Category Archives: Learning

We are talking about the ARCS framework, Alignment, Representation, Culture and Sustainability in a school system. And as you would expect, I’m making lots of connections to what we do at Randolph Central. The ARCS framework is embedded in the MPPR, or principal evaluation rubric, and it will help us to think about our own leadership as administrators but is also making me think a lot this week about distributed leadership.

The idea I’m learning and thinking so much about is this idea of a community that lasts. How do we strengthen our teacher leaders, our teachers and ultimately our students so that the changes we’re implementing in school improvement are aligned and sustained well after a single leader leaves? As I analyze this, I realize that if I was hit by a bus tomorrow, our BOE and Admin teams could clearly articulate our school improvement efforts and plans to my replacement. I don’t think our teachers and students could do so as clearly and I know it would be different depending upon who’s having the conversation. Room for improvement for me and my leadership? Check. Working on it.

The ARCS framework described above will give us a common language for developing and discussing a common vision and shared leadership. This conference is helping me improve my own leadership and will help me to strengthen our leadership teams as well. Bet you all can’t wait for me to return? 😉

My dad was a coal miner. He worked hard and became a foreman. His method of management? His plan for motivating the men? His fist.

As we look critically at our State and Federal leaders I’m thinking a lot about my own leadership and my father’s style of management. It’s my job to hold every employee accountable for a standard of performance that results in excellence for our students. I analyze every part of our organization constantly, looking for ways that we can improve, including my own performance. But at the same time I trust our employees to do their best every day. I want them to feel that trust and to feel empowered to take us where we need to go. It’s not very different from when I was teaching high school students at Pine Valley for ten years. Back then I was successful as a teacher not only because of my test scores (an 8th grade Proficiency exam and Regents exams) but because I tried to show every student that I believed in him, expected the best of her, would do everything in my power to help each find success, and would be first in line to call him out when he made a mistake. My students took a swift kick in the butt when needed because of all the pats on the back I’d already given them—and because they knew I truly cared about them.

As a leader, I expect the best of every student and employee in our District, I will do everything in my power to help us find success both in student achievement and in student learning. I don’t hesitate to have the hard conversations with people who need that swift kick in the butt. I care about everyone in the organization—I trust them until one shows me that I cannot.

This is not the leadership we’re getting from the State Education Department. They’re back to my father’s fist management. The policies and procedures being implemented are all about accountability and designed for the worst of our employees. One of the first lessons I learned as a young administrator, 12 years ago, was that I shouldn’t admonish the entire faculty for something only one or two teachers had done wrong. Why hasn’t the commissioner learned that yet? People don’t function at their best when working under a system of fear and stress. And our children feel all of this, despite the best intentions to keep a balance within our schools.

We do need to do a better job of aligning our curriculum as a system. The common core implementation is a good time to make that happen. We do need to make better decisions based on student data, not just on our own hunches or “feelings”. And we do need higher expectations for every child. What we do NOT need are these extreme accountability measures to make sure it all happens.

Here’s a personal example of accountability to others vs. internal accountability. The BOE members recently reviewed my evaluation with me, as they do every year. It is seven pages long and addresses 73 different competencies. What the BOE thinks and discusses with me is very important to me. I pay attention. I listen for what I can do better so I can improve. But you know what? If that BOE didn’t exist, I would work just as hard and I would endeavor to improve myself and this organization just as I do now. The majority of our teachers and administrators are just the same—they aren’t working hard every day because of a composite score but because they care about the quality of their work and their students.

We do this work because we want to make a significant difference in the lives and futures of our children. We do this work because we want our lives to have mattered when we reach the end. The only way that happens is if we do our work well, to the best of our abilities. I don’t do my best out of fear or intimidation from the State Education Department. And I surely don’t do my best work while feeling demeaned, demoralized, and distrusted. Neither do our children. What I’ve just described? That’s how the majority of our students feel while spending 90 minutes per day taking those tests. That’s NOT learning with passion, innovation and leadership. That’s not the way to motivate others to do their best work. And it’s not good leadership. Maybe NYSED will get results this way, but what will those results reap? And what will they cost? 

As a public school leader, I feel compelled to write again about the NYS testing debacle. Every day I’m reading more dissension from parents, teachers, administrators and community members on blog news articles, twitter, the opt-out movement web page and I’m seeing more interest in the news. If you’ve somehow missed this conversation, I can sum it up by saying our nation, and in particular for RCS, NYS State, has moved to spending a significant more time AND money on testing with high stakes for teachers and administrators.  As I wrote previously here, this creates a lot of churn over testing within a building.

The interesting thing for me as a leader, is this is exactly what I try NOT to create within the District. When our kids are testing, they’re NOT learning. When I began my superintendency four years ago, the BOE members and I spent a lot of time thinking about and discussing the leadership direction of the District. We agreed that our vision, our course we wanted to set, was “learning with passion, innovation and leadership”. I still believe in that vision for every Randolph student. One of the fundamental jobs that we have is to help our students become analytical learners who can make good decisions and who come to better understand themselves during their 13 years with us from PK-12. Learners who can find out what those things are that they’re really good at and enjoy, improve where needed, and determine an idea of where they are headed after us—you know, helping them to be more career and college ready. We want them to have rich opportunities in which they can create and think on their own and develop critical opinions. We want them to have all of the technology tools possible, similar to their peers who come from wealthier districts, so that they may compete in college and career. And we want them to be independent thinkers, leaders, who will make a difference in the world.

How far have our state and federal governments pushed us from that vision? With teacher and principal jobs on the line based on how our eight year olds perform on a test that lasts for 90 minutes per day, 3 days per week, in ELA and then again the next week in Math, what do you think teachers are spending their time on? TESTING. When children are testing they aren’t learning–this is too much time spent on testing. Add to the mix the questionable quality of the test questions and what validity will those results have?

We’re going to look back on these days in public education as very dark times. As the time when our state leadership may have started with what was a good idea—raise expectations for all teachers, administrators and students so that they will achieve more—and ended with a system based on suspicion, lack of trust in those doing the work, and accountability measures that demean good teachers and hurt our children.

It is unconscionable that we are allowing our youngest to test for this length of time, under these levels of stress, while they are judging themselves based on these measures. The NYS tests are not the full measure of our children. And we have to stop letting them be.

I want greater student achievement and better learning experiences for every child here. I’m committed to figuring out how we can improve and then setting that expectation for everyone. This is not the way. This is not what good leadership is about and it is not the way to make a meaningful difference in childrens’ lives or to best prepare them to be the analytical thinkers that we need for career and college readiness.

If I want every child to learn to think and to speak out when something is wrong, how can I not do the same? If we could OPT OUT of this testing mania as a District, I would be the first in line to raise my hand and say, “We’ve got this. I believe in the talent we have here, we will improve, and our children will succeed.” WITHOUT first testing our children right into stress induced mania.

As we congratulate Dave Davison, our HS Principal since 2004, on his appointment as the superintendent of schools for Westfield, we look to the future and our hiring of his replacement. Dave has worked diligently in Randolph for eight years, he will be greatly missed but we know will be an incredible asset to our neighbors in Westfield.  Congratulations and Best Wishes Mr. Davison!

We will have a rigorous hiring process including committees of students, teachers, support staff, administration and BOE members, and parents and community members. The final interview will be with our full BOE, as they look to this person for leadership with integrity, commitment, passion and innovation.

We aren’t interested in maintaining the status quo at Randolph Central. As we’ve seen so much success on our athletic fields, we look for that same success academically. We are on that path and we’re looking for someone who can lead our HS faculty and staff, connect with our students, show imagination and enthusiasm for our programs and future, and understand the changes from NYSED. I personally want the very best person available, someone who can strengthen us as an Admin team–who brings something more to us than what we have now. I want someone who’s going to help us to be our very best.

We are such an incredible district with wonderful students, hard working, dedicated teachers, a smart, supportive BOE, and a caring, close knit community. Of all the districts in which we could work, none provides a better opportunity for success. We’re figuring out how to take a great district to even greater excellence, we’re looking for someone to help us get there.

Do I have high expectations for this person? Absolutely. The same high expectations I have for myself and every other RCS employee. Only the very best need apply. Think you’ve got what it takes? Deadline is April 27, 2012. Come and help us achieve even greater academic excellence!

The RCS Board of Education and Administration began developing the budget for the 2012-13 school year in December 2011. As always, our goal was to develop a fiscally responsible budget that maintains our educational programs and at the same time reflects our responsibility to our taxpayers. Therefore, our RCS budget was prepared, using the Governor’s proposal, before the state budget was passed on March 31, 2012. Upon passing the state budget, some of our aid was restored. This amounted to an increase in aid to the district of $91,663.

We are confident that the budget we developed, prior to the restoration of the $91,663 in state aid, is a sound and responsible budget. Because of this we are instead using the $91,663 to reduce the tax levy, thus reducing the burden to the taxpayers.

We  present a budget of $18,470,469 which is an increase of $557,918 or 3.1%. Of this increase to the budget, 80% results from increases to payroll and mandatory NYS retirement contributions. Still, we have a local tax levy decrease of $91,633 or -1.9% (amount of money to be raised by taxpayers in the district). This is the fourth year in a row that there has been no increase to our taxpayers and the second year in a row for a decrease.

The election of two Board of Education members will also be on the ballot on Tuesday, May 15. Incumbents Janet Huntington and David Adams will be running for re-election, along with newcomers Daniel MacLaughlin and Thomas Deacon. Please join us for the public hearing of the budget on Tuesday, May 8 at 6:30 in the HS Auditorium. Immediately following the public hearing will be a “Meet the Candidates Night”. PTA Member Janell Sluga will organize the event and ask questions of the candidates. Please join us to hear what your BOE candidates think about the issues most affecting our District.

I love Spring Break. Not for the reasons you’re probably guessing.  I’m not on a beautiful beach somewhere relaxing in the sun. But I am working quietly in my office with the sun streaming through the windows.  It’s wonderful to have the time to think, to analyze, to work virtually uninterrupted.

I’m hopeful that this Spring break returns our teachers and students to us relaxed and rejuvenated. We will have one week with our students before NYS testing in ELA and Math 3-8 begins so we’ll be focused on reinforcing the learning from September through March and testing tips to best prepare our students. Please make sure your children are getting a good night’s rest each night upon return from break and coming to school with after a good breakfast.

This break has been a wonderful time to catch up on projects and to analyze data. It’s a time to research even more about the changes from the New York State Education Department. I’m confident we have a good handle on the teacher evaluation process, including next year’s implementation of Teachscape, a wonderful technology and training tool to help us learn more and improve on the Danielson 2011 rubric. We have a plan in place for the principal evaluation process, utilizing the Learner-Center Initiatives (LCI) MPPR Multidimensional Principal Performance Rubric. This focuses largely on reflection, goal setting and feedback. Both of these evaluative methods should lead all of us to focused, analytical thinking about our work.

Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) about which I’ve written previously are falling into place. I’m still not sure that I’m convinced this piece will make a difference in student learning, at least not proportional to the amount of work needed to implement, but thanks to my friends Theresa Gray at Erie 2 BOCES and Tiffany Giannicchi at Catt/Alle BOCES, I’m at least beginning to see the direction here. I’ve seriously needed SLO AIS :-)— or remediation in this initiative.

I’m also thinking a lot about our upcoming NYS assessments, our work toward improvement here and the work we’ve done through our iReady interim assessments and data analysis. I’m hopeful that increasing the rigor of our work with students and intentionally teaching the common core curriculum will improve our results. I’m concerned about what the assessments will bring in these transitional years to full implementation. Will it look like the tests from previous years? Will our students be better prepared because of the iReady work? Are the changes from NYSED impacting individual teacher practices yet? So much change at once leaves  for much opportunity and also for much uncertainty.

At the end of the day I can say that we have worked very hard as an admin team, a School BOE and a faculty to learn and implement all of the pieces to this changing puzzle. I’m cautiously optimistic that our hard work will pay off.  Let’s finish strong Randolph, we’ve got much work to do upon your return but as always, we’re all in it together. If anyone can do it and do it well, it’s us.

I’ve done some more research since Monday’s post about the composite score based on guidance from the NYSED website. According to the website the,

The field guidance previously available on this page is being revised and will be reposted as soon as possible.

Luckily, Richard Iannuzzi, President, New York State United Teachers issued two guidance docs on the subject, “Setting the Record Straight: New York’s Teacher and Principal Evaluation Law” and “NYSUT and State Education Department (SED) Settlement FAQ”. As Dick says, he was personally at the table throughout the negotiations, so I’m hoping it’s good information. If you’re wondering why I don’t just sit back and wait for NYSED to issue more guidance, remember we have to implement this in the 2012-13 school year. And at RCS, we have a contract expiring June, 2012. That means I’ve got some preparation to do, need to know what I’m talking about, consider the District position, plan… you know, just generally do my job. Maybe it’s my learning style, I am analytical and I tend to over-prepare, but that clock’s ticking (Plans submitted by July 1 if possible) and I want us to make good decisions about all of this. For that, I need solid information and guidance. Now.

So here’s where I’m at since reading Mr. Iannuzzi’s guidance docs. The composite score will be 80% locally negotiated–60% for the other measures, at RCS we’ve agreed that’s evaluations and portfolio review. And 20% iReady as our locally selected student achievement measure and we don’t know yet what that local measure’s going to be for teachers other than K-8 Math and ELA.

I’ve no idea how we’ll measure this 80% to fit into a scoring band and contribute to the composite score. Will there be more guidance on how the iReady results will equal the 20 points? Or will we decide that ourselves? And here’s my point, if we negotiate that individually in districts, won’t it look very different from district to district? And if so, how will these composite scores be a fair comparison across districts? Couldn’t one district set a scoring range that indicates something like, I don’t know, if 50% of students are at grade level by the end of the school year on iReady the teacher achieves a 20/20? And could another district negotiate and set a scoring range that indicates 100% of students must be on grade level to achieve a 20/20? Now consider the evaluation tool in the same way–one district could set a range that says all teachers who achieve a 2.5 or better on the rubric receive 31 points while another sets a range that says teachers must achieve a 3.8 or better on the rubric to receive 31 points.

Doesn’t this cause you to conclude that the public use of this composite score business is lunacy? I hope Mr. Ianuzzi is right when he says  in the FAQ document,

We will take legal action in an effort to prevent the public release of APPRs, as such release would be contrary to the purposes of the APPR law.

I’m guessing he means the public release of the teacher’s composite scores not APPRs. Can you imagine the parent phone calls when they can look to see that one of our fourth grade teachers has a composite score of 88 while another has an 84 and a third has a 78—guess which teacher every parent may insist upon? This cannot happen, it will not help us to improve. But I digress, that was yesterday’s post.

What about this? How do I make good decisions in negotiating this 80% that strikes the balance between holding safe from a Teacher Improvement Plan the vast majority of our teachers who are effective, while still holding everyone accountable for greater student achievement (which we’re all working on collectively), AND that affords me the latitude to use this information effectively for the small minority of teachers who may need to be removed? How does it not become overly punitive and humiliating in one district while being a shallow farce of compliance in another? And what are we accomplishing with all of this at the end of the day?

Please note: If this is your first time reading my posts, PLEASE review previous posts, in which I’ve shown how much work we’ve done in implementing the changes from NYSED and how on board I am with aligning to the common core curriculum, giving teachers the time and skill to study data and work together to problem solve in data inquiry teams, learning the new evaluation system and in school improvement. My point? I’m not an anarchist (not completely anyway), just a district leader trying to do just that: lead in a time of change and uncertainty when people are looking to me for answers I don’t have.  I’m plugged into the network team, I talk to colleagues in two different BOCES regions and I’m not hearing the answers anywhere.  If someone’s got the answers I’m looking for or knows where to find them, please speak up.

And all of this during budget preparation season. . . but that’s another subject.