Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
The voice of the American Consortium for Equity in Education at ace-ed.org | Host Larry Jacobs facilitates rich discussions with innovative educators, thought leaders, authors and the leaders within the education industry to promote equity, access and opportunity for every student in every school.
I'm David Cicero, and this
is Education Talk Radio.
One thing I've noticed over the
years is that schools are incredibly
good at responding to problems.
Test scores decline, we
introduce a new curriculum.
Teacher turnover increases, we launch
a professional development initiative.
Students fail courses, we
create credit recovery programs.
Education is full of
well-intentioned solutions.
But I've started to wonder whether
we spend enough time asking an
even more important question:
Are we solving the right problem?
Because every solution begins with
an assumption, an assumption about
why students are struggling, an
assumption about what teachers need.
And if those assumptions are wrong,
even our best ideas may never produce
the outcomes we're hoping for.
In this conversation, we're
not really looking for another
list of best practices.
Instead, I'd like to explore how
leaders can learn to see problems
differently, how to move beyond the
symptoms, uncover what people actually
need, and build systems that help
both students and educators thrive.
Today, I'm joined by Eric
Rowe and Losha Brooks.
Together, they've spent years
helping schools and organizations
think differently about
leadership, organizational
change, and human-centered design.
Eric and Losha, welcome to the show.
Hey, David.
Thank you.
Thank you, David.
Thank you for the introduction.
So let's start from where I'm
thinking the beginning is.
Losha, this one's for you.
When a district identifies a challenge,
how do leaders know whether they're
looking at the problem itself
or simply one of its symptoms?
So I think, David, very good question.
The, the most telling way I,
I believe district leaders can
identify the challenge is are
they actually looking at numbers?
So are we looking at attendance scores?
Are we looking at maybe
turnover rates, right?
And so in that case, we know that
people are typically not the problem.
It has to be some type of structural,
um, internal challenge versus
just looking at this as a symptom.
The, the turnover is a symptom.
And so really getting them to understand
something is causing these symptoms.
Something is causing the attendance,
something is causing the scores,
something is causing the turnover.
And so with that, having district
leaders to think more deeper about
what is causing this symptom will help
them to quickly identify is this a
symptom or is this the actual issue?
So it's just that take a step back.
Is that what- Certainly, especially
if it's, if it's people oriented.
If it's, "Oh, the students
aren't performing.
Oh, our teachers aren't prepared," there
has to be something structurally bigger
than just the people that's causing that.
So yes, David, you are right.
Having them to actually take
a step back to look at it.
And my, my add to that is like-
Yeah ⦠you know, you interrogate
processes, not people Right?
'Cause w- if you start at the people
first, students, teachers, parents,
whatever, right, like at that point
your, your biases are coming into
play, your assumptions about a certain
cultural group are coming into play.
And so you aren't gonna get to a solution
or a resolution because you've already
decided that they are the problem.
And, and that's, and that's just
deficit thinking in a nutshell.
So best to, in that moment,
think- Right ⦠system first.
If we identify the who instead of
the what first, we're almost, we've
almost a- assumed that we know where
the problem is, who it is, right?
'Cause they've brought, those people
have brought something into the
system, so we're pointing a finger
almost saying, "Hmm, the problem's
probably with what they brought."
Yeah.
Does that make sense?
Yes.
And David, to add to that, um,
just because first of all, I just
wanna be very candid about this.
I think sometimes when we have these
conversations we're, we're kinda
uptight, like we just trying to
identify what the best answer is.
And even with this, when thinking about
what the challenge is, it's most often
creating space just for the conversation.
Because the most glaring
things are the symptoms.
The most glaring things are we do
have high teacher turnover rate, we
do have, you know, low test scores,
but these again are systems, uh, these
are symptoms to a larger problem.
And so always creating the opportunity
to just have some dialogue exchange
so people can even express what the
perceived challenge could be, because
then that, that highlights what is
actually internally going on within the
system that can be creating friction.
Do you find often, do you two find
often that that space doesn't exist?
Oh, yes.
Nobody's talking, David.
No, it is because it's, we still largely
operate in a very top-down way, right?
Like we, we hire leaders.
So i- if you think about a school
leader coming in, and say they're
interviewing for a job, I don't
care if it's superintendent, chief
academic officer, or principal, or AP.
The fir- one of the sort of
performance tasks they give you
is like, "Please present us to
your ni- your 90-day plan," right?
"So we wanna know what you're gonna
do the 90 day, the first 90 days to
get some idea of your priorities."
Think about the assumptions that you make.
You're asking a person outside of your
organization, whether they spend time
with you or not, to come into a new
context and then identify the major
improvement strategies or major priorities
for a district or a school, right?
By themselves.
And then you all are going to judge
that and assess whether this person
is the right fit for the job.
Meanwhile, no one talks about,
well, what's actually happening?
Can we get to maybe a real service
level and ask some questions of the
folk who are experienced in our school
system, our organization, in a very
different way, and then design from
that and include them in that process?
It, it's stillâ¦
You're right.
We aren't having those conver- They are
happening, but in very small places.
Um, but I would think in part a large,
in part K12 education, nonprofits and
the like are still oper- philanthropy
are still operating from the space of
we kinda know what's best, and, and
we're gonna design for that and not
include anybody else in that process.
Are you saying that we expect this
person to come up with a 90-day plan of
how, you know, what they'll accomplish-
Yes ⦠within that timeframe, but
they don't have access to learn
about what's going on in the system-
No ⦠before they create that plan?
And, and you're evaluated on how you're
gonna come in in August pre-service.
What's gonna happen September?
What's gonna happen October?
What are gonna be some goals that you hit?
Now, you can go on the website and look
at a school's, um, school improvement
plan or a district's, uh, strategic plan,
but at the end of the day, it, it's we,
we are literally judging people on, on,
on the problem, as Lawson pointed out.
Like- You aren't asking the right
questions, nor are, nor are you
really giving voice, um, to people's
experiences within that system.
You're just looking at the, the end result
of the data and assuming that the people
are the problem and not the organization
and its structures and policies.
Okay.
A- actually, I, I had- Yeah
another question for you, Eric, and
now I, I think I've gained a little
bit of insight even into that question.
You tell me if I'm thinking
about this in the right way.
So the question was, or the question
is: what assumption do organizations
tend to make about people that cause
them to mix, to misdiagnose problems?
It sounds like even in that 90-day
plan, we're, we're almost thinking
this person filling it out has insights
they're, they haven't even been privy
to, that we may not even know about.
Like, we assume, we're assuming that
they'll be able to create an effective
90-day plan when in fact th- they can't.
Yeah.
It's- Am I kind of- It's, it,
it's, it's performative, and
that's part of the game, right?
Like, we don't reallyâ¦
We say we want change.
We really don't want to change things.
So the assumptions that come
into play are, um, we start
with the school level, right?
So once a week or once every other
week, um, a group of teachers by grade
level or subject area get together, and
they have a data team meeting, right?
And in that data team meeting, they're
gonna take student artifacts and work
samples, and they're gonna categorize
them by high, medium, and low.
Now, that should be familiar to everybody
'cause that's the bell curve, right?
So I'm not gonna get into
debunking the bell curve and
all of that, but think about it.
You send a child to school, and the people
that you're trusting with your child's
education are categoriz- categorizing
your child based on, um, not even a,
a body of evidence, one or two sort of
quizzes, tests, some type of task to
say, "Well, this child is a high child.
This child's medium.
This child is low."
And the other sort of thinking that we
do is to say, "We're gonna focus on the
kids in the middle because we can move
them faster" to meet your arbitrary,
"Oh, we, we've got this reading goal.
We've got this goal.
We have to hit this benchmark
on this particular assessment."
That's the prevailing thinking and
practice in a lot of K-12 schools.
And think about who that leaves out.
And think about actually sorting kids
based on one or two, um, assessments
or tasks that they turned in.
And if you're in the low group,
you're often overlooked and ignored.
And if you're in that high
group, the assumption is, "Oh,
we'll, they'll figure it out.
They're good anyway.
They're GT or they're this
and they're performing well.
We wanna focus on these middle kids."
What you're describing, the system
is kinda set up to make, I mean, kind
of bad assumptions in a way, right?
We're, we're assuming we understand- Yes,
it makes assumptions ⦠we're co- 100%.
Right.
W- what students know, what they
can do, and then we wanna build
instructional strategies based on- Yes
limited evidence.
To fix them.
So how do we f- how do we
fix this in, in that case?
And w- d- is there a time you could
share with us, Eric, when changing the
question or the approach completely
changed how the, the solution came about?
I think you, you've gotta maybe start,
you've gotta start internally first.
As a school leader, if I don't really
see the system and see how inequity's
operated in the system, I'm gonna
continue the same pattern, and I did that.
I was, as an AP, I was d- I
was over, disproportionately
disciplining Black boys, right?
Without recognizing the impact and the
harm and the assumptions I was making
and the data I was looking at, right?
So if I think about my time at
Prep, um, I began, um, Prep is an
alternative school in, in Denver Public
Schools, um, just as involved youth.
Um, youth who've been
disengaged in some way.
And I started asking the teachers,
like, "What should a quality
alternative education model look like?"
And then began asking the students
those same type of questions, and
thinking about how do you align, how
do you create a very different learning
experience than just coming to school
and walking around, um, 20 by 20
boxes for six and a half hours a day.
If you're a teacher, the same thing.
You, you're gonna seeâ¦
You're gonna have two or
three preps, maybe four.
You're gonna see about 100 students or so.
Alternative schools are much
smaller, but you get my point.
And you're gonna teach es-
essentially the same lesson
for six and a half hours a day.
And so I had to really get folk to maybe
see how the system was operating, um, and
to really focus and think about what d-
what could joy look like in our space?
How can we redefine what
a learning experience is?
Um, and but especially in
Colorado, there is no seat time.
So if you don't have to really deal with
credits and seat time, w- what would you
design differently if you had the option?
And so we really just asked
questions of the students like,
"What do you want school to look
like, sound like, and feel like?"
They wanted belonging.
They wanted, um, to be engaged in hands-on
things and make some connection between
real world, um, and work and school,
and see the connection between that
clearly, and have those experiences.
Um, they wanted challenge.
They didn't want like, "Oh, I
just want to get on a computer
and just, like, just answer some
questions," like Edgenuity, right?
They really wanted to be engaged and
challenged, um, and intellectually
stimulated in a very different
way, 'cause they know what they
had gotten before was very inferior
and below their expectations.
This actually leads to the o- one
thing that I was thinking about that's
kind of inside of my next question.
You said something, and
you just kinda said it.
You just kept rolling-
Yeah ⦠but it popped out to me.
And I wanna hear from both of you on
this- Tag, Losha ⦠in particular.
So it was, uhâ¦
All right, Losha, you're
gonna take the first one.
So- I'm cool ⦠what Eric said was,
he just kinda, he just kinda said this,
but I think it's very interesting.
You said leaders could sit down
and think to themselves and ask the
question, what could joy look like?
I mean, that's not how do we solve
the test score problem, right?
That's totally different.
He said, what could joy look like?
Ask students, what do you want it, what do
you want school to feel like, sound like?
I don't think that thoseâ¦
I feel like those words were
intentional- Yeah ⦠Eric, so let's,
let's dig into that a little bit.
So before weâ¦
Now we, we see a problem as
school leaders, and we, we
wanna jump to what do we do?
Yes.
How do we solve this?
L- Losha, whatâ¦
I'll, I'ma- Yes ⦠give you
both a chance to answer here.
What questions should they be
asking to better understand
what people actually need?
So, uh, this is just a very good question
because you can really find out a lot
by just getting straight to the point.
And I think when, when we ask our teachers
and even ask our babies, ask our students,
"What does learning look like to you?"
I think oftentimes the answers are
those that are not conventional
with what someone would say is,
uh, a class that is well-managed.
So students might say, you know, me and
my friends are having conversations, or
I hear, um, you know, laughter and noise.
And we would be like, "Oh,
that class should be quiet."
In reality, students want to engage.
Like Eric said, they wanna talk
about things, and they, they
wanna be happy in their learning.
There are science that proves when you
incorporate movement, when you incorporate
kinesthetics inside of learning, this is
how students really take in information.
And so just basically asking
students and teachers, "What does
learning look and feel like to you?
How would that look in a class?"
And I think we would be surprised as
how it would be described from their
viewpoint versus what the expectation
is when an administrator comes
around to do their walks and, and how
performative it can become because of
what the norm has been established.
A learning environment should be quiet.
Students should be, um, reading or,
you know, pen to paper and, you know,
no interaction versus when we ask
our teachers and we ask our students,
"What would it look like to see
you learning, to see you teaching?
What would that look like?"
We would get totally- Oh,
yeah ⦠different answers.
And so again, yeah, surveying them on what
it actually looks and feels like to them.
And, and you gotta, you
gotta follow through.
Like whenâ¦
And I, when I, when I started sort
of thinking about my own journey
and when I learn best, right?
And you thought it was somebody who
flunked out of college their first
year 'cause I didn't know how to learn.
I, I got asked the question,
like, "What do you wanna learn?"
And for by dean, and I was like, "Wait a
minute, you're supposed to tell me what
classes I need to take, what do I need to
do to get an A so I can navigate college."
I was not ready for sort of an open
inquiry system where I had to like
become a learner instead of compliant.
And so y- y- you gotta really
follow through on the experience.
And so I, I, I challenge or provoke
people with this question, right?
Um, it still gets to joy.
It still gets to what, you know,
what, what do you essentially,
what's the purposes of education?
But the question can be, "Can
you tell me about a time, um,
that you learned a skill?"
What did that feel like?
Who, who was your teacher or
facilitator for that, right?
And, and if you think about folk
who run like the Boston Marathon or,
or hike up Kilimanjaro, or I don't
know, like a, or tri-sport athlete.
I got all these sports
metaphors in my head right now.
But, but anything.
They don't say, "Oh, I went to
a classroom somewhere, and I sat
with this expert for, you know, 90
hours, and they gave me quizzes and
tests till I could pass them all.
Then I was ready."
That is not learning.
It's ju- it's just, it's just not.
And so but folk did share like, "Oh,
I remember my uncle showed me how to
change a tire or oil in my car," right?
"I learned how, I learned how
to use my, um, my grandmother's
recipe for cooking collard greens."
Right?
'Cause I, I learned how,
how you clean them, right?
What, what ingredients you need to
add to that to season them up right.
How long should they be on the pot, right?
And so, like I think we, we minimize
learning to a very discrete set of
experiences in a, in a formal education
setting, and I think it ignores culture.
I think it ignores joy.
I think it ignores the, um, the,
the wisdom and knowledge that
students and folk and community
bring into school spaces.
If we ask those questions- Mm-hmm
⦠like it's a very simple question
really, but it's, it's, it's loaded.
What does learning look like to you?
If we ask that of a student, is what
you're, what you're saying is we
will uncover some of those essential
things they learned about learning
in their own experiences outside the
classroom, and we can learn from that
and try to bring some of those- Yes
into the classroom?
And, and where I'm coming
from is not anything new.
If you have ever read Gloria
Ladson-Billings' work from back in '95
around culturally relevant pedagogy
and teaching, um, a lot of her work
is what our dissertation is around.
Three elements, really simple, right?
One is, um, academic success.
How do you define that?
What does that look like?
How do you help all students have,
um, an experience of academic success?
The next is recognizing
culture and cultural relevancy.
What do you bring to the table, right?
Like, what knowledge and, and skillsets
and, and ways of being and knowing, um,
have you learned along the way, and how
do we incorporate that in, in very real
and authentic ways in the classroom?
And the last one is criticality,
helping students, adults see the
world in a very, uh, different way,
um, and, and seeing the inequities
that exist, and then the praxis.
You've, you've researched this.
You've studied this.
Then what are you gonna do about it?
Can you apply the skills that you have
in, in, in school, in your family, in
your community, and apply them in a
different context to create change?
That's a very different set of
questions and a way of thinking
about the purpose of education.
I'm sitting here listening to, to you
and Losha speak, and I'm, I'm wanting to
ask some very specific questions- Mm-hmm
⦠like around test scores and, like, right,
how do we actually take some of this
information and take a first step- Mm
when we see a problem?
So I've got a couple, um, scenarios here
that are- Let's do that ⦠that are-
Yeah ⦠that are passions for me, right?
Um, so I'm gonna, I'm gonna put
them to you both, and we'll see,
you know, if we can think of some
new ways to approach these, um, for
these students we care so much about.
So one thing that has always
bothered me, um, and I've, I've
worked in a lot of schools.
I spent a number of years traveling
the country and helping schools
integrate ed- educational technologies.
And what I saw in credit recovery
programs, for instance, you
would have a few students who
perhaps failed a math course.
Let's say it's an Algebra 1 course,
and then many schools respond to this
by, um, enrolling them into self-paced
online credit recovery program.
Now, the classroom facilitator often is
a subject matter expert in something,
but they may not be a subject-
Correct ⦠matter expert in math, right?
So I've, so I've got a, you
know, 20 students in front of me.
A couple are in math, a couple are in
social studies, a g- a couple are in some
science course, whatever the case may be.
And what always struck me is that, let,
let's say you've got a student working
on his Algebra- Mm-hmm ⦠1 course
that he failed, but the facilitator,
you know, uh, is an English teacher.
I feel like we've actually responded
to a struggling student by increasing
the distance between that student
and the subject matter expert.
I mean, that's how it has always felt to
me, and that kinda felt a bit backwards.
And so if I'm thinking about where you
and, and Losha kinda stand, I thought
of some questions around that scenario.
So the first one would be what assumptions
about teaching and learning do you think
are embedded in that system, and why?
Oh, it's, it's, it's,
it's sorting and ranking.
It, it's what, uh, Paulo
Freire wrote about and against.
Um, we're going to sort and rank
students by letter grades, and We
use Fs as a way to tell students that
you failed and you need to make up
something or make up this credit.
But then as your scenario suggests,
put them in a situation that's not
gonna really lead them to do that.
I, I'm in alternative school.
I use credit recovery programs.
I, I think what we did specifically, and
I've done in several schools, is say like,
"Yeah, the letter grades really don't tell
us anything about what a student can do."
Yes, it categorizes them, but we are
now saying that there's gonna be a group
of students who will always be in, bell
curve again, in the high group, there'll
be a middle, and there'll be a low group,
and those students are largely failing
'cause they can't pass these classes.
That has nothing to do with teaching
and learning, 'cause a lot of times we,
um, we, we conflate attendance, whether
how often you're in school or not, and
your effort or lack thereof, and then
give you a, a, and give you a grade.
So we're actually giving
students failing grades.
I would say the, a lot of the deficit
thinking is built into that type of
system of you're failed, we're now
gonna put you onto a program and you go
at your own pace, but we're not gonna
really give you any support with that.
But I think it's some video lessons
within the system that can help you.
You watch those, you pass the test,
and you've gotta pass with a C or
better Again, the assumption is that
learning is not social, and it is.
The assumption is that only, um, certain
students deserve or get access to real
authentic learning opportunities, whether
it's concurrent enrollment, whether it
is, um, work-based learning, whether
it is, um, project-based learning.
But other students don't have the, the
intellectual bandwidth to handle that.
So again, we are sorting and ranking
students based off our assumptions,
not what they actually can do.
Yeah.
I wanna add to that as well.
Um, I definitely think just the
assumption that covering the
content matters more than students
actually having the contact- Yeah
as you all mentioned, with the expert,
and that just any adult can supervise a
recovery as long as you have the software.
And David, I could go off on a
whole tangent about- I know, I, I
All the, all of these platforms,
you know, for credit recovery
and, and things of that nature.
Um, but I think we all know on the
call too, just even thinking about the,
the companies that have come in with
these different programs to assist with
credit recovery and, and just totally
missing the mark where the students
who need the most help are now being
distanced the most with this program, and
distanced from the actual content expert.
I, I, I really think I got great answers
from both of you right now, and I, I have
a follow-up question, and it, it mightâ¦
You know, it's a tough one to
ask because- I mean, we're three
sitting here talking about this.
It seems clear that that's not
what you'd want to do with a
struggling student- Right ⦠right?
You wouldn't wanna, you know,
he's having, the student is having
trouble managing his own learning.
He's having trouble, um, maybe connecting
with the educators, um, you know, finding
inspiration in, uh, the subject area.
So the response to that, it wouldn't
really make sense to say, "Okay, just
cover the content somewhat on your
own and at your own pace as well."
And so why don't schools think to
themselves something like, I mean, in
my mind, I would seriously consider,
hey, the students that are doing well
should have the privilege of doing that.
Mm-hmm.
And we take our struggling
learners and decrease the distance
to subject matter experts.
Why aren't we making a decision like that?
I ask the same question, David, because
in- Yeah ⦠in a perfect world, I,
just as you just stated, my students
who are on level and above, those are
the students w- who would have access
to those modulated platform courses.
The students who are below grade
level, who are repeating the class,
course recovery, those are my students
that I would definitely make sure
that they have a content area expert
that's delivering the content.
And I, I also wanna add that it is
culturally responsive to those students.
The- these are the essentials.
They need the classroom expert as well as
somebody who is culturally competent to
understand what their actual needs are.
Mm-hmm.
So cu- culturally responsive,
subject matter expert.
My next question was, like, how do we
think to redesign how schools respond
to something like credit recovery
or, or, uh, students failing courses.
What else could we add to that, Eric?
I mean, I, I know I kinda, I feel
like I kinda led us in a certain
direction, but I think that we
were all saying the same thing.
Like, again, if, and Lo just said
it, if, if we continue to focus on,
um, we need to cover everything.
So if, if you were a math teacher, I
was a history teacher, humanities, you
are not gonna teach the entire canon,
literary canon, in 12, 12 to 16 years.
It's not gonna happen.
You are not gonna teach the all
of math and, and the nuances
of math and the connections to
math and science in 16 years.
Not gonna happen, right?
Y- so you then have to think about- Not
only like, 'cause seat time's irrelevant.
You, that's not getting you anything or
making sure students cover something.
You covering something is, is, is
a very shallow way to approach,
um, teaching and learning.
You really wanna go in depth over
some connecting concepts or standards,
and so you, you have to really
provoke educators to think very
differently about, um, their pedagogy.
So I, we have a studentâ¦
We, we do internships at my school.
We had a young man, um, who actually
has his own business, right?
He, he's a welder, wants to get his
license in welding, but he fixes cars.
Um, so we did two things for him, 'cause
one, he's trying to start a business.
Um, he's a senior.
Was a senior.
He graduated.
So we put work-based learning on
part of his schedule for half the
day second semester, which means he
was getting academic credit, right?
Um, largely in electives, 'cause he had,
he had done most of his core requirements.
Um, but he was getting academic credit
for working on his business, and, and
he would turn in, like, you know, like
scope of work if somebody wants to
come in for whatever work they needed.
But we couldn't get him into the,
the auto, uh, tech program at
the, at the local, at the, at the
school district's, um, CTE school.
There's a 200-student
waiting list there, right?
But we did find a nonprofit
owner who actually builds solar
batteries for go-karts, 'cause
he's got-- he owns a go-kart track.
So that student and five others
spent, um, eight weeks learning
how to build a solar battery
Like I can, can I tell you the
number like of standards in math,
science, physics involved in that?
Yeah.
A lot.
But the experience of having someone in
the field building that relationship,
using skills outside of, um, on a platform
or in a classroom space, um, meant
the difference 'cause now that student
was coming to school more regularly.
Now that student was, um, taking
concurrent enrollment classes,
uh, through BYU independent study.
N- now this student was now thinking
about a future going to a tech school
and getting his welding certificate
or actually taking up, um, getting
his auto- automotive license or
certificate Before that, not really
engaged in school at all, and really
just said, "Mister, listen, I'm here.
I skipped a lot of school.
I, I don't know how far I'm behind,
but school's not really my thing."
So you have to think very
differently about how you engage the
students to make it personalized.
And like, there's a-- I don't
mean like, oh, we're gonna put you
on a platform, and you gotta go
through this sequence of modules.
I mean, what are your hopes, dreams, and
wishes, and how do we help you get there,
and actually build that into the school?
Again, a very different set of
questions you have to ask as a school
leader, as a teacher, and as students,
'cause now you're asking the student
to start having some voice in terms
of where they wanna go, and agency.
That makes me think about teachers, and
I kinda wanna shift the conversation over
to just touch on teachers for a moment.
When we're thinking about something
like teacher shortages, which is super
hot topic right now, is the deeper
question that we really need to ask,
what do thriving teachers experience
that struggling teachers don't?
It's, it's almost a parallel
to the student question, right?
What does this look like to you?
Let's learn about what learning
looks like to you and use that.
I'm wondering if there's a teacher
side to this too, because I sometimes
wonder if we've become so focused on
improving instruction that we don't
spend enough time understanding the
people that are doing the teaching.
So, um, LoShea, I had this one slated
for you to start, and, and, and
either one of you can answer or both.
What do you think thriving teachers
actually need from the organization they
work for in order to continue growing
and continue doing their best work?
Thank you, David.
I, the, first of all- That's all
⦠shout out to all of the teachers.
Um, we love the teachers who
are closest to the babies.
I I know for a fact thriving
teachers, non-punitive, uh,
real coaching, um, and what that
simply looks like is just support.
I will never forget my, my
first instructional coach, um,
just amazing, amazing soul.
She would come in, and, you know,
I'm beginning year teacher, and, you
know, she's just assisting me, and it
was non-punitive, and it felt so good
to just get feedback and, you know,
to even allow her to record me at
times so that I could see some of the
things or, um, some, uh, instructional
practices that I wanted to improve on.
But creating a, a culture and environment
in a school where teachers can actually
get non-punitive coaching and support
Is going to help teachers grow in their
practice and, and be willing to be
vulnerable when someone does come into
their classroom, into their space to allow
for appropriate feedback versus it being
performative and now we don't know how
you can actually support that teacher.
So, um, again, thriving teachers
need just real coaching and support.
And I also believe, uh, as a teacher
first, you know, teaching is a art form.
When you're not suppressed in the way
that you can actually express your art
form of teaching and you are allowed
that autonomy, and even, I don't wanna
say autonomy to not do it correctly
maybe, but just the autonomy to- Mm-hmm
to try what you believe is best, to have
that in a school and embedded in the
culture, yes, we're hitting the standards,
yes, we're hitting, you know, all of
the, the metrics that we need to hit,
but allowing a teacher to still operate
within their creative space of actually,
you know, teaching- Yes ⦠is a art form.
And Loescher's right.
Like, if you read between the lines or
listen between the lines of what she
said, it is, it is frustrating, it is,
um, anxiety inducing, secondary trauma,
all the things we're teaching right now,
and a lot of it stems from gotcha culture.
Like, if you don't do this
right, we're gonna write you
up, and you may not have a job.
Think about that.
Like, they, it's, some systems
create a culture that is toxic in,
in teaching, telling professional
teachers that you can never fail.
You can't get anything wrong.
You always have to get it right.
W- where does that ever work?
And so in the same way that we've been
talking about what students need, I
think it also applies to the teachers.
Because if they're the one closer
to the babies, as Loescher says, how
do you get them into a space that
is emotionally safe for them, that
they can be vulnerable and create-
Mm-hmm ⦠something very different?
Um, how do they receive, like,
real support and coaching that
builds their capacity, right?
W- what, what do they want, what do
they, what does learning look like,
sound like, and feel like for them?
And it can't be everybody report at 3:30
to the cafeteria to sit on uncomfortable
chairs and the leader's gonna go
over a 40-point slide deck with you.
And oh, by the way, you better get
all of this implemented by Monday.
It's Friday
That is not inspiring anybody, right?
And so I, I think it's, for all the things
teacher needs, they, they need space,
they need support, um, coaching and not
just kinda figuring it out on the fly.
Um, and I think they deserve to be in
a space that has, and everybody does,
that has a real instructional model,
that there's a pedagogy of, of, of,
of, of liberation and practice in that
space, that there are resources that
they need and use and not have to be s-
taking money out of their own pocket.
And I, 'cause I, I did that.
Mm.
And, and the, the trick is, like,
you tell yourself, "Well, I, I
really believe and love these kids,
and so I'm gonna stick with this.
This is what I'm gonna do, and this is
what I need to do to be successful."
I, I ⦠And, and for
leaders the same thing.
Like, we have convinced leaders
that if you aren't working the 60
hours a week, you aren't doing the
job of leading the school right.
I wanted to talk a moment
about professional development.
This sounds like something bigger
than professional development.
I mean, Eric, can, can we achieve this?
Can we create a thriving environment
through professional development, or does
it take something outside of that in,
in addition to professional development?
So the, 10 toes down, yes,
through professional development.
Um, that, that's what
our dissertation's about.
But aside from that, yes you
can, and, um, it is happening in
places like Big Picture Learning.
If you look at, um, Arizona State's
School of Education, they're looking
at, um, different sort of transformative
models away from the one teacher in a
classroom to thinking about co-teacher
arrangements, thinking about, um,
like our guy with the solar battery.
Who can we define as educators or
teachers in our community other
than the licensed certificated folk?
So don't get me wrong, I'm not
saying, like, anybody can teach.
What I'm saying is, is there a way in
formal structures, in formal schooling,
that we can provide space or allow space,
uh, for folk who really have cultural
knowledge in their community, um, and
to share their culture, their language,
um, in, um, in a very authentic way with
students and build positive relationships?
'Cause it, it ⦠Learning is social, and
if you sort of isolate people away and
just only look at the technical pieces of
it, like how you do lesson delivery, um,
your tone, how you, what are your rituals
and routines, if it's just simply limited
to the technical part of standing and
delivering in a classroom, you've totally
erased the cultural relevancy of this.
You've erased the person.
Thanks for joining us on Education Talk
Radio, a part of the B Podcast Network.
If there's a topic you'd like us to
tackle or have a guest idea, send me
a message at dciceroedutalk@gmail.com.
Thanks for listening, and
we'll see you next time.