How to be a terrible administrator in 5 easy steps

How to be a terrible administrator in 5 easy steps.

There are bookshelves full of people saying how to be a great administrator, but I would like to outline how to make teachers cry, let test scores slip and have new and exciting problems, if you happen to find yourself in charge of an urban public school.

I have worked with several administrators in my teaching career, whether they be principals, superintendents, assistant principals or other random titles. Some have been great! Some have been so awful that I feel the need to channel their terribleness and create this guide.

1.    1)   Treat all teachers as if they have no idea what they are doing, and have never done this before.

This step is by far the most important step to becoming a terrible administrator. No matter the length or success of any individual’s career, it is best to treat all teachers as if it is the very first time they have ever been in a school before. Even if a teacher has been decorated by more awards than Meryl Streep, and has been at the top of their game for decades, it would be advised to sign them up for basic workshops (examples include: basic classroom management, objective writing, anything aimed at beginners).  This strategy works two fold, first it lets them know that you did not bother to learn anything about them, but as a bonus it also generally insults their entire career. If you want to really drive this point home, have all your teachers ALWAYS attend the exact same trainings on basic teaching principals. Why shouldn’t everyone in the school spend half a day learning the basic definition of differentiation? Again, the important part is to assume that no teacher has any experience or expertise in anything. This way, you can distinguish yourself as the only person that knows anything. Very quickly you should have insulted, bored, and probably angry staff members. This is an important attitude to foster, if you are truly committed to being a terrible administrator.

2.     2)  Treat all evaluations as if giving points to teachers, means taking them away from yourself.

To add to the step above, no teacher should be feeling any level of success. So treat all evaluations as if giving teachers points, will take them away from you personally. It may not matter that bonuses, tied to evaluations, are paid by a private foundation and do not affect school budgets, or that moral could be boosted if people feel that their jobs are secure. The important part is that people feel scared, intimidated and unsuccessful at their jobs. As much as you can ruin their day, week, year, entire career by giving a low score, you should seize that opportunity. It lets them know that no matter what they do, you control that number that can determine their entire career/life. Not sure how to do this? Here are some helpful tips. 1) Ignore anything positive happening in the room, focus on the one student that may look sleepy, or was staring at the wall. Figure out a way to work that into every part of the evaluation. 2) Focus on what is posted on the wall. No Anti-Bully poster, deduct points, also take off points for font sizes, not using colored markers (or using too many), having too many visual aids (or not enough) and anything “fun” should be cause for deductions. All of these things have very little to do with actual quality teaching, but you can take pictures of them with your phone and then later claim that it is evidence of something, although no one will know of what. The most important thing is to make all teachers know that not only do you control their fate, but you have no intention of considering that when visiting their classroom.

3.      3) Pick favorites, and most importantly, non-favorites.

This is easier to do than you may think. Here are some helpful tips.

1)      Make a large deal about punctuality, but always allow one person (or group of people) to saunter in late (with everyone watching) and have it be consequence free. Same goes for leaving early, turning in paperwork, etc.

2)      Always use the same people in your examples of amazing teaching. Do not under any circumstances use anyone outside of the favorites, as a positive example. It may give the idea that people outside of the favorites groups have redeeming qualities.

3)      If two ideas are presented, always choose the one from a favorite, even if it is terrible.

4)      Constantly tell non-favorites what the favorites are doing right, even if it has nothing to do with the conversation.

4.    4)  Micromanage as much as possible, but only certain things.

This step can be tricky. I will try to make it simple. Micromanaging can be time consuming, so make sure that you are overly concerned, and will continuously be checking on, things that don’t really matter. Posters on the wall is one of my favorites. A great tactic is not worrying about what the posters are, or if you ever use them in teaching, but focus merely on the quantity. This way you can go into a classroom when the teacher is not there and then send them emails at 9:00pm, telling them to fix their unacceptable poster situation by 8:00am. Always good to include pictures from your phone, so they know you were really there. Other good ideas include, font sizes of anything displayed, where on the board you write things, colors of markers (note: you must be willing to not provide markers, forcing teachers to purchase their own), where students write their name on the paper, and what kinds of boxes supplies and books are kept in. These are some really great things to micromanage.

5.       5)   Be a “Yes” person to all higher ups, regardless of the request.

It is the teacher’s job to advocate to administration on behalf of the needs of their students. However, as an administrator do not be fooled into thinking that you need to advocate for teachers. Your job is to appear in charge, and powerful. Your boss should see your teachers cowering at your feet while jumping to fulfil your every command. A solid way to destroy teacher’s trust, all while looking good to your boss, is simply to say “Yes” to every crazy, spur of the moment, poorly planned initiative that comes down from the district level. Need to change math curriculums three times within the year, you need to make sure that your teachers comply and don’t ask questions. This is not about what is best for students, it is about looking good to your boss. Is the district mandating something that is totally not appropriate for your population? (a great example is, monthly paragraph writing for all students, including preschool and newcomer ESL students) You should double the mandate to show your boss that you are taking it seriously. With luck, students will begin to get demotivated, teachers will feel defeated and loose that spark that makes them love teaching. This also relates to the first step. Teachers, obviously, can not decide what is right for their students, you need to enforce whatever crazy idea comes down the pipeline because people who have never met your students, are in the best position to make decisions about their daily education.

Following my five easy steps you should quickly become a truly terrible administrator. However, if you are truly following my advice, you should note that I am a teacher and therefor know nothing. 

Advice for my sisters, upon their graduation

My younger sister posted an article on Facebook. Something along the lines of "Advice to 20 year old me, from 30 year old me." I am in my 30s and decided that it was time that I impart my wisdom upon my sisters, both of whom are graduating this year. So here it is:

  - Take the corporate job. You may hate it, but learn what it is like to have a real paycheck, and work. You will probably quit, but you will love your next job so much more. Plus you will learn to speak in acronyms, it is like a whole other language.

 - I do want to, now, travel in style, but also wish I would have gone more places when I didn't care if I slept in a room with 20 other people, so do both.

 -Don't be late. It is rude. It makes you look bad, and it is a waste of time. Punctuality Matters. 

 - No matter where you live, find a good Thai Food place, Coffee place, and a place to get dessert. These are a must for any decent neighborhood. Find them before you decide what apartment to rent.

 - Try things, just because you found a Groupon. 

- Have high thread count sheets and wash them often. There is no excuse not to get a good night's sleep. Invest in good pillows, you will not regret it.

 - Find a work friend who you can go to Happy Hour with and complain about work. If you bottle it up, you will explode. Think of it as therapy. 

-If you want to be single, be single. If you want to be in a relationship, find a good one. Don't feel pressured for either. 

- Make weekend brunch a priority.

- Always have an updated resume and probably some swanky business cards, even if you made them yourself. 

-Live in a big city, at least once, at least for a year. If you hate it, then leave, but at least you will know what it is like to not have to drive anywhere, and get any kind of food delivered at any hour.

 I am sure I have more life altering advice, but that is it for now, from someone in their 30s, to someone in their 20s.

Converting Teaching to 21st Century Learning

I have been involved in a few discussions recently about technology’s role in education. I hear everything from, “I just want kids to be able to type,” “They need to be able to pass the PARCC,” “I want them to be able to make a PowerPoint.” You get the idea. I have done TONS of reading and research on the idea of, What do we really want kids to be able to do? Many states and counties make this very clear, mine does not. In all of this research I have found out some things that have thrown me onto different paths, or simply just made me think. There is an infographic put out by Rosetta Stone about Technology in the Classroom. Most of it contains things that we have heard before, but one bullet point on one page caught my attention. It is talking about how students learn differently in the digital age. There are obviously hundreds of articles, papers and websites devoted to this. What caught my attention was, immediate feedback. I have been successful at convincing most teachers that the skills that are gained through integrating technology into the classroom are useful as students matriculate up through their education and eventual careers. However, I think that I have been less successful in showing that students are actually coming into the classroom with different expectations around gathering and retaining information. I think this idea of “immediate feedback” really brings this home. Time for an example. If I give a quiz to students, let’s say on Thursday. I take it home to grade it, but get side tracked, have to do laundry, deal with family stuff, whatever. I attempt to do it on Friday during planning, but a parent calls and now my planning period is gone. So I, like a good teacher, spend my weekend grading a quiz on fractions. Give it back to kids on Monday. Here is the issue. I taught math on Friday, so we are already one lesson beyond the quiz. What if on Friday they “got it.” This data is already so outdated. Plus, it is not at all useful to students. They had no concept of what to study, or how to get more practice. If they play an online math game, or do an online quiz, they know immediately. I know immediately. I can totally change my Friday lesson if needed. They know right where they stand. Also, I didn’t have to spend my weekend grading papers!

However, it is so much bigger than that. If I want to know what year the Declaration of Independence was written, I can ask Siri, or Google, or Cortana (insert your brand of OS platform personality). I don’t ever have to wonder about dates, facts, who was that actress in that movie? I can have that information instantly. So can students, and they are used to it. The idea of walking up to the library, looking in a catalogue, finding the book, flipping through and index, reading a page, sounds exhausting to someone who is used to just saying “OK Google.” So they don’t do it. Some would brand this as lazy. I don’t. I think it is using tools, and being efficient. That student who didn’t go all the way to the library now has, probably, a half an hour more time to do something with this new information. I now have time to fold my laundry and put it away, instead of leaving it in a huge pile next to my bed. OK, so what does this mean for teaching? If students, and teachers, are used to immediate feedback, they also have, or will have, the tools to use that feedback to change course, or create action. So it is the paradigm shift, of we need to not just know information, we need to know what to do with it. Information is so easy to obtain, that it is no longer a skill to be able to know a date, or name in history. The new skill is knowing WHY that date and person are important, how they relate to the whole story. Also, now that you know this, how are you going to use it to better yourself or others? This is the shift. Obtaining information, or “learning” information is not the objective. That is what we all did in school, we learned how to find specific information, how to memorize it. This is no longer a necessary skill. Why are we still teaching it? If you really believe in this idea, your textbooks become obsolete; dictionaries and times tables charts become useless. This shift in mindset is important. It is also not happening. How do we convince teachers that the way that information in obtained and processed, in 2016 is like no other time in history, and that teaching and learning needs to adjust?

Authenic Assignments

These are posters, made by 3^rd graders. As far as third grade work goes, there is not really anything remarkably wrong with them. However, if we put on the lens of creating 21^st century learners, a whole lot starts to be wrong. Sure, they could have done them on a computer, or typed the text, but let’s go further. The assignment was to create an advertisement to encourage people to vote. A fine assignment. Step back and let’s look at this through a 21^st century lens. Who is the target of your advertisement? I would assume people who are eligible to vote, and are not voting. This raises the question of authenticity of assignments. If posters are created and hung in the hall of an elementary school they will be mostly seen by children, so not really reaching the target audience. This gives the impression of doing an assignment, simply for completing an assignment. One of the keys of creating 21^st century classrooms is having authenticity to the work, giving the assignments meaning. If student’s have a reason to complete the assignment that is authentic, they care more about the work. If an advertisement had to be created to encourage people to vote, and actually be seen by the eligible voting population, creativity is forced to take over. I am willing to bet that students will come up with ideas like YouTube videos, A series of Tweets, commercials, the list goes on. Now their work has purpose. They could actually influence someone to vote. So the product being digital is not what makes it an example of 21^st century teaching and learning, it is the idea of authentic work that has meaning and purpose.

Inquiry Based Teaching and Learning..... as I see it

Inquiry Based Learning

How I understand it.

I am best in stories. So here it goes.

My mother recently came back from a trip to Australia, and brought me a boomerang.  It came with a tri-folded one page pamphlet, printed on neon pink paper and featured a picture of a man in very short shorts.  On one of the first pleasant weather days that we had in a while, a friend texted me and asked if I want to go do something outside. We went to a local park and thought we would try to throw this boomerang. Certain that we would be boomerang world champs in the next few minutes, we whipped out the pamphlet. Not surprising, we did not end up with a single successful boomerang throw. We read the instructions but after a few failed attempts we gave up saying “we should have YouTubed this.” This story is what finally made me understand student directed, inquiry based learning. Let’s pretend for a second that the end learning goal is that students know how to throw a boomerang (you can substitute just about any learning goal, but let us go with my boomerang goal). How would a teacher, especially one who does not know how to throw a boomerang, teach kids how to throw a boomerang? This got me thinking about creating the ideal learning conditions, versus teaching. In traditional teaching, I would need to know how to throw a boomerang, be an expert actually, able to analyze the various throws of the students and find the mistakes and be able to provide feedback and correct mistakes.  I have no idea how to throw a boomerang, but I do know how to teach learning. Here is what I would do: I would have a resource list of YouTube videos, articles about boomerang throwing, maybe some information about famous boomerang throwers and their advice, and give them full access to a library and the internet. I would then provide a whole bunch of boomerangs, a wide open space and some digital video cameras. Here is how it would go down. I would start with the goal, be able to correctly throw a boomerang. I would design a way to prove that students have gained this knowledge – Students will email me a video of them correctly throwing a boomerang by Friday (if I was really good, I would have them create a YouTube video explaining to someone else how to correctly throw a boomerang with demonstrations). I would lay out a process for them. First students will research the correct way to throw a boomerang. Students will create a list of criteria for success for boomerang throws (what makes a boomerang throw “correct?”)They will then try to throw the boomerang based on their research, and video themselves (or a partner). They will critique their own video based on the criteria which they established. Students will compare their video to expert videos that they found online.  They will then correct mistakes, and try again, and again, and again, going through the critique cycle until they have a throw that they consider correct, and can submit, along with the student established criteria for success.

This all sounds great, right? OK let’s break it down:

What did the teacher do?

1)      Chose a learning goal

2)      Provided materials and resources

3)      Created a process for students to follow

4)      Had a concrete goal and deadline.

What did the students do?

1)      Researched the topic in a way that met their style of learning (If I learn best via videos, I am going to naturally watch videos, if I learn best from reading, then I can get a book)

2)      Created criteria of success – They knew what they had to do to be successful and were invested in that success because they created what that meant.

3)      Completed tasks, collected data, analyzed their data.  This is usually what teachers do, but why? Kids will get so much more out of finding the mistakes and correcting them, than they will if we tell them what to do.

4)      Completed an assessment.

5)      Most importantly: learned how to learn! Whether or not they will ever need to throw a boomerang in their life is irrelevant. They now know how to learn something, independent of anyone else.  So next time something comes up and they want to know how to fix a car, get into college, write a great paper, build a website, whatever, the process is the same.

The students did the work! Traditional teaching has been an expert at the front of the room imparting knowledge to a group. We live in an amazing age. No longer do we need to depend on someone else knowing the subject matter. But rather, with the internet, everyone has access, instantly, to the entire collective knowledge of all mankind! In this model the teacher facilitates. They do more work on the back end, of preparing materials, having clear expectations and learning outcomes, and almost zero time “teaching.” They are the sheep herder, steering the flock and catching those who stray away, or need a little extra support. The teacher is no longer the grand marshal leading the parade, but the person in the back making sure the parade moves forward. This is a HUGE paradigm shift for some people.

Side note/personal note: The DCPS coaching plan focuses on the “teaching.” It has mandated demonstration lessons, and co-teaching. If the design and facilitation is done correctly, there should be such minimal time devoted to teacher led lessons, that is would seem almost silly to devote so much time to coaching this part of teaching/learning. Rather that time could be spent on the back end, the planning side. Coaches should help teachers create the learning experience, not necessarily help with the delivery.  In student driven learning, it is exactly that, the student is driving, the teacher provided the map. So why is our coaching program looking like driver’s ed for teachers and not map making? We are forcing teaching and learning back to the 50s and wondering why it is not moving forward. I wonder no longer. The DCPS coaching program, as it is currently, and IMPACT, focus heavily on the delivery of lessons. The traditional teacher standing in front of students, telling them something, hoping that they “get” whatever the teacher is saying, is outdated. How about, help teachers create learning experiences where students are the drivers, let coaches focus on helping teachers with planning more than lesson delivery, and focus IMPACT on how well students know how to learn, not how well teachers know how to teach.

Why the Technology Instructional Coach program in DCPS will fail

DC Public Schools funded 11 Technology Instructional Coaches (TIC) for the 2014 -2015 school year. This represented the first time that DCPS has funded this position in multiple schools.  This move was prompted by the city council and was aimed at helping the District’s children to become more technologically proficient. As standardized testing moved to an online platform, DCPS threw money at a last second, disorganized effort, to catch up with other districts. This program was disorganized from the start, and spent the last year dealing with some serious growing pains. First, the positive, the coaches that were hired are all experts in technology integration and all are already notably accomplished in this arena. All but two were hired from outside the district and a manager was brought in from Arlington, VA. The coaches were quickly frustrated as they learned that the technology integration models that are successfully implemented in other districts were not copied or even considered. DCPS chose to take its already existing Instructional Coach program and tack on the word technology. The existing coaching program aims at providing scripted and overly structured support to teachers mainly in the areas of reading and math.  It is the insistence by a few people at central office, to adhere to this suffocating format that will sink the TIC program. It is set up for failure and already, some talented people are abandoning what is sure to be a sinking ship.

                                                                                                                                   

The IC model, as it is written, is geared towards coaches spending many hours a week with a small group of teachers working through scripted plans which are supposed to improve their teaching. The existing ICs focus on one particular subject such as math or small group literacy. Anyone who knows anything about true technology integration should be quick to shout “Technology is not a subject!” True technology integration is present in all aspects of teaching. It is something that is authentic, and often student led. When working with a coach, a teacher is to lay out a specific student data point to be improved. Example: 80% of students will increase their words read per minute by 10 words.  A coach will identify where this skill should be taught, and help the teacher to improve their teaching to achieve this data point increase. The coach and teacher will work on nothing else for a full six weeks. If true technology integration is the goal, the focus can not be that myopic. Tech integration is not a data point, although it can be measured, it is not a program or a teaching method, it is a tool. Let me say that again, technology is a tool.

I recently tried to explain the concept of technology being a tool, and not a content area, to someone, it went something like this: I can hand you a pencil. The pencil is the tool. The pencil will not make you a better speller, although you can now show the teacher you are a better speller. The pencil cannot make you learn math, but it can help you practice your math problems until you can work them successfully. The pencil can be used for math, and reading, and writing. The pencil can help you communicate and progress in school. If everything was verbal before, and now you have pencils, your teaching may look different, but will be better. If I measure usage of the pencil, that will tell me nothing about spelling, only that you used the pencil. A good TIC will give a teacher lots and lots of different kinds of metaphorical pencils. They will help to provide tools to enhance teaching and learning. This can be as simple as sharing a new resource with a teacher, or as complex as helping a teacher figure out that the internet is more than just Google. The goal is not to get teacher simply using technology, but utilizing it to really show measurable growth in student learning.

In ten years, my current second graders will be graduating high school. I can only imagine the world that they will be entering. Whether they choose to go to college, or into the work force, I can be sure of one thing, technology will play a large and important role in their lives. They will need to have the skills to navigate a digital world. The process in which they attend college or focus on a career will be drastically different than it is even now. They need the technology skills to be able to compete in a market where their suburban counterparts have had an iPad since birth. How can DCPS even begin to have its students come close to having the technological skills to be ready for this future world? It is not the current TIC model. The current model focuses only on one skill, with a small group of teachers, for six weeks. This is limiting and does not allow for the rigorous work that needs to be done to close an ever increasing technological achievement gap.

I am a TIC in DCPS. When I attended the first training for this new position, I was handed the same manual that is handed to a coach working in the realms of math or reading. Our next meeting, they forgot to give us a room and told us we could move some boxes and sit in a closet. The manager who was brought in from the successful program in Arlington, VA, was getting increasingly frustrated with the constraints put on the TICs. The TICs were getting frustrated as well. We all had the same goal of student learning, but the path to get there was no twisted, it was preventing us from reaching our destination. The leaders at central office did not understand the true idea of technology integration, that it is a tool. At our most recent meeting we were told that our frustrations, our concerns, and our expertise in this area were, and I quote “not special.” Rather than listen to the decades of experience in the room, rather than listen to the concerns of the experts in this field, even more restraints would be placed on the TIC program next year. The TICs came up with a list of very specific, and reasonable changes that could be immediately implemented at no cost, and would save time and paperwork. They were immediately dismissed without consideration.  Also, instead of a person who had experience in tech integration overseeing the coaches, they would now report to someone who has had zero experience with integration because it would be more convenient.  I was sitting in the meeting with the head of Instructional Coaches, where we pleaded, presented evidence, shared our experience and sang in one voice that this program will fail, unless changes are made. We were told, without explanation that if we would not fit a square peg into a round hole, we should think about finding new employment. We are being set up to fail, and will be blamed for sinking the ship.  Our training, experience and common sense tell us, that this plan is wrong and doomed to not succeed. We were asked to list the accomplishments that we had achieved this year. All of us looked at the list and could not help but noting that we could have done so much more. We were hampered by the confines of a system that is meant for math and reading. The IC program is likened to a bathroom scale. It is a great bathroom scale that works perfectly. However, you are asking us to measure how tall a person is, not how much they weigh. We need the tools and support to build a tape measure, not the blueprints for a functional bathroom scale. I must accuse DCPS of doing what is convenient and familiar instead of listening to experts and doing what is right for the students of DC.

The changes pleaded for by the current TICs are simple and reasonable. First, we would like shorter or more flexible coaching cycles. The current coaching cycles are fixed at six weeks. Throughout the year, we found that we needed longer or shorter time spans to accomplish our goals. We could still be accountable for working with the same number of teachers, at any given time, but this simple and no-cost change would allow us to work with a greater number of teachers, and tackle a greater number of small changes that can account for a huge difference. We asked that the successful coaching models in other states, and they are plentiful, be considered as models for shaping the TIC program in DCPS. The District is late to the game in terms of technology integration, and should not waste time trying to figure out ideal implementation, successful models exist, DC should be learning from them.  Every Instructional Coach in DC is given a pie chart saying how they should spend their time. The TICs asked that some of the percentages on the chart be adjusted for the extra technology repair and planning time that is demanded of them.  The last request was, that the TICs have more frequent and meaningful collaborative planning and professional development time. Again, all of these changes cost DCPS absolutely nothing. They simply require the head of the Instructional Coaching Program to be willing to admit that the integration of technology in the District does not fit perfectly within an already existing system.  By trapping technology in this system, the District’s children are being cheated out of the technological skills that they will need to become the citizens that DC deserves. 

Curling!! Yeah!

For those of you who don't know, I am a curler (yes that sport on ice with brooms). My curling team is made up of some really awesome women! We are raising funds to help with the high cost of this amazing sport! I would appreciate it from the bottom of my heart if you supported us and bought a shirt. www.booster.com/tpcbs