If you have been reading my latest posts, you might jump to the conclusion that I am against accountability, including merit pay for teachers. Nothing could be further from the truth. I embraced accountability because it forced us to do what we should have been doing all along--hold all students to higher standards. As a principal, I worked in a high-stakes accountability state (Virginia), and that accountability system gave our school the leverage it needed to promote increased rigor and high expectations for all students.

What does a high-stakes accountability environment look like? In a high stakes accountability environment, everyone including students and schools are held accountable.

In too many states, there is accountability for teachers and schools, but no accountability for students. In those states, the destiny of the school and fate of the teachers rests on the good will of the students. If the students feel like taking the state test, they do. If they don't feel like it, they "flag the test." How can so many states hold everyone but the students, who actually take the tests, accountable? It makes absolutely no sense.

I worked in Virginia throughout the first decade of the SOL, Standards of Learning, assessments. Initially, the tests were set up to discredit and embarrass public schools. However, when just about every school failed the tests, the parents revolted and the state threw out the old guard and worked with schools to develop a fair system, which included the following for high school:

Schools were held accountability.

• Eleven end-of-course exams
• Schools had to achieve a 70% proficiency rate or lose state accreditation.
• Schools were held to graduation targets.
• Schools who failed to achieve prescribed targets were required to go through a school improvement process.

Students were held accountable.

• The end-of-course exams acted as barriers to graduation.
• Students were required to pass the courses and six of the eleven end-of-course exams in order to earn a diploma.
• At the urging of the Virginia Association of Secondary Principals, the State strengthened existing attendance laws and stepped up enforcement.
• No students were "Christmas-treeing" tests in Virginia. Students took the test seriously because they counted for them and, even if they had the six required verified credits, they cared because their teachers cared so much.

Note: There was no statistically significant change in graduation rates in the barrier year, 2004, because the State initiated a "Project Graduation" initiative that began in 2000.

Teachers were not held individually accountable.

There was no need to hold teachers personally accountable, because they held themselves to such high standards. Our teachers expected more of themselves than anyone else would ever expect of them. They felt a sense of shared responsibility and a commitment to their students, their colleagues, and to the school as a whole. They understood that test scores reflected on "our school" and on "our students." In fact, teachers were so committed to student success that we had to be very careful how we reported test results, lest we single out or inadvertently identify any one individual teacher. Our teachers took each test score personally. Instead of having to light a fire under our teachers, we had to hold hands and sooth hurt feelings, because they cared so much.

That is the kind of accountability environment we want. We want students to take the tests seriously. We want the teachers to care about the success of their students. We want a collegial environment that encourages collective effort and cooperation. We want the students to say that the "teachers would never give up on us."

Why Do We Need Merit Pay?

Coming from that experience explains why I don't understand the merit pay argument. Anyone who knows teachers knows that money is not a motivator. They don't need to be cajoled with promises of bonuses to dedicate themselves. In fact, like most achievement-motivated professionals, teachers are insulted and demotivated by the use of tangible rewards. Teachers want what Frederick Herzberg called "motivators"--recognition, challenging work, responsibility.

Pay teachers as professionals! Pay them in proportion to their contribution to society. Stop nickel-and-diming them with promises of meager bonuses!

What Teachers Really Want

Supportive Leadership - More than anything else, including higher pay (45%), 40,000 teachers surveyed reported that they want supportive leadership (68%). Supportive leadership ensures that all of the following are available to teachers in the school.

Sense of Purpose - In the long run, what most motivates teachers is a sense of purpose--the desire to make a difference in the lives of their students. After all, that is why we became educators. However, when teachers drive old beaten up cars and they can't even afford to live in the communities in which they teach, it is hard to talk to them about a higher purpose.

Mastery - Teachers want to feel that they are skilled professionals. They want to feel that they are continually growing and improving. They want quality professional development that actually helps them improve their practice.

Self-Direction - Teachers want input into the key decisions that impact their profession on a daily basis. They want opportunities to collaborate with their colleagues.

Team - Teachers want to feel that they are a part of a collective effort. Teaching does not have to be lonely endeavor. Schools work best when teachers are committed to each other and the success of their students.

Professionals - Teachers want to be treated as professionals. They want to be treated like people not workers.

The Bottom Line

Professionals keep score, but their score is actually a true reflection of actual performance. Some of the current practices, such as not holding students accountable for test scores, and some of the proposals like merit pay and value-added teacher evaluations fail to pass the reality test and set up schools to fail. For example, our school wide literacy effort made a big difference in student performance on State assessments. However, since literacy strategies were practiced in every classroom every day, it was impossible to single out an individual teacher to receive a merit pay bonus.

Team efforts should garner collective rewards. Merit systems pit one teacher against another competing for scarce resources--the merit bonus. We need to reward and encourage collective effort not the individual all-stars teachers, who exemplified 20th century assembly line schools.

School leaders want and welcome accountability, but lets make it a meaningful and fair system, not one that singles out individuals for rewards or punishments. School leaders rely on the voluntary cooperation of teachers, students, and parents if the school is to succeed. Set us up to succeed!

Posted by Mel Riddile at 09:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This week I am blogging from the NASSP Conference in San Francisco.

"More is easy. Better is hard."

This morning I listened to Bill Daggett of ICLE talk about school improvement. Bill said something that I have heard him say many times before. In fact, I have used the same statement in many of my own presentations. What Bill said went something like this. "Teachers and principals in high-performing schools are not working harder than their counterparts in other schools, but they are working different."

I had to pause and recall our experience in moving from a good to a great school. I often describe the first three to five years as "dog years." Each year seemed like seven in terms of the stress and workload. However, the last four or five years were a lot different.

It seemed like we were working harder in the early years mainly because we were doing so much experimentation. We were trying to figure out a school wide approach to improving literacy and how to turn around our Algebra I performance. We were inventing things that no one else had done before. We were pioneers or "edunauts" as I called education improvers.

We were changing on a daily basis and that is stressful, but stressful doesn't mean working harder. It just seemed that way. Our teachers were already arriving early and leaving late and that never changed. From my perspective, I could not ask any of them to work harder.

We needed to get better and better is harder. What did change was that we were reaching "tipping points" and we started to see things change. We were actually making progress.

Our students were improving dramatically and it seemed like it happened in an instant. We would work and work and hope that we were doing the right thing. Then, all of a sudden, we would see improvement. We couldn't point to the exact moment when all the students were in class on time, or when all the teachers were teaching bell-to-bell, or when our reading performance and algebra achievement jumped, but it happened, and the positive changes began to gain momentum. Success became contagious.

I liken the school improvement process to an airplane taking off and eventually reaching cruising altitude. A lot of energy is expended in the takeoff and the climb to the desired altitude. However, at a point the plane reaches altitude and seems to ease off. Although the plane continues to expend energy, it seems to be taking less effort.

We never stopped working hard, but we were working in a different way, and different is hard, at least at first.

As we moved through the stages of change from forming, storming, norming on the way to performing, we were working just as hard but we were enjoying it more, and here is the key. We were making progress. We were making a difference with our students, and that made us even more determined. We simply refused to go back to the way it used to be, because the way it was was simply too much fun, and because we were having fun, everything seemed to be much easier.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 08:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Assistant principals are difference makers. When it comes to getting things done on a day-to-day basis in a middle or high school, assistant principals play a key leadership role.

Educators are great at generating plans and ideas, but we are not as good at implementing them. From my experience, both as a long-time assistant principal and principal, the head implementer is the assistant principal. Because assistant principals are in constant contact with students, teachers, and parents, they play a key role in shaping the culture of the school. They get things done on a daily basis.

Assistant principals are an integral part of raising student performance. If schools are going to raise the performance of each and every student we are going to need to effectively implement a wide-variety of instructional programs and initiatives. Schools need multiple leaders, not just a leader. Most importantly, schools need instructional leaders who are lead learners. Raising the performance of each student demands the involvement of a wide variety of individuals. We must draw on the knowledge and expertise of every member of the staff.

My decision to leave teaching and go into administration was driven by my desire to go beyond my classroom to make a difference for more students. Early in my tenure as an assistant principal I arrived at what I now know was a crossroads. Like every assistant principal I have ever known, I was getting bogged down in the usual "administrivia." I would regularly lament to my colleagues that attendance, discipline, the cafeteria, and buses were all keeping me from doing what "I should be doing," which was working with teachers to improve classroom instruction.

I would still be on that same path had it not been for the sage advice of a seasoned veteran who told me, "Everything you do impacts instruction in a negative or positive way. Your actions are either helping or hurting. Everything you do helps create an environment in which teachers can teach and students can learn. Teaching and learning cannot take place unless you ensure a clean, safe, and orderly environment. The buses have to arrive and the bells ring on time. Lunch needs to be served. Your problem is that you are majoring in the minors. You have hundreds of opportunities every day to role up your sleeves and get involved with teachers, but you are waiting for someone to tell you what to do. My advice to you is to find something that can benefit teachers and improve instruction and at the same time. Find something that interests you, and run with it. Don't wait. Take the initiative."

Based on that advice, I became much more proactive. One year I taught a course for teachers on learning styles and instructional strategies. For two years, I co-taught a college-level course on cooperative learning. On another occasion, I worked with several core departments teaching mind-mapping strategies to our students. I headed up our business partnership, which organized our annual senior seminar. My most rewarding experience as an assistant principal was leading our school-wide technology initiative, which included teaching a technology integration course for our teachers. This role got me invited into classrooms and afforded me numerous opportunities to work in partnership with teachers helping them integrate technology into their classrooms. In addition, in this role, I helped establish two writing and reading labs, which directly contributed to our improving test scores.

Over my years as an assistant principal, I learned that there were numerous opportunities for me to take on the role of an instructional leader, but it was up to me to take advantage of those opportunities. Instead of whining about what I didn't like about my job, I had to start winning and creating my own reality. Our teachers began to see me as a learning leader because I was willing to be a lead learner.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 11:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

by Stuart Singer, The Teacher Leader

Over the course of my forty-year teaching career, which included twenty-six years as a department chair,  and ten as Curriculum Coordinator, I worked with a significant number of school administrators and district leaders. This is the third in a series highlighting those individuals who in my opinion were the most effective in their particular roles.  The goal of these analyses is to illuminate those qualities that make professionals in these critical positions successful and maximize their positive influence in a school.

I had the good fortune to work with a number of extremely talented assistant principals.  Many moved on in their careers to become successful principals at either middle or high schools.  A few rose to the superintendent level in other districts.  I also interacted with many individuals who were lacking in either the skills or the experiences required to be productive.  Though they made my vocational life more difficult at the time, the shortcomings of these individuals allowed me to better understand and appreciate the strengths of the effective APs.

Due to the large number of excellent administrators I encountered, I have the wonderful dilemma of trying to parse out which one was the best.  As an indication of my good fortune, I have found that to be an impossible task.  Consequently, with apologies to many other worthy candidates, I believe that two individuals, David Smith and Cordell Gill best embodied the personal talents and skills necessary to be outstanding assistant principals and have a positive impact on both the math department and the school.

What attributes made them the most effective assistant principals?

The role of an Assistant Principal is very different from that of the Director of Guidance or Instructional Coordinator.  Both of those positions have a very specific focus, the students and master schedule for the former and a single curriculum for the latter.  In contrast Assistant Principals must be multi-taskers.  They must provide discipline, supervise multiple curriculums, evaluate teachers, and contribute to school policy, in addition to miscellaneous jobs ranging from hall duty to planning graduation.  Consequently their success cannot be explained with a list of specific personal qualities that produced effectiveness as was done for the previous “bests”.  For this position excellence is found in the mindset they took to their role.

In both casual and formal situations, Dave and Cordell never envisioned their position as one with an elevated status—neither perceived himself as owning a seat at “the head of the table” in a room full of teachers.  Their vision of the job of an Assistant Principal was not to give orders or make unilateral decisions.  Rather they saw their basic role as assisting teachers to perform more effectively. They listened.  To that end they solicited the needs and concerns of teachers and department chairs then worked in a collaborative manner to find solutions.  They realized that teachers were not interchangeable parts.  Each one possessed unique strengths and weaknesses that needed to be either nurtured or mitigated. 

Unfortunately this approach is not always the norm.  One of the most corrosive relationships that can be created in a school is a “we vs. they” mentality between the teaching and administrative staffs.  I once heard an AP tell a teacher who questioned one of his decisions concerning a student, “I find it hard to believe that a teacher would not simply follow the directive of an administrator.”  Another explained to a department chair, “Your role is to implement the policies of the administration”.  Such attitudes, which occur far too often, are one of the primary sources of low teacher morale. 

In a perfect educational world every department would be supervised by someone who is qualified to teach in that area.  While that situation can make an AP even more effective, in most cases it is not the reality.  Both Dave and Cordell had a narrow view of their role in determining curriculum policy.  They reserved such decisions for those who were certified in the subject area.   They understood that their area of expertise was in creating the best possible educational climate in the building, not in determining what topics were to be taught in each individual room or which teacher should be teaching a specific class.  They offered their services in a reactive manner—as someone who was a willing listener who would give suggestions and advice when solicited or necessary.   

To attain educational success there must be strong classroom management. Dave and Cordell understood that certain students could “highjack” the education of others.  When dealing with such individuals they sent a powerful and consistent message—such conduct will not be tolerated.  Both worked in a positive manner with all the involved parties.  They were always “pro-teacher” when working with the students.  When informing teachers of the outcomes they would become “pro-student” explaining in detail any circumstances that may not have been previously revealed.             

Like every great Assistant Principal I worked with I viewed these two men as my allies never as adversaries.  They handled every situation in a professional and even-handed manner. They approached all personal interactions whether with students or teachers with an open mind.  Most importantly they saw themselves as a person working behind the scenes to make the school better.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 04:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

• 20% of eighth graders are on target to graduate from high school
• 20% of students earn passing scores on AP exams
• 20% of students are prepared to enter the military
• 20% of students have the writing skills needed for college
• 20% of current ninth graders will graduate from college in 10 years

"America has a moral obligation to prepare young people to become self-supporting members of society -- and national security also hinges on having enough youths fit for military duty."--Colin Powell

"Dismally, 70 percent of young Americans in the 17-to-24 age bracket are unfit to join the U.S. military, former Secretary of State and Joint Chiefs Chairman Colin Powell warns." While 30% of students are fit to join the armed forces, fully one-third of them lack the reading and math skills needed by our high-tech military.

Conversation Starter: The 20% solution has nothing to do with student ability, and everything to do with readiness. Our students can achieve to high levels, but they need us to prepare them.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 10:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

“Districts have to treat principals like they expect them to lead.”—The District Leadership Challenge

It’s October and it is National Principal’s Month. Congratulations, fellow principals! However, I’m confused. Are we actually honoring principals at the same time that the national plan for school reform is to fire principals first and fire principals often? I have heard stories of the preemptive firing of principals just in case their school would be placed on a state “under-performing” list.

In order to accept the authenticity of the current school reform blueprint, which, in every scenario, calls for the replacement of the principal, one must believe that principals act autonomously and that school districts have very little say-so regarding what goes on in a school. In reality, the opposite is closer to the truth. Many school districts are small and lack capacity, and, too often, principals are on their own in their efforts to turn around their schools. A recently released Wallace Foundation study indicates that “collective leadership”— “total amount of influence attributable to all the participants in a given educational system: teachers, parents, principals, district office staff, and community members”—is the key to higher student achievement and school improvement.

Teachers need and want supportive leadership to succeed in the classroom. Likewise, principals desperately need the full and active support of their district leadership in order to improve their schools.

As an SREB report on district-school alignment points out that “A central reason for the unending graduation and preparation problems is the failure of many public school districts to systematically provide the working conditions that well-trained principals need to succeed. Districts have to treat principals like they expect them to lead.”

Principals are being widely criticized for not firing bad teachers, but principals don’t control key personnel functions. The authority to hire and fire rests solely with the superintendent and the school board. Dismissing any staff member demands an often-lengthy due process procedure that some are reluctant to go through except in the most urgent cases. The dismissal process is so expensive and time consuming that some districts take the easy way out and move around weaker teachers. Principals do not have the authority to reassign teachers to other schools.

Principals who bring forward too many dismissal cases are seen as problematic. The same assistant superintendent who complimented me privately for dealing with poor performance commented in front of two school board members that I was sometimes “tough.” I responded, “You sent them to me because you knew that I would address their needs. You can’t come back to me later and say that I am tough.”

The Rubber Room

Almost eleven years ago, our high school was labeled a “failing high school” by our superintendent in a Washington Post article. I remember being compelled to sit in a room in the central office every Friday afternoon for several months with three other “failing principals.” This was our district’s version of the “principals’ rubber room.” The purpose of these meetings was for us “failing principals” to come up with a plan to turn around our under-performing schools. To this day, I don’t understand why our district would ask “failing principals” like us to come up with the solution to school improvement. That would be like a teacher asking her lowest performing students to advise the rest of the class on the best strategies for studying for tests.

On one memorable occasion, one assistant superintendent became so frustrated that she pounded her fist on the table and said, “You (principals) have to bring up your test scores.” Not knowing how to respond to this tirade, we just sat silently and stared at each other in disbelief. Finally, I spoke up. “Tell us what you want us to do and we will do it.” The assistant superintendent leaned forward, squinted her eyes and said, “That’s what we hired you to do, and, if you can’t, we’ll find somebody who can.”

Even though that outburst took place over a decade ago, incidents like that are occurring with increased frequency today. So-called experts, many who have never worked in a school, are demanding that principals improve their schools or face dismissal. ‘We have no idea how to change the culture of a school, but we’re going to fire you if you don’t.’ ‘We’re not going to train you. We’re not going to support you. We’re just going to threaten you and then fire you.’

If they have what it takes

Less than a year ago, I sat in meeting discussing one state’s strategy to turn around low-performing schools. A superintendent from a large district in the state was asked to speak to the group about his strategy to reform his district. His plan was simple and honest. “I hire principals and put them in the schools. If they have what it takes, they stay. If they don’t have what it takes, I find someone else.” By his own admission, this superintendent had no idea what his principals needed in the way of skills or training. In fact, he didn’t have the time to find out. He needed results now! He was simply going to hire and fire until he found the right person.

You are a principal?

When people asked me what I did for a living and I told them that I was a high school principal, they looked at me as though I had just landed from Mars. To most people, being in the mere presence of large groups of teenagers is intimidating. Most parents will readily admit that have their hands full dealing with their own teenagers let alone trying to work with hundreds or even thousands of other peoples’ kids.

We can’t wait for Superman

When I read the resolution honoring principals, I wonder how anyone could actually be a successful principal. In addition to a myriad of responsibilities, principals are being asked to do something that no one before us has ever done in any country--raise the achievement of all students, particularly poor and disadvantaged students, to high levels. And they are being asked to raise student performance by people who have never done it themselves and who, sad to say, have no intention of asking those who actually have.

An assistant superintendent for whom I have much respect once told me, “I was a good principal, but I never raised test scores. You are going to have to and I don’t know how you are going to do it.” Her remarks were honest and supportive, and I appreciated the fact that she was willing to partner with me to find a way to help our school succeed.

More than any other time in memory, principals are under attack, and so are our teachers. We are not the enemy! Threats of punishment and dismissal are not what principals or teachers need to help us improve schools. Instead of attracting us to work in our neediest schools, current policies are driving us away. What we need is training, support, and encouragement.

Our mission is critical to the future of our country and to the future of each of our students. We have a daunting but not impossible task. Success demands that we all work together in a collaborative partnership to improve every school. Why don’t we all admit that we don’t have all the answers and start working together to find them?

Posted by Mel Riddile at 08:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

First, I will give you the bad news boys and girls. Superman and Santa Claus are not coming, at least not to public education any time soon.

Now here is the good news. Everyone is talking about the importance of education. New York Times op-ed columnist, Gail Collins, put it best when she wrote, “Right now, the public is engaged. The best charter schools are laboratories for new ideas. But the regular public schools are where American education has to be saved. We can do better. Superman hasn’t arrived. But we may be ready to fly.”

The Bottom Line

It is up to us to be the hope that our students need. From a high school perspective, we are the end of the line. No one stands behind us to help our students. Without the literacy and math skills needed to succeed in postsecondary education and training, our students will be relegated to a lifetime of marginal employment and second-class citizenship. We are the last and best hope that our students have to lead a better life.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 01:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

by Stuart Singer, The Teacher Leader

Over the course of my forty-year teaching career, which included twenty-six years as a department chair and ten as Curriculum Coordinator, I worked with a significant number of school administrators and district leaders.  This is the second in a series highlighting those individuals who in my opinion were the most effective in their particular roles.  The goal of these analyses is to illuminate those qualities that make professionals in these critical positions successful and maximize their positive influence in a school.

The job of a district-level instructional coordinator is extremely challenging.  It is a role that must weave together the requirements, goals and needs of remarkably disparate groups.  The rules and regulations of the state and district school boards must be implemented and the goals of the system’s leadership team must be accomplished while assisting two dozen different high schools establish programs that serve very different student bodies.  Moreover, all of these tasks must be performed from a position that possesses little actual authority.  But Tom Nuttal, District Coordinator of Math Instruction, overcame all of these obstacles to become a significant contributor to the success of math education throughout the system. 

What attributes made him the most effective district supervisor?

Tom believed that all of his responsibilities were equally important.  The previously defined job description becomes infinitely easier if the component of meeting the needs of each individual school is ignored.  Creating programs that only satisfy state and local educational leadership is relatively simple when compared with creating plans that work in a wide-ranging set of circumstances.  Tom understood and appreciated the reality that every school is unique. He believed that a “one size fits all” approach where every math program is the same could make for wonderfully simplified, impressive power point presentations, but lack the necessary complexity and flexibility to address the educational challenges inherent in a diverse school system.  The less affluent schools were at particular risk in such situations.  Tom strongly encouraged the creation and implementation of a variety of methods to improve student success.  He did far more than simply talk about such innovation.  He helped put into practice a unique approach to Algebra 1 at my school which was predicated on the fact that we had the largest ELL population in the system.  When our program began to demonstrate significant progress he looked for ways to utilize some of its fundamental principles to help other schools.  This attitude was in stark contrast to many others in similar positions who preferred simplistic answers for complex issues.  Tom did not feel that student success should be borne entirely by the teachers, but that sometimes the district’s program may need to be altered to enable those teachers to be effective.

Tom took a pro-active approach to educational change.  Anticipating state standardized end-of-course exams years before their implementation, he created a district Algebra 1 exam to be administered to every student at the conclusion of the course.  This testing helped teachers and administrators prepare for the eventual creation of barrier state exams.  It also served as an excellent measure of student achievement throughout each building and the system.  As is so often the case, the reception for this “extra burden” at the end of the year was less than enthusiastic but Tom was adamant and as a result many students and teachers benefitted years later.  He also realized that technology was going to become a large part of the educational scene.  While others waited for funding to purchase computers, he found creative methods to utilize existing monies to ensure that math teachers were at the forefront in terms of hardware and training.  When it was obvious that graphing calculators were going to revolutionize math education, Tom acquired funding to train large numbers of teachers in the effective use of these devices.

Tom was not averse to challenging the educational leaders in the district.  When the concept of “block” scheduling was being favorably discussed by the system’s policymakers, Tom recognized that such a program could be detrimental for many math students.  He spent countless hours mobilizing discussions that would reveal some of the negative aspects of this type of schedule.  Likewise, when the district was discussing a new set of grading and reporting regulations that would result in diminishing teachers’ control of their classroom grading policies he used many of his department chair meetings to explain the potential repercussions.  His results were mixed.  Block scheduling became a reality but the grassroots resistance to the new grading system resulted in a rollback of these potentially misguided policies.  Win or lose, his first loyalty was always to the success of the students and the integrity of the curriculum.

Tom was a pragmatist. Whether he agreed or disagreed with a district initiative he worked hard to make the implementation as smooth as possible.  My favorite Tom Nuttal story revolved around the block scheduling debate.  He fought the good fight but when it became obvious the new plan was inevitable he swallowed his bruised pride and announced that every district workshop in the future would be ninety minutes in length—replicating a typical “block” thus giving teachers a preview of what their educational future would look like.

Tom treated teachers as professionals.  Every year he would apply for and receive federal grants that would enable him to take large numbers of district math teachers to national math meetings.  These exposures gave educators throughout the system an enlightened view of math education from a national perspective.  In addition such trips to large conventions gave teachers an opportunity to network with each other much as professionals in other occupations do on a regular basis.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 02:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The new school year has begun and my principal friends are telling me that they are already hearing complaints about the behavior of this year’s senior class. After years of listening to the same complaints, I finally had heard enough and one day I said to our administrative staff, “If we don’t like how our students are behaving, we need to look in the mirror. We have had these students in this school for three years. What have we taught them? Instead of blaming the kids, we need to look at ourselves. If we want our students to change we have to change. They are only doing what we have taught them either by our actions or our inaction. It is our responsibility to teach them what we want them to know and to be able to do. We drive the bus!” From that day forward, whenever someone started complaining or blaming our students we would look at each other, smile and say, “we drive the bus.”

Like many high schools, our school had every excuse to fail—high poverty, high mobility, a large number of second language students, gangs, and a decaying facility. Blaming the poverty of our students and making excuses might make us feel better, but it did nothing for our students. It didn’t matter to them if we could explain away low achievement. After all, it was their lives and their future that was at stake.

The reality is that we, in high school, are the last in line. If we couldn’t help them, there was no one standing in line after us who would. Without our help, our students would be sentenced to a lifetime of marginal employment and second-class citizenship. Blaming students only distracted us and detracted from our mission of helping them graduate ready for postsecondary education and training.

That is why I read Robert Samuelson’s article in the Washington Post with stunned disbelief. Samuelson went through the usual litany of school failures including decades of flat NAEP scores, drops in student achievement from elementary to high school, teacher pay, and dropouts. There is nothing new here. We’ve heard it all before.

The source of our troubles

Samuelson gives two reasons for the failure of school reform efforts:

First, school reform is difficult. On this point, I agree. Meaningful, responsible, and lasting change is as difficult in schools as it is in most organizations. Here is where my disagreement with Samuelson begins. He contends that reforms fail because “no one has discovered transformative changes … that are scalable—easily transferable to other schools.” The operative word here is “easily.” Whereas Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, insists that there are no “silver bullets” when it comes to school reform, Samuelson seems to think that our failure is in not finding the quick fix that will help all schools improve.

Reality Check

We proved for years that we knew how to help some students succeed to high levels. We did very well with the students who should do well. We didn’t do very well with poor, disadvantaged, and under-resourced students, and in that arena we all have a lot to learn.

When are we all going to accept the fact that raising the performance of each and every student is a much more difficult task than anyone had anticipated? Successful students are not successful by accident. Success is about work, effort, and deliberate practice. Improving schools is difficult. It takes time and hard work by, parents, teachers, and principals, and it means a lot of hard work for students.

Reaching previously underserved students requires a change in mindset and subsequently a change in our culture from one in which success is a scarce commodity to a culture in which success is an expectation. Changing the culture of our schools means that we have to change our culture and no one believes that that would be a simple, one to two year, task.

It’s the kids, stupid!

While it may be human nature to want to discover the simplest solution to a complex problem, attributing low student performance to “shrunken student motivation” crosses the line from the rational to the absurd. Blaming students for the problems of education is like blaming a hospital’s problems on sick patients. “We couldn’t cure the disease because our patients wouldn’t get well.”

Think of it. This whole time the answer has been right under our noses. It’s the kids. It’s their fault. The debate is over. Let’s fold the tent and close the schools, because nothing we do will work with these danged kids.

“Who’s driving the bus?”

Experience has taught me that moderately dysfunctional schools blame the feeder schools. Dysfunctional schools blame the parents. Truly dysfunctional schools blame the students. Blaming the kids is a waste of time. In fact, if you are wasting your time blaming anyone, stop! It isn’t helping.

Blaming the kids is a last act of desperation by someone who has run out of answers. Let’s just admit that we don’t have all the answers and then we can get on with the work of finding solutions.

My career as a high school administrator spanned four different decades, and I can tell you that today’s students are the best of the lot. If you asked me to choose students from the 70s, 80s, 90s, or the 00s, I would not hesitate to choose today’s students.

Stop Blaming

Our schools must improve, but blaming parents, teachers, or principals, and especially the  kids won’t accomplish anything. The world, not just our country, is more competitive. We can no longer outwork or outproduce the rest of the world. Today, we must outthink and out create the rest of the world. Ideas, not land, trade, or factories, are the “wealth of nations.” If ideas are wealth, then schools are today’s factories.

Improve, we must, but we won’t get better taking the easy way out. The search for “easy” and “quick” needs to end. We are wasting valuable time and scarce resources as well as eroding public confidence with our obsession with quick fixes.

We must do the right thing, and, more often than not, the right thing is the hard thing to do. We must ensure that each and every student reaches mastery by teaching a rigorous and relevant curriculum in a warm and inviting school environment.

Students must be able to read, write, speak, think, and compute at high levels and to apply those skills in the real world. It is our responsibility to teach our students whatever we want them to know and be able to do.

Students will not exceed the quality of their teachers. It is not up to the kids to improve our schools. It’s up to us. We drive the bus!

Posted by Mel Riddile at 01:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

“The interviewing process says as much about the school as it does about the candidate.”—The Teacher Leader

Note: Thanks to the passage of a $26 billion jobs bill to protect 300,000 teachers and other non-federal government workers, principals and school leaders may have the opportunity to actually add or save teaching positions.The interview process may be more important than you thought!

I thought long and hard after I read Finding the Best Teachers, which emphasized the importance of the interview process in hiring and retaining the best teachers. In doing so I arrived at one conclusion. The process of interviewing prospective teachers is the culmination of hundreds of small interviews, not of teacher candidates, but interviews that our staff conducted with me every day.

Every interaction I had with our staff was an interview of sorts. What occurred in those interviews of teacher candidates was the result of thousands of interactions that we had over months and years that cumulatively formed the culture of our school. It was our culture that we revealed to teacher candidates. It was our culture, our beliefs, attitudes, expectations, and commitment to each other that either attracted or repulsed would be candidates. Over a ten-year period of hiring teachers, the staff we ended up with was a direct reflection of our thinking and our mindset.

A school cannot exceed the quality of its teachers. In this respect, the moment of truth for school leaders is the teacher interview process, for the future of our school is determined by the team members we attract and those we fail to attract in those interviews.

Reputation: It’s all we have!

I once had an assistant principal who told me, “the only thing wrong with this school is its reputation.” I turned to him and said, “Our reputation is all we have!” When we interviewed teacher candidates, we kept in mind that they were probably interviewing at other schools. Even if they never ended up working at our school, we knew that the candidates would remember that first impression for a long time and they will not hesitate to share that impression, particularly if it was a bad one. We knew that how we greeted and welcomed teacher candidates as well as who conducted the interview and the manner in which the interview was conducted said much about our school and us. As Teacher Leader pointed out, “The interviewing process says as much about the school as it does about the candidate.”

How do you want to be remembered?

We knew that the manner in which our school approached the interview process would reveal our school culture to the candidate. So, think carefully about the impression you want to make on candidates. Do you want to be remembered as formal and professional or warm and inviting? Do you want to be viewed as a collaborative, cohesive team that shares key decisions or as a top-down, more formal school organization?

Teammate or Employee?

As a new teacher, I was interviewed and hired by the principal. I was introduced to the department chair on the first day teachers reported. Instead of being warmly greeted and embraced, it took me quite a while to gain acceptance and to find my place in the department. Ask yourself, are you looking for a teammate or an employee? In my case, I was hired to fill a vacancy not to be a team member.  If you want the candidate to be a member of a cohesive team, you will want to involve members of that team in the interview process. Yes, you may have to give up some control and the process may take longer, but the benefits will far outweigh the costs. Involving more people in the interview process will increase the staff’s sense of ownership and will help to ensure that the new teacher is welcomed and embraced upon arrival.

The Answer to Retaining Teachers

Teachers who get off to a bad start don’t last long. Some believe that the key to retaining teachers is a quality induction and mentoring program. However, I have come to believe that the solution to teacher-retention may begin with the interview process. Involving future team members in the process of selecting their new teammates will not only increase their sense of commitment, but, more importantly, it will ensure that those team members are committed to the success of the new hire.

Control or Cooperation?

Hiring new teachers may be our most important responsibility. How we deal with that responsibility may tell more about us than anything we say. If we want our staff’s cooperation, buy-in, and a sense of ownership, we must be willing to give up the illusion of control. If we are serious about collaboration, distributing leadership, and growing new leaders, we must provide our staff opportunities for meaningful involvement in key decisions, and what decision is more important than hiring staff.

Involving more people in the process will let the staff know that they are trusted and respected. Experience has taught me that our staff would take more time and be more cautious in hiring a teammate than I would be in “filling a vacancy,” particularly if time is short and we had a number of staff to hire.

Hiring or Recruiting

Real estate is all about location, location, and location. The same holds true for schools. Unfortunately, we can still accurately predict student test scores by zip code. Like most under-resourced schools, our school was both economically and geographically challenged. A vast majority of our teachers lived in affordable housing that was a long distance from our school. Their daily commute would find them driving past a half dozen schools in more advantaged neighborhoods with fewer needy students. We had to convince teacher candidates that the extra commute and time away from their family was worth it, and the best convincers are the teachers in your school. If they believe in what the school is doing, they will convey that belief to the candidate. 

We learned that, in under-resourced schools, we were recruiting and hiring at the same time. Time after time, teacher candidates would tell us, “All the other schools I interviewed with wanted to know what I could do for them. You were the only school that told me what you could do for me.”

The Best Recruiters

No school has too many top-notch teachers. One of the defining qualities of high-performing schools is that they are able to attract and retain the best teachers. Conversely, under-performing schools typically have high turnover and teachers with the least experience. As the years went on, we learned that our best recruiters were our own teachers. Our teachers were so proud of our school and what we were accomplishing that they couldn’t stop talking about it. Word of mouth became our best recruiting strategy. Schools in more advantaged areas simply could not believe that high-quality teachers would want to teach in a school like ours. The reality is that teachers want to work where they are a part of making a difference and they want to work in a teacher-friendly school.

A Teacher-Friendly School

When asked  by a group of visitors, what is different about this school, one of our teachers replied, “I have worked in schools all over the country, but this is the most teacher-friendly school that I have ever worked in.” When asked to explain she said, “In this school, our opinion counts. We get to make decisions like bell schedules and exam schedules. We approve field trips. We are constantly asked for our input. When we come up with ideas, we are encouraged to try them out.” Anyone can create a school culture that is teacher-friendly. It takes no money, but it does take time and effort. The Teacher Leader and I learned through experience that, if we build a teacher-friendly school, they (teachers) would come.

Interviewing is Year-Round

Hiring and interviewing the best teachers is a full-time, year-round activity. Every thing we do and say reflects on our school and its culture and it is the culture that attracts teachers. Instead of change for the sake of change, we must stand for responsible change—change that seeks to improve student performance on a solid foundation of positive beliefs, attitudes, expectations, and a growth mindset.

“Culture eats strategies for breakfast.” In the right culture virtually any interviewing strategy will work. In the wrong culture, the best interviewing strategies are doomed to fail.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 08:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sports fans believe in miracles?

Today is the anniversary of the Miracle on Ice. Thirty years ago today, the U.S. Olympic Hockey Team stunned the world with a victory of the powerful Soviet Hockey Team. ESPN named the Miracle on Ice the greatest sports moment of the 1980s. Some equate the victory to “a high school football team beating the Philadelphia Eagles.”

Researchers and physicians believe in miracles?

USA Today reports on recent research findings that indicate “When it comes to the placebo effect, it really may be mind over matter.” Once placed in the same category as magic and hocus pocus, increasing evidence has led researchers to conclude that placebos “have an actual biological effect in the body.”

“The doctor-patient relationship, plus the expectation of recovery, may sometimes be enough to change a patient's brain, body and behavior, experts write.”

The Miracle on Ice and the research on placebos is not as much about the idea of miracles as it is about believing. Simply put, this research tells us that, if we believe that our health will improve, it improves. The question is, is the reverse true? If we have no hope or if we give up hope, does our health deteriorate?

Do educators believe in miracles?

One of my saddest moments in recent memory came last year when I read On the Front Lines of Schools. I have spent the better part of the last decade trying to convince educators what I had learned from my teachers and students--given time, all students can learn and achieve at high levels and, and that despite seemingly insurmountable barriers, teachers, students, and schools can beat the odds.

I knew that we still had work to do. I just didn’t know how much work was yet undone. If someone had asked me, I would have guessed that less than 20% of the teachers and school leaders still held on to old attitudes believing that only a select few students could really be expected to achieve at high levels.

I was stunned when I read the report. In fact, months later, I remain shocked. Apparently, all the talk about high expectations amounts to no more than a waste of time. According to the report, two-thirds of the teachers and two of five principals do not believe that all students can or should be held to high standards. The report concludes that our so-called achievement gap may, in fact, be an expectation gap. We hear about miracles in science, medicine, and sports everyday, yet many educators refuse to believe that our students can learn and achieve at high levels.

Several years ago I had the opportunity to have a private conversation with some high-ranking officials in the U.S. Department of Education on the topic of school reform. I was asked my opinion on what was needed. Without hesitation I told them that, based on my personal experience, unless educators truly believed that students and schools could succeed, it would never happen. Author Michael Fullan agrees. He writes that most educational reforms are short-lived or doomed to failure because they fail to account for the most important, third dimension of change—beliefs. Fullan believes that change is 25% ideas and 75% beliefs.

Implications for school leaders

Based on my conversations over the past five or six years with school leaders from all over the country, I have concluded that raising student achievement is less about what needs to be done and more about how to do it. As it turns out our challenge may be less about our students and more about winning the hearts and minds of our teachers—changing beliefs. Students cannot exceed the quality of their teachers nor will many students exceed their expectations.

I have tremendous confidence in the power of teachers to inspire and motivate students. From my viewpoint, if a teacher does not believe that students can achieve, they won’t.

Who is going to get them to believe?

There are no victims here, only volunteers. School leaders, it is up to us. We are in the position in order to make a difference. We want to offer every student the promise of a quality education and the prospect of a good life. We cannot raise student achievement unless we all believe that we can. We cannot raise student achievement unless we believe that each and every student, if given time, can learn at high levels. In our every waking moment, we must do everything in our power to pass on our unwavering belief in the unlimited potential of our students to our teachers, counselors, administrators, and parents. If we don’t, who will?

Finally, let’s make some minor changes in the USA Today article on placebos to read “the teacher-student relationship, plus the expectation of learning, may be enough to change the student’s brain and behavior.”

Posted by Mel Riddile at 03:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)