For the past couple of days I have been attending the Response to Intervention Conference in Anchorage. Because much of my job involves work with finances and legislative issues, I found my time at the conference focusing on instruction and interacting with teachers from around the state to be refreshing. I am pleased to learn that KPBSD, by comparison with other Alaska districts, is in pretty good shape with regard to our RTI processes. As always however, I recognize areas for improvement. One of the concerns that I heard during the three days was that some teachers are too quick to refer a student who struggles to the RTI process without thoroughly reflecting on whether their core content instruction can be adjusted to better meet the student’s learning needs.
I know that our focus on effective instruction has helped our teachers improve their skills. A next step on our path of improvement is using video to more thoroughly analyze the effectiveness of instructional practices. One presenter showed the benefits of video as a way to show student engagement. The first clip illustrated the limitation of the traditional practice of a teacher offering open ended questions with a few students raising their hands. This was contrasted with a video that showed a high level of student engagement with students working in groups to solve problems or to teach each other. For teachers, it is a big risk to have your instruction viewed in this way. But when it is done in a non-evaluative manner, teams of teachers can collaborate on what they see and offer suggestions for improvement.
Mandate or Persuade
One of the challenges that school leaders face is finding the right balance between that which is mandated and that which is supported through persuasion. Push too hard on the mandate side and the staff will likely resist. An initiative promoted with a persuasive approach can slow the rate of change and may lead toward complacency. If I don’t have to do it, then why should I? It is my sense that this is where we are with professional development. We mandate certain things, usually that which is tied to the mechanics of teaching and persuade staff to participate in other offerings. With this in mind, I feel that it is time for the state to rethink its recertification requirements that require earning six credits in five years. Teachers have a fair amount of autonomy to choose which classes to pursue for this purpose. I’d like to instead have the districts provide some input on which courses can be used.
It is easy to casually talk about the importance of professional development. The challenge of finding time to do it well is limited by the inherited structure of education. The state can do two things to help in this area. One, provide funds for more professional development time and two, rewrite the regulations that guide recertification so that a district can determine which courses will be accepted. Our persuasive approach toward PD is helping us to improve. I feel that the suggested coordination with the state on PD will be the mandate to help us get to the next level.