LeadershipPortfolio



System Analysis: Teacher Leadership in the Cedar Rapids Community School District Melissa Courtney Drake UniversitySystem Analysis: Cedar Rapids Community School District Teacher LeadershipIntroductionCedar Rapids Community School District is currently writing a proposal to meet the guidelines set out by the Department of Education for the Teacher Leadership and Compensation System and the Teacher Leadership Supplement of categorical funding. The district’s goal is to organize all current teacher leadership opportunities into a comprehensive system of Cedar Rapids Community School District teachers to improve instruction and student learning at all levels. Iowa’s Task Force on Teacher Leadership and Compensation and legislation (Division VII of House File 215) has provided districts with three models to choose from, each requiring the following 5 “Must-Haves”: Minimum salary of $33,500Improved entry into the professionDifferentiated, multiple, meaningful teacher leadership rolesRigorous selection process for leadership roles Aligned professional development The Cedar Rapids Community School District is developing a plan that meets the requirements of the Department of Education and aligns with the district’s board goals, i.e., the achievement gap, professional learning communities, and quality instruction. It is essential that our proposal meet the needs of our students, teachers and the larger community. Once our proposal has been approved, Cedar Rapids Community School District will receive approximately $5 million annually from the Department of Education. One-third of the districts in Iowa will be funded in each of the next three years. This district has a long history of tapping its talented teaching staff for leadership roles that contribute to increased student achievement. As the second largest district in Iowa, we feel a sense of urgency to create one of the best proposals which will allow us to better systematize our teacher leadership roles to best serve students and further raise achievement across the district. Summary of the Current Teacher Leadership SystemCedar Rapids Community School District serves 15,975 students in 21 elementary schools, 6 middle schools, 4 high schools and a variety of alternative schools. The district is proud of the teacher talent that fills our school buildings and considers itself a frontrunner in teacher competency and leadership. For example, our district has over 50 teachers who have earned their National Boards Certification. This number is more than double compared to our large neighboring districts (Des Moines, Dubuque, Davenport, and Sioux City). The district employs 1,269 teachers. Each year, it is estimated that over 25% of teachers (315 teachers) currently serve in at least one teacher leadership position listed in Table 1. The funding awarded by the state with grant the district the opportunity to sustain and build its current leadership program. Presently, it is estimated that Building Leadership Teams, Professional Learning Community (PLC) Leaders and Cooperating Teachers are the highest populated subgroups of teacher leaders. Table 1: Teacher Leadership Positions Behavior Specialist (RtI) Building Leadership Team Cooperating Teacher Curriculum Facilitator Department Chair Induction CoachInstructional Coach Instructional Design Strategist Iowa Core Curriculum WriterLearning Supports Facilitator Mentor Facilitator Model Classroom Teacher Professional Learning Community (PLC) LeaderProfessional Development Facilitator Resolution Team Facilitator Technology Trainer Teacher Leadership Program Facilitator (to be added)Teacher Quality Leaders Under the current system, teacher leaders are not compensated for their additional leadership work unless they agree to work extra days over the summer and receive stipend pay. The lack of formal contracts for many of these roles results in leadership positions that fluctuate from year to year or even throughout the year. Many of the current teacher leadership positions lack uniform job descriptions resulting in a wide array of responsibilities and outcomes that range from building to building throughout the district. Added consequences include low levels of commitment and investment of those individuals holding the leadership positions due to inconsistencies within the current teacher leadership system. Indicators for ChangeTroubling Student Performance DataOverall, the students in Cedar Rapids are performing better than the state and national averages according to Iowa Assessment Data. The district’s website states that 60% of students in the nation are considered proficient (at the 40th National Percentile Rank or above). Figures 1 and 2 indicate the percentage of students in the district who are proficient in reading and math. right26606500266700031908750Figure 2 CRCSD Iowa Assessment Data: Math 0Figure 2 CRCSD Iowa Assessment Data: Math Figure 1 CRCSD Iowa Assessment Data: ReadingDespite positive results on Iowa Assessments as a district, various schools in our district struggle to make annual yearly progress even with supports in place. Of the 361 school districts in the state of Iowa, we are within the 8% (or 28) of Districts in Need of Assistance (DINA) according to No Child Left Behind (NCLB). In other words, one or more of the schools at each level (elementary, middle, and high) has not met the state Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) for subgroups according to AYP targets and growth models for 2 or more consecutive years. Specific supports are applied to Title I Schools in Need of Assistance, or otherwise named SINA schools. Schools designated as SINA 1 schools must offer school choice options to the students and parents of that school. Should a school not make acceptable progress in that year, they are moved to a level 2 status. Schools designated as SINA 2 schools (schools in need of improvement for 2+ years) must also provide supplementary educational services (SES) to low income students. As of 2013-2014 school year, nine Cedar Rapids elementary schools were designated at the level of SINA 2 or more. Low income students in these schools were eligible for free tutoring that occurred outside of the school day. Table 2 illustrates the number of students who have been eligible for SES and who have taken advantage of this opportunity since 2007-08. Table 2SES Eligibility and Participation in Cedar Rapids Community School District2007-082008-092009-102010-112011-122012-13Number of students eligible 2232211898521,4711,841Number of students participating in SES353656254350285Percentage of students participating in SES16%16%30%30%24%15%Our elementary schools are progressively advancing to critical levels of assistance. Cedar Rapids Community School District appears to be suffering from the disability of The Parable of the Boiled Frog. Table 2 indicates since the 2010-11 school year, the number of elementary students eligible for SES has increased as a result of the increase in SINA 2 schools; yet the percentage of students who take advantage of the SES has remained the same or has slowly decreased since 2009-10. The percentage gap from 2010 to 2012 is steadily widening. Although the nine designated SINA 2 elementary schools are getting an increase in support through NCLB, this data shows that the schools are not advancing from this assistance because fewer and fewer students are involved in the instruction and support. Meanwhile, our number of SINA 2 schools gradually continue to increase suggesting that neither the additional SES nor the instruction being provided during the school day is making a considerable difference in test scores. Rather than focusing on overall achievement data such as Iowa Assessments, Senge (2006) claims it is essential that the district “see the gradual processes that often pose the greatest threats” such as the rising number of SINA schools and the subgroups of low income students (p.23). By thinking analytically and broadening the scope, it is evident that the poverty trends in Iowa are continuing to rise, hitting and all time high of 40.1 percent of total students in the state of Iowa who are currently living in poverty (The Annual Condition of Education Report, 2012, p. 8). A strong prediction can be made that our poverty levels in Cedar Rapids will continue to rise and impact our student achievement. Without our immediate attention, our current struggling elementary students will continue to struggle as middle school students and high school students. Meanwhile, new batches of struggling low income students will enter our elementary schools. Soon our overall Iowa Assessment Data will begin to reflect those struggling scores, but will it be too late by then for us to correct our problem? Will it be too late for those (current elementary students) students who have experienced so much failure? Therefore, we must be attentive to the “subtle as well as the dramatic” events in education because the subtle can creep up on us, rendering the district in a place that is difficult to repair (Senge, 2006, p. 23).It should be noted that this is only one small piece of assessment data that currently impacts a subgroup of students in nine of the twenty one elementary schools. The low income students are not the only subgroup of students within the district that deserve our attention. This particular example is meant to draw attention to this subgroup and any other subgroup that may be lingering under our radar. There is no question that teachers, principals and district personnel are working tirelessly to serve students. Unfortunately, we are not working on the right work because we are not seeing the accelerated results that our students deserve. Teacher Burnout and Turnover As the teacher burnout and turnover rate continues to make disturbing headlines in the news, Cedar Rapids finds themselves questioning their own turnover rate and the acquiring costs of teacher attrition. According to a study conducted in 2007, President of the The National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (NCTAF) found that teacher turnover costs public schools nearly $7.3 billion a year. This number accounts for teacher who leave the district completely as opposed to teachers who move buildings within a district. Carroll (2007) contends that “America’s teacher dropout problem is spiraling out of control” (p.1). In the last fifteen years, teacher attrition has increased by 50 percent and the national teacher attrition rate has risen by 16.8 percent. Carroll (2007) warns, Until we recognize that we have a retention problem we will continue to engage in a costly annual recruitment and hiring cycle, pouring more and more teachers into our nation’s classrooms only to lose them at a faster and faster rate… it will undermine teaching quality, and it will most certainly hinder our ability to close student achievement gaps (p. 1).Studies such as this one continue to paint a picture of a nation desperate for good teachers and millions of exhausted and overworked educators leaving the profession before they reach the age of retirement. Thus, it is no surprise that the Teacher Leadership and Compensation System requires that districts create a plan to improve and retain teachers within their district. Should our district be selected for funding in the first year, it is critical that we provide evidence that the money funded to the district is making a difference in teacher retention and quality. In order to gather this data, the district must start with a baseline, or in other words, data reflecting our current status. The Deputy Superintendent, Director of Human Resources and the district’s UniServe Director were asked about the current retention rate of teachers within the district. No one could provide this information. The Human Resources director responded with the following:We don’t have this report prepared and under the Freedom of Information Act, we would not be required to compile a report that we don’t currently keep.? Since we would have to spend quite a bit of time compiling this, I will have to decline the request.? Carroll (2007) recognizes that the majority of school districts do not have the capabilities to track and analyze their teacher turnover and costs. The first step to solving any predicament is to fully understand the fundamental problem. A functioning data collection system will help Cedar Rapids “analyze which teachers are leaving, from which schools, and how much money is walking out the door each time a teacher [leaves]” (Carroll, 2007, p. 7). Rather than acting on assumptions, the district must begin by analyzing the complete story with all of the facts. Only then can they design a plan that is deeply reflective and systematically identifies the elements that would produce the highest leverage and greatest impact for improvement. Strain on Building Principals The building principals in Cedar Rapids have seen an increase in their responsibilities as leaders. Heightened awareness and accountability for the widening achievement gap has resulted in a need for principals to become instructional leaders, as well as balance their role as managers of a school. In their efforts to close the achievement gap, the district has embraced several new initiatives with the intent to cultivate districtwide school culture to one that fosters collaboration between educators, focuses on learning for all students and accountability for results. Some of the chief initiatives that support this culture include the following: Professional Learning Communities (PLC), Response to Intervention (RtI), Standards Based Grading (SBG), and Positive Interventions and Support (PBIS). From each new initiative stems accountability that essentially falls on the shoulders of the principal. Subsequently, principals have the added responsibility of completing and entering classroom walk through data, as well as implement School Improvement Plans that are carefully aligned to the utilization of district initiatives as s/he attempts to implement, monitor and measure the success of these programs within their building.The pressure to raise student test scores and the demands of implementing various initiatives while simultaneously guaranteeing that their building functions efficiently and safely creates a heavy burden for school principals in Cedar Rapids. They find themselves fighting hard to survive the day to day challenges, and coupled with the spirited loyalty to their profession makes it difficult to focus on much else. Consequently, many of the principals in Cedar Rapids have become the job. Senge (2006) refers to this disability as I Am My Position. These principals focus exclusively on the daily tasks (e.g. dealing with student discipline, returning parent phone calls and emails, sitting in on PLC meetings, frequent classroom walk-throughs, and preparing for the next all school assembly) that they lose sight of their purpose. Those overcome with the disability of I Am My Position feel as if they no longer have influence over their surroundings. In the case of the Cedar Rapids principals, their surmounting responsibilities render them feeling helpless and sometimes hopeless. Thus, “they do their job, put in their time, and try to cope with the forces outside of their control” drifting further and further from the reasons why they entered education to begin with (p.18). Overworked, overwhelmed and dogged by the disability of I Am My Position, school principals feel little responsibility for the larger problems that our district faces and struggle even more to help diagnose the ailments weakening the system. Feeling as if their backs are up against the wall, it is no surprise that these leaders find an outside force to blame because they struggle to adapt to a complex, shifting systems within education. Unfortunately, their discouragement and desperate attempt to justify their strained leadership performance leaves many voicing to their staff that this is the district’s fault. In reality, struggling “to see how [their] own actions extend beyond the boundary of [their] position,” many principals have lost touch with the system as a whole. Under the current system, a number of Cedar Rapids principals cannot comprehend how their actions or inactions have contributed to the widening achievement gap. Challenges and problems are now viewed as externally caused which stems from the disability that Senge (2006) titles The Enemy is Out There, a “natural by-product” of I Am My Position (p. 19). The truth is that their short sightedness has caused them to lose touch with the whole system’s story. Undoubtedly, these complex challenges and obstacles are not solely unique to Cedar Rapids. Districts across the state and across the country are grappling with many of the same dilemmas. However, Cedar Rapids is unique in that we already have the beginnings of a teacher leadership system with the potential to capitalize on current teacher leadership positions that can aid the district as a whole envision and implement supports that we have yet to realize. The key is to push our minds to think broader and to look through a systems lens as we search for solutions. The Teacher Leadership and Compensation System provides us with an opportunity to see how our current teacher leadership structure can be adjusted to influence our broader system: specifically student achievement, teacher burnout rate, and building leadership. Once we understand how our interrelationships are influencing the larger systemic structure, we will gain the leverage and power to create real change. Digging Deeper into The 5 “Must-Haves”Minimum Salary of $33,500In 2013-2014, teachers entering the Cedar Rapids Community School District with their Bachelor’s Degree in teaching will earn a minimum of $43,500 annually, exceeding the minimum salary requirements. In 2012-13, the average teacher in Cedar Rapids earned $57, 226. This surpasses the state average of $51,528. Cedar Rapids stays competitive with neighboring districts within the state to increase the size of the applicant pool, resulting in a greater probability for diverse, quality interviewees who can better meet the needs of a school and the student population that it serves. Cedar Rapids has the philosophy that investing in quality teachers will pay them back in the long run by increases in student learning. Leadership SummaryCompetitive base salaries attract desired candidates Talented new hires bring skills and ideas that increase student learning Competitive salaries are an investment Improved Entry into the Profession Cedar Rapids has recently shifted its new teacher mentoring program. Previously, the district structured an in-house two year mentoring program where trained teacher leaders, who shared a similar content area and taught in the same building as a new teacher, were charged with supporting, advising and counseling new teachers. These teachers were compensated by the district. Currently, Cedar Rapids is utilizing full release Induction Coaches from Grant Wood Area Education Agency (GWAEA) who are contracted to mentor new teachers at no cost to the district. Full release Induction Coaches are also trained professionals in the areas of mentoring and coaching, but these individuals may not have specialized in the same content area as the new teacher. They do not work in the building, but they mentor the same new teacher for two consecutive years. The district is currently in the midst of the first year of implementation with the new model. There are varying levels of support throughout the district for the change in the mentoring system. Whereas, it is too soon to measure the impact of full release Induction Coaches from GWAEA compared to the previous system, it is obvious that teacher retention is a national crisis and warrants additional attention and support. As stated previously, the present rate of teacher retention in Cedar Rapids is in question. However, one should not assume that Cedar Rapids is immune to the national crisis of teacher burnout. Instructional Coaches that are currently employed by the district frequently witness teachers who struggle from lack of experience, increasing pressure to raise student achievement and the universal lack of on-going and individualized support. Cedar Rapids often fails to recognize and continually support inexperienced teachers who are new to the PLC process and culture. PLC conversations are anchored by student assessment data as a team collaborates about best practice and intervention strategies. The current mental model is that effective PLC’s increase job embedded teacher growth as teachers continually learn from one another. However, Figure 3 diagrams how PLC’s can impede an inexperienced teacher who does not have a regular support system in place. Figure 3 Impact of PLC Process on Inexperienced TeacherThe PLC process is most effectively and efficiently utilized by teams of teachers who are highly reflective, have established trusting relationships, and who have developed a sizable “toolbox” of teaching strategies to work with. As seen in Figure 3, whereas a team of experienced, knowledgeable teachers feel supported by group collaboration (positive reinforcing loop), an inexperienced teacher is often times intimidated by the added accountability of sharing their student results with stranger teachers (negative reinforcing loop). An amateur teacher is still building their foundational teaching abilities and have yet to develop self-directed reflection skills, strong relationships or a variety of strategies to employ in their classroom. Ashamed and insecure of their performance, their inexperience results in a slowing action leading to less collaboration, added stress, feelings of uncertainty or failure and anxiety to “do it right”. Not only is this devastating for the inexperienced teacher, but it directly impacts student achievement and the overall flow of the PLC team as one teacher and the corresponding students lag behind. In theory, the nature of PLC’s should self-correct this dilemma. A collaborative team of highly skilled individuals should encourage and mentor the inexperienced teacher. However, teachers are often too busy and lack the specialized training to help inexperienced teachers reflect and identify obstacles in order to formulate solutions. Current Induction Coaches are removed from the PLC process and the day to day happenings of the building and the teacher’s classroom. Intensive, specific and timely support is unavailable to these inexperienced teachers. Even veteran teachers are at risk of burning out from the weight of failure. Reflecting back on the SINA data for Cedar Rapids (Table 2), a considerable population of teachers in Cedar Rapids is experiencing increased stress to improve test scores in the district despite the district’s vision and implementation of PLC’s. Repeated failure, as evidenced by increasing SINA designations, manifests itself as a structural conflict. PLC’s pull teachers towards the district’s vision of “Excellence for All,” but recurring low achievement creates emotional tension that renders teachers feeling incapable, hopeless and more likely to leave the profession. Equally dangerous is the possibility that our veteran teachers cope by “letting [their] vision erode,” smothering the sense of urgency for necessary accelerated student growth in order to close the achievement gap in these buildings (Senge, 2006, p. 146). Cedar Rapids has the ability to better utilize their numerous teacher leadership positions (Instructional Coaches, PLC Leaders, and Model Teachers) to specialize in coaching both inexperienced new teachers and struggling veteran teachers. These teacher leaders can focus on tapping into a struggling teacher’s potential and fostering personal mastery. Under the Teacher Leadership and Compensation System, teacher leaders can align and strengthen their training focus on struggling teacher. For example, they can work with teachers by identifying where the teacher’s current reality is at odds with their vision (creative tension), explain appropriate strategies, model instructional strategies, observe classroom instruction, support teachers in analyzing their data, and finally, refine their practice and learn together, thus creating a partnership with that teacher and an ongoing support system. Teacher leaders can help struggling teachers become “acutely aware of their ignorance, their incompetence, [and] their growth areas” Leadership SummaryDevelop a plan to obtain and continually measure current teacher retention rate and subsequent costs to the district Reevaluate how current mental models of PLC’s encourage growth for all teachersIncrease ongoing and specific teacher leadership support for struggling new and veteran teachersSupport teachers with an intentional focus on personal mastery and utilizing creative tensionand use this reflective process as a source for “creative energy” and lifelong learning (Senge, 2006, 133-141). Teacher leaders can support struggling teachers by partnering with them to work through their emotional tension. Instead, teacher leaders can nurture the use of creative tension as a vehicle that pulls struggling teachers closer to their vision, rather than allowing them to cope and lower their goals so far that they lose their sense of purpose.Differentiated, Multiple, Meaningful Teacher Leadership Roles It is clear that Cedar Rapids currently offers multiple and differentiated teacher leadership roles throughout the district (see Table 1). Each position aims to support the district’s vision and mission of “Excellence for All”. However, these leadership positions exist in silos and each position has a difficult time identifying how their role and their work specifically fits into the “All” portion of the district vision. Cedar Rapids teacher leaders are not given the opportunity to internalize the interconnectedness of leadership positions throughout the district, let alone see how they fit as individuals. Although the leadership positions exist, teacher engagement and sense of importance is questionable since they are not currently joined by a common vision nor do they understand what they as leaders have to offer in helping the district reach its outcomes. Table 3Possible Attitudes Toward a VisionCommitment: Want it. Will make it happen. Creates whatever “laws” (structures) are needed. Enrollment: Want it. Will do whatever can be done within the “spirit of the law.” Genuine Compliance: Sees the benefits of the vision. Does everything expected and then more. Follows the “letter of the law.” “Good solider.” Formal Compliance: On the whole, sees the benefits of the vision. Does what’s expected and no more. “Pretty good soldier.” Grudging Compliance: Does not see the benefits of the vision. But, also, does not want to lose job. Does enough of what’s expected because he has to, but also lets it be known that he is not really on board. Noncompliance: Does not see benefits of vision and will not do what’s expected. “I don’t do it; you can’t make me.” Apathy: Neither for nor against vision. No interest. No energy. “It is five o’clock yet?”(Senge, 2006, p. 203-204)The absence of a shared vision for teacher leadership results in questionable levels of commitment and compliance. At this point in time, it is difficult to measure how many of our teacher leaders are committed to a vision as opposed to those who merely accept it and comply. Senge (2006) clarifies the difference in Possible Attitudes Toward a Vision seen in Table 3. It is likely that many teachers are compliant and do the work that needs to be done. This compliance moves the district forward, but not at a pace that accelerates us ahead to make noticeable strides in closing the achievement gap. In order to do this, we must have teachers who are more than compliant; they must be committed to a shared vision that explicitly marries their leadership work to the district’s goals for student success. It is essential that the district hire a Teacher Leadership Program Facilitator who is in charge of working with teacher, building and district leaders on creating a shared vision, communicating and modeling that vision, and evaluating the implementation and success of that vision. A shared vision will “create the spark” that Cedar Rapids needs to push its current leadership to the next level (Senge, 2006, p. 194). It is the Teacher Leadership Program Facilitator’s job to expedite team learning and shared vision that excites teachers and renews the current teacher leadership model. During the shared vision process the facilitator will build momentum by encouraging teacher leaders to shift from compliance to commitment. Compliant leaders focus on playing by the rules. However, according to Senge (2006), committed teacher leaders are capable of identifying when the rules get in the way of their shared vision and uncovering “ways to change the rules” (p. 205). Only then will our teacher leaders develop the courage and toughness to overcome systemic barriers that slow us down as a district. Leadership SummaryHire a Teacher Leadership Program Facilitator Engage teacher leaders in developing a shared vision to renew the current model by increasing commitment, courage and toughness. Communicate the visionModel the visionEvaluate the visionTable 4Rigorous Selection Process ComponentsSelection Criteria: design and employ “measures of effectiveness and professional growth” to select suitable candidates for teacher leadership roles Selection Process: Committee comprised of both teachers and administrators work collaboratively to review and accept new applications or reassignment applications for teacher leadership positions and make recommendations to the superintendentAnnual Review of Assignment: includes peer feedback specific the job responsibilities and duties of the teacher leader. Teacher leaders have the option to reapply for the following year or choose to apply for a different teacher leadership role. Experience: requirement of a minimum of three years’ experience as a teacher with at least one year within the district. (Iowa Department of Education Guidance on the Iowa Teacher Leadership and Compensation System, 2013, p. 5)Rigorous Selection Process The Guidance on the Iowa Teacher Leadership and Compensation System set out on July 15, 2013 clearly describes the components necessary to hire and retain the most qualified teachers as teacher leaders. Table 4 provides a detailed description of the components. As stated earlier, many teacher leadership roles in Cedar Rapids do not require a rigorous selection process or any selection process at all. Although this varies from building to building throughout the district, many of the teacher leader positions are filled by volunteer teachers. Teacher leaders shift in and out of positions at various times of the year and for a variety of reasons (time and workload, personal or professional connection to guiding mission, relationships with teammates, etc.). Without a formal selection process coupled with the fluctuating retention rate of teacher leaders, appropriate qualifications for leadership positions tend to get overlooked. The current teacher leadership system is unstable causing unreliable results that are both difficult to measure and sustain. Teacher input in the selection and review process promotes a collaborative culture and partnership between classroom teachers and new and existing teacher leaders. Teaching is a very personal activity. Teachers often identify their profession as a central part of who they are as people, causing them to be vulnerable and intimidated by the leader and their feedback concerning instruction. The selection committee is the first opportunity to unify the teachers, administrators and potential teacher leaders, sending the message that teacher perspective is valued and respected. Involving teachers in the selection and review process creates a level playing field where neither teacher leader nor classroom teacher is above the other. Explicitly communicating the role of the teacher participants and reinforcing their importance to the teaching community is important so that all teachers, whether they are participating in the process or not, understand that they serve a role that is valued by their district and building leadership team. This is a small, but crucial first step in developing trusting partnerships between teachers and teacher leaders. The district must be ready to justify that these teacher leaders are worthy and deserve additional pay. An increase in pay will, without a doubt, reinforce a mental model where teacher leaders are seen as “better than” other teachers. Figure 4 demonstrates just how damaging this mental model is to the overall initiative by limiting its overall growth. left22098000Figure 4: Limits to Growth The funding provided by the Teacher Leadership and Compensation System will ideally make the positions more attractive, leading to a greater number of strong applicants. This is represented by the positive reinforcing loop in Figure 4. However, as depicted by the balancing loop, additional pay can create a hierarchy and mental model that associates higher pay with a higher or “better than” status. This mental model can create a slowing action to the overall growth of the system as teachers are hesitant to trust and partner with teacher leaders. Since teacher enrollment determines the success or failure of an instructional coaching initiative, a positive image for coaches and other teacher leaders is vital to the life of the program. As seen in Figures 5 and 6 below, a teacher’s validation of a teacher leader is what fuels enrollment and change in classrooms. On the contrary, a lack of enrollment can slowly cause the deterioration of the teacher leadership system. 3429000Figure 5 Positive Reinforcing Loop00Figure 5 Positive Reinforcing Loop31146752324100034290022860000314325012700Figure 6 Negative Reinforcing Loop00Figure 6 Negative Reinforcing LoopThe importance of hiring the right people cannot be stressed enough. Since many of these leaders will be helping our current teachers develop a sense of personal mastery, evidence of personal mastery should naturally be a requirement of the all of the teacher leadership positions. It should be clear via the interview process that these leaders have a deep sense of responsibility for their work because they are inflicted with a strong sense of purpose that acts as the footing to their vision. These people do not see a vision as a thing- but as their vocation, the reason why they are in education. According to Senge (2006), these people tend to be “deeply self-confident” because they see the “journey as the reward” and therefore they learn faster and take initiatives because they are always learning to learn (p. 133). They welcome lifelong learning and the every change complex challenges that bubble up and impact our systems as education continues to evolve. These leaders will always pull the district forward. Unfortunately, simply involving teachers in the selection and review process cannot totally undo any current hierarchical mental models that bleed over from the inconsistencies that exist from the current system. Thus, utilizing the opportunity for a fresh start can drastically help the district employ the best possible hires and justify the additional pay that these hires will receive. Detailed and differentiated job descriptions should be developed by the district’s leadership team with the help of teachers who hold current leadership roles in the district. Most importantly, these roles and descriptions should be communicated to teacher and principals in a variety of forums (e.g. email, multiple open presentations and question-answer sessions for teachers, story on the district website, online forum) to increase exposure and welcome clarifying questions and concerns prior to the first year of implementation. It is important that the district go the extra mile to be proactive and generate new mental models about teacher leadership that advocates for the truth rather than waiting to react to mental models built on assumptions. Senge (2006) advises that the leverage can be found in the balancing loop (review Figure 4). In order to redirect the behavior of the system, it is imperative that you find a way to change the limiting factor (“better than” mental model) (p. 100). Involving teachers in the rigorous selection and evaluation process and clearly communicating job descriptions and responsibilities in a way that welcomes conversations can begin to shape mental models early on. Hiring leaders that can demonstrate a strong sense of personal mastery will sustain the leadership program. Without a rigorous selection and review process that results in identifying the best possible hires and includes the perspective of teachers, teacher leadership positions will lag or stall out completely. Leadership SummaryTo counteract the effects of a dangerous hierarchical “better than” mental model, leadership should… explicitly communicate the purpose behind involving teachers in the selection and review processhire teacher leaders who can demonstrate and provide evidence of personal masterydevelop clear and differentiated job descriptions for teacher leaders communicate teacher leadership roles to teachers and principals early in the processcommunicate using a variety of modes that allow for clarification and conversation Aligned Professional Development Of the current teacher leadership positions, minimal professional development is delivered or aligned to the teacher leadership roles and responsibilities. A veteran Cooperating Teacher commented that she did not have any formal professional development or training on how to best mentor her student teacher. She exclaimed, “I actually had no idea if I was being a good cooperating teacher or not!” In the event that professional development is provided for a teacher leadership role, it is often a one-time event that lacks job-embedded follow through and support. Of the most populated leadership positions in Cedar Rapids (Building Leadership Teams, PLC Leaders, and Cooperating Teachers), the PLC leaders are the only leaders who received any district provided formal training since the start of the PLC initiative. The district embraced PLC’s in 2008-09 and appointed PLC Leaders in 2009-10. In their first year, these leaders where sent to three full day professional development seminars centering on assessments, using data, and effective leadership in groups. Teachers were provided substitutes to cover their classes on these days. When asked to assess the value of this professional development (PD), one of the few original high school PLC Leaders responded with the following comments in Table 5: Table 5It was pretty difficult to go back to our PLCs and “teach” the other members of the group when they didn’t have much of a context for what we were talking about. The PD was not valuable because the District never had us do anything with the information. We were never told how to apply anything. And, for that reason, I know most of the people who went to the professional development seminars don’t even remember them (for instance, I have heard other PLC leaders say things like “we were never told how to do assessments” when I know I sat at the same table with them as we listened to PD about assessments). That’s not a knock on the other leaders, either; it’s a knock on the District for never having us do anything with the knowledge they wanted us to learn and never having us apply the professional development. Personally, I have been able to use the professional development in my PLC and in my own collection/analysis of data for my own classroom. I just don’t know that my experience is because of anything the District or the professional development did to make the seminars particularly valuable, though.Experience High School PLC LeaderClearly this teacher leader did not feel as if the vision of PLC was well-defined nor did this teacher feel a connection to any vision. Most importantly, this leader did not feel as if s/he had the tools to truly lead and teach others how to use the assessment and data strategies. Sadly, according to this high school leader, the money and resources spent on sending some of these teacher leaders to training was wasted. Cedar Rapids struggles because a large population of our leaders do not feel connected to the charge, connected to one another, supported in their work, or accountable for their actions. The teacher leader commentary above illustrates a classic example of the archetype or behavior pattern Senge (2006) labels as Shifting the Burden. This archetype is exemplified on several levels throughout the district and has a glaring impact on the current teacher leadership model. Shifting the Burden occurs when a problem is handled by solving an immediate effect or symptom. As a result, the larger problem is overlooked because it is either difficult to identify or costly in some way. Senge (2006) states, “What makes the shifting the burden structure insidious is the subtle reinforcing cycle it fosters, increasing dependence on the symptomatic solution” (p.108). The longer the central problem goes unseen, the more difficult it is to correct. The lack of planning due to the urgency to get PLC’s underway resulted in both the overall stall of effective implementation of PLC’s and a deterioration of the teacher leadership that led the charge for the district (see Figure 7). PLC’s were a huge undertaking for the district and require careful monitoring and continuous support. By delegating these responsibilities, teacher leaders relieved building principals and district-level leaders of some of these duties. Furthermore, building principals and district-level leaders felt that peer leadership would increase teacher buy-in and speed up implementation (also referred to in Improved Entry to the Profession), leading to a more collaborative school culture and effective decision making that would result in student success. Meanwhile, the district continued to develop and communicate their vision and mission for PLC’s, but they never strategically did this with the PLC Leaders. As evidenced from the teacher leader comments above, some PLC Leaders were able to find some personal benefit from the PD provided by the district, but overall, they lacked the vision and their sense of purpose to be able to communicate this effectively to their peers. When faced with challenges during implementation, our leaders needed on-going support to teach their colleagues. This support never arrived. As a result, many PLC leaders resigned. A number of the original leaders failed to retain the information from their original training because they did not apply it in a timely manner. Improper implementation led to little change in the schools at the secondary level (middle and high school). Teachers and teacher leaders doubted the initiative and the leadership behind it. Since that first year of implementation, the district was forced to essentially fire all secondary PLC leaders and rehire (again, another symptom to the fundamental problem) in hopes of improving the quality of implementation of PLC’s. It is highly likely that without fixing the fundamental problem (on-going professional development and support that involves a shared vision), the district is bound to repeat its mistakes. 10287000Figure 7 Shifting the Burden00Figure 7 Shifting the BurdenMany teacher leadership positions have been hastily created to relieve the pressure of time and responsibilities placed on building principals and district-level leaders. However, most of these teacher leader positions lack ongoing PD that aligns to the purpose of the position, which often times also remains murky. As the district continues to fix the symptoms, the system as a whole crumbles. In their efforts to regain some respect and dignity, leaders blame one another for the dismal results as evidenced by the teacher above blaming the district for their lack of direction and follow through. These defensive routines cause leaders to put up this self-protective shells, shielding themselves from their own personal fears of failure and how that failure might be perceived by others. However, Senge (2006) reminds us that “Systems thinking shows us that there is no separate ‘other’; that you and someone else are part of the system. The cure lies in your relationship with your enemy” (p.67). Teacher leaders lack the necessary supports to fulfill their leadership roles, yet the district is too consumed by shifting the burden and fixing the symptoms to notice this underlying problem. Meanwhile, everyone copes by blaming each other instead of partnering with one another to uncover the source of their common struggles. To effectively synergize the leadership plan for Cedar Rapids, our teacher leaders must use their professional development to practice what they preach (i.e. personal mastery, mental models, shared vision) and develop team skills to change the current reality. Our teacher leaders will already exemplify personal mastery and capitalizing on their personal visions to develop clarity, enthusiasm, communication and commitment” is the first step (Senge, 2006, 211). However, it is our district’s responsibility to challenged them even further. Team learning must begin by systemically breaking down some of the deep seated defensive routines which result from troubling mental models and the absence of a shared vision. Recognizing how these defensive models are hindering learning is the first step for our leaders. Only then can they take a systemic view of problem and how all the parts interrelate. Then, as a team, they must capitalize on their personal mastery skills to close the loops and solve fundamental glitches in the system. Professional development is the glue that will hold this entire plan together. Team learning is far more complex that individual learning. However, this kind of multilayered thinking defends why these individuals should earn higher salaries. The district should have an unwavering expectation that these strive to take a balcony view and see the whole system and its working parts. Under our new teacher leadership system, our teacher leaders are responsible for effectively challenging the status quo to increase improve building leadership, reduce teacher retention and positively impact student achievement in Cedar Rapids. Leadership SummaryDebunk the defensive dialogue Design professional development that fosters Team Learning ReferencesCarroll, T. G. National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, (2007). The highest cost for teacher turnover. Retrieved from website: rapids community school district dashboard: student performance. (2005). Retrieved from performance.htmlGuidance of the iowa teacher leadership and compensation system. (2013, July 15). Retrieved from , P. (2006). The fifth discipline: the art & practice of the learning organization. New York: Random HouseIowa Department of Education, (2012). The annual condition of education report. Retrieved from State Board of Education website: Annual Condition of Education Report (2012).pdf ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download