Building a Curriculum System

Before we get started, let's clear up some vocabulary.

STANDARD: Is a long-term outcome that is reached through curriculum and instruction.  This is why Common Core emphasizes that it is not a curriculum - it is a set of desired outcomes for students.

OBJECTIVE: Is short-term outcome achieved in classrooms through daily instruction.  It is a building block towards the standards.

The first thing to understand is whether it is the school or the teacher that doesn't understand the standards.


Does your school have an ACADEMIC vision that is tied to the standards and to the state assessment?

Part of your work as the school leader is to make sure that you have created or articulated the school vision of standards implementation.  Many schools have thematic organization; they focus on social justice, technology, career preparation, college readiness, etc.  Whatever, your vision of the standards are should be articulated.  This allows the school to establish their 4 year academic goals.

Your school's 4 year academic goal may be that all students will be creative, critical thinkers who will contribute to their communities.

Accordingly, if this is clear, when you talk to your teacher about their standards, you will ask them:

1.  How does your interpretation of the standards support students' creativity?
2.  How does your interpretation of the standards support students' critical thinking?
3.  How does your interpretation of the standards ensure student contribution to the community?
4.  How does your interpretation of the standards ensure student success on the state assessment?

NOTE:  Even though it seems counter intuitive, it is important to include a discussion of the state assessment and it's value in your academic vision.  For instance, my school's slogan is Bogan Today, College Tomorrow Our state assessment includes that ACT.  If we really believe Bogan Today, College Tomorrow, then we have to believe that student performance on a college entry test really does align with our vision and mission for the school.  This prevents confusion when teachers are held accountable for results - we agreed the test was an important measurement because....If you are going to have a big blowout, have it here, so everyone can move past their disagreements and work together.


How do the standards align to the state assessment?  Does your state have a criterion test (clearly stated objectives that will be tested) or a norm-referenced test (a framework of objectives that may or may not be tested)? And, are the state standards the exact same as those listed for the test or "aligned" to the test?

The easiest scenario is that your state has a criterion test and that the criteria for the test are the exact same as the state standards.  This makes your job easy: either your school, your departments, or your individual teacher needs to place these criterion in logical order.

The next easiest scenario is that your state has a norm-referenced test with a framework that is also the state standards.  You know you have a framework if either a standard or topic is given along with a group of objectives.  The challenge here is to identify, as a school,  what the MOST IMPORTANT standards and objectives are - because most likely, you aren't able to do everything and some objectives will be learned as a by product of others. Your school academic vision should help in this selection.   After your important standards or "power" standards are selected, they need to be broken down by school consensus and put into logical order.

The most difficult scenario is that you have a framework, a norm-referenced tests, and state standards that are different from the framework of the test.  This means that your teachers have to figure out multiple alignments, which leads to confusion.  In this case, I have learned that it is best to make a choice about which standards you are going to use in order to plan.  If you are lucky, your state provides a clear alignment document already; if you are not, your time is better spent building curriculum than aligning standards.  If the standards have clear objectives connected to them, you spend your time putting them in logical order.  If the standards are numerous, you will still need to select your "power" standards, break them down by school consensus and put them into logical order.

Does your school have the TOOLS to build daily lessons?

Many schools skip over one very important document - the scope and sequence.  A scope and sequence document maps out how standards are taught over the four years at a school.  This creates accountability at each grade level and for each teacher and prevents "individual" courses.  If your school does not have a scope and sequence, your students, classes, and scores may be suffering for it.

A good scope and sequence will look something like a spreadsheet.  The standards AND objectives will be in the left column.  The other columns will represent blocks of time (i.e. 5 weeks or 10 weeks), and there will be X's that make it clear what will be taught in that time period.  High level scope and sequence maps will show you differentiation as well - what honors classes are expected to cover, what regular classes are expected to cover, and what support classes are expected to cover.

The second document that the school should have is a curriculum map.  The curriculum map can be overlaid on the scope and sequence.  The curriculum map explicitly states the content that is going to be taught with the standards.  Many schools use themes rather than specific materials to provide teachers flexibility.

When these two documents are in place, teachers can focus on planning instruction.  AND, your job as an administrator will be exponentially easier because you have the scope and sequences to refer to when you are participating in planning sessions, observation cycles, and coaching.  Your job is to make sure that the teacher honors their colleagues' work; the teacher's job is to implement what the team has agreed on.

But, it's the middle of the school year!  Yes, we all face that.  One thing that has to be clear is that building a curriculum system takes multiple years - you will always be revising - at first, the revisions will be big, but then they will get more targeted and focused as the teachers get a handle on it.

Expect your first product to be very messy.  Your teachers will learn a lot in the process.  Things that they thought were so crucial will be weeded out or replaced.

In the short term - have your teachers do this work by the quarter.  Have them keep notes and pay attention to student results.  In the long-term, use the summer to really hash out a better plan and dirty details.  Remember, most likely, it will take 2-3 years to really gel your scope and sequence AND curriculum maps.  Most people are going to face this task with Common Core becoming the new planning standards.  But, the pride and collaboration that will come from this will be invaluable, and it will go a long way in making your school a positive, academic culture.

Conducting a Pre-Observation Conference with a Framework

For many principals, the jury is still out on whether or not the framework approach to teacher evaluation is worth the efforts.  One of the most intimidating factors for some principals are the extended conversations around instruction.

I actually love the framework approach because I used to have to use a standard checklist - a checklist that I was not fond of and that I didn't feel that was very helpful for teachers or myself.  The framework, on the other hand, is very specific, and is helpful.  One, it helps both the teacher and I start off with a common, detailed understanding of what great planning and instruction look like.  Two, it helps both myself and the teacher zero in on practices that can take their work to the next level.  And, three, it helps me as the instructional leader see patterns that need to be addressed by professional development (differentiation rules!)

Accordingly, I wanted to share my "protocol" for conducting pre-observation conferences, which allow me to not only gather information prior to the observation, but to support teachers in their own thinking and lesson preparation.

Teachers lead, I follow.  So, I look at the formal observation as "performance art" - my job is to understand how the teacher has gotten to the current point.  I need to understand the teacher's logic.  Therefore, I usually group questions and let the teacher talk, interjecting only to ask clarifying questions, or, if needed, to point out missing information and/or model suggestions.  Occasionally, when teachers are way off, I go back and review the rubric and school expectations.

The pre-observation conferences usually last between 20-30 minutes - sometimes as long as 45 minutes if the teacher needs additional coaching and support.  This has made the process very manageable, maximizes my time, and allows me to do multiple observations throughout the school year (I can do 5-7 pre-observation conferences in a week; my APs can do a similar amount as well - we complete cycles in two week spans).

The Questions.

1.  Talk to me about the professional development that you have done since your last observation.  What will I see different in your instruction as a result?  How has this impacted your relationships with your colleagues?  How has this impacted student achievement and what is your evidence?

2.  What standard/objective will I be seeing in your classroom?  How did you get here (talk to me about your unit and recent lesson plans)?  Student results/work that you want to share?

3.  How will you and I know that students are successful/that they mastered this objective?  What will their student work look like?

4.  What does the instructional activity look like?  Walk me step by step through what you will be doing and what the students will be doing?  How have your students' impacted your design?

Review the Answers.  I always review my notes with the teacher to make sure that I am accurate in my understanding.  This also gives the teacher a chance to correct any confusion.

1.  So,  X was your best PD.  As a result, I will see you doing A, B, and C.  The students will be doing D, E, and F.  And, you've been able to share with your colleagues by....

2.  On XDay, you will be teaching the students to....because your unit is on .... and you have been doing X, Y, Z.  Your current data/student work shows....

3.  When I come to observe, (describe lesson).

4.  So, by the end of the class period, students will be able to ...... and by the end of the unit, they will be able to ..... And, you will know they are successful because the work has A, B, and C.

I've had pretty good success with this protocol, but I am always looking for ways to improve.  What protocols are you using?

Using Lesson Plans to Diagnose Instruction

One of the most common tasks for school administrators is reviewing lesson plans.  But, the question is why are you reviewing lesson plans.  If your answer is accountability, then you most likely are not leveraging your lesson plans for the fantastic conversation starters that they are.  Lesson plans in conjunction with observation are a powerful tool that helps you understand how teachers think and to provide the appropriate coaching to teachers.

The question for each TEACHER's lesson plan review is "why you are reviewing it"?  Note, that I focus on the teacher and not the general lesson plan.  Why the teacher?  Because if you are looking to improve instruction through your feedback on the plan, you have to know the teacher's needs, not the lesson plan template requirements.

I look at lesson plans for four standard things:

1.  Does the teacher understand the standards and how they are meant to be implemented?
2.  Does the teacher organize instruction into clear objectives that are logical and that build on each other?
3.  Does the teacher plan instruction and/or activities that are aligned with objectives and/or standards?
4.  Does the teacher plan for formative assessment and differentiated response to student needs'?

If your school has a special instructional initiative, you can also ask a fifth question: Does the teacher implement X strategy in their activities with fidelity to our school vision of implementation?

To decide on what to review, I find it is usually helpful to observe the teacher and looked at some type of student results - this does not have to be standardized or state exam data.  For instance, my school district has Gradebook, I can go into any teacher's gradebook and look at how students did on a teacher's specific assignment or exam.  Gradebook provides a simple pie chart for every assignments/exam showing the distribution of student performance.

Diagnosis for Question 1:  If you walk into a teacher's classroom, and no one including you, knows what is going on, it's probably best to start at the standard.  Does the teacher demonstrate that they actually understand the standard or are they just copying and pasting from your state/district documents?  Other indicators are that the teacher is completely off from what the standard describes or they are doing incredibly low, rote exercises (e.g. having students trace pictures from the textbook, copying portions of the textbook, etc.).

Including more than two standards for the lesson plan is always a clue.  Standards usually have to be broken up in order to be taught; giving a laundry list usually suggests that the teacher doesn't know what they are teaching, what the students are learning, or what the students are practicing.  These classrooms frequently are just a non-stop activity fest, and students don't know their progress until after the test is given.

Diagnosis for Question 2:  Does this teacher have a standard of the day?  Start the class without referring to any previous learning?  It might be that they haven't really broken the standards down into viable instruction units AND put them in a logical order. Classes like these are often poorly paced and have plenty of student complaints - "We never learned this", "The teacher goes too fast", etc.

Teachers with this issue usually are at the extremes of the instruction spectrum - they're always "teaching" or the students are always "practicing" even though there was no instruction - because they're short on time.  Both the teachers and students are always complaining that no one is learning anything.  The teacher also has to frequently interrupt the class as they interact with students to share what they "forgot" to tell the class.  In addition, the teacher has to continuously extend their instruction or activity time because they are out of time.

Diagnosis for Question 3:  Are all of the teachers' classes EITHER instruction or activities?  Many teachers plan instruction but fail to provide activities OR they plan activities and fail to plan instruction.  The result is that they get mixed results on assignments/exams and student response.  These teachers are most likely to have wonderful instruction or fantastic activities that end up netting "no results".

These teachers can also get lost and forget to make sure that their classes are aligned to their stated objectives and standards.  You may see a great class from this teacher one day and an o.k. class another day.  Inconsistency is one of the biggest clues that this may be the needed starting point for this teacher.

Diagnosis for Question 4:  Do all students perform in the same range of performance with this teacher or are there large gaps between different groups?  You might have noticed that all of your top students complain about this teacher or that all of the special education teacher complain about this teacher.  The teacher may actually say to you themselves that they just can't get through to a certain type of kid.

If you persistently see that specific groups of students are excelling in a teacher's classroom, you know that the instruction is somewhat effective, but it's not responsive.  In these classrooms, you will see many of the students engaged, but some students not engaged or the same group of students continually asking for assistance.  The teacher probably has one great lesson that works for many students, but not all.

Introducing Myself

Hello!

I am new to blogging, but I wanted to start blogging about something near and dear to my heart - instructional leadership.  I frequently see and find articles about how to be a great leader or a great principal that have cursory references to instruction, but very little on the actual instructional practices of principals.

Accordingly, I wanted to create a blog, where I could share what I have learned and hear from other principals about the actual work of instructional leadership.  I have spent a lot of my time talking and working with other principals who have questions about specific instructional practices and developing logic for their instructional plan.

I hope that this blog assists those principals who are interested as well as anyone who is interested in transitioning to instructional leadership or principalship.

So, what is my background?  I was an English teacher in both Memphis City Schools and Chicago Public Schools, and I had pretty decent results.  In Memphis, my students demonstrated high levels of proficiency - my classes were 90% proficient during the 2002-2003 school year, and 100% proficient  on a criterion test during the 2003-2004 school year.  After working in Memphis for three years, I moved to Chicago and taught in Chicago Public Schools, where my classes proficiency rates increased 3-4% each year on a standardized test.

The challenges of moving students on two different types of tests taught me a lot about instruction, students, and the organization of schools for student success.  I shared what I learned with others as an area coach.  I worked with principals and their teams to understand data, school metrics, and most importantly - instruction.  I led a pilot of interim exam assessments with 7 schools - 5 of the 7 schools posted growth in the number of students who were proficient on the PSAE - one school moved 12% in one school year.

I then moved on to assistant principalship where I worked with a dynamic group of teachers on the instructional leadership team and in classrooms.  Together, we revamped the curriculum, focused on understanding student data, and improving instructional practice, and we had pretty good results.  My last year at the school, we were the 6th highest school in growth and posted some double digit gains in reading growth.  The school has continued to hold onto their academic momentum since I have left, and I am looking forward to seeing where the school will go.

I'm currently working as a principal at William J. Bogan High School, where, in my first year,  many of the most significant data changes were in climate and culture, but we expect that we will begin to see the fruits of our academic labors.  We had some small victories and are looking to continually seeing more.

Feel free to visit my school website boganhs.org or to follow us on Twitter @BoganBengal79.

Why Professional Development? A Chance to Think

When I talk to other principals and district personnel, I frequently hear the same plans for professional development.  We are going to show teachers Strategy X.  We are going to take teachers through Y Planning Process.  We are going to review data and plan.

My question is always, "why are you doing that professional development?".  The most frequent answer that I hear is that we want to improve instruction.  I understand that we all want to improve instruction, but the approaches to professional development that we take tell teachers a lot about what we think of them and what we think of teaching.

I frequently hear the frustration expressed that students are not widgets.  Well, teachers are not widgets either.  Even though all of us are very excited by seeing high level implementation of certain classroom strategies or protocols or inspired by a research review that says that a school focused on just these strategies and demonstrated improvement, I think we often miss an important component - the teacher's thought process.

Great teachers do not just imitate or replicate strategies or lesson plans; they have a clear, deep articulation about WHY they are doing what they are doing.  You can learn how to fly a plane, but if you hit a storm or the plane breaks down, what's going to save the plane is your THINKING, not a rote procedure.  When the "bullet proof" strategy falls flat in the classroom, can the teacher spring into action or does he or she look like a deer in headlights?

If professional development does not help teachers develop their thinking around instruction or clarify their rationales for taking certain actions, it most likely is not bearing the desired fruit.  I love to see teachers come out of PD and say to me, "I need some time to get my head around this", or "I'm really going to have to think about this.  It's not what I usually do", or, even better, "When we were talking about/doing, I thought about my classroom and...".  Even better is when teachers can finally say after wrestling with something for 6 months, "I get it", AND you see it play out in their classroom with a twist.

I was attracted to teaching because of the complex problem solving - not the opportunity to follow a script. I believe most teachers are that way.  Professional development is a rote activity unless it helps teachers develop their practice AND their thinking.  Problem solving brings about great things - inquiry, collaboration, paradigm shifts, and innovation.  Great PD shouldn't just be judged on the Likert scale; it should be judged on Bloom's Taxonomy.

All Teachers Can Be Master Teachers (If they Choose To and Have The Right Support)

I have never met a teacher who wanted to be mediocre, but I have met teachers who have given up, and I have met teachers who are so confused that they don't know what to do.  Teachers, who are not that strong at their craft, rely on their principals.  This can be a good thing or a bad thing.

The good thing for principals is that most teachers are more than willing to give you a chance, when you walk into the building.  They may do things that drive you crazy, but, overall, they want your help.  The bad thing is that, if the teacher needs too much individual attention, the principal can come to the conclusion that what they have on their hands is a "bad" teacher rather than one who needs a lot of support.

That's why it's important, as a building leader to create a balance of support for your teachers - they need both administrative support as well as teacher support because the fact is that you are not going to be able to do it all.

Find out the teachers' stories.  Ask and listen - teachers will tell you the whole life story of a building.  The most revealing will be the stories of teachers who have never taught anywhere but at your school.

If you are taking over a building where professional development or teaching was a low priority, you're bound to hear some horror stories: teachers who have received evaluations without ever having been observed, teachers who have attended inquisitions, or who have been targeted by other cliques' of teachers.   But, you may also hear some really encouraging, inspiring stories - ones about teachers who have stayed to save their alma mater, teachers who have supported each other and stood up for students, and, the amazing teachers, who despite their circumstances, are spectacular and have amazing classes.

These stories will tell you the emotional state of the building, which is key because hurt and angry people take a little more to reach than happy, sunshiney people.

Talk to the students about instruction.  Ask general questions, "are you learning a lot today?", "Who is your favorite teacher?", "Who do I have to see in this building?", etc.

See the teachers teach.  When I first walk into a building, I like to see teachers in groups.  I go and observe whole departments or whole grade levels on a day.  Why?  So, as the leader, I can see the big picture of instruction.  Teaching is a team sport.  Where does the school team excel?  Where do they need work?  What are the experiences of the students throughout the day?  If we going to call on teachers to support other teachers, we have to understand who we are calling and what we are calling them for.

Talk to the leaders.  Share the school data and have them explain the outcomes.  If the leaders give you a blank stare, you know where to start.  If the leaders give you a list of problems, you know where to start.  If the leaders point out what has worked and what has not worked, you know what to support and where to start looking for fixes.

Share your findings and start the negotiations.  After doing all of the observing and talking, people are going to be nervous.  They want to know if they said too much or if they missed something.  Let them know what your observations of the netted.  Their responses will let you know if you're on the right track and give you common ground to start from.