Rebuild or Remodel, that is the question.

There are many schools today who are asking this question in a number of contexts. This question pops up in the area of facilities, curriculum development, relationship building, technology infrastructure etc.
We live in an era where our current world is changing so fast those not able to keep up are holding on desperately to the past. This is understandable, as being cautious was an advantageous trait in terms of surviving not so long ago. Those who took risks in the past were more often than not reviled as heretics. of course there were those who were extremely successful and hailed as innovators. Most of the innovators were not remodelers, however, but rather builders of entirely new paradigms. In my teacher days I spent a great many summers working construction to pay the bills not covered by my teaching and coaching income. Often our little crew were hired to do remodeling projects as the new construction was gobbled up by those who made their living all year long in the construction trades. Why did they leave the remodel jobs for semi-pros like myself? I quickly learned that remodeling is much more difficult than new construction. In fact there were jobs where total demolition of an existing structure and then installation of a new one was far more cost effective for the customer than if we were to try to save and therefore work around the limitations of the existing structure. I know that this is straying somewhat from a discussion on leadership so I will attempt to make a connection. I truly believe that many of the reform initiatives I have seen over the past twenty years of my career have been unable to be sustained or make significant changes in how schools operate is due to our approach. We always make attempts to "remodel" our existing system and hold on to parts which act as significant barriers to a real shift in how we do business. We often replace old obsolete systems with new ones which, when you get right down to it, are not significantly different that the old. We try to make a series of small changes hoping that they will lead to a significant change in the overall system. When we really just get more of the same.
I have teachers who have badgered me for video projectors to be mounted in their room only to use them to present notes they used to write on the white board now using PowerPoint presentations. I can remember not so long ago we were using overheads for the same purpose and the low tech version at that time was writing on the chalk board. Yes there hase been a change in technology or what I am refering to as a "remodel" but no significant change in instruction. Whether we are lecturing and have them copy notes from a chalk board or a PowerPoint presentation, we are still lecturing and we are still asking students to far point copy. I am fairly certain that since Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press and was able to make multiple copies thus replacing the age old process of producing multiple copies of manuscripts copying by hand. This huge innovation was a "rebuild" rather than a "remodel". It was not only significantly different in the process, but also had a huge impact on the spread of knowledge.
I have seen the same thing occuring in the use of technology in our schools. We are assimulating new technology into our current practices rather than using them as tools to change our current practices. We focus on putting laptops in the hands of every student but seldom consider the infrastructure needs this will require. We put the laptops in the hands of every student, but then limit their use to word processing. We put a laptop in the hands of every student, but rather than teach them responsible aquisition and use of information, we deny them accesss.
I see technology as an opportunity to rebuild our schools. Unfortunately, I also see many schools using these tools to simply remodel what we are already doing. We need to really stop trying to figure out the sequential steps to a smooth evolutionary improvement process and plot our revolution. Stop trying to remodel and instead tear down our existing structure/limitations and build a new system freed of the constraints of our traditional practices.
We need to convince our public that the wonderful old schools that they want to so desperately cling to, after all they worked when they were there, are no longer able to be modified to meet the needs of our students who will see a drastically different future. If we hope to remain competitive with the rest of the world, we need to get a fresh start like they are enjoying today. New factories have an advantage over old ones. To improve a process in an existing model you must first tear out the old technology to make room for the new. When building a new factory you get to plan the construction to accomodate the new technology rather than spending valuable time trying to find out how to fit it in.

I wonder how many communities are struggling with buildings which were built shortly after the second world war. What types of commitments have communities made recently to build new schools as compared to those who have simply tried to remodel what they already have? Which choice has allowed for more innovative instructional programs? Which approach has seen a significant increase in overall student achievement?

Posted by LeaderTalk Contributor at 6:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In most states, a good deal of their state budget is used for education. As a society, we are comfortable with spending a great deal of our tax funds on educating our youth knowing that this is an investment that must be made to insure economic security for our country. It is amazing to me that although we require teachers to have very specific endorsements within a subject matter, we have few states who require any sort of endorsement for school business managers. I would guess that most states mimic Iowa, the state in which I live, and require a financial component to superintendent certification. I am not sure that this is enough. In many of our smaller schools, we have both superintendents and business managers who are not well equiped to manage the finances of the districts they serve. School finance is often very different than what is seen in other organizations.

It is comforting to know that in my state, we have both a professional orgnization dedicated to assisting school business managers as well as experts at the state organization of school boards who are dedicated specifically to supporting district financial officers.

I still feel strongly that there needs to be a certification process as well as a requirement for ongoing training for these individuals responsible for managing our tax dollars. I believe that there needs to be a requirement for an annual explanation of school finance for school board members and the public they represent. Not just an outline of the district finances, but an explanation on how school finance works in general. There are many, including most educators, who do not understand restrictions on spending. We have teacher organizations/unions who are negotiating for their salaries without a good understanding of categorical spending limits, what funds can be used for salaries, limits on spending authority and the impact their salary negotiations have on the overall organization.

In our district we have teachers and members of our community who don't understand how we can be discussing large spending on infrastructure while we in turn express a need to reduce staff. Frustration by our public is largely due to our shortcomings in educating them about school finance and often results in a distrust of school leaders.

On another note I will not elaborate on extensively, school leader's salaries are often reported with little explanation of how their contracts and responsibilities differ from those of the teachers. In my district, I am paid for 260 days of work while the public often has the impression that I work only on the days teachers and students are in the building. Again this is due to our shortcomings in educating our public. I would love to see my salary posted as a per diem along side the per diem of individual teachers in the district. To place my annual salary next to a teacher's salary who is working 70-80 fewer days can often leave a public and many teachers the impression that I am over compensated for my duties. If comparisions are to be made, they need to be made in an apples to apples manner.

David Keane

Posted by LeaderTalk Contributor at 7:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There has been a great deal of effort throughout history focussed on transforming America's schools. There have been many attempts to bring schools up-to-date with the latest technologies. Sadly, most schools throughout history have been good at preparing students for a work environment which is already in the past. Good schools may be preparing students for the present, but few schools are preparing students for their futures. There have been significant changes in which the focus of education has shifted. Early on, the focus was on skills and basic literacy, in the not so distant past, the focus was on the quick recall of specific information. These were both economically adventageous in their time. We have now entered a new economic age which, coupled with rapid advancements in technology, has a made creativity and ingenuity necessary. Not that being creative has ever been a bad thing. We know that it has always allowed organizations to be successful, but there were so many other factors which also contributed to organizational success. Organizations who were dependable and produced quality were often able to out compete those who were creative.
Individuals like Seth Godin, Daniel Pink, and Thomas Friedman all point to a new global economy where creativity, ingenuity, and effective uses of communication technology will be the most marketable traits of successful individuals and organizations.
Schools, however, still focus students on content rather than on concepts and skills. Why is this the case?
Teaching the way we were taught
Teachers in schools today are doing what they were taught to do. Teachers are teaching with techniques which have been modeled for them in every aspect of their education. How do we expect our teachers to practice any differently, unless they are taught to do so. Even many of what are considered to be some of the best teacher preparation programs do not model what they propose are effective teaching strategies. Instead, they may expose students to techniques which will be far more effective, but they do so in a lecture format, using often what appear to me as poorly designed summative assessments to determine their students' levle of understanding.
Professional development in schools is no better. As educational leaders we are aware of the research regarding quality professional development, but most districts still bring large groups of teachers together to a "sit and get" experience where a one-size-fits-all program is delivered. This is normally done in a large uncomfortable room and quiet often there are not even attempts made to relay to teachers how one professional development topic is related to another. This often leaves the idea of professional development as less than appealing to teachers and they often adopt the "one more thing on my plate" mentality towards any new idea or initiative.
Underfunding
Legislators, in their infinite wisdon, have continued in their belief that they can legislate quality. The attempt to do so through constantly proposing additional requirements to be placed on schools. Rarely, however, doe they allocate funds to support these new requirements. An example of this, in Iowa in just the last two years our Legislators have added requirements for counselors and teacher-librarians in every school. Many districts had reduced these positions as budgets became tighter. Now, there is ample research to demonstrate that these two positions in a school can make a significant impact, but with many schools having reduced positions outside of regular classroom teachers due to a need to continually increases teacher salaries (much needed increases), increases in the cost of benefits for employees, and increases in the costs of many of our classroom supplies. These have all been ignored when our politicians consider the allowable growth in budgets for schools. To require the addition of staff in specific areas when most of the school resources are already spoken for, without an increase in funding, was not a great move. It required schools to cut other necessary positions in order to meet these new requirements. The impact is higher class sizes, and a reduction in funds available for supplies and technology updates.
Past Practices
We focus all school reform on "improving" the existing system rather than transforming it. Any contractor will tell you that remodeling is messy and expensive. New construction is so much more efficient. "New construction" is taking place in countries like China and India. They are not bound by many of the traditional practices that we must first tear down prior to putting new practices in place. We continue to teach courses in isolation and seldomly look at merging subjects or addressing knowledge in themes rather than disciplines. We know that there are natural connections between disciplines yet rarely provide students with opportunities to see them. We make very few connections for students even within the same discipline. Our focus is still on content and the teacher is expected to be the expert. We assess facts and often deem students with good short term memories as being proficient despite their lacking a true understanding of the concepts. Highly qualified teacher legislation judges a teacher by the number of college credit hours they have in a very specific area. Teacher preparation thus involves very focussed instruction particularly in secondary education programs. Today's world is not in need of students who are able to quickly recall vasts amounts of information in a specific content area. Most can get that through the use of technology. Today's world requires individuals who are indeed specialists, but their specialty is learning. The ability to learn and solve problems creatively will be necessary for the students we currently have in school to be successful in the jobs which will remain in this country. Most of the jobs we are currently seeing leave the U.S. to less developed countries do not require these skills.
The loss of confidence
A move away from the use of grades to sort and select, and towards a method of reporting a students' mastery of concepts and skills, will be necessary if we are to hope to regain confidence in schools and a focus on learning.
We have established a culture in schools where the grade is the target and not the learning it represents. The grade, which has lost its ability to communicate anything, and the certification or diploma is seen as the passport to success. Unfortunately, this belief has led to a loss of confidence in public education. We have a growing number of people with a degree, but without the higher order thinking skills and depth of understanding they are supposed to represent. Parental pressure for the grade and our desire to provide all students with success has caused a lowering of expectations in the classroom. Standards based report cards, which truly communicate a student's current level of performance, are possible, but not widely accepted by parents and teachers. This is despite the fact that the process of assigning a single letter grade is quite different for every teacher in a school. This includes that same class within the same school but taught by different teachers. Some give a great deal of the "points possible" to homework, while others to tests. Some deduct credit for behavior or late work while still others give extra points for things like bringing a box of facial tissue to class. So what does that grade really communicate to anyone? There are teachers who provide students passing grades due to effort, while fail others who have demonstrated competency on assessments but refuse to do the abundance of homework often assigned as a classroom management strategy. I know I don't want to be asked to do 40 practice problems if I am able to obtain the skill by doing only 10.
At some point we have to break the single letter grade into the actual components it represents.
Schools need to be honest about a student's level of performance by reporting exactly what areas are strengths and where deficiencies still exist. Those looking at a report card or transcript should be informed about about exactly what skills a student has and what other desirable characteristics (soft skills) they possess.
Community of Learners
Schools need to change from being a building full of administrators, teachers and students to a community of learners. They need to become a place where teachers are no longer seen as the experts but rather as experienced learners who intern are facilitating the learning and learning beside others. It must also seen as a community that extends beyond the walls of a building. Learning within this greater community would involve learners being presented or actually establishing their own authentic tasks and made to use resources not currently sought out by our existing system.
I look forward to seeing this transformation take place and to be a part of moving our schools and our country into the 21st century.
Dave Keane

Posted by LeaderTalk Contributor at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)