School Reform

Whose Voice Will You Hear   When Entertaining the Notion Of

School Reform?

Everyone has an opinion. Everyone wants to be heard. Everyone believes that they have some sort of stake in the education of youth in each perspective community. The questions are: Whose Voice Will You Hear? Who Gets To Sound the Alarm? Who Carries the Most Influence? Who holds the truth?

About ten weeks ago, I was introduced to a wonderful book entitled Reframing Organizations. I took from it many valuable points. A couple of which I'd like to share with you. We know that as leaders, our charge is to move an organization from the former to a future bigger, better, and more successful state. In order to do that, it is very important for district and campus leaders to understand that people will undoubtedly bring their own preconceived theories and images to work with them daily. These preconceived theories and images will determine what they see, what they will do, and how they will judge what is accomplished (Bolman & Deal, 2008). These ideas are then transmitted onto the sponge- (the student), who will internalize what is shared however it fits into their own theories and images. 

So, which stakeholders get to provide input on reformation efforts? It is my humble belief that all of them do. Stakeholders should include the teachers, students, parents, district cadre, community members, and other politicians at all levels.  The extent of how much input is honestly taken into consideration will be contingent upon whether or not those persons are getting the right picture. Many stakeholders will come to the table with a good picture; but not necessarily the right one because they are tuned in to the wrong channel (Bolman et al, 2008).  To truly have a voice, people must have some sense of why reform is needed in the first place. They also need to know what the outcome should look like BEFORE they actually see it. The model for backwards design works in all aspects of education. It should not be confined to the classroom setting only.

Stakeholders with power and influence tend to shift their weight around. Without a clear view of the real goal(s) set forth in the reform efforts, they could negatively alter the true destiny of the organization at hand. It is mostly caused by a fear of uncertainty. School leaders must ensure that they possess imagination and courage to modify the opinions of those with the loudest voice without demeaning them.

In the David School, the principal, teachers, and students have the loudest voice. Parents are invited to take part in decision making especially when students are about to react off  of emotion. Community members and businesses have close ties with the school as well. They sponsor many of the students as they pursue their educational endeavors either by diploma or GED. These groups often hire David School students or provide scholarship opportunities as a means of helping the students and their families see a broader picture. The David School personifies the concept of "it takes a whole village to raise a child."

Gender Equity

Do you think the problem of gender bias has been overblown?  Is there any merit to the argument that boys lose out as much as girls do, just in different ways, in schools today?  How do you want to approach the issue of gender in your own schools and districts?  How is the issue of gender bias (or lack thereof) illustrated at the David School (from the Country Boys video)?

I would venture to examine the belief system that teachers carry with them as they set out educate our students of today. In order to critically determine whether or not there is a problem with gender bias in our classrooms, we have to first self-reflect on our actual roles as educators. What do we come to the table with in terms of expectations? Educators will not be able to rise above whatever the media hype throws our way until we are able to answer the hard questions in the first place.

Every community in the United States takes on a different stance on education. As we have learned before, students are afforded as many opportunities as the economy and immediate community needs and/or can render. The study of gender bias takes on a different meaning depending on where it is being studied. When the community is conscious about it, it tends to put mechanism together to combat it. If the community chooses to keep quiet about it, then it will simply turn a blind eye.

Let’s go back to the idea of self-reflection. When teachers can identify why they chose to go into the field of education, they are more likely to discern the needs of all students on a more consistent basis- both male and female; black or white; brown or tan; short or tall….. They can do this because they have a mindset to make a difference for each and every student that they serve. Teachers who have no fear of the cultural background that each of their students bring are better equipped to embrace the ideas of differences; thus minimizing the chances for gender biases- and any other biases to form. Teachers have to expect that all of their students can achieve--- ALL of them; no matter what the content area is. Finally, teachers who actually believe that they are making a difference in the lives of their students are less likely to form biases in the classroom. When one is teaching in an environment that advocates this type of thought processes, then they may believe that the topic of gender bias is overblown. Those who are not afforded the luxury of being in an upbeat and positive teaching environment may think that we are not doing enough to combat the apparent bias to gender.

In the classroom, out on the court, on the track field, on the stage, in the band, and on the debate team, are boys losing out? Do girls get an upper hand now on academics since the fight for equality has been on the minds of leaders? Have girls mastered academics to the same caliber has our young men used to? Is there a despairing gap? How do you know?  Well, the State of Texas has put an indicator system into place to measure subgroup performance. While it is phasing out as we speak, TAKS or the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills sought to define how each subgroup performed on standardized testing. Surprisingly enough, the State scores show that male and female students perform equally or very near the same in the core academic areas. This approach should continue to be examined each year as scores are reported to each district in the State. Now that we are crossing over to a new standard of testing- it is more likely that differences in gender performances may become evident. Districts

should begin now to provide training on bridging gaps.

The documentary that examines the lives of two “Country Boys” could depict gender bias, if that is what one is looking for. Since the video is more about struggling to make good choices in hopes of a better life, I think it is a stretch to say it shows gender bias. Everyone in the lives of these two young men wants to see them succeed. If the documentary was about two female students- I suppose you could say that it was biased against the male students in the David School.

A Different Kind of Leader

How would the David School be different if Rita was principal?

We know that Rita has taken on a social justice perspective... just as the staff members at the David School have. The exposure to best  practices for educating low-socio economic students seem to be vastly different amongst the staff of the David School and Rita at the Wilson School. There is a need for change in both schools. The approach will be different based on the fact that at the David School, staff members want a better change to occur; but the school cannot financially afford to mandate the changes. At the Wilson School, most staff members don't want to see their way of providing enrichment activities changed.  Rita knows that she is up against a concrete wall at the Wilson School.

Now, if she took over the David School, Rita would more than likely not have to deal with resistance to change. She would; however, have to challenge her teachers to move beyond the limitations that their students endure on a daily basis outside of the wall of school.

One idea that Todd Whitaker, author of What Great Principals Do Differently, suggests that Rita should help her teachers understand that they are the common variable linking theirr students to success or failure. Rita cannot assume that teachers know what and how to teach certain concepts. She needs to take on the role of an executive instructional leader on her campus. She will need to evaluate the talents and competence of her teachers. Rita cannot be afraid of rearranging teachers according to their strengths and talents. If the change does not work for multiple years, Rita may need to look at encouraging them to find different employment. As Rita continues to promote change for the benefit of her students, she will help her teachers disaggregate assessment data, and use the data to make future decisions about instruction. Teachers will be encouraged to move beyond the circumstances of the students and instruct them in spite of: Empathy vs. Sympathy. It is ok to care, but teachers should not become overwhelmed with the lives of students outside of the classroom. This may cause negativity to creep in. Too much negativity can birth ineffective teachers.

Rita is a "doing" principal. She is a purposeful thinker. Her decisions her purposeful. Her actions are purposeful as well. With Rita as the chief on David School's ship, the school will dramatically move forward with great innovation and success.

The Exploitation and Social Exclusion of Individuals

My instructor posed the following question:

The exploitation and social exclusion of individuals based on race, gender, ethnicity, social class, sexual orientation, etc. is a phenomenon that prevailed in Jefferson’s time and is still apparent today.  Discuss how this notion of exclusion is evident in our contemporary system of education.  In your view, how can educators best address this phenomenon?

I will post my thoughts on it... Tell me what you think?

Let's imagine that Jefferson was a deeply devout student of Aristotle and not someone that simply read his works. Let's also imagine that no one knew any other way of life than what was established in Aristotle's time which was then continued or reflected in Jefferson's time. Why then are the thought process incorrect? Why would anyone believe that individuals were actually being excluded? If the thought ever came to mind, WHO was being excluded? It was natural for women, children, slaves, and non-citizens not to have a voice. Was the notion accepted? Who brought up the point that things should be different?

The background is highly important. The thought processes cannot change if no one thought that anything was wrong in the first place.

Case in point, I was raised by my great-grandfather. He was 55 years old when he took me in early in the 70's. By that time, he himself endured massive social exclusion based primarily on ethnicity and social class. He still taught me that it was never ok to hate or want to get revenge based on what was done to another. Instead, he expected me to UNDERSTAND the training that each person actually received from their parents, teachers, and society itself. If they knew no better, they could never do any better. They conformed to what was the status quo- or what was expected, or taught socially. I am so totally amazed, because the man who taught me this only had a 3rd grade education. He never was taught Aristotle, yet understood that society itself shaped the education, schooling, and training of all human beings.

How is this evident today? Let's look as something simple. In the state of Texas, what is the make-up of its demographics? How does the ethnicity of the state mirror those that govern it? Is it equal?

What about those who are making legislative decisions regarding education? How many educators are actually involved? Of those that are, what are the disparities regarding race, ethnicity, social class, sexual orientation, etc? Is there really an equal distribution?

Bringing that thought pattern down to an individual classroom- how can teachers address this? First of all, they must understand it. If you ask the modern teacher if they believed there were still levels of social exclusion, they would most likely say no. Why? I would venture to believe that they are answering based on their own individual believe system and not the overarching ideal of the community, district, state, or country. They see things in their own individual viewpoints and rarely take on the more global aspects of teaching. In order for them to address this issue, they have to broaden their thinking. Then they will be able to challenge the thinking of their students.