Oregon "the most beautiful piece of real estate on the planet."  Others, standing in awe of the pristine mountain glory, have dubbed it "little Switzerland."

      Making our goal that day as we hiked was a nameless granite spire we called "little El Capitan."  The pace was healthy.  Spirits were high.  Our towering granite landmark was a long way off from the bottom of the Minam river canyon, but the distance was irrelevant.  The clear day was glorious, and we made excellent time just anticipating the beautiful scene awaiting us at Big Minam Meadows.  On a clear day, as the song goes, you can see forever - and feel as if you could climb there, too.  Everyone was caught up in the spirit of it.

      And then...the weather closed in around us.  The clouds dropped down into the tree tops.  It began to drizzle.  Our granite landmark disappeared, along with the horizon.  Inevitably, our eyes dropped from the distant peaks to the top of our own boots.  And we slowed down.  Boy did we slow down.  The spring in our steps became pains in our legs.  When we lose sight of our goal, you lose a lot more than that.  Little things began to get to us.  Someone has said,  "We are slowed more by the grain of sand in our shoe than the mountain we climb."  So true.  The grain may have been there all along, but suddenly it takes on boulder proportions.  Nothing was right anymore.  Whose idea was it to hike back into this forsaken wilderness, anyway?  The day seemed colder.  Our pains seemed magnified.  And the complaining set in.  Irritability became the order of the moment.

      What happened?  How did glory turn into misery?  The answer is simple enough:  We lost our vision.  We lost perspective.  We were no longer drawing energy and gladness from that shining goal on the fat horizon.

      When you've lost your vision for who you are and where you are and why you are where you are, you find yourself powerless to take necessary action.”