As we embark on the 2020-21 school year, we are facing challenges we’ve never experienced before in terms of cleaning and disinfecting schools differently, social distancing, masks, and many safety precautions. Some of the challenges, while exacerbated, aren’t so far removed from our daily educational challenges. Instructionally there are things we need to consider in our planning and preparation. Assigning blame never fixed a problem and facing reality is a mindset we must accept to be able to find solutions for performance. Our reality is that students have a gap in curriculum and standards-based instruction from last school year, probably several months at the least. When core curriculum is broken down into a scope and sequence, then a pacing guide, to unit plans, aligned with formative assessment pieces, and then to daily lesson plan units of instruction it’s done for a reason and with a given sequencing and timing that’s designed to provide every child with a year’s worth of instruction in a calendar year’s time. When schools were closed last spring, we know our students lost instructional units. It’s our job as educators to fill in these gaps and try to reach students where they are and move them forward. Neglecting to fill in these missing pieces would be an instructional injustice for children. We also know that there’s a negative impact on student achievement with summer break, which is more than double for students from poverty. Unfortunately, this break for students was more than double the normal amount of time. Assuming a student was at grade level proficiency, and we know more than half our students weren’t at grade level when we closed, this still means this normal summer gap increased in magnitude and negative impact on student learning. This gap even widens for students from poverty, which are normally the students that need the most differentiation with scaffolded instruction and multiple additional levels of intervention and support. The reality that students from poverty and student of diversity experienced the most significant negative outcomes from schools shutting down, both instructionally and mentally/physiologically, is a sad and disheartening truth that we must address. We know the achievement gap was widened even further for students that need school, and all the supports that schools provide, the most of all subgroups of the student population.
The
pandemic has expedited our entry into integrating technology and increased the
need for remote learning. Many schools
have rushed into this school year and tried to fill the instructional and
technological gap with scripted programs, online and virtual scripted
platforms, and boxed products in an effort to provide instruction to students
virtually. Many educational product companies should have record profits this school year as federal money and state allocations are poured into technological resources for virtual instruction. Wouldn't it have been great to have stock in Zoom, Google, Canvas, Apple, Apex, iReady, or any of the educational technology based companies? However, the impact on
learning could actually be negative, in terms of actual versus projected growth, without building capacity, human instructional
capacity. How do we 100% know these
programs are aligned to the standards that our students will be assessed
on? How do these programs take into
account rigor and relevance? Is there a
component of differentiation and personalized learning or are these a
one-size-fits-all programs for every
student? Are we using these programs as
resources or stand-alone instruction? On
the surface these types of programs seem like a quick fix solution that will
appease our students and parents. Don’t misunderstand, I believe 1:1, virtual, and/or blended learning is a great thing and something that every school should do or have
already done…..but as a resource for instructional facilitation to be
integrated into best practice strategies that foster high student engagement. It can also be a resource that makes
classroom discourse more efficient and communication more effective with all
stakeholders…..as long as it’s utilized effectively.
I’m a proponent of virtual and blended learning, but not stand-alone without a great teacher guiding instruction. Technology, if used alone without building instructional capacity with teachers to use this as an instructional resource, won’t transform education but technology in the hands of great teachers can be truly transformational. Scripted programs of any type, that don’t address the need to truly differentiate and fill in gaps in learning like a great teacher can, do an instructional injustice for children and negate the instructional capacity of our most effective teachers to extend student growth to exponential limits. There are some cases, at the high school level, where the differentiation is by content and can stand alone. The K-8 standards in Reading and Math build on each other and are sequenced specifically to lead to the next level of instruction. There’s also a transitional gap leading into high school, especially in Math instruction that is highly involved in school composite scores in most states, although the results don’t sometimes show up for years until a cohort graduates. At the high school level, students need some of the foundational skills from an Algebra II course, that lost months of instruction, to be able to be successful in Algebra III and this leaves them with a deficit this year that would put them in a dire disadvantage if they were put into a Calculus course. Long story short, it's our job (principals and teachers) to fill these gaps and meet every student's needs.
In
his book “Coherence: The Right Drivers in Action for Schools, Districts, and
Systems” , Fullan says “John Hattie (2015) has added further confirmation to
our conclusions in his report What Works Best in Education: The Politics of
Collaborative Expertise. His conclusion represents a powerful endorsement of
our findings: “the greatest influence on student progression in learning is
having highly expert, inspired and passionate teachers and school leaders
working together to maximize the effect of their teaching on all students in
their care” (p. 2).” This is completely
true and exemplifies the importance of learning in organizations. The greatest resource any school or system
has is the employees (teachers, administrators, support staff, etc.) that make
the most significant impact on organizational success and student achievement. To learning organizations, building
instructional capacity is a key to our success and follows a continuous cycle
of improvement through human capital development. Instructional leaders need to make the
decisions of what is best for students, while ensuring that we continually build instructional
capacity with our teachers to ensure we continue to grow and improve. To
attain systemic instructional coherence, leadership must “always do what’s best
for the team.” This means making improving student learning a top priority and
mission for the school. Decisions must
be made around what is best for students and their learning, not what's easiest for the adults in the building. This means connecting the dots in every facet
of the school so that each part complements the next part and there is a
synergistic effect where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. The key to effective implementation of technology
or use of online resources comes down to the people using them. No matter what online resource, instructional
program, textbook, technology, or other resources or programs are utilized, the
most effective teachers will still be the most effective teachers. If we know there are learning gaps from
school closure last year, it’s our job to meet those needs. If there is a lack of differentiation in a
scripted program, it’s our job to differentiate instruction and provide what
our students need to be successful. When
teachers need support and guidance in effectively implementing technology it’s
the job of the principal, as the instructional leader, to help guide this
process and provide the necessary support.
When part of our students are learning virtually and other are learning face-to-face,
it’s our job to meet their needs and ensure our students learn at a high
level. Regardless of how we facilitate instruction,
what platform is used, what programs are implemented, what mandates may come
that seem to take autonomy away from great teachers……it’s our job to find a way
to be successful, our students are counting on us and our future generations
are counting on us to meet the learning needs of ALL students.
The
two best ways principals can improve schools are (1) hire great teachers and (2)
make the ones they have better, great principals do both. Principals, as instructional leaders, need to
remember that the most important part of continued school improvement and
sustained gains in student achievement requires improving the instructional
capacities of our teachers. This is done
both individually and collectively as we create a professional learning
community where teachers collaboratively support each other and create a
culture of collective efficacy where they believe they will positively impact
learning for ALL students in the school.
We need to embrace the opportunities that we have as educators to work
with children and impact future generations and create a safe, supportive,
engaging, and fun learning environment. We are lucky that students
and parents choose us for their education. Without students, they
wouldn’t need teachers, principals, or schools. It should’ve always
been about students and their learning, never about what’s easiest for the
adults in the building! Let’s remember who our customers are and
focus on service with gratitude in creating an engaging and fun learning
environment for ALL students! As we build instructional capacity and
instructional coherence, we are all in this together and we increase the
potential to increase student achievement and improve our schools as we develop
human capital and improve instructional capacity.
No comments:
Post a Comment