MEMORANDUM TO: John Silveri, Superintendent, and Waterford School District CC: Dr. Caryn M.

Wells, Professor, Oakland University FROM: Lauren Bauer, Second Grade Teacher, Schoolcraft Elementary, and OU Ed. S. student DATE: December 1, 2011 SUBJECT: Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum and Lab Classrooms Dear Mr. Silveri, I would like to present a plan to you that Ive been thinking about regarding an issue confronting our district. While our population here in Waterford struggles financially, we as educators have found ourselves serving a more transient population. Our parents are struggling to make ends meet and are frequently forced to relocate in hopes of finding more affordable housing options. As students are entering and exiting our schools here in Waterford the need for a guaranteed and viable curriculum becomes even more necessary. Based on my observations as a teacher at Schoolcraft Elementary, my concern is that as students relocate from one elementary school to another, they are not coming into classrooms with the prior knowledge necessary to be successful with our curriculum. Waterford students, in theory, should be able to relocate within our district and be familiar with the fundamentals of our Waterford curriculum and to readjust quickly to their new environment. From what Im hearing from teachers, and witnessing in my own classroom, some students are coming to our school and it appears they have not received the same education we are providing here at Schoolcraft.

As Im sure youve noted, since 2004 our percentage of economically disadvantaged students has more than doubled from 23 percent to 49 percent. While an 85 percent population stability rate seems promising, it seems as though our most academically at-risk students are the ones who are most often relocating. The purpose of this memo is to view this issue from multiple perspectives and offer my suggestions for a solution that may help us move our district forward. I look forward to discussing this proposal with you in detail. Let me just give you a brief overview of the issue as I see it. For purpose of analysis, Bolman and Deals four frames will be used, because it gives us an evidence-based approach to consider in analyzing individual events within an environment: The Structural Frame, the Human Relations Frame, the Political Frame, and the Symbolic Frame. Each of the frames has a particular power in itself; their combination into a multi-frame approach is perhaps their greatest strength.

1. The Structural Frame According to Bolman and Deal (2008) the structural frame highlights aspects of an organization and assumes that the organization exists to achieve goals and objectives. This frame recognizes that control is needed for individuals to work together to meet the organizations goals and that a critical structural challenge is how to hold an organization together without holding it back. The authors state, If structure is too loose, people go their own way or get lost, with little sense of what others are doing (p.75). When analyzing this issue through the structural frame Im beginning to question: If our mission is to inspire, educate and empower all students, is our current PD structure for teachers really helping us reach every student? Are all teachers presenting the same guaranteed and viable curriculum to students?

Do district teachers and staff know the importance of pacing instruction at a somewhat similar rate and teaching district curriculum?

How can district leaders provide relevant PD and provide appropriate materials if there is no alignment across our district?

Are district leaders structuring their time as to provide teachers with support and supervision while they are delivering our curriculum?

How can our districts movement towards being truly collaborative be realized if we do not focus on the same materials?

If the above concerns were addressed, I believe we could more easily make sure our most challenged students persist through challenges outside of school through consistent and clear curriculum no matter whose classroom they enter and exit from. 2. The Human Resource Frame This frame focuses on peoples skills, attitudes, energy, and commitment to an enterprise. This frame also champions the notion that attitudes can either make or break an organization. Bolman and Deal (2008) also assert that organizations can provide energizing, productive, and mutually rewarding experiences that can fully engage peoples talents and energy (p.124). When looking at this issue from a human resources perspective I was wondering: How are we tapping into teachers commitment to delivering district curriculum? Are we fully engaging the talents of our teachers and doing comprehensive and timely professional development aimed at remedying any issues or confusion that may inhibit teachers from fully becoming invested in our curriculum? Are we, as a district, providing our district curriculum teams with the best representatives possible?

Would the teachers from those district curriculum teams be willing to open their classrooms to struggling teachers? If so, could they serve as mentors to struggling teachers?

Ultimately, students are the ones paying the price for our human resource management issues. We know that teachers are vital in delivering the guaranteed and viable curriculum we dream of all Waterford students receiving. I suspect that providing mentors to struggling teachers in our district would be looked upon favorably by teachers. Im sure you would agree that one of our districts greatest resources is our teachers. 3. The Political Frame This frame asserts that the presence of scarce resources means we need to make the most of what little resources we are allotted to make sure we are properly educating all students to the best of our ability. When viewing this issue from this frame Im concerned: Can district leaders afford to be seen as slow to take action to remediate deficiencies in our tier 1 level of instruction? That base level of educational service delivery aimed at meeting the needs of most students in the school setting should be delivered in the most effective way possible to prevent students from needing remediation in the future. Do we want to be seen as using a wait to fail model with our teachers who are not receiving exemplar evaluations from their supervisors? Are we actively finding ways to support struggling teachers so that we can avoid conflict in the future with our teachers and unions? Additionally from a political frame, we need to show to the teachers unions our active commitment to helping ineffective teachers improve before taking more decisive forms of action. This initiative would have a larger impact politically as well with all the pressure teachers are

under with common core state standards (CCSS) coming as well as so much new curriculum. As Im sure you would agree, all students deserve not only a highly qualified teacher, but a skilled and competent one. 4. The Symbolic Frame The symbolic frame demonstrates that what is most important about any event is not what happened but the response. According to Bolman and Deal (2008), in the face of uncertainty, people create symbols to resolve confusion and provide direction. (p. ) To many, the symbolic aspects of our schools are the most powerful. From a symbolic frame, I think showing a commitment to timely and worthwhile professional development opportunities for all teachers struggling to deliver curriculum. Although PD is mandated, this differentiated professional learning seems like it would be appreciated by district staff, and unlike other mandated sit and get type professional learning. Symbolically, seeing an issue in our district and actively working to support our teachers is a powerful gesture to all stakeholders. Other considerations: Wouldnt it be powerful for a struggling student whose life has been turned upside down by a move to enter a classroom in which the teachers instruc tional language is similar to the classroom the child just left? A child who can look around a new classroom, see similar anchor charts as in the classroom he or she just left would find it reassuring. Wouldnt it send a powerful message to the students that we are all learning? Teachers are growing as professionals just as students are growing in knowledge. After reviewing the issue from the perspectives of the four frames, you can see that this issue is troubling from all angles. In summary, from a structural point of view we need to make sure we have a structure in place to support teachers as they deliver curriculum. From a human resource frame, we need to find a way to fully engage our teachers talents. Politically, we cant

afford to be seen as slow to take action to remediate deficiencies in our tier 1 level of instruction, especially with the common core expectations coming. Symbolically, remediating this issue would send a powerful message to all stakeholders that we are learning and growing as a district. In terms of what can be done to manage this issue of providing a level of instructional consistency in our district, I would like to suggest beginning lab classrooms. These lab classrooms would provide time for our teachers to experience professional growth while observing our teachers presenting our own curriculum in an effective way. We would need to first target teachers who need improvement, then move to teachers who desire to improve. Our lab classrooms could take place in a selected teacher's room during the normal school day. The visit could begin with a pre-observation meeting and a session for debriefing after the observation. Lab classrooms could provide our district teachers an authentic opportunity for colleagues to see curriculum in practice. We could offer several sessions throughout the year, and teachers would have the opportunity to share and discuss the successes and challenges of their independent practice with their colleagues, and therefore be continually examining practice with the intent of improvement. Lab classroom are emerging in surrounding counties and first appeared in Michigan in Lapeer. We could start small, with just a few lab classrooms with the intention of expanding the program if it proves successful. To prepare for this proposal I did a scholarly search of people who inform our practice. I initially chose Marzano (2003), who speaks to the importance of quality curriculum delivery, The factor that has the most impact on stude nt achievement is a guaranteed and viable curriculum (p. 19). Further, as we look toward our possible solution of lab classrooms, according to Houk (2010),

Instructional leadership is essential for a lab classroom project to succeed. Leaders need to understand the value of the lab classroom model and be willing to provide the time, location, and staff resources for implementation. The cost of substitute teachers is perhaps the only significant financial expense, making the lab classroom a cost-effective means of providing professional growth (p.6). With our tight resources, it seems as though lab classrooms would be an affordable solution to our issues. According to Fullan, Hill & Crevola (2006) The new direction (in education) that we advocate, is the complex and challenging task of transforming classroom instruction into a precision-based process that provides the teacher with the necessary information to make well-informed instructional decisions for all students (pg.28). Through integration of lab classrooms into our district, we could provide teachers with the necessary information, as described in the above quote, to make those important informed instructional decisions teachers make every day in their classrooms. In terms of a timeline, I believe we could begin this process quickly by just getting observations going in the area of literacy. For our pilot program, the teacher teams could meet for four half school days during the year to observe a reading and writing workshop. These meetings would include the pre-observation meeting, the visit to the lab classroom, and a time for debriefing. In closing, I really look forward to meeting with you and discussing this proposal more in depth. Im sure there are challenges inherent in my possible solution, but inaction at this time seems even more troubling.

Sincerely,

Lauren Bauer

References Bolman, L., & Deal, L. (2008). Reframing Organizations . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Fullan, M., Hill, P. & Crevola, C. (2006). Breakthrough. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Houk, L. M. (2010). Demostrating Teaching in a Lab Classroom, Good Teaching in Action, 1-6. Marzano, R. J. (2003). What Works in Schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.