Interesting day for education . . .

I learned about two different, but somewhat related events that took place today with the potential for significant impact on our profession over time.  The first is the state court decision in the California v. Vergara suit by students and school districts where the court struck down laws protecting teacher tenure and last in first out (LIFO) decisions.  Expecting an appeal, the court ordered a stay on the decision.  The plaintiffs focused on state statutes they believe are in the way of all students receiving the guaranteed education under the state constitution.

 “Plaintiffs claim that the Challenged Statutes result in grossly ineffective teachers obtaining and retaining permanent employment, and that these teachers are disproportionately situated in schools serving predominantly low-income and minority students. Plaintiffs’ equal protection claims assert that the Challenged Statutes violate their fundamental rights to equality of education by adversely affecting the quality of the education they are afforded by the state.”

You can go anywhere in the education blog world and find articles and commentary.  In this New York Times piece we read about reactions from both sides and get a sense of the court's decision in the words below.

“Substantial evidence presented makes it clear to this court that the challenged statutes disproportionately affect poor and/or minority students,” Judge Rolf M. Treu of Los Angeles Superior Court wrote in the ruling. “The evidence is compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience.”

In this piece from Andy Smarick at FLYPAPER he shares 10 things to keep in mind as this case proceeds through the court system.  

6.  Like just about every groundbreaking decision, this one includes dramatic language to make its point (and likely help sustain the decision on appeal). “Evidence has been elicited in this trial of the specific effect of grossly ineffective teachers on students. The evidence is compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience.”

This case will be important to follow as it will open the door for similar suits in other states.  The provisions that were struck down by the court such as teacher tenure and last in first out (LIFO) are protections against what unions see as unfair personnel decisions made by building and district leaders and undoing them will not result in fixing the problems in schools.

“We believe the judge fell victim to the anti-union, anti-teacher rhetoric and one of American’s finest corporate law firms that set out to scapegoat teachers for the real problems that exist in public education,” said Joshua Pechthalt, the president of the California Federation of Teachers. “There are real problems in our schools, but this decision in no way helps us move the ball forward.”

Supporters of the lawsuit disagree and seem ready to help those in other states with a similar belief.

Observers on both sides expect the case to generate dozens more like it in cities and states around the country. David Welch, a Silicon Valley technology magnate who financed the organization that is largely responsible for bringing the Vergara case to court — Students Matter — has indicated that his group is open to funding other similar legal fights, particularly in states with powerful teachers’ unions where legislatures have defeated attempts to change teacher tenure laws.

The second event was an announcement by the Gates Foundation that they are recommending a two-year delay in linking Common Core test scores to teacher evaluation.  I'm wondering how their change in policy that ed to our state's waiver loss aligns with this new belief and whether Secretary Duncan is open to being influenced.  I'll share some thoughts in my next post.

Celebrating success . . .

This evening was one of those occasions that makes it all worth it to me.  We celebrated our Transition Program Graduation at Lake Wilderness Lodge.  Six young people shared their experiences with us as they celebrated this milestone with family, friends, staff, and the many businesses that support their learning and training needs.

Caralena, Melanie, Sean, Jordan, Colin, Skylar

We learned of their goals to find employment and of their many accomplishments on that journey. I was honored to be included in the celebration and given the privilege of awarding them their diploma. Thanks to the staff who support these young people and to the community organizations and businesses that provide them with meaningful learning and work opportunities.

Push back from another source . . .

I enjoyed reading this article in stamfordadvocate.com about college officials pushing back against the latest federal education initiative to rate colleges based on factors such as how many students graduate, how much debt students carry, and how much money graduates earn.  Welcome to the NCLB accountability club where federal funding is held hostage; conform to the one size fits all federal plan or lose funding.

Others worry about the one-size-fits-all measure, when colleges have different missions. Moreover, certain criteria reveal more about the ideology of those rating the schools than the quality of the schools themselves. For example, those ranking a school based on its graduates' earnings value high salaries over professions such as teaching, social work, or other important, but not lucrative, jobs.

Williams College president Adam Falk decried the rating plan as "oversimplified to the point that it actually misleads."

Wendy Lecker, author of the post, believes enough is enough and challenges college presidents and all of us to fight back.

It is high time for university presidents, good government groups and others to join public school advocates in demanding that the democratic purpose of our public schools be restored, lest no one remain when the profit-seekers come for them.

The article makes me reflect on my beliefs.  I don't believe that I am in complete agreement with Lecker, but with each new federal initiative or mandate I get closer, especially with comments like the one below.

“It’s like rating a blender. This is not so hard to get your mind around.”

This is what  Jamienne Studley, a deputy under secretary at the Education Department, told a group of college presidents who were meeting to talk about President’s Obama’s plan to rate colleges with the apparent aim of driving out of business schools that don’t meet the administration’s definition of success.

Sharing our learning . . .

Dawn and I had an opportunity today to share some of our new learning about giving and receiving feedback with the Rock Creek leadership team.  They are beginning a process at the team level to collect data and provide feedback first among themselves and then with their grade level colleagues and had asked for some support.  What would have been a fairly easy presentation using material already developed became a more difficult process because of new learning from a book we are reading, Thanks for the Feedback by Douglas Stone and Sheila Heen.  The book is causing me dissonance so having the opportunity to partner with Dawn and share with Rock Creek was appreciated and helpful.

Over time, our focus has been on the giver of the feedback supporting them through training, role playing, and feedback.  We now know that we need to spend as much time supporting the receiver to be receptive to the feedback even when it feels wrong and misguided.  We know from experience how difficult it can be to receive feedback that makes us question our knowledge and skill so leverage in this process rests with supporting the receiver in maintaining a positive mental model through the process. As we shared in a draft to support their individual and team reflection:

We are learning that we need to focus on the receiver as much as the giver because the receiver is in control of what they do with the feedback, how they make sense of what is being shared, and whether they choose to learn and change.  How can we influence the receiver to recognize and manage the tendency to resist less than “wow” feedback and maintain the capacity to learn and grow even if the feedback seems wrong?

Another change in practice is encouraging a dialogue and not the one way conversation that we sometimes experience in a feedback situation.  The focus of the dialogue is on creating mutual intent and shared understanding of what the data means that results in meaningful feedback and options for growth for the receiver.   Initial feedback from our time together suggests that this approach to providing feedback can lessen the anxiety associated with those beginning the process of giving feedback.  Dawn and Shelly did a great job of modeling this practice and sharing how all of us are increasing our knowledge and skill in this important work.

Varied focus on NCLB . . .

Yesterday, I had the opportunity to meet with Katie Whittier, King County Director, for Senator Patty Murray.  She called and asked for the opportunity following the School Board decision to support the WSSDA Resolution asking our federal legislators to make reauthorization of ESEA a high prioirty.  ESEA is the legislation that gave birth to NCLB that is driving the federal department's one size fits all solution to education reform in our country.

www.edweek.org

We had a good conversation and learned that Senator Murray tried working with Secretary Duncan to maintain the state's NCLB waiver without success, as he needed to make an example to the remainder of states that they need to follow the department's mandates for reform.  We were assured that reauthorization is a high priority for Senator Murray and that she will try to work in a collaborative effort to replace this broken and overdue legislation.

Also yesterday I read in a Valerie Strauss Answer Sheet post that Oklahoma Governor Fallin has this week to decide if she will support the bill recently passed by both legislative houses to repeal the Common Core.  It will not be an easy decision as she is in a difficult situation.

Fallin is in a complicated position in regards to the Common Core. She is the chair of the National Governors Association, one of the organizations behind the development of the Core. Last December, amid growing concerns among conservatives that the Core constituted a federal takeover of local education, Fallin issued an executive ordersupporting the Common Core standards, which in Oklahoma were being called the Oklahoma State Standards, and saying that there would be no federal intrusion.

Though popular with legislators the decision is not one that others in the state view as a positive step including the teacher quoted in the article.  As with us, it would be difficult to once again be forced to respond to yet another set of standards.  I'll continue to follow this process as I am interested in seeing if moving away from the Common Core Standards will jeopardize Oklahoma's waiver.

The Oklahoman newspaper quoted Steven Crawford, executive director of the Cooperative Council for Oklahoma School Administration, as predicting that “chaos” would ensue if the Core is rescinded. One middle school math teacher, Heather Sparks, Oklahoma’s 2009 Teacher of the Year, was quoted as saying:

“For next year, we’ve already written our curriculum map and the pacing guides for the Common Core standards. It’s kind of disheartening. If these are repealed, we’ll have to go backward.”

I'll end this post with a section from an opinion in the LA Times focused on school reform and NCLB that resonates for me.

In other words, right now the nation is operating under a hodgepodge of federal rules that seem to change state by state and depending on the political winds. The Obama administration hasn't done a particularly good job, but the bulk of the blame rests with lawmakers for leaving No Child Left Behind on the books.

School reform shouldn't be this hard. States should be allowed to set up their own improvement programs, as long as those programs meet certain parameters for ensuring steady progress for a broad spectrum of students, especially disadvantaged and minority students. The measurement of those improvements should include more than test scores. The U.S. government should get out of the business of micromanaging schools, using its authority instead to ensure that it is receiving good value for the dollars it spends on public education.

Difficult day . . .

Today was my last Educational Leadership Team (ELT) meeting as superintendent.  It is the monthly meeting of administrators in our district and one of three opportunities I have each month with these individuals with formal leadership responsibility in our system.  As I shared with them, losing these opportunities to share learning and support growth will be one of the most difficult losses in retirement.  It will rank up there with the respect, appreciation, and sense of accomplishment that I get from working with our school board.

We have a quality leadership team and I take pride in having had some small influence on their capacity to create, implement, and sustain the adaptive changes necessary to meet the accountability measures imposed by federal and state mandates.  More importantly, they have the capacity to continue our "Future Ready" initiative to ensure that all Tahoma graduates are prepared for success in post high school learning and work. We are positioned for continuing success as Rob transitions seamlessly into the superintendency.  I am excited with the combination of commitment to what we do well and adaptive thinking that he is bringing to the work and to following our progress over time.

It will be no surprise to those that know me that my last message was about leadership.  It was about passion, beliefs, collaboration, collective capacity, transparency, humility, learning, and our purpose for being our YOUNG PEOPLE.  I chose to use the quotes on the slide below to end my short presentation, just before I got emotional and embarrassed..

The day ended, however, on an upside as it was the annual Board meeting to honor retirees and those with 20, 25, 30, and 35 years in the district.  Board President Mary Jane, made it easy for me by allowing me to sit while the kind words were said.  It was fun to honor the other eighteen retirees and multiple Years of Service Award recipients.

More high school talent . . .

Last week Ken Riggs, high school music teacher, shared information with us on how well the high school choirs did this year with a focus on a recent Chamber Choir performance.  Below, are his words and a link to the performance.  I watched videos of four of their songs, well worth the time. Can't wait until the day our young people share their talent on a performance center stage at the new Tahoma High School.

It has been a great year for the THS choirs!  Each group received the highest scores of any choir at their region contests, one of our singers won the state solo contest, and we gave many wonderful concerts, not to mention all of the great learning and musical growth that has been taking place in the classroom, but without a doubt the highlight was our Chamber Choir’s performance at the Northwest Division Convention of the American Choral Directors’ Association.

I did not see all of the performances at the convention, but of the ones I did see - a great middle school choir, as well as high school, university, and adult professional choirs - we were the ONLY ONE that received a standing ovation from the audience of nearly 600 choral professionals from throughout the northwest.  These experienced musicians are not easily impressed, and do not give this kind of accolade without good cause.

You can access the videos of their performance here:  http://thschoirprogram.weebly.com/nw-acda-convention-2014.html