Saturday, August 4, 2018

School Improvement, Strategic Planning, ESEA, and Multi-Tiered Systems of Support: An Anthology of Previous Blogs


Integrating Successful Research-to-Practice Strategies into the New School Year (Part I of II)


[CLICK HERE for the Full Version of this Blog]

 

Dear Colleague,

 

Introduction

   While some of you are starting to “trickle” back to your schools, districts, or other employment settings, other educators are still off “for summer vacation.” 

   As for me. . . I am writing this while traveling to my second school consultation of the new school year (I did a training last week in Mississippi).  In fact, this current two-week trip brings me to Kentucky, Philadelphia, and Chicago. 

   My Kentucky district actually starts school on Wednesday August 6th, and I will be able both to train different staff in the District before the school year begins (Monday and Tuesday), and then watch the training being implemented of the first day of school (Wednesday).  This is an ideal situation, because I can support the teachers on Wednesday as they move from training to implementation and ensure that the training transfers to effective and high-fidelity practices.

   In Philadelphia, I am helping a kindergarten through high school charter school district create and implement a comprehensive, multi-tiered social, emotional, and behavioral (PBSS/SEL) school-wide system.  Here, I am working with the Leadership and SEL/MTSS Teams this week, and then returning next week to work with their entire staff.

   Another “effective practices” professional development situation.

   Finally, in Chicago, we are beginning a multi-year MTSS process— helping all of the staff in this high-school-only district to utilize systems-level and student-level (ESEA, academic, and social-emotional-behavioral) data to make effective instructional decisions.

   Next Monday, I work with the Administrators and MTSS Teams (especially their related services professionals).  Then, I return next month to begin the school-by-school MTSS training and implementation.

   All of this contrasts with my full-day of professional development last week in Mississippi. . . which was a “one and done” training for a random group of elementary through high school teachers.  The District’s Professional Development Director had three or four similar sessions (on different topics) occurring simultaneously and was expecting participants in each session to return to their schools and share the content from each session.

   My prediction?  This approach was a recipe for failure.  There was no way for those participating in my session to be able to go from science to effective practice. . .  much less understand my multi-layered content so quickly and so well that they could successfully communicate it to colleagues.

   I am not being disrespectful in any way to my audience.  I am simply reflecting the principles of effective professional development and adult learning.
_ _ _ _ _

   Reinforcing the effective PD approaches in Kentucky, Philadelphia, and Chicago:  It is critical that the professional development—received by teachers and others immediately before the new school year begins—is implemented with coaching, mentoring, and consultation.  This facilitates helps to ensure both implementation fidelity and science-to-practice intensity. 

   But. . . with all of the competing perspectives and “pitches” in today’s educational “marketplace,” we need to begin with sound science

   And so, as we enter (or approach) the new school year, I thought that it would be useful to review some of the most popular Blog articles that I have written over the past year or two.

   Making this topic-driven, I have organized the Blogs into four clusters:
  • School Improvement, Strategic Planning, and Effective School and Schooling Practices
  • The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA/ESSA) and Multi-Tiered Systems of Support
  • School Climate, (Disproportionate) Discipline, Safety, and Classroom Management
  • Students’ Mental Health Status and Wellness 

   In today’s Blog, I briefly overview the first two areas above—and then chronologically provide the Dates and Titles of the most important past Blog messages.  In Part II of this “series,” I will address the last two areas. 

[CLICK HERE for the Full Version of this Blog]
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

School Improvement, Strategic Planning, and Effective School and Schooling Policies

   Strategic planning processes should anchor virtually everything that we do when working to continuously improve our schools.  Over the past three years, a number of my Blogs have discussed how to conduct effective strategic planning processes, make sound leadership decisions, build staff cohesion, and minimize the impact of (sometimes routinely) losing superintendents, administrators, and instructional staff.

   In addition, I often analyze and critique, from a science-to-practice perspective, programs and strategies that have become “educational bandwagons” despite their poorly-researched or unproven claims.  Related topics here include approaches addressing teasing and bullying, chronic absenteeism, reading and grade retention, the length of the school day and when it starts, and even the mindfulness “epidemic.”
_ _ _ _ _

Research-to-Practice Lessons Learned
  • The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA/ESSA) has virtually replaced the No Child Left Behind term “scientifically-based” with the term “evidence-based”— providing a specific statutory definition.
  • Educators need to recognize that they must independently validate any program, intervention, or strategy that claims it is “research-based”—as the research could be sound, unsound, or non-existent.
  • Even when research validly supports a specific program, intervention, or strategy, educators still need to validate that (a) it is applicable to the students, staff, schools, or situations that they want to change/affect, and (b) it can be realistically implemented “in the real world” (as opposed to a controlled or “laboratory” setting).
  • As but one example:  John Hattie’s research significantly contributes to educational decision-making. . . but educators need to fully understand the decision rules and outcomes inherent in his meta-meta-analytic methods and outcomes.
  • Even when Hattie’s research provides a programmatic, intervention, or strategy-related “recommendation,” educators need to understand that (a) meta-analytic research often pools research focusing on the same approach, but using different methodologies; and (b) it is effective methodology, implemented with fidelity, that ultimately determines student, staff, and/or situational success.
   For a chronological summary of the 33 Blogs in this Area

          [CLICK HERE] 
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA/ESSA) and Multi-Tiered Systems of Support

   The Elementary and Secondary Education Act/Every Student Succeeds Act (ESEA/ESSA) was passed by Congress and signed by President Obama in December 2015.  It makes states, districts, and schools more responsible for designing and implementing effective school improvement strategies (and their own accountability) than ever before.

   Written to work “hand-in-hand” with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004), ESEA/ESSA has a number of specific provisions related to the delivery of multi-tiered systems of support.

   Over the years, I have discussed 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 other special education services. 

   Specifically, ESEA/ESSA and IDEA discuss “positive behavioral interventions and supports” as a generic approach, and it appears in both laws in lower case letter without an acronym (i.e., PBIS). 

   Similarly, ESEA/ESSA discusses “multi-tiered systems of support” as a generic approach, and it too appears in the law in lower case letter without an acronym (i.e., MTSS).

   And yet, the U.S. Department of Education and its funded PBIS and MTSS National Technical Assistance Centers often make it appear that ESEA/ESSA and IDEA require their uppercase versions of the required generic services.

   I have also discussed some large-scale research studies and national evaluation reports that question whether the PBIS and MTSS frameworks advocated by the U.S. Department of Education produce consistent, sustained, and needed student outcomes.

   To conclude:  Just as ESEA/ESSA has given states, districts, and schools more responsibility for designing and implementing effective school improvement strategies, it similarly encourages them to create multi-tiered systems of supports that are personalized to the needs and circumstances of their own students.

   For a chronological summary of the 20 Blogs in this Area:

         [CLICK HERE]
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _


Summary

   As the new school year approaches (or has already begun), and as districts and schools begin to implement their strategic and/or continuous improvement plans with a clear eye on ESEA’s requirements, the importance of effective science-to-practice approaches cannot be understated.

   The new school year gives us an opportunity to reboot, recalibrate, or renew our efforts to maximize all students’ academic and social, emotional, and behavioral competence and proficiency.  I hope that one or more of my Blogs can be part of your efforts to reach your “next levels of excellence.”

   Meanwhile, I always look forward to your comments. . . whether on-line or via e-mail.

   And . . . if I can help you in any of the area of school improvement (please visit the other areas of this website), I am always happy to provide a free one-hour consultation session to help you clarify your needs and directions on behalf of your students, staff/colleagues, school(s), and district.

Best,

Howie

No comments:

Post a Comment