Building
Strong Schools to Strengthen Student Outcomes—A Summer Review of Previous Blogs (II of IV)
Dear Colleagues,
Introduction
Happy (early)
Fourth of July !!!
Knowing that we are
sometimes not able to “fully digest” all of the interesting and innovative
information coming at us during the school year, I am devoting my “Summer
Series” to helping you to read, re-read, or re-conceptualize my most-popular
Blogs by organizing them in a thematic way.
To be more specific,
I have reviewed and organized virtually all of these popular, well-“Liked”
Blogs into four clusters:
* School
Improvement, Strategic Planning, and Effective School and Schooling Policies
and Practices
* The New Every
Student Succeeds Act (ESEA/ESSA), and Multi-Tiered and Special Education
Services
* Students’ Mental
Health Status and Wellness, and School Discipline and Disproportionality
* School Climate
and Safety, and School Discipline and Classroom Management
_ _ _ _ _
The Summer Series
began on June 17 focusing on the Blogs that broadly addressed School
Improvement.
The Series continues
on July 15 and July 29, respectively, with the latter two clusters above.
But today, this
message discusses my past Blogs addressing the new Every Student Succeeds
Act (ESEA/ESSA), and multi-tiered and special education services.
Below, I provide
you with the Dates and Titles of past Blog messages in this cluster—so you
can look up and read at your “summer leisure” those that particularly interest
you.
_ _ _ _ _
In addition, I continue
(immediately below) the overview of Project ACHIEVE (www.projectachieve.net) begun in the
June 17 Blog.
Project ACHIEVE is
the evidence-based national model school improvement program (as designated in
2000 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration—SAMHSA) that I have developed over the
past 30 years, and that is the foundation behind my thinking, writing, and
practice.
Project ACHIEVE
components have been implemented in “Great to Greater” through “Needs Improvement”
preschools through high schools nationwide—as well as in alternative, residential
treatment, juvenile justice, special education, and other specialized school
centers.
In the June 17
Blog, I provided an overview of Project ACHIEVE. Below, I discuss Project ACHIEVE’s primary
goals and outcomes, and the significant differences between Project ACHIEVE
as a model versus other school improvement and discipline approaches that
are “frameworks.”
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Project ACHIEVE’s
Primary Goals and Outcomes
Project ACHIEVE is
an innovative school reform and school improvement program that has been
implemented in schools and school districts in every state in the country since
1990. To date, one or more of its
components have been presented to thousands of schools nationwide—in schools
ranging from urban to suburban to rural, and from the lowest performing to the
highest performing schools in the nation.
At its core,
Project ACHIEVE provides implementation blueprints that are based on
research-proven and empirically-demonstrated effective practices woven together
into an implementation process that works.
Initially, we work
with schools to complete a comprehensive needs assessment and resource analysis
to determine their current needs, the approaches they are using that are
working, the gaps that are preventing them from improving further, and the
strategic goals and outcomes that are indicated or desired.
Project ACHIEVE’s
evidence-based whole-school design and school improvement process focuses on
the following goals:
1. To enhance the
problem-solving skills of teachers and other educators such that effective
interventions for students experiencing or at-risk for academic and/or
social-behavioral difficulties are developed and implemented.
2. To improve the
classroom and behavior management skills of school personnel and increase the
prosocial and self-management skills of students such that safe and disciplined
environments are created that increase students’ academic engaged time and
their positive interpersonal, problem-solving, and conflict resolution skills.
3. To ensure
comprehensive, high quality educational services to all students in the school,
and to intervene strategically with those students who are not performing at
their expected levels, serving them, as much as possible, in regular classroom
settings with equal access to all programs.
4. To increase the
social and academic progress of students by increasing the commitment and
involvement of parents and community resources in the education of their
children. This is accomplished, more
specifically, through parents’ direct involvement in the schoolwork and
schooling of their children, and through their use of effective parenting and
supervision skills; and through additional support and wrap-around services by
community-based resources and other leaders.
5. To validate the various components of Project ACHIEVE
during the school’s comprehensive continuous improvement process, and to
develop the school’s capacity to independently maintain and expand the
Project’s activities and outcomes as quickly as possible.
6. To create a school climate in which every teacher, staff
member, and parent believes that everyone is responsible for every student in
that building and community.
_ _ _ _ _
To accomplish these
goals, we work with schools and school districts to:
* Maximize
Students’ Academic Achievement
* Create Safe
School Environments and Positive School Climates
* Build Effective
Teaching and Problem-Solving Teams that Speed Successful Interventions to
Challenging Students
* Increase and
Sustain Effective Classroom Instruction
* Increase and Sustain
Strong Parent Involvement
* Develop and Implement
Effective Strategic Plans
* Organize Building
Committees and Student Learning Clusters
* Develop Effective
Data Management Systems for Outcome Evaluations
This work utilizes
an approach that uses a sequential and explicit activity-oriented evidence-based
implementation model approach—rather than a menu-oriented “choose what you
want to do” framework approach.
_ _ _ _ _
Differentiating Models versus Frameworks
In a framework
approach to school improvement or school-wide initiatives, schools are
given a list of activities that may or may not be evidence-based, and that
other schools (or the developers) have used in the past—toward some specific
goal. A number of national school
improvement approaches—for example, MTSS, PBIS, and SEL—use frameworks in their
practices.
The problem here is
that these frameworks allow schools and districts to largely set their own
goals, and choose which components and activities they believe will help
them to accomplish these goals.
Critically, these
choices may not be the BEST or most-needed approaches as schools tend to
choose (a) the easiest or least intrusive activities to implement; (b) the ones
they have the available resources for; (c) the ones recommended by others (but
not necessarily right for them); or (d) those that specific leaders
think “are right” (but may not be given the history, status, needs, and
staffing in a specific school).
Framework
approaches also tend to use “Train the Team” and “coaching” approaches where a
representative group of school staff are trained in their chosen components,
and then the Team is encouraged to “coach” their colleagues toward
implementation integrity and “success.”
At times, one designated staff person actually becomes the primary
implementation coach.
This just simply
does not work.
In thousands of
schools, I have seen well-meaning coaches attempt to implement sophisticated psychoeducational
processes and activities that they have just learned, they do not
fully understand, they have never successfully implemented independently,
where they are largely left to implement on their own—with NO on-site
expert technical assistance.
When “Framework
staff” DO go on-site, it typically is to evaluate the degree and integrity
of implementation, NOT to provide on-going consultation and implementation
assistance.
This is like
sending a team to a three-day training to teach them—for the first time—how to
electrically wire a new apartment building.
With one team member designated the “Foreman,” the team proceeds to
implement the training. And then, after
three to six months of construction, the “City Inspectors” come to see if the
wiring is “up to code.”
I’m sure we can all
guess the outcome here.
_ _ _ _ _
In contrast, Project
ACHIEVE uses an evidence-based implementation model approach—with
on-site expert training, consultation, and technical assistance. As noted above, this begins with an on-site
comprehensive needs assessment, resource analysis, and strategic action
planning process. This helps to identify
clear, strategic, actionable, and needed goals and outcomes, along with an agreed-upon
personalized action plan that specifies needed resources, training,
implementation steps, and formative and summative evaluations.
The Project ACHIEVE
model proceeds with specific, sequenced activities in the (up to seven school
improvement) interdependent components that are chosen based on the needs
assessment and the school or district’s clarified goals.
While these
activities are tailored to the current status and needs of the site, this
sequence—and the best components and activities to use—has been field-tested and validated in thousands
of school implementations across the country over 30 years.
Continuing the
contrast: Project ACHIEVE
provides on-site professional development and technical assistance using
skilled specialists who focus on school-based activities in their areas of
expertise (rather than a “distance learning” approach).
It also uses a
“consultation” (as opposed to “coaching”) approach where external and internal
experts (i.e., existing school and district staff, and community and regional
professionals) use their skills to work with school and district colleagues to
enhance their skills.
Thus, Project
ACHIEVE relies on the professional expertise of others; it does not put staff
in positions where they are responsible for guiding the implementation of
processes that they, themselves, have just learned and have never used
successfully on their own.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
The New “Every
Student Succeeds Act” (ESEA/ESSA), and Multi-Tiered and Special Education
Services
Literally starting
TODAY (based on the original legislation), states, districts, and schools
are now responsible for the implementation of the Élementary and Secondary
Education Act/Every Student Succeeds Act” that was passed in December,
2015.
Embedded in ESEA/ESSA
are a number of provisions for multi-tiered services, and ESEA/ESSA was written
to work “hand-in-hand” with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA, 2004) which guides the provision of services to students with
disabilities.
Over the past three
years, I have written a number of Blogs discussing the functional implications
of different parts of ESEA/ESSA, and how the U.S. Department of Education (and
a number of its funded National Technical Assistance Centers) have misled
educators as to what is (and is not) mandated by federal law relative
multi-tiered and special education services (specifically, MTSS and PBIS).
Below is a list of
the Dates and Titles of the Blogs addressing topics in these areas. To find the Complete Blog Cited Below:
Please go to the right-hand side of
this Blog page. There you will find a Blog
Archive. Using that Archive, pull
down the month and year of the Blog you are interested in, and click on
the Blog’s title to link to the original message.
Here are the Past
Blogs:
Federal Law:
ESEA/ESSA
February 4, 2017: ESEA/ESSA, School
Improvement, Race/Ethnic Status, and Students with Disabilities: We Need
to Differentiate Disability Just as We Differentiate Race and Ethnicity
January 22, 2017: ESEA/ESSA Tells Schools
and Districts: Build Your Own Multi-Tier System of Supports for Your Students’
Needs--- Focus on Your Principles, Students, and Staff. . .and Verify the
ESEA/ESSA “Guidance” Advocated by Some National Groups
July 24, 2016: Rethinking School
Improvement and Success, Staff Development and Accountability, and Students'
Academic and Behavioral Proficiency: Using ESEA/ESSA’s New Flexibility to
Replace the U.S. Department of Education’s Ineffective NCLB Initiatives
March 4, 2016: The New ESEA/ESSA:
Discontinuing the U.S. Department of Education's School Turn-Around, and
Multi-tiered Academic (RtI) and Behavioral (PBIS) System of Support (MTSS)
Frameworks
April 10, 2015: The NEW ESEA Draft: Tell
Congress that Capital Letters Make a Difference
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Multi-Tiered and Special Education Service Delivery
May 14, 2017: The Endrew F.
Decision Re-Defines a “Free Appropriate Public Education" (FAPE) for
Students with Disabilities: A Multi-Tiered School Discipline, Classroom
Management, and Student Self-Management Model to Guide Your FAPE (and even
Disproportionality) Decisions (Part III)
April 22, 2017: The Endrew F.
Decision Re-Defines a “Free Appropriate Public Education" (FAPE) for
Students with Disabilities: A Multi-Tiered Academic
Instruction-to-Intervention Model to Guide Your FAPE Decisions (Part II)
April 2, 2017: Special Education
Services Just Got Easier. . . and Harder: The Supreme Court's Endrew F.
Decision Re-Defines a “Free Appropriate Public Education” for Students with
Disabilities (Part I)
December 18, 2016: What the Next
Director of the U.S. Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) Needs to
Do: My “First 100 Days” if I was Appointed the New OSEP Director
September 25, 2016: U.S. Department of Education
Reminds Educators about Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports for
Students with Disabilities: But. . . Watch Out for Their Recommendations
and References
September 5, 2016: Political Doublespeak,
Students with Disabilities, and Common Sense: A Legal Case Study on
Students’ Rights and Standards-based IEPs. . . How Departments of Education Use
Language, Fear, and Ignorance to Get their Way
March 4, 2016: The New ESEA/ESSA:
Discontinuing the U.S. Department of Education's School Turn-Around, and
Multi-tiered Academic (RtI) and Behavioral (PBIS) System of Support (MTSS)
Frameworks
November 14, 2015: New U.S.
Department of Education Report: Students in RtI Tier II Interventions are
Losing Ground. What the Report Says. . .Why RtI is Not Working. . .
Recommendations for Improving the RtI Process
October 20, 2015: Want to Improve Student
Learning? Look at your "Instructional Environments" - -
Standards Don't Teach . . . Teachers Do !!!
February 15, 2015: Your State's Guide to RtI:
Some Statutes Just Don't Make Sense- - What your Department of Education isn't
Sharing about its Multi-tiered/Response-to-Intervention Procedures
January 31, 2015: Correcting the Flaws:
The Feds’ Thinking on Academic Proficiency and Results Driven Accountability
November 22, 2014: Academically
Struggling and Behaviorally Challenging Students: Your Doctor Wouldn’t Practice
this Way
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Summary
I hope you find
these Blogs important and meaningful to your work.
Meanwhile, I always
look forward to your comments. . . whether on-line or via e-mail.
If I can help you
in any of the areas discussed in this and these Blog messages, I am always
happy to provide a free one-hour consultation conference call to help
you clarify your needs and directions on behalf of your students,
staff/colleagues, school(s), and district.
Please accept my
best wishes for the continuation of your safe, restful, and fun summer !!!
Best,
Howie
