Drive Decisions with Open Air Data

We are about six weeks into the school year. We had some initial data from last school year and summer that could inform the initial steps we took, but now it is time to get serious about planning for the students that we have in front of us and moving them toward proficiency.

I take this part of turnaround leadership very seriously. We do not have a single moment that can be wasted in classrooms in order to ensure that our students make the growth that is necessary for them to have the future that they deserve. To be able to immediately respond to the needs of our individual students requires knowing our students, understanding how they learn and where their gaps are, and believing in where they can be with our help. Teacher preparation programs do not train teachers to think this way - to plan in such a way that they can modify and adapt the standards to meet the needs of every individual child in the classroom - but it is necessary in order to move our students that we develop the skills to plan in this way.

Here is an example of our September data based on the STAR Reading Assessment.

What do you notice? As a school building leader, what would your first step be? As a teacher leader, how would you begin to look differently at the needs of your students? As a classroom teacher, what would you immediately begin to consider in order to plan for the students in your classrooms? 

I have a colleague who has her teachers create individualized plans for every student across their grade level team so that they can have a strong plan for moving each student toward proficiency. That is a powerful way to drive decisions based with the data. Whateer your approach to owning, sharing, and planning based on your data, it is essential to name the students at each proficiency level and have a clear plan for moving those students. There must be as strong of a plan for the students who are in green (at proficiency) as there is for the students who are in red. 

My plan is to meet with each grade level team and ask them to name the students performing at each level of proficiency, as well as information about each student in order to round out our understanding of what each child needs. Each grade level team will create a data wall that will track the interventions and progress for our students. This adds a level of accountability for the data. It also makes us constantly aware of where students are performing and our obligation to providing them what they need to move toward proficiency with grade level standards. 

Driving decisions with data is an essential component of school turnaround. The model above, which builds on a key quote from Peter Senge, supports the assertion that without the use of data to drive decisions, the underlying structures and mental models will not be significantly impacted. As Senge stated in The Fifth Discipline, "In a learning organization, leaders are designers, stewards, and teachers. They are responsible for building organizations where people continually expand their capabilities to understand complexity, clarify vision, and improve shared mental models - that is, they are responsible for learning." Turnaround leaders must own their data and be able to lead the next steps for changing the events, patterns, structures, and mental models underlying the practice in classrooms. Making significant change requires that we have a clear plan for moving our students toward proficiency. Every moment counts. 

Why Don't Some Changes "Take?"

I have been thinking deeply about why some schools are successful in school turnaround and others are not. What are the differences between a school or a district that experiences visible change and sees visible results and a school or district that is on a treadmill of trying things differently but getting the same result. While I believe that there are many things that ultimately impact this change, there is one key ingredient that is critical to every single component of the change. Systems.

Go to your bookshelf and grab your copy of Peter Senge's book, Schools That Learn. If you have never read Senge's work, it is really critical to understanding systemic change in any organization (buy it or download it here). Senge has spent his career studying businesses, the corporate world, schools, and higher education with the quesion of what underscores real and effective change in these large scale organizations. His theories on systems thinking and having a systems approach to imacting meanigful change speak to the underlying reason that some schools successfully turnaround and others do not. Here is Peter Senge in his own words explaining systems thinking in schools.

Systsems thinking requires that leaders (classroom leaders, school building leaders, district leaders, corporate leaders) see change in terms of the entire system - what are the actions that will be required at every level of the system and who is responsible for the successful implementation. This is significantly different from a leader issuing a memo stating what the change will be and then becoming frustrated when that change has not been thoroughly implemented or implemented to the degree in which the leader is satisfied. It's the same idea as we have been pushing in classrooms with the implementation of the Common Core - who is doing the thinking and who is doing the work? In learning organizations who are successful in implementing systemic change, everyone in the system is doing the thinking and the work around the key components of change as outlined by the leadership.

I was first introduced to Peter Senge's work in 2001, when I was invited by my principal to join her in a year long book study with other leaders throughout the county. I was mesmerized by the principles that Senge outlined and it made so much sense in light of the work we were engaged in at the time - continuously striving to get enough momentum to move the needle away from single digit student achievement and significantly disruptive and dangerous student behaviors, struggling to be more proactive and less reactive, and always struggling to get our staff on-board with our vision. In my twenty-four years in education, I have watched district and building leaders have varying degrees of success with the same issues - trying to get buy-in, make changes that stick, and move the needle on student achievement. But changing the system is different from making changes - and systemic change is the only thing that will ultimately result in the organization looking, feeling, and acting differently.

The image of an iceberg is used in many different ways to describe thinking. Senge's image of system thinking uses the iceberg to analyze what we see as opposed to what is the underlying reasoning or purpose. If we are to make real systemic change, we must focus on what is underneath and not simply on the surface of what we see.

The bottom of the image refers to "mental models." That's the thinking that goes in to the decision making of people in your system. No matter how much effort you as a leader put into changing the surface of your system, if you do not disrupt the thinking patterns, or mental models, of the people in the system (in schools that includes teachers, students, parents, and the community) then we will not succeed in implementing systemic change. For leaders (classroom leaders, school building leaders, or district leaders), this is critical. We must look at every aspect of the system and work to built capacity for every person in that system to see how we need them to think, act, and respond differently if we are to make a difference in how the entire system performs.