Peer Assistance and Review Nitty Gritty

"Iowa should be a system of schools, not isolated islands of curriculum."

I'm not certain why that statement resonates with me, but as I think of the #iaedfuture blueprint, I'm absolutely certain that we need to take a look at this plan and redesign, not just K-12, but K-AEA.   Here's why.

Peer Assistance/Review

First of all, full disclosure:  I love the idea of 4 levels of teaching in the Blueprint, and I am an ISEA member.  It's spot-on at addressing the concerns about attracting quality teachers into the profession, and it addressed the issues of unjustified tenure and automatic step-lane matrix.  

Still, that nagging question remained:  How could we make this happen in Iowa, and do it right?  There is no doubt about it...it will cost money to remove some of our current teachers from the classroom, and help shape them into coaches or mentors.  Perhaps we need an analogous system for administrators that is more structured than current practice.

All that I read about peer review uses districts in Ohio and California that are much larger than the average district in Iowa. These programs have district sizes of 13000 to 35000 students.   Iowa districts are much smaller than government examples of peer review and assistance, too.

A look at the Condition of Education# report and the DE shows some numbers*:

• smallest Iowa districts....around 100 students*
• largest Iowa district...30000 students*
• 40% of the districts in Iowa have less than 600 kids#
• smallest AEA...9800 students#
• largest AEA...132000 students#
• including public/nonpublic students:  508000 students#
• # of teachers in Iowa...37000 #
• 15-20% of Iowa workforce...7400 teachers (the number indicated by the BP to be mentor or coach teachers)
• teacher:student ratio....small district  (one teacher for 10 kids)#
• teacher:student ratio...district of 7500+ (one teacher for 15 kids)#
• total # principals...1164 --240 in the largest 10 districts, 9 in the smallest 10 districts
• total # superintendent...314--10 in the largest 10 districts, 5 full-time in the smallest 10 districts

OBSERVATIONS

There is a disparity of resources between large and small.   No surprise there.

1. National programs have larger districts to achieve a critical mass.   To do this, we need larger structures, like the AEAs, to organize and train our coaches and mentors. This is critical and builds Iowa as a system of schools!
2. We may have to pull in the experiences of teachers who taught in 1988 onward to remember Phase III (an earlier Branstad initiative) and the nepotism that sometimes resulted.  In some Districts, teachers were paid to attend ball games and 'surveys' were used to determine 'teacher quality'   Favoritism happened, and I'm afraid to go back.
3. If we have a school that is small (let's say 10-13 teachers), we have 2 or 3 mentors/coaches in a district; comparably, a district that is large, such as Des Moines, (around 2000 teachers), will have 400 masters/coaches in its District.   Immediately, I can the advantages of a large district that can group its learning teams by subject area and grade level;  I want that flexibility for ALL kids in Iowa, not just large districts.

WHAT DO I WANT FOR MY DISTRICT?

I want to be able to get peer coaching that maximizes:

1. Good pedagogy.  So many teachers have the right disposition for being teachers, love kids, but need additional formation in best-practices. An AEA-centered structure help facilitates that.  NOTE:  I am not dissing teacher preparation programs; I just believe in constant improvement.
2. Extensive content knowledge.   In a school that has at most 3 masters/coaches, I cannot imagine that we will have all levels or all content areas represented.   Sometimes, that confidence in content knowledge needs a partner with which to bounce ideas.  And I do believe a masters in your content area is worthwhile for this purpose.
3. Low burnout for those on the upper two tiers.   Being a mentor/coach/leader in a district can make you a lightning rod for criticism if there is not a support system.   Moving the model to the AEA gives you a larger pool of expertise, fidelity of training, and others with whom I can communicate.

HOW DO I ANSWER THE CRITICISMS?

#1   Different buildings have different DNA.   This is true.   But some buildings are having success and others are not.   An AEA team approach would allow us to group in multiple ways, and send coaches with different strengths to develop the individual district

#2  Are we giving up local control?  Well, in a sense we are.   We moved to common core, we moved to CTE state proficiencies, we have the Iowa Core outcomes as models for professional development, community interactions, and we are accountable as a state.   But ultimately, don't we want what is best for OUR kids, OUR communities?   Are we so insular that we can't look to the advice of others, or are we willing to shape our building outlook and ideas by using some of the most creative minds out there?

#3  What will all the administrators do with their 'spare time'?   We know that administrators have different skill sets necessary for the jobs they do.  That being said, I imagine that there are some administrators out there that would love to move back to being a coach. 

PROPER RATIOS

To determine how this will look, I decided to look at California, where peer assistance is being implemented.   My question was simple--should administrators be doing this already, or do we need those top two tiers?   Here's a look at the numbers:

• As a whole, Iowa has 37000 teachers, and 508K students.   That's a ratio of 1:14.    
• We have 1164 principals who administrator the same 508K students, for a ratio of 1:346 (California =1:700).  
• Schools in Iowa have a ratio of about 1:1600 for a superintentdent/student ratio (California =1:2400) 

While I suppose we could have principals coaching in addition to their current duties, that will not give us the added diversity of teachers in an AEA consortium.  And it does not appear that it would free up enough teachers to make it worthwhile. It would probably be more productive to decide if we have the 'right' ratio of administrators to students and how we compare with other states on that factor.

CONCLUSION

If we're going to adopt peer review and assistance, let's do it right.   Let's get ALL teachers the help they need, not just teachers in large Districts.   Let's get fidelity in the training process, so best-practices are self-evident.   Let's maximize the value of our AEAs by providing a community of districts, rather than silos of excellence.

Intention into Practice: Kids should take the Compass, not the ACT

Iowa has never lacked for good ideas.   And when Jason Glass floated the idea of everyone taking the ACT so we had a consistent measure that looked at content across the state in addition to the Iowa Test, I was intrigued.  But as I looked, and talked with colleagues, I was a bit stymied, because the ACT is designed to be a top-end measuring device.  And frankly, I just think a test without a value to the kids is a recipe for apathy.  I'm not a fan of exit exams, but I am a supporter of tests that can provide a stepping stone to preparation for the next step in kids' lives.

Here are the basics of the ACT:

• Cost:   the ACT costs $34/kid for the basic, and $49.50 for the segment that includes writing. 
• Time frame:   We'll need to offer this one day a year for kids in IA.   Can't be on a Saturday, because of religious reasons.  ACT is not kind on the idea of makeups.
• High-stakes:   This is a buy-in issue.    Kids headed to college are perhaps willing to try on the ACT , but unless we make this a graduation exit requirement (which I don't support), kids headed to community college, the workforce, or the military may just blow things off.

The alternative:

I think that the best alternative is the ACT Compass test, which is slightly less expensive ($25/kid), but still tests readiness.  The time frame is flexible, because it is an online test, and could be offered over a several day band to account for absences.   Many kids are required to take this test already to take Senior Year Plus or Concurrent Classes for Iowa Community Colleges.  This means that they naturally care about their performance.  We could require the test in the fall of the Junior year.   Then, kids who want to take the ACT have a natural practice test, and there is a natural comparison of success (similar to the PLAN test required of many sophomores across the state). Even better, if kids are struggling, they can take the Compass twice in one year.   For college bound kids, we could correlate PLAN to COMPASS to ACT and see a growth matrix.

Just thinking aloud here.    Am I missing something?

Blended Learning Reflections

Well, I can firmly say that the adventure is established with two schools and two curriculum areas.  I've been teaching at West Delaware during the day (physical/earth science, physics, and astronomy) and teaching through blended learning at Oelwein, with an evening class once per week for the kids (chemistry).  I'm using blended, project-based learning for both, running a series of blogs for WD and a Moodle for Oelwein.

What have I learned thus far, 4 weeks in?

• Being FLEXIBLE is the number one thing to consider.  In the Oelwein class, I've had to adjust class times because of kid's schedules.  Next week, for example, I need to meet three nights instead of two.  Kids can come when their schedule permits, and with play practice, volleyball, football, cross country, and church night to consider, that means advance planning for me.  I'm using Skype.  I've set office hours at home where kids can call me.   I'm meeting at Mickey Ds for a study session on a Sunday night because that's when the kids have time.
• Kids create their own solutions when given a chance. We've always had kids who are sick and need makeup, but now I've replaced the WD paradigm by setting group norms for each table, exchanging contact info, and setting a communication standard.  If kids are gone, the group leaders communicate with them and tell them what they are doing.  Because we are in teams, I can pull kids out during the class day.  We've even had a procedure developed by the groups for slackers (they get warned, then they have a group conference with me, and then the slacker gets a contract, and if it continues, the slacker becomes a group of one)!
• The traditional day seat time model is obsolete.  The kids I have in the West Delaware classes are wonderful, but much of the time, I am just their facilitator.   I give them a series of tasks, and a week to complete them.  They are divided into teams and work things through.  Really, my role as their teacher is to communicate with them as needed (I rotate through each of the groups several times each period) and then GET OUT OF THE WAY.   They let me know if they need something.   They let me understand their needs.   I could just as easily manage most of their needs via txt, phone, or online communication.   I'm finding that I need to be a resource for them, and I need a 15 minute per day class meeting to check progress, and introduce new concerns.   The rest of the time I am the person who helps with individual differentiation.    It's almost as if I am back at Scout Camp and people are coming to me to learn a specific knot-tying, woodcraft, or nature skill during exploration time.
• Reflection by students is just as important as the work that we do.   It's only when we reflect that we realize what we do, and don't know.   It's my goal to try to make this metacognition the tool kids use to check for their own understanding.   They need me when they don't get it, and if they do, I am just the cheering person on the side who is shifting their ideas.
• My paradigm shift, personally, is in the way that I am planning.  No longer am I trying to lockstep kids through a time frame.   NOW, I am trying to cover important concepts in a way that excites and engages what they know and have available to them. It's as if I'm the CEO and the product is getting ready to roll.   I have to trust my students (employees) to do their stuff. 
• STEM:  We're making kid-friendly products in chemistry and engineering edible race cars.   We're designing insulation structures to keep a house cool.  We're looking at thermal mass.   My goal is to START with the relevance and rigor, and move backwards.   
• The technology is a tool to help make Productivity and Chaos different.   Productivity may be messy, but there is an organizational structure.   These kids are productive.  They are contacting me by email, and attaching assignments if the Moodle fails.   They send me a tweet or a text if they have a concern.   I'm just as likely to get a picture message or a URL as a paper product.  If an assignment will be late, they contact me. 
• The assessments flow naturally.   My quizzes are now almost daily, 1 or 2 questions. I had a student tell me of a grueling 8 page unit test in another class, and I find myself wondering what that proved. My projects are complex, and if I offer a test, it's 25 questions (a max of 3 pages) and online.  I'm offering an online test on three different dates to meet kid needs.   It's about the learning.  Rinse.  Repeat.   It's about the learning, not about the points!   Because we're not lockstep, I can take the time to ask for a resubmit.  My job is to teach the content, and to support the styles the kids are working on.

 Is it worth it?   I think so.  This is scary, exciting, and I still have kinks to work out.   I'll talk about those next time.   But so far, I'm empowered, the kids are excited, and this grand new adventure is like a journey into the real world for me and for my students.  This has the potential to TRANSFORM small schools, and offer FLEXIBLE options for bigger buildings.   How exciting is that?

Tell your students YOU MATTER

Eating your way to understanding
lunar phases task, sent to me as a
MMS from a cell phone . Relevant,
fun, and important as a type of
scientific model.

I've thought about the phrase 'YOU MATTER' in the past two weeks with my family, my 9-12 students, and my friends after watching @AngelaMaiers TEDx talk.  


As I start the new year, I am cognizant of the fact that it's my job to help kids uncover knowledge, address misconceptions, reflect on their understandings and find joy in the study of science. 


I need to make certain that I listen to my colleagues and my PLN and my personal mentors as they share their knowledge; I need to share my ideas with them so we can learn from one another.  It's a rich stream of ideas for me and the climate I cultivate for my high school classroom.  


Here's what works for me.

• Be accessible  Find a way to connect with kids in addition to the classroom, whether it's your Skype address, a Twitter account, a number that they can text or call through (try using Wiggio or Gmail as a message portal if you want to track the messages for your own safety and peace-of-mind), and an email address. This isn't new....we all had teachers that had phone numbers in our local telephone book who would talk if we called for help on homework...remember? I talk to kids by working through the hallways during passing time, and find out what is important to them.  I compliment them on their achievements.  I connect to the kids and I'm available through communication avenues to help them with issues of importance outside of the school day.  This is about Relationship, and It Matters.
• Be relevant  If I can't tell a kid WHY we are doing something, and why it matters, perhaps it means that I should reconsider the idea, or figure out how to make it matter.  I've jettisoned most of my textbooks in favor of digital media, and my teaching has become focused on project-based learning.  We build things, we take the time to connect current events (like the earthquake of the last week), and we adjust our projects as needed.  This is about Knowledge, and the ideas of My Kids Matter.
• Use the tools  Different learning styles mean kids need different learning options, and they need to know their strengths.  We figure that out at the beginning of the year, then I divide the class into teams, complete with team expectations and tasks, ask them to let me know if something isn't working, and I try to provide more than one pathway to get there.  I go around and visit each team, checking to see if they are having troubles, just like a supervisor at a business.  Content reading, model building, web walks are all happening at different rates, and we have 'company meetings' at the beginning and end of each class period. This past week, some kids made historical astronomy timelines using online software, some made Power Points, and others took paper and pencil and made their timelines, and then sent a MMS text or a webcam photo shot to my email address.  There's more than one way to do this needs to become a rallying cry for kids and teachers.  It's easy for the kids, but for the teachers, it is saying that the Needs of the Kids Matter.
• RESPECT your students Seriously. Every year since I have started teaching, I seen the phrase,  "Respect isn't given.  It must be earned." in someone's classroom, or on a set of class rules or expectations.  How sad is that?   You respect your boss, at least a bit, from the moment you are hired.  You respect people like the President even if you are of another party.   Why shouldn't we start out respecting kids, and treat them like we do personal relationships? I listen to them, discuss with them when there is a problem, and  Approaching it from the other way around is a disaster, leading to a boot camp mentality.   We need kids to know that Respect for Others Matters, and that starts with ME and the classroom climate we create.
• Believe In the Content You Teach I want my kids to do great things, and that means they need STEM skills. They need to be scientifically literate. They need Higher-Order Thinking Skills.  I've stopped making them memorize things that they can look up on Google in 3 seconds (no more quizzes strictly on vocab) Instead, we use the information we gather, including vocabulary and current news events, in context. We are able to contrast, create, share, and strategically plan as a way to problem-solve. For example, the first project in my introductory science class is to prepare a housing model and a specific disaster plan for surviving an Iowa catastrophe.  We've been looking at models of the New Madrid fault, plate tectonics, weather disasters, and tying them all together around the big ideas of convection, conduction, and radiation. They're doing great things, because Science Content Matters!

What are you doing to make sure you are having a year that tells others #youmatter?   I'd love to hear from you.

Why 'Regaining the Luster' really needs some focus

I'm sure many of us read the DM Register article about the upcoming education town halls and summit.  The DE, headed by the leadership of Jason Glass, has done a fabulous job of organizing and promoting the event to stakeholders.

But yesterday's article left me cold, even angry. It's not that I am resistant to change, as I try to grow and change each day of my life, and especially in my teaching career. But it appeared that the same tired solutions that were used back in Terry Branstad's first term (and didn't fix the problems) were being posited yet again.  And those solutions simply are not enough.  We must consider the following as we approach the summit.

NAEP. Is the NAEP framework correlated to the Iowa Core, or the Common Core?  If that correlation is not established, we have no indication for its validity in Iowa. We have no idea if the test's achievement level represents what children can know and do as a result of their learning.  We don't know if what is tested is important to us as Iowans.  Additionally, there is no penalty for kids not trying on this, or other standardized tests.  We are shooting in the dark when we check achievement levels on this test.  Secondly, does a NAEP score actually translate to a job in an age of networking and college names?  I'm not certain that it does anything besides giving a government entity bragging rights.   Either communicate the urgency to Iowa citizens, or let it go.

National Board Certification. I've never been a fan of NBPTS certification, but I did try the process more than a dozen years ago because of the money involved as a carrot by Gov. Branstad (full disclosure, here).  I missed the target, and set out to find out why.  At that time, the board did not disclose who scored the test, although their website has been updated to say 'fully certified teachers.'   That still doesn't tell me much.  And a look at their board shows me very little in the way of people who understand research on what works best for teachers and students in regards to learning.  It does placate political and union interests, though, with a wide variety of stakeholders being represented.  We have no idea if the prompts are correlated to the content we teach in Iowa, either.

But why do this, when we have already put into place the Charlotte Danielson model for Iowa teacher evaluation?  Why don't we modify this and add one detailed reflection of teacher practice, which is the model that NBPTS uses for 4 of their 10 assessment pieces?  Wouldn't a state model, administered and evaluated by AEA personnel who are experts in their content fields, as well as versed in best-practices, be a cheaper alternative.  It wouldn't require a $25,000 carrot per teacher, and would allow that funding to be used to support AEA work.  I just don't think I need teachers in Texas, the home of the processing center, to evaluate me and tell me how to teach Iowa children.  And I don't think that just because a teacher can write well on the NBPTS means that he or she is a leader at their skill.

Master's Degrees.  And what about master's degrees?   I've read and seen blogs and tweets all spring that lead me to think that the only good degree is one that leads to administration certification.  We shouldn't, the thinking goes, be paying for those silly classroom teachers who expand their learning via a master's degree in their subject area.  The fundamental issue here is money.  Branstad is quoted in the DM Register as saying that we need to pay teachers who are starting their careers more money.   I do agree that our current model of funding is not sustainable, as each year we pay more state dollars for a declining student population.  Salary scales need to be addressed, but not by recklessly invalidating the hard work of those who have devoted themselves to advanced learning.  Our first step is to replace tenure with a system of evaluations that don't take place once every three years.

Issues and Innovations.  My hope for the summit  is that we address the needs of today's student that we can control, including technology integration, data-driven assessment and reteaching, the use of social media, and innovations like project-based learning and blended learning.  We have excellent teachers across the state doing great things in their classroom, and we should be capturing that, and using those teachers as models, perhaps on a state you tube channel or digital professional development network.  We should be in deep conversations with the institutions who are forming our pre-service teachers, as their efforts are critical to transformation.  I hope that the summit is focusing on the teachers and the higher learning stakeholders.

Creativity and 21st Century Readiness.   How often are we testing our kids for this skill, which has set the US apart for years, and has led other countries to focus on our teaching structures?  And what internationally validated test experience compares US innovation to other countries?  Isn't this what we are trying to do when we look at the research?  As we study books like "The Global Achievement Gap," isn't that the direction we are to be heading?  How do we measure that?  I'd like the summit to point me in the right direction


What We Can't Control.  This is the underlying elephant in the room.  It's the reason that we all get frustrated.

• First, we cannot guarantee that kids always do their best, either in the classroom or on assessments, which is why we have structures like #IDM and #RTI.  But if we can't motivate a kid with a local assessment, this is doubly true for standardized assessments that are not directly linked to a classroom grade.  And so the ultimate validity of our student performance is possibly whether or not they can get a job after they graduate.  A look at the May statistics shows that Iowa is doing ok, and that jobs are available.  What do we want for our kids?  Exit exams?  Rubrics?  Multiple Measures? 21st century readiness evaluations? E-portfolios? The summit should focus in, with laser precision, on this idea.
• Similarly, we cannot control teachers who will not change. We need a fundamental restructuring of the evaluation and tenure process before this will be possible.  Until then, we can have PLCs and enact systemic, teacher-led professional development and tech integration,  but these innovations fall flat if we have administrators hamstrung by tenure, and infrequent evaluations..  This is perhaps the critical issue where stakeholders need to come to consensus at the summit.

We cannot afford to be stymied by old solutions to new problems at the upcoming education summit.  But we need to reach both the attendees and those who are watching from afar as we plot our course for the next 10 to 15 years in Iowa.  Our students are depending upon it.

Day 4: ISU Mesonet

Boy, I'm sure glad I didn't promise 30 sequential days, as I have been sick.  I'm better now after a round of antibiotics!

I love this site.   Teachers of earth science can see the progression of weather in real-time across the state by looking at the webcams from Sioux Falls, KCCI, KCRG, and the Iowa DOT.  Compare with the results of the current radar from the national weather service, or let kids see and critique the 'cool lapses' videos cloud types, precipitation types, and landscape changes across the state.   After all, a picture is worth a thousand words, especially in the world of earth science.

What would you  use this site for in terms of classroom resources?

Toondoo.com

This is another tool that my students really like, and it's great for telling stories.  If the kids are artists, they can make transparent gifs of their work and put it into the cartoon shot.  There are educational versions that can load to your school, as well as the freeware version that I use.

Toondoo is definitely worth a look for people in all content area.

Vocaroo

Is anyone out there using Vocaroo for student oral work?  I find that many of my students do better when they have an option to respond to essay questions orally.  Vocaroo provides an easy way to do this, as they don't even have to sign in.   They simple hit record, and then when they are done, there's a button at the bottom that allows them to download the .wav file so I can listen to it.

Pretty easy to use!

Day 1: Slide Rocket

Sliderocket is a nifty online presentation software that has a Lite, or freeware version.  The student who showed me this program really, really liked it, because it allowed him the opportunity to connect with the freeware library on Flickr, and gave him an enormous number of images to choose from to augment the presentation.   The product ran on any computer, included his own pictures, and allowed the final object to be embedded into a blog.  Pretty cool.

Have you used SlideRocket with your kids?  If so, what have been your results?

Summer Challenge: 30 Days of Web 2.0 tools

My goal for June is to look at some of the great Web 2.0 tools that are out there and being used by my students.   I would love your feedback or suggestions about tools to consider.

Web 2.0 tools are popping up on a regular basis, so these are simply some of them that people have suggested to me in the last months and that I hope can be of interest to participants in #iacopi.

So, here we go!  Welcome to a summer of learning.

Summer Challenge: 30 Days of Web 2.0 tools

My goal for June is to look at some of the great Web 2.0 tools that are out there and being used by my students.   I would love your feedback or suggestions about tools to consider.

Web 2.0 tools are popping up on a regular basis, so these are simply some of them that people have suggested to me in the last months and that I hope can be of interest to participants in #iacopi.

So, here we go!  Welcome to a summer of learning.

Astronomy pictures

Why Wiggio?

A friend of my asked me,  "Why Wiggio?"  Good question.  Wiggio is an organizing software that is password protected..  It does many of the things Google Docs does, like storing files.  But it also includes a powerful communication suite, including conference calls, virtual meetings, and chatrooms.   When a student signs up for Wiggio, we give him/her a username and password for our group.  They enter their password and we have a vehicle for group emails.  They enter their cell phone, and notifications can be sent to them via cell phones.  I do not work for Wiggio.   This is an un-endorsed post.

We chose Wiggio over some other forum boards because it was a common theme in our District.   We had 4 teachers using it, so we expanded to 38 in an hour's time.   We have teachers using it to archive documents, but it's biggest advantage over Google Docs is the SMS feature and the Voice Mail

Wiggio features:

• forum board protected from spammers
• a drop box for files and (coming soon!) individual drop boxes for all students
• a calendar with an automatic notifier feature
• a polling feature
• a to-do list for the class
• a hyperlink feature
• security for your students
• security for your staff if they have a document library they want to share
• it's FREE

Downsides:

• you can't record the webinars (well, you can, but you need to use Jing as your recording add-on)
• there's no testing software, so it's not an all-in-one platform
• I still embed my videos to YouTube.

Real World Uses for Wiggio

• video conversations with sick students
• posting makeup assignments
• posting professional development documents
• keeping a calendar with an automatic notification system for students
• the ability to SMS students without sharing your Twitter life with students
• the ability to keep conversations with students archived

• managing sports schedules and notifications
• keeping track of a detasseling service  
• sending out school late starts, cancellations, and notices of emergency information
• SMS to a study group

Why not give it a try?  I've set up a Wiggio sandbox so you can connect with a colleague and try it out.

PLC learning group reflection for Mary

You asked, my friend.   I feel good about PLCs this year, and that's a new thing. Last year, I felt that we had failed at PLCs in the high school.  You had moved on to a new position, and we approached PLCs the way we had previous learning teams, where we divided into self-chosen groups.  Each group picked a topic, discussed it monthly, and tried to implement it using data-driven methods.   It was an 'islands of excellence' approach, and it was no better than the one-shot PDs we tried, because it was not systemic.   Since we run our own PD at the high school, we just did it, and shared with the new curriculum director after the fact.  I'm not saying the PD was a waste, but I am saying that effective PD for the 21st century needs to be systemic, not department-based.  So I accept the fact that the mistake was primarily my own, although it was supported by the BLT.  And so I re-learned lesson #1 of PD:   Be careful what you ask for...you might get it--and if you ask for department excellence, you may not get system excellence.

This year, we tried again.  Along the way, we had gotten much, much more educated.  The BLT, as well as myself, realized that we needed to set a PLC structure that was not departmentalized for the high school.  We organized the groups around the four 21st century skills we planned on implementing in 2011-12.  We realized that our PLCs would have two primary purposes during the year:  implementing RTI and Tech Integration.   And we started over from step zero....the groups needed to gain trust, to become cohesive, and to make certain things didn't disintegrate into 30 min grouch sessions.  We talked about the need to connect with one another in meaningful ways.   We meet twice/month--once for individual meetings, and once in professional development.  Lesson #2:  Take the long view of PLCs.   Plan on the dynamic lasting for 3 years, and you'll be less likely to take shortcuts in implementation.


We are getting richer conversations--fabulous stuff, as a matter of fact.  Our building IS changing.   We are getting better at looking at system data.  Now we've got to add in SMART goals that let teachers start collecting meaningful data themselves.  We plan on using the PLC as the primary PD focus for our next two years, building tight-knit communities that are focused on change.  Lesson #3: Real change takes time.

Our guideline book is Learning by Doing by duFour (solution-tree.com), and I know that some of the other levels are meeting by grade group.   This is not an option for the HS, so we are not stressing it.  I think that the buy-in was the fact that the IRIS project was focused into PLCs, but I would suggest that if a district is doing this, another way of buy-in would be to have a group of teachers take the Learnersedge.com course on PLCs.    It was nicely done, and provided plenty of personal reflection.  Lesson #4:  Personal reflection is the power in PLCs, because it is in reflection that TRUE CHANGE comes into view.

Universal Constructs

<div class="prezi-player"><style type="text/css" media="screen">.prezi-player { width: 550px; } .prezi-player-links { text-align: center; }</style><object id="prezi_gyvue04mmmea" name="prezi_gyvue04mmmea" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" width="550" height="400"><param name="movie" value="http://prezi.com/bin/preziloader.swf"/><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"/><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"/><param name="bgcolor" value="#ffffff"/><param name="flashvars" value="prezi_id=gyvue04mmmea&amp;lock_to_path=0&amp;color=ffffff&amp;autoplay=no&amp;autohide_ctrls=0"/><embed id="preziEmbed_gyvue04mmmea" name="preziEmbed_gyvue04mmmea" src="http://prezi.com/bin/preziloader.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="550" height="400" bgcolor="#ffffff" flashvars="prezi_id=gyvue04mmmea&amp;lock_to_path=0&amp;color=ffffff&amp;autoplay=no&amp;autohide_ctrls=0"></embed></object><div class="prezi-player-links"><p><a title="The “Universal Constructs” were identified following an analysis of the competencies and habits of mind needed for future successes in careers, college and citizenry." href="http://prezi.com/gyvue04mmmea/universal-constructs-essential-for-21st-century-readiness/">Universal Constructs: Essential for 21st Century Readiness</a> on <a href="http://prezi.com">Prezi</a></p></div></div>

Being a Bridge is Tough

I've been watching the protests that are sweeping across WI, and my gut reaction is simple:   it's much tougher to be a bridge.  We have difficult issues to solve, but making extreme statements on one side or another makes it difficult to find a win-win solution.  It's only when a center ground is reached that change becomes possible.  Bridges must stand against strains from both sides, and it is tempting to let go before the work is done.

This does raise the question of whether a system can totally be thrown out.  Wouldn't it be great to totally reinvent education?  To stop working within the status quo?   Of course it would, but we don't live in such a system.  Every time you speak of throwing out an old system, you come smack up against the personality dynamics found in most schools. While we all fantasize about it, we are wasting our energy.

Here's a better way to spend your time: do you know the Kiersey, or Myers-Briggs, or Color Temperaments of your staff?  Once you know that, you can better plan your strategy, because schools contain large numbers of personality types that are   _NF_, to use Kiersey or Myers-Briggs language.  These are the teachers that have devoted their lives to one district, and serve as coach, as unpaid class sponsor, who come to ball games and donate their own money to buy lunch for a hungry kid.  They want the kids to succeed, but change is difficult for them, because so many reforms have come and gone.   We need to consider them if we want change to succeed.  Based on your personality distributions, you can know how to re-frame the debate to meet their needs.   Give those teachers who are Kiersey Inventors and Generals a leadership role, but don't ignore the loyalty of those teachers who are NF personalities..  Take the time to listen to them, to give them the information needed to make the hard decisions, and talk about the health of the District.   It's that type of persuasion that will move you along as you consider the future.

This is the reality that faces us.   And it means that we MUST get teachers involved in the process and work of the Iowa Core, especially in Outcomes 5 and 6.  You MUST be the bridge, standing in the middle, encouraging your teachers and providing the resources and research that will let them meet the needs of the community in which they teach.  You are not the top, you are the middle.   Rinse. Repeat.

I'm sure this is not the only pathway that works, but I also know that overthrow of the system is not possible.  Start with your own BLT, with your PLCs, and see where they are at.   We all know that flexing our muscles can be done in a myriad of ways, but when we all pull together, we are more likely to win.

Questions to Anticipate in SBAR for Waukee

Waukee did a brave thing when they announced their standards-based grading system to the press.  To hear the resulting hulabaloo, they did something that never had been considered before in Iowa.

Except that simply is not the case.   A large number of schools use standards-based rankings.  Price Lab is one of many that have been experimenting with this in grade books, following the leads of elementary schools. Districts such as Wahlert, and Iowa City have had extended discussions on eliminating class rank, defeating the formula of the public Iowa RAI score for the state universities.  Teachers who have been trained in the CLI model, including West Delaware and Independence and some of the schools in Southwest Iowa know that standards grading is a refinement of the first OBE, or outcomes-based education model that were proposed fifteen years ago and subsequently adopted by the Archdiocese of Dubuque.  Reteaching is a critical part of Tier I and II IDM /RTI intervention, and I am sure that the time and resources are in Waukee's plan, also.

SBAR can be a rich and rewarding way to look at student knowledge, and IMO, certainly more valid than an A to F alphabet grading system.  So as we have the conversations with others about SBAR, what roadblocks do we need to plan for?  When we do this, we have a better opportunity to sidestep them with an alternative route for the teacher and students.

Perhaps the most important conversation is what to do in your district when your students aren't meeting the standards you establish.  Obviously, you reteach them, but what will that do to your classes and your final grades when you run out of time...on that very last day of school, when a standard hasn't been met?  Will there be summer schools?   A hold-back?   An INC applied?  This will eventually happen, and if the matter hasn't been thought through and accommodated with time and/or financial resources, it will become a public relations' issue.


How will credit be assigned to students in high schools that have an SBAR system in place?  This is a question my own district had to grapple with as they considered the problem.  For years, we agreed that we would reteach; students who did not pass a standard would not pass the class.   But how do you explain to a parent that a child has 80+% and is going to fail a class because of a summative assessment?  Design issues become critical.


Does the standard of proficiency represent a minimum critical amount of knowledge or a maximum point of acceptance?   If you choose a minimum standard, you must differentiate for the student who accomplishes that proficiency in advance of others.  And the state must grapple with the issue of seat time Carnegie Units vs. mastery competencies.


Finally, how will districts using SBAR anticipate the students who are early adopters of the get-rich-quick philosophy?  In such a philosophy, savvy(?!) students take the summative assessment the first time without preparation, learn what is really on the assessment, and then retake it for mastery.   It's a great way to avoid the need for study, at least from the perspective of a student who is not intrinsically motivated by grades.  Even better, at least from the perspective of the reluctant student, it drives teachers nuts!


The way of SBAR embodies the ideas of radical constructivism.   But constructivism needs many, many, repeated opportunities for entry into the learning.  And that repetition means that district who do not anticipate the rich continuum of concerns may be blindsided, rather than seeing SBAR as the ultimate student-centered learning, where kids can advance at their own place. After more than a dozen years dabbling in such systems myself, I would hate to see such an ideal short-circuited by not anticipating the perils.

The Change Process and the Shut Down

Here's a thought to all the change advocates here talking about the #iowacore  and #iowareformation.   Do you remember the number one law of the change process?   Change is SCARY.  It's a paradigm shift.   It's messy.

There are definitely strong voices on the Iowa Tweet Line.   Many of you are 30 somethings in the midst of being digital pioneers and I am all for it!!   Let me hear your ideas.   But from what I've heard privately and from direct tweets offline in the last two weeks, I have a suggestion...don't let your ideas get in the way of your network building.


Here is the thing that bothers me, at least a little.  I've been a personal user of twitter for years, but the value of using it for personal development this year seemed to be a good idea.  I've heard lots of suggestions.  Still, just because I bring up a counter-point does not mean that I am against your idea; I'm not a cynic,  in fact, I'm probably as big a cheerleader in this whole process as you are.  But with a few years experience in the training arena, I have lost some naivete.   I'm a realist, I've been through many of these innovations once already, and I have some questions.  Blithely shutting them down does not mean that they go away.   And for people perhaps less-passionate and/or stubborn than myself, it slams the door on what should be a constant conversation.

Assessment, including formative and summative?   It's been in Iowa since 1995, when the first Stiggins' institutes were held.  Mastery education and SBAR?   I've been through it three times, in three Districts, starting with the OBE philosophy of a previous Branstad administration.  Cell phones in the classroom?  I gave my first presentation on it three years ago.  Inquiry and project-based learning have been around as long as Dewey and are standards in my own classroom.

This type of experience is available to you from a wealth of--ahem--mid-career professionals who have seen the promise of what you propose, but still have another 15-20 years in the classroom.  And they are just starting to come on Twitter--as settlers, not as pioneers.  So here's what I'd suggest.   The next time someone asks you a question and you want to respond immediately with an answer that resembles  "we don't need that type of stakeholder, because there are many of us who do want change," stop and think.   Try responding instead with a comment like,   "that's a good point to to keep in mind" or "how did your system handle that problem?"

In the end, we don't want to stop change because of the cynics, the "stay-at-homes" or the "rocks-in-the-river," but we also need to develop a rich conversation with the teachers of Iowa.  Our work is too important for our children not to do so.

ICN meeting for Iowa IRIS schools

So we met again to figure out how to take 'the next step' with our intentional non-learners. 


Dates to Remember

February 15:  meetings in Western Iowa

Statewide meeting on 24th and 25th at the Schemann Conference Center in Ames, 

• starting at 10 am and going to 4-4:30
• starting at 8 am and being done about 1:30

##focus on accountability plans during this time##
Case study approach:   a) what is working, b) what is unique  c) how can we change?

March 14 Union, Summer,  Bellevue, and Davenport North
March 15 PM West Delaware, Central Clinton

Intervention tools:  We have data collection tools for attendance and behavior.  We NEED data collection tools for math and reading 

West Delaware: We have added extra struggling learners and assigned them mentors for weekly checks.  We are looking at a systematic Tier 3 structure for next year, and the conversation is in process.

West Sioux:  mentor/mentees are in place; follow mentor meeting schedule.   Updated data within the Learning Criteria process.  30 minute meetings for struggling learners happening at the middle school.  We are looking at information for the intentional non-learner.


Union:  mentoring program is a work in process, and have met with schools that have established projects.  Our mentors are designed to be community members.   BINGO game for staff interaction and motivation.  Reading,  Teach Like a Champ,   Teacher advocates are trying to help struggling learners.  We need to have ways to motivate and continue the momentum.

Manson:  Finalized process and learning teams are talking about interventions, a struggling learner survey.
30 minute meeting next week.  We need to motivate the intention non-learner
.  


Sumner:  Mentoring program is in place.  Working on Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 for system-wide adoption.  30 minute team meetings. 

AHST :  In transition, with a new administration.   Intentional non-learner focus needs to happen.

Bellevue
Davenport
Dewitt

General questions about ICLE conference attendance and/or presentations.


RTI in Chicago Conference, can Warren pass this information along?

Concerns about funding were raised.  This is an issue for the future that we have, but hopes are high for funding.

The Pitfalls of Analyzing RTI Data

Here's a guilty little secret:  I like to know the ending of books ahead of time.   See, it's the one time during life that I can peek at the back page and know whether or not it will all turn out ok.  I don't look for details other than the quick answer of whether the main character lives or dies. And that's the problem with RTI.  We've set this system up, we're working on data, but I don't know how to say for certain that we've succeeded.  It's the worst part of action research for me.

A little background is probably needed.  My District has been part of the Iowa IRIS project, and we've been working on the process of learning and implementing RTI/IDM.  One of the first things we realized was that we needed a wide base of involvement for our teachers.   Over a quarter of our teachers were trained in the model initially, and we've used professional learning communities to help others get on-board, learning together in teacher-focused PD and from one another.  After long discussion, we identified a group of 24 students who we felt were struggling and got ready to pilot our model.  My administrator empowered our BLT to set up the structure of interventions, and another teacher and I set up the process and are running the pilot program.  We've been collecting data for two quarters.

When I first looked at the data, I simply counted up the numbers of D+, D, D-, and F for each grade and put it in a matrix.

	9	10	11	12	TRACKED
D+
D
D-
F

But this way of looking at data is not good enough.   Even though I tried to see patterns, the n(students) is not constant from grade to grade.   This makes comparisons ineffective, although trends may be seen, perhaps, from quarter to quarter.

Next, I tried a comparison of Ds and Fs in graphical form, but I decided that wasn't really the best usage of data for a myriad of reasons.  For one, we use a mastery system, so if a child passes all of the standard assessments, we feel that they have a minimum standard of knowledge in the coursework, even if they get a D-.   Grading scales are another discussion, but just for now, I decided to focus on Fs just for struggling learners, to see if the average number of Fs was decreasing over time.

This showed the data in a different light.   I can see that term 2 is worse than term 1 for most grades.   Perhaps it's because the newness of school has worn off, but it was a relief, I think, to see that term 2 is historically more difficult for kids.  But this was inadequate.  I was only looking at n(struggling students), and those numbers were not consistent from grade to grade.

At this point, my husband interjected a comment (perhaps seeing me tear at my hair was having an effect), suggesting that we take a look at the total population of each group, and then use a pareto study to normalize the numbers to account for the n(students) of each grade.    I'm so glad that his quality background lets him see the value of statistics!  So I ran the numbers.
          
So, in Term 2:

9th:  18/119 kids had a F for a 15% problem

10th: 10/132 kids had a F is a 7.5% problem

11th: 11/134 kids had a F is an 8.2% problem


Hey, that means we have something happening with our pilot kids in 10th grade (it also means we need to act, because our 9th graders need added to the pilot as quickly as possible).   Because of the analysis,  and the data shown to teachers, we have added another forty kids to our tracking procedures.

Finally, I looked at the pareto study. I tracked this year's 9-12 graders for 4 quarters---terms 1 and 2 of last year and terms 1 and 2 for this year.   My data is longitudinal, so the 9th graders for this year have no high school data for two of the four terms.  This is what resulted.

This also prompted some realizations for me.   Last year, even though we identified this year's 10th graders because we wanted three years of data, we really should have identified lots of this year's 11th graders.  And this year's data tells us, loudly, that the 9th graders need some help.   This is powerful information to share with our teachers, and by doing so, we continue to reform the way we do business

To summarize:

• Data-driven education is not just for administrators--it's for teachers, teacher-leaders, and for the effectiveness of students.  While I've done this for assessments, this is the first time I've applied statistics to the needs of a class.
• This is action research, and it's in-process.   I'll be taking the time to look at more data before I am confident with the patterns. I'll continue to look at the data in different ways
• Data doesn't always follow a perfect trend line.  In that case:  collect more data to get your answer.
• In the past, we've just noticed kids were struggling, but we weren't systematic in addressing the weaknesses. This data shows us exactly where we are headed, and who we need to target for intervention next.
• Teachers can use data to make decisions, and schools will benefit as a result.   That is what we hope to accomplish with RTI...a way to use data to make decisions.

I would be interested in your thoughts on what other data I should be collecting.  My husband, the quality guy, suggested a capability study, because it will tell us if our RTI program is having an effect on all students, pushing up the number of students with As or Bs over time (which would appear to be an indicator of being intrinsically motivated).

I'll talk about exactly WHAT we are doing for struggling learners in my next post.

Blended Learning for Iowa

As we move into the second generation of e-learning, it is imperative that we have teachers who are qualified to teach in this new and different way.  Over the past 22 years of my own education, there have been all sorts of distance learning opportunities.   Book study, cassette tapes, early efforts by IPTV to correlate coursework to weekly video programs, WebCT, ICN, Iowa Learning Online; especially for people in remote locations, e-learning is convenient and brings resources to a community that would not be available otherwise.

Out of curiosity, I asked the question on Facebook:  "How would you feel if your child could take half of his/her classes in an online environment?"  Boy, did I get feedback!   Parents and teachers told me that their students needed face-to-face contact, a teacher for motivation, and/or a teacher to help the children understand difficult content. Online classes, they told me, are a problem because kids lack discipline and self-regulation, and they often 'cheat'.  Blended classes, including formats like Adobe Connect or ICN, still struggle to maintain connectedness with students, and some parents were concerned that their children would have to do dangerous experiments without supervision in online science classes.

The first factor for Iowa schools, of course, is the parent.  Without parental buy-in, we are dead in the water.  What good is developing large amounts of courses for the high school environment without considering the comfort level of parents who do not commonly use webcasts or forums in their daily work?   I would suggest that we develop a series of 6 hour classes through the DE or through AEAs on common topics and market them to parents.   Once parents see a good, interactive, student-centered learning environment, they are more likely to let their children enroll in an online class.   While Moodle or Blackboard are often used as large platforms, I would see a value in exposing consumers to a variety of resources; perhaps a combination of Google Forms, Wiggio  and ClassMarker can be used for discussion, assessment and interactivity.  This could be a win-win for the state, especially if there were mini-courses on Love and Logic, study skills, or 21st century expectations for students.

Secondly, we need to consider the motivation of the student.  This is a factor, of course.  As we transition to 1:1 environments, we need to realize that the research on multitasking does matter:  kids think that they are better at multitasking then they actually are.  Social networking during time that should be spent in classwork should be focused ON the classwork, so we need to build that socialization factor into our simulations or discussions, along with other activities that play to the strengths of today's global learner.  In addition to video and images, analytical learners could benefit from text, but with the web, this is no problem, as multiple images and formats of the content can be uploaded, and differentiation can naturally occur.

Finally, though, we need to train teachers to utilize the web effectively, and to assess in a variety of ways to remove the stigma of 'cheating.'  The Department of Education is piloting this type of teaching option, and I hope it is expanded to each AEA.  From robust options like the Certificate in online education available through UW-Stout, or more modest options like the online certification program I am taking for teaching at my community college, teachers cannot expect the online class environment to be the same as the regular classroom.  At this point, my own family has taken more than 20 classes online, or through blended environments like the ICN and Moodle/Skype.   Many have been effective (my core classes in science education were delivered this way); others have been disastrous for my husband and kids.  The complaints I heard were not because of technology (we were able to deal with disruption or glitches), but about the quality of the teacher, or the quantity of homework (in one case, the teacher felt that quantity replaced face-to-face interaction).

Is online education perfect?  No, it's not.  If it were so, anyone with a DVR could become a gourmand simply by watching Iron Chef.  But with a shrinking rural population, it's something Iowans need to take advantage of to prepare their kids for the future.  Innovation is where we need to be focusing our efforts in a time of shrinking resources.

Training Teacher-Leaders to Make the Difference

I like to think of myself as a teacher-leader, but that is a process that has taken years and years to develop.  It’s time for Districts everywhere to develop their own leaders, and administrators need to step up, encourage their teachers, and accept cooperative leadership. 

1.     Use your curriculum director.  Thank GOD for good curriculum directors.  In particular, people like Cheri C., Wayne W., Luann B., Sue D., and Robin M. have made a huge different in my own life.   They identified opportunities and they give me a chance to go to conferences, present to others, or to ask my opinion on an issue.  Without their encouragement, I never would have participated in formation like Toolkit 95(an early Rick Stiggins assessment package), Eisenhower Institutes, local presentations.  They showed me the importance of moving beyond my own classroom and looking at the  state and national trends in education. Have your curriculum director identify several leaders in your building, and encourage them through conversation.

2.     Use your AEA.   My biggest frustration with the current financial climate is the suggestion that we drop funding from AEAs, which is one of the things that distinguish Iowa from other states.   Let me be clear: AEA consultants are invaluable.  They will come into your classroom, not just once, but over time, give you suggestions for student-centered teaching, work with you to integrate technology, and suggest leadership strategies.  My most important formation as a teacher leader came from AEA opportunities, including inquiry institutes, technology integrations, and membership in Every Learner Inquires.  Encourage your staff or colleagues to utilize the AEA, and ask them to invite consultants into their classroom.

3.     Regional Opportunities.  Each year, look for an outside opportunity.  Some of these will fall into your lap through serendipity—a flyer in the teacher’s lounge, a chance email, or a glance at a professional website.  For me, this included Eisenhower Institutes, the DEN network, Quarknet, and This opportunity usually includes a stipend or a credit as an enticement, but gentle encouragement on the part of co-teachers and administrators can tip the consideration into a definite commitment.

4.     Outreach from Local Universities.  UNI, Iowa, and Iowa State have all been part of innumerable summer opportunities and I’ve taken advantage of them.  They’ve allowed me to network with others across the state, and gather the thoughts of people who have devoted their lives to education reform and change.  Eventually, the change I experienced led me to pursue an advanced degree.  Here, I think it is important for more-experienced teachers in a department to encourage newer teachers, and administrators, to take advantage of these chances.  What are you waiting for—start looking!

5.     Shared Leadership.  The reality is that we still have pockets of permissive leadership in schools.  Your job is to make sure that your staff shares in the decision-making through a strong Building Leadership Team and through relational leadership; although it is a more complex dynamic, the conversations are richer, the teacher growth is phenomenal, and the leaders benefit.  Promote shared leadership at every opportunity.

6.     Online Community.  I know that this seems obvious to you, but that does not mean that it is obvious to your staff—many still use the Net as a newspaper, not as a 2.0 collaborative.   Developing an intentional online community is a priority for you and your District, as it allows a movement from local concerns to state and national conversation. One of the best building communities I have seen has been developed by @Shawn_Holloway and his teachers at #mnwcougars; ask your building tech, a teacher, or a student to help you show off Twitter and RSS readers.

I’ll leave you with an example of an unintentional teacher-leader—Ms. Q,  whose call for dietary reform at http://fedupwithlunch.blogspot.com  have brought national attention to an issue, and were fueled by simultaneous efforts by Michelle Obama, Jamie Oliver, and a national debate.  Although none of us plans to save the world, sometimes it’s an unintentional consequence. J

Note to Jason Glass

Jason,

I’ve been following your tweets for a couple of weeks now; I think that you are a quick learner, and you do what I often do:  you embrace the moment.   As I watch you focusing on innovation and tech integration, I wonder how Iowa will assimilate it all.  Are you prepared to dig in, build consensus, encourage buy-in and set up systemic structures for change and spend 5 years doing the legwork?  That’s what I hope you mean when you talk about Leadership, Innovation, and Service to your state team.

When you first came to the state, I listened to your interviews about the Iowa Core and I felt you had only heard the sound bytes, rather than seeing the whole of the process.  This is not uncommon; after years of working with Every Learner Inquires, I have lost count of the number of time legislators and principals have said to me:  “You mean it’s not just the curriculum?”   I don’t care what we call it, but we need to move forward on the structure we’ve set up.  That being said, I think that the underlying intent of the Iowa Core is spot-on:  content based on national expectations, professional development, student-centered, instructional decision making and 21^st century skills delivered in a constructivist fashion.    It’s simply too bad that intent has not matched execution. 

I want technology and blended learning—but I want quality, like Shannon C’DeBaca or Gail Wortmann teaching their Iowa Learning Online courses.  I don’t want lower level skills, and instructors steeped in worksheet and busy work, as I have seen in other online classes.  How do we control this?  How do we avoid the ‘online high school’ problem from a few years ago that focused on the Carnegie Unit?  How do we convince other school leaders to embrace the 1:1 concept, unblock social networking, and teach kids using student-centered methods?  How do we expand Senior Year Plus, and expand the number of dual-credit courses I teach to move our kids to a better place?

I want teacher-led PD, and I have worked for the last twelve years to prove that we could do JUST THAT.  I have stayed in the classroom when I could have moved up and out, but my administrator has treated me as a leader and honored my efforts to advance my education and make a difference in the district to both students and teachers.   Building teams of teachers and letting them share their ideas and focus through a teacher-leader model will meet the needs of the students much better than one-shot consultants coming in and out. PLCs need development and the teachers on them need to know that we will work to help kids, whatever it takes, so mastery can be achieved at some level.  If teachers don’t want to do that, it’s time to gently encourage them to find a new vocation.

Service to others is the focus of character counts, and one of Covey’s habits.  Without a realization that we all must depend on the efforts of one another, we can’t make a better Iowa.  And that’s what I’m all about.  I believe so passionately in all of this that I want it to happen, now!  And I want you to get us there, but I remember other shining ideas that got side-tracked.

You’ll notice that I haven’t mentioned money, and it’s because I don’t know how you’ll get control over it.  As an outsider looking in, you see the possibilities, but this state has a long history of local control, and salary matrices and tenure are splashed across the pages of the IAPERB contracts.  Unless you are willing to go to a state payment model for salaries in their entirety, I wonder if you should waste energy on it; perhaps it’s just a red herring that will irritate the status quo and take energy away from the real issues you can control.

So welcome aboard, Jason;  come visit me and lots of other exemplary teacher leaders at the Iowa IRIS February meeting in Ames on the 24^th or 25^th.  Let’s take this pocket of excellence and build on it, so all students really can start to feel that they can learn.  I look forward to our conversations.