Trusted to Obey the Rules < Trusted to Know When Not to Obey

Early this week, I found myself having conversations with various colleagues about  the direction of our district.   During the dialog, I brought up several thoughts that I addressed in an earlier post titled “The Value of a Shared Vision”, with the key point being that  “If there is one consistent lesson that emerges from studies of the change process, it is that no one leader has all the energy and expertise to reform...a district, improve a school, or meet the needs of students in the classroom each day” (DuFour & Fullan, 2013, p. 24).  In other words, in order to be effective, leaders of a school must be sure to share a clear vision for the district and then nurture and support the dispositional leadership of the early adopters.

Those who are the early adopters of a vision could be called the first followers and it is these folks that play a key role in building a culture that is aligned to the vision.  One of my favorite TedTalks to share is Derek Sivers “How to Start a Movement”.  It is a short and hilarious observation of the power of nurturing the first followers as equals.  In the video, Sivers astutely points out that “new followers emulate the follower, not the leader”.  If school leaders (positional leadership) are to be effective, they must become more like stewards of the school (See Entitlement:Stewardship as Oil:Water) whose role is to develop the strengths of school staff (dispositional leadership).  It also means a safe environment must be created in order to nurture a culture that promotes always doing the right thing over always doing things right.

This excerpt from Simon Sinek’s book “ Leaders Eat Last” is a great example of the importance of doing the right thing over doing things right.

“KH209, I need to descend immediately.  I can’t maintain altitude,” was the abrupt call from the pilot. (due to smoke filling the plane)

But there was a problem.  There was another flight 2,000 feet directly below the troubled aircraft.  The FAA rules are simple enough: no two aircraft flying en route may pass each other any closer than 1,000 feet, above or below, or five miles around each other.

The air traffic controller replied to the pilot’s request to descend immediately, “KH209, turn fifteen degrees right and descent”.

This was a very experienced air traffic controller sitting at the console that day.  He was fully aware of all the aircraft in the area.  What’s more, he was very aware of all the rules and restrictions.  He radioed the pilot of the other aircraft and spoke in very clear, plain English.  “AG1446, there is an airplane flying above you.  He has declared an emergency.  He is going to descend through your altitude at approximately two miles off your right front.  He needs to descend immediately.”  

This same message would be repeated again as the troubled vessel passed through the airspace of another three aircraft as it made its way down….126 souls were saved because one very experienced air traffic controller decided to break the rules (Sinek, 2014, pp. 72-73).

The air traffic controller did not tell the pilot, “Sorry, but you can’t descend due to FAA regulations”.  He also did not stop what he was doing and waste precious minutes to call a supervisor in order to get permission for the plane to descend.  Instead, he assessed or diagnosed the situation, used his expertise to decide what to do, and had the confidence that he would be supported in his decision to do the right thing by ordering the plane to descend over doing things right by following FAA regulations.   126 precious lives were saved that day which, ironically, is around the same number of students a teacher might work with on a daily basis when teaching five classes of 25 each day.

I don’t feel as if I am being overly dramatic when comparing the importance of  the decision making process for 126 passengers on a smoke filled plane and an equal number of students in a classroom.  Clearly, there is not an immediate danger to the students versus those of the passengers, but there is a concern in the long term if we, as educators, are not knowledgeable of our trade and don't follow best practices (the air traffic controller was an expert), are not able to be diagnostic when observing or speaking with students (the controller immediately identified and addressed the problem), and don’t feel we have permission or can be trusted to focus on what a student needs over what a student needs to do (Be trusted to obey the rules and trusted to know when to break them).   Fortunately, there are teachers who are able to meet all three of these criteria, but to have all three is not always common.  However, it is the last criteria combined with the first follower concept that has been on my mind this week and what I would like folks to consider.

In my mind, a healthy school culture is not created by one individual, but is instead built with the support of first followers acting as catalysts.  These first followers understand the vision of the school and help to nurture an environment of trust that gives all educators permission to do the right thing over doing what is portrayed to be right.  I say what is “portrayed to be right” as a reference to a focus on grades, test scores, or covering the curriculum  and “doing the right thing” as a reference to meeting kids where they are and nurturing them from that point.  Getting things “right” (high test scores) will be a natural byproduct of “doing the right thing”.  A school culture  in which all educators (teachers, administrators, counselors, psychologists, etc.) focus on developing our young people’s ability to learn (Nurture the Roots) more than the scores they produce is why we went into education, what our parents want, and how are kids need to learn.

References

DuFour, R. & Fullan, M. (2013).  Cultures built to last: Systemic PLCs at work.

    Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Sinek, Simon (2014).  Leaders Eat Last.  New York, NY: Penguin Group.

Ready to Drink the Disciplinary Literacy Kool-Aid?

I never was a big believer when, as a Science teacher, I was told, “We are all

Reading Teachers” or the little more tolerable “We are all teachers of reading”.  My response was typically, “No we are not and I don’t want my students writing like they are in English class either.”  I know that sounds “grumpy”, but I would suspect that any ELA teacher would point out the importance of considering audience and purpose when writing.  That being the case, the audience and purpose in Science is very different than in an ELA class, a Social Studies class, Math class, or any other class for that matter.  In a Science class, I wanted the students to “cut out the fluff” and write about the facts, be precise in their writing, and reference the data to support their findings when writing.   Similarly, when reading a Science text, article, research, etc.  I wanted the students to not worry about what the author thought, in fact I didn’t really care about the author, and instead wanted the students to focus on what was stated and if the data in the graphs, charts, data tables, diagrams, etc. supported what was in the text.  Confident in my own opinion, I down played this idea of “being a teacher of reading”, but I am now wondering if I couldn’t see the forest because of all the trees.

Now that I have taken the time to reflect on the statement “teacher of reading” I am

allowing myself to take a broader perspective.  However, my disclaimer is that I still don’t believe “reading” is the appropriate term, but instead would suggest “literacy”.  That is to say, if you asked me, as a science teacher, do I try to help my students read and write (literacy) as a scientist would read and write?  My answer would be, "absolutely".  So, semantics is going to be my excuse for not getting on board earlier and how I will justify my own shortsightedness. That’s my story and I am sticking to it.  Of course, that thought is mostly expressed with “tongue in cheek” to salvage my own pride, but I do think that having the discussion on the difference between what Tim Shanahan would call “disciplinary literacy” and “content area literacy” would be a valuable PLC topic for every subject area.

How does literacy (reading & writing) in your content area look?  I already mentioned

how I thought it should look in a science classroom.  I suspect social studies teachers will want their students to be able to read and write more like historians by considering the author, the time period in which it was written, and the most probable intent of the author.  These, by the way do align with several “signs and signposts” in  Kylene Beers & Robert Probst  book titled “Reading Nonfiction: Notice & Note”  (see Using Signposts As Life Preservers Across the Curriculum for more thoughts on this).  I also would wager that, like a science teacher, math teachers don’t spend much time worrying about the author of a text, but will have even higher expectations of the precision of the writing and exam the text with a critical eye when reading.  These are all suppositions on my part, which is why it is important teachers have these conversations with other teaches in their subject area (PLC).  The point here is that the conversations about “disciplinary literacy” will be different than “content area literacy”.  Content area literacy, MAX teaching  is an example, has its place because it incorporates key ELA skills into your content.  However, it is not going to get content area teachers on board to the importance of literacy as much as conversations about how to nurture the skills for our young people to be Scientist, Historians, and Mathematicians (...and Artists, Businessmen, Linguists, etc. etc. etc.) that is to say the conversations centered around disciplinary literacy.  So, again, I encourage all of us (in grades 4-12) to consider those conversations.

The reason why I say grades 4-12 is because it is the “reading to learn” time period our students travel through while in school.  That is to say, I understand the importance of focusing on “learning to read” (and write)  in PreK-3 in order for students to develop the skills that allow them to access the aforementioned disciplinary literacy.  In fact, I am not shy about saying that, “I have drank the Kool-Aid” when it comes to reading and writing.  I get that if we want our kids to be better readers (PreK-12) we have to get them reading more and if we want them to be better writers they have to write more.  That means in all of our classrooms. Frederick Douglass has been quoted, “Once you learn to read, you will be forever free.”  I would humbly add that the addition of writing not only makes you free, but helps contribute to a culture in which all can be free as we learn from each other.  It is a pretty hard to argue against “being a teacher of literacy in your content area” when you think about it in that light.

The Value of a Shared Vision

In his book “The Greatest Generation”, Tom Brokaw speaks of an overwhelming driving force that provided an opportunity for ordinary people to accomplish extraordinary tasks.  This force was a sense of common purpose.  Brokaw remembers from when he was five, “Looking back, I can recall that the grown-ups all seemed to have a sense of purpose...there was something greater connecting all of us, in large ways and small”(Brokaw, 1998, p.11).  The theme is revisited throughout the book in the many stories he shares.  This sense of common purpose for Americans to defeat the Axis Powers (Germany, Japan, and Italy), the driving force at the time, provided them the opportunity to rise to the occasion.   I can think of no more powerful example of the value of a shared vision or common purpose.  The power behind a common purpose can be easily carried over into our school culture and it was this concept I found myself explaining while in a dialog with three different groups of  teachers this week.  

“For any culture to cohere, its members need a common purpose.  Such a purpose gives the culture meaning and direction, and it is what its members’ behavior is organized to accomplish.” (from Larry Geni ’s on-line book “A Teacher’s Handbook” ).  Simon Sinek describes this common purpose as the “Why” in his TED talk “Start with Why”.  The point here is that in order to meet the needs of our young people, everyone in our schools should have an idea of the common purpose of our schools.  It is the vision which is communicated through our words and supported through our actions.   However, in order to have that shared communication and support, such a vision first has to be articulated and that is where I have found myself falling short as the Director of Curriculum & Instruction in our district.

After meeting with the three aforementioned groups of teachers, what is clear to me is that a common purpose or vision has not been clearly articulated in our district as there is still a concern and belief that the “administration is most worried about the test scores”.  This fear of the repercussions from the test scores still seem to be the driving force or common purpose of schools be it a conscience or subliminal decision..  Until that fear is addressed within our school culture, we are not going to be able to take the necessary steps to move forward.  I have referenced “Adopting a Greenhouse Philosophy for Schools” many times in this blog post and have continually brought up the importance of  “nurturing our students roots”.  They are two concepts that are not radical or new as many educators, both within our district and around the world, share similar beliefs on where the focus of schools should fall.  This leads to the importance of considering  the structure and function of the brain and how it physiologically functions and  the heart and how it  metaphorically functions.  I will start with the brain.

“There are two fundamental things that brains want: to be safe and happy” (Zull, 2002, p.49).  If there is a perceived fear, such as repercussions from low test scores, that exists than one of those two fundamental requirements of the brain are not being met.  Often it is the feeling of loss of control that provides the fear for our brains to not feel safe.  So, whether it is our young people in the classroom or ourselves in the schools, it is important to feel in control.  “The brain evolved to detect and resist exactly this type of thing (loss of control) for over five million years.  It is not going to give in now” (Zull, 2002, p. 53), so it is best to take this into account when supporting a culture of learning.  .A second rule, besides being in control,  for our brain and therefore ourselves to be ready to learn/grow is that we have to see how it matters in our lives.  This is were a common vision comes into play in schools.  The third and final piece of the puzzle is that “we must expect to encounter emotion and we must take it seriously” (Zull, 2002, p.52).  These emotions lead to, metaphorically speaking, the heart of the matter.

Almost 15 years ago, when making the shift from being a teacher in the classroom to being a teacher outside of the classroom, I came across an impactful book titled “Moral Leadership: Getting to the Heart of School Improvement” by  Thomas Sergiovanni.  In this book, Sergiovanni discuss how the “heart of leadership has to do with what a person believes, values, dreams about, and is committed to” (Sergiovanni, 1992, p.7).  It is similar to the vision, but goes beyond as it is more foundational to a person’s actions which he refers to as the “hand of leadership”.  Sergiovanni adds that the “head of leadership” is not the brain but rather the philosophical and pedagogical approaches that leaders develop over time.  When put together, “the head of leadership is shaped by the heart and driven by the hand” (Sergiovanni, 1992, p.7).  Add in the fact that all leadership should be dispositional (see The Power of Dispositional Leadership) and not just positional and you have the beginnings of a culture with a common purpose.

It is this common purpose or vision that can drive a culture and can help ordinary people to do extraordinary tasks.  Rick DuFour & Michael Fullan’s observed,  “If there is one consistent lesson that emerges from studies of the change process, it is that no one leader has all the energy and expertise to reform...a district, improve a school, or meet the needs of students in the classroom each day” (DuFour & Fullan, 2013, p. 24).  Having a common vision for our schools will give all educators the latitude to contribute based on each of their expertise.  Each district will have its own vision as it applies to their specific community, culture, and young people within it.  Do you know the vision of your district?  If not, find out and share it with others as it should be the driving force for all of our decisions for time, money, and pedagogy.  In the end, the value of a shared vision will create a culture that nurtures all of the people within it and will lead to places we could never get to on our own.    

References

Brokaw, Tom. (1998).  The Greatest Generation.  New York, NY.: Random House.

DuFour, R. & Fullan, M. (2013).  Cultures built to last: Systemic PLCs at work. Bloomington, IN:

     Solution Tree Press.

Sergiovanni, Thomas. (1992).  Moral Leadership: Getting To The Heart Of School Improvement.  

San Francisco, CA:  Jossey-Bass Inc.

Zull, James (2002).  The Art of Changing the Brain.  Sterling VA: Solution Tree Press.Stylus

            Publishing.

Have You Taken That First Step Yet?

Happy New Year!  Hopefully, you had time between the holidays to enjoy some downtime for yourself.  I made it a point to do so and took advantage of the time to catch  up on some reading.  Typically, I have a list of “Books on my RADAR” to refer to when making a new book selection, but shortly before the holidays I came across a twitter post by  Pernille Ripp which caught my attention.  I then found one of her books titled Passionate Readers: The Art of Reaching and Engaging Every Child on Amazon and, thanks to Amazon Prime, I had my book for break.  

I almost didn’t purchase the book because it sounded similar to Donalyn Miller’s The Book Whisperer and Penny Kittle's Book Love (Two books I highly recommend by the way)..  However where Miller does a great job of explaining why it is important to nurture a culture of readers with a lot of student choice for the elementary level and Kittle focuses on the 30,000 foot view of the topic for the secondary level , Ripp, as a 7th grade ELA teacher, goes a little deeper and gets in to the “how” to pull it off in a very limited (45 minutes) class time that is more typical for grades 6-12.  As a result, I believe Passionate Readers would be a great book to read and discuss as a PLC for any ELA team in grades 6-12.

In this book, Ripp shares her journey from her more reader centered 5th grade classroom with its 90 minute block of time to a 45 minute 7th grade ELA class that really challenged her approach to nurturing passionate readers.  Specifically, she shares five keys of passionate readers:  

1.  Teacher Reading Identity and How it Matters

-Emphasis here is if we want our students to become passionate readers we must become visible readers ourselves.  This includes being familiar with young adult reading, understanding that our feelings of reading influence our students' feelings on reading, being aware of our own book gaps, and many other applicable pieces of advice.

2.  How Our Physical Space Affects Our Reading Experience

- “This is not about the furniture we have, but the experience we create” (Ripp, 2018, p.24).   The environment also is one in which the students do not feel powerless, but instead feel like they have control over many parts of their learning day.  (Ripp, 2018)

3.  The Classroom Library as a Cornerstone of the Passionate Reading Community

-  This is all about getting books in front of kids in a timely manner.  Ripp eludes to even if your room is right across the hall to the library it is still too far away when a student finishes a book and is looking to start another.  She also pointed out that, knowing funds are limited, quality should trump quantity.  A small class library with books the students will read is better than a lot of books which the students will not pick-up.

4.  The Reality of the Passionate Reader Learning Community

- Not every kid is going to like reading and Ripp shares some advice on how she hooked kids (not always successfully) into becoming more passionate about reading.  Hint:  Part of it had to do with presentation and access

5.  Developing Student Reading Identity By Making Reading a Personal Journey

- Our district’s Reading Specialist, Jen Miller, often says that we should be cultivating a love of reading in our students that extends beyond the walls of our classrooms.  Ripp addresses this point in her fifth and final key of developing passionate readers.  Interestingly, this includes the power behind being able to, as well as knowing when to, abandon a book.

Within each of the keys, Ripp references a basic framework of “What I thought I did then.”, “What I think I do now.”, and “Suggested components of change”.  She also provides a series of questions on which to reflect for your own classroom and teaching philosophy.  

I suspect this blog post came across more like a “book report” or something similar, but I wanted to give you a taste of what Passionate Readers addresses.  In the end, it is one more way we can promote student choice and voice in the classroom.  In general, I recognize it is some version of the Readers’ and Writers’ Workshop model and would encourage it, despite the time constraints, in the 6-12 classroom setting.  I have often said, in education time is currency, so we should reflect on how we are currently using the time in our classrooms.  If we look back and we don’t see the time being spent on what we most value, we should step back and re-examine how we are spending the time.  In short, if we want students to become better readers and writers we have to have them read more and write more.  If we want them to become passionate, we have to provide the time and environment to nurture that as well.  It is a  messy prospect, which is why they call it a workshop, that won’t be perfect the first time you try it, but “a journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step”...right?  Ripp shares how she is attempting to create such an environment one book at a time, one conversation at a time, and therefore one step at a time.  

References

Ripp, Pernille  (2018).  Passionate Readers:  The Art of Reaching and Engaging

Every Child.  New York, NY: Routledge Press