Friday, July 30, 2021

Generalizing Virtual Strategies That Worked and Planning for Accelerated Learning

Undoubtedly, the sudden need for remote teaching required teachers to find innovative ways for reaching students and building community. Some of the virtual strategies are best practices that should be generalized regardless if teaching a traditional brick-and-mortar classroom or needing to manage Roomers and Zoomers through a concurrent model (Mclaughlin and Borup, 2021).  Regardless of the approach or needed modality, let’s first agree that student engagement is key.  Then we can consider approaches to addressing student achievement during the pandemic and whether students will benefit more from accelerated learning rather than defaulting to remediation.

Let’s first consider how we can increase student engagement.  An educator’s utilization of an intentionally caring, optimistic, respectful, and trusting (ICORT) mindset should optimize feelings of inclusion and promote a positive school climate.  However, an ICORT-driven educator must also be guided by the axiom: ‘A goal without a plan is just a wish.’ Therefore, inclusion and engagement goals should be strengthened by plans that pursue research-based practices to increase awareness of what is relevant, elevate student knowledge, and willingly make better possible regardless of the teaching modality. This approach is wonderfully exhibited by the following strategies and justifications shared by Schwartz (2021):

·         Encourage writing by hand. There is compelling evidence that writing by hand rather than on a keyboard promotes better recall and comprehension of new information.

·         Welcome international visitors. This endeavor invites students to build connections and exhibit empathy between groups of students. Teachers can freely access organizations such as PenPal Schools or ePals, which can connect your class with international classes. Additionally, Narrative 4, is a nonprofit organization dedicated to telling and sharing stories and thereby promoting social-emotional learning opportunities.

·         Incorporate music. Through Burnout: The Secret to Unlocking the Stress Cycle (Nagoski & Nagoski, 2020), suggest engaging in some form of artistic expression.  Their book provides several activities that can help classes move through stressful experiences regardless of the needed modality.

Next, let’s consider whether your students will benefit more from accelerated learning rather than remediation. As noted by Mercanti-Anthony (2021),  the broad assumption that students will need to catch up may result in schools being inclined to default to remediation strategies. However researchers from the Fordham Institute suggest that the focus should instead be on accelerated learning.

The Acceleration Imperative is an open-source, evidence-based document designed to promote four key principles:

  1. Many students—especially the youngest children in the highest-need schools—will require extra help coming out of the pandemic, particularly in the form of extended learning time, high-dosage tutoring, and expanded mental-health supports.
  2. That extra help should complement, but cannot replace, what students need from schools’ core programs, such as high-quality curricula and positive school cultures.
  3. To make up for what’s been lost, we need to focus on acceleration, not remediation. That means devoting the bulk of classroom time to challenging instruction at grade-level or higher, and giving all students access to a rich, high-quality curriculum in English language arts, mathematics, social studies, science, the arts, and more.
  4. Decisions should be guided by high-quality research evidence whenever possible.

Created with input from dozens of current and former chief academic officers, scholars, and others with deep expertise and experience in high-performing, high-poverty elementary schools, The Acceleration Imperative is designed to be an organic document.  As such, it will continuously evolve.  You are invited to download and use The Acceleration Imperative as a starting point or as an aid for your own planning purposes.

Practitioners can share comments and experiences, and suggest edits through a wiki-style website: www.caocentral.wiki. Since The Acceleration Imperative is in the public domain, with no rights reserved, you are invited to freely access, utilize, and distribute! Given previous links will age out due to the nature of the document, click here to view and download the latest version of The Acceleration Imperative.

 

 

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (July 31, 2021). Generalizing virtual strategies that worked and planning for

accelerated learning. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

 

References

McLaughlin, C. & Borup, J. (April 26, 2021). Roomers and zoomers: Tips for working

with in-person and virtual students concurrently [Webinar recording] retrieved from:

 https://home.edweb.net/webinar/commonsense20210426/

 

Mercanti-Anthony, M.J. (2021). Using cognitive science to boost learning. Edutopia.

Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/article/using-cognitive-science-boost-learning

 

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2016). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2nd Ed)

            International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from:

http://invitationaleducation.net/product/category/books

 

Schwatrz, J. (2021) Virtual Teaching Practices With Staying Power. Edutopia retrieved from

https://www.edutopia.org/article/virtual-teaching-practices-staying-power

 

  

Wednesday, June 30, 2021

An ICORT Mindset Impacts More Than People

 Yes, greater student success is possible when educators utilize an intentionally caring, optimistic, respectful, and trusting (ICORT) mindset. Through intentional invitations for vibrant discussions and active interactions. an ICORT-driven educator systemically addresses institutional needs through an inventory of the people. places, policies, programs, and processes (5-Ps) that influence the potential for success. This intentional desire promotes collaboration,  exhibits critical, higher order thinking skills (HOTS), and analyzes accessible, reliable data.  Are you an ICORT-driven educator embracing models, promoting cooperative learning, exhibiting high expectations, utilizing HOTS, and analyzing data to monitor and adjust as needed?

Effective accountability requirements hastened the emergence of professional learning communities (PLC).  Marzano and Waters (2009) believe, a PLC “suggests a group of people sharing and critically interrogating their practice in an ongoing, reflective, collaborative, inclusive, learning oriented, growth-promoting way; operating as a collective enterprise” (p. 56).  The PLC and undertaken action research addresses the need to develop and sustain a systemic culture of continuous improvement that promotes positive learning (DuFour, et al., 2008). 

Educators benefit in a number of ways from working together to identify a clear, shared vision, developing a collaborative culture focusing on learning, engaging in collective inquiry, remaining action oriented, committing to continuous improvement, and being results oriented (Dufour et al., 2008).  Those six elements of an effective PLC promote learning by doing.  As with many processes developed for sustaining success, the six elements work most effectively if treated as an interdependent, cyclical process. 

To be successful, the PLC requires “reculturing the traditional culture of schools and districts” (Dufour et al., 2008, p. 6).  This shift needs to be systemic and not merely structural, embedding sustained improvements in “the assumptions, beliefs, values, expectations, and habits that constitute the norm for that organization” (p. 90).  A skillful educational leader begins developing an effective collaborative culture by understanding the interdependency of the improvement process rather than merely undertaking elemental processes for change.  A skillful educational leader and empowered educators trust in non-negotiable goals (NNGs) and values while embracing both school-based and teacher autonomy. 

The improvement to the collaborative learning culture begins with recognizing promotion of student learning in schools that are loosely-coupled by design must be tightly-coupled in relation to non-negotiable goals (NNGs).  Beginning with district leadership, a culture based on “defined autonomy” (Marzano & Waters, 2010, p. 8) communicates NNGs to both the internal and external stakeholders.  Otherwise, change can be either slow, inconsistent, or nonexistent.

An effective educational leader confidently handles the conveyance of more autonomy or degrees of freedom.  Therefore, novice principals or leaders at struggling schools need more guidance and direction from district-level leaders.  An effective leader recognizes when and how staff can work autonomously and collaboratively, thereby developing or removing staff as necessary, which promotes the culture of high expectations within the school (Eck & Goodwin, 2010).  Establishment of non-negotiable goals (NNGs) are a product of earlier collaboration.  Intentional invitations promote staff empowerment (Purkey & Novak, 2016).  Determination to collaborate, time to meet, willingness to ask serious questions, creation of an action plan, and always meeting with an agenda, promotes collaborative communication aligned to the established NNGs. 

Positive change can be the outcome of innovative thinking, willingness, humility, collaboration, and a collective vision grounded in a clearly-defined mission.  Unintended consequences, which often fall into the pool labeled “negative change,” typically ignore the characteristics connected with positive change.  In conclusion, leaders interested in promoting a collaborative learning culture must embrace this reality: It is not enough to want to change or need to change, to become enculturated within an organization, stakeholders must experience positive change.

As an advocate for Invitational Education Theory and Practices, I would always encourage the pursuit of becoming an ICORT-driven educator.  Remember: A goal without a plan is just a wish. An ICORT-driven educator plans for success!  Strengthen your plans through the active pursuit for increased awareness, elevated knowledge, and willingness to make better possible. Thank GOD for the blessed freedom to lead with love, to respect diversity, and to intentionally invite everyone to reach her or his human potential.


To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (June 30, 2021). An ICORT mindset impacts more than people. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

References

 

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at

            work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Eck, J., & Goodwin, B. (2010). Autonomy for school leaders. School Administrator, 67(1), 24-27.

Lezotte, L. W., & Snyder, K. M. (2011). What effective schools do: Re-envisioning the             correlates. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Marzano, R. & Waters, T. (2009). District leadership that works. Bloomington, IN: Solution             Tree Press

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2016). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2nd Ed)             International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from: http://invitationaleducation.net/product/category/books

 

Monday, May 31, 2021

Continuing to Stitch a Collaborative Quilt Sewn by an ICORT Mindset

As noted previously, educators need to embrace the educational needs presented by the reality of concurrent Roomers and Zoomers. Before students fully return to the brick-and-mortar classroom, there will be a time when many teachers will be concurrently instructing and managing Roomers and Zoomers. The need to manage both in-person and virtual learners in a concurrent model was nicely addressed during Mclaughlin and Borup’s (2021) webinar.  Advocates of Invitational Education theory and practices professionally invite others to seek, develop, and implement effective connections. We must always be mindful that each two-dimensional virtual image in a rectangle AND three-dimensional in-class person is actually a whole child and student contributing to the patchwork quilt that comprises the learning community.  

 As Roomers and Zoomers become either the next phase of recovery or a longer-standing option within the continuum for providing Free and Appropriate Public Education, effective educators need to embrace the educational needs presented by concurrent Roomers and Zoomers. In all cases greater student success is possible when educators utilize an intentionally caring, optimistic, respectful, and trusting (ICORT) mindset. An ICORT mindset is the foundation for better communication. 

Exhibiting these principles, a former student addressed the need for flexibility and consistency when seeking to collect, present, and share information with parents and other IEP Team stakeholders.  Stephanie embraced the opportunity to be more professionally inviting during the preparation process for evaluation and IEP meetings.   Her resource is shared herein with the following suggestions for how to utilize it with an intentionally caring, optimistic, respectful, and trusting (ICORT) mindset:

  • Prior to the meeting, share access to the file with other team members through Google Slides so they can add information based on their areas of expertise. The slides allow parents to follow along with a visual of the information being presented. This then allows everyone to focus on the slide’s information rather than the speaker, thereby elevating IDEA principles over individual personalities. 
  • During the meeting, the case manager can then type notes directly into the slides, thereby allowing all team members to see that their input is being accurately documented.
  • The notated slides can then be referenced to transfer information to the IEP and serve as an artifact if questions arise about what was discussed or decided during the meeting.
  • The slides file provides a handy reference when a teacher or related service provider has questions about the schedule of services.  In addition to the signed IEP, the slides file provides an artifact of real time agreements and documentation of the IEP Team’s decision related to LRE and service delivery.

Ideally, Stephanie’s resource and ICORT-driven suggestions for utilization will help you provide further flexibility and consistency for collecting, presenting, and sharing information with parents and other IEP team members. You can view the template in Google Slides

Regardless if your opportunity is to concurrently teach Roomers and Zoomers or to communicate more effectively with stakeholders involved with diverse learners, an ICORT-driven educator promotes vibrant discussions and active interactions. This intentional desire promotes collaboration,  exhibits critical, higher order thinking skills (HOTS), and analyzes accessible, reliable data.  Therefore, an ICORT-driven educator embraces, models, and promotes cooperative learning, high expectations, utilization of HOTS, and analysis of data.

Some readers may consider this a worthy goal.  At this point, it is important to remember a goal without a plan is just a wish. An ICORT-driven educator plans for success!  May your plans always be strengthened through the desire for increased awareness, elevated knowledge, and willingness to make better possible.

 

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (May 31, 2021). Continuing to stitch a collaborative quilt sewn by an ICORT

mindset. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

References

McLaughlin, C. & Borup, J. (April 26, 2021). Roomers and zoomers: Tips for working

with in-person and virtual students concurrently [Webinar recording] retrieved from:

 https://home.edweb.net/webinar/commonsense20210426/

 Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2016). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2nd Ed)

            International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from:

http://invitationaleducation.net/product/category/books

Sweetland R, (n.d.) Ways to classify questions. Revised by Anderson (2012) Retrieved from http://www.huntel.net/rsweetland/pedagogy/teach/question/classify.html

Swenson, S (May 2021) A resource for collaborative IEP meetings. Retrieved from

Google Slides

 

Saturday, May 1, 2021

Building a Patchwork Quilt Comprised of Roomers & Zoomers: Effective Questions Matter

During the pandemic the need for effective virtual instruction became paramount.  Teachers needed to adapt to conducting classrooms that seemed to be comprised of students framed in two-dimensional rectangles.  Educators embracing Invitational Education theory and practices seek to develop effective connections and therefore mindful that each virtual rectangle is actually a whole child contributing to the patchwork quilt that comprises the learning community. 

Before students fully return to the brick-and-mortar classroom, there will be a time when many teachers will be concurrently instructing and managing Roomers and Zoomers.  Whether the need to teach both Roomers and Zoomers becomes the next phase of recovery or a longer-standing option within the continuum for providing Free and Appropriate Public Education is yet to be determined.  Presently, educators need to embrace the educational needs presented by the reality of concurrent Roomers and Zoomers.

The need to manage both in-person and virtual learners in a concurrent model was addressed in a wonderful, must-see webinar presented by Mclaughlin and Borup (2021). The need to facilitate the Roomers and Zoomers concurrent model certainly creates previously unknown stressors upon students and teachers. However, educators embracing Invitational Education theory KNOW success is optimized when we bring a mindset guided by intentionality, care, optimism, respect, and trust (ICORT) to examine the people, places, policies, programs, and practices (5Ps) of any teaching and learning dynamic. 

The planning for and implementation of instructional dynamics involving Roomers and Zoomers invites analysis of the 5Ps.  The metaphor of herding cats might seem apropos.  However, observation of the most effective teachers interdependently exhibited elements of the seven correlates of Effective Schools Research. Specifically, while teaching both concurrent Roomers and Zoomers the most effective educators intentionally exhibited:  a safe and orderly environment, a climate of high expectations for success, clear opportunity to learn with focus upon student time on task, and frequent monitoring of student progress. The latter three became increasingly obvious through the types and levels of questions planned and presented to both groups of students.  Therefore, the balance of this article details the importance of understanding the nature and purposes of diverse questions.

Crucially, for concurrently teaching Roomers and Zoomers, an ICORT-driven teacher promotes vibrant discussions and active interactions.  This setting promotes higher order thinking skills (HOTS).  The foundation for this environment is the teacher’s ability to plan and implement effective questions that lead not only to answers but to more questions. Questions can be classified by:

I.             Convergent and divergent,

II.            Effects of questions upon people,

III.          Bloom’s taxonomy,

IV.          Types of questions (Lehnert (1978), and

V.           According to the purpose of the question.

 

I. Convergent and divergent questions:

In theory the perfect convergent (closed-ended) question would have only one answer and the perfect divergent (open-ended) questions would have infinite answers.  However, most question will fall on a continuum between having more than one answer and a finite limit.  In most situations the better question is probably the one that will provide the most answers. For example: if I start a lesson on trees by making an overhead statement to involve the students in a visualization activity I could make the following statements: “Close your eyes and imagine a silver maple tree” or “Close your eyes and imagine a tree.”  The first statement would probably have few students with mental images of a silver maple tree, but the second would probably have all students with mental images of a tree.  If I were to have them describe their tree, the information would suggest the range of understanding of trees the students have.  Open-ended or divergent questions can be used to encourage greater involvement and provide a more accurate assessment than closed-ended or convergent questions.

Convergent questions (closed) have direct answers (What is 2 + 2?). They are generally used to focus on something. For example:

  • What is your name?
  • What is in that container? 
  • What are you doing? 
  • What is three groups of four? 
  • What kind of animal has six legs?
  • What is the last book you read?

Divergent questions (open-ended) have indirect answers (How can we use this battery?).  They are generally used to try and encourage a number of answers and lead to critical thinking, creativity, and problem solving. For example:

  • What does the name Miranda make you think about? 
  • What could you put in the container? 
  • What else could you be doing? 
  • What different representations can be made for three groups of four? 
  • If we go outside and find an animal with six legs, what will it look like? 
  • How were the last two books you read different?

II. Effects a question has on the person answering the question.

Cognitive opportunity to gain information or understanding

Affective or emotional cost or benefits related to the question and attempts to answer it.

Focusing attention or expanding attention or distracting the students' attention.

Stimulating more questions or answers: A convergent question is less stimulating than a divergent question because divergent questions have many answers.

Difficulty related to the complexity of the question’s syntax, sophistication of information needed to answer the question, the difficulty of the process needed to answer it, students’ interest, and ability.

Motivation related to the need of the question to be answered by the individual. Is it their question?  Are they curious?  What is the duration of curiosity?  Curiosity increases when the individual believes they can find a solution, should know a solution, need to know a solution, and want to know a solution.

Ability of the student to process the question:  Variables which affect this are the student’s ability, interest, developmental level, background, resources available, time, and community mores.  If a question can’t be answered should it be asked?

 

III. Bloom’s taxonomy:

Can be used to classify the type of question as to the level of cognition that is required to arrive at an answer (see handout) and the affective response the person may have as a result of it.  Bloom’s taxonomy can be used to guide an inductive and deductive investigation.  If students start with questions from the knowledge level, answer those questions, then ask questions from the comprehension level, answer those, and continue up the hierarchy to evaluation that would be an inductive inquiry.  Conversely if they start with an evaluation question, answer it, then ask a synthesis question, answer it, and proceed down the hierarchy it would be a deductive inquiry.  This does not mean that the hierarchy needs to be moved along in a linear fashion.  It could be used to evaluate a series of questions to see if other questions could be formulated to provide a more detailed analysis of a topic.

Knowledge questions.

  • Where are the major fishing grounds?
  • What is the quantity of fish caught?
  • Where are the major whales?
  • What do the major whales eat?

Comprehension questions.

  • What are some reasons why fish are plentiful in these regions?
  • What relationship is there to fish and whales?

Application questions.

  • If you went fishing where would you fish?
  • If you were a whale where would you fish?

Analysis questions.

  • What are the characteristics of a good fishing place?
  • What are the environmental factors for whale survival?
  • What trends are there in fish populations?
  • What trends are there in whale populations?

Synthesis questions.

  • What needs to be done to maintain the fish population?
  • What needs to be done to maintain the whale population?

Evaluation questions. Simple evaluation questions which can be answered with a yes or no need to have follow-up questions which ask the student to give reasons for their decision or consequences of the decision.  As students begin to write reasons and list consequences new questions at different levels will arise and need to be answered.  For example many students would think that all whaling should be stopped.  However, they may ask the question, "Who is whaling?" (comprehension).  The answer of Japan, Eskimo cultures, and Norwegian cities will lead to higher level questions and probably to an evaluation of should any or all of these continue?

  • Should something be done to maintain the fish population?
  • Should something be done to maintain the whale population?

IV.  Types of questions have been classified by Lehnert (1978) according to the first word of the question.

A. Questions beginning with what, when, where, why, who, and which.  Most of the time these questions are divergent (open-ended).

1. “What questions” ask for a determination of cause, judgment, and properties.  What caused something to happen (antecedent)?  What did something cause to happen (consequence)?  What enabled something to happen?  What opinion does a person have for an action (judge)?  What are the properties of an object or concept?

2. “Why questions” ask for goals, expectations, and requests.  Why did you do that?  Why don’t you do this?

3. “Where questions” ask for location or process.  Where is it?  Where would you begin to solve it?

4. “Which questions” ask for identification of a person, place, event, or object.

5. “When questions” ask for time of an event or process.  When was he born?  When do you capitalize nouns?

6. “Who questions” ask to identify a person or group of people.  Who was the first person on the moon?  Who should be elected class president?

B. Questions beginning with how and have.

1. “How questions” ask for a procedure and quantity.  How would you solve this problem?  How much do you have?

2. “Have questions” ask for yes and no responses.

C. “I questions” begin with is.  They ask for verification, permission, and clarification.  Is this the answer?  Is it all right for me to go?  Is this the way to solve the problem?

V. According to the purpose of the question.

Categories such as:

·         Factual questions: Used to get information.  Usually started with what, where, when, why, who, and how.

·         Explanatory questions: Used to get reasons, explanations, broaden discussion, get additional information.  Such as: What other aspects are related to this issue?  Should you consider...?

·         Justifying / Probing questions: Used to challenge old ideas, develop new ideas, and to get reasoning, and proof.  Such as: Why do you think so?  How do you know?

·         Leading questions: to introduce new ideas, and advance ideas. Such as: Should we consider this?

·         Hypothetical questions: Used to infer what if, and if this, then what?

·         Decisional questions: Used to make decisions between alternatives, to get agreement, and to move the discussion along or close it.

 An effective classroom that exhibits cooperative learning, high expectations, and utilization of higher order thinking skills (HOTS) does not occur by happenstance.  Effective classrooms plan for success.  A foundation of planning for academic success is having awareness of question approaches and willingness to implement diverse questioning strategies. Ideally, this article increased awareness, elevated knowledge, and promoted willingness to plan for increased academic success! 

 

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (April 30, 2021). Building a patchwork quilt comprised of roomers & zoomers:

effective questions matter. [Web log post] Retrieved from 

http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

 References

 McLaughlin, C. & Borup, J. (April 26, 2021). Roomers and zoomers: Tips for working with in-person and virtual students concurrently [Webinar recording] retrieved from: https://home.edweb.net/webinar/commonsense20210426/

 Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2016). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2nd Ed)             International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved   from: http://invitationaleducation.net/product/category/books

Sweetland R, (n.d.) Ways to classify questions. Revised by Anderson (2012) Retrieved from http://www.huntel.net/rsweetland/pedagogy/teach/question/classify.html

 

Wednesday, March 31, 2021

A Strategy to Utilize a Formative Assessment Process During Virtual Chapter or Content-specific Quizzes

Proponents of Invitational Education theory KNOW effective connections matter in education.  A dozen or more individual rectangles on a screen does not perpetuate community.  In this regard, the first intentionally inviting opportunity is to remember that behind each virtual rectangle is a whole person who individually comprises a part of the patchwork quilt that is your potential learning community.

During the pandemic the need to effectively conduct breakout rooms, utilize discussion boards to stimulate a professional learning community, or virtually assess student learning has provided opportunity and angst.  During the best of circumstances, 60% of a course's learning objectives are "lost" within 8-weeks after completion.  What will be the percentage of learning loss during times of forced virtual instruction resulting from the pandemic? The full impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on students is still very much being processed

 The educational community can increase retention of learning with a strategy that utilizes a formative assessment process during virtual chapter or content-specific quizzes.  So many teachers have been using multiple-choice quizzes through their learning management system (LMS).  A little fine-tuning of the quiz’s restrictions and submission perimeters can turn a summative quiz into a more inviting formative opportunity.

For upper elementary grades and above, chapter quizzes through a LMS can provide formative evaluation. Specifically, this can be done by the teacher providing two opportunities (attempts).  The higher result of the student’s two attempts is graded.

If the initial attempt earned between 40-95% then the LMS has been set to allow the student a second attempt.  The feedback from the initial attempt affirms and reinforces the student’s correct response to the question.  The student then must deduce or identify which initial responses were not affirmed, which means they were incorrect.  If below 40%, the student is obviously lost and needs more direct support before a pothole in learning becomes a crater. This is the communication loop essential to formative assessment.

Prior to the second attempt, the instructor's explicit guidelines intentionally invites the errant student to review what was unknown or unclear. Additional individual learning can then occur.  Thereafter, the second attempt elicits a better answer that ideally validly acknowledges the student’s learning.   

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (March 31, 2021). A strategy to utilize a formative assessment process

during virtual chapter or content-specific quizzes. [Web log post] Retrieved from

 

 

References

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2016). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2nd Ed)
            International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from:
            http://invitationaleducation.net/product/category/books
 
Weymes, E. (2003). Relationships not leadership sustain successful organizations.
            Journal of Change Management, 3(4), 319-331. doi.org/10.1080/714023844

Monday, March 1, 2021

Like a Hand in a Glove: Invitational Education Theory and Implementation of the Effective Schools’ Correlates

 February 28, 2021

Implementing Effective Schools Research has proven successful for promoting and sustaining optimal opportunities to learn for all students. Effective Schools Research (Lezotte, 1991) identified the following correlates as being present in all cases of an effective school:

1. Clear and focused mission

2. Climate of high expectations

3. Instructional leadership

4. Opportunity to learn/student time on task

5. Frequently monitoring student progress

6. Safe and orderly environment

7. Home-school relations 

 An Effective School’s mission, grounded in the seven correlates for reform, would expect success regardless of socioeconomic status (SES) of its students. Stakeholders would therefore need to make the interconnected seven correlates more powerful within its mission than the power of the low SES to deny opportunity. “Effective indicates that a school, teacher, or district is doing the right job. Based on our definition of an effective school, this term specifies that the school must attend to the twin policy pillars of quality and equity. Effective schools research has shown that the practices among effective schools have consistently been found to be more alike than different” (Lezotte & Snyder, 2011, p 17).

Given the need to inter-dependently implement the seven correlates, educational leaders and all stakeholders would benefit from utilization of Invitational Education theory, which provides a framework for assessing and monitoring school climate. Rather than suggesting a quick fix, the Invitational Education framework encourages ongoing vigilance before affirming sustained change (Purkey & Novak, 2015; Purkey & Siegel, 2013; Strahan & Purkey, 1992). Vigilance is required because changing how a school operates requires transforming its people (Asbill, 1994). School reform requires systemic change, a metamorphosis, based on systemic analysis of the people, places, policies, programs, and processes (the Five Ps). This structural analysis of school climate discerns whether any part of the whole is disinviting (Purkey & Siegel, 2013).

School climate plays an important role in how stakeholders perceive the school (Anderson, 2016; Curry, 2009).  Evaluation of school climate reflects stakeholder perceptions of the social, emotional, and academic experiences of school life.  Stakeholders need to include students, administrators, teachers, parents, and support staff (Smith 2012).

The literature suggests leaders high in emotional intelligence may be more competent to influence, inspire, intellectually stimulate, and develop their staff to promote a culture of sustained educational success (George, 2000; Marzano, Waters and McNulty, 2005; Leithwood, Louis, et al, 2004; Moore, 2009; Ross, 2000; Salovey and Mayer, 1990; Sanders, 2010; Wolff, Pescosolido, & Druskat, 2002).  Inviting behaviors exhibited by the leader optimizes the school climate (Asbill, 1994; Purkey & Siegel, 2008; Schmidt, 2007; Smith, 2015).  A positive school climate results from relationships that flourish (Weymes, 2003). For increased function, the culture must be perceived as correct and valid. When perceived as functional, newcomers must then be taught the culture (Schein, 2009). Identifying the competencies that increase the conveyance and receipt of personal and professional development opportunities could optimize school climate for all stakeholders because people can only accept invitations that have been received (Purkey & Novak, 1996; 2016).

The effectiveness of school leadership remains contingent upon teacher acceptance (Matthews & Brown, 1976). Teachers’ attitudes and perceptions influence positive or negative responses to initiatives (Rokeach, 1968). Teachers’ perception of respect and trust exhibited by the principal correlates with both teachers’ and students’ morale, commitment, and achievement (Ellis, 1988). When a school leader effectively communicates a vision for success, models positive expectations, exhibits optimism, and utilizes inviting leadership practices, the teachers’ behaviors become positively influenced (Asbill, 1994; Asbill & Gonzalez, 2000; Burns & Martin, 2010).

It is now assumed that intentionality, care, optimism, respect, and trust (ICORT) exemplify the invitational leader’s mindfulness (Anderson, 2017).  Integrating the five ICORT assumptions into a system’s people, places, policies, programs, and processes, which Purkey and Siegel (2013) called the “five P’s” (p. 104) provide limitless opportunities to impact the total culture of nearly every organization. For a school system seeking to sustained success towards the learning for all mission, Invitational Education theory will facilitate interdependent application of all seven correlates of Effective Schools Research.


To Cite:
Anderson, C.J. (February 28, 2021). Like a hand in a glove: Invitational education theory
    and implementation of the effective schools’ correlates. [Web log post] Retrieved from 


References

Anderson, C.J. (2016). A correlational study examining demonstrated emotional
            intelligence and perceptions of school climate. (Doctoral dissertation).
            Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 10027119
 
Anderson, C. J. (2017). Examining demonstrated emotional intelligence and
            perceptions of inviting schools. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice,
            23, 35-61. 
 
Asbill, K. (1994). Invitational leadership: Teacher perceptions of inviting principal
            practices. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Educational Management,
            New Mexico State University.
 
Asbill, K., & Gonzalez, M. L. (2000). Invitational leadership: Teacher perceptions of
            inviting Principal practices. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 7(1),
            16-27. Retrieved from:
            http://www.invitationaleducation.net/pdfs/journalarchives/jitpv7n1.pdf
 
Burns, G. J., & Martin, B. N. (2010). Examination of the effectiveness of male and
           female educational leaders who made use of the invitational leadership style of
            leadership. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 16, 30-56. Retrieved
            from: http://www.invitationaleducation.net/pdfs/journalarchives/jitpv162010.pdf
 
Curry, C. C. (2009). Correlation of emotional intelligence of school leaders to
            perceptions of school climate as perceived by teachers. (Order No. 3387434,
            Indiana University of Pennsylvania). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , 257.
            Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305061864?accountid=7374.
            (305061864).
 
Ellis, T. (1988). School climate. Research Roundup, 4 (2), 1. Retrieved from:
            http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED291154.pdf
 
George, J. M. (2000). Emotions and leadership: The role of emotional leadership. Human
            Relations, 53 (8), 1027-1055 doi.org/10.1177/0018726700538001
 
Lezotte, L. W., & Snyder, K. M. (2011). What effective schools do: Re-envisioning the
            correlate: Solution Tree Press.
 
Matthews, K. M., & Brown, C. L. (1976). The principal’s influence on student
            achievement. NASSP Bulletin, 67, 11. doi.org/10.1177/019263657606040201
 
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works:
            From   research to results. Association for Supervision and
            Curriculum Development. Retrieved from:
            http://marzanoresearch.com/products/catalog.aspx?product=13
 
Moore, B. (2009). Emotional intelligence for school administrators: A priority for school
            reform? American Secondary Education, 37(3), 20-28. Retrieved from
            http://www.eiconsortium.org/members/moore.htm
 
Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (1996). Inviting school success: A self-concept approach
            to teaching, learning, and democratic practice (3rd ed.). Wadsworth
            Publishing Company. Retrieved from: http://invitationaleducation.net/featuredbooks.html
 
Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2016). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2nd Ed)
            International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from:
http://invitationaleducation.net/product/category/books
 
Purkey, W. W., Schmidt, J. J., & Novak, J. M. (2010). From conflict to conciliation: How
            to defuse difficult situations. Corwin Press. ISBN:
            9787452212104
 
Purkey, W. W., & Siegel, B. L. (2013). Becoming an invitational leader: A new approach
 to professional and personal success. Humanics. Retrieved from:
http://invitationaleducation.net/featuredbooks.html
 
Rokeach, M. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes, and values: Theory of organization and change.
            Jossey-Bass, Inc. ISBN 087589013X
 
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition, and
            Personality, 9 (3), 185-211. doi.org/10.2190/dugg-p24e-52wk-6cdg
 
Schein, E. H. (2009). The corporate culture survival guide. Jossey-Bass.
ISBN: 0470293713
 
Schmidt, J. J. (2007). Elements of diversity in invitational practice and research. Journal
        of Invitational Theory & Practice, 13, 16-23. Retrieved from:
            http://www.invitationaleducation.net/pdfs/journalarchives/jitpv13.pdf
 
Smith, K. H. (2012, 2015). The History and Development of the Inviting School Survey: 1995-
      2012. Journal of Invitational Theory & Practice, 18, 57-64. Retrieved from:
http://www.invitationaleducation.net/pdfs/journalarchives/jitpv182011.pdf
 
Strahan, D., & Purkey, W. W. (1992). Celebrating diversity through invitational
            education. The International Alliance for Invitational Education
 
Weymes, E. (2003). Relationships not leadership sustain successful organizations.
        Journal of Change Management, 3(4), 319-331. doi.org/10.1080/714023844