Principals and teachers working in diverse, high-poverty schools are constantly challenged, even on a normal school day. In addition to the need to raise the achievement of each and every one of our students, our school had to overcome a number of externally imposed challenges. In fact, our teachers designed a t-shirt to commemorate our decade-long series of ordeals.

The back of the shirt read:

WE SURVIVED...

Seven years of renovation

SOLs (Virginia Standards of Learning)

Columbine

September 11, 2001

The Beltway Sniper

The War in Iraq

The Winter of 2003

No Child Left Behind

"The Worm" (a computer virus that virtually shutdown our entire school system)

Hurricane Isabel

Lead in our water

"The Meltdown" (We lost all power to for an entire day.)

The front of the shirt read:

AND WE THRIVED!

J.E.B. Stuart High School

A Breakthrough High School

Without a doubt, of all the events, September 11, 2001 sticks out in my memory, just as it does for many Americans, most of whom will never forget what they were doing and where they were on that fateful day.

Ten years ago, our diverse, high-poverty school was basking in the light of being featured in highly complimentary article titled "Changing America" in the September, 2001 issue of National Geographic Magazine. The article was the culmination of a two-year long vetting by the Magazine's writers and photographers, who were given 24/7 access to the school and homes of our students.

The article, which was initially intended to focus on the difficulty that immigrant populations had assimilating into American culture, ended up being a celebration of the culture of our school as a focal point of our diverse community. If anything, and I mean anything, wasn't working in our school, the writers and photographers would have found it. It was as though we had gone through a two-year long audit of our school culture.

National Geographic Magazine, I later learned, is renowned in the field of journalism for their thoroughness. Yes, this was risky, but we came through with flying colors, and we all breathed a big sigh of relief when the issue was finally released. Although we didn't know it at the time, we wouldn't have long to enjoy our success.

Expecting the Unexpected

There are some things that happen in schools that simply cannot be anticipated. We conduct fire drills and bus evacuation drills. We plan for bomb threats and chemical and biological attacks, but sometimes things just happen and our work is put to a real-world test, not a multiple choice or fill in the blank test, but a real honest-to-goodness test. If and when the unexpected occur, and we, as school leaders, and our staff have done our jobs, we pass the test with flying colors. If not, things could get pretty ugly.

September 11, 2001 was just such a day. For our school, it was the mother of all tests. We never could have anticipated the tragic events of that day. It was one of those days that put everything we did in a school to the test. If we had done our homework in building strong relationships, and a warm, inviting school culture, and made enough deposits into our "emotional bank account" we would get through this unscathed. If we thought that National Geographic had been a test of our work, we hadn't seen anything yet. Working in America's "most diverse high school" on September 11, 2001 was a day that I will always remember.

Shock and Disbelief!

Our school resource officer burst into our weekly staff meeting and announced that we were under attack. We immediately turned on the television in time to see the second plane fly into one of the Twin Towers. Like everyone else, including the network reporters, we were confused and horrified. There were many false reports made that day. So, we had to try to sort rumors from reality. For example, our resource officer received reports that one of the nearby apartment buildings, in which many of our student lived, had been bombed and that vehicles were exploding on the highway near the school. Both turned out to be false. However, when I looked out of my window, I could see smoke billowing overhead. We didn't know it at the time, but that smoke was coming from the plane that had crashed into the Pentagon. In the following days, we learned that we lost several parents who worked there.

Compounding the fears of everyone was the fact that all the cell lines were jammed. It was impossible to reach anyone. We felt isolated and we learned early on that we were on our own.

We knew couldn't control what happened outside of the school, but we could impact what happened inside the school. We had to be calm and to maintain a sense of business-as-usual. Our first thoughts went out to our own families, but we had to keep our focus on our responsibility to protect and care for 1,500 other peoples' children.

We knew that everyone would be watching us and taking their cues from us. Despite the confusion and turmoil that we all felt on the inside, we knew that we had to be visible and put on a positive face. We had no choice. We had to hold it together!

As soon as I could, I went on to the PA system and made an announcement informing everyone of what we knew at the time. We immediately went into action circulating through the building to take the pulse of the teachers and students. Many of the classes had already turned on their televisions, and the students were fixated on the screens.

Our school was undergoing a major renovation and we had a number of construction workers in the building every day. As soon as the news of the attacks circulated, they could be seen literally running from the building.

After a while, it became apparent to us that we needed to limit prolonged viewing of TV news coverage, because it was too emotionally gut wrenching for our students to helplessly watch constant reruns of scenes of planes flying into buildings and people jumping to their deaths. So, early on we decided to limit the number of cable stations available to the classrooms and to have our librarian watch all the major networks, take notes, sort out truth from rumor, and provide me with periodic reports, which I delivered to the entire school.

Our teachers were doing a fantastic job of holding things together in the classrooms. Our concern focused on the times that the teachers were not with the students. We knew that class changes and lunch would be our critical times. If we could get through the lunch periods without a melt down, we would be home free. We were all present in the cafeteria and we recruited some teachers to be available to talk with students.

Everything was going smoothly until some of our parents, who had left their places of work, arrived. Some had come with the intention of taking their children home. Some even bypassed the main office and rushed into the cafeteria sobbing. I am proud to say that it was the students who calmed their parents. I distinctly remember the daughter of one local official telling her mother, who had come to pick her up and take her home, "Calm down. I don't want to go home. We are safe here! Everything is okay. I want to stay here with my friends." When I heard that statement, I knew things would be all right.

At the End of the Day

Eventually, the school day ended without incident. The construction workers left, and many parents departed their places of work to come to the school to pick up their kids. However, despite the fact that we all had our own families and children, our entire staff remained at the school. We knew that we were all that our kids had that day. If our students needed calming down and comforting, we were the one who would do it. As far as we knew, we were all they had.

9/11 was a big test for our school. We had to make a huge withdrawal from our "emotional bank account" that day. Fortunately for all involved, our teachers and staff had made so many deposits with so many kids that this withdrawal was hardly noticed. Our students trusted us, not because of who we were. They trusted us because of the relationships we built with them every day, day in and day out.

Our students knew that we cared about them, because we demonstrated it to them in so many ways ranging from a simple smile or holding a door to providing a clean, safe and inviting school environment where they felt wanted and, more importantly, where they wanted to be. In retrospect, we passed all the big tests our school faced because of all the little things we all did every day.

The Bottom Line

When the unexpected occurs, and it will, schools can't fake it. We have either earned trust or we haven't. Ultimately, we have either done the right thing, the right way, for the right reason or we haven't, and our students know it. Believe me! They know it and they will show it!

Posted by Mel Riddile at 11:36 AM | Permalink

"Some things are worth more than money," Wayne Washowich, School Board President, McKeesport, PA

A colleague recently asked my opinion of charging students fees for participating in sports and other activities.

Background

I grew up in Western Pennsylvania and I know that high school sports are "an integral part of many communities." According to an article in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, "athletic fees started in California and New England in the early 1970s as a result of state budget issues. For decades, the fees remained isolated in a few areas of the country. A 2005 study from the National Interscholastic Athletic Administrators Association found that about a third of their member districts reported charging athletic participation fees, with 80 percent of the fees below $50.

My Take

Schools across the country are in the midst of huge budgetary shortfalls. School officials admit that charging fees for participating in sports will not bring in enough revenue to balance a district budget.

Charging any fees is a regressive approach to balancing the budget, because fees target the poorest and most under-resourced students and schools. To middle class families, fees are an inconvenience. To poor, working class families, fees are the difference between participating in sports, clubs, or college-level courses and not participating.

The good news is that some officials understand that "many students wouldn't be able to pay the fees and would not participate in sports or activities if it required any payment. We might as well tell the kids, 'Go ahead and walk the streets because you can't play,' and we'd never do that."

Posted by Mel Riddile at 12:13 PM | Permalink

"As a man thinketh in his heart so is he." James Allen

Here is the ultimate essential question posed in a New York Times article titled When Math Makes Sense (To Everyone): To what degree are our beliefs about children’s abilities determined by the results of our current education system?

The article was a follow-up to a previous piece on Jump Math's founder John Mighton, who expressed some interesting viewpoints on education and math instruction.

“Our belief in hierarchies is producing the hierarchies.” In other words, our belief that some people are naturally better than others in some areas produces an education system characterized by hierarchies designed to sort students. Formalized academic tracks would be the most extreme example of these formalized hierarchies. A math curriculum gamed to ensure that only "gifted" students could take Algebra in eighth grade, and thus, prevents many capable students from taking calculus in high school, would be a less obvious, but just as insidious, example.

Using Mighton as a case in point, the article postulates that we may not know what we are capable of achieving. "As a youth, he (Mighton) was fascinated by math, but he wasn’t a natural. He almost failed his first calculus course. But he trained himself to break down complicated tasks and practice them until things that initially confused him became second nature. He went on to do a Ph.D in mathematics."

"Research on experts – whether in chess, cello or computer programming – indicates that natural ability is less a predictor of success than effort and deliberate practice. A big part of what we call “giftedness” is “task commitment” – and that can be encouraged."

My Take

Our beliefs act as our auto-pilot that drives our behavior. What we believe about the capabilities of students to learn and teachers to teach directly impact the approaches we take. We can quickly discover what teachers and schools believe about students by examining four areas, which gives us insight into both a teacher's and a school's auto-pilot:

1. Grading - A teacher's philosophy of grading reflects the teacher's beliefs about human nature and how students are motivated. In fact, one of my favorite interview questions for prospective teachers was to ask about their philosophy of grading. Their response told us more about them as a person and as a future staff member than just about any other question we asked.

Teachers who believe that work and effort predict student success use grades as a means of providing both feedback and encouragement to their students. Grades are viewed as a byproduct of learning. Their students understand that their grades are a reflection of their work and effort and that they have the power to change them if they choose to work hard enough and to put in the time needed to master the concept. These teachers view student learning as feedback on their teaching and they use that feedback to guide their instruction, to focus review efforts, and to target remediation, because in their classroom, the only way a student can fail is if the student either quits of gives up. Failure is not an option. Their students typically say that their teacher will not allow them to fail. They never give up on any student. These teachers often used standards-based grading practices that emphasize mastery. They believe that learning time is relevant and the outcomes and mastery is an absolute.

Conversely, teachers who believe that grades are a reflection of student ability, use grades as rewards and punishment and as a weapon hoping that the fear of failure will motivate students to do better. Instead of using student learning as feedback on their teaching, they place the blame for poor performance on the students. Review and remediation are not a priority for ability-driven teachers. If a student is doing poorly in their class it is because they "didn't do their homework," or they "don't belong" in the class.

Schools tend to take on one of these two belief systems or mindsets. They either believe that all students, given time and effort, can achieve to high levels or they believe that students are either born with "it" or they are not, and no amount of work or effort will raise them to high levels of achievement.

The school that believes in work and effort seeks to reduce course failures and to increase the number of students taking higher-level courses through enhancing their skills. Schools who believe that ability predicts performance resist efforts to reduce course failure or to encourage more students to take higher-level courses because they fear that they will have to "water-down" the courses to help students succeed in those courses.

2. Interventions - Teachers who view ability as the best predictor of success see no need to provide interventions because failure is viewed as a natural consequence. They believe that it is their responsibility to sort students and to weed out the capable from the less capable.

Teachers who believe that work and effort predict academic success view interventions as a natural part of their teaching and helping to raise student achievement. These teachers simply refuse to give up on students.

Ability-driven schools often have no 3. Math, or 4. Reading interventions for struggling students. When offering interventions for struggling learners, ability-driven schools do so begrudgingly. Conversely, schools that believe that time, work, and effort are the best predictors of student achievement, have numerous interventions in both 3. Math, and 4. Reading for students and some even go as far as to require students to attend extra sessions.

Final Take

The beliefs, attitudes, and expectations of teachers combine to form a collective mindset or school culture, which drives the behavior of individual teachers and schools alike. Four specific areas provide insight into those beliefs and mindsets--grading, interventions, math, reading. How teachers and schools view and address these issues are strong indicators of the school's culture.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 09:39 AM | Permalink

Recently, Jay Mathews of the Washington Post, in preparation for an article on the accuracy of school incident reports, asked me to respond to the following question: "Do security incident reports adequately describe the climate of a school?" Here is my complete response.

The answer is simple. No single data point can accurately depict student performance nor can incident reports describe the climate or culture of a school. Experience has taught me that the only way to truly assess the climate of a school is to spend time in the school and to use that time to observe as well as to gather data from multiple sources.

Ask the teachers!

What teachers say is a much better indicator of school climate than incident reports. I admit that I pay close attention to reports from teachers, which identify specific issues and incidents. Experience has taught me that teachers are generally reluctant to make such reports, but when they do, it is usually a sign of a much larger problem.

What affects consistency in reporting?

I have found discipline reports to often be inconsistent within a school and wildly inconsistent among a large number of schools across a district. Schools in which several administrators deal with student discipline could have a wide variation in how some incidents are reported.

The more serious the incident, the more consistent the reporting. Many schools and school systems have zero tolerance policies for drugs, weapons, and gang-related behaviors. The more clearly defined the behaviors, the more consistent the reporting within a school.

NCLB has dramatically improved the consistency of reporting. States like Virginia developed reporting systems that met federal requirements and districts aligned their reporting to match state systems.

Another factor that greatly impacts the consistency of reporting relates to the police presence in a school. In schools with a full-time school resource officer, the reporting will be more consistent.

Pressure to avoid negative labels

We know that schools are under tremendous pressure to raise test scores. However, that pressure pales in comparison to the need avoid the stigma of being labeled a "persistently dangerous" school. Parents will absolutely refuse to send their child to a dangerous school and school leaders know it.

School Discipline and Grey Areas

Like most school issues, there are a number of grey areas, and that is particularly true when reporting student behavior. For example, one student brings a knife to school to protect him, but since the blade is shorter than that specified in the code, the knife is not considered a weapon. Another student goes on a camping trip and forgets that he left his knife in his backpack. However, because the knife is of a specified length, it is considered a weapon.

Generally speaking, the tendency is to downplay incidents. In fact , I cannot imagine a case in which a school would want to overstate the number of serious incidents. Truth be told, some principals pressure school resource officers to downgrade some incidents. Likewise, some police officers don't want to deal with juveniles and the juvenile court system and they want to downgrade incidents.

Data can be misleading

In the short run, a school can look better when less is done. Principals can reduce the number of incidence by not showing up or by simply doing nothing. Schools that take a less aggressive stand could look better on paper than they actually are in real life. On the other hand, schools that actively and consistently address discipline issues could, in the short run, have a high number of incidents. In that case, the school could look worse on paper than it actually is.

The Bottom Line

School culture is a product of the values, beliefs, mindsets, and behaviors of the entire school community. Just as no school and no student can or should be judged on the basis of a single data point, neither can the number of incidents portray the culture or climate of a school. When it comes to reporting student behavior, I would trust first-hand experience and the word of the teachers and students rather than a state or district report that simply lists the number of incidents.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 03:01 PM | Permalink

In difficult economic times the poorest and under-resourced schools and students suffer the most. A new report on workforce employment tells us what many high school teachers and principals already know--there are few jobs for our students.

The report points out that the number of people 55 and older holding jobs is on track to hit a record 28 million in 2010 while young people increasingly are squeezed out of the labor market, a USA TODAY analysis finds. The portion of people ages 16-24 in the labor market is at the lowest level since the government began keeping track in 1948, falling from 66% in 2000 to 55% this year. There are 17 million in that age group who are employed, the fewest since 1971 when the population was much smaller.

Impact on Schools

CTE and work-study programs have been struggling to find employment opportunities for students. Many of our students need to work to help support their families. The lack of jobs puts more pressure on the students and their families, which makes this time of the year even more challenging for teachers, counselors, and school leaders.

The Bottom Line

In difficult times our neediest students need us the most. They rely on us to provide a clean, safe, orderly, and inviting school environment. They count on us to do whatever it takes.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 11:43 AM | Permalink

Just before I went on stage to deliver a keynote speech on dropout prevention before over a thousand people, my host grabbed my arm and said, "See that large man in the front row? He controls the finances in the state legislature and he is very interested in what you have to say." I looked at him and said, "Thanks for not putting any pressure on me."

I began my speech by saying "Our school operated on a simple premise. Treat other peoples' children the way that you would want your own child treated. If every school believed that, we wouldn't be here today talking about dropout prevention." At that, the man in the front row stood up and began to applaud. I breathed a deep sigh of relief.

I always believed that many of our challenges in education could be corrected if we would simply treat other peoples' children as though they were our own. I would want my child in a small classroom with an excellent teacher. I would want my child to receive personal attention from the teacher. I would want my child to receive additional assistance should she fall behind. I would want my child to have an individual learning plan customized to her unique talents and interests. Our school accomplished many things for many students because we walked the talk.

Unfortunately, too many influential people refuse to walk their talk. They are locked into a do as I say not as I do mode. They talk about public education and the benefits of diversity and send their own children to elite private schools. They tell us that large class sizes and teacher pay don't impact student performance. According to Bruce Baker in School Finance 101 "private independent schools in particular, systematically outspend public schools in the same labor market by about 2/1" and their main point of differentiation is, you guessed it, small class sizes. In other words, small classes and high teacher pay for my child, large classes and low teacher pay for your child.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 09:25 AM | Permalink

Guest blogger: Bob Farrace, NASSP Senior Director for Communications and Development

Typically, educational technology documents don’t make much of a splash outside of the educational technology community. The final National Educational Technology Plan (NETP) released earlier this month is the exception. Unlike so many educational technology documents that romanticize new tools for narrow tasks, the NETP is so much more about education than technology. The plan proposes a new model of learning enabled by technology but driven by the student’s individual educational needs. Language of personalization and engagement and student empowerment are a familiar echo of the Breaking Ranks framework that NASSP has promoted for the past 15 years. So this might be just the opportunity school leaders need to shatter the ed-tech echo chamber and join—perhaps even lead—the conversation about technology as a transformative force that enables and accelerates the attainment of educational goals to which we have aspired for years.

The plan comes at an opportune time. At last count, 43 states are poised to adopt Common Core standards, complete with technology-enabled assessments—a key element of the NETP. Prior to taking the assessments, though, students will benefit from a likely new explosion of open educational resources, or OERs, whose development will be focused by the Common Core. The new model of learning requires access to these new multiple resources—not just content, but teachers, mentors, and learning communities.

Certain new realities might push us this direction, ready or not. A recent National Coalition for Teaching and America’s Future report details one reality that boils down to this: Boomers are leaving the teaching profession more quickly than we can replace them, and half of those new teachers leave the profession within five years. If we plan to hang on to the industrial-era model of replacing an outgoing body with a new (and cheaper) body, we might as well ring the crisis alarm now. We’re not going to recruit our way out of this one. Otherwise, we can take the opportunity to remodel the teaching profession along the lines, for instance, of the NETP “connected teaching” model, in which teachers act less as content delivery agents and more as superconnected conductors of the various content sources and learning networks that contribute to the student’s education.

The NETP is a rich document with big aspirations for transforming the learning enterprise. Its success will require the coordinated efforts of everyone with a stake in schools. And we have a 2015 deadline to pull it all together. So there’s a new urgency for principals to do their part and take a crucial first step: Create the conditions for connectivity in schools. First, this presumes all kids can access connectible devices—one small part of the infrastructure overhaul NETP calls for. Schools with 1-to-1 laptops or other mobile learning devices (MLDs) are the exception, so the norm remains students who occasionally visit the computer lab or wait their turn to use the classroom computer. Such access is not nearly enough to fulfill the NETP aspirations, yet principals can reallocate their small discretionary budgets only so far. Thankfully, there are a number of favorable precedents—the state of Maine, in fact, even figured out how to institute a 1-to-1 policy statewide. So we’ll be keeping an eye out for the policies and funding sources that will replicate that success throughout the nation.

In the meantime, principals can prepare for the advent of MLDs by beginning the crucial conversation about connectivity. NETP will see no progress while we continue to debate if schools should give students (and teachers) access to social networks and other Web 2.0 tools. They should. They must. Now. Some schools have figured out how to make it happen without the CIPA police tapping at their doors. And while some potential dangers are real, frameworks are emerging for principals to lead stakeholder conversations that set expectations for responsible use of social media and accountability for misuse. (Here’s one, to get you started. And NASSP will continue to identify and share them.) Those conversations are overdue. And the only real investment is the decision by an enlightened leader to make the conversation a priority.

What are the other ways principals can prepare now for the NETP to get traction in schools?

Posted by Bob Farrace at 01:19 PM | Permalink

by Stuart Singer, The Teacher Leader

In any conversation about education, the views of Bill Gates should be given serious consideration.  Unlike many of the other high profile people engaged in this ongoing discussion, his thoughts are not influenced by any professional involvement.  Gates does not have a job description to fulfill as does Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.  He does not have to speak for teachers like Randi Weingarten.  He is not a politician, has no profit motive, or even a former career in education to protect.  What he does have is a sincere interest, a powerful commitment and the necessary resources to make competent judgments on the subject.  Consequently when I saw an article about him in a recent issue of Parade Magazine I decided it was a must read.  One of the most interesting aspects of this discussion was his opinion of the qualities of a good teacher.    

Simple but compelling

When asked why there are so many bad teachers and not enough great ones in American public schools Gates replied:

“Very little is invested in understanding great teaching. We've never had a meaningful evaluation system that identifies the dimensions of great teachers so we can transfer the skills to others. The Gates Foundation has learned that two questions can predict how much kids learn: ‘Does your teacher use class time well?’ and, ‘When you're confused, does your teacher help you get straightened out’?”

I found the two questions posed by the Gates Foundation very intriguing.  In my experience with teacher evaluations, the process was exclusively top down – in other words, from the perspective of the teachers and administrators. There would be an evaluator who solicits information from the teacher such as classroom goals and objectives.  This person then attends classes to observe what activities or actions actually do occur.  The evaluation concludes with a discussion of the relevant information with the teacher. 

The Foundation questions, on the other hand, were from the viewpoint of the classroom consumer—the student.  And based on their research the responses were strong indicators of the level of student learning.  Since this outcome is the ultimate goal of education it would seem that some use of this resource would be appropriate.  While student input cannot replace the evaluation process, it could bring into the procedure a group of individuals who have a unique perspective on the work of the teacher. Though the two questions mentioned by Gates are very simple, they have proven to be a strong indicator of student learning.  Expanding on those inquiries might provide a method to define the basic ingredients of successful teaching.  Below I have incorporated them into a ten-part student questionnaire. 

1. Does your teacher use class time well?  (Gates)
2. When you are confused, does your teacher help you get straightened out?  (Gates)
3. Do you believe that your teacher wants you to succeed?
4. Do you think the teacher is fair and consistent?
5. Does your teacher have a broad knowledge of the subject?
6. Does your teacher sincerely care about the subject?
7. Do you believe your teacher enjoys teaching?
8. Do you feel that your teacher will spend extra time to ensure that you learn?
9. Do you look forward to going to this class?
10. Do you listen to what is being said by the teacher during class?

My question for you is this—what should be added to or subtracted from this list?

Posted by Mel Riddile at 12:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

The New York Times reports that schools across the country are going to great lengths to ensure that every student is included in the yearbook. Apparently, the days when only the "most popular" students dominated the yearbook are gone. "

"Students who saw star athletes and bench warmers alike rewarded with thanks-for-playing trophies are now experiencing new efforts to protect their self-esteem: An editor has been charged with tracking how often all 1,400 students appear in the 325-page yearbook. The goal is for every student to appear twice, in candid photos or feature stories, regardless of whether he or she is the senior class president, the yearbook editor’s best friend or the student who comes late and leaves early."

"The changing yearbook is a result of a decades-old effort to foster a kinder, gentler culture through measures like smaller schools, character-building and peer counseling. “We want every student to be known and valued in a school.” Research has shown that students are less likely to drop out when they feel connected to their school."

Posted by Mel Riddile at 05:03 PM | Permalink

“Successful teaching cannot begin until students are regularly attending class.”—The Teacher Leader

Student attendance is the proverbial elephant in the middle of the room when it comes to discussions of school improvement. How can teachers be held accountable for student achievement when students have poor attendance? How can school and principals be held accountable for student achievement when states allow students to quit school at age 16 and/or have weak attendance laws? How can schools be held accountable for student achievement when law enforcement agencies or the courts reluctant to enforce existing attendance laws? Finally, how can schools be held accountable for student performance when they have no resources like school attendance officers to assist in improving attendance.

Upon arriving at my new school, I proceeded to ask our teachers a simple Peter Drucker question. What do we need to do in order to improve? Although simple in structure, this question contains some critical underlying presuppositions. First, we believed that our students were capable of learning at much higher levels. Second, our school needs to improve. Third, our school can improve. Finally, our school will improve.

When I asked the question, I had a number of teachers give me similar answers, but I will always remember what our Science Department Chair, Sherry Singer, said to me. “Mel, our students don’t come to school, and, when they do, they can’t read.”

It was from that simple question and Sherry’s straightforward response that our decade-long school journey began. For it was on those two focal points, attendance and literacy, that we formed our “R-A-G-S to riches” school improvement plan—Reading plus Attendance will result in better Grades and a Safe school. If we can get our kids to school and give them strong literacy skills, student performance will improve and discipline problems will decrease. Sounds simple, doesn’t it? However, in apparent simplicity lies complexity.

A Culture Shift

We learned that improving attendance and implementing a school wide literacy initiative each require massive changes in school culture in terms of mindsets, attitudes, and adult behaviors. I knew from experience that improving attendance had a lot to do with good old fashioned, roll-up-your-sleeves, hard work. Improving student attendance also required alignment between state laws, law enforcement and court policies, district policies, school practices.

Having the right laws and procedures in place was important in the short-term. However, in long-term, we had to build a school culture that attracted students. We had to become a place where they wanted to be. We had to be the kind of school in which each and every student felt wanted and valued. We had to be the kind of school that students wanted to attend and hated to leave. We had to be a school that had to work to get students to leave, not one that had to work to get students to attend. To be that school, we had to provide a safe, clean, orderly, warm and inviting school environment built on quality relationships. In addition, we had to create a culture of success in which students came to school expecting to succeed and knowing that their teachers would not stand bye and allow them fail.

The Role of the State

When Virginia imposed strict accountability measures on schools in the mid- to late- 1990s, the principals met with state officials and made it very clear that if we are going be held accountable for student achievement, the State needs to strengthen existing attendance laws, which they did. Compulsory attendance laws in Virginia require attendance until age 18. In addition, state statutes require schools to refer students to the courts after a prescribed number of days—five.

The Role of Law Enforcement

Local crime statistics indicated that teenagers who, either should have been in school at the time, or who had a record of chronic truancy committed a significant proportion of crimes against property. The principals simply asked the police to, instead of ignoring school-aged students walking around the community during school hours, pick up truants and return them to school.

The Role of the Courts

Principals met with court officials to urge them to impose strict consequences on truants. Judges were understandably reluctant to detain a student for truancy when they had so many more serious criminal offenses to deal with. However, we pointed out to them that if they weren’t willing to detain them for truancy, they would be detaining them for much more serious offenses later. In addition, we pointed out that their current lack of will in enforcing existing laws was actually encouraging truancy. We predicted that, their willingness to take a strong stand, would, in the long-term, result in a significant drop in truancy cases, and it did. Ironically, because the courts were willing to detain truants, in the long-run, they rarely had to do so.

The Role of the District

Principals met with district officials and requested additional attendance officers, a clear district-wide policy on attendance referrals, and a clear policy relating to attendance and grading. All three requests were implemented.

Now we had strong state laws, the agreement of the courts, and district support. Now, that all the barriers were removed, it was up to us. We had no excuses and no one to blame. It was time to get to work.

Next: The Role of the School in Improving Student Attendance

Posted by Mel Riddile at 01:30 PM | Permalink

Ask any educational reformer for a list of the most critical problems in our schools today and the topic of student attendance will inevitably be found near the top.  The logic is simple—if you are not there, you are not going to learn.  But based on a recent Education Week article by Hedy Chang the solutions to this long-term problem may be far more complicated than many would expect.  Ms. Chang presents five significant myths about student attendance that should give everyone in education pause.   Here are the misconceptions that she believes are inhibiting some real solutions to the problem.

Students don’t start missing a lot of school until middle or high school.

National research has determined that 10% of all kindergarten and first-graders miss at least a month of school each year.  In some places, such as New York City, the number of students is twice as high.  Obviously the vast majority of these absences are excused—children at this age are unlikely to be staying home without some parental supervision.  According to Ms. Chang the ramifications are potentially immense:  “…the bad attendance habits that lead to skipping school can become entrenched in the early years.”

Absences in the early grades don’t really affect academics.

Not surprisingly studies show that chronically absent kindergarten students do not perform as well in the first grade as those who were consistently present.  It is not unusual to have these deficiencies continue throughout elementary school.  Perhaps one of the most compelling arguments was found in Chicago where the attendance of ninth-graders proved to be a better predictor of drop outs than eighth-grade test scores.

Most schools already know how many students are chronically absent.

Ms. Chang laments that most school data concerning absences only revolve around the total school attendance patterns and “unexcused” absences.  Consequently many individuals who are missing large portions of class time remain under the educational radar.  As she points out “an elementary school of 400 students can have 95 percent of its students showing up every day and yet still have 60 children missing 18 days—or 10 percent of the school year.”

There’s not much that schools can do to improve attendance; it’s up to the parents.

While certainly the traditional path of parental involvement and truant officers needs to be taken, there are often unique concerns that an individual school can incorporate into their programs.  Ms. Chang relates that many causes of chronic absenteeism can be mitigated.  She speaks of Muslim students missing classes during Ramadan for fear of sitting in the cafeteria during these days of fasting.  Other schools had problems resulting from parents who were shift workers and were not awake when their children should have been leaving for school.  Another group that missed too many days was those in homeless shelters.  In each of these cases the affected schools found solutions. One brought in a Muslim counselor and a separate room for these students during the lunch period.  For parents who slept during the day, a school opened the building early to allow parents to drop off their children after work and before going to bed.  

The Federal government has no role in reducing chronic absenteeism.

Test scores may be important but one of the major reasons for poor test scores is bad attendance.  Ms. Chang believes that the federal government should be requiring statistics on chronic absenteeism as well as truancy and test scores.  School improvement can be measured by improved attendance.

The Bottom Line

Successful teaching cannot begin until students are regularly attending class.  Every day that is missed is a lost opportunity regardless of whether the absence is excused or not.  Consequently strategies need to be created to maximize student presence. At my former school the administrative team recognized the importance of this problem and employed a number of techniques to reduce “excused” absences.  When many Muslim students were leaving early on Fridays for prayer, the principal met with officials from the mosque and arranged for a parent volunteer to come to the building during lunch to hold the sessions in the school.  For students who were chronically absent, an automated callout system was used to make 6:00 a.m. wake-up calls to these specific homes.  But as Ms. Chang has written, too many times such innovations are being implemented too late in the process.  These kinds of interventions need to occur at the very beginning of a student’s education.

For every elementary school the overriding need is to acknowledge that all absences -excused or unexcused - are detrimental. They have both short- and long-term negative consequences.  A culture establishing excellent attendance must be created in the earliest grades.  To that end, careful and consistent attention must be given to the analysis of the attendance record of each individual student not just school-wide data.  Every reason given for missing school should be examined and methods devised to prevent them from becoming chronic. If such an approach is started in the primary years, the continuation of such policies at the high school level will become far more effective.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 02:05 PM | Permalink

A safe, secure, and orderly school environment is essential to learning. When students are bullied, threatened, or harassed, achievement suffers. WestEd has released a national study entitled “What Characteristics of Bullying, Bullying Victims, and Schools Are Associated With Increased Reporting of Bullying to School Officials?”

The key findings of the report include:

• Frequency and severity impact reporting. “Students who were bullied were more likely to indicate that their victimization was reported to a school official if the bullying involved injury, physical threats, destruction of property, actual physical contact (pushing, shoving, and the like), greater frequency, multiple types, more than one location, and at least one occurrence on a school bus.”
• Those involved in fights and those who feared for their safety were more likely to report bullying. “Two types of bullying victims were more likely to indicate that their victimization was reported to school officials — those involved in a fight during the school year and those who reported being afraid of attack and avoiding certain school areas or activities.”
• Older students are less likely to report. “Higher grade levels are associated with less reporting: reporting ranged from 53 percent in grade 6 to 27 percent in grade 12.”
• No relationship between school characteristics and frequency of bullying. “No characteristic of bullying victims' schools — including general characteristics, school culture, and school security and safety — was associated with either increased or decreased reporting.”

Posted by Mel Riddile at 01:55 PM | Permalink

Mention accountability and most principals think about state assessments and “adequate yearly progress.” However, when I think of accountability, I think of a lot more than state tests, I think about real world assessments. Today, September 11, is the anniversary of 911, and I couldn’t help but think how our school was put to a severe, real world test that day. It was one of those events in life when the unexpected occurs for which we could not prepare and which tested us to our core.

Looking back over the years, it seems that our school faced an inordinate number of external events that ultimately tested our mindset, values, beliefs, and the strength of our relationships. If we had done our job and walked the talk, we would come through each with shining colors. If we hadn’t, our weaknesses would be exposed.

We had so many things happen that, one year, one side of our annual faculty t-shirt told the story of how “WE SURVIVED” twelve events which included Columbine, 911, the Beltway Sniper, two wars, one hurricane, and a “snowmageddon.” Although these events were all much different, they all tested our culture, our commitment, our focus, and most importantly, our relationships with our students and our relationships with our colleagues.

September 11, 2001 holds a special place in my memory. We can all remember where we were and what we were doing on that fateful day. I can remember it as though it were yesterday.

We were in our weekly staff meeting and our SRO rushed in and told us to turn on the television, which we did just in time to see the second plane fly into the Twin Towers live. This was particularly disconcerting to me because I had stayed in the Vista Hotel on a number of occasions, and that summer, our family had visited New York, bought theater tickets on the ground floor of the Towers, and rode to the top of the Towers.

The worst part of the day for me was the rumors and what we didn’t know. There were so many conflicting reports on the television that we decided to turn it off and have our librarian compile a report consisting only of what we did know. Our police department gave us a report that a nearby apartment building had been bombed and that cars were exploding on Route 7, which was only a block from our school. All these reports later turned out to be false. Our school was so close to the Pentagon that the smoke from the crash floated over the school until late in the day.

I am not going to go into all the details of the day, except to say that our students and our staff passed the test with flying colors. Our students trusted us and we respected them. They always felt safe and secure in our building and we all felt like we were part of the same team.

Personalization was always a priority for our staff and a long-standing strength of our school. We had a number of former Peace Corps volunteers teaching in our school, which helped us establish caring relationships with our diverse student body, which had students from eighty-eight countries speaking sixty-six different languages. In fact, we were so diverse that, in an article that was published that month, National Geographic Magazine had called our school “the most diverse high school in America.”

Many parents came to our school that day with the intent of taking their child home. However, when they saw how calm everything was at our school they decided to allow them to remain. I remember one of our School Board members, who was sobbing almost uncontrollably in the cafeteria, being told by her daughter “Go home, mom. Everything is okay here.”

The Ultimate Test

We had no way of knowing it that day, but the real test of our relationships and our school culture would come in the weeks and months that followed 911. Our diverse student body included a large Muslim population, which made up approximately one-sixth of the school. Reporters and journalists flocked to our school all wanting to know how the kids were getting along. Were there any incidents?

In early November, four of our Muslim students were interviewed on a morning NPR broadcast. It didn’t take long for the interviewer to ask the students if they had been harassed or if there were any incidents at school. Each of the students indicated that school had gone on normally, that they always felt safe at school, and that, to their knowledge, there had been no incidents.

The Bottom Line

Schools are about a lot more than bricks and mortar or tests and test scores. Schools are about people and their relationships. We were tested many times by outside events that we could never have anticipated. Fortunately, our entire staff made daily deposits into our “emotional bank account” so that, when the unexpected occurred, we had a large reserve of goodwill to draw from. In retrospect, these unforeseen events made us a better school and they brought us closer to each other.

By the way, I mentioned one side of our faculty t-shirt told how “WE SURVIVED.” On the other side of the shirt was the following: “WE THRIVED! J.E.B. Stuart High School, A Breakthrough School.”

Posted by Mel Riddile at 05:28 PM | Permalink

Teachers and school leaders across the country are working night and day to improve student performance. Current plans to reform schools often ignore that fact that schools are about more than bricks, mortar, structures, or programs. Schools are about people—students, parents, teachers, administrators, counselors, and community members—and their relationships. These relationships form the culture—attitudes, beliefs, expectations, mindsets—that define a school.

High-performing schools have learned that the foundation of their success rests upon the quality of these relationships. Researchers continually remind us that the number one factor in raising student academic performance is the teacher-student relationship. Schools can have great teachers, quality lesson plans, outstanding leadership, and the best resources, but without high-quality relationships, learning will suffer.

Discussions about school improvement must address strategies to increase personalization. We all want our children to attend schools that are warm, inviting, safe, and orderly, and it is our responsibility to ensure that other peoples’ children have that same opportunity.

However, according to the results of a 2008 national survey, we have work to do:

• Sixty-two percent (62%) of the students surveyed agreed with the statement “School is a welcoming and friendly place.”
• Twenty-nine percent (29%) of the students surveyed said they do not feel comfortable going to the cafeteria for lunch.
• Just under half (49%) of all 6-12 students reported they are proud of their school.
• 33% of students surveyed agreed bullying is a problem in their school.
• Forty-four percent (44%) of those students surveyed believe teachers care about their problems and feelings.

A Free Personalization Resource

The 2008 survey is being updated in 2010 and schools across the country are invited to participate. The Million Voice Project is a public interest initiative that is gathering and analyzing the perceptions of 1 million students, grades 6-12, about school. This student voice project will be the largest single initiative to document and analyze student engagement and to highlight the related variations in academic performance in American schools.  This initiative is being underwritten by the Pearson Foundation, and is being supported by a number of national education organizations including NASSP, CCSSO, NEA, and AASA.

Schools may register between August 16 and December 17. Administration (when students start taking the survey after the school has registered them) begins September 13. Once all of a school’s teachers have administered the survey, the Million Voice School Report will be emailed to the school within three business days.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 11:17 AM | Permalink

I am on vacation where we have access to basic cable. As I was channel surfing, I saw a promotion running for Christmas gifts. The channel was QVC, which apparently runs an annual “Christmas in July” promotion.

This reminded me of a conversation I had a few months ago with a high school faculty. This was a school that had been restructured. All teachers had to reapply for their jobs and only half were rehired. The school also had a new principal and a new administrative staff.

We were discussing accountability and one teacher mentioned that the students were “Christmas-treeing” the tests. While I had never heard the term “Christmas-treeing,” I quickly figured out that the students were not taking the tests seriously and were using the answer sheets to create drawings. In our discussion, the teachers talked about their frustration with the lack of student accountability.

The school, the teachers, and the administrators were being held accountable for the results of the test, but the students were not. The bottom line is that the careers of these educators as well as the reputation of the school and the school district depended on the good will of the students. If they didn’t feel like taking the test, there was nothing that could be done.

This is not the first time that I have had this discussion. I worked with one district in which all the high school principals were fired or replaced and hundreds of teachers fired or transferred on the basis of student test scores and that state had absolutely no student accountability.

In yet another state, a high school principal lamented that his students inexplicably decided that they were not going to put forth their best effort on the state tests. Despite the school sending record numbers of students to four-year colleges, the high school was placed on a state list of “low-performing schools.”

I worked in a high-pressure, high-accountability state that held high schools accountability by using eleven end-of-course exams to calculate adequate yearly progress. However, students were also held accountable. The tests were used to award course credit and as barriers to graduation. In this context, everyone, students, teachers, and administrators took the tests seriously. In the early days of the state program, only the schools were held accountable, and it was difficult to get the students motivated to take the tests. I must add that our teachers had excellent relationships with our students and, in most cases, the students would put forth effort simply because their teachers cared so much. However, we had time to build a school personalized school culture that emphasized the importance of student-teacher relationships. I cannot imagine what it would be like to go into a new school that was beginning to develop a positive culture and having to depend on the good will of the students when the staff barely had time to get to know them.

Notice that I didn’t even mention student attendance and the inconsistencies in holding students accountable for regular attendance. I will save that for another discussion.

From experience I have learned that unless everyone—students, teachers, administrators, schools, and school districts-- is held accountable for student performance, there is not true accountability. Unless everyone is working together toward a common goal, we have no accountability system. Instead, we have a scapegoating system.

The following is a summary of information on state accountability systems, exit exams, and end-of-course exams as provided by the Education Commission of the States:

Exit Exams

• States with exit exam policies require students to achieve a passing score on each subject tested in the exit exam, as well as fulfill all other graduation requirements, to receive a high school diploma.
• Exit exams vary greatly from state to state in numerous ways, including the level of content tested (upper middle grades in some states, while upper high school grades in others) and the opportunities for students who do not pass (from none to numerous and detailed appeals procedures and alternative methods of demonstrating competency).
• School accountability: Nearly every state with an exit exam uses it as a means of measuring school performance.
• Course credit: Six states use exit exams as a component of the course grade.
• Level of diploma: Six states use scores as a criterion for an honors or other advanced diploma or endorsement.
• Scholarship eligibility: Three states use the scores from exit exams to determine scholarship eligibility.
• As of June 2007, 24 states and the District of Columbia do not have (and have no plans to implement) exit exams, citing adequate means to measure student performance and academic rigor in existing state assessments and other mechanisms.
• Currently, 22 states require passage of state exit exams as a component of high school graduation requirements. By 2012, the number of states with exit exams will grow to 26.

Subjects Tested

• The subjects tested in state exit exams vary greatly by state, but nearly all include a reading/writing component and a mathematics component.
• Some states are phasing in tests over time to increase the scope of subjects tested. For example, the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) currently includes reading and mathematics, and passage of a writing test will be required starting with the class of 2010.

End-of-course Exams

• End-of-course exams are given at the end of a specific course (for example, after completing Biology I) rather than at a particular grade level (i.e. 10) or at a single point in time during the high school career. In contrast, standards-based exams are given at a specific grade level, for example, at the end of grade 10. Ten states use end-of-course exams for exit purposes.
• States that use exit exams for other purposes including:
• School accountability: Nearly every state with an exit exam uses it as a means of measuring student performance.
• Course credit: Six states use exit exams as a component of the course grade.
• Level of diploma: Six states use scores as a criterion for an honors or other advanced diploma or endorsement.
• Scholarship eligibility: Three states use the scores from exit exams to determine scholarship eligibility.
• 16 states require the scores from the exit exams to be printed on the students' transcripts.

Graduation Requirements

• 22 states currently use exit exams as a component of their graduation requirements.
• By 2012, four more states will use exit exams:
• Arkansas- beginning school year 2009-2010
• Maryland- beginning with the class of 2009
• Oklahoma- beginning with the class of 2012
• Washington- beginning with the class of 2008
• States are slowly phasing in new subjects to be tested in their exit exams. 
• Ten states use end-of-course exams for exit purposes.  
• North Carolina uses both end-of-course and standards based assessments.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 11:33 AM | Permalink

Yesterday’s USA Today article contended that online harassment of teachers and school officials was protected speech and an opportunity for “payback time”—a golden opportunity to get back at teachers and school administrators. An informal poll of my friends and acquaintances confirmed my shock and dismay that any reasonable adult would believe that it was acceptable and even justifiable for students to engage in such despicable behavior. One said it best, “I’m sure glad that I don’t have that person’s child in my class.”

The author would probably use the “payback time,” free speech argument to defend the same student behavior directed, not at teachers and administrators, but instead to other students. You don’t like someone so you publish your attacks on the Internet for all the world to see.

Fortunately, reasonable minds may yet prevail. Today’s Washington Post properly acknowledges the grave impact that online misbehavior can have on lives of students. The Post points out that the “LACK OF MATURITY, lack of supervision, and technology that can transmit messages instantly to millions of people: This is the volatile cocktail that lies at the root of cyberbullying.”

While students may be “digital natives” who have been using technology as a normal part of their lives since birth, skill doesn’t necessarily translate into wisdom. Simply knowing how to use technology does not mean that students know how to us it wisely. When “extensive technological knowledge combines with the raging hormones, limited impulse control and failure to understand consequences that mark the teenage years, the results can be devastating.”

Cyberbullying “can be a minor annoyance or, drawing in strangers through hate speech or provocative images, it can escalate far beyond the schoolyard.” Furthermore, as the Post points out, “this bullying, following students out of school hallways into the privacy of their homes, can have a debilitating effect on daily life. To combat it, parents and educators must stay vigilant and establish clear expectations for conduct online.”

Instead of viewing cyber attacks as “payback time,” the Post points out that “Schools can help themselves combat the problem by clearly banning cyberbullying in their acceptable-use policies and honor codes, as they do traditional bullying.

Schools can’t fight cyberbullying alone. “Ultimately it is the role of parents to establish the terms of their children's activity online, setting clear limits and responding supportively and definitively if things go awry.

Instead of viewing cyber attacks as protected speech, the Post points out that schools and parents work together can create “clear expectations for student behavior and teaching teens and tweens about the consequences of their online actions can go a long way toward changing the culture in which such bullying thrives.”

Posted by Mel Riddile at 10:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

According to an NPR report, Beach High School, Savannah, Georgia’s only Title I high school has shown marked improvement in the three-year tenure of Principal, Dr. Deonn Bostic Stone. Scores on state assessments have risen steadily and graduation rates have increased from 49% to 66%.

Apparently, the progress made by the school is not enough and not fast enough to keep it off Georgia’s list of schools in need of improvement. However, in order to qualify for School Improvement Grant (SIG) funding, the school will replace Dr. Stone and a minimum of 50% of the faculty.

Jack Jennings of the Center for Education Policy indicates that, if there is a bright side to the current reform efforts, it is hard to find. Jennings warns that the belief that closing schools and replacing staff will improve achievement and close the achievement gap has no basis in reality. In fact, the record is so skimpy that reform seems to be more about cash-strapped school districts chasing federal dollars than it does about actually improving schools. “It is less about improvement and more about money,” Jennings points out.

In other words, the focus is no longer on students and is now on desperate school districts willing to sacrifice the good name and tradition of a historic school as well as the careers of the staff for federal dollars regardless of whether those dollars will help improve student achievement.

Students interviewed believe that the school will get worse before it gets better. “Trust is gone,” said one student. Other students point out that many of the teachers who will be replaced built trust and quality teacher-student relationships that defined their experience at the school. “It will hurt relationships,” said one student.

Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, reiterated his desire to have funds reach the neediest schools, but acknowledged that it is the individual states who make up the lists of schools needing improvement.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 03:14 PM | Permalink

"We're setting up our culture to being over-reactive."—Sarah Coyne

Teachers and school leaders know that TV and other media contribute to short attention spans and missing homework assignments. Now we learn from USA Today that reality TV may be teaching our already active and sometimes emotional teens to over-react.

Most mature adults understand that the reactions we see on reality and cable TV are “largely for effect,” are over-gradient, and often inappropriate. However, behavioral researchers believe that we may be more affected than we realize. The problem for teachers and school leaders is that these shows are most often viewed by growing, developing, and easily influenced teens, whose sense of emotional norms may become exaggerated.

"People can be seduced into thinking that's the most common way of reacting to life, when it's not," says Roderick Hart, a professor of communication studies and government at the University of Texas-Austin. Because of this "tutoring" of emotions, Hart says, people are becoming culturally conditioned to think, "it's OK to be more over-reactive."

"Reality television has hyped all the emotions. You can't just be happy. You have to be ecstatic. You can't be upset. You have to be violently angry," he says.

We may just have a new emotional rollercoaster and we may not enjoy the ride.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 12:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Last August, First Lady, Michelle Obama, was chastised by Washington Post writer, Robin Givhan, who reminded readers that “None of them (previous first ladies) revealed as much leg as the current first lady.” Givhan cautioned Mrs. Obama that “Avoiding the appearance of queenly behavior is politically wise. But it does American culture no favors if a first lady tries so hard to be average that she winds up looking common.”

Ms. Givhan is qualified to address fashion issues. However, as Spring breaks into full bloom, high school principals and assistant principals will be forced to become experts on fashion and to enforce student dress code policies, many of which are unenforceable.

Believe me, as a high school principal, the last thing that I wanted to do was worry about dress code policies. The reality of life is that some students will push the envelope and dress so provocatively or inappropriately that they distract their peers to the point that they disrupt the educational process.

I can remember a prominent legislator confronting me because I had the audacity to send his daughter home to change from her pajamas and slippers into appropriate school attire. I reminded him that, not only did I not discipline his daughter, but that I had personally warned his daughter and her friends not to wear pajamas to school for an upcoming school celebration.

School systems make a difficult and unpleasant task doable by having policies that are specific enough to be enforceable. In Fairfax County Public Schools, Virginia, student services representatives annually meet with principals and ask for feedback on the current policy. The policy is kept up-to-date, and principals have specific, identifiable behaviors to enforce. The Fairfax County policy is clear and reasonable. “All students are expected to dress appropriately for a K-12 educational environment. Any clothing that interferes with or disrupts the educational environment is unacceptable. Clothing with language or images that are vulgar, discriminatory, or obscene or clothing that promotes illegal or violent conduct, such as the unlawful use of weapons, drugs, alcohol, tobacco, or drug paraphernalia, or clothing that contains threats such as gang symbols is prohibited. (See page X, for additional information regarding gang-related clothing.) Clothing should fit, be neat and clean, and conform to standards of safety, good taste, and decency. Clothing that exposes cleavage, private parts, the midriff, or undergarments, or that is otherwise sexually provocative, is prohibited. Examples of prohibited clothing include, but are not limited to: sagging or low-cut pants, low-cut necklines that show cleavage, tube tops, halter tops, backless blouses or blouses with only ties in the back, clothing constructed of see-through materials, and head coverings unless required for religious or medical purposes.”

Other school systems take the easy way out and leave the dress code issue totally up to the principal’s judgment. Instead of taking a position, they put the principal on the chopping block. For example, one school system’s policy stated, “A student’s dress and appearance shall not cause disruption, distract others from the educational process or create a health or safety problem. Students must comply with specific building dress regulations of which students will be given prior notice.”

Upon reading this, I concluded that, given some of the current attitudes about dress, a student would literally have to run through the hallways naked to cause the kind of disruption that would warrant action by the principal under this policy. Perhaps I am overstating the issue, but there is simply too much subjectivity in the application of this policy to ensure consistent and fair enforcement. In other words, the policy is unenforceable.

That wouldn’t stop a school official from calling the principal to complain that supposed students, who were walking down the street in the middle of the day, were dressed inappropriately. Nor would it stop another official from calling to complain that a constituent objected to the principal’s interpretation of the dress code. Caught in the middle again!

Principals want to be instructional leaders. School systems need to align policy with practice to ensure that the school leaders they hold accountable for student achievement actually have the tools and resources needed and that they are protected from the distractions of the fashion police.

Posted by Mel Riddile at 03:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)