by Dennis Sparks
Journal of Staff Development, Spring 1997 (Vol. 18, No. 2)
JSD: The National Commission on
Teaching and America's Future's report, What Matters Most: Teaching and
America's Future, argues that every teacher has the right to a competent
teacher. If you were a superintendent of schools, what would you do to ensure,
in a timely way, that there was a competent teacher in every classroom? JSD: It sounds like you're saying school leaders
must believe that all teachers can learn just as they encourage teachers to
believe that all students can learn. JSD: How do we affect attitudes -- whether they
are teachers' beliefs about students or school leaders beliefs about teachers --
so that we all come to believe more is possible? JSD: How do we create the individual and
collective will to create schools in which all students learn at high levels? JSD: In that vein, you advocate using powerful
master teachers as a resource for staff development. At the same time, you also
acknowledge that those teachers are often marginalized, as are schools that are
particularly effective? How do we prevent the marginalization of those
individuals and schools? JSD: How do you make the work of those master
teachers more widely available?
Hilliard: I would borrow a strategy from Atlanta which grouped schools
into three categories. One group was the high achievers. Supervision was
withdrawn from them and given to the schools in the middle that were trying to
become high achievers. The lowest performing schools became a high priority for
the superintendent. In a very short time, some of the low performing schools
began to experience fairly dramatic improvements in student achievement.
The school was viewed as the unit to create the momentum to bring along the
faculty. While that didn't solve the total problem of uneven instruction, a
rigorous accountability system could be used, combined with support for
individual teachers. If low performing teachers did not change, hard decisions
would have to be made about whether they should continue.
We need to pay greater attention to the history of individual teachers in
raising academic achievement so we can work with teachers who are not
particularly productive. We can't do that, though, unless we have a record of
who's doing what with students. That means disaggregating information about
student learning by teacher so we know who needs assistance.
We must also create a culture of collaboration in schools so teachers feel like
they're in this together, that they can make decisions that will influence their
students' learning.
Another important part of ensuring competent teachers for all students has to do
with the beliefs we hold about whether lower performing teachers can become
powerful teachers. That means all teachers need to be exposed to winning
teachers and their kids so they can see that it's possible for teachers to
become successful with these students.
Hilliard: That's exactly it. In the same way that we develop a belief in
kids by observing successful students who we wouldn't expect to achieve, we
often believe particular teachers can't improve through staff development. We
now have an empirical record that demonstrates that teachers can take on new
energy and use new strategies that make them successful. So it's extremely
important that we maintain the faith in the ability of teachers to grow and meet
our expectations.
Hilliard: There are districts that have dramatically improved student
learning. Those schools have the same staff and students who were there when
they were performing poorly. Being confronted with that reality can help leaders
have more faith in the changeability of teachers. There are many examples of
teachers and principals turning schools around.
Hilliard: That's a tough one. Some of the current school reform
initiatives, such as vouchers, speak to selfishness more than they do to our
obligation to all children. The low level of resources provided to some schools
and the low expectations for many students are inconsistent with the need to
educate all kids. We tolerate mediocrity.
The issue of will is certainly broader than the schools. It's a political issue
about whether we care about everybody. I'm not sure I know how to change
society's general commitment so that we care about everybody. I am sure, though,
that if we do care about everybody there are lots of examples of teachers and
schools that can turn themselves around.
Hilliard: The very existence of these people and schools is threatening
to those who are not achieving. They fear they're not able even with hard work
to reach the levels of these individuals. Examples of schools that have made
improvements should help people feel less threatened because ordinary people
became achievers. It puts high achievement within reach for any teacher. If we
show that it's possible for people like themselves to produce these results
within a relatively brief time, we can make the achievement of the few less
frightening to the many.
Hilliard: Visitation would be best, but that's not feasible in most
cases. The next most practical way is through video. Well-produced videotapes
can bring real schools and classrooms to people who can't go there. I'm hopeful
that, at some point, we will have hundreds, maybe even thousands of videotapes
that would expose large numbers of teachers to what is possible.
Another part of the process is disseminating those tapes. Perhaps agencies such
as federally-funded regional research and development laboratories could make
this a priority so videos would be available to all schools.
For more information, contact Asa Hilliard, III at Georgia State University, Dept. of Educational Policy Studies, 30 Pryor St., Suite 450, Atlanta, GA 30303-3083, (404) 651-1269, fax (404) 651-1009