INSIGHT—Spring 2007 by Texas Association of School Administrators

TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS PROFESSIONAL JOURNAL

SPRING 2007

INSIGHT

Spring 2007 Volume 22

No. 1 FEATURED ARTICLES

p. 13

p. 23

p. 16

Time-Shift Technology and the English Language Learner in Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD

by Andrew W. Berning and Isabella Piña-Hinojosa Discusses the use of portable media devices and podcasting to impact achievement of English language learners

Mentoring, Coaching, and Reﬂecting with Principals

by Reba Schumacher Describes a supervisory style and structure for networking based on three distinct paradigm-changing events

Best Practices of Award-Winning Public School Principals

by Sandra Harris Summarizes ﬁndings from a best practices study conducted with 69 award-winning elementary and secondary principals

p. 32

Texas Leads the Way

Shares a recent interview with America’s crime ﬁghter John Walsh on the tremendous success of a safety education partnership between TASA and The Safe Side Snapshot of a Leader Texas’ 2007 NSOTY Nominee—Guy M. Sconzo

Offers a snapshot of Humble ISD Superintendent Guy M. Sconzo, Texas’ Representative for AASA’s 2007 National Superintendent of the Year Program

SPRING 2007

Ofﬁcers DEPARTMENTS Upcoming Events at TASA

President’s Message

Executive Director’s View

TASA Headquarters Staff Executive Director Associate Executive Director, Administrative Services Assistant Executive Director, Communications & Information Systems

Johnny L. Veselka Paul L. Whitton, Jr. Ann M. Halstead

Design/Production

Emmy Starr

Editorial Coordinator

Karen Limb

INSIGHT is published quarterly by the Texas Association of School Administrators, 406 East 11th Street, Austin, Texas, 78701-2617. Subscription is included in TASA membership dues. © 2007 by TASA. All rights reserved. TASA members may reprint articles in limited quantities for in-house educational use. Articles in INSIGHT are expressions of the author or interviewee and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of TASA. Advertisements do not necessarily carry the endorsement of the Texas Association of School Administrators. INSIGHT is printed by Thomas Graphics, Austin, Texas.

INSIGHT

Kay E. Waggoner, President, Grapevine-Colleyville ISD Thomas E. Randle, President-Elect, Lamar CISD Rick Howard, Vice-President, Comanche ISD Alton J. Fields, Past President

Executive Committee Arturo Guajardo, Pharr-San Juan-Alamo ISD, 1 Henry D. Herrera, Alice ISD, 2 Larry W. Nichols, Calhoun County ISD, 3 Leland Williams, Dickinson ISD, 4 Gail Krohn, Nederland ISD, 5 Mike Cargill, Bryan ISD, 6 Mary Ann Whiteker, Hudson ISD, 7 Eddie Johnson, Harts Bluff ISD, 8 John Baker, Seymour ISD, 9 H. John Fuller, Wylie ISD, 10 Jerry W. Roy, Lewisville ISD, 11 Rod Townsend, Hico ISD, 12 Ryder F. Warren, Marble Falls ISD, 13 Kent LeFevre, Jim Ned CISD, 14 Alan Richey, Bronte ISD, 15 David G. Foote, Dalhart ISD, 16 Mike Motheral, Sundown ISD, 17 Michael Downes, Big Spring ISD, 18 Paul L. Vranish, Tornillo ISD, 19 John Folks, Northside ISD, 20

At-Large Members Rose Cameron, Copperas Cove ISD Patricia A. Linares, Fort Worth ISD Ron Peace, Dallas ISD Alicia H. Thomas, North East ISD

Editorial Advisory Committee Kay E. Waggoner, Grapevine-Colleyville ISD, chair Thomas E. Randle, Lamar CISD Virginia L. Collier, Texas A & M University H. John Fuller, Wylie ISD Rick Howard, Comanche ISD Patricia A. Linares, Fort Worth ISD Mike Motheral, Sundown ISD Ron Peace, Dallas ISD Alicia H. Thomas, North East ISD

Upcoming Events at TASA Excerpts from TASA’s Professional Development Calendar For locations and other information about any of these workshops/trainings, please call TASA, 800-725-8272, or go online at www.TASAnet.org

April–May 2007 Curriculum Management Audit Training, Level II: Systems Factors with Jan Jacob April 30–May 3

Mentoring the Reﬂective Principal with Jan Jacob Session 3: May 10–11, 2007 Session 4: June 7–8, 2007

g Who Should Attend • Superintendents • Deputy/Assistant Superintendents • Curriculum Leaders • Principals • Board Members • Professors • Individuals interested in becoming certiﬁed as a curriculum management auditor

g Who Should Attend • Superintendents • District-Level Curriculum and Instruction Administrators • Principals • Team–Principal Supervisor and two or more Principals

g What You Learn • Session 2: Critical Success Factors and Team Planning for Achieving Schools Schoolwide Classroom Observation

iPods and Podcasting in Education with Maria Henderson May 14 & 15

Mapping Assessment & Curriculum with Heidi Hayes Jacobs May 15–16

g Who Should Attend • Central Ofﬁce Administrators • ESL and ELL Coordinators/Directors • Campus Administrators • Lead Teachers

g Who Should Attend • Curriculum Specialists • School Leadership Teams–Elementary & Secondary g What You Learn • How to employ seven speciﬁc schoolwide active literacy strategies • How to integrate core-adopted materials

INSIGHT

g What You Learn • How to establish a rationale for quality curriculum management policies • How to use audit criteria for policy analysis • How to use performance-driven budgeting • How to develop a long-range approach to facility planning

Protocol for Curriculum Alignment and Powerful Instructional Practices • Session 3: Creating a Learning Community Feeder School Principals' Joint Academic Goals Interventions Protocol Annual Performance Review • Session 4: Team Approach for Working with Low-Performing Schools and Listening to the Voice of Your Principals Protocol

g What You Learn • How to download and manage resources with iTunes, sync the iPod, and access materials from the iPod • How to use the iPod's capabilities to support teaching and learning • How to create a podcast and make it accessible to a community of learners

into school and district curriculum maps • How to use curriculum mapping to build literacy strategies with English language learners • How to analyze assessment data for both subject and literacy needs • How to assist middle and high school subject areas to integrate literacy strategies

June 2007 Improved Questioning Training of Trainers with Jackie Walsh and Beth Sattes June 6–8

g Who Should Attend • Curriculum and Instruction Specialists • Staff Development Providers • Principals • Teacher Leadership Teams g What You Learn • To restructure classrooms to make the learning environment more active, more

Handheld Technology Leadership Academy (h2TLA) with Lori Gracey

g Who Should Attend • Superintendents • Central Ofﬁce Administrators • Principals • Assistant Principals • Teacher Leaders

June 14–15

student-centered, more constructivist, more inquiry-based, and more metacognitive—in other words, more engaging to all students, especially those in the NCLB subgroups • To understand the theory and practice of effective questioning

g What You Learn • How to use handheld technology to increase your efficiency • How to identify and select current software to meet your needs • How to use the handheld's capabilities to support teaching and learning

SMART Tools for SMART School Leaders Institute with Anne Conzemius and Jan O’Neill June 18–19 g Who Should Attend • Superintendents • Central Ofﬁce Administrators • Principals and Leadership Teams

g What You Learn • Power of using collaborative processes for focused, datadriven learning and improvement. • SMART Schools process that creates the motivation for team action and experimentation. • Skills and knowledge needed to successfully implement professional communities in your schools, including the ability to translate data into SMART goals and a willingness to engage in continuous improvement of your professional practice.

SPRING 2007

TAKS Relief! PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE “… and I never cease to be

Did you hear the collective sigh of relief coming from 1,000+ school districts around the state the weekend after TAKS? Regardless of the time and effort invested in test preparation, the stress associated with these tests is inevitable. Before you push TAKS entirely off your radar, however, I’d like to suggest that you take a few moments to think about this past round of testing and how your staff handled the experience. What was the general attitude of your teachers immediately prior to and during TAKS week? Was there a higher than normal level of anxiety? Were your classrooms calm and orderly or was the tension palpable? The expectations for high-level performance that teachers place on themselves and their students are only intensified by the external pressures that come from even the most well-meaning parents and community members. As superintendents, we can do many things to ensure teachers are prepared so that, in turn, our students, parents, and patrons look on the testing experience in a positive light. Now is the perfect time to be proactive in planning so that next year’s testing takes place in the best possible environment.

amazed at your innovation and dedication in the face of difficult challenges.”

Teachers who are well informed about the tests and understand what is expected of them will be able to do a far better job of creating a positive atmosphere within their own classrooms. Take time now to talk with your teachers about what they experienced this year. Encourage all staff to share ideas and suggestions for the next round of testing. Maintain an open dialog throughout the year, share as much information about the tests and testing process as you can, and let your teachers know that you have confidence in them. At the same time, keep parents and your community informed about the purpose and nature of TAKS. Their understanding and support will have positive repercussions on your teachers and ultimately on your students. I have been honored to serve as TASA president this year. Your confidence in me has been vital, and your support of TASA speaks volumes of your dedication to education. Our association is an established one, and our membership and involvement keep it vibrant. I have met many of you around the state throughout the year, and I never cease to be amazed at your innovation and dedication in the face of difficult challenges. What an incredible network of support to tap for advice and encouragement. I hope you take full advantage of your TASA membership and benefits. If you are not actively involved in TASA—either at the state or regional level—I encourage you to become so in the coming year. I want to thank those who supported me throughout this year, both at local and state levels. I wish all of you the best!

SPRING 2007

S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S

VIEW SPRING 2007

“Each student is provided with a personal iPod containing audio and video podcasts produced by their teachers. Students listen to teacher-produced podcasts, as well as (audio) novels and content area instruction … ”

INSIGHT

Time-Shift Technology and the English Language Learner in Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD by Andrew W. Berning and Isabella Piña-Hinojosa Carrollton Farmers Branch ISD (CFBISD), a K–12 school district of 26,500 students near Dallas, Texas, is devoted to the appropriate use of technology to achieve the instructional and business goals of the district. We recently introduced a new paradigm of instructional technology based on “Web 2.0” technology. Web 2.0 refers to a second generation of Web-based communication tools. This article discusses the use of portable media devices (in this case the iPod from Apple) and podcasting (media files that are distributed over the Internet using syndication feeds) to impact achievement of English language learners (ELLs). We have also implemented iPod programs for students in kindergarten, students in our foreign language courses, and teachers participating in staff development. We consider the benefits of portable media devices such as the iPod or the Zune from Microsoft in terms of “time shifting.” Time-shift technology allows learners to control the time, place, and length of their exposure to instructional content. We believe the flexibility offered by portable media devices will impact the achievement of our ELL students as well as catalyze modern learning opportunities for all students and teachers in the district. The number of English language learners (ELLs) in schools has grown significantly. The Texas Education Agency (2006) reported 4.5 million students in its public schools during the 2005–06 school year. Of this number, 711,396 students were identified as Limited English Proficient. Nationwide, 5.5 percent of the school-age student population in the U.S. speak a language other than English (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2005). In CFBISD, the number of ELLs represents one out of every four students. ELLs have increased substantially to a current number of 6,707. Of the 6,707 continued on page 15

SPRING 2007

INSIGHT

continued from page 13

“… iPods and podcasts seem to be providing motivation for students to spend additional time viewing, listening, speaking, and acquiring new vocabulary skills.” ELLs, 44.4 percent (2,981 students) are served in the bilingual program while 54 percent (3,648 students) are served in ESL. The remaining 1.2 percent (78 students) have declined all ELL services. English language learners face the difficult challenge of learning the content while acquiring the English language. Cummins (1984) leads us to a deeper level of understanding language proficiency with an iceberg metaphor. The tip of the iceberg visible to the eye is the basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS), which is everyday conversational English. Beneath the water level of the iceberg lies the academic English or cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP), which is the application of academic English to the content standards. The academic English, the bottom portion of the iceberg, is the language of the classroom that encompasses critical thinking and problem-solving skills needed to comprehend and articulate abstract knowledge. We began the program by integrating iPods into the Bilingual-ESL program. The purpose of a Bilingual-ESL program is to help students become proficient in English through the development of language skills for comprehension, speaking, reading, and writing. We began with our newcomers, those students in the U.S. less than 12 months, and have expanded to our ESL 1 student population. Each student is provided with a personal iPod containing audio and video podcasts produced by their teachers. Students listen to teacher-produced podcasts, as well as (audio) novels and content area instruction. Further enhancement is made by integrating lessons from other technology courseware for language acquisition. Students take their iPods home for additional time on task and to share learning time with family.

We combine the portable media devices with strategies such as content literacy instruction to integrate viewing, listening, speaking, thinking, reading, and writing. The ultimate goal of content literacy strategy instruction is to assist students in becoming independent readers and thinkers and give them a repertoire of strategies to use when confronted with difficult reading material (Marzano, et.al., 2001). The iPods, and podcasting in general, are intended to assist our newcomers in deciphering the basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS) while acquiring content literacy strategies. Listening and speaking skills are essential in the early stages of language acquisition. In order to move to a deeper level of reading and writing, ELLs must initially be engaged in viewing, listening, and speaking at all times. Yet, low motivation can deter language acquisition (Hill & Lynn, 2006). Culturally relevant tools such as iPods and podcasts seem to be providing motivation for students to spend additional time viewing, listening, speaking, and acquiring new vocabulary skills. All this occurs in the context and content area of language development. Time-shift technology provides structure to activate and build on a student’s prior knowledge while presenting new avenues of knowledge through the use of technology. Words on a page have no meaning for a non-English speaker during the early stages of language acquisition. Nonlinguistic representations are brought to life in the form of pictures or video clips. These symbolic representations are being utilized with the video iPod by having students make a visual and audio connection of what they already know and what they are learning. These connections form meaning by using nonlinguistic representations that are highly appropriate ELL strategies.

The ELL Language Acquisition project will be evaluated based on student achievement on the Woodcock-Munoz Language SurveyRevised (WMLS-R) triangulated with student and teacher interviews. Expansion of the project will be determined based on the evaluation results. We will continue to investigate how Web 2.0 technology and portable media devices can enhance student achievement for all students, faculty, and staff in the district.

Andrew W. Berning, Ph.D. (berninga@cfbisd.edu), is chief technology officer, and Isabella Piña-Hinojosa, M.Ed. (hinojosaI@cfbisd.edu), is Bil-ESL coordinator, at Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD. REFERENCES Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. San Diego, CA: College-Hill Press. Hill, J. D., & Lynn, K. M. (2006). Classroom Instruction that Works with English language learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Marzano, R. M., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Texas Education Agency, (2006). Program Evaluation: Limited English Proficiency. Retrieved September 16, 2006, from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/ opge/progeval/LimitedEnglish/lep.html U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2005). The condition of education, 2005. Retrieved February 10, 2005, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/

SPRING 2007

Mentoring Coaching and Reflecting with Principals by Reba Schumacher

“What is the area that, if I made an improvement in the way I provide leadership, would give you and your teachers the greatest return on time, energy, and dollars invested?” The words, borrowed from Susan Scott’s book Fierce Conversations, reverberated around the room and back to me quickly—much too quickly. Well, now it was done! I actually just asked 18 elementary principals how they wanted to be supervised. It was too late to bring the words back and most of them were far too experienced and savvy to allow this opportunity to pass. The leaders, the veterans of the group, spoke immediately before I could change my mind about allowing this train-of-thought to continue. “Networking.” Without fail, they indicated the professional development that would best support and strengthen them as principals was time for networking with their district colleagues. It was clearly evident that they were ready for a new level of leadership within our school district. They were forward-looking principals, ready to reach a higher level of thinking, and they wanted to support one another in the difficulties encountered by the modern-day principal. They appeared ready and eager to create a district professional learning community with principals achieving the optimal level of effectiveness. The truth be told, I too was ready for a change in my relationship with them. I had first supervised the elementary principals in this school district for three years approximately ten years earlier, and had left them for a while to take the position of curriculum director. Then, when a new superintendent restructured the district central office staff, the elementary principals were returned to my supervision. 16

INSIGHT

In the seven-year lapse since I last supervised them, the group had changed. Several principals from the previous group had retired, and the average age of this new group was much younger than it once was. It became immediately apparent that this younger group had a different paradigm. They were less likely to believe that they must ride in like an Old West gunslinger and single handedly solve all the problems of their schools. Rather, they were more apt to collaborate and depend upon one another for support, ideas, and solutions. They seemed to be born of an era that values intrinsically rewarding, professional relationships to limit the tendency toward isolation that typically defines the principal’s role. They were also more likely to readily acknowledge areas on their campuses needing improvement, and they just as quickly gathered knowledge and problem-solving skills from their colleagues in order to improve their own administrative skills. They seemed to be of the generation born for sharing and teamwork, and they loved thinking out of the box. They were authentic and open to new ideas, and their creative juices were flowing. In short, they were fun, alive, and ready to form a collaborative team.

SPRING 2007

What seemed to be missing was a structure for their networking, and I was wary of simply throwing them into a loose-knit session. My caution, born of past experience, sent off an alarm that, absent structure, their meetings could become just monthly gripe sessions.

“making the conversation the relationship.” It became clear that this was information to be shared, and for one year, at the monthly principals’ meetings, we read and dissected Fierce Conversations. Through our book study, we learned to take our relationships to the next level.

reflection and improved performance, with the ultimate goal of higher student achievement. The protocols include supervisor/principal walk-throughs in classrooms and incorporate motivational strategies in working with campus-based administrators.

In an attempt to find a solution for this dilemma, I participated in three distinct paradigm-changing events. The first was Strategies for Powerful Living and Leading training, a model for coaching school leaders, presented by the Coaching For School Results organization. The second was reading the book Fierce Conversations, by Susan Scott; and the final event was attending “Mentoring the Reflective Principal” training sponsored by TASA and presented by Dr. Carolyn Downey. For this last event, I included three of the principals whom I supervise for the comprehensive eight-day training.

Following the coaching training and the experience of working with a coach, I redefined a supervisory style that fit me. I had never been comfortable in the skin of the kindly, benevolent matriarch who dispenses great wisdom and sage advice. I knew that, for various reasons, advice could become a wedge between those supervised and the supervisor. Anyway, it was not my intent for a principal to leave one of our conferences or phone conversations saying, “I have the most brilliant supervisor. She gives the best advice.” Rather, it was my intent for them to say, “I (the principal) discovered my own brilliance, my own genius, and I came up with my own solution to the problems of my school.” Coaching, as a facet of my leadership, allowed me to reinforce each principal’s brilliance and is compatible with my longheld philosophy that the solution to any school’s problems is held by those leading and working in that school.

Following Downey’s training, we began on two campuses with Protocol I: Supervisor/Principal Walk-Throughs. Each month at our regularly scheduled principals’ meeting, the three of us shared our experiences with the remaining principals. We even made a video of the walkthroughs and reflective questioning defined in Protocol One to provide a “visual” of the experience which, until then, was only shared through description. A picture truly does speak a thousand words and, as a result of the video and sharing, I received other invitations to “walk and reflect” from more principals. On one campus, I walked with the principal and her two assistant principals and modeled the reflective questioning techniques for them to later use in coaching one another.

I must stop to qualify that I am not a “program” person. In other words, I wasn’t out in search of the perfect program for my newly discovered needs. Rather, I lean toward empowerment for those whom I lead; empowerment born of knowledge and professional development. That is why

Rather, it was my intent for them to say, “I (the principal) discovered my own brilliance, my own genius, and I came up with my own solution to the problems of my school.” each of these three experiences had such appeal. Each had its role, and each worked well because of commonalities. The idea for where to go next with the networking request naturally took shape. Fierce Conversations was crucial because, in reading Scott’s work, I recognized the kind of relationship I longed to have with the principals. I also embraced the fact that I could come out from behind myself and have those really difficult conversations over and over in the same way even when conversing with different principals. I learned and practiced, in Scott’s words, 18

INSIGHT

Gradually, my relationship (which had always been good) with the principals took on the characteristics of a smooth dance. I was coaching and we were all taking on some of the more difficult conversations and everyone was happy—well almost. I was having just a slight uneasiness that there was still a missing element. Enter “Mentoring the Reflective Principal,” which became a framework for structuring and organizing the other two experiences. Downey’s model consists of six protocols that focus on using collaborative dialogue, with principals and assistant principals, for

Gradually, it occurred to me that not even the most skilled supervisor could schedule monthly reflective walk-throughs on 18 campuses. Downey’s process requires a minimum of two hours per visit per school if implemented for efficacy. However, using two of the other protocols and reverting back to the original request from the principals for networking, we adapted a workable model. I couldn’t walk through 18 campuses monthly, but 18 principals can network as they walk and reflect together, if organized into small manageable cohort groups. Furthermore, the members of these same cohort groups can meet to set goals, review campus plans, discuss data, and problem solve. Eighteen elementary principals are now organized into four cohort groups with four or five members to a group. They meet in September/October, November/December, and January/February, and the group visits each member’s school spending three minutes or less in each classroom. The walkthroughs are followed by forty-five minutes to an hour of reflective questioning. The

“visitors” ask questions of the host principal and frequently resist giving advice, because each knows that reflection is not advising. Each host provides a structure and printed agenda for the visit and follow-up meeting. As a value-added element, the same cohort groups also meet twice annually with me, their supervisor. What once was a one-onone meeting as a part of the principal appraisal process has now morphed into a cohort process. Each of the principals uses this time to take turns sharing goals, campus improvement plans, student achievement data, and problem solving. Principals are in charge of the content while I merely facilitate the meetings. (See figure 1, next page, for a visual of the implementation).

these meetings that we continue to refine our skills through book studies, presentations, and group networking. It is the cohort group that gives the support system, and the walk-throughs maintain our focus on student achievement and in turn drive our topic selection for principals’ meetings. Figure 2 demonstrates the relationship of our chosen path to success. What about that success? How has Mentoring the Reflective Principal impacted our district? Student achievement has significantly improved and continues to improve. Principals are working together collaboratively and are coaching and supporting one another, and they are sharing the responsibility and accountability for not just their students but for every elementary student in the district.

Principals’ meetings continue to be the catalyst for professional development. It is here that we discuss the challenges of implementing cohort groups and the Downey Protocols. Reflective questioning continues to be a challenge. It is also in

What is it that my three experiences— Fierce Conversations, coaching training, and Mentoring the Reflective Principal— have in common? Reflection, Reflection, Reflection, and the principals summarize our journey best with their reflections:

• “I feel empowered by this experience.” • “When we are wrapped up in the ‘game,’ we don’t take time to reflect.” • “Group walk-throughs take ‘a lot’ of time, but it is time well spent.” • “Getting into the reflective questioning mode is difficult. Reflective questioning has to be a habit.” • “Walk-throughs help us to: • Build a district focus • Develop curricular expertise • Gain strategies • Develop listening skills • Become closer as a principal team continued on next page

SPRING 2007

Figure 1

Principal Appraisal Process • Realize what a difference the teachers make • Learn to appreciate one-another’s challenges • Develop a problem solving network

June Groups Conference with Supervisor

• • • • •

District and Campus Plans of Action TAKS and Performance Plus Data Continuous Improvement Goals Human Resources Summer School, etc.

• • • •

Plan for Half of a Day 10-Minute Campus Overview Informal Walk-Throughs Conversation/Collaboration

• Get to know our own campuses better • Hone in on what it is we are tolerating • Develop a campus professional development plan

September / October Groups Complete Walk-Throughs

• Address accountability issues • Develop camaraderie • Find time to reﬂect

November Groups Conference with Supervisor

• AEIS and AYP • Student Performance Domain Worksheet • Continuous Improvement Goals

• Develop good partners • Find out we are not in this by ourselves” January Individual Conferences with Supervisor

January / February Groups Complete Walk-Throughs

March / April Groups Complete Walk-Throughs

INSIGHT

• Principal Job Evaluation Form • Student Performance Domain Worksheet • Continuous Improvement Goals • Teachers in Need of Assistance

• • • •

Plan for Half of a Day 10-Minute Campus Overview Informal Walk-Throughs Conversation/Collaboration

• Plan for Half of a Day • 10-Minute Campus Overview • Informal Walk-Throughs

Figure 2

Following the Path to Success

SUGGESTED RESOURCES Blankstein, A. Failure is Not an Option: Six Principles That Guide Student Achievement in High-Performing Schools. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press, 2004. Blumber, A., and Greenfield, W. The Effective Principal. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1980. Downey, C. Leaving No Child Behind: 50 Ways to Close the Achievement Gap. Johnston: Curriculum Management Systems, Inc., 2003. Garmston, R. J. Why Cats Have Clean Paws. Journal of Staff Development Summer 2000: (Vol. 21, No. 3).

Each circle becomes a shared staff development opportunity toward a common goal of student achievement.

Reba Schumacher has been the director of elementary education at Tyler ISD for 13 years. She has 33 years in public education, with prior experience as curriculum director, director of professional development, elementary principal, special programs director, and classroom teacher.

REFERENCES Scott, S. Fierce Conversations: Achieving Success at Work and in Life, One Conversation at a Time. New York: Viking, 2002. Downey, C., et al. The Three-Minute Classroom Walk-Through: Changing School Supervisory Practice One Teacher at a Time. Corwin Press, 2004. Downey, C. Mentoring the Reflective Principal: Collaborative Approaches to Impact Student Achievement: A Professional Development Manual. Curriculum Management Systems, Inc., 2004 Strategies for Powerful Coaching: A Training Manual from Coaching School Results.

Latta, R., and Downey, C. Tools for Achieving TQE. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press, 1994. Schlechty, P. Working On The Work: An Action Plan for Teachers, Principals, and Superintendents. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002. Steffy, B. E., Ed.D. The Principalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Role in Promoting Reflection, Renewal and Growth Using the Life Cycle Model. Instructional Leader, May 2003: 1â&#x20AC;&#x201C;3, 12. Whitworth, L., et al. Co-Active Coaching: New Skills for Coaching People Toward Success in Work and Life. Davies-Black Publishing, 1998. York-Barr, J., et al. Reflective Practice to Improve Schools: An Action Guide for Educators. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press, Inc., 2001.

SPRING 2007

INSIGHT

Best Practices of Award-Winning Public School Principals by Sandra Harris In December 2006, the Texas Governor’s Business Council (2006) charged that excellence in classrooms will not be achieved “unless we bolster and improve principal leadership in our schools” (p. 11). This criticism is not new, since it seems that every day the media reports about America’s failing public schools. This has caused the “blame game” to be in full swing as everyone seeks to find fault with superintendents, principals, and teachers for failing schools. Even educators themselves (Levine, 2005; Murphy, 2005; Starratt, 2005) have voiced their concern of graduate programs not bridging the gap between scholarly theory. Despite this widespread notion of school failure, Texas schools, for example, over the last 15 years, have “made good progress in education” (Governor’s Business Council, 2006, p. 2). Responding to criticisms, many university preparation programs have already redefined and restructured their programs. In essence, there is agreement with research which has clearly documented that successful school leaders have a strong influence on student achievement as they set direction, support and develop effective teachers, and implement effective organizational processes (Davis, DarlingHammond, LaPointe, & Meyerson, 2005; Leithwood, Louis, Anderson & Wahlstrom, 2004; Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2003).

As a professor of educational leadership in a Texas university, I agree that there is always room for improvement in education at all levels. However, on the other hand, I hear stories every day of administrator leadership successfully influencing our K–12 campuses for student success. At the same time, every year when public school report cards are issued, exemplary schools are recognized and many are awarded NCLB Blue Ribbon status or recognized for other prestigious awards. Often, their principals are recognized by local, state, and national organizations, such as National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) and National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP), for outstanding leadership. Obviously, many schools are flourishing under effective principal leadership. This led me to ask the question: What did award-winning principals consider the “best practices” that helped them lead their schools effectively?

What I Did Since 2004 I have contacted award-winning elementary and secondary principals and asked about their best practices for leadership. Sixty-nine principals who had been recipients of local, state, and national leadership awards during their careers participated. This included 35 elementary and 34 secondary principals from across the nation. Ten of these award-winning principals were from Texas.

SPRING 2007

Participants reported school populations varying from small (220 students) to very large (2,700 students). Twentyfour principals led schools of 220–500 students, 21 led schools of 501–750 students, and 11 led schools with 751–1,000 students, while 13 led schools with more than 1,000 students. All of the schools with populations over 1,000 were at the secondary level. Thirty-two of the participants had been recognized for leading an NCLB Blue Ribbon school, 29 had been a state Principal of the Year, 4 had been recognized with both of these awards, and 4 had been recognized through other national and state award programs.

What I Found Award-winning principals who participated in this study described more than 200 practices that emphasized leadership aspects, which I categorized into the following six themes: • Leadership with a mission • Leadership for a positive campus culture • Leadership to communicate and collaborate • Leadership for curriculum and instruction • Leadership for school improvement • Leadership for diversity All of the 200 strategies submitted reflected the correlates of effective schools as defined by Lezotte (1991) and Taylor, Pearson, Peterson, & Rodriguez (2002): clear school mission, high expectations for success, effective instructional leadership, frequent monitoring of student progress, opportunity to learn—using time for instructional purposes, ongoing curriculum improvement, safe and orderly environment, positive environment, and support of home-school relations. In the paragraphs below, I report some of these strategies from throughout the nation. I specifically emphasize some of the Texas principal best practices.

Leadership with a Mission Setting directions, developing people, and redesigning the organization have been identified as important in leading with a mission (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2005). The 23 entries included in this category emphasized all three by being purposeful, having a vision, working toward shared goals, building leadership capacity, and empowering faculty. For example, one Texas principal noted the importance of having a “clearly defined mission and clear goals.” He pointed out that hiring from an applicant pool that “has qualified individuals that fit your school’s philosophy and mission” enables the mission and goals to be implemented. His strategy to make this happen was to involve faculty and parent groups by working collaboratively from the beginning. He noted that then the mission statement “was a reflection of the best of everyone’s thinking about what this school would be.” Another principal told how his school redesigned the organization to include selecting future staff members (including teachers, secretaries, custodians, food service personnel) with great care. After all, he pointed out, the faculty hired “may end up being your legacy at the school.” Leadership for a Positive Campus Culture Before principals can improve the tasks of teaching and learning in schools, they must first understand the school’s culture (Matthews & Crow, 2003). Newman and colleagues (1996) attributed positive school cultures to those that emphasize student learning, high expectations, and support for innovation. Likewise, awardwinning principals reiterated the importance of these components in building a positive campus culture with 33 entries. Principals noted such simple strategies for shaping and defining a positive campus culture as building a trusting culture by “doing what you say you will do,” and having a sense of humor. One Texas principal wrote that “we must be

relentless in our commitment to our profession; our students deserve nothing less.” She emphasized the importance of “doing whatever it takes to allow students to succeed personally and academically [because] their future depends on it.” At this school, when the faculty looks at data, they look to see how students perform and what practices are successful in the classroom. They do not subscribe to the “gotcha” mentality, but instead the focus is on students and student achievement. Other principals described continuing student recognitions, and promoting citizenship and social skills in advisory classes. Other best practices included reciting a peace pledge every day and creating student volunteer and mentor programs. Leadership to Communicate and Collaborate While there are many ways for collaboration within a school and the larger community, it begins with communication, which Verdugo and Schneider (1999) identified as one of the top five traits that effective schools have in common. The 41 submissions in this category reflected these strategies. Several principals described the importance of communication with collaborative efforts, such as surveying parents, students, and faculty for their input and then implementing some of these suggestions. One Texas elementary principal described a morning assembly as a “community-building way to start the school day.” Another Texas principal made a “point of meeting face to face at the beginning of each week” with assistant principals. She noted that this standing meeting gave them an “opportunity to purposefully and meaningfully discuss the needs and progress of our students.” Another Texas principal discussed the best practice of connecting with the community. This was done with Project Reconnect, which provided a Parent Center coordinated by a parent educator. continued on page 26

INSIGHT

continued from page 24

This parent educator is available daily to encourage parent and community participation in school activities and to provide educational opportunities, such as ESL and self-improvement classes. She noted that parents who “are engaged in school and community activities model a high standard of success for their children.” A variety of school publications were reported by principals, including weekly/monthly newsletters, school brochures, updated Web sites, and press releases to the local newspaper. One principal reported that he wrote three notes every day to faculty, students, and/or parents. Several principals noted the importance of listening. Emphasizing staff strengths rather than focusing on their weaknesses was a valuable strategy for one principal in building a more collaborative environment. Another principal created an advisory committee that included individuals from the larger community when he was new to the school to “assist me in navigating the politics.” Three years later, this group was still meeting regularly. Leadership for Curriculum and Instruction Six ways that principals influence instruction include encouraging academic excellence, supporting faculty improvement, including teachers in instructional improvement, providing resources and materials, sharing best practices with faculty, and recognizing and celebrating academic excellence (Hoy & Hoy, 2003). Thirty-six submissions echoed these strategies. A Texas principal noted that she was “a firm believer in the power of the alignment of curriculum, instruction, and assessment.” She created a school climate focused on teaching and learning that “emphasized a diagnostic approach.” This was done by emphasizing staff strengths, which came to be called the “teacher’s bag of tricks.” Other strategies implemented at this school included discussing developmental theory, learning styles, multiple intelligences and other learning theories; creating time for all teachers to participate in training for planning and curriculum design; discussing schoolwide assessments and creating service plans for at-risk students; and establishing a school-wide portfolio system for assessing student progress. 26

INSIGHT

Other contributors noted that looping, a strategy to provide continuity in instruction, had been implemented. This process was credited with allowing teachers to concentrate on student achievement, increasing a feeling of shared responsibility for students, as well as creating a “smooth transition from middle school.” Several principals described celebrations, such as Homework Heroes, a parent-sponsored activity that brings back former high school Homework Heroes. Leadership for School Improvement Establishing a culture of inquiry builds leadership capacity, which fosters school improvement (Harris, 2006; Lambert, 2003; Southworth, 2005). At least 38 suggestions with the theme of improving the school were identified by participating principals. Ideas for improving the school ran the gamut from understanding data analysis to providing training for bus drivers. A

Another principal created an advisory committee that included individuals from the larger community when he was new to the school to “assist me in navigating the politics.” Texas principal described a program called Teachers as Lifelong Learners (TALL). This is a scheduling design where for a 90-minute period every school day as many as six teachers can meet to work collaboratively on school improvement issues. While the teachers are working together, their students are instructed by PE staff in enrichment activities. Another Texas principal described the yearly book studies at her school to broaden knowledge of different ideas and subjects. One principal described a program she created called SUCCESS, which provided individualized instruction to improve deficit areas for students unsuccessful in the regular classroom. This same principal reviewed teacher lesson plans for alignment with the state standards. Another principal started the first day of

school by reminding all faculty members that “we are all responsible for the successes and failures of our students all the way through their educational careers.” Several principals reported on their mentoring programs for teachers, while others noted the benefits of participating in a formal award process as a school improvement strategy. One principal supported faculty in developing a program that allowed a two-week break between grading periods every nine weeks. During one of these breaks, an intersession remedial program to help students “catch up” without missing any regular class work was implemented. Leadership for Diversity The achievement gap along racial lines continues to exist. While nearly 40 percent of U.S. students are non-White,

SPRING 2007

only 14 percent of elementary teachers, 10 percent of secondary teachers, 16 percent of principals, and 4 percent of superintendents are non-White (Hodgkinson, in Owings & Kaplan, 2003). Thirty-four entries emphasized diversity issues and the importance of the school as a welcoming center. Principals considered their “best practices” to be providing programs such as Reading Recovery and Early Literacy for at-risk elementary students, reminding everyone that “all students belong,” and providing services for struggling students in the form of tutoring, counseling, instructing in social skills, utilizing preferential seating, providing resources, and many more ideas. One Texas principal shared her experience of being assigned to a low-performing high school with a very high dropout rate. This was nine years ago. She shared that the first strategy implemented was to address the dropout rate

INSIGHT

“with a very progressive discipline and attendance system.” She described how school staff “stayed on top of attendance by not excusing any absence unless the attendance clerk spoke directly with the parents by telephone.” Next, academic issues were addressed by implementing a reading program called Reading Right and creating a summer camp in math and science. Another program instituted was called “Tuesday Extra.” On Tuesdays the counseling office, the library, the computer lab, and tutoring services stay open until 8:30 p.m. One principal wrote that “we stopped making excuses for children’s inabilities and focused on building children’s strengths.” Another noted that his faculty believed that all children can learn, but this phrase was added to their mission statement: “It is our responsibility to ensure that they do at high levels.”

Conclusion Today, school districts and universities are engaged in restructuring programs with the goal of placing more effective leaders in our K–12 schools. Studying the work of award-winning principals has important implications for these programs. There must be a constant going back and forth from university classroom to K–12 campuses to critically examine reflecting on “best practices” and acting on “best practices.” When this happens, the connection between classroom and campus will become a “best practice” bridge that results in strengthened preparation programs and, ultimately, successful K–12 schools led by well-prepared school administrators. For a full report of the study findings, see Harris, S. (2005), Best Practices of Award-Winning Elementary School Principals, Thousand Oaks, Corwin Press; and Harris, S. (2006), Best

Practices of Award-Winning Secondary School Elementary Principals, Thousand Oaks, Corwin Press. Sandra Harris, Ph.D. (Sandra.harris@lamar.edu) is a former teacher, principal, and superintendent in public and private schools who is currently director of the Center for Doctoral Studies in Educational Leadership at Lamar University in Beaumont, Texas. She is also past-president of the Texas Council of Professors of Educational Administration and author or co-author of many journal articles and 11 books on education. REFERENCES Davis, S., Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., & Meyerson, D. (2005). School leadership study: Developing successful principals. Commissioned by the Wallace Foundation. Stanford, CA.: Stanford Educational Leadership Institute. Governorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Business Council (2006, December). Excellence in the classroom. Retrieved on January 3, 2006, from http://www.texasgbc.org/pdfs/Excellence%20in%20the%20Classroom.pdf. Harris, S. (2006). Six Kinds of Questions to Create a Culture of Inquiry. NASSP Principal, 7(2), 27â&#x20AC;&#x201C;31. Hoy, A. & Hoy, W. (2003). Instructional leadership: A learning-centered guide. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. continued on page 30

SPRING 2007

continued from page 29

Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Owings, W. A., & Kaplan, L. S. (Eds.) (2003). Best practices, best thinking and emerging issues in school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Leithwood, K. & Jantzi, D. (2005). Transformational leadership. In B. Davies (Ed.) The essentials of school leadership, pp. 31–43. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Southworth, G. (2005). Learning-centered leadership. In B. Davies (Ed.), The essentials of school leadership, (pp. 75–92). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Leithwood, K., Louis, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning. Report Commissioned by the Wallace Foundation. Retrieved March 3, 2006, from: htttp://www.wallacefoundation.org/WF/knowledgecenter/ KnowledgeTopics.

Starratt, R. J. (2005). Ethical leadership. In B. Davies (Ed.), The essentials of school leadership, pp. 61–74. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications, Inc.

Levine (2005). Educating school leaders. Washington, D.C.: The Education Schools Project. Retrieved March 17, 2005, from http://www.edschools.org/reports _leaders.htm. Lezotte, L. (1991). Correlates of effective schools: The first and second generation. Okemos, MI: Effective Schools Products, Ltd. Matthews, L. J., & Crow, G. (2003). Being and becoming a principal. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. Murphy, J. (2005). Unpacking the foundations of ISLLC standards and addressing concerns in the academic community. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 154–191. Newman, F. M. & Associates (1996). Authentic instruction: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 30

INSIGHT

Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Peterson, D., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). The CIERA school change project: Supporting schools as they implement home-grown reading reform. Retrieved October 11, 2005, from http://www.ciera.org/library/repor ts/inquiry-2/2-016/2-016h.html. Verdugo, R. & Schneider, J. (1999). Quality schools, safe schools: A theoretical and empirical discussion. Education & Urban Society, 31(3), 286–308. Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning. Retrieved March 6, 2006, from: http://www.mcrel.org/PDF/Lea dershipOrganizationDevelopme nt/5031RR_BalancedLeadership .pdf.

Texas Leads the Way

Pictured left to right:: TASA President Kay Waggoner; Lt. Governor David Dewhurst; Julie Clark, co-founder of The Safe Side; and John Walsh, host of America’s Most Wanted and co-founder of The Safe Side

Safety education partnership with TASA a “tremendous success,” says America’s crime fighter John Walsh in a recent interview In February of this year, all 1,037 Texas Independent School Districts joined TASA and The Safe Side Company in launching Texas First!, a public-private partnership created to disseminate innovative K–2 child safety materials. “Six months ago we challenged ourselves to place The Safe Side’s new K–2 safety curriculum in every U.S. elementary school,” said John Walsh, host of America’s Most Wanted and co-founder of The Safe Side. “Texas was selected as our launch partner because of its leadership position in the educational community, and the demonstrated commitment of its political leaders to child safety issues.” Under the Texas First! partnership, TASA and The Safe Side offered to donate a copy of the company’s new Stranger Safety School Resource Kit to each ISD. The partnership was announced to educators by Walsh at TASA’s Midwinter Conference in January. Earlier the same day, Texas First! was introduced to the media during a press conference at the State Capitol with Lt. Governor David

INSIGHT

Dewhurst, TASA President Kay Waggoner, and TASA Executive Director Johnny Veselka. To claim the donated materials, an ISD representative went to the TASA Web site (www.tasanet.org) to register and download the free Stranger Safety Lesson Guide. The companion Stranger Safety Media Library was then shipped to the ISD. Prior to the conclusion of the donation campaign on March 1, 100 percent of Texas ISDs had registered for their donated materials. The Safe Side’s Stranger Safety School Resource Kit includes two components, a TEKS-aligned Lesson Guide with lesson plans and student activities; and a Media Library, consisting of 25 copies of the Stranger Safety DVD. The Safe Side’s instructional model calls for classroom teachers to deliver basic safety content to students in grades K–2 through the use of five daily 20-minute lessons (“Super Safety Week”). The Stranger Safety DVDs are then sent home with students for family viewing and discussion. The take-home materials are available in English and Spanish. Several Texas ISDs have already reviewed the Stranger Safety School Resource Kit and are expanding their implementation. Additional Kits can be purchased at the cost-recovery price of $99. Many schools have expressed interest in reaching as many students as possible before the summer break since, statistically, summer is when predator activity increases.

An Abduction in San Antonio Foiled by The Safe Side “We’re big fans of The Safe Side,” said Debbie Krueger, director of elementary counselors, Northside ISD. “We believe the Stranger Safety DVD helped prevent a student from being abducted.” According to Debbie and Kimberly Burke, the district’s Safe and DrugFree Schools coordinator, a Boone Elementary School counselor, Cherilynn Pirtle, presented The Safe Side’s Stranger Safety DVD last fall to several primary grade classes, and discussed its personal safety tips. It made a big difference. One of Boone’s third-graders was on her way to school. She had been delayed at home and was traveling alone rather than with friends. She noticed a van driving slowly in her direction and became wary. When the van pulled along side her and the driver asked if she wanted some candy, her Safe Side Hot Tips kicked in. She knew nobody was home and immediately raced to the nearest trusted “Kinda Know,” a schoolcrossing guard. She reported that a “Don’t Know” had tried to use a trick to try to lure her into a van. The student was taken to Cherilynn, who praised her for practicing what The Safe Side DVD had taught her: Be aware, don’t fall for tricks, and run from danger. The student later requested an opportunity to tell her story (“Someone tried to steal me this morning”) to her classmates.

“We’re delighted with the response of Texas districts, and the story that recently came out of Northside ISD (see sidebar),” said Julie Clark, The Safe Side’s co-founder and creative director. “As the implementation matures, we hope to reach more than 1 million Texas students and their families each year. With Texas educators showing the way, we hope to have similar success with the other 14,000-plus U.S. school districts and 10 million primary students outside of Texas.” “This has been a very satisfying program for us,” added TASA Executive Director Johnny Veselka. “We’ve been able to expose school administrators, principals, and classroom teachers to new tools that address the important subject of child safety. We also believe the children of Texas will be safer because of our work with The Safe Side.” To learn more about Texas First!, visit www.thesafeside.com/texasfirst/post

According to a parent who was later briefed on the encounter, “It looks like an inexpensive DVD helped save a kid’s life.” “The ﬁrst time I watched the Stranger Safety DVD, I didn’t get it," Cherilynn said. “It seemed ‘weird,’ but the children absolutely loved it. They wanted to watch it again and again.” “Repetition is key to The Safe Side’s instructional approach,” said Julie Clark, co-founder of The Safe Side and creator of Baby Einstein. “We took important and serious safety messages and imbedded them in a funny, engaging movie that kids would want to watch again and again. As a former classroom teacher, I know that repetition and repeat exposure helps children internalize and really own the information.” Julie noted that the Boone story is as pleasing as it is disturbing. “I am so sorry and angry that there are people out there that intentionally try to harm our children. It’s very, very rewarding when your work makes a difference.”

The Safe Side was founded by Julie Clark, the creator of Baby Einstein and a former middle school teacher; and John Walsh, host of America’s Most Wanted. The Safe Side’s two home videos, Stranger Safety and Internet Safety, have won numerous awards, including Parenting Magazine’s “2005 Video of the Year” and three Youth Programming Emmys. The Safe Side collaborates with the nonprofit National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (www.missingkids.com) on the content of its products, and is a proud financial sponsor of the organization.

SPRING 2007

Snapshot of a Leader

Texas’ 2007 NSOTY Nominee— Guy M. Sconzo Guy M. Sconzo, superintendent, Humble ISD, was selected as Texas’ nominee for the 2007 National Superintendent of the Year Program sponsored by the American Association of School Administrators. The following offers a snapshot of his responses to specific questions on AASA’s 2007 NSOTY Award Program Application. Q. Identify the research that has had the greatest impact on you, and demonstrate how you have used that research to strengthen public education in your district. Give examples. A. Over the years, there has been a variety of research that shaped my core belief that learning must be the focus. This focus must be spread throughout the district from curriculum development through teacher and program evaluation to strengthen public education. Research on student achievement, as it relates to teacher quality, shows that a student has just a 15 percent chance of passing a state test if he or she has two grade levels under poor teachers within a five-year period. This shows the tremendous impact a weak link has. Add to that my basic belief that no structure will lead to student learning if those who are leading and teaching are not being developed as well. This reinforces how diligent and serious we must be to ensure teacher quality through professional development, monitoring and observing, and leadership. We must personalize the model; know who our teachers are, what they know and need to know, how they think and respond, and make certain that they are well prepared.

Scrivin’s research on goal-free evaluation is important in developing the kind of people who lead learning in an organization. It means not having preconceived notions about what one is observing. We should observe, not evaluate, from a purely descriptive standpoint—solely for what it (that which is being observed) is at the time, compared to what was intended. A secondary belief is about systems and systems in balance with both structures and culture being developed simultaneously. Systems won’t work until people buy into them. Districts must provide people with experience, meet individual needs, and provide challenge to assure growth. This includes providing positive feedback especially in difficult situations. When Humble ISD was rated unacceptable due to a middle school dropout accounting issue, employees responded without whining— and with true encouragement from myself and other administrators—to develop better student accounting procedures. Results came quickly. We had zero middle school dropouts to report this year and regained an acceptable rating. The research on organizational values, including creating a set of values, developing a response to behaviors surrounding those values, and then defining ourselves within those values, provides another key element—just as does the research on shared leadership and “leading from behind.” It is easier to “lead from behind” academically as the state now defines a gauge—the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS). But leading from behind affectively is more difficult. What does it look like? How do we measure it? That is when continued on page 36

INSIGHT

continued from page 34

shared values are important because we begin to form a culture of affective “learnings” that is important to everyone in the organization. It is the kind of leadership in which we have to spend time and energy to determine the desired results. When I first came to Humble ISD, we had to work toward a shared sense of priorities for the organization. We had to spend time and energy defining/refining us as a learning organization. I had to spend time learning who the employees were. What were their values? What was their common language? What were they willing to negotiate? To change? And to what degree? I paid attention to what our employees paid attention to. For the Humble ISD family it was about becoming a Professional Learning Community (PLC). I identified three to four attributes/behaviors of a PLC that could take us through the process, then began to write about it, speak about it, and develop multiple layers of people to behave and think like it—the Board, Cabinet, Leadership Team, etc. For those outside the school walls, I determined what affected the approval of the district. What caused the community to feel good about the school district? What kinds of hurdles could tip the organization? Challenge it? A good example was a failed bond referendum that could have tipped the community, but we extended a hand to embrace the resistance, created authentic shared leadership, and recreated a culture that resulted in the passage of an even larger bond referendum. More importantly, it built trust—a value important to Humble ISD and to the community. Q. What recommendations would you make to Congress on the reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind law? Be specific. A. I recommend changing the measurement system of No Child Left Behind to something more like the value-added 36

INSIGHT

assessment pilot in Tennessee that the U.S. Department of Education has authorized. I would add a growth assessment, then frame measurement in terms of value added each year. Measurement of a child’s progress should not be just a snapshot—it should be multiple and varied assessments—and be more like a continuing video of each individual child’s learning and growth. The value-added component benchmarks a child’s academic performance to date and then follows it forward thereafter. We all know that every child is not going to be at grade level every year. That is a fact of life in every child’s developmental process. As educators, we must insist on the reality that everyone is capable of learning and growing. Make it NCLB from continued growth and learning. We would be NCLB compliant if every child learns over the course of a year at some minimal level. I recommend that NCLB redefine that level to one year of relative growth and development and hold us accountable to one year. As we all know, achievement gaps among students will happen—but as learning organizations, we should have the structures and culture that responds to those gaps over time. I also must recommend that we own up to the reality that the implementation of laws costs money. We must take time to determine the real costs and then provide the necessary funding. Q. What do you see as the barriers to public school reform? How has the pressure for reform changed your role as superintendent? Be specific. A. The barriers are: 1. Money. Again, we must own up to the reality that the implementation of laws costs money. To truly bring about reform, time must be taken to determine costs and then provide funding. This includes funding for every phase of reform: development,

implementation, evaluation and judging effectiveness, regrouping and adjusting reforms, more evaluation, etc. Funding must be provided for the long haul. 2. Lack of a shared definition of what public school reform is. What is it? What should be accomplished? How will it be measured? How will we know if it has been achieved? What then? And will we realize that public school reform—as in any business—is in part a growth process and will never end? 3. Political expediency. There are competing demands for resources and a lack of shared priority. Too often, it is not about educating ALL students, but rather how to better serve political constituents. 4. Natural resistance of organizations to change themselves. People— employees, parents, students, community members, etc.—must buy in to change and the need and/or reasons for it. These barriers have not really changed my role so much as heightened the need to be more inclusive and patient, as well as to help others become more patient. So much more time has to be spent on: • Reacting to and reaching mutual understanding of appropriate reforms • Making reform initiatives meaningful . . . to ensure total buy-in Superintendents have to be willing to empower people and to have a wider zone of tolerance for direction. They have to be so much more about listening than talking. And when superintendents talk, it should be mostly about asking questions so that answers to where the district needs to go come from others’ mouths, minds, and thinking. Superintendents have to be relentless, especially when they hit a double brick

wall (like when we introduced the notion of vertical teams). However, they need to know when not to pull out a sledge hammer; that is, to know when to back off, but remain relentless nonetheless. It’s almost as if one must wear people down so that they either act to prevent more relentless persistence, or it becomes part of their learning. Superintendents must be in constant search of “compromises” and the thought processes behind those compromises. Compromises serve to continue to anchor us in our values, but at the same time give way to community or political pressures. However, at times a superintendent must declare a “charge” or a non-negotiable when an immediate outcome is needed and an outcome doesn’t require buy-in over time or a “zone of tolerance.” Q. In the broadest sense, show how your schools fulfill their civic mission. Give examples to support your conclusions. A. Two words show how our schools fulfill their civic mission: Service Learning. Service learning provides both the expectation and opportunity for students and schools to fulfill their civic mission. It is systemic in our learning community. It connects a variety of classroom learning to civic mission. Service learning makes learning through service so much more authentic and genuine. One example that demonstrates how service learning changes communities is a water-testing project. Two of our high schools and an elementary—Quest and Humble high schools and Humble Elementary—are doing this project together. It is about our students helping educate the community about something as simple as why they should not dump grass clippings in the sewer. The first step in this civic mission is educating the community and then helping it change its behaviors. While we may never have a quantifiable outcome, I see the things that students have done—signs posted in the community, speeches given at Rotary

meetings and at other organizations’ functions, presentations at PTA meetings, interviews with students and community members—and I know that they have made a difference and a change in our community. When this kind of civic mission happens, everyone who comes after us is so much better informed. Internships, as a sub-set of service learning, also serve to help students and schools fulfill their civic mission. This is about providing a well-educated citizenry who can step into the work force and not only be productive but also fulfilled. Internships allow us the opportunity to assess whether our students are well-prepared, informed, and passionate about their responsibility as citizens. We get to see them in a setting for which we are preparing them. With this kind of learning opportunity, students benefit from teacher/adult-driven scaffolding of learning behaviors outside the classroom walls that historically have been inside the classroom. When we begin these kinds of experiences so early—for example, we have a butterfly habitat project in the 4th grade—it becomes the expectation as students move up through their school years. This changes the learning experience because our customers, the students and their parents, start to expect a service learning kind of learning experience—just like Advanced Placement, dual credit, or gifted and talented programs. This is an internal change mechanism. Service learning allows others to see us differently through our students. It changes the paradigm of what people may have of our students. For example, just because a student is in need of social service doesn’t mean that she or he can’t provide social service. Just because our economically disadvantaged students get dinner from Humble Area Assistance Ministries (HAAM) doesn’t mean they can’t give to the “Superintendent’s Bowl” (a major food donation effort) to serve others. Service learning causes us to have different attitudes about all of us. At a macro level, it’s

the “Aha!” that adults have when exposed to an adolescent in a positive way. When I think of all the factors that interact to affect student learning. I also see service learning as a vehicle to help educate children out of poverty. It allows them to be better and more broadly prepared to know how to live and function in a different way. It provides those “employment” opportunities—both paid and non-paid. Q. This is the 20th year of the National Superintendent of the Year program. In your experience as a superintendent, what is the most significant change you have observed during this time that had a profound impact on the superintendency? A. The most significant change I have observed was when public education became an item on the federal agenda. It caused the superintendency to become so much more than serving education in a local community. The demands became more varied, more competitive, and more conflicting—but in a positive sense! It created opportunities to enrich education in the community. The superintendent’s role became about brokering and leveraging resources in a broad sense—not just about money—toward more opportunities and more people. It forced districts to be more evaluative of their way of doing business. It became more about assessment and more about whether needs were being met. As with any competition, it made us more aware of how much better we can be.

SPRING 2007

The following 4 pages of INSIGHT showcase the products/services of four of TASAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

Presidentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Circle Corporate Partners

Thank You to TASA Corporate Partners Our Corporate Partners support TASA and its mission through sponsorship of major association events throughout the year, including contributions for general session speakers, distinguished lecturers, receptions, meal functions, golf tournaments, and more. Their generosity makes it possible for us to enhance the quality of events we offer our members. Please take any opportunity you can to express your appreciation to these companies (a complete list is shown on page 43).

INSIGHT

Unlocking Learning Potential™ LeapFrog SchoolHouse classroom solutions combine research-based curriculum with multisensory technology to advance student achievement and inspire a love of learning.

Multisensory Approach A leader in the education technology market, LeapFrog SchoolHouse develops tools to help teachers teach and students learn. It is no secret that students learn best when they are fully engaged. Our multisensory approach captures students' attention, making them full participants in the learning process. We work hard to enable students to learn by seeing, touching and hearing—appealing to all the ways children learn. LeapFrog SchoolHouse Solutions are designed specifically to meet the needs of today's classroom; LeapFrog SchoolHouse™ Personal Learning Tools redefine the relationship between curriculum and technology by delivering portable, affordable, special-purpose learning devices to children. Our tools and programs enable teachers to personalize student instruction, instantly assess and monitor student progress relative to state and national standards, and easily integrate the programs into classroom learning. LeapFrog SchoolHouse™ product areas currently include assessment, reading, language arts, math, English language development, special needs and early literacy.

specifically to meet the needs of the students. In Texas, there are implementations in small districts like Canyon ISD as well as in large districts like Ft Bend ISD and Northeast ISD.

Scientiﬁc Research Basis LeapFrog SchoolHouse programs are based on the latest scientific research in the fields of language development, literacy, pedagogy, assessment, and educational technology design and were created with input from experts and researchers at the forefront of education.

Ongoing Efﬁcacy Research The effectiveness of LeapFrog SchoolHouse programs is continuously evaluated using goldstandard research designs and methodologies. Whether conducted by independent research entities or by education partners working with LeapFrog SchoolHouse, these studies demonstrate the power of LeapFrog SchoolHouse programs when used by students at various age and proficiency levels, and in diverse models of instruction.

In 100,000 Classrooms

For more information:

LeapFrog SchoolHouse multisensory technology currently reaches students in over 100,000 classrooms across the U.S. with hundreds of interactive books, skill cards, and screen-based products designed

Call 1-800-883-7430 and ask to speak to your district’s education solutions specialist. You can also find us on the web at www.leapfrogschoolhouse.com or in TASA’s Education PLAZA.

FORT WORTH LeapTrack® Efﬁcacy Study In less than three months of use, students increased reading score assessments by an average of 18%. Fort Worth ISD purchased the LFSH LeapTrack system for the special education programs of 10 district schools. The program provided differentiated instruction to more effectively manage each student’s Individualized Education Plan reports. One classroom served 18 students with special needs, ages 4–11, with a range of pervasive developmental disorders; nine were also designated as having limited English proficiency. In this classroom, students increased their reading scores by an average of 18 percentage points in less than 3 months. Similar gains were seen with the math assessments. For additional information about the research completed with LFSH, visit www.LeapFrogSchoolHouse.com /research.

SPRING 2007

A S.M.A.R.T Approach to Improving Student Learning District-wide • Can you predict where your results will be this year…and the next, and the year after that? • Are you balancing the need to continue to meet higher and higher standards …without burning out teachers and principals? • Are campuses and teachers changing practices fast enough to meet the demands of No Child Left Behind and the needs of the global economy? QLD can help you answer these questions by working smarter— not harder. QLD is partnering with school districts in Texas to improve student results through goal-focused, collaborative, data-driven processes. Our “S.M.A.R.T. Solution” of systemic alignment, professional development, and job-embedded ongoing coaching support is based on best practices in staff development, effective schools and continuous improvement.

A Process for Instructional Improvement At the heart of QLD’s S.M.A.R.T. Solution is the well researched, proven effective S.M.A.R.T. Goals instructional improvement process which empowers school staff to take control of accountability and accelerate student learning. This process is described in detail in three books authored by QLD co-founders, Anne Conzemius and Jan O’Neill: Building Shared Responsibility for Student Learning (ASCD premier member book, 2001), The Handbook for

INSIGHT

SMART School Teams (Solution Tree, 2002), and The Power of SMART Goals (Solution Tree, 2005). “I have been a public school teacher for 18 years and I’ve seen a lot of things come and go. In all that time I have never seen anything that makes as much sense as the S.M.A.R.T. Goals Process. This is not just an add-on program; this is a process that will breathe life into teachers, their classrooms, and their students, as well as change the way everyone in education does their job.” (Gail Ramesh, Rockford School District, Rockford, MI)

A Systemic Approach QLD’s S.M.A.R.T. Solution is systemic and systematic. To reduce fragmentation, as with all “change initiatives” it needs to be presented in the context of other district and campus initiatives; its connection to ongoing work must be transparent. The district’s executive team, principals and teacher-leaders work collaboratively with QLD to implement a plan that brings focus, coherence, structure, and direction to all initiatives. Our QLD team also meets regularly throughout the implementation with a steering team that is charged with providing direction and guidance to the change efforts, ensuring that system barriers are removed and the organization learns from each schools’ experiences. “We began working with QLD because we have seen the power of focusing our improvement efforts through the lens of S.M.A.R.T. Goals.

This is systemic work, requiring patience, practice and persistence, but we are already seeing improvements in our use of collaborative time that focuses on measurable student results.” (Mike Cargill, Superintendent, Bryan ISD, Bryan, TX)

Job-embedded Professional Development Led by building principals, campus-level leadership teams use their own school data to learn the S.M.A.R.T. Goals Process, and then are supported in using the process back in their schools by QLD certiﬁed coaches. During the training teams learn the collaboration skills they need to be effective, and are provided with protocols, templates and tools to support their improvement work. QLD’s unique coaching model, provided both on-site and by phone, allows teams to work through the S.M.A.R.T. Goals Process according to their level of skill and understanding. Principals also receive one-on-one support for their roles as instructional leaders and “lead learners.”

Living Our Beliefs We are long-time educators who share a passion for learning and a commitment to public education. Our books and resources provide practical, user-friendly tools and methods teachers and administrators can use to improve processes from the classroom to the board room. We look forward to partnering with districts that share our passion and commitment.

We believe: • All children can excel when expected to. • Student achievement is a shared responsibility. • Real change is about commitment, not compliance. • People have to get in the driver’s seat to own change. • Accountability starts with the individual. • Next to children, time is our most precious resource.

To learn more about QLD, visit www.QLDLearning.com or call 608.437.2425.

In 10 years, 50 states and more than 10,000 classrooms, READ 180 is proven effective with overwhelming results and marked improvement on state mandated tests.

THE CLEAR CHOICE FOR READING INTERVENTION FOR STUDENTS ACROSS TEXAS— WE HAVE THE RESULTS TO PROVE IT! Across the country, and right here in Texas, READ 180 is already helping schools change the lives of struggling students. There is no other program that can match the results you will see when you put READ 180 in the hands of a caring teacher. Students who have struggled for years will receive the gift of a future, because they will succeed in this program, and they will go on to realize their dreams. The results are in:

Austin ISD Up to 44% of Middle School English Language Learners go from below proficient to proficient on the TAKS in one year. As the school year came to a close, the leadership of Austin ISD coalesced around a plan to improve middle school performance on the TAKS. Because data analysis revealed a significant opportunity for improvement, English-Language Learners (ELL) were targeted for intervention. READ 180 was implemented in seven schools across the district with ELL who had performed below proficient on the TAKS the previous year.

After one year of treatment, all schools moved significant numbers of students from below proficient to proficient, with the most successful implementations seeing 44% of students converted.

PLATINUM PERFORMER Socorro ISD—El Paso Socorro ISD created an implementation plan including a district-wide literacy campaign, scope and sequence, and benchmark exams; however, they still needed a reading intervention program that could be implemented consistently across the district. The Socorro team accepted the challenge and after just one year of READ 180 implementation,

pass rates on the TAKS among READ180 students jumped from 7% to 62%. Also, approximately 70% of struggling readers improved their Lexile® scores, with an average gain of 100 points. Equally important was what READ 180 did for the lives of the students. They gained interest in books and reading, plus their improved reading skills were translating to other academic areas.

Aldine ISD After just six weeks, 42% of special needs students achieve two years’ growth in reading level. Aldine ISD (suburban Houston) was committed to improving reading skills for its special education students. Their plan addressed students in a variety of settings, including self-contained classrooms and resource rooms. READ 180 was implemented in the fall of 2005. After just six weeks, enrolled students showed an average growth of 130 points in their Lexile scores, as measured by the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI). After nine weeks the average lexile gain was 180 points, equal to nearly two years reading level growth.

ABOUT READ 180: READ 180 is a reading intervention program built on more than a decade of scientiﬁcally based research and collaboration with reading experts. Developed in clinical and classroom settings, the program is uniquely positioned to address the needs of struggling readers. To learn more about this and other Scholastic programs, visit www.scholastic.com/texas.

TO FIND OUT HOW TO GET RESULTS LIKE THESE IN YOUR SCHOOL, VISIT WWW.SCHOLASTIC.COM/READ180 OR CALL THE SOUTHWEST REGIONAL OFFICE AT (800) 221-5312 OR EMAIL SOUTHWEST@SCHOLASTIC.COM. Copyright © Scholastic Inc. All rights reserved. SCHOLASTIC, READ 180, and associated logos and designs are trademarks and/or registered trademarks of Scholastic, Inc. LEXILE is a registered trademark of MetaMetrics, Inc. Other company names, brand names and product names are the property and/or trademarks of their respective owners.

SPRING 2007

How to design with planning and purpose High school inspires, engages and motivates students An inspired education begins with an inspired learning environment. No one knows this better than the students, staff and administration of Wunsche Senior High School in Spring, Texas. A walk down the school’s main street makes it easy to see why students are attracted to the new building—the surroundings feel more like a mall than a school, complete with the student-run coffee shop, credit union, school store and computer center. Further along the walkway, you’ll find the library, cafeteria and a water wall, where you then cross the three successive career pods where the classrooms are either open office cubical space or glass encased. Students are able look into each other’s learning environments and observe the interactive learning taking place. “This makes learning exciting,” says Debi Koch, Wunsche principal. “Students get to show off their work, and other students are motivated by what they see. It fosters a sense of respect among our students, and adds to the feel of collaboration and openness.” Schools like Wunsche break down educational conventions that parents, teachers and students are used to because of the district’s vision and comprehensive planning.

“Traditionally, planning took a minimal role and was more facility driven,” says Keith Sockwell, VP of educational services and governmental relations for SHW Group. “Today, more and more districts see the benefit of putting a long-range vision in place that will guide growth, instruction, community involvement and construction for many years to come.” Wunsche is the result of long-range, cumulative planning. “You can easily say it was a labor of love,” says Jeff Windsor, director of planning and construction for Spring ISD. “Wunsche is part of a visioning process the district went through. We included the board, administrators, teachers, community members and architects/planners. The result of that effort gives us clear guides for long-range planning.” Spring’s planning participants met for five Saturday meetings over a four month period. They delved into issues like school size, grade alignment, class size, organization of instructional programs, and pre-K. The group also looked at athletics, performing arts, security, transportation and maintenance. What followed were key findings and new directions that helped to guide the design planning process.

Designing with purpose Planning process School districts are beginning to see how important long-range visioning processes are.

INSIGHT

In addition to strategic planning, educators now realize that the design of a school plays a big role in successful learning. The design should provide a catalyst for student

learning and exploration. Spaces should be flexible and encourage interactivity and collaboration. Wunsche is organized around three academies, each serving about 500 students: • Legal, business and child studies • Technology • Medical/biological services Each academy integrates its subjects into core curriculum classes through reading, lectures and projects so students are highly focused, engaged and motivated. Students are inspired with hands-on education at the on-site, working childcare center, veterinary clinic, culinary kitchen and automotive garage. There is also a dentist office with a waiting room, a television studio with broadcast quality cameras and production equipment, and a state-certified courtroom, as well as to a plethora of computer labs for graphic design, engineering, AutoCAD and programming courses. The inspired learning at Wunsche has proved infectious outside the school’s walls. “I talked with a girl at a local restaurant about her experience at Wunsche, and she spoke very highly of the academy and how wonderful it is,” said an area teacher in an e-mail to Principal Koch. “Although very happy at my school, I am so curious about a school that would prompt a student to rave about the facilities, teachers, academics, and opportunities as much as this young junior did.”

President’s Circle Platinum Gold Silver Bronze

TASA CORPORATE PARTNERS 2006–07 TASA is grateful to our corporate partners for their support: PRESIDENT’S CIRCLE Apple ETS LeapFrog SchoolHouse Pearson Education QLD—Quality Leadership by Design Scholastic Inc. SHW Group, LLP

PLATINUM CompassLearning The Princeton Review Scientific Learning

GOLD LifeTrack Services, Inc. PBK Renaissance Learning Tango Software SILVER AIG Valic ARAMARK Horace Mann Indeco Sales, Inc. KAPLAN K12 Learning Services Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP MIND Institute Promethean Schoolware, Inc. Summit Interactive Taylor/Balfour TCG Consulting, LP

BRONZE Alton Lynch Associates AT&T Bank of America DriversEd.com First Southwest Company Huckabee & Associates Parsons Questia Media, Inc Saxon Publishers Sodexho The Staubach Company Vantage Learning

Each level of the Corporate Partner Program is designed to offer our partners quality exposure to association members. Partners at the President’s Circle, Platinum, and Gold levels may customize special events and opportunities. List current as of 4/23/2007

SPRING 2007

406 East 11th Street Austin, TX 78701-

Presorted Standard U.S. Postage PAID Austin, TX Permit No. 1941