A Conversation About School-wide Change

An Interview with Jeni Schmidt, Vice Principal for Academics at Columbia Adventist Academy

and former Lead Teacher at Rio Lindo Adventist Academy

 

 

Q:  How did the school improvement journey begin?

It was the principal’s vision to improve the academic program. He really wanted to “up our game,” ensuring that students got the best education possible. He understood that the school would benefit overall as people heard and saw a clear improvement in the students learning experience. The hiring of a new staff member with primary responsibility for leading strategic improvement was key.

Q:  What was the school improvement goal that came into focus?

In the beginning, we were novices, really, in best practices and educational research. A consultant was invited to engage the faculty in reviewing data, practices and identifying critical areas for improvement. As a group, the teachers and administrators identified classroom practices as the area we wanted to improve. We believed that an intentional, collaborative process and a transition to standards-based teaching and learning would lead to more rigorous instruction.

Q:  What were some of the first steps in your improvement journey?

Well, I mentioned the first two. Providing personnel to lead, a staff member with much of their job assignment given to strategic improvement, and engaging the right consultants to lead the staff in thinking and planning for improvement. We had more than one consultant, and each led in different tasks. Beyond learning about the educational change process, we had a lot to learn about standards-based education.

Q:   What “investments” were made to ensure a measure of success?

The personnel assignment and using consultants did take some time and money, so grant writing was also a part of the portfolio of things to do, and the results were very helpful. Time was needed for bi-monthly PLCs and more professional development days.

One of the recommendations from consultants was to use lead teachers. That’s when I got more involved. As lead teachers, we made classroom observations and led in reflective follow-up conferences. I cannot overstate the importance of lead teachers. Because we were not administrators, teachers didn’t feel “evaluated.” Having us as lead teachers in and out of the classrooms became the norm.

Q:  How did you engage interest and support from the teachers?

Because we had identified our initial goals of improving classroom instruction as a group, there was better buy-in. This is not to say it was perfect. Someone had told us that when new initiatives in education come along that about 1/3rd of the teachers embrace it, 1/3rd reject it, and 1/3rd wait to see if it “sticks!” There is truth in that observation.

Each spring, we updated our improvement plan and brought in a new group of teachers to do that work. This was intentional to create buy-in as all had a chance to be heard and to contribute. Then when we presented an annual report to the board and to parents, that teacher group was tasked to assist with the public reporting.

Also, as you might expect, surveys of stakeholder groups were vital to getting feedback and gaging support.

Q:  What were three clear “take aways” from your experience?

1. Systemic change takes time. To address change appropriately, it must be rolled out over time. Addressing a significant change in school culture cannot happen overnight. We have been “doing” school in traditional ways for years. It is what are stakeholders know. True systemic change requires re-educating students, parents, teachers, and administrators.
2. Every teacher can learn. This was an important lesson for me personally. It was frustrating when some teachers would balk at change. It seemed like they did not even try. In time I realize that each teacher is in a different place. Just like I believed that every student can learn, I had to embrace the idea that every teacher can learn. As a lead teacher, I needed to figure out how to take them from where they were. That being said, if a teacher chose not to embrace change, he or she became uncomfortable being a part of our community of learning and usually chose, on his/her own, to find another school that fit their traditional methods of teaching.
3. Change does not have to cost a lot of money. I know this must sound disingenuous coming from someone who had significant grant money available, but I believe it to my core. Change happens when two or more teachers desire to strengthen their craft. Then, through reading, teacher research, and peer collaboration, they move forward through trial and error to building their practice. This is perhaps the most exciting and rewarding work possible. Other teachers in the building take notice and do not want to be left behind.