6 kilmer koenig revised

8/14/2019 6 Kilmer Koenig Revised

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/6-kilmer-koenig-revised 1/21

NATIONAL FORUM OF APPLIED EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL

VOLUME 21, NUMBER 2, 2008

JOB-EMBEDDED PROFESSIONAL

DEVELOPMENT FOR PRINCIPALS

Lloyd C. Kilmer

Western Illinois University

Georgianna L. Koenig

Mississippi Bend Area EducationAgency

ABSTRACT

The greatest challenges of delivering professional development to educational leaders is

(1) to find a means to make the content relevant to their day to day work and (2) to find

the time to permit them to reflect on, discuss and implement their new learning. Staff

members of the Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency, in Bettendorf, IA, and faculty

members of Western Illinois University Department of Educational Leadership

collaborated to provide professional development for principals from eastern Iowa and

western Illinois through the Principals Leadership Academy. The most recent academy

blended a variety of delivery systems, large group presentations and job-embedded

activities, to best meet the needs of the participants. Program participants learned a

large body of new research on leadership and also developed the steps that they could

take to improve their organizations. Overall participants were highly satisfied with thisdesign as well as content of the professional development.

“Leaders are the architects of individual and organizationalimprovement” (p. 27).

Doug Reeves – The Learning Leader

67



68 NATIONAL FORUM OF APPLIED EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL

he greatest challenges of delivering professional development

to educational leaders is (1) to find a means to make the

content relevant to their day to day work and (2) to find thetime to permit them to reflect on, discuss and implement their new

learning. The Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency, inBettendorf, IA, has a twelve year history of providing professional

development for principals through the Principals LeadershipAcademy. The most recent academy blended a variety of delivery

systems to best meet the needs of the participants. The participants

learned a large body of new research on leadership and also developedthe steps that they could take to improve their organizations.

T

McREL developed a professional development series based on

the research outlined in “School Leadership That Works: From

Research to Results.” For organizations that want to assist principals

in their professional development, this series and its application in thefield, holds great promise in assisting them to manage change, develop

a purposeful community and to select the right focus for school change

initiatives. In addition, superintendents who supervise principals needto know which leadership responsibilities are in the forefront during

change initiatives so as to better guide and support the building level

administrator.

The Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency (MBAEA), in

partnership with Western Illinois University, developed a two year

series of professional development opportunities for 107 principals

and central office staff in the service areas of eastern Iowa and westernIllinois. The director of the General Education Division contracted

with McREL to deliver the newly created sessions to inform the participants of McREL’s research findings from a meta-analysis

conducted to answer the question, “What does the research tell us

about school leadership?” McREL professional development sessionsfor the first year were designed to apply this information to school

practices by examining the concepts of Developing a Purposeful

Community and Managing Change (Waters, McNulty, Grubb,Cameron, 2005). In addition, the MBAEA staff members and



Lloyd C. Kilmer & Georgianna L. Koenig 69

professors from WIU developed a series of “implementation sessions”

to provide participants with an opportunity to delve more deeply into

the material and to discuss the opportunities for application withintheir buildings/districts.

The first of the second year large group sessions included theMcREL research and practice on “Choosing the Right Focus.” The

other three large group sessions included “The Learning Leader”content provided by Dr. Doug Reeves and Dr. Brian McNulty of the

Leadership and Learning Center. These presenters also were able to

integrate the Balanced Leadership concepts into their presentations tofurther develop understanding of that research. The implementation

sessions provided by the AEA staff and university personnel

reinforced the large group sessions similar to the year one series of workshops. In addition, the leadership team at the Rock Island School

District #41 decided to dedicate one of their two monthly

administrative meetings to discussing, and gaining greater depth of knowledge, of the Balanced Leadership research and practices. This“job imbedded” delivery of professional development allowed the

executive administrative team to learn and collaborate right along with

the principals.

MBAEA’s approach to improving principal learning through

professional development is congruent with the Iowa Professional

Development Model and the best practice that supports that model.

The model, based on the work of Joyce and Showers, espouses that themost productive professional development includes the application of

the cycle of theory, demonstration, practice and coaching (Joyce andShowers, 2002). In addition, the National Association for ElementarySchool Principals (2001) report, Leading Learning Communities:

Standards for What Principals Should Know and Be Able to Do,

advocates that principals provide time for teachers (and themselves)for reflection, for investing in learning, connecting professional

development to school learning goals, and to plan and work together.

(Sparks, 2002, p. 7-3). Elmore (2000) reinforces this notion when he

stated “People make these fundamental transitions by having manyopportunities to be exposed to the idea, to argue them into their own




normative belief systems, to practice the behaviors that go with these

values, to observe others practicing these behaviors, and most

importantly, to be successful at practicing in the presence of others…”(p. 31). The Educational Research Service publication Professional

Development for School Principals states that effective staff development for administrators is “long term and planned, focused on

student achievement, job-embedded, supportive of reflective practiceand provides time to work, discuss, and problem solve with peers”

(Sparks, 2000, p. 8-3).

Design Standards

Designers of the workshop series were committed to

incorporating the Standards for professional development created by

the National Staff Development Council in the design of the series.There was considerable communication with the staff developers from

McREL on the content and delivery of their new product, BalancedLeadership, and with the staff developers of the Leadership and

Learning Center. In addition, the design team also designed and

delivered the implementation sessions with the NSDC Standards as aframework. Each category of the standards is listed below with

examples of the application of them within the professional

development “implementation” sessions of the series.

Context Standards: Staff development that improves the

learning of all students:

• Organizes adults into learning communities whose goals are

aligned with those of the school and district. (Learning

Communities)

• Requires skillful school and district leaders who guide

continuous instructional improvement. (Leadership)

• Requires resources to support adult learning and collaboration.

(Resources) (NSDC, 2001)




One of the unique elements of the workshop series was the

inclusion of “implementation” sessions, attended by volunteer

participants, to assist them in deepening their knowledge of thecontent, discussing issues related to leadership in their buildings, and

exploring the application of new learning. These sessions, which were“context driven,” were delivered in a variety of ways. The first option

that was offered to participants included a series of half day meetingsscheduled in-between the McREL and other large group presentations.

These sessions were conducted by MBAEA staff and university

professors. Some of the principals and curriculum directors preferredthis model as it offered a time to get out of the buildings and work

with other area principals and/or their own district administrator

teams. Activities were created to meet the needs of individual districtsand grade levels (elementary and secondary).

For example, an implementation session from year one focusedin on the change initiatives those participants had identified for their

buildings. Individually they completed a change diagram introduced inthe McREL Session, completed the Balanced Leadership change

initiative form and the “sharing the leadership responsibilities” chart.

The facilitators worked with the four groups of principals to exploreand apply their knowledge more deeply as they worked with the

documents listed above. The facilitators also introduced two tools

from the National Staff Development Council’s The Learning

Principal publication. The tools introduced Conflict Resolution Styleand Dare to Delegate Checklist (NSDC, 2005). These tools could be

applied in the buildings as ways to facilitate the sharing of leadership.A leadership style inventory was used during the session to help the principals more thoroughly complete the sharing responsibilities chart.

Participants were also assisted in using Inspiration as an electronic

planning tool.

The second year inter-district implementation sessions focusedon follow-up to the large group sessions. Facilitators created activities

in having principals reflect on the question, “Are you doing the right

work?” They did some charting of the way they spent their time over




several weeks to see if they truly linked their mission with how they

allocated their professional time. In addition, consideration of Dr.

Reeves presentation on, ”The Myth of The Silver Bullet,” lead toseveral conversations about the initiatives that had been selected for

school improvement plans in the past. The participants were also ableto reflect individually after each session on an implementation log

The second implementation option that was developed was todeliver the implementation activities out to district administrative

teams as a part of their regular meetings. In year two, one district

committed a monthly meeting just to working with the Balanced

Leadership content and application within the district’s initiatives. Amember of the design team planned these meetings with the district

leadership team and then facilitated the meeting. An example of this

type of embedded training was a session dedicated to identifying the

type of changes required to develop and implement a state required process for early intervention for struggling learners. The “learning

community” of Rock Island administrators not only shared their ownstruggles and victories in designing this process in the district meeting,

a small group also started visiting each other’s buildings to look at

new strategies. This was a major shift for the principals to be involvedin unified, sustained training with expert support over a two year span.

The creation of “learning community” of principals has been a

powerful outcome of the professional development series.

Process Standards: Staff development that improves

the learning of all students:

• Uses disaggregated student data to determine adult learning

priorities, monitor progress, and help sustain continuous

improvement. (Data-Driven)• Uses multiple sources of information to guide improvement

and demonstrate its impact. (Evaluation)

• Prepares educators to apply research to decision making.

(Research-Based)




• Uses learning strategies appropriate to the intended goal.

(Design)

• Applies knowledge about human learning and change.

(Learning)

• Provides educators with the knowledge and skills tocollaborate. (Collaboration) (NSDC, 2001)

The process standards emphasize the use of data and system

design. Adult learners appreciate the opportunity to interact with peersand to reflect on new learning. “Opportunities for group discussion

and collegial problem solving typically result in more informed

decisions and ownership of those decisions” (Tate, 2004, p. xxv).Reflection is also an essential element of adult learning theory.

According to Tate, “In the absence of reflection, teachers (principals)

either tend not to change behavior or they spend too much time simply

recounting everything that had not worked in the past” (Tate, 2004, p.105).

All participants in the workshop series were required to write a

goal action plan related to the building initiatives for each year in theseries. The action plans had to include a “student learning goal” and a

“leadership improvement goal”; any other goals for school could also

be added. These goal action plans were submitted on-line and wererevisited several times during each year of the workshop series. The

workshop design team members responded to the plans and also

responded to the four reflections that participants submitted during the

course of the year. These action plans charted the participants’ progress they made on school improvement initiatives. This “one on

one” coaching has been valuable for many of the principals as there is

typically no mechanism for this type of feedback within their districts(Appendix 1).




Content Standards: Staff development that improves

the learning of all students:

•

Prepares educators to understand and appreciate all students,create safe, orderly and supportive learning environments, andhold high expectations for their academic achievement.

(Equity)

• Deepens educators' content knowledge, provides them with

research-based instructional strategies to assist students in

meeting rigorous academic standards, and prepares them to use

various types of classroom assessments appropriately. (Quality

Teaching)

• Provides educators with knowledge and skills to involve

families and other stakeholders appropriately. (Family

Involvement) (NSDC, 2001)

The Content Standards reflect the need for professional

development that does not ignore the needs of students, their families

and other stakeholders. Principals routinely are involved with

planning and administration of policies and practices to supportstudents and their families. Many of the principals have been focusing

their attention on the research based instructional strategies that will

result in higher student achievement, especially in reading and math.One of the elements of the Iowa Professional Development Model is

for district and building leaders to align their district Comprehensive

School Improvement Plans with individual building plans. These plansincorporate professional development specifically selected to meet the

academic goals in the plans. The state of Iowa requires that the

professional development selected meet standards of sound research,

be delivered with fidelity and be evaluated based on teacher implementation and student performance.

The design team frequently integrated this process into the

discussions on the application of Balanced Leadership and TheLearning Leader content. One of the most powerful findings of the




McREL meta-analysis was that principals will be more effective in

dealing with second order change if they “distribute leadership.” First

order change is incremental and usually is an extension of changes thathave been previously introduced; second order change requires the

leaders to alter the system in fundamental ways often requiringdramatic shifts from past practice and past thinking (Marzanno, et. al,

2005). Providing participants with tools and strategies to purposefully plan for change and implement leadership teams was a

regular element of the McREL and Learning Leader workshops and

implementation sessions.

Session Feedback Data

The McREL Balanced Leadership research and content is

challenging. It clearly demonstrates that effective principals can havea positive effect on student achievement; however it also demonstrates

that ineffective principals contribute to poor student achievement. Itincludes a strong research base and borrows on many studies to offer

strategies to improve principal practice. This staff development series

requires much more from them that the typical isolated “sit and get”content. How did they evaluate their experience? The overall series

evaluation of the 2005-06 Principals Leadership Academy (PLA)

reflects a positive opinion of their experiences. The data is included in

Table 1.

Table 1.

Principals Leadership Academy Summative Evaluation 2005-06

(N=50)

A The PLA series:

Prin

Very

true for

me

Fairly

true for

me

Not

very

true for

Not true

for me at

all

Not

sure

1. had clear goals. 69.80 28.30 01.89 0.00 0.00

2. had clear expectations of

results.

47.17 45.28 05.66 0.00 0.00




3. used content aligned with

participants’ needs.

39.62 50.94 07.55 0.00 0.00

4. used a variety of strategies,delivery systems, models and

techniques to meet the needs

of participants.

47.17 41.51 11.32 0.00 0.00

(Table 1 Continues)

(Table 1 Continued)

5. included content and best

practice based on research.

86.79 11.32 00.00 1.89 0.00

6. provided follow-up. 43.40 37.74 11.32 1.89 3.77

7. provided opportunities for

participants to practice skills.

41.51 41.51 13.21 1.89 0.00

8. modeled mutual respect and

collaboration.

79.25 20.75 00.00 0.00 0.00

9. collected data on an ongoing

basis regarding content and

delivery.

41.51 43.40 07.55 0.00 7.55

10. used data results to drive on-

going planning cycle.

45.28 39.62 07.55 0.00 5.66

11. expected demonstrated linksto improvement of teaching

and learning as an end

product.

35.85 52.83 05.66 1.89 3.77

12. increased my understanding

of leadership responsibilities

that result in improved

learning for all.

67.92 22.64 05.66 0.00 3.77

13a. improved my understandingand ability to create a

purposeful community.

54.72 37.74 5.66 00 1.89

13b. improved my understandingand ability to manage change

within that community.

54.72 39.62 5.66 00 0.00

14. provided an opportunity for

me to review and reflect on

processes and strategies that

are effective in improving

student achievement.

56.60 35.85 5.66 00 1.89

15. increased knowledge base

through interactions and

problem solving with my

58.49 39.62 0.00 00 0.00




colleagues.

After analyzing the feedback from the 2005-2006 sessions, the

design team decided to change the delivery systems and the workshop

content for the next year. The team from Dr. Doug Reeves’ group, theLeadership and Learning Center, was contracted to present the content

found in The Learning Leader . This very practical, applied practiceapproach to learning leadership best practice research was combined

with more customized job embedded sessions with smaller groups of

participants. The design team hoped that these changes would lead to

higher satisfaction in the areas reflected in items 4, 6 and 7 in theannual survey. There was more follow-up and involvement in building

level applications of the research and practices. The workshop content

was also customized to allow the participant to apply the BalancedLeadership concepts along with Dr. Reeves’ approach to

organizational improvement.

The subsequent measure of workshop satisfaction for 2006-07

reflected this improvement in delivery of the professional

development. The report reflected a higher level of satisfaction withthe overall content of the workshops and other activities. Items 4, 6

and 7 (bolded) reflect much higher satisfaction in the areas of variety,

follow-up and application activities, targeted in the second year

design. These data is included in Table 2.

Table 2

Principals Leadership Academy Summative Evaluation 2006-07

(N=38)

AE

Prin The PLA series:

Very

true for

me

Fairly

true for

me

Not

very

true for

me

Not true

for me at

all

Not

sure

1. had clear goals. 89.5 10.5 00.0 0.0 0.0

2. had clear expectations of

results.

76.3 23.7 00.0 0.0 0.0




3. used content aligned with

participants’ needs.

65.8 31.6 02.6 0.0 0.0

4. used a variety of strategies,delivery systems, models and

techniques to meet the needs

of participants.

60.5 36.8 0.0 2.6 0.0

(Table 1 Continues)

(Table 2 Continued)

5. Included content and best

practice based on research.

94.6 5.4 00.0 0.0 0.0

6. provided follow-up. 71.1 23.7 5.3 0.0 0.0

7. provided opportunities for

participants to practice skills.

65.8 23.7 10.5 0.0 0.0

8. modeled mutual respect and

collaboration.

94.7 5.3 00.0 0.0 0.0

9. collected data on an ongoing

basis regarding content and

delivery.

68.4 31.6 00.0 0.0 0.0

10. used data results to drive on-

going planning cycle.

73.7 23.7 00.0 0.0 2.6

11. expected demonstrated linksto improvement of teaching

and learning as an end

product.

68.4 29.0 00.0 0.0 2.6

12. increased my understanding

of leadership responsibilities

that result in improved

learning for all.

89.5 10.5 0000.0 0.0 0.0

13. a improved myunderstanding and ability to

select the right work

79.0 18.4 2.602.6 0.0 0.0

13. b improved my understandingand ability to change my

leadership behaviors to

improve teaching and

learning.

83.8 16.2 0.00.0 0.0 0.0

14. provided an opportunity to

review and reflect

improvement strategies

86.6 10.5 602.6 0.0 0.0

15. increased my knowledge base

– interaction and problem

solving

84.2 15.8 0.0 0.0 0.0




The assessment of the “job embedded” implementation

sessions by the principals in Rock Island was even more positive. Thefacilitation of discussion and problem solving by the agency/WIU

facilitator was effective. In addition, the principals felt that theactivities that were created to increase their depth of knowledge of the

content and the strategies presented to implement the content werevaluable. The data is included in Table 3.

Table 3

Principals Leadership Academy” Rock Island” Implementation Evaluation 2006-07 N=11

A PLA Statement: Strongly

agree

Agree Disagree Strongly

Disagree

No

Resp

1. The value in BL research was

reinforced

30.00 70.00 00 0 0.00

2. The facilitator provided new

tools for leadership

40.00 60.00 00 0 0.00

3. The PD positively affected

practice

30.00 70.00 00 0 0.00

4. The monthly meeting

enhanced collaboration in

group

50.00 40.00 0 0 0.00

5. The facilitator responded to

the group’s needs

50.00 50.00 00 0 0.00

6. The RI Cabinet supported mein my professional

development

50.00 50.00 0 0 0.00

7. I was able to distribute

leadership

10.00 90.0 0 0 0.00

8. I expanded my professional

network through PLA

22.22 77.8 00 0 0.00




The second year “inter-district” implementation activities

received high marks as well. The sessions’ content and approach was

adjusted according to the participant’s needs and response to the largegroup sessions. These data are included in table 4 and represent item

means for all of the sessions.




Table 4

Principals Leadership Academy” Inter-District” Implementation Evaluation 2006-07.

(N=7)

A PLA Statement: Strongly

agree

Agree Disagree Strongly

Disagree

No

Res

p

1. The course was of high

quality

73.00 27.00 00 0 0.00

2. The material coved will assist

me in improving instruction.

92.50 7.50 00 0 0.00

3. The ideas and skills presented will be

immediately useful inimproving student learning.

80.00 20.00 00 0 0.00

4. The facilities were

comfortable and conducive

to a quality learning

experience.

58.50 21.00 20.5 0 0.00

The combination of high quality workshop presentations with“job embedded” application is an effective design for providing

professional development for principals. This design incorporates the

research driven principles of the Iowa Professional DevelopmentModel. This group of principals had the opportunity to learn the

theory of Balanced Leadership and The Learning Leader. The

demonstration of the practices took place in the workshops with the

expert providers and within the job embedded sessions provided indistricts or at the agency. The participants’ practice of the research to

enhance student achievement was monitored by the design teamthrough participant action plans and the participant driven application

sessions. Finally, the critical element of coaching occurred in formal

and informal collaboration within the participant groups and with the

design team members.




REFERENCES

Educational Research Service (1999). Professional development for

school principals. The Informed Educator Series (WS-0350).Arlington, VA.

Elmore, R. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership.

Washington D.C. Albert Shanker Institute.

Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed . ). New York: Teachers College Press.

Joyce, B. and Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development . Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

National Association for Elementary School Principals. (2001).

Leading learning communities: Standards for what

principals should know and be able to do. Alexandria, VA.

National Staff Development Council. (2001). National Staff

Development Standards. Retrieved October1, 2007, from

http://www.nsdc.org/standards/index.cfm

National Staff Development Council. (2005). The Learning Principal -Conflict Resolution Style [Brochure]. Oxford, OH: Author.

National Staff Development Council. (2005). The Learning Principal

- Dare to Delegate Checklist [Brochure]. Oxford, OH: Author.

Marzano, R., Waters, T., McNulty, B. (2005). School leadership that

works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Reeves, D. B. (2006). The learning leader . Alexandrai, VA: ASCD.






Sparks, D. (2000), April). Make principal development a priority.

Retrieved June 27, 2006, from http://www.nsdc.org.

Tate, M. (2004). “ Sit and Get” won’t grow dendrites: 20 professional development learning strategies that engage the adult brain.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Waters, T., McNulty, B., Grubb, S., Cameron, G., Balanced

leadership: School leadership that works (2005). MCRELParticipant Manual. (Available from McREL), 4601 DTE Blvd.

Suite 500, Denver, CO 8023.

http://www.nsdc.org/

http://www.nsdc.org/




Appendix

Goal Action Form

Name: Mr. Principal

1 - Improvement Initiative:

Creating and implementing a Response to Intervention/Systems for Student Success initiative

at Sample Elementary School that supports improved student achievement in reading.

2 - Goal(s): The specific achievement(s) you want to make (within a period of time)...achievement(s) that move you closer to the desired results. (Nov. 1)

a. I will work to create an atmosphere of support, teamwork, and cooperation at SampleSchool (Balanced Leadership Responsibility-Culture). b. I will work with the Central OfficeAdministration to inservice the staff on the framework of the Response to Intervention

initiative (Balanced Leadership Responsibility-Intellectual Stimulation, Optimize). c. Work with the Literacy Facilitators at Sample Elementary to design and implement a professional

development program centered around the Balanced Literacy theory of instruction (BalancedLeadership Responsibility-Intellectual Stimulation, Involvement in Curriculum, Instruction,

and Assessment). d. Implement ways to assist struggling readers (Balanced LeadershipResponsibility-Focus, Intellectual Stimulation, Involvement in Curriculum, Assessment and

Instruction).

3a - Improvement Initiative Baseline: Preliminary data around selected improvementinitiative (i.e. 360 Survey, Culture Survey) (Nov. 1)

I utilized my quarterly "How Am I Doing?" survey with the staff. There is congruence between my beliefs on how I am doing in the areas of culture, monitor and evaluate andaffirmation. The staff doesn't believe that I am doing as well in the areas of communication,

discipline, and focus as I do. The staff believes that I am doing better in the areas of monitor and evaluate, input, and change agent than I believe I am doing.

3b - Student Achievement Baseline: (ITBS, ITED, ICAM, District Assessments) (Nov. 1)The DIBELS/Early Learning Assessment was administered to every student at Sample School.

The scores were as follows: 52% of students are at grade level benchmark in reading asmeasured by DORF--Oral Reading Fluency Test. (More disaggregated data is required here)

4 - Plan: The action that enables you to reach the goal(s). An outline of methods, strategies, people and resources you can use to guarantee the attainment of your goal. (Nov. 1)

a. To create an atmosphere of support, teamwork, and cooperation at Sample School (BalancedLeadership Responsibility-Culture) I will: 1) Establish outcomes that matter to all (Kids

First!), 2) Develop Collective Efficacy, 3) Use the Fish! Facilitators to develop team buildingactivities for staff use at Sample Elementary. b. I will be in each classroom three times per week to monitor reading instruction to see that the principals of the Balanced Literacy




program are being implemented in the classroom. c. The Response to Intervention Team willdevelop procedures and documentation to monitor student progress in the area of reading. d.

Utilize the Literacy Facilitators, District Best Practices Coordinators, and BuildingInterventionists to inservice staff and provide follow up training on best practices in reading

based on the Balanced Literacy program and the five elements of reading instruction based on

the findings of the National Reading Panel. e. Use Data Teams to provide support and monitor implementation at each grade level.

5 - Timeline: A list of specific dates for each task from the plan to be completed by that time.

(Nov. 1)

a. At each monthly faculty meeting, time will be set aside for team building activities such as

sharing and celebrations. The Literacy Facilitators will also be given at least 30 minutes ateach faculty meeting to work with the staff on Best Practices in Reading. b. Beginning in

August and continuing through May, I will complete both scheduled and unscheduledwalkthroughs of each regular and special education classroom, specifically during the

Language Arts block, to see that Balanced Literacy instruction is occurring in the classroom. c.The Response to Intervention Team will meet monthly to discuss and prepare documentation

protocols to record student progress in reading, aligned with the five elements of readinginstruction developed by the National Reading Panel. d. The Literacy Facilitators will work to

establish a professional development plan for the year beginning in August. The plan will berefined monthly as I meet with the Literacy Facilitators to discuss progress and needs. DistrictBest Practices Coordinators will be brought in on an as-needed basis to help provide clarityand direction to our processes.

6 - Reflection 1: Describe implementation of your Action Plan with results to date (referenceBalanced Leadership behaviors) (January)

Balanced Leadership Responsibility--Culture: To date, we have revisited our missionstatement (Kids First!) and have created descriptors of what that should look, sound and feel

like in our classrooms and in the school as a whole. We developed these descriptors workingin cooperative teams and have reviewed them quarterly this school year. Our Fish! facilitators

have developed a program whereby teachers draw a stick each week or each day (their choice)that describes an action they can take to bring the Fish! philosophy to life in our school (e.g.

Look for something positive someone did with their students today and compliment them onit). We have utilized our Literacy Facilitators and District Best Practices Coordinators toreexamine the Balanced Literacy philosophy. Literacy Facilitators have been provided withtime to present and share with the teachers at each faculty meeting thus far this year. Teachers

have re-worked their daily classroom schedules to reflect the Balanced Literacy Philosophy. Ihave not been in to the classrooms as much as I had intended to be--not the three times per week. My data tells me that it is probably closer to two times per week. The Five Elements of Reading Instruction from the National Reading Panel has become the cornerstone of our

efforts at implementing Response to Intervention in Reading. All assessment, intervention anddocumentation that has been developed in reading is tied to those elements. The results of theHow Am I Doing Survey that I asked the staff to completed towards the end of the secondquarter were disappointing. The staff feels that culture and climate are suffering with the

implementation of Response to Intervention. They also feel that I am still trying to do toomuch on my own and not delegating leadership responsibilities enough. This is something that




I will try to rectify throughout the remainder of the year. Perhaps I need to consider how todelegate some responsibility for culture and climate so that the staff feels involved and valued.

7 - Reflection 2: Describe implementation of your Action Plan with results to date (referenceBalanced Leadership behaviors) (February)

The implementation of the plan continues. I have attempted to delegate more responsibilitiesto my staff, especially my data team leaders, though I have no additional data at this point to

quantify the results. We continue with the implementation of Response to Intervention and theFish! action plans. Impact on culture is key.

8 - Reflection 3: Describe implementation of your Action Plan with results to date (referenceBalanced Leadership behavior Learning Leader Tools) (March)

As above.

9 - Reflection 4: Describe implementation of your Action Plan with results to date (reference

Balanced Leadership behavior Learning Leader Tools) (April)

The latest How Am I Doing Survey that was administered to the staff indicates that the climate

and culture in the building have not improved (3.8 on a 1.0-4.0 scale with 1.0 being the

highest score). However, staff has noticed that they have been entrusted with moreresponsibility and that I am not trying to do as much on my own which they see as a positive.Parents and students indicate overall satisfaction with culture and climate as indicated on the

District Survey.

10a - Summary of Results: Improvement Initiative Data: (Required)(June 22)

The staff continues to be dissatisfied overall with culture and climate, due primarily to theimplementation of RiI.

10b - Summary of Results: Student Achievement: (Required)(June 22)

Student achievement data is not available as ISAT is our primary indicator. However, as noted

earlier, most students and parents indicate that they are pleased with the education they arereceiving at Sample Elementary. DIBELS results are going in the wrong direction. Student

writing scores are up.

10c - Summary of Results: Other (June 22) None

11 - Summary of Learning: Comment on your results. (June 22)

I feel that I have a better handle on those things that I need to delegate. However, I'm going to

delegate further those areas that continue to suffer--climate and communication. Perhaps withstaff responsible for those areas with my oversight, the situation will improve and student

learning will be enhanced.

12 - General Comments: (June 22)

I enjoyed my PLA experience over the past two years. However, I was not able to devote thetime to it that I wanted to. Too much management still gets in the way of my being as effective

a leader as I would like to be.

6 kilmer koenig revised

Documents