Think about your own school. What are the three greatest stengths and the three most critical needs related to the teaching of reading/language arts at your school? How will your strengths help to address your needs?
As a whole, LFHS is doing some wonderful things with teaching reading and writing. Right now it seems to me that our biggest assets are the following: 1. We have dedicated teachers who enjoy low student-to-teacher ratios. With 5 English teachers for 350 students, our classes are small and we get to know students personally. This means we can often address literacy issues informally and within classes and do not need formal programs that don’t always fit into the traditional high school structure. In short, we can accomplish a lot with a minimum of bureaucracy. 2. We are benefiting from and building on literacy work done by the elementary and middle schools. As Peter said in class, literacy has “trickled up” to the high school. Many incoming ninth grade students speak the literacy lingo better than the teachers. As a result we can build on the skillset they have developed. Many of our teachers have gone through some level of literacy training this year and more are scheduled to be trained next year. In fact, my core literacy folks—those with the most training—teach English, social studies, math, science, special education, and research skills. This cross-discipline group volunteered and demonstrate that educators from all sectors realize the importance of literacy training. 3. We are in a great position to make major gains. This is one of those silver-lining characteristics. As a rule, we don’t do well on tests here. Our SAT and NWEA scores leave a lot to be desired. This is bad. On the other hand, we are in a great position to implement some fairly low-impact but high-yield strategies that will have make the few critics we do have take notice.
And, of course, if we have assets we must have liabilities. 1. Not everyone is on board. Some educators decry the lack of reading and writing skills but do not see themselves as part of the solution. High schools are very compartmentalized beasts and ours is no exception. This often means that math and science teachers do not think they should teach reading and writing. This also often means that when the focus is on grades 9 and 10, teachers of grades 11 and 12 do not think they should be using the strategies we are trying to implement. Most of our faculty is on board with these efforts but some are not as active as they need to be. 2. Cracks are beginning to develop as a district between the different versions of literacy programming. That is, the elementary school is in what I would call a second or third generation of programming. This means they have been doing it long enough that it is old hat. And with anything that has been around for a while the approach to it can be cavalier. The middle school, on the other hand, has had literacy training for a while but in recent years it has had to be a specific brand of Maine-approved and Maine-funded training because the school is an NCLB CIPS (Continuous Improvement School) facility. And the high school is now using the same person who started the middle school on its literacy path but there are shades of differences that are starting to emerge. This has not been a deal-breaker at all, but I’m aware of the situation and would not at all be surprised if problems arise out of it. 3. Finally, many of my students are not motivated to have higher aspirations and so do not see the need to have higher literacy skills. Motivation is a factor at all levels but in high schools unmotivated students can more easily refuse to participate and simply drop out of school. By and large my communities do not have a high rate of high school completion or college attendance. As a result, my low-achieving group tends to be hard core and hard to reach.
Remember, however, that I have not actually read any course materials yet! I’m hoping that after reading them I will develop more refined assessments of the state of affairs at LFHS and more specific steps on how to make it better!
Shawn’s post reminded me of how important it is to take stock of what is working in my school by celebrating and building on strengths.
First and foremost, WDS is a positive, supportive community. While many of our students are solidly middle class, a large percentage of our students come from less stable homes where income and often living and family situations are unpredictable. The school provides much of the stability that our more fragile students need. With a highly successful positive behavior-support system in place, as well as school-wide Responsive Classroom practices, WDS is a safe, joyful place to learn. Our students have been involved in many service-learning projects engaging in their community as agents of change.
The district has developed a comprehensive assessment system which provides rich formative and summative data about how children are performing. The literacy assessments are closely aligned to the local and state benchmarks. We continue to ask critical questions about which assessments provide the most useful information and inform our instruction. Next year, in our school, we will continue our identification of power standards and refine assessments in literacy. I am optimistic that some of this work will help us develop assessments and instruction in higher order literacy skills.
The teachers and staff at WDS demonstrate high levels of professionalism and commitment to professional learning. It is a dynamic staff that embraces learning and change. We light a candle at the end of each year honoring change in our school community because it is so much a part of the school culture. We have historically embraced multiple initiatives with fervor. What we are coming to realize is that we need sustained and focused professional learning.
Collaboration is high among several of our grade level teams and instructional practices and assessments are becoming increasingly transparent. The greatest collaboration gap exists between special education and regular education. The school has an impressive level of services; however, the lack of coordination between regular and special education has left our most at-risk students with disjointed programming. The percentage of students identified as special education is very high and classroom teachers feel an unending revolving door of students coming and going for additional services.
Finally, as I look through the list of eight characteristics outlined in Going Public, I question whether a culture of rich literacy prevails in the school. There are sweet moments of literacy experiences, but it is not everpresent or deep and rich. Classroom libraries are undernourished, and students need more opportunities to read, write, and think deeply.
I am very optimistic about our ability to confront our greatest challenges as much of the infrastructure for substantive change is in place. Over the last year, we have been able to rework the master schedule to allow for common planning and staggered literacy blocks. Teachers work in professional learning communities and have developed progress monitoring systems. With these critical pieces in place, I believe we are in a great place for realizing better outcomes for our students.
Much of my current thinking about what is working and not working in my school is drawn from Kathryn Au and Taffy Raphael’s work in Hawaii and Chicago with the standards-based change process. I have begun reading the Vogt and Shearer text and see many similar themes. (On a side note, I ordered a used copy of the Allington text and it seems to be on the slow boat. I am regretting my frugalness.)
Shawn's school has a lot going for it and is poised to take some second steps. What are the priorities? It may be wise to map out the path as you begin and then continue to modify it as time goes on. Also, what are the instructional practices being used throughout the school? How is instruction being delivered? (Lecture, teach and test, investigations, cooperative groups, literature study, etc.) Are there practices that need to be continue and strengthenes? Some that should be discontinued? What are the "truths" of best practice that can be shared throughout the school?
Jill's school is also on a good track, isn't it. So many good things happening, especially among the faculty. The regular ed/special ed conversation is a necessary one in many schools. So much research on struggling learners affirms that we need to compliment good first teaching with good intervention. As you develop a literacy rich community, are there strategies suggested in Harwayne's text to help you? It will be interesting to compare the qualities of excellent schools as stated by harwayne, Allington, and others.
Shawn's school has a lot going for it and is poised to take some second steps. What are the priorities? It may be wise to map out the path as you begin and then continue to modify it as time goes on. Also, what are the instructional practices being used throughout the school? How is instruction being delivered? (Lecture, teach and test, investigations, cooperative groups, literature study, etc.) Are there practices that need to be continue and strengthenes? Some that should be discontinued? What are the "truths" of best practice that can be shared throughout the school?
Cape Elizabeth High School has some definite strengths when it comes to emphasizing whole-school literacy. First, we generally speaking have a pretty positive and talented faculty. There are pockets of expertise in issues of literacy that are there to be exploited, including our librarian and several teachers in various departments who have an acute awareness of the challenge of reading for many students.
Second, the mission statement we adopted for our NEASC review a couple of years ago highlighted "read well and reflectively" as one of our academic expectations which we committed to implement. Since adopting that mission, we have struggled with figuring out what to do with it. This past year, we made progress towards a common reading rubric that would cut across disciplines. This coming year is the year when we need to translate that rubric into a real examination of student work and teacher practice.
Third, we have committed the budget resources to add a literacy support teacher to our staff for next year. As the difficult budget year unfolded, the hope to have this as an add-on position disappeared and I made a decision, consistent with the school priorities we had fixed on early in the fall, not to replace a technology and tech integrator teacher in favor of a literacy and literacy integrator teacher. There was some grumbling about that, but not too much, since we had identified adding a literacy teacher as our top budget priority. I was fortunate I could make this change without letting somebody go. That would have produced far more grumbling. In any event, there will be a well respected teacher leadiing our charge up the literacy hill.
The major challenge we face in turning literacy into a significant focus that affects classroom practice is the same challenge we face in implementing just about any change: complacency based on how well our kids do right now. There is a tendency to pat ourselves on the back, and some of that is deserved. But sometimes it gets overdone. There is no question we have huge advantages compared to other schools. It is also very clear that some of our rival schools are doing a better job addressing the reading/writing needs of students. We consistently lead the pack in math, whereas we tend to come in a bit lower down on reading and writing. This was a significant topic of conversation last year, and it is beginning to sink in as a reality we need to confront.
Taking Stock Hyde School 3 strengths: 1. A faculty, student and parent culture that encourages, even demands, direct and honest conversation - as we say 'intentional intrusion' - focused on going after one's best. We also live by the principle of 'brother's keeper - I help others achieve their best. That 'best' might be on the athletic field or in the classroom. It can apply to student or to coach. In this and many other ways, we have paid attention to social tone of the school and we involve families. Brothers Keeper also leads to shared leadership*. 2. Autonomy from federal whims. We can focus on what we feel is important in teaching and learning. We also have small school size that allows us to operate. 3. A philosophy that focuses on the Unique Potential of individuals. We are most concerned with the integrity (soul) of the student, teacher and parent. We are more focused on the attitude than the aptitude of the individual. We are educating the whole student and the family. So, our aim of creating readers, writers and thinkers is contextualized and has a richer purpose than college admissions.
The critical needs: 1. Perhaps a little less autonomy. We can unfortunately begin to live in a bubble that filters out the good as well as the bad when it comes to information regarding education. We need a person - no, people - who can access and synthesize the info that can help us. For example, we need access to info on the literacy needs of adolescents. We must stop living in fear of not getting them prepared for college because it makes us make instruction look a bit too much like college. We need to learn how to scaffold adolescents better. At this level we need to work on curriculum integrated to promote meaning, assessment aligned with instruction and standards and shared instructional leadership.* 2. More time to see each other teach as well as talk and learn about teaching. Because we are generalists, our time is totally consumed with many tasks. So, though we have the culture of Brother's Keeper, we rarely take the time to practice it with each other in the classroom. 3. A physical space that supports learning. Our walls are bare most of the year because the classrooms are multipurpose. Few teachers can have a classroom library in the traditional sense because s/he might teach in two to three different rooms. this step is just one of the steps for developing a culture of literacy.*
*references to the Manhattan New School 8 criteria for a literacy rich school.
How will my strengths help the school address those needs... an excellent question. I am still wrestling with the answers.
7 comments:
As a whole, LFHS is doing some wonderful things with teaching reading and writing. Right now it seems to me that our biggest assets are the following:
1. We have dedicated teachers who enjoy low student-to-teacher ratios. With 5 English teachers for 350 students, our classes are small and we get to know students personally. This means we can often address literacy issues informally and within classes and do not need formal programs that don’t always fit into the traditional high school structure. In short, we can accomplish a lot with a minimum of bureaucracy.
2. We are benefiting from and building on literacy work done by the elementary and middle schools. As Peter said in class, literacy has “trickled up” to the high school. Many incoming ninth grade students speak the literacy lingo better than the teachers. As a result we can build on the skillset they have developed. Many of our teachers have gone through some level of literacy training this year and more are scheduled to be trained next year. In fact, my core literacy folks—those with the most training—teach English, social studies, math, science, special education, and research skills. This cross-discipline group volunteered and demonstrate that educators from all sectors realize the importance of literacy training.
3. We are in a great position to make major gains. This is one of those silver-lining characteristics. As a rule, we don’t do well on tests here. Our SAT and NWEA scores leave a lot to be desired. This is bad. On the other hand, we are in a great position to implement some fairly low-impact but high-yield strategies that will have make the few critics we do have take notice.
And, of course, if we have assets we must have liabilities.
1. Not everyone is on board. Some educators decry the lack of reading and writing skills but do not see themselves as part of the solution. High schools are very compartmentalized beasts and ours is no exception. This often means that math and science teachers do not think they should teach reading and writing. This also often means that when the focus is on grades 9 and 10, teachers of grades 11 and 12 do not think they should be using the strategies we are trying to implement. Most of our faculty is on board with these efforts but some are not as active as they need to be.
2. Cracks are beginning to develop as a district between the different versions of literacy programming. That is, the elementary school is in what I would call a second or third generation of programming. This means they have been doing it long enough that it is old hat. And with anything that has been around for a while the approach to it can be cavalier. The middle school, on the other hand, has had literacy training for a while but in recent years it has had to be a specific brand of Maine-approved and Maine-funded training because the school is an NCLB CIPS (Continuous Improvement School) facility. And the high school is now using the same person who started the middle school on its literacy path but there are shades of differences that are starting to emerge. This has not been a deal-breaker at all, but I’m aware of the situation and would not at all be surprised if problems arise out of it.
3. Finally, many of my students are not motivated to have higher aspirations and so do not see the need to have higher literacy skills. Motivation is a factor at all levels but in high schools unmotivated students can more easily refuse to participate and simply drop out of school. By and large my communities do not have a high rate of high school completion or college attendance. As a result, my low-achieving group tends to be hard core and hard to reach.
Remember, however, that I have not actually read any course materials yet! I’m hoping that after reading them I will develop more refined assessments of the state of affairs at LFHS and more specific steps on how to make it better!
--Shawn Lambert
Shawn’s post reminded me of how important it is to take stock of what is working in my school by celebrating and building on strengths.
First and foremost, WDS is a positive, supportive community. While many of our students are solidly middle class, a large percentage of our students come from less stable homes where income and often living and family situations are unpredictable. The school provides much of the stability that our more fragile students need. With a highly successful positive behavior-support system in place, as well as school-wide Responsive Classroom practices, WDS is a safe, joyful place to learn. Our students have been involved in many service-learning projects engaging in their community as agents of change.
The district has developed a comprehensive assessment system which provides rich
formative and summative data about how children are performing. The literacy assessments are closely aligned to the local and state benchmarks. We continue to ask critical questions about which assessments provide the most useful information and inform our instruction. Next year, in our school, we will continue our identification of power standards and refine assessments in literacy. I am optimistic that some of this work will help us develop assessments and instruction in higher order literacy skills.
The teachers and staff at WDS demonstrate high levels of professionalism and commitment to professional learning. It is a dynamic staff that embraces learning and change. We light a candle at the end of each year honoring change in our school community because it is so much a part of the school culture. We have historically embraced multiple initiatives with fervor. What we are coming to realize is that we need sustained and focused professional learning.
Collaboration is high among several of our grade level teams and instructional practices and assessments are becoming increasingly transparent. The greatest collaboration gap exists between special education and regular education. The school has an impressive level of services; however, the lack of coordination between regular and special education has left our most at-risk students with disjointed programming. The percentage of students identified as special education is very high and classroom teachers feel an unending revolving door of students coming and going for additional services.
Finally, as I look through the list of eight characteristics outlined in Going Public, I question whether a culture of rich literacy prevails in the school. There are sweet moments of literacy experiences, but it is not everpresent or deep and rich. Classroom libraries are undernourished, and students need more opportunities to read, write, and think deeply.
I am very optimistic about our ability to confront our greatest challenges as much of the infrastructure for substantive change is in place. Over the last year, we have been able to rework the master schedule to allow for common planning and staggered literacy blocks. Teachers work in professional learning communities and have developed progress monitoring systems. With these critical pieces in place, I believe we are in a great place for realizing better outcomes for our students.
Much of my current thinking about what is working and not working in my school is drawn from Kathryn Au and Taffy Raphael’s work in Hawaii and Chicago with the standards-based change process. I have begun reading the Vogt and Shearer text and see many similar themes. (On a side note, I ordered a used copy of the Allington text and it seems to be on the slow boat. I am regretting my frugalness.)
Shawn's school has a lot going for it and is poised to take some second steps. What are the priorities? It may be wise to map out the path as you begin and then continue to modify it as time goes on. Also, what are the instructional practices being used throughout the school? How is instruction being delivered? (Lecture, teach and test, investigations, cooperative groups, literature study, etc.) Are there practices that need to be continue and strengthenes? Some that should be discontinued? What are the "truths" of best practice that can be shared throughout the school?
Jill's school is also on a good track, isn't it. So many good things happening, especially among the faculty. The regular ed/special ed conversation is a necessary one in many schools. So much research on struggling learners affirms that we need to compliment good first teaching with good intervention. As you develop a literacy rich community, are there strategies suggested in Harwayne's text to help you? It will be interesting to compare the qualities of excellent schools as stated by harwayne, Allington, and others.
Shawn's school has a lot going for it and is poised to take some second steps. What are the priorities? It may be wise to map out the path as you begin and then continue to modify it as time goes on. Also, what are the instructional practices being used throughout the school? How is instruction being delivered? (Lecture, teach and test, investigations, cooperative groups, literature study, etc.) Are there practices that need to be continue and strengthenes? Some that should be discontinued? What are the "truths" of best practice that can be shared throughout the school?
Cape Elizabeth High School has some definite strengths when it comes to emphasizing whole-school literacy. First, we generally speaking have a pretty positive and talented faculty. There are pockets of expertise in issues of literacy that are there to be exploited, including our librarian and several teachers in various departments who have an acute awareness of the challenge of reading for many students.
Second, the mission statement we adopted for our NEASC review a couple of years ago highlighted "read well and reflectively" as one of our academic expectations which we committed to implement. Since adopting that mission, we have struggled with figuring out what to do with it. This past year, we made progress towards a common reading rubric that would cut across disciplines. This coming year is the year when we need to translate that rubric into a real examination of student work and teacher practice.
Third, we have committed the budget resources to add a literacy support teacher to our staff for next year. As the difficult budget year unfolded, the hope to have this as an add-on position disappeared and I made a decision, consistent with the school priorities we had fixed on early in the fall, not to replace a technology and tech integrator teacher in favor of a literacy and literacy integrator teacher. There was some grumbling about that, but not too much, since we had identified adding a literacy teacher as our top budget priority. I was fortunate I could make this change without letting somebody go. That would have produced far more grumbling. In any event, there will be a well respected teacher leadiing our charge up the literacy hill.
The major challenge we face in turning literacy into a significant focus that affects classroom practice is the same challenge we face in implementing just about any change: complacency based on how well our kids do right now. There is a tendency to pat ourselves on the back, and some of that is deserved. But sometimes it gets overdone. There is no question we have huge advantages compared to other schools. It is also very clear that some of our rival schools are doing a better job addressing the reading/writing needs of students. We consistently lead the pack in math, whereas we tend to come in a bit lower down on reading and writing. This was a significant topic of conversation last year, and it is beginning to sink in as a reality we need to confront.
Taking Stock
Hyde School
3 strengths:
1. A faculty, student and parent culture that encourages, even demands, direct and honest conversation - as we say 'intentional intrusion' - focused on going after one's best. We also live by the principle of 'brother's keeper - I help others achieve their best. That 'best' might be on the athletic field or in the classroom. It can apply to student or to coach. In this and many other ways, we have paid attention to social tone of the school and we involve families. Brothers Keeper also leads to shared leadership*.
2. Autonomy from federal whims. We can focus on what we feel is important in teaching and learning. We also have small school size that allows us to operate.
3. A philosophy that focuses on the Unique Potential of individuals. We are most concerned with the integrity (soul) of the student, teacher and parent. We are more focused on the attitude than the aptitude of the individual. We are educating the whole student and the family. So, our aim of creating readers, writers and thinkers is contextualized and has a richer purpose than college admissions.
The critical needs:
1. Perhaps a little less autonomy. We can unfortunately begin to live in a bubble that filters out the good as well as the bad when it comes to information regarding education. We need a person - no, people - who can access and synthesize the info that can help us. For example, we need access to info on the literacy needs of adolescents. We must stop living in fear of not getting them prepared for college because it makes us make instruction look a bit too much like college. We need to learn how to scaffold adolescents better. At this level we need to work on curriculum integrated to promote meaning, assessment aligned with instruction and standards and shared instructional leadership.*
2. More time to see each other teach as well as talk and learn about teaching. Because we are generalists, our time is totally consumed with many tasks. So, though we have the culture of Brother's Keeper, we rarely take the time to practice it with each other in the classroom.
3. A physical space that supports learning. Our walls are bare most of the year because the classrooms are multipurpose. Few teachers can have a classroom library in the traditional sense because s/he might teach in two to three different rooms. this step is just one of the steps for developing a culture of literacy.*
*references to the Manhattan New School 8 criteria for a literacy rich school.
How will my strengths help the school address those needs...
an excellent question. I am still wrestling with the answers.
Post a Comment