Be Proactive

Well....I'm back at it.  Blogging?  Yes, but no not really.  Blogging for school?  Yes.  Yes, that is correct.  In fact, this part of this blog will not make it into my blog that is turned in.  I had to cross post for my own self.  For the part of me that needs to be on my blog.  The part of me that needs to write and just has found every excuse not to write.  The part that has said "lesson plans, keeping in touch with friends, homework, sleep, Vox, my pets, my family, my husband, supporting teachers, student council, Twitter, conference planning, our school TV station, sunshine committee, exploring Google, meetings, and so many other things (not in that specific order) need to come first".  Well, now I have to write.  So now I chose to write here.  I will copy and paste and add that tiny extra step. But somehow my soul has already breathed a sigh of relief.  No one will see this.  I will not blast this, I will not announce it, I will keep this to myself. But that's ok, because that's who I am doing it for.

And now...homework.

When I think of being proactive, I think of planning.  I think of being prepared for a variety of paths so that no matter what happens, I have a plan and will not react.  The phrase be proactive became a regular part of my vocabulary when I was working with some challenging students in a high risk school.  The focus of everything was to be proactive: be prepared.  Have behavior plans, have incentives, know the triggers, know their positives, look for signs of a bad day, start the day with good things, etc.  I was being proactive for my students.

Now, I need to look at being proactive for myself.  Am I proactive?  How can I be proactive?  How can I make it a habit of mine?

My natural personality is not one of "proactivity".  My natural personality is one of frustration and, I admit, I pout.  However, I also recognize that pouting and being frustrated and complaining doesn't get me any where or solve any problems.  The only thing it does, is become annoying OR become a breeding ground for negativity.  THAT is not my natural personality.

So how can I proactive?  I am going to take a look at how I approach school (both work and MA) at the moment.  Working on a MA while working full time alone is extremely overwhelming.  However, somehow, at school I have also managed to take on an incredible amount of extra curricular activities. It has gotten to the point where my attitude is becoming very poor.  I believe that this is the perfect opportunity for me to become more proactive.  I have already made it clear to my administration that I need help.  However, I need to be more proactive about seeking out the help I need.

I should accept any help that is offered instead of playing it cool, like I have everything under control. I should ask my colleagues if they can handle a task so that I can focus on a bigger priority.  I should take control over how I react.  I should be proactive.

This is a skill that I know I am capable of mastering.  It is something that I work very hard at typically.  However, now I recognize that in a time of stress, I need to be more purposeful at being proactive.

I will be teaching this skill to a group of teachers that I Vox with from all over the country.  We are all in a similar situation in that we are all teachers at the beginning of the school year.  We all love education.  We all work hard to make our classes a valuable and engaging experience for our students.  We are all experiencing significant causes for stress as the school year starts.  I believe that they would all benefit from hearing the words "Be Proactive".  It's a chance to put a word to what they already do, celebrate their successes of being proactive, and recognize when they are not...when we are all needing to change a negative habit and be more proactive.

EDL 680 Module 10 Discussion Post

What big take aways do you have from reading Friedman?

What are the limitations?

I have really enjoyed reading Friedman’s book.  The messages he shares, from a world outside of education, are so powerful and how he shared them through his stories of his own life experiences and reflections made it all that much more interesting.  Despite the fact that he is in a completely different field, he manages to (in my opinion) express the excitement and concern that we all feel of living life in today’s world.

I think my biggest take aways come from Friedman’s discussion of and constant personal reflection.  Our world is in a state of constant change.  “This is how it’s always been done” is no longer acceptable because everything around whatever “this” is, is no longer the same either.  So whatever “this” is, needs to change, update, and/or be more flexible.  As a teacher, one of the big questions that is constantly at the forefront of my mind is “How can I have done that better?” or “What do I need to change?”  From those type of questions, I’m able to confidently, continue to grow and learn as a teacher and as a human.  Even Friedman (2016) believes that “if there was ever a time to pause for moral reflection, it is now” (p. 340).  As he quoted Leon Wieseltier (2015) “Every technology is used before it is completely understood...there is always a lag between an innovation and the apprehension of its consequences.  We are living in that lag...we have much to gain and much to lose” (p. 340).  I feel like when we stop learning and stop reflecting, when we think we have truly learned all there is to know, is when we assume the attitude of “this is how it’s always been done”.  And that attitude can be dangerous.  By shutting yourself down to learning, the changes in our world and our society can sneak up on you with no choice now but to adjust immediately.  

Friedman (2016) stated that in the Middle East the dominant political ideology was “‘I am weak, how can I compromise? I am strong, why should I compromise?’ The notion of there being ‘a common good’ and ‘a middle ground’ that we all compromise for and upon- not to mention a higher community calling we work to sustain- was simply not in the lexicon” (p. 447-448).  Sadly, he also mentioned that what he saw in Washington DC was not that much different.  Are these changes in society caused by a lack of reflection?  Are we no longer looking at what is happening in other cultures and reflecting on why it’s happening?  Are we no longer reflecting on how we can collaborate and thinking only of ourselves?  This lack of reflection is happening on a large scale than in our own individual lives, but I still believe that when a larger shift happens those who have not reflected and started to adjust, will struggle with the changes, whatever that may look like.

Friedman broke his book into four sections: reflecting, accelerating, innovating, and anchoring.  I believe that accelerating, innovating, and anchoring are all reliant on reflecting.  How do you know you’re accelerating unless you’re reflective on where you have been?  How can you innovate, unless you reflect on your failures?  How can you find and recognize your anchor...be it person(s) or place(s), unless you reflect on your life?  

As for the limitations of Friedman’s book, I cannot say there are many.  He shares many political stories about situations that I am not familiar with due a variety of reasons.  Regardless of my unawareness, he outlines the needed information in order to understand the purpose of his story. Due to how he framed everything, I was able to understand his point and then apply it to my situation in education or life in general.   

EDL 680 Module 9 Discussion Post

Friedman talks about reflecting, accelerating, and innovating. How do each of these apply concepts to your school situation?

When reflecting on my school, I feel extremely fortunate.  While it is not perfect (but in life what is?), it does provide opportunities for reflecting, accelerating, and innovating.  I believe these opportunities are afforded to us because of our previous leadership as well as our teachers.  

In my role (technology teacher) in our school, assessment is not necessary for me.  My previous principal and I had a number of discussions around inspiring creativity and excitement with the use of technology and how to measure my success.  He suggested that I create a student reflection form (Google form) to gauge students interest in the projects.  I felt that my success was strongly tied to their success because my goals are more to excite and encourage as opposed to explicit instruction. This year, I plan on implementing a similar reflection piece for the students.  

My own reflection is critical in my success as an educator.  I have been blogging for many years but it has never been very regular.  This year, I made it a point to blog weekly but my focus was always a tool and/or academic strategy.  At the beginning of the summer, I joined a small blogging community where I was inspired to use my blog as a more personal platform.  I think by tying in the personal aspect to the professional, technical part of my blog, I am taking the necessary time to really reflect on all the aspects of my professional life and even part of my personal life.  I feel like taking that time to reflect and put it out in the world has helped me connect and created a ripple effect.  The questions and feedback I get about my reflections cause me to reflect and question myself and others more.  This practice is so powerful for me...I have to believe that it has great potential for my students as well.  Friedman (2016) quoted Megginson as reportedly saying “the species that survives is the one that is able to best adapt and adjust to changing environment in which it finds itself” (p. 298).  Reflection allows us to adapt and adjust to the changing environment of education.  

Accelerating is a difficult concept to tackle because it can viewed and approached in so many different ways.  I saw this first hand when interviewing my new principal(s) versus my previous principal for our EDL 600 project.  I asked what would be best for a technology update roll out, if we did a little at a time or if we rolled everything out at once (if money was not factored in).  My previous principal thought that doing everything at once and then putting out little fires was the better approach.  My current principals believe that going slower and incrementally is the better approach to ease everyone into the new devices.  Friedman (2016) explains that “when so many things are accelerating at once, it’s easy to feel like you’re in a kayak in rushing white water, being carried along by the current at a faster and faster clip” (p. 198).  Everyone can and everyone is accelerating through change.  It’s just that some people are ok moving at a faster speed than others.  

Innovating can also be viewed and approached in different ways.  What is innovative for one school may not be innovative for another school.  For example, this year, we have made the jump to GSuite for Education.  Many schools have already made that jump, so we are not doing anything new and innovative but it is for our school.  Our school has been 1:1 BYOD for 5th through 8th grades for many years now.  That, compared to other schools in our Diocese is innovative.  However, some of the things that we are doing with that is no innovative.  This is where GSuite may come in.  What can we do with these two things to become more innovative?

EDL 680 Module 8 Discussion Post

Which of the core disciplines will be challenging for you as a leader and why?
Which will be most natural for you and why?

I believe the core discipline that will be most challenging for me as a leader is Mental Models.  I personally recognize that I like to try new things in school.  For me, it’s ok to readjust and fail and keep trying until something works.  However, I know that there are many teachers with an “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” attitude.  I have seen first hand some of the passive aggressive attitudes that come my way if I try to suggest a new or different way of approaching a project or style of teaching.  I am excited about what we can do to change and improve education but often my ideas or suggestions “conflict with deeply held internal images of how the world (in education) works” (Senge, 1990, p. 163).  

In my current position, I am able to suggest new and innovative ideas to teachers.  We can collaborate and build off of each other’s ideas until we’re both happy with our experiment.  Our conversations are natural debriefing and planning sessions.  However, I know which teachers I can plan and create with, and I know which teachers I should avoid discussing any kind of educational technology or current trends in education.  The role I have now allows me to pick and choose who I plan with and push toward new ideas.  As a leader in school, I will not always have that choice.  

More importantly, it will be difficult to recognize the mental model(s) at a school.  When “we remain unaware of our mental models, the models remain unchanged.  As the world changes, the gap widens between our mental models and reality, leading to increasingly counterproductive actions” (Senge, 1990, p. 166).  In fact, before reading the Mental Models chapter, I wouldn’t have been able to come up with what I believe to be what a schools mental model should be; what’s best for kids.  I do believe that most educators would agree with the idea that whatever we do, it should be what’s best for kids.  However, it will continue to be the HOW that is a challenge.

I believe that the most natural core discipline for me would be Shared Vision.  I recognize that I have a personal vision.  However, I also recognize that my personal vision is still very unclear, in fact I would call it more of a personal directional vision.  I know some things that I think are important when it comes to changing education today.  However, I am not crystal clear on how to achieve the change I would like to someday see.  For this, I rely on others.  I ask for opinions, ideas, and feedback.  I understand that I do not have all the answers, but if we can work collaboratively, we have better chances of making some really impactful changes.  I feel like because I want to rely more on the collaborative creation of a vision, I can avoid what Senge (1990) said happens to many leaders; “many leaders have personal visions that never get translated into shared visions that galvanize an organization” (p. 9).  Senge (1990) went on to explain that “what has been lacking is a discipline for translating individual vision into shared vision - not a “cookbook” but a set of principles and guiding practices” (p. 9).

Again, Senge (1990) explained that “when you look carefully you find that most “visions” are on person’s (or one group’s) vision imposed on an organization” (p. 192).  My hope is that by working together with others at school we can build a shared vision in which everyone feels like they had input.  There will be compromise and not everyone will be in the same place when it comes to vision achievement.  However, I believe that if everyone believes we are working together to achieve our goal and that they are supported no matter where they are in the process, that shared vision will be successful.  

EDL 680 Module 7 Discussion Post

What 2 things resonated with you in chapters 4-6?

What 1 question do you have about the chapters?

When reading The Fifth Disciple so much of what Senge says translates into schools in my head.  As I read this week’s chapters it was hard to pick out just two things that spoke to me but as I reviewed everything, I realized that “Seeing Circles of Causality” applied to school on multiple levels.  In addition, the concept of “Dividing an elephant in half does not produce two small elephants” also made me think of many of our schools today.  

Schools are constantly changing.  Each year, teachers get a new class.  In that class, students are rearranged into different groups, the content taught is different, the behaviors and the expectations are different.  Not only in classrooms but also as a whole school there may be changes.  Sometimes it’s administration, sometimes it’s central office, sometimes it’s just the classroom teachers.  Schools at their core are full of change.  However, sometimes with all the change that is going on, it’s important to look at and understand not only what is being changed and how to change it, but why.  Senge said that “...individuals, teams, and organizations need to see beyond events and into the forces that shape change” (2006, p. 74).  Every decision causes a ripple effect.  It is practically impossible to foresee every result, but in seeing that “reality is made up of circles” we can understand why to make the decisions we make, why to make the changes that are needed.  I feel as if we start to really understand that every change we make sets in motion both a cause and an effect, we can make better decisions to benefit our students.  

One of the better decisions we can make to benefit both our students and our teachers is to limit the amount of “things” happening in our school days.  I taught at a school where a new principal came in and she had previously served on a school improvement board for our school.  One of her biggest comments had been there are too many “programs” happening at the school.  Students were rotating to reading interventions, they were pulled into required small groups for a specific program during the ELA block, they were given 3-5 different computer programs that they had to have a certain number of minutes on each day.  The teachers were asked to do a different program or project or something every year, without anything from the previous year being taken off of their plate.  It was all very overwhelming and hard to keep up with.  The teachers and the students were going in so many different directions when the new principal came in that nothing was getting accomplished.  It was just as Senge described it, “you don’t have two small elephants then; you have a mess” (2006, p. 67).  He also describe the mess as, “a complicated problem where there is no leverage to be found because the leverage lies in the interactions that cannot be seen from looking only at the piece you are holding” (2006, p. 67).

When the new principal came in, she had already taken a hard look at all the pieces and determined what was critical for the success of the students, and wiped out the rest.  It was a good reset year because we took the time to focus on our students’ needs and took the time to focus on what we needed to do to truly be effective with the pieces that we did still have in place.  Everyone was learning and everyone was given the chance to be successful.  From there she continued to add to what was now a relatively solid foundation to provide continued growth.  

Since I do try to apply everything I’m reading to a school setting, I’m reading about the different diagrams and I’m curious which one really suites a school?  Or do they all in some form or fashion?  I just can’t make the alignment between my role as a leader and how to best help my school (now or in the future) from these diagrams.  

Are we a systems diagram where we’re looking at the desired achievement and how to “fill” the students with knowledge and experiences as they grow with us?  Are we a reinforcing circle diagram?  We teach the content, they learn the content, and if they pass the assessment, we teach more content?  Perhaps we are a balancing circle diagram.  The students come to us with a certain amount of knowledge, we assess to figure out what they know and we teach or challenge depending on the student, and then everything is balanced in that at least everyone should know the basic level of content taught?  Could we even be a delay diagram?  Students come to us, not knowing a significant amount but due to standards, we are aware of what they should know by the end of the year.  They come in and we figure out where on the spectrum the students are, we adjust our teaching and the content so that students can grasp what we’re teaching in their own way, and then if we are lucky, we are successful.  Another question...are we applying these diagrams to individual students, whole classes, whole grade levels, or whole schools?  I will admit, my head is swimming.  

EDL 680: Module 4 Discussion Post

How do the different perspectives from the additional readings impact your view on Tony Wagner’s suggestions for changing education?

I will admit that I am struggling with this week’s post.  I don’t believe that any of the additional readings impacted my view on Wagner’s suggestions.  I could say that none of the reading swayed my belief that Wagner is correct in the fact that we need to change education, in fact all of them reaffirmed this belief.  However, none of them were trying to dissuade any reader of that fact.  They were all, Wagner included, trying to share how THEY have seen and/or experienced a change in education for the benefit of the students.  Their posts or videos or books were all about their own individual experiences and opinions.  That being said, I believe that they are all correct and that nothing any of them said, could possibly take away from or make anything else that was said “incorrect”.   

We know that ALL children, all humans, are different and need different things.  So why would varying approaches to improving education be any different?  There need to be different types and styles of schools to meet the needs of all the different students.  Is it even possible, that there should be some traditional, lecture based schools with textbooks still in place (with a few tweaks) because some students learn really well that way?  

For example, Lisa Nielsen talks about how students plan and produce a business concept in front of business leaders who assess the students and their plan.  She debates against Wagner that this is NOT innovative because we need to “stop treating youth like people who are always in state of preparation for life rather than a state of living life. We need to stop wasting time "preparing" kids to do stuff and instead let them do stuff” (2012).  Now let me explain my thought process as I was reading this post.  

First, this post was five years old and therefore, more schools COULD be following either her or Wagner’s lead on being innovative, regardless of the exact definition.  However, from my own experience exclusively, schools are NOT doing anything close to what Wagner and Nielsen are talking about.  With that said, YES, what High Tech High is doing is innovative.  There is always room for growth, but to take steps to helps students prepare for their next steps in the real world, by pulling in the real world, is innovative.  

That leads me to my next point, why should we stop “wasting time” preparing kids to do stuff? Why do you believe it is “wasting time”?  Students are children.  They are in the process of learning.  To allow them to practice and learn and fail and success, we are “preparing” them to do stuff.  Sometimes, they are able to take that “stuff” and run with it.  No adult or school (at least the ones we are looking at) would tell the student no because they are just kids.  However, if their projects are not everything that they should be, having that opportunity to revise and improve with guidance and mentors is what provides students with the learning they need to then be successful.  Additionally, Wagner shares that “at High Tech High (students) complete a ten-week internship with a local company or nonprofit organization in their junior year as a mandatory part of their academic program” (2008, p. 225).  This internship is not a just preparing students, it is expecting them to perform in the real world.  However, it has provided them time and exposure to a variety of options so they can make a choice of internship that will prepare them for college or life or whatever next step they are going to take.  

Adults are not successful at everything, all the time.  We are still learning and our “stuff” that we do, doesn’t always come out the way we hoped.  However, with maturity, wisdom, and the guidance of our mentors and peers, we can make the changes necessary.  We are modeling exactly what they are asking of students.  How is that not innovative again?  

EDL 600: Module 3 Discussion Post

California has an increasing percentage of students representing ethnic minorities.  What implications does this fact have for California school finance?

According to Townley and Schmieder-Ramirez (2015), in 2013 “There are more than a million English learners, which represented 22% of the total enrollment in California public schools” (p. 35). In 2015, that number increased “English learners constitute 22.1 percent of the total enrollment in California public schools” (www.cde.ca.gov, CalEdFacts, Basic Facts).

As an educator, as someone who values education, I recognize the importance of a quality education for all children. I also recognize that when there is such a large percentage of the student population that are not only learning content, but also the language that the content is delivered in, that quality education may need to be approached differently and on a larger scale. Of course, we also know that when those kind of large changes are made, there is a financial impact. There is always a financial impact.

In 1998, Proposition 227 was voted into effect. Essentially, this proposition took bilingual classes out of schools and instead “limited English proficient (LEP) students (were) placed in English immersion classes and then mainstreamed into regular classes” (Townley & Schmieder-Ramirez, 2015, p. 22). Proposition 227 was favored because voters felt that this would better prepare students to not only learn English, but also be able to learn content that was taught in English. The financial aspect of this particular proposition was that the state was required “to provide $50 million every year for ten years for English classes for adults who promise to tutor LEP students” (ballotpedia.org, California Proposition 227).

It was a long time ago, but from my own personal experience, I think the state should have saved their money and put it to better use. I was in the 2nd grade (I told you it was a long time ago) bilingual classroom. I lived in Perris, CA and my school had a high number of hispanic students, many of whom were my friends. In my classroom were both English and Spanish books, notes on the board were in both English and Spanish, the newsletter was sent home in English and Spanish, directions were spoken in English and in Spanish. I learned so much more Spanish that year by accident, than I did when I took Spanish for 2 years in high school. I remember sitting in the classroom library looking at a Spanish book and not understanding anything. I told a friend how hard it was and she read the book with me. It was benefitted the Spanish speaking students, but it benefitted the English speaking students as well. More students were being positively impacted than placing ONLY non-English speaking students in an immersion class.  

Townley and Schmieder-Ramirez mentioned “the possibility of a new proposition being placed on the California ballot in 2016 that (would) change the restrictions of Proposition 227” (2015, p. 22). I did investigate the new proposition and found out about Proposition 58, which was voted for in 2016. Proposition 58 repealed some of the provisions put into place by Proposition 227. Based on the website Ballotpedia, “Proposition 58 no longer required English-only education for English learners. It allowed schools to utilize multiple programs, including bilingual education” (California Proposition 58, Initiative design). We are past the ten year mark in which the state was having to provide $50 million, so assuming that money was no longer being paid out, Proposition 227 was not requiring any extra funding above paying additional teachers as enrollment increases. In reviewing Proposition 58, it appears that “No notable fiscal effect on school districts or state government” (Ballotpedia, California Proposition 58, Fiscal impact).

Ballotpedia (2016). California Proposition 227, the "English in Public Schools" Initiative (1998).  Retrieved from https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_227,_the_%22English_in_Public_Schools%22_Initiative_(1998).

Ballotpedia (2016). California Proposition 58, Non-English Languages Allowed in Public Education (2016).  Retrieved from https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_58,_Non-English_Languages_Allowed_in_Public_Education_(2016).

California Department of Education. (2016). Facts about English Learners in California - CalEdFacts. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/cefelfacts.asp.

Townley, A & Schmieder-Ramirez, J. (2015). School Finance. Kendall Hunt Publishing Company.

EDL 680: Module 3 Discussion Post

1. Discuss your previous experience with Instructional Rounds - could be your own experience or what you’ve heard about this strategy for improving instruction.

I have had some experience with Instructional Rounds, though it was limited.  

It was the end of my first year teaching 1st grade (my 5th year teaching) and the principal decided she wanted to implement instructional rounds.  I am certain that it wasn’t solely her idea.  That year our school was being visited and observed by MANY people from central office and was highly scrutinized because we were not meeting AYP or making the necessary gains in order to meet AYP in the near future.  

The climate of our school was not positive to begin with and having so many critical eyes rotating through our school did not improve anyone’s attitude.  When the idea of instructional rounds was announced, it was pitched as a way for us to see what everyone in our grade level was doing.  One member of the leadership team would cover a class period and another member of the leadership team would walk around with the teacher during that 50 or so minutes, to the other classrooms in their grade level.  We were all reassured that it was non-evaluative but there was a checklist so that there would be points to discuss at the debrief meeting.  Each grade level was doing these instructional rounds at the same time in their grade level.  

There was only one 1st grade teacher that made the rounds.  It was the end of the year and we all know how chaotic that time of year is, so that was the reasoning for not continuing the rest of the rounds.  My theory revolved around the teachers that had been selected to kick off the initial round. They were all incredibly vocal and negative and contributed largely to the stagnant climate that had settled on our school.  Let’s just say, I wouldn’t have wanted to be in the debriefing meeting with those teachers.  

This year at my current school, completely different dynamic...completely different everything, the idea of a Pineapple Chart was presented at the Sunshine Committee meeting.  Jennifer Gonzalez, author of Cult of Pedagogy blog, (2016) explains “a Pineapple Chart is a system that allows teachers to invite one another into their classrooms for informal observation”.  Although some of us on the team loved the idea of allowing fellow teachers in the room to observe, others were VERY against it. Wagner (2008) describes education as a profession as a craftsman trade, there is a “craftsman’s regularity and repetitiveness in that they often teach the same lesson two or three times a day and the same courses for years, with little or no change”.  The teachers were against the Pineapple chart because they fear anyone coming in and asking them to change something.  Whether they think they are doing everything perfect (doubtful) or they just don’t feel like they have the time to invest to change anything.  

I suppose it just blows my mind that teachers, regardless of the school and the atmosphere, don’t want people coming into their classrooms.  That feedback is so valuable! I am willing to admit though, that a lot of it comes from experience and whether than experience was positive or negative.    

2. Discuss how these additional resources connect to the ideas Wagner puts forth about improving instruction.  

There are some distinct similarities and differences between the Instructional Rounds and Wagner’s Learning Walks.  The basic idea is the same; taking some time to get a glimpse of what teachers and students are doing in their classrooms, non-evaluative, and time to debrief.  All of these are critical components for growth of the observer.  I think the biggest difference is the audience and the purpose.  Wagner’s Learning Walks focuses on getting an overall picture of what is happening in classrooms for school and district administrators.  These positions are not in the classroom daily so they may not know exactly what instruction looks like, let alone what they want instruction to look like.  The ultimate purpose with these walks is for the leaders to figure out how to better support the teachers as instructional leaders in the classroom.

3. Thinking about your own leadership, how would you bring this strategy to a school you lead? Think about being a new leader and how you would roll out this new plan, keeping in mind the differences in learners/teachers, and the structure of this school’s PD strategies already in place.  

Without going too in depth, I do have a couple of ideas of what I would do if I were to try and roll this type of PD strategy at my current school.  First, I would love to model that “open to feedback” mindset.  I would like to invite teachers to join in components of my job as an administrator and ask for their feedback; be it regarding planning a staff meeting or lunch duty or really anything that isn’t confidential.  I think the next step would be to ask a handful of teachers that are looked up at the school to open their classrooms.  There is at least one teacher in each pod, that are always happy to have teachers in their room.  Depending on the comfort of the observing teachers, we can start by going in just to watch one of the teachers of their choice.  After the first observation, the same teachers that observed would do a second round. I’d like to include a focus, the “problem of practice” as described by Wager (2008) and the Classroom Observation Strategies: Instructional Rounds video (2015) and a short debrief session that really only asks the observers to describe what they saw in regards to the problem of practice.  This will also hopefully cause them to reflect on their own practices.  Then I would like to have a third round where we include each of the phases that were shown in the Classroom Observation Strategies: Instructional Rounds video (2015).  Additionally, I would like to invite the teachers that opened their classrooms to the debriefing meetings so they are able to see what is being discussed and see what they would like to contribute.  These teachers are big on growth mindset so I’m confident they would model what it looks like to say, “How can I do this better?” or “How can I meet the needs of my students better?”

My hope is that by scaffolding with teachers and teacher leaders, the school would be more accepting of the opening of classrooms and learning from one another. I recognize that it will take awhile to onboard everyone using this approach. However, my personal belief is to take as much time as we need to do it WELL and do it ONCE. Of course, with the exception of new teachers, but if new teachers come into the school where that climate and expectation are set, it will be much easier for them to become a part of it.

EDL 600: Module 2 Discussion Post

React (based on your reading) to one of the two articles on Charter Schools issues that were provided as supplemental reading and discuss its connection to the readings about charter school policy.

When I read both of the articles, it made me more aware of how little I knew about charter schools, especially Why You Might Find a Charter School in a Mall because why would I find any school in a mall?  I read through the article multiple times and picked out a couple of statements that struck me as interesting because it was not necessarily what I had heard about charter schools.  

http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/education/might-find-charter-school-mall/print/

As a current teacher in a private school who previously taught in public schools, I was not aware that a charter school fell under either of those categories.  I was under the impression that charter schools were not public, but not private, and that’s all I could articulate.  The article provided some clarification that charter schools do fall under the umbrella of a “public school” because they receive state funding.  Koran (2016) explained that “(Charter schools) are publicly funded schools that operate mostly autonomously” (p. 1).  I didn’t realize that charter schools received funding from the state, but it’s not as simple as that.  Is it ever?  Gownley and Schmieder-Ramirez in School Finance (2015) said that in 1999, Assembly Bill 1600 “gives charter schools the option of receiving funding directly from the state, instead of through their local school district” (p. 22).  Why is that legislation necessary though?  Why is getting funding from the school district so complicated that charter schools need an alternative?  

Another question that I had about charter schools was in regards to enrollment.  The only thing I knew about charter school enrollment was that there was some sort of lottery system in place.  In order to find some answers, I reviewed CCSA’s website and found that charter schools give “admission preference to pupils who reside within the former attendance area of that public school” (CCSA, 2012, p.1).  Then the admissions area is expanded and additional enrollment preference is given to students in the school district that the charter school is located.  Assuming that these two filters provide a high enough enrollment, when is the lottery system put into effect?  Does it take the place of the previously stated filter?

The enrollment question has been a big question for me for the last couple of years.  Previously, in Las Vegas there was an elementary school on our Air Force base (AFB), Lomie Heard, that was part of the Clark County School District (CCSD).  Only students that lived in military housing were able to attend due to zoning.  When Nellis AFB decided not to renew their contract with CCSD, they accepted a charter school’s bid to move onto the base.  Is the charter school able to ONLY accept students from military housing?  If it’s a lottery system, what if students from military housing aren’t chosen?  Are families that are not military able to attend the school?  Are families required to go through the typical military background checks if they are not military personnel?  Is that something that can be required?

Koran, M. (2016). Why You Might Find a Charter School in a Mall. Voice of San Diego.  Retrieved from http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/education/might-find-charter-school-mall/print/.

Townley, A & Schmieder-Ramirez, J. (2015). School Finance. Kendall Hunt Publishing Company.

CCSA. (2012). Charter School Conversions: Myth vs. Facts. California Charter Schools Association. Retrieved from http://www.ccsa.org/blog/fact_sheet_Charter_Conversion_Myths_Reality.pdf.

EDL 680: Module 2 Discussion Post

Wagner's Learning Walks - in what ways do/don't they add valuable insight into what's happening in classrooms?

Wagner's Learning Walks overall seem to be more beneficial than not.  The concept of getting an overall glimpse, a summary, of what is happening in a school is so powerful.  The Learning Walks essentially take you into multiple classes for about 10-15 minutes.  Wagner points out that when goes on a Learning Walk, "rather than look only at what teachers are doing, (he tries) to assess what students are being asked to do: the specific skills and knowledge that students are expected to master and the level of intellectual challenge in the lesson.  What the teacher does is the means by which the students learn - not the end" (Wagner, 2008, p. 52).

I think one of the most valuable insights that a Learning Walk provides is the patterns of positive and negative, in both teaching patterns and student behavior patterns.  Often times building and district administrators will join Wagner on the Learning Walks.  So this is a perfect opportunity to see what is happening in a school that is having a positive impact on the students.  Are the students actively engaged?  Are the teachers challenging the students?  It's also helpful to see some of the practices in school that are not helping the students.  Is the focus the standardized test?  Are teachers "lecturing" and not engaging?  But knowing what is happening is the first step to figuring out what changes need to be made.  So regardless of what is being seen, it's positive.

The Learning Walks don't only provide valuable insight.  Some things to keep in mind are that they are not 100% accurate.  You are only seeing a sampling of the not only the teachers, but the lessons as well.  Additionally, noting what is seen in the Learning Walks doesn't identify the root cause of any concerns.  For example, Wagner talks about the fact that the majority of teachers come to school genuinely wanting to make a difference.  Perhaps, rather than blaming the teachers, we should look at "the quality of teachers' preparation, continuing professional development, and supervision (it's) very low in our nation's schools" (Wagner, 2008, p. 52).

What does Wagner like to see in classrooms?

When I first started taking my notes for this question, my answer consisted mainly of Wagner wanting to see students answering open ended questions, are the teachers asking follow up questions, who is answering the questions - the teachers or the students - and are only select students answering or is everyone engaged.  However, I went back and reread a section that hit me as more what I would want to focus on when looking at what was happening in classrooms.  Wagner talks analyzing how are we preparing our most academically well-prepared students?  "Are they learning how to think critically, solve problems, work collaboratively, take initiative, communicate effectively, access and analyze information, be curious and imaginative" (Wagner, 2008, p. 46).  

Discuss how these two additional articles connect to the ideas Wagner puts forth about what learning should look like?

When I read Eric Sheninge's article "It's Not a Technology Issue" I was struck when he noted schools' lack of willingness to adapt and/or evolve to a digital world.  Wagner initially states that our current school system is obsolete.  When you are looking at why a school system is obsolete, why anything is obsolete really, it comes down to the lack of adaptation.  Technology can be an incredibly powerful tool to be one way that we can start adapting education to our current world.  "Even with the proliferation of technology across all facets of society, we still see schools moving at a snail's pace (if at all) to adapt, or better yet evolve, to a digital world.  In my opinion, sheer ignorance is to blame.  From this ignorance a plethora of excuses arise" (Sheninger, 2015, Huffpost).  

George Couros is a fantastic bloggers and author and always provides educators points to really ponder. His article, "Connecting Professional Learning and Leadership" just seemed to drive home the point that Wagner discussed regarding professional development.  As I stated above, Wagner said "the quality of teachers' preparation, continuing professional development, and supervision (it's) very low in our nation's schools" (Wagner, 2008, p. 52).  Couros' article discussed the problems of providing professional development to a small group of teachers.  This particular approach was met with success with the small group.  There was a good variety of choice, the teachers could do the PD on their own time, and there was an incentive at the end to complete the PD.  The downfall came when the PD ended and there was no ripple effect.  The teachers that went through the PD weren't expected to continue to share the wealth of knowledge.  Professional development for all teachers is critical.  We must be life long learners in order to continue to grow and improve.  Couros said it perfectly, "what if you adopt the idea that if you teach someone to fish you could also teach them to lead others to fish as well?" (Couros, 2016, The Principal of Change).