I just returned from a national meeting on drop-out prevention. Building Effective Practices in Dropout Prevention: A Summit for State and Local Education Agencies involved participants in a collaborative team-based process that included active learning, strategic planning, and the identification of contextually relevant practices in the areas of dropout prevention/intervention, recovery/re-entry, and school completion. I attended as part of a DESE in conjunction with several teams from southwest Missouri school districts that have agreed to take part in a targeted assistance project conducted by the National Drop-Out Prevention Center. 23 states were represented at the summit and several presented their success in implementing drop-out prevention plans. Georgia presented information on their statewide program while Miami-Dade Schools presented information on their county-based efforts.

An abundance of resources were shared to assist schools in addressing the growing problem of rising drop-out numbers and falling graduation rates. The NDPC web site offers access to a 282 page technical report on Drop Out Risk Factors and Exemplary Programs as well as a72 page Drop Out Prevention Guide. The state of Georgia drop-out prevention site provides links to power point presentations covering a variety of topics

Effective Interventions to Keep Youth in School (.ppt)

Engaging Students – Sandra Christenson (.ppt)

Strategies to Improve Academic Success -January 2008, Paul Riccomini (ppt)

Reaching Hispanic Families for Better Outcomes: Part 1 (ppt)

Moving from High School to Post-school Opportunities: Transition Components and Strategies for High School Redesign (ppt)

Another resource is the UCLA Center for Mental Health in schools which offers an Introductory Packet on Drop Out Prevention.

One of the reasons that I was included on the Missouri “guest list” for this conference was the identification of several southwest Missouri districts with elevated drop-out rates, especially among students with disabilities. For me, as for many others in the room, the information presented at the summit represented a Call to Action for all educational agencies, at both the state and local levels, to develop action plans to deal with this growing problem. Increasing drop-out numbers represent both a mounting financial burden to public infrastructures as well as an expanding deficit in the “brain trust” of skills and knowledge to maintain the societal “lifestyle” that we as 21^st century Americans are accustomed to.

As a result of this “Call to Action” I am looking at implementing a Drop-Out Prevention Support initiative at the regional level. The initiative will include training and support in developing and implementing Drop Out Prevention action plans at the district level (both long term and short term) while providing a vehicle for networking with schools facing similar problems and challenges dealing with the drop-out issue. Please let me know what you think. What would such an initiative look like and what would it include? Your feedback is essential to successful SWRPDC programming.

October, 2009

The current issue of ASCD’s Educational Leadership (click picture link)  includes a report of a recent international survey of  70,000 middle school teachers and principals in 23 countries conducted by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The OECD is a forum for 30 of the world’s democracies to get together and compare experiences, identify common problems and collaboratively seek answers to those problems. The results of this Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) revealed several areas of common concern with regard to conditions shaping teaching and learning, leadership preparation, and professional development worldwide.

Of particular interest to me was chapter 3 of the report, “The Professional Development of Teachers”. The major findings included the following:

• On average, teachers participated in professional development just under one day per month. Over ½ of the teachers surveyed wanted more PD than they had received

The reasons for this PD “supply & demand”  gap are illustrated in the graph below.

Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments, OECD, 2009, p 72

• A significant proportion of teachers do not feel that professional development, as it exists, does not meet their needs.

When asked to identify the types of PD that had the most impact on student achievement,  teachers identified several high impact PD practices, however there were striking differences in participation in these activities.

Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments, OECD, 2009, p 75

While “Individual and Collaborative Research” is ranked as the highest impact activity, participation is low. Generally, the trend is for those high-impact activities that require higher commitments of time and effort garner less participation than activities reported as lower impact.

What are the implications for professional learning in southwest Missouri? The OECD report notes “Effective professional development is on-going, includes training, practice and feedback, and provides adequate time and follow-up support. Successful programmes [sic] involve teachers in learning activities that are similar to ones they will use with their students, and encourage the development of teachers’ learning communities.  There is growing interest in developing schools as learning organisations [sic], and in ways for teachers to share their expertise and experience more systematically.”

One of the most significant SWRPDC changes over the last few years is the switch to the academy model of professional learning. This model, including Teachers, RtI , and Instructional Leadership Academies, provides ongoing learning and support throughout the year and includes an element of collaborative action research where participants go back to their schools, modify practice according to new learnings, and come back together to share successes and not-so-successes. In addition, this year’s Literacy Network program has shifted the focus to on-site professional learning focused on the school improvement needs of individual districts. The demand for Professional Learning Communities support is on the increase as is the systemic behavior model, Positive Behavior Support (PBS).

The problem we face is not the knowledge of  what types of programming will impact the students of Missouri, but rather the organizational capacity to meet the needs of the schools in our region within the context of diminishing budgets and increased accountability. I welcome your ideas and suggestions.

I recently took part in a training session for SAMs project Data Collectors. Funded by the Wallace Foundation SAMs

Mark Shellinger

( School Administration Managers) was developed as part of the Alternative School Administration Study (ASAS) conducted by  Mark Shellinger, author and project director. Mark was the facilitator for the training and talked about the principalship being an “interruption-driven” position that usually allows little time f or the instructional leadership role so necessary for increased student achievement.

The SAMs  process allows the principal to focus time on instructional leadership, teaching practice, student learning, and school improvement. It is a data-based change process that holds principals accountable for their use of time on the job. There are a variety of SAMs models:creating a new position, converting an existing position or adding duties to an existing position. Promising results in initial pilot studies prompted the Wallace Foundation to support the development and diffusion of SAMs. Work is underway to replicate SAM projects in 176 schools in eight states including Missouri.

We have 2 schools in Southwest Missouri that are part of the project and there are plans to add 2 or 3 more. Assistant Director Marsha Lay is a trained Data Coach and there are 5 trained data collectors here in the great Southwest including Marsha Lay, Robyn Hagerman, and yours truly.

SAMs: “A complex change process disguised as a simple idea” Dr. Jody Spiro, Wallace Foundation

Let's Talk Football

SAMs is a rigorous process that requires a change from the traditional role of building principal. Research and common sense tells us that observing teacher performance and giving feedback to improve individual and group practice is key to improved achievement and learning for all students. Why is this not how school leaders spend their time?(samsconnect.com) Being football season, let’s talk football. You would not expect the coach of an NFL football team to be sitting in his office while the team is on the field playing an important game! Why then should the principal be bogged down in managerial tasks that pull him/her away from his/her team?

As a side note, I am wondering if someday in the future we can come up with a similar process for ensuring that school counselors are able to spend the majority of their time doing what they’ve been trained to do – counseling and working with kids. While research has shown that fully implemented comprehensive school counseling programs help all students achieve, many counselors are bogged down with scheduling and assessment management tasks that take time away from the guidance and career counseling that benefit kids. I broached this subject with a group of principals at one time and was immediately reprimanded for trying to tell them (principals) what their counselors should be doing. Just a thought to chew on……..

But back to SAMs – I was skeptical of the SAMs project a few months ago when I was first introduced to it – it seemed too much of a break with the traditional principal’s role to be effective within our schools. As I got to know the process better and was able to watch the changes that took place in just one year in 2 Southwest Missouri schools, I became a believer. For more information, check out the web site, samsconnect.com or the latest SAMs newsletter. And, as usual, you are welcomed to contact us here at the office. Leave a comment and let me know what you think.

Just wanted to share a great resource with you. The Equity Allaince at Arizona State University is one of  10 Equity Assistance Centers across the country.The September newsletter (distributed electronically via list serve to subscribers) discusses

Data: Mining and Decision-Making

Data-driven decision making for school improvement has become a part of the everyday vernacular of educators. However, saying that teachers, families and administrators need data to make decisions is one thing; understanding and using data well is another. In some schools, educators are conflicted about how to get started with the data. For others, once started with the data, questions surface about what to do and when to do it. In many cases teachers—the very people who can make the best use of student-learning data, have the least access to it………………………………

Click here to read more in the Equity Alliance September newsletter.

Recently, the SWRPDC has developed a relationship with the Midwest Equity Assistance Center

The Midwest Equity Assistance Center provides technical assistance, professional development, and    information dissemination in race equity, gender equity and national origin equity to state and local     educational agencies in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska.

At the request of public school districts, including charter and magnet schools, center staff provide a variety of    free services and resources, including professional development workshops, institutes, conferences, and in    service training for teachers, administrators and parents.

Key issues addressed by these centers include  disparities in student achievement and outcomes based on race, sex, or national origin; limited expectations for minority and female students; increasing violence and racial and sexual harassment in schools; renewed physical segregation among and within school buildings; ability grouping or tracking that isolates students based on race, sex, or national origin; persistence of stereotyping and bias; cultural bias in instructional methods and assessment tools; inadequate bilingual/ELL programs and services and recruitment/retention of highly qualified teachers.

The Midwest Center was one of the sponsors for last summer’s SWRPDC RtI Summit that educators from all over the state attended.

Katherine Sprott

In the spring, Katherine Sprott, Coordinator of Professional Development at the Midwest Center, and I will be presenting at the state conferences. Katherine’s areas of expertise are poverty, data, and assessment. I hope to see you there. Equity in education is a passion of mine. That is one reason that I am working diligently to spred the word about RtI, what is is, and, more importantly, what it IS NOT. At the present time, too many educators, schools, and districts in their adoption of the RtI model,focus on the intervention side rather than the instructional side. This type of focus often causes RtI to become an exclusionary or segragating program rather than an inclusionary problem solving process. I would much rather  see the model referred to as Response to Instruction, rather than Response to Intervention.  This simple name change changes the contextual shading from a negative need for intervening when things go “wrong”, to a positive focus on what teachers can do right. Response to Instruction suggests that teachers monitor the student response to instructional strategies and modify or change strategies when they (the teachers) do not get the response they desire.  Response to Intervention suggests that students fail first, requiring an intervention of some sort that is outside the realm of the instructional process. I would be interested in hearing what you think about this name change.

I recently received the September issue of Educational Leadership (ASCD). I had one of those “Twilight Zone “ moments when I discovered that the theme of the issue was “Teaching for the 21st Century“. Sooooo…….a brief discussion of the September issue highlights seemed an appropriate follow-up to my last blog entry.

Although the journal offered a range of articles focused on various aspects of 21st Century learning and teaching (click on picture on right for article listing), the one that caught my immediate attention was entitled “Focusing the Digital Brain” by Marilee  Sprenger. Sprenger maintains that the main goal behind the technological hyper connectivity that has become a hallmark of the new digital generation of young people is driven by a need to be connected to someone or something and fueled by a desire to be “busy and in demand” (p35). This hyper connectedness too often leads to a state of what Linda Stone calls “continuous partial attention.”

I would guess that the majority of classroom teachers can relate to this state of consciousness on the part of their students. Teachers often experience waves of frustration due to this state of “partial attention.” Some of us may even refer to it as a state of “partial consciousness” on the part of students in response to our seemingly efforts to facilitate learning in a diverse classroom.

Among the 7 strategies that Sprengler lists to help create this balance are:

(1) Provide Reflection Time: Reflection requires a different part of the brain than that stimulated (and often overworked) to garner attention. Reflection time allows students to slow down, fully engage the frontal portions of their brains and think about their thinking. Reflection also triggers a mental recap of the information being received, thus reinforcing the information into memory banks.

(2) Let Them Teach: Encouraging students to share the xpertise that they may possess in technological creations, manipulations and/or communications allows examination and discussion focused on the use of technological tools  (blogging, wikis, media editing, etc.)  for 21st century learning. In addition, these teaching experiences serve to validate students as active participants in the learning process.

(3) Build Emotional Literacy: Allowing student opportunities for face-to-face collaboration and interaction aids in the development of a sense of self-awareness as well as social awareness within student groups.

The information shared in September’s EL reinforced my belief that the most essential and effective instructional strategy for the 21st century is relationship-building.  While the “digital brain” is motivated by connectivity, 21st centuryinformation and  social-networking technologies sidestep the need for face-to-face human interaction that is hard-wired into the human brain. Only through collaborative interaction with teachers and peers can students develop the sense of self and social awareness required to mediate and control the technology explosion taking place around them. The role of the 21st century educator is to provide opportunities for the development of emotional literacy through interactive teaching and learning. Collaborative and cooperative interactions promoting shared responsibility for learning between teachers and students are essential to strengthening each individual’s emotional quotient (EQ) and providing the  balance with IQ necessary for success in today’s global community.

What do you think? Leave a comment or ask a question. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Welcome to the 2009-2010 school year. It seems that the annual educational cycle seems to accelerate as the years progress.  While I attribute some of this quickening pace to my advancing age, I would have to argue that the most influential contributing factor is the rapid societal change occurring 24/7 around us. This point hit home with me this past weekend while I was spending some one-on-one time with my 20-month-old-grandson Eli. As he was exploring Grandpa’s coffee table for interesting playthings, he happened upon a small solar calculator. As I watched, Eli picked up the calculator and put it to his ear as if he had just received a phone call on his blackberry!! The technology for this solar calculator was not readily available when Eli’s dad was 20 months old, yet for Eli’s generation the solar calculator technology was obsolete and was mistakenly recognized within the current context of ever advancing electronic communication.

A news story the following day reinforced this message as the opening of a brand new school celebrated new classrooms with student-accessible Smartboards and computers in select classrooms. What I realized at the time was that many of the students sitting in these classrooms would probably be carrying portable Smartboards, in the shape of iphones, and Smart phones, in their pockets. Though the acquisition of this technology for classrooms does indeed need to be celebrated, I think that we as educators must also realize that education as we know it lags behind in “keeping up” with the changes that are a part of the world our young people are experiencing outside of the classroom walls. With this realization comes the responsibility of education to provide students in our classrooms with the skills to recognize, understand, and utilize the information and communication technology that they (the students) are bombarded with on a daily basis.  We as educators need to “retool” our literacy programs to focus on 21^st century conceptual arenas including information literacy, critical thinking, and problem solving. Furthermore, we need to do it in such away that we engage our students in the learning to the extent that what goes on in the classroom becomes a relevant part of their lives rather than a block of time separate from their “real lives”.

I found a graphic that I felt depicted the challenge of 21^st century learning.  It is taken from the Center for Media Literacy website and appears in conjunction with an article entitled Learning for the 21^st Century.

http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/article580.html

I would like to hear your thoughts, ideas, comments, and reactions to what I have shared. Please share your comments and reactions. Tell us what you are (or aren’t) doing in your classroom to address these changes. Hope to hear from you soon.