What would you do if you could do anything?

What would you do if you had complete autonomy to structure a school where the only definite was that you had to dramatically improve student achievement? Would the student growth be enough of a motivator for you to change your practice or try something new? What would you need in order to have enough instructional mastery to take risks and fail forward? Daniel Pink, in his book, Drive, presents research that directly contradicts that "reward the top performers" mentality that is central to TIF (Teacher Incentive Fund) grants and other incentive based programs that have surface since the APPR legislation that has changed much about how we look at teacher performance.

 One of the key concepts in Drive, is that productivity is increased, not by monetary incentives, but rather by increased autonomy, higher levels of mastery, and a strong sense of purpose.

click here to play video on mobile device

This makes me wonder about the ways that we make decisions in education. If the teachers are actually charged with the task of dramatically improving student achievement, how are we as turnaround leaders increasing their autonomy, purpose, and mastery so that they can truly innovate within classrooms? I know that in my first months as a turnaround leader, I worked with teachers as we mapped out our first months of school, but I did not empower them to really be innovative. What's more, it can be difficult to feel like you have the autonomy to be innovative within curricular structures and with deadlines for assessments.

So, I am trying to reflect on Pink's work and challenge myself to increase the level of mastery in my teachers in order to be able to increase their autonomy. We have a clear purpose - we have to move our students from predominantly below level (2% baseline on state assessments before turnaround) to predominantly proficiency (we are charged with achieving 85% proficiency within three years on state assessments). But even that is more of a goal than a real purpose. My purpose is to provide the same level of education for the children I serve that I would expect for my own children, but Pink reminds me that I have not asked teachers to define their purpose - to articulate what they are working for. We have goals, but Pink challenges us to think about the purpose of goals in changing what we do. Without autonomy, mastery, and purpose, we will see very little impact in our day to day interactions despite clearly articulated goals.

Pink's work has significant implications for education - and particularly for turnaround schools. We lack innovation in education. We try to keep everyone inside the same box. Teachers are scared to try new things for fear of not being "effective" or "highly effective." Leaders are scared to stand alone in an approach for fear that it will not have the desired impact on student achievement. We try approach after approach that promises "significant results" from "research-based strategies." As leaders, we must be strong enough to get off the hamster wheel. Look at our teachers, our students, and our staff and ask them to be part of the solution. Slow down in order to go fast. Let's reach as high as we possibly can - not just settle for good enough.

The Pressure to Perform

As a turnaround leader, you are always aware of the pressure to hit the targets - to achieve the goals of the turnaround plan. It can color the way that you look at the progress that you are seeing. When you are looking at data - even when it shows growth - you are painfully aware that it is not enough growth. The pressure to perform can impact the morale of the staff and lead to anxiety in both the adults and the students within the school. Teachers can worry that they won't be able to keep their jobs if they don't demonstrate enough growth in their data. Students can feel like they are "less" than students who are moving faster. Parents can start to feel like they wish it could go back to when they were blissfully ignorant of how the school was performing because it didn't seem like there was anything wrong with the "old ways."

Our targets require that we move from 2% proficiency on state assessments (our baseline) to 85% proficiency within three years. That seems like a pretty difficult mountain to climb. We broke the targets into grade level proficiency targets so that we could see how we would get there, one step at a time. Even so, 85% proficiency means that all students are involved. Twenty percent of our population receives ESL services and 15% of our students receive support through special education. Eighty-five percent proficiency includes these students. When we say that we believe in meeting the needs of every child, every day, we mean that all of our students need to be performing at a level that meets or exceeds grade level expectations. That is a very real pressure to perform.

Celebrating each step along the way is an important aspect of continued improvement. We may not have hit our goal, but when we see that our students are improving in their reading comprehension, or have used text-based evidence in their writing, or can explain how 5/8 is larger than 1/2 on a number line, then we need to celebrate.

We need to celebrate in our own teaching and in our own leadership as well. Each day there is an opportunity for us to see something that we did that made a difference. Maybe the conversation you had with a colleague helped a light bulb go off and they have renewed commitment to the work. Perhaps you only had to speak to your most challenging child once during your whole group instruction. It could be that you finally got some supports for a parent who is in severe need. Whatever the celebration, take the time to acknowledge it and know that the work that you are doing matters. Don't give up. Keep encouraging those around you to stay the course. No matter what - do NOT lower your standards. Make sure that because of your leadership, your teaching, your support that your students will achieve  - and it will all have been worth it.

What is the Impact on Kids?

No matter what we are doing - whether we are planning, analyzing data, collaborating with teams of teachers, or looking at student work - we should be asking ourselves "What is the impact of this work on our students?" In other words, how are we making a difference each and every day for every single child we serve? This is quite a shift in thinking. If I am continually reflecting on what is the impact on kids, then when my students don't "get" my lesson or my approach - I adjust. I change it. I think about how I can reach and teach that child and I make adjustments. That is a very different approach from writing plans that I will teach no matter what.

We administered writing benchmarks as part of our turnaround goal to increase 75% of our students' writing scores by at least one point on the NYS rubric. Our grade level teams have been able to look at student work to identify trends (across classroom or grade level teams) and gaps (individual or small groups of students who lack specific skills or conceptual understanding). This has allowed us to plan more effectively - even within our curriculum - to give students more of what they need. The impact for our students has been clear as we see students who are aware of what quality work looks like and what they need to do differently to get closer to their goals. Involving students in understanding their own data by looking at specific growth on individual indicators within the rubric has had a powerful impact on students owning their own progress and targeting their own improvement.

So, what is the impact of using data to identify gaps and trends in student learning? Why is it worth the amount of time and effort that it takes? If we think about the amount of time that we, as educators, spend planning, wouldn't it make more sense for that planning to be targeted to the needs of students in order to ensure that we are moving students to where they need to be? If I give myself permission as a teacher to say, my team mate needs to focus on this strategy because that's what his/her students need, but my students need something different, AND then I share this thinking with my colleague through collaborative discussions and unpacking the standards - we both benefit from understanding our students more deeply and have increased our toolbox of strategies to meet different learners. The impact on using data to drive instruction is far reaching. Our students grow in their learning and understanding and are better able to meet or exceed grade level expectations. Our planning becomes more effective at reaching and teaching all of our students. Our school communities become more collaborative and better able to determine the specific competencies and skills that students must master to be proficient in the standards. It is time well spent and is the work that we need in order to turnaround our schools.