Whew - Week 3 Web Conferences

It appears that we are running out of things to talk about - I choose to take that as a good sign.  A core few students have logged on this week, mostly in order to clarify what items were to be done and what course assignments to include.  Many people, including me, are excited about graduation and can't resist making some plans.  I remember how silly and off-task I believed that to be on my first web conference:  how times have changed.

Feeling the Pressure

I attended at least a portion of all three web conferences this week, and everyone appears a bit tense.  As I know is the case in my house, I suspect many of my colleagues are suffering from exhaustion, frustration, and revision anxiety.  In some ways, the web conferences exacerbated the problem, layering one set of responses onto another until most were not sure exactly what information applied to their efforts and what did not.  However, between conferences, many of us communicated privately with our professor and/or our IA, so that by today most of us have some obtainable goals.  Life outside of Lamar has made the going more difficult for some than others; so, I feel blessed that my support system is still intact as we move forward into week 3. 
My observations from the conferences:
1.  Answer all of the questions for the reflections specifically
2.  Put a page number on every citation
3.  Check all headings
4.  Focus on the specific assignments

Off I go into the next week.  Hopefully I'm moving towards the right path at a pace that will land me in the target by Week 5.

Close to the Finish Line: EDLD 5370 Web Conference

I can scarcely believe we've come to this place:  this week, I began finalizing my portfolio and writing my comprehensive exam in order to finish my master's program.  I actually attended two conferences this week:  on Tuesday, I simply hoped that someone else might have a question that I hadn't even considered.  In fact, it appeared that most people felt the same way.  Dr. Abernathy gave us some guidelines for getting started on the comprehensive exam, including recommendations for how to most effectively create the paper in APA style.  She also clarifed for the group which items should be contained on the eportfolio (wiki) versus which items should be included in the comprehensive exam.  One bit of a surprise came when Dr. Abernathy told the group to add the curriculum vitae to their comprehensives.  It is certainly not trouble to do so, but I appreciated her pointing it out specifically.

By Sunday, I was feeling some of the pressure and had my own list of questions ready for the final web conference of the week.  This conference consisted of a small, intimate group of students, most of whom I have connected with throughout the coursework.  Consequently, we were able to bounce ideas between each other and Dr. Abernathy for what I consider the most robust, productive web conference of my entire program.  My first main question was answered almost immediately:  Dr. Abernathy told us that our comprehensive exam introductions should maintain a balance between the expression of our own personal narratives and an overview of the types of material to be covered in the paper.  Later on, Dr. Abernathy addressed my concerns regarding the field-based summary reports, indicating that various activities that reflected mastery of several ISTE indicators could be crossed-referenced to indicate the connectedness of our learning and experiences.  Also, she informed us that the signed summary report would not be due on our eportfolio until the final week of the course.  I was immensely relieved to have more time to refine and organize my thoughts for those all-important reflections.  Overall, this second conference allayed many of my fears and allowed me to feel much more confident in my abilities to complete this course in time for the long-awaited December graduation date.

The Power of Reflection (EDLD 5397)

Chinese philosopher Confucius said in The Analects, “Learning without thought is labor lost; thought without learning is perilous.”  (Sturgeon, 2006)  Like Confucius, I believe that experience becomes a bitter teacher if reflection does not serve as part of the learning.  Dana (2009) emphasizes the need to incorporate inquiry and reflection into already existing activities.  She describes how principal Jim Brandenburg took a regular and necessary responsibility of his work, an annual evaluation, and engineered it to be an opportunity for reflection and realignment of questions and goals.  In this way, Brandenburg has allowed for a specific time for reflection, and has involved his superintendent in the inquiry process.  Although I teach the same curriculum every year, the lessons themselves change and evolve.  Each time I teach a lesson, I take time to consider the successes and failures of the day.  I notate what I’ve discovered in the process, so that I can make informed decisions about not only that lesson, but future lessons.  When I meet with my administrator and lead science teacher, I can speak about not only the hard data from assessment but of the qualitative data I collect from self-reflection.   

     In his book Why Don’t Students Like School, Daniel Willingham (2009) sets apart the cognitive processes of experts from those of novices.  The difference between a novice and an expert stems from something more complex than simply having more information stored in long-term memory.  Experts use this information in fundamentally different cognitive ways:  “the cognitive processes of experts are set apart from those of novices in this way:  Experts don’t think in terms of surface structure, as novices do; they think in terms of functions, or deep structure” (Willingham, 2009, p. 133).  Reflection is the mechanism by which new information is incorporated into existing abstract functions and by which adjustments are made to future action.  In studying, reflecting on, and adjusting my own best practices and the practices of others, I become a leader capable of more strategic and long-term thinking.   I also find a place of ethics and empathy that stem from true metacognition about my choices and their consequences that enables more effective communication and leadership.

References:

Dana, N. F. (2009). Leading With Passion and Knowledge: The Principal as Action Researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Sturgeon, D. (2006). Wei Zheng. Retrieved July 12, 2010, from Chinese Text Project: http://chinese.dsturgeon.net/text.pl?node=1083&if=en

Willingham, D. (2009). Why Don't Students Like School? A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions About How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Web Conference 2 Overview - EDLD 5397

I was able to participate directly in the Week 2 web conference, and I took the opportunity to ask questions regarding the action research project write-up coming in Weeks 3 and 4 of the course.  To the best of my understanding, we will not be required to write the action research summary in an article form for submission; however, Dr. Martin encouraged those students who had an interest in doing so would need to follow IRB protocols.  Students in this week’s conference, as in last week’s, had questions concerning the changing of a site mentor.  Many also asked for clarification on several clarifications for the Week 2 assignment as they related to the differences between the ISTE indicators for Educational Technology students and the Principal Competencies for the Educational Administration students. In listening to the discussion, I determined that my best course of action was to consider both aspects as I made adjustments to my plan.  A few students had questions regarding TK20, which I frankly do not find particularly useful.  The assignments required on TK20 have been prompted thus far, and I do not see any reason for that to change.  After many student questions had been answered, Dr. Mason prompted us to share examples of leadership successes in an effort to offer colleagues some potential options for consideration.  Although a few members of the web conference complied with this request, it seemed that the majority of attendees participated solely to receive information as opposed to offering it.  Some of my own anxieties regarding the final push towards certification and graduation were reflected in the tenor of the conference, which served both to validate and heighten my own concerns.

A Milestone on the Path to Leadership

When I was selected by my principal to serve on the campus instructional leadership team in spring of 2009, I frankly felt some reluctance to serve.  I would finish a two-year rotation on the campus improvement committee (site-based decision making) in a few short weeks, and I had found the experience to be frustrating.  The committee served essentially in a compliance capacity:  the principal completed the campus needs assessment and the improvement plan each year, and the members would simply endorse the document after only the most cursory of reviews.  The instructional leadership teams were required by the district, and I had little confidence that the team on my campus would play any real role in campus decision making. 

Less than a week after being appointed to the committee, my principal announced his departure from the campus.  After an awkward and contentious transition to new leadership, the team had a tenuous start in the 2009-2010 school year.  However, even in that first year it became clear: under new campus leadership, this team would serve as a critical component of decision-making and continuous improvement.  As I began my coursework and internship at the end of that year, two surprises awaited me:  first, I learned that my campus would receive a campus-wide technology upgrade to interactive whiteboard technology; second, I was asked to serve in a new, more visible leadership role on campus as head of the quality instruction sub-committee.  I was thrilled about the prospects of having such an avenue to promote and model constructivist teaching practices with the integration of technology. 

At the start of the 2010-2011 school year, I assembled a robust, cross-curricular, and vertically representative team to begin framing goals for professional development, peer coaching, and professional learning.  As I mentioned in last week’s posting, the committee worked with me to set a new framework for professional development in technology integration and instructional practices.  In a comparison between initial and summative staff surveys, staff related an increased confidence in new instructional techniques and technology integrations and a more consistent use of the same.  It was an excellent first step and a proud moment for me as a developing leader. 

Web Conference overview - EDLD 5397

I took an opportunity to view theJuly 12th web conference and read over the chat transcript, and I came away feeling as frustrated as has often been the case over the past months.  In hearing the questions and answers for both Educational Technology and Educational Administration being tossed back and forth at random, I wondered if combining these two groups in conferencing causes more difficulties than it solves.  There are concerns and questions specific to each of the program requirements, and hearing random details of one simply muddled the information for the other. 

One message that I received loudly and clearly from the conference was the “eight change” requirement for internship plans, regardless of course number or program type.  As a student taking my tenth course, in July when the entire district is shut down, I find this arbitrary standard both unnecessarily rigid and essentially unproductive.

I have further questions regarding the action research component of the coursework, and I hope to be able to attend the web conference this week to request some answers.

Watershed Moments

As I begin my final sprint to the finish line, the time has come to look back on the experience of evolving from a leader of students to a leader of teachers:  the process has changed me in more ways than I could have known.

Building a professional development framework has been one of the most authentic learning experiences of my coursework and field-based activities.  I strived to create a sort of narrative thread throughout my different activities with the intent of building a robust documentation of my professional vision.   As such, I used a particular professional development need on my campus as the thrust of my action research, so that my professional development efforts could serve as both qualitative and quantitative data for my research.  From early in our coursework, I have seen the benefits of a professional development plan that supports ongoing learning in the style of professional learning communities (PLC’s) that provided shared learning and support from small groups working toward a similar goal. (Dana, 2009)  While I recognized the need to maintain a level of cohesiveness with the prevailing methodology for professional development in my school district, my internship activities allowed me to use the new approach in conjunction with more traditional PD norms.  As a result, I developed a PD process for the implementation of our new IWB technology that utilized a combination of large group instruction, open lab opportunities, and follow-up collaboration with grade-level or content-level teams as they prepared for realtime implementation.   What evolved as the most significant surprise in this process was the level of autonomy faculty members were willing to take on as the PLC’s moved forward in the PD framework for the year.  As often as I checked in with groups to monitor their progress toward yearly goals and offer my assistance, my group members came to me with fully formed lessons that were ready for implementation.  The overall level of participation by faculty members in this initiative far outpaced my original expectations, a reality I found not only surprising, but absolutely thrilling.

One of the more challenging activities during the past year sprang up from a completely unexpected source:  the transition of my internship to a more administrative perspective.  As a result of this shift, I was asked to work closely with my principal to develop the comprehensive needs assessment and campus improvement plan for the upcoming school year.  While I had a passing familiarity with these documents as a former member of the campus improvement team, they were, to me, documents one step removed from the day to day functions of my campus.  This had evolved for two reasons.  Under the leadership of my former principal, the development of these documents were not particularly collaborative: while teams were invited to offer feedback and suggestions, the actual drafting of the documents was done by the principal and presented to the campus improvement team for approval.  Additionally, the message was clear that these were simply compliance documents that were not going to act as the overarching law of the campus.  Few people on campus could even locate the documents upon request, and virtually none, myself included, could speak intelligently on the content of the documents.  At the same time I moved into a more significant administrative role, my new campus principal looked to create processes where the campus needs assessment and campus improvement plan would function as they were intended: as legitimate governing documents for decision-making and campus improvement.  (Elmore & City, 2007) The leadership training I completed to facilitate the development of these documents forced me to look at data in completely new ways, and gave me at times shocking new insights into how data is used both effectively and ineffectively for decision-making.  Concurrently, I took the Leadership for Accountability course, which worked in perfect conjunction to cement this new skill set.  I had the opportunity to lead the two-day professional development session on my campus that used the districts’ new formats to create cohesive documents with common vocabulary but unique campus goals.  In my follow up meetings with campus and district leadership, I felt more confident than I dreamed possible as I analyzed data trends and strength/gap assessments to develop campus goals and action plans.  It was in that moment I realized that I was ready to take on not only a teacher leader role, but a true campus leadership role.

References:

Dana, N. F. (2009). Leading with passion and knowledge: The principal as action researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Elmore, R., & City, E. (2007, May/June). The road to school improvement. Harvard Education Letter , 23 (3), pp. 1-3.

Give Curriculum its Due

In reviewing the article “Ten Big Effects of the No Child Left Behind Act on Public Schools” (Jennings & Rentner, 2006), I found two of the conclusions particularly disturbing.  I have a degree in American history, and I fervently believe that an understanding of our collective history provides the basis for a responsible populous. (Hirsch, 1988)  In light of this, I am constantly frustrated when social studies is sacrificed on the altar of math and reading instruction more often than any other subject. (Jennings & Rentner, 2006)  The realities of unfunded mandates runs completely counterintuitive to core beliefs about how we value and facilitate student success.  At the time of the article, 80% of districts report that they have been required to take on the financial burdens of these federal mandates, a situation only made exponentially worse by the draconian cuts on the horizon for Texas schools.  As educators, we all strive for and expect the very best from our students, a standard frustrated by a system that does not necessarily reward our best practices.

References:

Hirsch, E. D. (1988). Cultural literacy: what every american needs to know. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.

Jennings, J., & Rentner, D. (2006). Ten big effects of the no child left behind act on public schools. Phi Delta Kappan , 88 (2), 110-113.

A Tale of Clickers: Fear, Frustration, and Ultimate Victory

When they first arrived on campus, my ‘clickers’ stayed in the box for four months. It is a fact of which I am not proud, but in the spirit of full disclosure, I feel it is important to state that outright as a counterpoint to my current view on interactive whiteboard response systems. I had been given the response system almost as an afterthought: they arrived approximately 8 weeks into the school year with no prior notice, no training, not even a driver CD, as the driver was in the suite of network programs. I do not consider myself either particularly risk-averse or particularly slow to adapt to new technology; however, this just seemed so unimportant to my district, I couldn’t seem to drum up the wherewithal to start from scratch. Even after my curiosity overwhelmed me and I pulled them out for the first time, I would definitely have qualified as an “infrequent user”, a teacher who not only uses the technology rarely, but focuses on only a narrow range of its potential uses; that of summative evaluation. (Penuel, Crawford, DeBarger, Boscardin, Masyn, & Urdan, 2005). It was only after a reading from a previous course that I considered how many other options were available to me.




Around that same time, I was enrolled in a district professional development for use of the response system remotes. I came away with more technical knowledge of the system and the accompanying software and even more frustration about how to make the system an authentic part of instruction as opposed to a bit of Vegas-style fluff whose central purpose was to get students’ attention. (University of Minnesota Office of Classroom Management, 2009) So, as many of us do, I began to dig. I looked on the online lesson exchange that supports our district resources (SMART Technologies), I floated around discussion forums, and I spent real time with the software. Over the course of the following weeks, I came back to an important truth known by researchers and teachers alike: professional development in how to integrate technology into instruction has broad power in committing teachers to regular use of that resource. (Penuel, Crawford, DeBarger, Boscardin, Masyn, & Urdan, 2005) In other words, convince a teacher that students are the better for it, and they will use the remotes. In March and April I had an opportunity to implement some training on my home campus that stems from this truth. Between the first session and the second, eight new teachers brought their teaching and their ‘clickers’ out of the box. Eight might seem a small number, but to me, it is the start of a revolution.

References:
Penuel, W., Crawford, V., DeBarger, A., Boscardin, C., Masyn, K., & Urdan, T. (2005). Teaching with student response system technology: A survey of k-12 teachers. Retrieved 5 2011, May, from SRI International: http://ctl.sri.com/publications/downloads/Teaching_with_Audience_Response_Systems_Brief_Report.pdf

University of Minnesota Office of Classroom Management. (2009, March 25). Student response systems overview. Retrieved May 5, 2011, from University of Minnesota: http://www.classroom.umn.edu/support/support-srs.html

Using Networks for Professional Learning Communities

online collaboration and professional learning communities02

View more presentations or Upload your own.

A Little Side Trip into the Xtranormal

I received a link from a colleague to a little animated short on the dangers of simply Googling a topic for information.  I thought the video was quite innovative, and I wanted to learn more about the application behind the project.  I spent about four hours on the Xtranormal website using their Movie Maker application.  I found it to be easy to use and entertaining.  It does have its limitations, namely cost - while a membership is free, users must buy "points" in order to select features and to publish movies.  At anywhere from one to five dollars per movie, the cost is not very significant, but with teachers watching every penny, it is noteworthy.

Rockin' With Technology: A Project Overview

I had the profound pleasure to work with an amazing group of professionals during my EDLD 5364 Teaching with Technology project.  The experience has reminded me again how fulfilling, enlightening, educational, and how fun a group project can be when a group of true collaborators work towards a common goal.  Many of the recommendations offered by Solomon and Schrum (2007) for creating an effective community have in fact made their way into our cohort team, including “creat[ing] an environment of trust” and “creat[ing] productive dialogue” (pp. 105-106).  We have together created a cohesive body of resources appropriate for a legitimate learning environment, one that I would be proud to utilize on my own campus, and we have done so while we shared new ideas and overcame challenges as a group.

The requirement of the coursework to look at a variety of options for integrated learning activities was vital to addressing both subject area and technology content standards for students. From a pedagogical perspective, this project called for the team to strike a balance between the goal of student-centered instruction and the need to address content standards in curriculum.  I endorse the Core Knowledge philosophy pioneered by E.D. Hirsch, which emphasizes our obligation to students not only to make information available to them, but to act as leaders in creating the framework for learning.  However, I also support the main tenet of constructivist theory:  that learning is shown to be a personal, intimate relationship between student and knowledge (Laboratory, 1999).  The project touched on many of the Technology Facilitator Standards and Performance Indicators, including 

·         II.A:  Provide resources & feedback to teachers as they integrate technology into units; consult with teachers during development and assist teachers during implementation;

·         II.B:  Assist teachers as they apply current research on teaching/learning with technology during planning;

·         II.C:  Assist teachers in identification and location of available technology resources/ model use of available technology resources;

·         II.F:  Assist teachers in identification and application of instructional design principles associated with technology resources;

·         III.B:  Facilitate use of strategies for integrating technology in the instruction of diverse learners, including adaptive and assistive technology;

·         III.E:  Facilitate curricular methods and strategies that are alignment with district/state/national technology standards;

·         IV.A:  Model and facilitate strategies for the use of technology in student assessment (diagnostic, formative, and summative);

·         VI.B:  Facilitate use of technology in instruction to enable learners with diverse learning needs;

·         VII.C:  Provide/support PD at the building level utilizing adult learning theory; (Williamson & Redish, 2009)

I am particularly pleased with the results of my efforts in this project.  While I experienced some logistical challenges in working with the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) Lesson Builder website, in the end I submitted three excellent artifacts. The lessons come together to build a cohesive unit that integrates the best technological tools available on my campus along with the best practices that I bring to the classroom.  The Book Builder application from CAST proved both practical to use and exciting to share.  In creating my original eBook, I found myself thinking more globally as I worked through the text and images.  It is a perfect way to support recognition networks, as it provides access to multiple modalities with both graphic and oral support to written text, and a glossary that can provide further examples to support the concept.  Moreover, the book can be specifically structured to highlight critical features in the graphics and images through organizers, text, and the oral language support of the ‘coaches’. (Rose & Meyer, 2002, Chapter 6)   I created a presentation video that speaks passionately to my ideals as an educator and as a technology facilitator while I refining my skills in Windows Live Movie Maker and Audacity.  One area of growth I uncovered in this experience involves my lack of knowledge in the available assistive technology in my district.  I plan to conference with my mentor and develop a plan to familiarize myself with my district’s resources and potentially receive intensive training in these resource options.

I had the opportunity to act as team leader for this project, and the collaborative component of this course offered me much more in the way of new learning than I thought possible.  My team members and I come from varying backgrounds in school districts of varying size throughout the state, with one team member actually employed at the collegiate level.  This diversity of experiences brought depth and perspective to our work, but also presented challenges to collaboration.  I found that some of our collaborative time needed to be spent on some background in educational theory and vocabulary; this deficit create what appeared to be, from my perspective, some frustration and anxiety on the part of my colleagues.  However, the professionalism of my colleagues overcame those obstacles in fine style. We used a variety of collaboration tools during our process, including Skype, Google Docs and a Google Site. We found that, although the real-time editing functions of Google Docs had their uses, the multi-level platform of the Google site and the intimacy of Skype IM were more in line with the type of collaboration needed for project completion. Through the site, we compiled lesson plans, eBooks, and related artifacts; archived transcripts of online conferencing; collaborated on assignment and proposal documentation; and tracked tasks and timeline status through our personal work logs and team project checklists. Please feel free to take a look at our process at the EDLD 5364 Project site . Thank you so very much to my team for time well spent and a job very well done.
References:

Hirsch, E. D. (1988). Cultural literacy: what every american needs to know. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.

Laboratory, S. E. (1999). Learning as a personal event: a brief introduction to constructivism. Retrieved February 26, 2011, from http://www.sedl.org/pubs/tec26/intro2c.html

Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: new tools, new schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

Williamson, J., & Redish, T. (2009). ISTE's Technology Facilitation and Leadership Standards: What Every K-12 Leader Should Know and Be Able to Do. Washington: International Society for Technology in Education.

Mock Mediation

I participated in a mock mediation that simulated a conflict between two faculty members.  I found the mediation framework to be a useful tool.  Often as a teacher I find myself in a position to mediate conflict between students, and having a set structure to regulate the process would save time and increase accountability to decisions made.  Based on the mock experience, I believe the structured format also decreases the tendency of a more aggressive party to attempt to dominate the conversation.  I found myself considering the next steps of this process, i.e. the follow-up with teachers and the method of archiving and tracking such documentation. 

My primary realization during the mock mediation process was that it is impossible to duplicate the environment of a true mediation.  This mock event was patterned after an actual conflict from my campus experiences of the past, and I know that the emotional component of the conflict was significant.  What I feel this experience did not prepare me for is the de-escalation of hostility at the outset of the mediation.  When personal feelings of pride, embarrassment, degradation, or devaluation stem from a conflict, it both raises the stakes and magnifies the challenges of finding an equitable solution that repairs an effective collegial relationship.  I do believe that working to build empathy for an opposing perspective through the use of  “I statements” and role reversal create a foundation for finding those areas of consensus and problem-solving.  

A school environment is one rife for conflict:  the various wants and perspectives of such a broad base of stakeholders almost ensure that not all waters will flow calmly.  I agree that prevention is vital, through the establishment of clear goals, expectations, and group norms.  However, this will not ensure that no conflict will arise.  I have seen first-hand in my career how an administrator’s intervention in conflict can affect the overall culture of a school:  the importance of effective mediation of conflict cannot be overstated.  This structure, which calls for direct dialogue, active listening to opposing parties, and a functional plan for resolution, creates a culture of collaboration over conflict, a standard that any administrator would do well to follow.

Thinking Like a Leader

I had the privilege of participating in the study group discussion about administrative decision-making and problem-solving skills.  Not only did the discussion present excellent insights, I think that the simple occurrence of the discussion reveals a vital component of administrative skill set development:  the ability and desire to collaborate.  Last week the lecture discussed some paradigm shifts that must occur in 21^st century principals, and one of those shifts called for a recognition of staff as colleagues.  In doing this, an administrator has now created a pool of knowledge, experience, and perspectives to utilize in their decision-making process.  Then, the principal must have the strength of conviction and the personal integrity to take all of that information and move forward with confidence.  Because, while many can be part of the decision-making process, in the final analysis the administrator stands as the face of accountability for those decisions.  Our study group shares, discusses, argues, and supports; then, in the end, we each put forth our own product and stand behind it.

So the question then becomes, “Is it nature or nurture?”  As many have stated eloquently before me, the ability to make effective decisions and solve complex problems requires both an innate skill set and an adequate body of experiences.  I have been a teacher for about 15 years, and during that time I have seen great teachers become outstanding administrators, I have seen great teachers die on the vine at the administrative level, and I have seen good, but not stand-out, teachers become truly exceptional administrators.  What were those great teachers lacking that kept them from excelling at the next level?   To my mind, this is where experience takes the fore in determining success.  A study group colleague mentioned in her discussion board post that administrators emerging from only a short tenure in the classroom must “learn everything on the fly”:  this sharply steeper learning curve can prove costly for a young administrator, as their choices have abruptly become much more high-profile and weighty.   In the same vein, a classroom teacher who spent years in growth and development in the classroom comes to administration with a true sense of how to work through a problem in order to find solutions.

I have what I hope is a healthy respect for the consequences of decisions.  In my post regarding ethics, I discussed the need for transparency, accountability, and trust in making ethical decisions.  Using this frame of reference, I consider myself a strong, ethical decision-maker.  I am constantly humbled by the vast amount of knowledge and experience that surrounds me on my campus, and I call on those resources as I make professional decisions.  I believe that my colleagues would consider me a person of significant knowledge and experience in my own right, and that they would tout my communication skills with all manner of stakeholders in all manner of situations.  I have a strong sense of conviction, and this gives me the ability to make a final decision and stand accountable to it.   This conviction might, in fact, also reveal my greatest challenge to decision-making:  the sense of meta-cognition that is required to assess to results of decisions and adjust them if necessary.  I tend to make a decision and move on; the spirit of ‘Continuous Improvement’ is one where I am still working to hone my skill.

Cultural Proficiency

The following continuum is drawn from an article entitled, “Cultural Proficiency: Tools for Secondary School Administrators” (Nuri-Robbins, Lindsey, Terrell, & Lindsey, 2007) :

Cultural                                   Cultural                                          Cultural        

Destructiveness                      Blindness                                    Competence

  Cultural                                Cultural                                          Cultural

Incapacity                         Precompetence                                 Proficiency

Public school can be an absolute hotbed of intolerance and cultural dissonance in the absence of strong, culturally proficient leadership.  A campus and its students can be buffeted between the strongly-held beliefs of various stakeholder groups, and much too often the public school environment falls prey to the most virulent intolerances in our society.   It seems many initial efforts to acknowledge and understand diversity are marked by inappropriate overtures.  From America’s early attempts at racial integration of schools through busing to my own awkward first implementation of differentiation for mainstreamed students, part of the learning curve involves making mistakes.  We over-compensate for the slights and discriminations of the past, and in doing so we create new ones.  A teacher with the best of intentions for providing a differentiated classroom can alienate both LEP learners through too overt accommodations and content mastery, and gifted learners through a disproportionate amount of project-based and independent study.  Here no child’s academic needs are served while maintaining both her dignity and her role in the whole classroom.  My experiences in vibrant, culturally diverse campuses throughout my career have given me a real-time education in the value of embracing cultural differences, and the real risk in ignoring them.  I do believe that while entire districts can and should have policies in place to facilitate cultural proficiency, the bulk of the responsibility to this charge falls at the campus level.  Each campus has a unique set of needs and opportunities, and it is necessary for a campus administrator to assess those and implement activities and communication that will speak to her campus’ specific profile.  I struggle with my own embedded cultural mores, and I know that part of my work as an administrator would involve retooling the way I think about creating opportunities for a campus to begin dialogue about those barriers. 

I currently work in a school environment which I believe is, on the whole, at the cultural competence stage of the continuum.  We recognize the benefit in giving value to our diversity, and we look for ways that we can accomplish this.  Our weakness is that our action tends to happen in fits and starts.  We have an International Night on our campus, where many of the cultures of our campus community are given an opportunity to share information and connect with the larger community.  However, we are at times lax in taking this opportunity to continue the lessons of the moment in our classrooms and using it to springboard instruction.  We also find that, with the overwhelming pressures of district and state assessment, creating opportunities to add these cultural components to instruction does not receive all of the attention it deserves.  We have engaged in some pieces of professional development, for example Ruby Payne coursework and sessions on developing home/school relationships; yet, these opportunities have not truly turned into school-wide initiatives, acting rather as ‘consciousness-raising’ activities with inadequate follow-through.  Cultural proficiency is the gold standard for which we all strive in our classrooms and on our campus, and I think that my school does much to work proactively toward this goal in all areas.  Accepting and celebrating diversity in all of its forms is a basic tenet of our campus improvement plan, and the professional development opportunities and campus activities that I have mentioned previously are results of that focus.  I believe this goal can never be achieved completely, because there is always more to learn about others, and there are always opportunities to learn and grow as a campus and as a community.

Nuri-Robbins, K., Lindsey, D. B., Terrell, R. D., & Lindsey, R. B. (2007, September). Cultural proficiency: tools for secondary school administrators. National Association of Secondary School Principals: NASSP Principal Leadership , 8 (1), pp. 16-22.

Ethics in the Schoolhouse

     In education, we often speak of ethics in the profession.  The very word can create a charged atmosphere among teachers and administrators.  Where can we begin to frame the conversation?  I view the concept of ethics as a function of three core conditions: transparency, accountability, and trust.  When discerning the ethical ramifications of an action, we ask ourselves, “Am I comfortable with any and all persons involved having complete knowledge of my action and its consequences?”  We evaluate the decisions we make through the lens of the people our choices will affect.  We consider, “Am I comfortable with shouldering the responsibility for any outcomes that result from this action?”  As educators we live in a world of accountability, and no choice can be made simply for its own sake.  The decisions we make directly affect the lives of our students, and therefore the larger world:  we accept the burden when we enter the profession.  And finally, at the heart of all of our decisions, we ask, “Does this choice value the students to whom I have been entrusted?”  Educators are indeed custodians of the public trust.  We are the institution entrusted every day with the most valuable resource of our community, and that trust must be brought to bear on each and every decision. 

     An administrator is the face of the schoolhouse and acts as the north point on a campus’ ethical compass.  The decisions are not simple:  many opinions vie for attention, and the consequences of one action mix inextricably with the consequences of another.  There is also no question that the intersection of cultural value systems can create miscommunication and conflict.   Finding true acceptance that even some of our most cherished beliefs are not shared by all can be an enormous obstacle.  Morals by their very nature have a deeply emotional component:  they reside at the core of our character.  This makes conflicts in this arena all the more volatile and all the more challenging.  A leader cannot help but to fall back on their personal morality to discern appropriate action, and it would not be appropriate to ask them to do otherwise.  However, adherence to an accepted set of guidelines, such as board policies, creates a common language for dialogue and a standard that does not depend on emotional judgments.  And so administrators are called once again to strike a balance, between choices of value and policy, and between personal values and community norms. 

Building Leaders

     My district possesses its own leadership development program, entitled the Strand Program.  While I have always been aware of this program, I had not given it a serious investigation, as I never intended to pursue a principalship.  However, I was intrigued by the work mentioned in the article, “Bridging the Gap: Building Leadership Capacity” (Swinney, 2007), and I wanted to analyze the similarities and differences between the Strand Program and the program in Auburn City Schools.  The Auburn City school system recognized a human resource need evolving in their district regarding the retention of top level teachers and administrators and the development of leadership among the current staff within the district.  In response the district, in coordination with Auburn University, created a leadership academy available to teachers and administrators within the district.  This academy met on several occasions and worked with a variety of topics related to challenges and charges of administrators, from diversity to budgeting to site-based decision making.  The academy format built relationships and collaboration between teachers and administrators in attendance, and served the dual purpose of facilitating ongoing professional development for current administrators and encouraging the leadership potential of district teachers. 

     The main thrust of the reading involved a school system’s efforts to create collaboration between parties within the district and to facilitate growth and retention of quality educators and administrators through contextual, collaborative professional development.  This relates to the following State Board for Educator Certification’s (SBEC) principal competencies:

Competency 1: The Vision of Learner-Centered Leadership and Campus Culture

1:1 - implement strategies to ensure the development of collegial relationships and effective collaboration.

Competency 6:  Human Resources Leadership, Management, Professional Development and Appraisal

6:2 - facilitate the application of adult learning principles and motivation theory to all campus professional development activities, including the use of appropriate content, processes, and contexts.

6:4 - implement effective, appropriate, and legal strategies for the recruitment, screening, selection, assignment, induction, development, evaluation, promotion, discipline, and dismissal of campus staff.

6:7 - engage in ongoing professional development activities to enhance one’s own knowledge and skills and to model lifelong learning.

Competency 7:  Learner-Centered Organizational Leadership and Management

7:4 - use strategies for promoting collaborative decision making and problem solving, facilitating team building and developing consensus.

     The article speaks directly to the concerns that I stated in an earlier question:  professional development needs to have relevancy to its participants, and collaboration needs to happen at all levels within the organization.  This leadership academy could be a model for campus-level professional development as well, where campus administration does not merely sit in the back working on other projects during the presentation, or use professional development time merely as an avenue to further personal goals and objectives; rather, administration plays an active role in the learning and the dialogue, and uses feedback from the faculty to determine what specific concepts and subjects should be addressed in that forum.  This article prompts me to take a much more serious look at the Strand Program within my district.  Although I am still not inclined to actively pursue a principalship in my district, I recognize the need for all members of a school organization to be able to participate as faculty leaders.  The competencies addressed in this assignment are the rules of governance that all schools should be following, which means that any educational leader needs to have an awareness of the competencies and their application.  I would like to have any available resources in my toolkit to respond to situations in my classroom, on my campus, and out in the larger community.

Swinney, A. (2007, May/June/July). Bridging the Gap: Building Leadership Capacity. Best Practices , pp. 14-15.

Campus Culture in Transition

It is interesting that in this first step of my coursework's new management and leadership direction, the week’s discussion involves an analysis of school culture.  That very concept has been much on the minds of my faculty recently.  My school thrived for many years under a leadership team that had a unique sensitivity to balance:  balance between faculty and other stakeholders, between various teams, between administration and staff.  Achieving this balance is somewhat of a rarity, and the benefits of it showed in the staff and parent commitment to the school community.  However, no situation can remain static indefinitely.  Change comes, and I believe any organizational culture can be defined by how it responds to the natural process of that change.  A  new leadership team took the reins on my campus last year, and we are still adapting to a new leadership style and vision.  Equally strong, capable leaders can present with very different skill sets and challenges, and such is the case at my school.  To our credit, we have strong relationships with each other and with our community, and I believe those relationships help us adapt and embrace new ideas.  I do believe that even positive change throws a system out of its former patterns, and that readjustment can produce some ‘growing pains’.  Even in a seemingly "perfect" school, there are areas of growth, and a new leader is called to find those opportunities to refine and enrich the  a campus.  One of the most pressing and complicated challenges of a new administration is to look closely at the systems and relationships that were most effective on campus, and to work at preserving those standards of excellence even while implementing a new leadership vision.   Conflict is inevitable, and the new leadership will make its mark through communication, collaboration, and modeling of best practices as it resolves these differences and guides the campus.  I have high hopes that my campus will weather the rough seas of change and emerge even stronger and more effective on the other side.

A New Day, A New Plan

I finished my previous course about a month ago and took a much-needed hiatus over the holidays.  I prepared to jump back into coursework with curriculum design, only to discover on the Friday before class was to begin that the university had restructured my degree plan.  The new slate of coursework would enable graduates to take not only the technology facilitator's certification exam, but also the principal's certification exam.  I must confess that I have never been interested in becoming a campus principal.  Both my skill set and my interests lie in a completely different direction.  However, the choice to transfer into the new degree plan was nonetheless a simple one.  We work in an environment where ever more qualified candidates are competing for what  at times seems to be a dwindling pool of opportunities.  Much of principal certification involves leadership and management, including the human resource management course that I will now be offered.  The skills of a leader serve candidates in any number of fields, and so it seems apparent to me that an opportunity to both hone those skills and attain a certification of mastery is one to be seized.  In short, I am taking my own road less traveled, and we shall see where it leads.