The National Board Certification process provides a framework that can define teacher effectiveness. Though Senator Johnston has introduced a “quick fix” for teacher and principal evaluation, this is a complex issue requiring money; which is in short supply during these difficult times. The simple and best solution would not require substantial expense. A great solution already exists. This work does need to be addressed urgently, and I would urge the senator to allow the Governor’s Council for Educator Effectiveness to continue its work. This Council, which includes educators at the table, has just begun to define “effectiveness” and would be wise to consider using the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards’ (www.nbpts.org) Five Core Propositions and Standards as its foundation.
The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) was established 23 years ago, and has created teaching standards in 25 different content areas that were developed by and for educators. Recently, the National Research Council, through a congressionally-mandated study, recognized National Board Certification as having a positive impact on student achievement, teacher retention, and professional development. By using the NBPTS framework, the Governor’s Council can achieve its objectives of defining effectiveness, improving the evaluation process, and increasing student learning.
We also know that effective leadership is a critical factor in increasing student learning, and retaining teachers. That is why the NBPTS recently released a standards based certification process for accomplished principals called National Board Certification for Educational Leaders. Now, school leaders have the same opportunity to demonstrate mastery of high and rigorous standards through documented evidence of high quality practice.
I would encourage the Governor’s Council to look at how model evaluation systems are implemented. By using a standards based system similar to the National Board’s process where mastery is based on evidence, it becomes much easier to rate performance based on objective measures. Current statute mandates that ALL teachers are observed annually. I would argue that effective principals are constantly giving feedback to their teachers, and should be able to make a summative judgment based on formative observations within three years. It is essential that teachers are included in the development of the process and it must include multiple measures in the evaluation system. To suggest that they need more time, or that teachers would “return” to probationary status is not sound based on the framework of a well-implemented evaluation.
By allowing the Governor’s Council to continue their work, and to consider best practices in the field of teacher evaluation, we will arrive at a common definition of effectiveness that will serve as the foundation for improving the evaluation process in our state. The National Board has created the platinum standard that has proven to make a difference in student learning. Colorado has the opportunity to harness this success into a system that will positively impact educators and students; let the Council continue its work!
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
MSLA in Article in The American Spectator
Yes, teachers unions really can run a school! Here's an article that discusses the latest union sponsored teacher-led schools across the country. I'm very proud that our Mathematics and Science Leadership Academy in Denver made the list of NEA affiliates on the cutting edge of reform!
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Business and Education Don't Mix, says Ravitch
Fascinating article regarding Diane Ravitch's new book "The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education"
It's quite a shift in philosophy from her previous stance in favor of the No Child Left Behind Act. Click to read the Washington Post article (2/26/10)
and the LA Times article. (2/28/10)
It's quite a shift in philosophy from her previous stance in favor of the No Child Left Behind Act. Click to read the Washington Post article (2/26/10)
and the LA Times article. (2/28/10)
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
UTLA gets nod from LAUSD to lead school reform!
Friday, February 19, 2010
Direct Placements and Teacher Evaluation: Setting the record straight...
First, I want to be clear. As a teacher, and union leader, I do not want to see any ineffective teacher in a classroom with students. Teachers go into the profession in order to have a positive impact on students and their learning.
Now, let's talk about what has been happening in Denver. Yes, Mr. Boasberg, it is true that we have been talking about the transfer cycle for a few years. Unfortunately, Ms. Mitchell's article didn't mention that we (DPS and DCTA) overhauled the entire process last spring, and were able to cut the number of direct placements by at least 2/3 in one year. There has not been a seniority based process in Denver since the early 1990's. We also had previously put into place specific provisions that if a teacher were on an improvement plan, that they couldn't be "passed on" to another school. In short, principals have to complete the evaluation process (both formatively and summatively) in the way it was intended.
Mr. Boasberg has proposed eliminating direct placements from all Title I schools. I don't know a teacher that enjoys dealing with the budget realities in our schools, of which direct placements are a result. When education isn't adequately funded at the school level, tough decisions have to be made. Assumptions should not be made about the quality of teachers who are directly placed. If there is a performance issue with a teacher, reducing their position is not an ethically responsible choice, and that teacher should be put on a remediation plan. If a teacher isn't able to meet the expectations of the improvement plan with appropriate supports and resources, then they should be removed.
The notion of having our best teachers in our most at-risk schools is one with which I strongly agree. I am a National Board Certified Teacher, and have always taught at at-risk schools. Does Mr. Boasberg realize that 70.45% of DPS students are on free or reduced lunch? Examining the root cause of this problem is key in finding a solution which effects a super majority of our schools. Some questions that should be addressed are:
• Why are teachers leaving these schools?
• Do these schools have effective leaders?
• Do they have the tools and resources necessary to meet the needs of students?
• Are teachers empowered to make decisions and influence practice to meet student needs?
• Are there adequate monetary incentives to recruit teachers?
• Is there a quality mentoring or professional learning community in the building?
I do know that nationwide, turnover of staff in Title I schools is higher than more affluent schools. I also know that there are many factors that influence attrition in our at-risk schools. The Alliance for Quality Teaching did a great job in highlighting this issue in Colorado. The "take away" here is that there are many factors that affect the quality of teachers in our most at-risk schools. There needs to be a systemic approach to improving the teaching and learning conditions; especially in these schools. The district should look at how accomplished teachers are able to transform at-risk schools in other areas in the country.
Teacher evaluations, as charged in state statute, are to be used to improve instruction. I truly believe if a teacher is found to be ineffective in an area(s) of instruction, they should be given the opportunity to improve. If they do not improve, they should be dismissed.
Speaking of the actual evaluation process, Denver has a standards based evaluation of teachers that includes "records of teaching" that require teachers to demonstrate mastery of each teaching standard. Each standard is rated, and a summative evaluation is given. The evaluation process, in my opinion, is not well implemented. Principals are still conducting "drive by" observations maybe once a year, as opposed to continual observations and formative feedback designed to improve instruction. There are some great examples of quality programs that incorporate an effective evaluation system. Dr. Tilton is beginning to implement "Instructional Rounds", similar to medical rounds, that shows great promise. Other well known models are found in Columbus, OH, Toledo, OH, Montgomery County, MD, and Poway, CA. These models go a step further, and incorporate Peer Assistance and Review.
Interestingly enough, The New Teacher Project conducted an in depth study of the evaluation process in Denver which shows what teachers have been saying for years. This is a systemic issue that needs to be addressed:
“Teachers absolutely do not receive effective feedback,”
-Joan Schunck, The New Teacher Project
So what is the solution?
Yes, the Gates Foundation money gives us- DPS AND DCTA a great opportunity to improve the systems needed to effectively evaluate teachers. It's now up to all of us to have meaningful dialogue and work together to achieve these goals. It will take compromise from both sides to implement an effective system.
The New Teacher Project's report on Denver emphasizes what we as teachers continue to emphasize. Principals are not effectively trained to conduct a meaningful evaluation. We need some joint training on inter rater reliability, and in depth conversations to establish common understandings of the evaluation rubric. If you ask any teacher of principal what it looks like to "meet" or "Exceed" one of the teaching standards, you would come different conclusions. Teachers and principals need to have conversations together as to what each standard looks like in the classroom. This takes time, and must be a priority of the district.
Sure, we can point the finger at teachers, or principals about the evaluation system, and transfer process. I believe it's important to acknowledge how far we've come. More importantly, we must find a path together to determine where we're going. These issues are not isolated and require a systems based approach to reach a mutual solution.
I challenge Mr. Boasberg to work COLLABORATIVELY with DCTA to fix the system. Simply throwing ideas out in the press is not productive.
Now, let's talk about what has been happening in Denver. Yes, Mr. Boasberg, it is true that we have been talking about the transfer cycle for a few years. Unfortunately, Ms. Mitchell's article didn't mention that we (DPS and DCTA) overhauled the entire process last spring, and were able to cut the number of direct placements by at least 2/3 in one year. There has not been a seniority based process in Denver since the early 1990's. We also had previously put into place specific provisions that if a teacher were on an improvement plan, that they couldn't be "passed on" to another school. In short, principals have to complete the evaluation process (both formatively and summatively) in the way it was intended.
Mr. Boasberg has proposed eliminating direct placements from all Title I schools. I don't know a teacher that enjoys dealing with the budget realities in our schools, of which direct placements are a result. When education isn't adequately funded at the school level, tough decisions have to be made. Assumptions should not be made about the quality of teachers who are directly placed. If there is a performance issue with a teacher, reducing their position is not an ethically responsible choice, and that teacher should be put on a remediation plan. If a teacher isn't able to meet the expectations of the improvement plan with appropriate supports and resources, then they should be removed.
The notion of having our best teachers in our most at-risk schools is one with which I strongly agree. I am a National Board Certified Teacher, and have always taught at at-risk schools. Does Mr. Boasberg realize that 70.45% of DPS students are on free or reduced lunch? Examining the root cause of this problem is key in finding a solution which effects a super majority of our schools. Some questions that should be addressed are:
• Why are teachers leaving these schools?
• Do these schools have effective leaders?
• Do they have the tools and resources necessary to meet the needs of students?
• Are teachers empowered to make decisions and influence practice to meet student needs?
• Are there adequate monetary incentives to recruit teachers?
• Is there a quality mentoring or professional learning community in the building?
I do know that nationwide, turnover of staff in Title I schools is higher than more affluent schools. I also know that there are many factors that influence attrition in our at-risk schools. The Alliance for Quality Teaching did a great job in highlighting this issue in Colorado. The "take away" here is that there are many factors that affect the quality of teachers in our most at-risk schools. There needs to be a systemic approach to improving the teaching and learning conditions; especially in these schools. The district should look at how accomplished teachers are able to transform at-risk schools in other areas in the country.
Teacher evaluations, as charged in state statute, are to be used to improve instruction. I truly believe if a teacher is found to be ineffective in an area(s) of instruction, they should be given the opportunity to improve. If they do not improve, they should be dismissed.
Speaking of the actual evaluation process, Denver has a standards based evaluation of teachers that includes "records of teaching" that require teachers to demonstrate mastery of each teaching standard. Each standard is rated, and a summative evaluation is given. The evaluation process, in my opinion, is not well implemented. Principals are still conducting "drive by" observations maybe once a year, as opposed to continual observations and formative feedback designed to improve instruction. There are some great examples of quality programs that incorporate an effective evaluation system. Dr. Tilton is beginning to implement "Instructional Rounds", similar to medical rounds, that shows great promise. Other well known models are found in Columbus, OH, Toledo, OH, Montgomery County, MD, and Poway, CA. These models go a step further, and incorporate Peer Assistance and Review.
Interestingly enough, The New Teacher Project conducted an in depth study of the evaluation process in Denver which shows what teachers have been saying for years. This is a systemic issue that needs to be addressed:
“Teachers absolutely do not receive effective feedback,”
-Joan Schunck, The New Teacher Project
So what is the solution?
Yes, the Gates Foundation money gives us- DPS AND DCTA a great opportunity to improve the systems needed to effectively evaluate teachers. It's now up to all of us to have meaningful dialogue and work together to achieve these goals. It will take compromise from both sides to implement an effective system.
The New Teacher Project's report on Denver emphasizes what we as teachers continue to emphasize. Principals are not effectively trained to conduct a meaningful evaluation. We need some joint training on inter rater reliability, and in depth conversations to establish common understandings of the evaluation rubric. If you ask any teacher of principal what it looks like to "meet" or "Exceed" one of the teaching standards, you would come different conclusions. Teachers and principals need to have conversations together as to what each standard looks like in the classroom. This takes time, and must be a priority of the district.
Sure, we can point the finger at teachers, or principals about the evaluation system, and transfer process. I believe it's important to acknowledge how far we've come. More importantly, we must find a path together to determine where we're going. These issues are not isolated and require a systems based approach to reach a mutual solution.
I challenge Mr. Boasberg to work COLLABORATIVELY with DCTA to fix the system. Simply throwing ideas out in the press is not productive.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Reform (with Rights!)
We hear the word “reform” almost daily; yet don’t have a common definition. For some, it means redesigning a school, for others, “fidelity” (my personal favorite), and yet others, it means implementing research-based practices through a rigorous standards based curriculum. At the Mathematics and Science Leadership Academy, reform assumes the latter. We designed our school based on what works best with our students. This model includes designing the curriculum, classroom materials/furniture, technology, student contact day, class size, wrap around programs, and peer evaluation.
As the first DPS “Performance School”, we feel the pressure to perform. Being the only teacher-led school, with union backing, definitely ups the ante. Our twelve teachers range from a first year teacher through nearly 30 years of experience. One fourth of our staff in National Board Certified, and our entire staff is going through the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards’ Take One! Process. In fact, our professional development is relevant, differentiated, and designed by and for our staff.
We are “on the clock” for 40 hours a week. We all have an hour for lunch, and 55 minutes of planning a day. Wednesdays are early release days, where we do service learning with multi-age groups. While our students are in enrichment programs, led by DCTA-R member Joann Estrada-Mast, we are actively engaged on team meetings led by our own colleagues. Decisions are made by consensus.
For your data team… we are 94% free and reduced lunch, over 90% ethnic minority, and over 50% of our student population is English Language Learners. We are not a charter school, and we did not seek Innovation Status. In fact, our school operates within the contract, and is still able to implement meaningful reforms, based on research and best practices. We did waive state statute so that we could operate without a principal, which is required for teacher evaluations.
The Mathematics and Science Leadership Academy allows teachers to use their professional expertise to best meet the needs of our students. We are constantly reflecting and refining our model and practices. Following our motto, we are “learners, teachers and leaders”… implementing meaningful reform for our students, without giving up our rights.
As the first DPS “Performance School”, we feel the pressure to perform. Being the only teacher-led school, with union backing, definitely ups the ante. Our twelve teachers range from a first year teacher through nearly 30 years of experience. One fourth of our staff in National Board Certified, and our entire staff is going through the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards’ Take One! Process. In fact, our professional development is relevant, differentiated, and designed by and for our staff.
We are “on the clock” for 40 hours a week. We all have an hour for lunch, and 55 minutes of planning a day. Wednesdays are early release days, where we do service learning with multi-age groups. While our students are in enrichment programs, led by DCTA-R member Joann Estrada-Mast, we are actively engaged on team meetings led by our own colleagues. Decisions are made by consensus.
For your data team… we are 94% free and reduced lunch, over 90% ethnic minority, and over 50% of our student population is English Language Learners. We are not a charter school, and we did not seek Innovation Status. In fact, our school operates within the contract, and is still able to implement meaningful reforms, based on research and best practices. We did waive state statute so that we could operate without a principal, which is required for teacher evaluations.
The Mathematics and Science Leadership Academy allows teachers to use their professional expertise to best meet the needs of our students. We are constantly reflecting and refining our model and practices. Following our motto, we are “learners, teachers and leaders”… implementing meaningful reform for our students, without giving up our rights.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
NEA has been featuring innovative schools across the country as part of their "priority schools" campaign. Here's a story released today on our Mathematics and Science Leadership Academy.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Union Grown Teacher Led Schools!
Great article highlighting teacher-led schools sponsored by their unions. It has been incredible to work with the Boston Teachers Union and United Teachers Los Angeles as we have pushed forward on our own innovations... led by teachers. All three of these locals are members of the Teacher Union Reform Network!
Friday, November 13, 2009
What’s Wrong with the New DPS Board?
I find it ironic that the new school board members are being criticized for running on platforms that included engaging the community, strengthening our neighborhood schools, and accountability. Isn’t that what is best for our kids?
Daniel Kim, co-founder of the MIT Center for Organizational Learning, developed a “Core Theory of Success” that identifies four key areas that need to be implemented effectively for any organization to be successful. Since looking at schools/districts as a business seems to be the accepted practice these days, let’s apply Kim’s Core Theory to the Denver Public Schools. The areas are:
• Quality of Relationships,
• Quality of Collective Thinking,
• Quality of Actions, and
• Quality of Results.
Daniel Kim’s theory purports that an organization can only be successful if all four areas are interconnected and implemented effectively. Due to the interwoven nature of these areas, the system engages in a loop of continual improvement. When organizations focus only on the problem, it worsens because no attention was paid to the root and additional factors that caused the issue.
Let me translate this into DPS language. Relationships matter with students, parents, employees, and community. Collective thinking allows for buy-in to reforms in the district, resulting in a school community that has contributed their ideas and energies to improving student learning. Implementing the plan will ensure that the entire community is engaged and accountable for their collective actions. Finally, the results are, in this case, student learning. DPS will show results because of the relationships, collaborative planning, collective action, and accountability of each stakeholder in the school community. Our students cannot succeed without each piece of this theory being enacted effectively.
Where has DPS gone wrong? A top down approach. Let’s play out the status quo:
DPS identifies a problem and comes up with a plan that is shared with the community. Courtesy meetings are held where community members are talked through the problem and solution, and then it’s implemented. This leaves out developing positive relationships with stakeholders, input/buy-in to the reform, and accountability for all stakeholders (all means all: students, parents, teachers, administrators, staff, community, and elected officials), and finally reflecting on the results and making adjustments to improve the implementation. Has the district studied the effectiveness of their previous reforms i.e. redesigns, closings?
The new members of our Board of Education have committed to real systems reform by working with the school community, our neighborhood schools, and holding all stakeholders accountable. After all, if it works for business, it should work for DPS. Sign me up- I’m “Up to the Challenge!”
Daniel Kim, co-founder of the MIT Center for Organizational Learning, developed a “Core Theory of Success” that identifies four key areas that need to be implemented effectively for any organization to be successful. Since looking at schools/districts as a business seems to be the accepted practice these days, let’s apply Kim’s Core Theory to the Denver Public Schools. The areas are:
• Quality of Relationships,
• Quality of Collective Thinking,
• Quality of Actions, and
• Quality of Results.
Daniel Kim’s theory purports that an organization can only be successful if all four areas are interconnected and implemented effectively. Due to the interwoven nature of these areas, the system engages in a loop of continual improvement. When organizations focus only on the problem, it worsens because no attention was paid to the root and additional factors that caused the issue.
Let me translate this into DPS language. Relationships matter with students, parents, employees, and community. Collective thinking allows for buy-in to reforms in the district, resulting in a school community that has contributed their ideas and energies to improving student learning. Implementing the plan will ensure that the entire community is engaged and accountable for their collective actions. Finally, the results are, in this case, student learning. DPS will show results because of the relationships, collaborative planning, collective action, and accountability of each stakeholder in the school community. Our students cannot succeed without each piece of this theory being enacted effectively.
Where has DPS gone wrong? A top down approach. Let’s play out the status quo:
DPS identifies a problem and comes up with a plan that is shared with the community. Courtesy meetings are held where community members are talked through the problem and solution, and then it’s implemented. This leaves out developing positive relationships with stakeholders, input/buy-in to the reform, and accountability for all stakeholders (all means all: students, parents, teachers, administrators, staff, community, and elected officials), and finally reflecting on the results and making adjustments to improve the implementation. Has the district studied the effectiveness of their previous reforms i.e. redesigns, closings?
The new members of our Board of Education have committed to real systems reform by working with the school community, our neighborhood schools, and holding all stakeholders accountable. After all, if it works for business, it should work for DPS. Sign me up- I’m “Up to the Challenge!”
Monday, November 9, 2009
Sometimes you need to have some fun in school...
Let's go Steelers! Can't deny my roots... always a Pittsburgh fan. Go Steeler Nation!
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
A New Day in DPS!!
The election results are in! I cannot tell you how excited I am to work with our new Board members: Jeanne Kaplan, Andrea Merida, and Nate Easley. All three, along with Arturo Jimenez, have shown a true commitment to listening to our school communities. They will continue to advocate for our students, families, and employees. (yes, this means the unionized teachers/ staff!)
It is very frustrating to watch reform plans that are being discussed in this district with a courtesy information session with the school community. Now the real work begins. Our candidates talked about neighborhood schools, and investing in them. We need to support them in their efforts to get the much needed resources into our schools, and hold them accountable.
It's a new day in DPS, and I know that these candidates will work hard to support our schools by working with teachers and parents so that our students have what they need.
p.s. Yes, get out your broom and dustpan, too.
It is very frustrating to watch reform plans that are being discussed in this district with a courtesy information session with the school community. Now the real work begins. Our candidates talked about neighborhood schools, and investing in them. We need to support them in their efforts to get the much needed resources into our schools, and hold them accountable.
It's a new day in DPS, and I know that these candidates will work hard to support our schools by working with teachers and parents so that our students have what they need.
p.s. Yes, get out your broom and dustpan, too.
Monday, November 2, 2009
When Schools Close: Effects on Displaced Students in Chicago Public Schools...
A report was recently released that looked at the student achievement rates of students that had attended schools that were closed in Chicago. Take the big districts... New York, Chicago...yes, Denver. Everything that happens in Chicago and New York is replicated in Denver. From closing strategies, to Human Resource Systems, to data collection systems... Denver follows them.
The Consortium of Chicago School Research's study is entitled:
When Schools Close: Effects on Displaced Students in Chicago Public Schools
"The authors focused on 18 CPS elementary schools closed between 2001 and 2006 due to chronically poor academic performance or enrollment significantly below capacity. The schools enrolled 5,445 students at the time of their closings. To assess the academic effects of closing on these students, the study compares students ages 8 and older displaced by school closings with students in similar schools that did not close. The comparison group provides an estimate of how the displaced students should have performed on a range of outcomes had their schools not been closed."
How does this relate to Denver??
DPS has closed and redesigned many schools throughout my 16 year tenure in the district. The real question is, were the redesigns effective? I would challenge the district to come up with any conclusive evidence that they were. Why? Because they haven't evaluated the effectiveness of these strategies. They need to focus more on sharing best practices in our schools... and not just based on CSAP scores. School Reform takes 5-7 years to show results. How would we be able to see results when student, teacher, and administrator turn over is so high? Has the district invested the necessary time and resources to implement a meaningful reform? Often times, a "change" is mandated, and schools are left on their own to implement and resource the changes. Meanwhile, the district sits back and watches pointing fingers until they feel the need to intervene- usually with a punitive measure. It's time to change the culture, and let downtown serve as a resource to our schools... if they really want schools to succeed.
p.s. dedicated to my Viking and Del Pueblo friends
The Consortium of Chicago School Research's study is entitled:
When Schools Close: Effects on Displaced Students in Chicago Public Schools
"The authors focused on 18 CPS elementary schools closed between 2001 and 2006 due to chronically poor academic performance or enrollment significantly below capacity. The schools enrolled 5,445 students at the time of their closings. To assess the academic effects of closing on these students, the study compares students ages 8 and older displaced by school closings with students in similar schools that did not close. The comparison group provides an estimate of how the displaced students should have performed on a range of outcomes had their schools not been closed."
How does this relate to Denver??
DPS has closed and redesigned many schools throughout my 16 year tenure in the district. The real question is, were the redesigns effective? I would challenge the district to come up with any conclusive evidence that they were. Why? Because they haven't evaluated the effectiveness of these strategies. They need to focus more on sharing best practices in our schools... and not just based on CSAP scores. School Reform takes 5-7 years to show results. How would we be able to see results when student, teacher, and administrator turn over is so high? Has the district invested the necessary time and resources to implement a meaningful reform? Often times, a "change" is mandated, and schools are left on their own to implement and resource the changes. Meanwhile, the district sits back and watches pointing fingers until they feel the need to intervene- usually with a punitive measure. It's time to change the culture, and let downtown serve as a resource to our schools... if they really want schools to succeed.
p.s. dedicated to my Viking and Del Pueblo friends
Denver School Board Campaigns end tomorrow...
Check out a new Nancy Mitchell article in the In Denver Times.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Teacher Effectiveness article by Susan Moore Johnson
Great new article from my colleague, Susan Moore Johnson from Harvard through the Economic Policy Institute. Susan presents research around teacher effectiveness, and the manners in which we recruit, support, and enhance their expertise. It's a different perspective on the meaning of "Teacher Effectiveness".
How best to add value? Strike a balance between the individual and the organization in school reform
How best to add value? Strike a balance between the individual and the organization in school reform
Pumpkin Bowling!
Pumpkin Bowling!
Today, our students rotated through various math and science activities using pumpkins. My groups did "pumpkin bowling" using 4 different sizes of pumpkins- in costume of course! Students practiced graphing, predictions, basic addition and subtraction, and scientific observations. Take a look!
Today, our students rotated through various math and science activities using pumpkins. My groups did "pumpkin bowling" using 4 different sizes of pumpkins- in costume of course! Students practiced graphing, predictions, basic addition and subtraction, and scientific observations. Take a look!
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Learning... hands on science without bubblesheets!
To coincide with our study of life cycles and holidays (Kindergarten state standards), we were fortunate to have Bob Alarid (President of DCTA-Retired)come today and root coleus plants with our class! The kids LOVED it, and were at the window throughout the day looking at their plants.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Stress, Control, and the Deprofessionalizing of Teaching By Thomas Newkirk
Check out this Ed Week article:
Stress, Control, and the Deprofessionalizing of Teaching
By Thomas Newkirk
Thoughts??
Stress, Control, and the Deprofessionalizing of Teaching
By Thomas Newkirk
Thoughts??
MSLA...How's it going??
The question I hear every day! It's truly great!! I like my job, my students, and colleagues. How many people go to work and actually enjoy it?? I have not been blogging that often, because nothing seems out of the ordinary to me. As I talk to others, they're really intrigued by what we're doing at school, so I'll do my best to blog more often. I'm going to follow up this post with an article I wrote for the DCTA Slate, that wasn't published this month due to space. Enjoy!! ~Kim
Teacher Leadership, Redefined
By: Kim Ursetta, NBCT
Math and Science Leadership Academy
The stares, half smiles, people wondering WHY I was there…
Imagine how it felt for the former DCTA president to attend the Principal’s Institute. So why was I there?
Our school does not have a principal; but we do have two lead teachers that teach part time. We all assume different leadership roles. Teachers are divided into four teams: professional development, curriculum and instruction, culture and climate, and peer assistance and review. At our weekly early release days, we rotate leadership roles based on the content area expertise that we have chosen. We also have an elected School Leadership Team that makes decisions as outlined in the Agreement. We also share leadership by taking turns attending the principal, assistant principal, and facilitator institutes.
Our school’s motto is “Where everyone is a learner, teacher and leader”. We all move in and out of these three roles, and encourage our students to do so as well. It’s a very empowering feeling to be able to look at what our students know and are able to do, and to create lessons and units to meet their needs. We are not married to checklists, nor do we follow every page of the planning guides. We are deeply committed to creating units that allow teachers and students to work as learners, teachers, and leaders while ensuring that our students meet the state standards.
This past week, we began service learning. Each teacher has a multi-aged group of only 15 students and will be creating their own service-learning project for the next eight weeks. Students shape the projects by determining the means by which our objectives are accomplished. It’s so exciting to see the students respond when allowed to be creative and find ways to integrate their learning with real life applications.
As we go through our daily business here at MSLA, it shouldn’t seem that strange. Back in “teacher school”, we were trained to teach the curriculum in our own way that was relevant to the needs and interests of our students. We are caught in this standardized testing frenzy across this country that is limiting our ability to teach in ways that encourage critical thinking and problem solving skills. Our school is unique, unfortunately. Hopefully, our model will encourage others to dare to do things differently; to challenge the status quo hierarchy that exists in US schools, and to allow our students to lead their own education by meeting standards through thought provoking, rigorous curriculum. If the teachers don’t lead education reform, we will continue in the same path we have followed for 150 years. Dare to think outside of the box… teachers are leaders, too!
Teacher Leadership, Redefined
By: Kim Ursetta, NBCT
Math and Science Leadership Academy
The stares, half smiles, people wondering WHY I was there…
Imagine how it felt for the former DCTA president to attend the Principal’s Institute. So why was I there?
Our school does not have a principal; but we do have two lead teachers that teach part time. We all assume different leadership roles. Teachers are divided into four teams: professional development, curriculum and instruction, culture and climate, and peer assistance and review. At our weekly early release days, we rotate leadership roles based on the content area expertise that we have chosen. We also have an elected School Leadership Team that makes decisions as outlined in the Agreement. We also share leadership by taking turns attending the principal, assistant principal, and facilitator institutes.
Our school’s motto is “Where everyone is a learner, teacher and leader”. We all move in and out of these three roles, and encourage our students to do so as well. It’s a very empowering feeling to be able to look at what our students know and are able to do, and to create lessons and units to meet their needs. We are not married to checklists, nor do we follow every page of the planning guides. We are deeply committed to creating units that allow teachers and students to work as learners, teachers, and leaders while ensuring that our students meet the state standards.
This past week, we began service learning. Each teacher has a multi-aged group of only 15 students and will be creating their own service-learning project for the next eight weeks. Students shape the projects by determining the means by which our objectives are accomplished. It’s so exciting to see the students respond when allowed to be creative and find ways to integrate their learning with real life applications.
As we go through our daily business here at MSLA, it shouldn’t seem that strange. Back in “teacher school”, we were trained to teach the curriculum in our own way that was relevant to the needs and interests of our students. We are caught in this standardized testing frenzy across this country that is limiting our ability to teach in ways that encourage critical thinking and problem solving skills. Our school is unique, unfortunately. Hopefully, our model will encourage others to dare to do things differently; to challenge the status quo hierarchy that exists in US schools, and to allow our students to lead their own education by meeting standards through thought provoking, rigorous curriculum. If the teachers don’t lead education reform, we will continue in the same path we have followed for 150 years. Dare to think outside of the box… teachers are leaders, too!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
