Practical Theory

So I was at the Penn State 1:1 Conference this week. Sunday night and Monday, I was working with administrators from all over the state -- mostly from smaller districts. I was struck by the way they talked about their schools and districts. Principals talked directly to superintendents, priorities were set by administrators who had been there for a dozen years. I spoke to one superintendent about what it was like to be in his job long enough to see the kids who were affected by a kindergarten initiative graduate... and talking about building support for initiatives over a number of years to get the kind of buy-in necessary to do it right. In short, it was the complete opposite of the experience so many of us in urban education have.

In the three years that SLA has been open, we have had three CEO / Superintendents of the school district, four regional superintendents, multiple changes to our School Reform Commission (a school board of sorts) and even the regional structures have been changed several times. We have seen initiatives come and go, and we have spent a ton of time and energy teaching the new administrations about SLA and what we do that is different than many other schools.

I'd assert that one of the keys to true sustainable innovation is sustainable leadership. We haven't had a superintendent for more than five years since (I think) Constance Clayton in the early 90s. I wonder what that does to the ability to cautiously and wisely affect change. I wonder what that does to teachers and parents and school-level administrators who live through change without innovation.

I have no doubt that there are plenty of days when the problems that the smaller districts face feel as frustrating as the problems we face in urban structures do. However, I admit that talking to the leaders I met at Penn State made me wonder what it would be like to run a school in a smaller district. I'm not leaving SLA or anything, and I'm an urban educator at heart, but I'd be lying if I didn't feel a touch of envy when I thought about how much easier it'd to be to sustain innovation if the support and leadership structures weren't changing all the time.

Tags: life, education

Science Leadership Academy is featured (along with High Tech High and New Tech High and Gary Stager and Jane Krauss, nice company!) in this month's Scholastic Administrator Magazine in The Power of Project Learning -- an article about project-based learning. In addition to some cool shots of Gamal Sherif and Matt VanKouwenberg (and a nifty one of me, I admit), there are some great quotes such as:

Sometimes the results surprise both the teacher and learner, says Zachary Chase, an English teacher at SLA. To learn about the oral tradition associated with Homer’s The Odyssey, students were charged with finding a family story, getting a first-person recording of the story, and preserving it to pass onto their children. When one student found a bunch of letters from an uncle who had left his family to go to California during the Gold Rush, he used GarageBand to record himself reading the letters. He altered the voice to make it sound like that of an older man, Chase says. This project not only outstripped the teacher’s demands, but the success of the final project even surprised the student, he adds.

But be sure to read the whole article.

That was one of John Wooden's credos -- Be quick, but don't hurry.

It seems to me that Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, a former former Harvard basketball player, would do well to remember. Sec. Duncan was quoted heavily in an April 17th editorial in the Chicago Tribune that suggested that unless Illinois quickly changes to his ideas on education reform, they will get none of the $5 Billion "Race to the Top" Department of Education money.

I question those folks who would say that there is one way to fix education -- or that we know what we need to know. I worry a great deal that in our hurry to change education, we are pushing "reforms" through that may not do what we want them. And I worry about a Secretary of Education who would use language such as this:

One, what is the data that suggests all of Illinois is at a mediocre level? Two, the innovations that Duncan proposes -- according to the rest of the article -- are more charter schools and merit pay based on test scores. The recent RAND study that included Philadelphia charter schools suggests that we still have a lot to learn about the efficacy of charter schools. That's not to say they shouldn't be funded, but rather that we shouldn't only look at the latest educational fads as the path to improvement.

And that's happening a lot lately. It's easy to forget, but NCLB is only eight years old. We have seen an almost complete upheaval of public education in those eight years. We are racing toward... what? What is the specific vision of those who would reauthorize NCLB, who would push for merit pay, who would push for both more charter schools and more standardized curriculum for the public schools?

There is no question that we must continue to work to fix our schools. There's no question that there is work to do. But let us be deliberate and thoughtful about the way we do it. Let us dial down the rhetoric and recognize the hard work and successes that so many educators -- and so many schools -- have achieved. Let us make choices (and spend money) in ways that help students as best we can, as opposed to changing as much as we can as fast as we can, just to say we did something.

In other words, let us be quick... but let us never hurry.

... and that's a very good thing.

In a recent post entitled "Let's Just Put Them All In Jail 24/7," David's title came from a comment a reader left in the post before about Secretary Duncan's comments in Coloardo where he called for more time in schools as he said:


David weighs in with his own opinion about this:


The whole post is worth reading -- as are the comments, but I wanted to jump in and say that what angers David most, it seems, is the whole "the beatings will continue until moral improves" mindset that seems to be prevailing these days. And yes, it's being applied to students and teachers alike. The answer to our problems in education seems to be teach more, teach harder, learn more, learn harder. More hours, more homework, etc...

... without ever questioning the validity of the time we spend -- and the work we do -- together.

David is right to challenge the prevailing winds in education policy. He is right to be angry. He is right to worry that the path we're heading down does not lead to smarter, more passionate students and teachers, bur rather it leads to teachers and students thinking that school is something that is done TO students, not with or for.

If we want to see a smarter populace, let's start by making sure we find ways to make the time we spend together meaningful, and then let's continue by helping kids make all the hours of their days meaningful. That might mean letting them find their own learning from time to time, but first, we've got to make sure school doesn't take that love of learning away from them.

Much of this blog post is coming out of comments that grew out of a Twitter / Facebook update and turned into a deeper conversation in the Facebook comments... I started with this...

The ability and confidence to network is a soft-skill that, unless we explicity teach it in schools, is an SES inequity. Thoughts?

I wrote that because I was at a networking event that was tied to the 40 Under 40 Philadelphia award. It was a "networking" event, and I realized:

a) I am really bad at it. (Yes, I know folks who have met me may find that hard to believe, but put me outside of those spheres where I am most passionate, and I'm shy. Really. I'm good at talking about stuff I care about or talking with people I care about. I have never been good at small-talk. Even at these networking things, I tend to find a few folks who are interesting and get into in-depth conversations, which doesn't exactly let you network much.)

b) Networking is a skill -- and therefore it can be taught.

c) School doesn't really teach networking -- and by "doesn't really," I mean, doesn't at all. This means that you learn those skills in other places, and if you want to look at the achievement gap in terms of post-school achievement, I think we can look right here.

d) Teaching kids to do these things cannot just be done in the realm of after-school activities, team sports, and internships. We have to be sure to reinforce these skills in the academic classroom as well.

I have a very good friend who was raised among the power elite here in Philadelphia. He grew up having very powerful people at his parents' table for dinner. As a result, there are very few conversations he does not feel comfortable joining.

I, as much as I had a solidly middle class upbringing, didn't grow up around privilege in that sense, and despite what has been a reasonably successful career so far, am still very unsure of myself when I am in situations where I am outside of my comfort zone. Put me in a room of educators, sure... I can network with the best of them. Put me in a room of business folks, and I am terrible.

So as I was sitting there, dealing with my own discomfort with feeling like I "belonged" in the room, despite what has been a life that has given me exposure to people from all walks of life, I thought of how much more difficult it would be for students of mine whose life experiences and skill sets were very much defined by limitations, not possibilities.

In the end, what it served to do was reinforce how important the SLA core values of collaboration and presentation are, because I do believe that we can give kids the skill and confidence and ability be always believe that they belong in the room and as a part of any conversation. I am reminded that we chose to teach drama to all students in the 9th grade so that our kids can learn how to powerfully present their voice to the world.

I watch SLA kids interact at places like EduCon, with people like Jeff Han and Stephen Squyres, and I am in awe of their comfort. I listen to them lead people around SLA and speak with confidence and humility, and I am humbled by them. But I remember that it didn't happen for them overnight. They've worked hard to earn their voice, and the teachers of SLA have created the spaces for them to do so.

But it also made me question (again) what we value in American education -- especially urban education. As we work to close the achievement gap -- what achievement are we talking about? Where does that achievement leave our kids? And are we teaching our students the skills they need to close the achievement gap that matters -- the achievement that matters when our kids leave our walls and take their place as fully realized citizens of the world.

I want my kids to feel more comfortable in the room than I do.

I think we should want all kids to be able to take their place in the world -- and I think we should want to help them learn what they need to do so.

Tags: networking, soft skills, school reform

I just wrote a piece for the Anytime, Anywhere Learning Foundation all about the SLA - TFI partnership. Here's a sample:

At Science Leadership Academy, we have been incredibly fortunate to have a deep and meaningful partnership with The Franklin Institute -- one of the oldest and most prestigious science and technology museums in the country. This partnership is unique in many ways, not the least of which is that the school was planned as a partnership school, in fact, my office was housed within the walls of The Franklin Institute (TFI)during our planning year. This gave us the opportunity to build many aspects of the school with the partnership in mind. In the end, the partnership in mind -- from the way the schedule works, to the hands-on pedagogy-- matched the philosophy of TFI itself. And in everything we did, we felt it was very important that the partnership was a true synergy -- one where both partners were enriched by the interaction. Too often, school-community partnerships fail because they are viewed not as a true partnership, but as a hand out or a public relations moment. With this in mind, as a founding blueprint, we framed partnership in three ways: Shared Public Vision; Shared Pedagogical Vision and The Interaction of the Two Communities. This is a framework we still use today.

The whole article is here. I'm hoping it's a useful frame for how school partnerships can be successful.