Organization and Administration of Schools Course Reflection

The course, Organization and Administration of Schools, has given me an opportunity to practice a range of leadership strategies.  I had to think politically and orchestrate collaboration among stakeholders, all while maintaining my original vision.  This is very difficult to do, but I believe that it is possible in the “real world.” 

Someday, I may be a first-year principal, facing the challenges that I could only imagine and partially observe during the Action Plan culminating project during this course.  I envision many pitfalls, and I envision feeling overwhelmed and skill-less.  However, any first year principal will have to overcome these challenges and move forward, keeping the best interests of the students in mind.  Imagining I were the new principal at the school I studied during this course, major pitfalls loom large for me that first year.  Historical artifacts such as “the way we’ve always done things around here,” an unwieldy vision statement in need of overhaul, past student achievement data showing flat-lined and/or declining improvement, and low morale among all stakeholders in the school and community would be at the top of my list of pitfalls.

How would I respond to these challenges?  During this Organization and Administration of Schools course, I was able to role-play the various players present in any school community, so I could get a sense of what issues each particular player must experience in a school improvement plan.  I learned that, as a leader, understanding all of the stakeholders’ concerns is of utmost importance.  I need to listen to all of the concerns and help the school community develop their own strategies for improving the culture and student learning.  Developing a new vision for a school is NOT something a principal does in isolation.  I need to engage the stakeholders in conversations and exercises that help the community develop the vision together.  Then, I need to develop leaders throughout the school to help bring that vision to reality.  As I mentioned frequently in my Action Plan project, professional learning communities with focused goals and activities are fundamental in effecting school reform, and I would need to be the “conductor” that brings out the best from these rich communities.

This course has prepared me to use twenty-first century leadership skills as I model a new culture for collaborating, analyzing student performance, and continually reflecting on instructional practices, school climate, and quality decision-making.  Modeling this new culture is a good way to gain the trust and understanding of all of the stakeholders in any school community.  Using technology efficiently to analyze data, to organize the school and to maintain progress benchmarks, is what needs to happen in any school today.  As the teachers and students learn how to reflect on teaching and learning, my role is to continually challenge everyone to stay the course.  Everyone must be familiar with the data, and look deeper into the root causes of poor achievement.  I will encourage everyone to participate in professional learning communities that focus on student learning to help all students achieve.  Most importantly, I will work with the whole school community to face the challenges and overcome them, to the best of my ability, with the help of all stakeholders, focused on the clear vision.

Individualizing the Curriculum: What Works Best?

Blog Post #2

This JHU Curriculum Theory, Development and Implementation course has helped me grow in my understanding of curriculum, as I begin a new phase of my career in education to strengthen student achievement.  Through the course, we have looked at many factors that influence what students must know and be able to do.  In this new age of curriculum redesign, technology integration, and 21^st century literacy skills, along with the new Common Core State Standards, it is more important than ever that we make good choices when utilizing and revising curricula for a school or district.

Individualizing the curriculum is a healthy challenge, and one we must consider carefully.  Is there a model or individualized program that works best in any given school or district?  Is it even possible to define what is best?  I think not, but we can make some wise choices that will give us the best strategies for improving student achievement. 

I begin this thought process with the assumption that Differentiated Instruction is the expectation, the norm, the “way we do things around here.”  The school’s mission, vision and goals can all be realized through a differentiated process for the administrators, the teachers, and most importantly, the students. 

The Glatthorn text substitutes the term individualized for a clearer term adaptive.   “Adaptive curricula are educational processes that arrange the conditions and materials of learning so that they fit individual learner differences” (Glatthorn, et al, p.468).  Using current adaptive approaches such as cooperative learning, learning styles models and computer-based models all work well in reaching all learners, and I believe that there is not a one-size-fits-all model that should be adopted for ALL students in a school or district.

Instead, I suggest implementing Universal Design for Learning to frame all curricular activities, using the framework as the building-blocks and foundation to curriculum that adapts naturally to help all learners learn, regardless of their learning style, interests, and/or disabilities.  Through Universal Design for Learning, I am convinced that educators have a better chance at improving learning for all students. Students should experience a variety of learning gateways, through cooperative grouping, grouping by learning styles, and individualized computer programs that adapt to levels based on student input.  Other good models include parallel and/or accelerated curriculum for the Gifted and Talented, and early intervention programs for the academically challenged learners, such as Reading Recovery and Response to Intervention models.

Developing relevant curriculum that reaches each and every learner in the school community is a huge challenge for school leaders today.  Is there something that can be called “the best”?  What is best is what works for everyone, and that is a differentiated, individualized approach that utilizes a variety of models and systems.  Will it be easy?  Absolutely not!  However, it is a mission I choose to accept!

Reference: 

Glatthorn, A.A., Bosche, F., Whitehead, B. (2009).  Curriculum leadership: Strategies for development and implementation. Thousand Oaks, CA. SAGE Publications.

Co-teaching: A Partnership for Success

Blog Post #1

Co-teaching is a way to deliver instruction to diverse learners drawing on the strengths of each teaching partner in the planning, delivery and reflection of learning, in order to help ALL students learn.  In most cases, one teacher is the general education teacher and the other is the special education teacher.  The general educator serves as the content and curriculum expert, and the special educator is the learning-process expert, making sure the content is accessible to students with and without disabilities (Heitin, 2011).  The features of this model range from a separate “class within a class” to full collaboration and complete integration for all students.

I experienced the co-teaching model myself during a conference sponsored by Very Special Arts (VSA), an international organization on arts and disability.  Two presenters/teachers were teaching a group of us the history of Japanese Taiko Drumming, which included opportunities to play the drums after learning a beginning drum sequence.  While one teacher spoke to the group, the other was scaffolding the instruction by drawing a graphic organizer and supporting the lecture/demonstration with additional non-verbal assistance.  The two would switch roles frequently, and the group experienced the learning in ways appropriate to their learning styles.  I will never forget that experience, as it culminated in a group performance utilizing the skills we learned in the lesson.

I refer to co-teaching often, encouraging teachers and administrators to utilize this model whenever possible.  With the importance of Common Core State Standards and 21^st Century literacy skills, co-teaching is an effective way to support these revised standards and skills, making the learning accessible to all learners.

As a curriculum supervisor or leader, the first challenge to implementing this model is cost.  It is expensive to hire the staff needed to make co-teaching a reality.  For the sake of this blog post, let’s assume that funding is not an issue.  What are the challenges?  Every instructional model requires a certain amount of trial and error, and it is especially true for co-teaching.  I would certainly utilize the Co-teaching Rating Scale (Gately & Gately, 2001) to help teachers focus on areas that need improvement.  The two teachers need to build trust among each other and establish some operating standards and understandings/assumptions.   

Open communication is a must, with room to revamp and revise as needed.  As a leader, I would work to build the trust and develop collaboration skills among the co-teaching teams.  I would address all of the challenges and struggles by implementing a strong professional development program and develop a viable professional learning community among the teams of teachers.  This model requires a lot of maintenance and revising.  Sometimes two individuals just don’t “click” as partners, and it would be my responsibility to address the situation and either repair it or revise the pairing completely. 

That is the nature of this work – we need to revise “on-the-fly” all the time in education, and this is no exception.  Co-teaching has many benefits, and when it works, it really works, helping all students learn, regardless of their learning needs.

References:

Gately, S. E. & Gately, Jr., F. J. (2001, Mar/Apr). Understanding co-teaching components. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40-47. Retrieved from https://inclusiveed.wikispaces.com/file/view/Understanding CoTeaching Components.pdf

Heitin, L. (2011, October 12). A Maryland initiative seeks to scale up co-teaching as a way to support students of all needs. Edweek, 5(01), 26. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org

Reflection: Influences on School Curricula Today

 

What are some of the societal forces that influence school curricula today?

Peter Olivia has stated that one of the ten general axioms for curriculum development is “Curriculum Development is an Ongoing Process.”  He goes on to say, “Continuous monitoring, examination, evaluation, and improvement of curricula are needed. No curriculum meets the needs of everyone. As the needs of learners change, as society changes, and as new knowledge and technology appear, the curriculum must change.”  One of these forces includes the definition of “college and career ready,” as noted in Maryland’s Common Core State Standards.  What is meant by “college and career ready?”  In order for students to be ready for the world of tomorrow, we need to help them develop the skills they will need:  problem-solving and critical thinking, technological knowledge and communication skills; the belief that we are all life-long learners and will continue to learn, guided by our interests and the needs of society.  These are the forces that influence school curricula today.

How do curriculum definitions, curricular history, and theoretical approaches and policy progress relate to major societal forces such as technology and the world at large?

These societal forces, such as technology and the world at large, highly influence today’s definition of curriculum and guide the theoretical approaches and policies to the types of curricula that is in place today.  For example, when the Russians successfully launched Sputnik in 1957, education, as we knew it, changed dramatically.  The “space race” was on, and we needed to beef up our knowledge of science and engineering and overall skills in our education system.  Millions of dollars were funneled into educational reforms, which included changing the curriculum.  Today, with new and emerging technologies and the need for highly skilled workers in our very technically focused work force, we need to think about preparing our students “for their future, not our past,” (Daniel Pink).  Students need to learn how to think deeply and creatively and have the skills and imagination to solve problems that don’t yet exist.

How might a school leader be proactive in the advent of these types of influences in terms of curricular offerings?

A school leader needs to be willing to “think outside the box” because today, there is no box!  If creativity and innovation skills are essential to functioning in today’s society and work force, the school leader needs to be revising curricula that develops these skills in students.  Integrating technology appropriately into the curriculum, making cross-curricular connections and seeing the links between art and science, all help students develop their imaginations to create solutions to problems that haven’t developed yet!  One of the causes of the tragic fire inside Apollo I that killed three astronauts was, as Frank Borman opined, was “a failure of the imagination.”  Everyone involved with Apollo at the time did not even imagine that something this catastrophic could happen on the ground, during a routine test.  They knew it could happen in space, but didn’t consider other possibilities.  It is this imagination for the impossible, that we need to develop in our children.  Our curricula need to reflect that goal, to have the imagination to respond to problems or situations that do not yet exist.  A school leader needs to remove the barriers to thinking beyond the impossible.

Clinical Observation: Post-Conference Analysis

-->

Post-Conference Analysis

I observed Ms. Sabrina Rose on December 3, 2012, and our post-conference was held on December 10, 2012.  After the observation, I asked the teacher to complete a brief survey/reflection about the lesson I observed.  My data collection tool, our school district’s adaptation of Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching, was filled with my notes and comments from the observation.  Before the post-conference, I labeled the data and rated the teacher based on the evidence I gathered.  I also completed a post-observation survey.  All three of these documents were ready to share during the post-conference.  Our post-conference was held via a private webinar/meeting using Blackboard Collaborate.  I was able to use the whiteboard space to upload the documents and a sample of student work so we could review them together.  We both used our webcams to see each other during the conference, as if we were in the same room. The post conference was recorded.

What strengths and/or improvement areas did you notice about the environment and tone of the post observation?

Because this conference occurred online, the variables are different than in a face-to-face meeting, yet I felt it was just as effective.  We could see each other’s facial expressions and hear the tone in our voices.  I saw her actions indicating whether she agreed and/or understood what I said.  We had tested and practiced using the online meeting space before the conference to ensure the technology worked smoothly.  From a technical perspective, the conference proceeded without any glitches.

During the post conference, I asked a series of questions to get a sense of Ms. Rose’s level of satisfaction with the lesson and if she thought it was an effective lesson in general.  I felt that my questions were kind and caring and that they did not threaten her nor cause her to feel defensive.  We were conversing about the lesson in a constructive manner, and the online format did not impede the progress of the conference.  Because we had the documents shared on the whiteboard, we had the added benefit of being able to view the same document, and could use the tools to point to text or underline certain comments.

What strengths and or improvement areas did you notice in the conference about strategies to improve instruction?

During our pre-conference, Ms. Rose shared her concerns and her goals for the year regarding improving instruction.  We referenced that conversation in the post-observation conference.  I began by sharing the positives that I saw during the lesson and commended her on how at ease she looked instructing the students, that she clearly loves what she is teaching, and cares for the students in her classroom. I told her that while I agree that her lesson was mostly an effective lesson and that students were learning, I felt that the lesson lacked real depth and did not challenge the students to use their higher-order thinking skills. I then proceeded to share the areas where I felt she needed improvement and provided suggestions on how to improve specific aspects of the lesson.

In the conference, which behavior did you seem to predominantly use?  Do you think this was an appropriate approach given the developmental level of the teacher? 

I wanted to clearly encourage and model a collaborative approach during the conference. Ms. Rose, a novice teacher needs to see the observation process as a combined effort to improve instruction for students, and not as a “gotcha” or more “directive” in nature.  I believe this was an appropriate approach.  Ms. Rose is open to improvement, is aware of her strengths and weaknesses, and is committed to doing the best she can for her students.  A collaborative approach will nurture this teacher’s improvement as she progresses and gains more experience.

Reflection - Room Arrangements

During this past week, I visited three computer lab classrooms.  I observed three different arrangements, reflecting three different teaching styles and three different school “personalities.”  I say this because I believe a room arrangement’s success depends on a number of factors:  the teaching style of the teacher, the classroom management systems in place for that teacher, and the personality of the school as a whole.

The first classroom was an “Open U” arrangement.  The computer tables were arranged around the perimeter of the room with an open area in the center.  The teacher’s desk and projection screen were located at the open end of the “U”.  All monitors were visible to the teacher as she stood at her teaching station in the middle of the room.  Students would turn their heads or chairs to see the projection screen during demonstrations or whole group instruction.  The “Open U” arrangement allows for wheelchairs, and specific special needs accommodations have been made per the student’s Individual Education Plan.  The door is located at the front of the room, and the traffic pattern is easy and clear for the students.  This arrangement works well for this teacher.  She has classroom management under control.  Occasionally, she has students working in groups, and the center space allows room for collaborating.

The large second classroom was arranged in a “Collaborative Grouping” arrangement.  There were tables with one or two computers on each, with table space available for creating art, designing storyboards or working with clay.  There were eight learning centers using this table arrangement with 16 computers and seating for 30 students.  The teacher’s desk is off to the side, and the teacher walks around the room to facilitate the activities of the students.  A projection screen is not necessary because the teacher uses Vision, a classroom management program for the 

Windows-based computers.  She can project her desktop on all computer stations to demonstrate, and can project a particular computer’s screen to all for showcasing.  Additionally, she can monitor activity without having to be physically within view of the computer.  The traffic pattern is relatively clear, and the students are busy working on their projects with their collaborative groups.  The “Collaborative Grouping” arrangement allows for wheelchairs, and specific special needs accommodations have been made per the student’s Individual Education Plan. 

The third computer lab is what I would call a “Traditional Computer Lab” arrangement.  Several rows of computers and tables are arranged horizontally, all facing the dry-erase board and projection screen.  The teacher is located at the back of the room, with the teaching computer connected to the overhead LCD projector.  When standing, he can see every student’s computer screen.  There are 35 computers and 35 students in the class.  The back row has room for wheelchairs.  Specific special-needs accommodations have been made per the student’s Individual Education Plan.  The classes are very orderly, there is a specific seating chart, and this teacher uses a traditional whole-group instructional model, giving students time for guided practice and independent activities.  The students rarely work in groups.  The room is quite cramped, but there are exit doors at both the front and the back of the room.

Overall, the three room arrangements work well for these teachers.  I prefer the “Collaborative Grouping” room arrangement because it facilitates project-based learning.  This particular teacher is a veteran teacher and very highly qualified.  She has adapted the Technology Integration curriculum to ALL project-based and has set up learning stations that students rotate in to complete the activities and projects.  She utilizes the classroom management software very well, and uses its strengths to support her teaching. This is the model I would encourage my teachers to use – even in a non-computer lab setting.

Regarding these room arrangements in supervising staff and planning staff development, I believe all three have merit for these purposes.  The “Open U” arrangement is good for whole group discussion, as teachers can move their chairs to face the center, while easily returning to the computer to take notes or look up something on the Internet, albeit a bit clunky.  The “Traditional Computer Lab” arrangement would work during meetings and professional development where a 1:1 computer to teacher ratio is needed, perhaps to learn a new software or data management system.  Personally, I see the most potential with the “Collaborative Learning Group” arrangement.  It has the most flexibility and potential to be used during staff meetings and professional development sessions to model the kind of learning activities we promote for our students.  This would give everybody a chance to see it in action without, maybe, making a “big deal” about the arrangement, and that it is a natural way to “do things around here.”

Effective Leadership - Final Reflection

This Effective Leadership course engaged me deeply as I took the first steps to answering the question, “Will I be able to become an effective leader in a large, urban school system?”  Before beginning this course, I believed I knew the definition of an effective leader.  Good leadership was a simple matter of facilitating a team of similarly skilled and passionate experts to bring about change and improvement in a school system such as Prince George’s County Public Schools.  A simple task, I thought.  Well, I discovered that it is not so simple, and that I have a lot of learning and growing to do.

I knew that good leaders needed to be authentic, ready for change, and willing to take risks.  The leadership skills of my favorite past principals and supervisors matched that description, and they made it look easy.  Honestly, I had no idea how difficult it really is.  Leadership style is one thing; understanding data and interpreting that data to influence change is another.  Data-driven decision-making skills are essential to success as an effective leader in school systems today.

In one of our Week I readings, Michael Fullan describes four guidelines for educational leaders: respect those you want to silence, move toward the danger in forming new alliances, manage emotionally as well as rationally, and fight for the lost cause (Fullan, 2007).  I found these ideas very interesting and I could see myself embracing those guidelines to grow as an effective leader. 

The guideline that struck a chord with me the loudest, was to “manage emotionally as well as rationally.”  Establishing good personal emotional health strategies will help when “reculturing” a system.  Changing the way an organization operates almost always generates resistance from the constituents, and this can be very taxing on a leader.  Personally, I have been growing in this area, as I have tried (not single-handedly) to change the status quo with technology integration in curriculum.  While facing resistance, it is very important to remain centered and healthy and to not take disagreement too personally.  While this is a challenge for me, it is one area I am happy to focus on personally.

Interpreting data and using that information to influence the direction of change is going to be a major challenge for me.  Years ago, as an undergraduate student, I took a statistics class from the mathematics department.  I was considering adding a business major to my music education major, and thought that what I learned in statistics class could be applied to whatever career path I chose.  I had no idea then how much that class would change my perspective on interpreting data.  Yet, I still do not feel skilled enough in data collection and interpretation to make sound reform decisions based on the inferences made from that data.

According to the article, The New Instructional Leadership: Creating Data-Driven Instructional Systems in School, the “heart of the new instructional leadership is the ability of leaders to shift school cultures of internal accountability to meet the demands of external accountability.”  Schools and districts need to establish the practice of constantly collecting a rich variety of data: student achievement data, behavioral data, student, staff and community surveys, financial information, and student services records, and not just one type (Halverson, Grigg, Prichett & Thomas, 2007).  In a video interview, Michael Fullan states that the public wants to “know how the school is doing” and that it is tempting to simply focus on one set of standardized test scores.  He stresses the importance of using data on student learning mainly as a strategy to inform instruction (Fullan, 2007).  I need to keep these thoughts in mind as I continue my journey as a life-long-learner with the goal of becoming an especially effective school leader.

I am in a wonderful situation in my current position as Creative Arts Technology Specialist for Prince George’s County Public Schools in Maryland.  It is a central office position in the department of Curriculum and Instruction.  I work with wonderfully skilled and talented educational leaders who have inspired me, and then encouraged me to move forward in Administration and Supervision.  I am able to apply the concepts I am learning in my course work at Johns Hopkins to the day-to-day activities in my current job.  Discussions and debates with my supervisor, the associate superintendent and other leaders at the executive level have been occurring naturally as we are all collaborating on resolving the current issues in our own school reform initiatives.  I even have the opportunity to practice my newly acquired skills as I observe teachers and classrooms throughout the district, shadowing school-based principals as they observe the teachers I support in the Technology Integration program at our 33 middle schools.  This experience is contributing greatly to the development of leadership skills that will most certainly be needed in the future, in whatever capacity that may be for me.

Discussions concerning educational technology for teachers, students and administrators are frequent, and I have been able to assist central office administrators in integrating the use of technology tools to assist with our work in adopting Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching model for formal observations. As we continue the process of adopting the Common Core, we tap into technology resources to assist us.  This experience will certainly impact my abilities as an effective leader in the future.

Yes, leadership style is a concept I found interesting and thought-provoking as I considered my own leadership skills and the kind of leader I want to become.  Data-driven decision making is definitely a challenge for me, but I know it is a skill I need to develop as I grow into the kind of leader I want to become.  I am looking forward to gathering and practicing new skills in professional development, organization, school law, supervision, and curriculum development, that all build up to certification in Administration and Supervision.

References:

Fullan, Michael (2007). The Jossey-Bass reader on educational leadership. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

Halverson, R., Grigg, J., Prichett, R., & Thomas, C. (2007). The new instructional leadership: creating data-driven instructional systems in school. Journal of school leadership, 17(March), 159-194.