It has been the mission of the Cahn Fellows Program for Distinguished New York City Principals at Teachers College since 2003 to keep our eye on the prize, if you will, by investing in the outstanding school principals that currently exist in the NYC school system. I propose that this strategy be included in the school reform agenda more broadly.
There's so much talk and energy spent on failing schools, closing schools, and turning around schools. Diane Ravitch has pointed out that by 2008 35% of the nation's public schools were labeled as failing according to the NCLB mandate. The current approach to education reform is to use accountability to weed out the "bad" schools, principals and teachers. Instead of offering support and time to learn from the data and organization, it creates a punitive atmosphere in schools. It doesn't allow for the good in the system to grow and uproots communities, creates chaos, and invalidates the efforts of all involved.
Cahn Fellow principals are the great untapped resource in the NYC school system. Yes, their schools reap the benefits. But have we done enough to understand and share what they're doing to benefit the rest of the system? How can we, as John Barnes (CF '08) put it, move from transforming the educational expectations at their individual schools to "transforming a borough" or even a City? Don't the students down the street or across the City deserve to experience success as much as Cahn Fellows' students?
I've had the pleasure of seeing Fellows share and implement strategies to not only offer interventions for their struggling students to succeed but also to support the development and interests of their high achieving students through enrichment programs. That is a big part of the improvement strategy for Fellows' students: intervention and enrichment. Why does the system abandon or ignore this notion when it comes to the adults who make decisions on behalf of students? Cahn Fellows are high performers and also deserve enrichment.
Who's minding the shop when it comes to what's working? My predecessor, Kirsten Busch, pointed out in a June 2004 Education Update editorial that she was often asked how many good principals are in the system. That tells us that a) no one else is really looking at who is effectively leading their schools- except through the Progress Report, which many have pointed out is a much too facile a tool to assess leadership capability; b) as Ernest Logan pointed out in his February CSA News letter, people are not focusing on the supports that principals need to develop as leaders; and c) the system is not leveraging the talent that already exists.
Figuring out supports for effective leaders is not easy or a one-shot deal; it's rooted in individual people and their relationships with those in their community. Providing principals with time and space to reflect on what's working, identifying areas of growth, questioning assumptions, and thinking about how to best support the people in their schools is what's required. It's not a technical course in understanding data or budgeting. And it's more than "do no harm". It's gathering people committed to their schools, communities and education and giving them a place to be present to their individual situations and goals, to be authentic with themselves, and take proactive responsibility for what they're able to do over time. It's called self determinism, and this can't be proscribed.
We can leverage strength to create more in the system. One way the Cahn Fellows Program does this is by identifying outstanding principals and promoting you as standards of excellence. Each year our network grows and our standards are just as solid as they were in 2003. We now have over 175 models of excellence in the form of leaders, and schools. And they've built strength from their strength by mentoring the next generation of leaders. Through inquiry work they've developed and their schools have benefited according to recent studies. And we make what they've learned public at the annual Leadership Conference, which is open to all in the educational community.
Reform, lately, calls for scale and sustainability. How do we take the strengths of individuals and this notion of self determinism to scale- to the masses? Perhaps we replicate the program. Perhaps we disseminate, more widely, what you've learned. Knowing what I do of people and communities this stuff can't be bottled and patented. If you have ideas about how we can turn around more than individual schools but whole boroughs, the City and the nation's school system, please let me know ( dunbar@tc.edu ).
I'll say this, as someone who believes in the power of people and a learning orientation, there's got to be a way beyond shuttering schools to those who depend on them.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=c5e34be8-781a-45ae-8250-a3284f36ec22)
There's so much talk and energy spent on failing schools, closing schools, and turning around schools. Diane Ravitch has pointed out that by 2008 35% of the nation's public schools were labeled as failing according to the NCLB mandate. The current approach to education reform is to use accountability to weed out the "bad" schools, principals and teachers. Instead of offering support and time to learn from the data and organization, it creates a punitive atmosphere in schools. It doesn't allow for the good in the system to grow and uproots communities, creates chaos, and invalidates the efforts of all involved.
Cahn Fellow principals are the great untapped resource in the NYC school system. Yes, their schools reap the benefits. But have we done enough to understand and share what they're doing to benefit the rest of the system? How can we, as John Barnes (CF '08) put it, move from transforming the educational expectations at their individual schools to "transforming a borough" or even a City? Don't the students down the street or across the City deserve to experience success as much as Cahn Fellows' students?
I've had the pleasure of seeing Fellows share and implement strategies to not only offer interventions for their struggling students to succeed but also to support the development and interests of their high achieving students through enrichment programs. That is a big part of the improvement strategy for Fellows' students: intervention and enrichment. Why does the system abandon or ignore this notion when it comes to the adults who make decisions on behalf of students? Cahn Fellows are high performers and also deserve enrichment.
Who's minding the shop when it comes to what's working? My predecessor, Kirsten Busch, pointed out in a June 2004 Education Update editorial that she was often asked how many good principals are in the system. That tells us that a) no one else is really looking at who is effectively leading their schools- except through the Progress Report, which many have pointed out is a much too facile a tool to assess leadership capability; b) as Ernest Logan pointed out in his February CSA News letter, people are not focusing on the supports that principals need to develop as leaders; and c) the system is not leveraging the talent that already exists.
Figuring out supports for effective leaders is not easy or a one-shot deal; it's rooted in individual people and their relationships with those in their community. Providing principals with time and space to reflect on what's working, identifying areas of growth, questioning assumptions, and thinking about how to best support the people in their schools is what's required. It's not a technical course in understanding data or budgeting. And it's more than "do no harm". It's gathering people committed to their schools, communities and education and giving them a place to be present to their individual situations and goals, to be authentic with themselves, and take proactive responsibility for what they're able to do over time. It's called self determinism, and this can't be proscribed.
We can leverage strength to create more in the system. One way the Cahn Fellows Program does this is by identifying outstanding principals and promoting you as standards of excellence. Each year our network grows and our standards are just as solid as they were in 2003. We now have over 175 models of excellence in the form of leaders, and schools. And they've built strength from their strength by mentoring the next generation of leaders. Through inquiry work they've developed and their schools have benefited according to recent studies. And we make what they've learned public at the annual Leadership Conference, which is open to all in the educational community.
Reform, lately, calls for scale and sustainability. How do we take the strengths of individuals and this notion of self determinism to scale- to the masses? Perhaps we replicate the program. Perhaps we disseminate, more widely, what you've learned. Knowing what I do of people and communities this stuff can't be bottled and patented. If you have ideas about how we can turn around more than individual schools but whole boroughs, the City and the nation's school system, please let me know ( dunbar@tc.edu ).
I'll say this, as someone who believes in the power of people and a learning orientation, there's got to be a way beyond shuttering schools to those who depend on them.