RtI and Scheduling

There is an old Chinese Proverb, some call it a curse that goes like this, "May you live in interesting times." Well, we are definitely living in interesting times. The underfunding of state education has created some very interesting times for us. While there are many questions we are asking and difficult decisions being made, we move forward with helping our staff and students excel.

While others are taking off work or calling in sick to search for the last bit of snow on the slopes, this time of year brings the promise of massive scheduling challenges for the building Principal. Most likely, you have already cleared off that white board and started moving names, sections and courses around. When you walk out of your office you may find a sticky note stuck to the bottom of your shoe with the name of a course or teacher. You knew something was missing from the scheduling wall.

As you begin to make plans, please keep RtI in mind. Scheduling for a new year gives us an opportunity to review those students on Tier 2 and Tier 3. Pat Quinn recommends that when scheduling you take the time to review the number of students on Tier 2 or Tier 3 in a classroom. Overloading a single class with students needing intense interventions may not be possible, especially if you know you will not have the support staff to help. You may want to distribute the tiers throughout the grade level or content. Pat Quinn also states that many principals prefer to place students needing interventions with their best teachers. This may give one or two teachers students needing more than the typical interventions. If you select this method, you may want to make sure you can provide support for that teacher.

Do I Have a Part in the RtI Process?

Eating vegetables, wearing bicycle helmets, getting enough sleep and school are all good for kids. Right? What if you found out that the vegetables at your family dinner table were dangerously polluted with toxic chemicals, would you go ahead and serve them? That bicycle helmet your nine year old received for Christmas has a flaw in the design. Would you go ahead and allow that nine year old to wear it? Stupid questions, right?

Then why would we continue to use a system that is not best for kids? We would not! That goes against all that is valued by most in education. Response to Intervention, RtI, is not new. Idea 2004 and all the research that went into its compilation, ardantly reveal the potential dangers of the 30 year old discrepancy model.

RtI is a strange bird. It is not a federal mandate and does not carry with it the all too familiar tag of accountability. States cannot require school districts to follow the 30 year old discrepancy model of identifying students with special needs. The proposed regulation, suggested in IDEA 2004, does permit states to prohibit districts from using the discrepancy model. So, where do you stand?

First question - Is the principal on the campus an instructional leader? You must answer yes or no. If your answer is "no," then get in your travel machine and set the date to circa 1950. I'm not judging only reporting the obvious. If you answer "yes," then proceed.

Second question- To what extent does the instructional leader play a role in implementing RtI?
No going back to your time machine. Diagnosing learning concerns and prescribing solutions may require re allotment of staff, schedule changes, allocation of funds and support for proven- evidence based instructional models. Who is in charge of the decisions and resources needed to accomplish such lofty requirements? Hopefully, the principal has some influence over why and how the above should occur.

Third question- Is learning the direct result of instruction? John E. McCook contends that "Learning is the direct result of the intervention of three sets of variables- student skills, the curriculum and the instruction provided to the child" (The RtI Guide). The instructional leader must be at the helm overseeing the integrity of instruction and supporting changes that influence learning in a positive direction.

Life is a collaborative effort or we would all be hermits. Let me know what you think. What role does the principal play in the RtI process?

Making Rounds

What are the students doing? This question is crucial to our understanding of effective teaching. As principals and central office administrators, we need to focus not on what the teacher is doing, but what the students are doing. Recently, a teacher wrote me that we have spent so many years training teachers to be the "doers" that we have forgotten the role of the student.

Phillip Schlechty's, Working on the Work, provides us with a clear picture of the types of student engagement. Schlechty illustrates five types of student responses to a given task. At any time throughout the day we can find students that are authentically engaged or immersed in a value added activity that they see as beneficial to their lives. Students can be ritual engaged to simply get the grade. Extending effort to complete a task simply to avoid negative consequences is the description of the passive compliant response. Students can respond to a task by disengaging or creating their own task while disrupting each other. These students are responding by retreating or rebelling.

This month I would like to shift from Working on the Work to The Three Minute Classroom Walkthrough. While I find any type of prescriptive solution to be contrary to successful instruction, I do appreciate those researches that give me a way of looking at things with a new pair of glasses.

Take a look at the 3C's presented in the The Three Minute Classroom Walkthrough, content context and cognitive type. Take away references to teacher action and acknowledge the 3C's as crucial components of student engagement.

Content: Do the students know what they are learning? Are they aware of the skills, knowledge or concepts they are going to be learning?

Context: What are the students doing? Under what type of conditions are they pursueing understanding of the content?

Cognitive Type: What level of understanding are the students going to reach with the content? Knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis or evaluation.

I agree with Scheltchy, that no one can sustain an authentic response level throughout the entire day. Nor is it reasonable or sound instruction to assume all understanding takes place at the top of Bloom's Taxonomy.

I have to ask myself how I would respond if I shadowed a student throughout any given day. What percentage of my day would I spend authentically engaged at a high level of understanding and interest?

This is in response to a great article, 21st Century Skills: the Challenges Ahead, by Adrew J. Rotherham and Daniel Willignham.

While I completely agree with all that was articulated by the authors, I feel crucial a component is missing. Recently, I have been reading Breakthrough by Michael Fullan, Peter Hill and Carmel Crevola. Both groups discuss the same concerns and suggested solutions for revamping our current status quo.
We need more meaningful assessments, understandings of content and skill, and a delineation of practice and skill.
If breakthroughs, utilizing instruction that works, assessing for readiness and understanding, learning to learn, focused instruction unique to content learning, and other more high quality improvements need to be made, then why do things still look so much the same? The old adage, wherever I go, there I am, rings true as we stay stuck in the status quo. How much have we really changed since the establishment of the first compulsory school in the United States? Sure, we have become more cognizant of the science behind learning. We are aware of motivation and the importance of learner readiness. The breadth of knowledge and understanding is staggering. My argument is that we have not been able to build our systems within schools and districts to genuinely improve. The way in which we schedule classes, structure the day, all those logistics, actually confine us to a system designed to meet the demands of early America, not the 21st century. Articles such as this only add to frustration because we are reminded of the design constraints of a school.
We have to begin to explore ways to allow teachers more time to collaborate and grow professionally. Schedules need to be redesigned to meet the needs of the learner and the teacher, not just transportation, UIL or athletics. Is this radical? Is there time for such an extreme remedy?
Personally, I need to find answers to a few questions. How do other countries find the time for teachers to collaborate? Is there any wasted time during the school day? Our country is accustomed to the 8-3 schedule of schools that giving students a day off during the week so teachers can collaborate is often fraught with concerns from parents about finding a sitter.
Anyway, great article and good thought.

Reading as a Participation Sport

Reading as a Participation Sport

This gives us an idea of the direction the Gen M student, as a reader, is heading. The idea of having tools to participate in my reading experience is comforting. Today's readers have a far wider breadth of information to sift through before drawing conclusions. We are challenged as teachers to help students graze through the steams of data to intentially select information that respondes to their needs.

What is the Daily?

The daily life of a principal. So what is it like to be responsible for the education, safety and well being of students? Share your thoughts and ideas.

How do you stay focused on instruction while working through the logistical web of everyday operations? Delegation is a great tool. How do you ensure delegated projects are completed on time and with quality?

Admin. meetings- when do you meet? How do you keep those pesky interruptions from halting your meeting?