Author: Alan Jones

One of the themes that runs through all of my blogs is the question that is often posed in graduate administrative courses, but, is rarely asked in main or central offices. The question being: what are the aims of schooling. The aims that are typically presented in introductory educational philosophy course courses fall into four categories: vocational, civic, creative, and cultivating humanity—what is true, good, and beautiful.

      Although all four aims are written into school mission statements, the aim that school administrators announce at school open houses and the aim parents assume schools are pursuing is “preparation, “meaning, training for a job. As I suggest in the title of this blog, one which John Dewey spent his career elaborating on, is preparation is treacherous idea.

      From a Deweyan perspective, the treachery involved in preparing young people for an occupation that stunts the intellectual growth of the child. The aim of schooling, for Dewey, was growth, meaning access to as many different meaning systems or human activities as possible. Vocational pursuits will always limit or narrow an individual’s ability to make meaning of the world they live in.

      In the case of schooling or the last century, the curriculum and pedagogy has been designed to prepare generations of students for college and vague references that some of what is learned in these academic courses will be necessary to succeed in the world of work. Of course, what generations of students discover in the world of work is academic discourse patterns are non-existent. In place a static world of facts, figures, reports, PowerPoints, are methods of inquiry and habits of thought that value collaboration, disruption, performance, social networks, and most of all—inventiveness.

      Returning to Dewey’s definition of “growth,” the emphasis on a singular discourse pattern leaves students without the intellectual tools to grow their civic function, to grow their creative talents, to grow their understanding of the human condition. The other phrase Dewey coined for his distaste for the preparation function of schooling was his often-repeated comment that our schools should not be preparing students, but, rather, should be inviting them into a marketplace of ideas. That marketplace should fill their intellectual shelves with theories, concepts, and ideas from the humanities, the social sciences, the natural sciences that provide students with the intellectual tools and vocabularies to view the world from many different perspectives.

     This does not mean that Dewey was opposed to vocational pursuits. Any field of inquiry can be “vocationalized.” When a student decides that he or she wants to work in a particular field of inquiry the field is transformed from studying ends (meaning) into a means (how to), which is a different orientation and different approach to vocabularies and conceptual understandings.

      The danger, however, with vocationalizing fields of inquiry, are discourse communities that will work at building firewalls between ends and means of the particular occupational pursuit. The treachery of these firewalls for workers is draining the nature of their of work of the values that make a particular job function meaningful and worthwhile for both workers and society at large.

Neil deGrasse Tyson

      I have dedicated a number of blogs to discussing the goals of schooling and what types of instructional methodologies would best promote those goals. In this short YouTube video below, Neil deGrasse Tyson, best summarizes in his commencement speech what I have attempted to describe in a number of postings.

            The most overlooked component of an effective professional development program is the audience involved—there are adults in the room. An underlying assumption of all school based professional development programs are faculties that enter the process as virtual tabula rasas to be inscribed with new theories, ideas, and practices. The reality however, is that all teachers enter staff development programs from somewhere. That somewhere are families, neighborhoods, schools, jobs, that have developed, over time, an instructional worldview on how children learn; what knowledge is of most worth; how knowledge should be organized; how students should be assessed; and how to teach. No matter how well designed a staff development program maybe, the failure to consider where teachers come from will doom the implementation of any new learning paradigm.

            The principles of adult learning fall into three categories: experiences; professionalism; engagement. Before any training takes place, the leaders of the program must first pay attention to and respect for where teachers are coming from. Yes, these backgrounds maybe serving as obstacles to achieving programs goals, but, program leaders must not only acknowledge they exist, but, more importantly, develop connections between the instructional worldviews in front of them and the worldviews of the programs they are presenting. Establishing these connections demonstrates to a teaching staff that the trainers respect the professional standing of the teachers entering their program.

      Once this professional standing has been established, trainers would orchestrate the components of a training regime outlined in prior blog. The training components, however, must be conducted in an environment where the content of the program—theories and concepts—are embedded in activities that allow teachers to socially make collective sense out of foreign theories and practices, and, most importantly, practice these theories in a risk-free environment.

      As a footnote to the elements of an effective staff development program, a theme that runs throughout all of these blogs is the vital role school leaders play in the process of implementation. From selecting theories, ideas, and concepts to be considered to the design of organizational structures that incorporate theories, ideas, and concepts into real world classrooms are all dependent on leaders who have that rare skill of embedding the why of schooling into the what and how of daily practice.  

      In Part I of Effective Professional Development Programs, I described the organizational components—instructional systems, administrative commitment, organizational commitment—that must be in place to fully realize the goals, theories, and practices of a newly adopted instructional methodology.

      As stated in the prior blog, most districts focus professional development on the implementation of a training regime. Although this component of effective staff development program becomes the center of program implementation, the adopted training regime will fall short on two essential elements of an effective adult educational program:1) most training regimes violate the principles of adult learning; 2) most training regimes fail to fully implement the educational components of learning and practicing foreign theories, ideas, and practices.

      In Part III of this blog, I will describe the principles of adult learning. In this blog, I present the substantive differences between two training regimes that districts consider when implementing new teaching metrologies. Most districts will adopt an institutional training regime to implement mandated changes to curriculum and instruction. Institutional training regimes are designed for efficiency: cost-effective, fast, and certifiable. To achieve these institutional goals the regime consists primarily of selling, telling, and complying (see Table Below). Nowhere in these institutional training regimes is there time or expertise dedicated to assisting teachers with developing a deep understanding of foreign theories of learning or to practice those theories in the classroom.

      Teachers respond to institutional training regimes by either adopting surface features of the new pedagogy (those that are readily observable) or by ignoring the pedagogy all together (depending upon supervisory vigilance). In some cases, teachers will actively sabotage a newly adopted instructional regime that is opposed to a school’s prevailing instructional worldview. The end game to all institutional training regimes is a compliance mentality where administrators comply with the managerial mechanics of implementation and teachers comply with the managerial mechanics of documentation.

      Educative learning regimes on the other hand position teachers in a process designed to transform theories into classroom practice (see Table Below). That learning process provides teachers with the time, the expertise, and the support, to develop deep understandings of the theories and vocabularies of a new pedagogy and, most importantly, to work closely with trainers who provide continual feedback on transforming theoretical understandings into classroom practices. The end game to all educative learning regimes is a continuing learning process in which administrators and teachers commit to jointly make collective sense out of theories and practices of a new instructional regime.

INSTITUTIONAL TRAINING REGIME

COMPONENT	WHAT TEACHERS ARE ASKED TO DO
Goals	Implement mandated teaching methodologies.
Distribute	Allocate materials associated with newly adopted teaching methodology
Present	Explain and demonstrate theories and practices associated with a new teaching methodology.
Standardize	Adopt curricular materials and accountability instruments that align with a new teaching methodology.
Document	Employing various accountability instruments (e.g. observation protocols, testing instruments) document the implementation of new teaching practices.

EDUCATIVE LEARNING REGIME

COMPONENT	WHAT TEACHERS ARE ASKED TO DO
Goals/Purposes	Identify gaps between agreed upon goals and purposes and actual student performance.
Theories & Practices	Identify a model of teaching that would best close the gap between goals/purposes and actual student performance.
Model	Observe expert performance of agreed model of teaching.
Adapt	Under the supervision of a mentor/consultant, identify elements of a model of teaching that conform to a personal teaching depositions and styles.
Coach	Participate in ongoing conversations with mentor/consultant on gaps between the intentions of agreed upon model of teaching and actual performance of those methods in classrooms.
Practice	Under the supervision of a mentor/consultant, continue to employ feedback from coaching sessions to close gaps between the intentions of a agreed upon model of teaching and actual performance of those methods in classrooms.
Author	Construct pedagogical approaches and plans of action that agree with a school’s instructional framework, the social context of the school, and pre-existing experiences of teachers.
Standardize	Normalize a set of teaching methods that make sense to teachers, are working for teachers, and accurately reflect the application of a agreed-upon model of teaching.

     In a prior blog, titled, “The Workshop,” I describe why district half-day workshops fail to achieve their announced purpose: to enhance teaching practices. Putting aside the obvious obstacles to effective professional development listed in the blog—purpose, content, time—the underlying problem is an organizational configuration that treats the complex process of learning new theories and practices as merely a managerial problem of implementation—distribution of materials of materials, training, documentation. None of these managerial problems addresses how adults learn to practice methodologies that are foreign to how they believe their students learn.

      School districts that take professional development seriously formulate the learning process around two organizational components: a professional development infrastructure and a training regime. Much of the literature on professional development concentrates on the elements of an effective training regime. While the actual training of staff is a necessary component of adult learning, it is not sufficient to operationalize and sustain new classroom methodologies.

      The foundation of an effective of staff development program lies with three organizational components that often overlooked in the implementation of an effective training regime. The table below describes the three organization components that must be present for a staff development program to realize its educational goals. Each of the organizational components—instructional system, administrative commitment, organizational commitment—work in unison to provide teachers with the talent, the support, and the resources—to fully realize the goals, theories, and practices of new classroom methodologies.

INSTRUCTIONAL SYSTEMS   (Induction-Mentoring-Curriculum-Teacher Evaluation-Staff Development)	FIVE INSTRUCTIONAL SYSTEMS: District/school administrations have adopted an organizational configuration that fully enacts the five instructional systems that compose a quality instructional program. The goals and content of each system reflect a coherent response to the fundamental questions of schooling and possess the resources (personnel, time, space, materials, expertise) to advance the school’s instructional worldview.   REFLECTION-ON-PRACTICE: Embedded in each instructional system are conceptual frameworks & venues (e.g. cognitive coaching, curriculum guides) for interpreting and applying instructional theories, ideas, and practices.
ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITMENT   (Framing-Educating-Coaching-Structuring)	VALUED RESPONSIBILITIES: Administrators are evaluated on their ability to assist teachers with resolving instructional problems and advancing the school’s instructional worldview.   TRAINING & PARTICIPATION: All school administrators are expected to participate in the enactment of the school’s instructional worldview and possess the necessary educational background and training to assist teachers with further advancing the teaching of their subject areas. CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF INSTRUCTIONAL WORLDVIEW: Administrators in private and public venues regularly communicate a clear understanding of the theories, ideas, and practices that govern the school’s instructional worldview. INSTRUCTIONAL CONVERSATIONS: Administrators are adept at conducting instructional conversations (ListeningàQuestioningàInterpretingàAuthoring) that aim at assisting teachers with making classroom sense out of the theories, ideas, and practices associated with the school’s instructional worldview.   PROBLEM SOLVING: Administrative responses to school wide problems reflect a purposeful approach to problem solving: What is the problemàwhat do we know about the problemà What theories, ideas, practices govern the problemàwhat strategies could our school employ to resolve the problemàWhat plan of action will we pursue to resolve the problemàHow will we know if we have resolved the problem. Plans of action continually reference theories, ideas, values, and practices embedded in the school’s instructional worldview.   ADMINISTRATIVE TIME: Administrators devote a majority of their time to participating in one or more of the school’s instructional systems, assisting teachers with resolving instructional problems, and further elaboration of subject matter pedagogies.   PROTECTION OF FACULTY: Administrators employ various administrative strategies (buffering/bridge) to protect faculty from foreign instructional worldviews.
ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT	RATIONALE FOR NEW PROGRAMS: District/school administrators regularly provide teachers with reasons for new instructional initiatives. The reasons agree with the school’s instructional worldview and the organizational capacity of school.   ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY: Before new instructional programs are implemented, district/school administrators have acquired the space, time, materials, and expertise to fully educate and train teachers.   WORKLOAD: Before new instructional programs are implemented district/school administrators have determined that teachers will be able to accommodate the additional workload required for educating and training.   ADDITIONAL RESOURCES: As the implementation of a new instructional initiative progresses, administrators regularly review the allocation of resources /workload and make necessary ADJUSTMENTS to support teacher learning.   GOAL OF INSTRUCTIONAL SUPERVISION: As the implementation of new instructional initiative progresses district/school administrators situate themselves in teacher workspaces and classrooms to assist teachers with bridging the theory/practice divide of new pedagogies and adjusting the time, materials, and work assignments for teachers to effectively implement a new instructional initiative.   INSTRUCTIONAL TIME: School administrators protect instructional time by eliminating classroom interruptions (intercom announcements, telephone calls, messages from administrative offices, non-academic events, fundraisers). REFORM CLUTTER: District/school administrators are highly selective about the number and types (sophistication level) of new pedagogies they adopt during a school year. The initiation of new pedagogies adheres to the school’s instructional worldview and provides appropriate levels of resources (time, materials, space, expertise) to educate and train faculty.   CHANGE IN INSTRUCTIONAL ROUTINES: District/school administrators adopt new pedagogies that conform to the instructional routines embedded in the school’s instructional worldview.