This is a desktop version of my PechaKucha presentation at the NWAIS Educators Conference. I discuss how belief inspires purpose, which in turn suggests program change initiatives.
This is a desktop version of my PechaKucha presentation at the NWAIS Educators Conference. I discuss how belief inspires purpose, which in turn suggests program change initiatives.
Originally published in UPrep Magazine
“A rolling stone gathers no moss.” — proverb
This ancient saying admonishes wanderers to settle down and establish themselves. But perhaps some wanderlust is good for you. The Rolling Stones evidently felt so, inspired by a Muddy Waters song of the same name. Wandering is not so aimless when we call it “exploration” and give it purpose: to experience broadly, appreciate difference, and try new ideas.
In 2015, UPrep set out to explore, question, and further develop intellectual courage, global citizenship, and social responsibility. First, the UPrep community identified the most promising opportunities for enhancing the student experience. Then, volunteer Research+Design teams surveyed literature, visited schools, presented at conferences, and wrote proposals. As you can see below, we are well on our way toward implementation of our Next Generation Learning Initiatives, which should be fully in place by 2020.
Upcoming: Intensives (our working title), in which students take a single course for two-and-a half weeks to think deeply across disciplines, study contemporary topics, and learn in the community.
Completed: Senior LaunchPad, in which all seniors design and engage in an off-campus passion project, and present it to the community. Social Entrepreneurship and Feminism, two new courses that are entirely student-conceived, designed, and delivered. Global Online Academy, in which students have registered for 50 fully online courses for next year.
Upcoming: Construction of a dynamic new center to support entrepreneurial thinking and connection to community. The building will feature flexible spaces for independent, group, and class work and house global programs, the Makerspace, college counseling, mentorship, and other student leadership programs.
Completed: A comprehensive review of justice and equity practices in and beyond the classroom. New courses that include social justice topics or represent many cultures. Coordination among teacher leaders, the Board of Trustees, and the Diversity and Community program.
Upcoming: Further development of culturally responsive classroom practices, course curricula, student leadership opportunities, and enhanced collaborations among different parts of the school.
Completed: A detailed review of SEL programs and UPrep needs, multiple surveys assessing students’ emotional health and social skills.
Upcoming: SEL curriculum built into the new schedule, Advisory for Advisors, and SEL classroom practices.
Upcoming: In 2018-2019, a new school calendar that includes intensive terms in January and June. New courses specially designed for these terms in which students deeply immerse themselves in different ways of thinking, study contemporary topics through multiple lenses, and learn in the community
and through travel.
While much of the UPrep program is consistent from year to year, Strategic Plan 2020 allows us to shake off a little moss and develop exciting new opportunities for powerful learning, which will equip our students to wander with purpose into a complex and ever-changing world
Next month will mark the second full year of the development of Next Generation Learning at UPrep, our initiative to identify and design the learning innovations most likely to enhance students’ educational experience.
For the whole of 2015, a single Student’s Educational Experience team conducted open focus groups and workshops with families, students and teachers. We asked people to identify the greatest strengths of the UPrep educational program and the best opportunities to make it stronger. Our small team included a broad range of roles: trustees, administrators, teachers, parents, and students. Clear themes emerged as we sifted through volumes of community input.
After further intensive consideration of strategic importance and potential, these ideas were shaped into initiatives. The school announced Strategic Plan 2020 in December 2015 with three pillars: facility, faculty, and future. The third pillar, future, directly addressed educational experience in action-oriented terms approved by the board.
At the start of 2016, we reconstituted the design team under a name that better reflected its newly identified purpose: Next Generation Learning.
This committee considered how to best pursue the goals of the strategic plan. Some objectives could carry forward as expressed, whereas others contained multiple objectives that required separate teams. This spawned seven initiatives.
Five of these initiatives required new development teams. The first two initiatives, Blended and Online Learning and Computer Science and Computational Thinking, had been identified and designed early on and were well into implementation. Social Justice and Educational Equity required its own initiative, lest it be lost amidst the consideration of multiple topics under the umbrella of Social and Emotional Learning. Similarly, Interdisciplinary Learning Opportunities split into two initiatives, one focused on identifying connections among existing disciplines, and the other breaking new ground in student agency and entrepreneurship (U Lab). Finally, New Models of Time was added, as we realized that the school would need to address how we allocate time in order to support the other objectives.
The Research+Design teams then engaged in a repeated cycle of development and engagement. Small teams did the bulk of idea development, sifting through community input, identifying themes, and developing creative proposals. Team membership remained fluid over time, welcoming new interest into the group and cycling out those who wanted a break.
Like incubators, these teams were given creative autonomy, protected from premature criticism, and supported by instructional leaders and external specialists. Once they developed robust proposals ready for critique, teams broadly shared their ideas with the school community, administration, and trustees in order to receive feedback and endorsement.
Ten department heads, program specialists, and other teacher leaders were invited to chair five Research+Design teams. This act of distributed leadership caused several positive benefits. One design team multiplied into five, allowing us to make huge progress in 2016. 10 colleagues received intensive, experiential, just-in-time leadership development, broadening the school’s collective capacity for institutional leadership. The leaders also brought a diversity of perspectives to bear on Next Generation Learning, developing far more interesting, creative proposals than a single, centralized body would have developed.
The five teams were opened to the full faculty and educational support staff. Fully half of the faculty and educational support staff joined one of the five teams, enhancing the creative capacity of each team and deepening faculty investment in strategic plan implementation. The teams also invited a dozen students to join. The teams demonstrated great passion and persistence, because they represented ideas distilled from community input, volunteered to join initiatives that spoke to them, and included a variety of perspectives and interests.
From spring 2016 to present, the Research+Design teams have met during professional development days, lunch periods, after school, and during the summer to deeply explore the school dynamics in their initiative areas and design thoughtful, detailed proposals for school change.
The teams were asked to develop short-, medium- and long-term goals in their area, as well as to write specific proposals for immediate program changes. A number of opportunities had already presented themselves and were achievable, so we decided to improve the educational program and demonstrate progress right away.
As of today, some teams have delivered specific proposals to our approving bodies, whereas others continue to frame large, abstract areas of the educational program.
Here is an update on the current status of the five initiatives.
Implemented from 2013, this initiative is currently in a growth and evaluation phase. Inclusion in the strategic plan recognized the importance of this new work to the student’s educational experience and Next Generation Learning. UPrep adopted Schoology in fall 2013. Teachers and students use the system in all classes and as a private social network. One may say that our entire program has become partially blended (face-to-face/online) over that time, as interactive, differentiated, and personalized learning takes place through Schoology.
We adopted Global Online Academy in the fall of 2015, with 30 enrollments last school year and 15 this school year. GOA instantly added 60 new courses to our elective program, in subjects that exemplify contemporary topics, inquiry learning, interdisciplinary study, global perspectives, and rich relationships among teachers and students. Students have explored their passions and interests, valued the independence of online work, enjoyed interacting with students from across the country and around the world, and created outstanding project exhibitions. The school has also benefited from professional connections with GOA staff, faculty development opportunities, and the opportunity to provide teachers to GOA.
In spring 2013, we conducted a study of computer science programs and decided that computational thinking, foundational principles of computer science, and connections to other disciplines would drive our new program. We hired our first full-time computer science teacher in fall 2014, and she has developed the program into five semester courses, with 51 semester enrollments, three student clubs, and support for physical computing in the Maker Space. We continue to maintain the capacity to respond to student interest in the subject and will eventually consider the possibility of a graduation requirement in the subject.
This team started by creating an inventory of existing SEL practices in the school, since it already gained momentum as a grassroots initiative as well as received the attention of administrative leadership. The group selected the CASEL SEL framework out of many possibilities and partnered with consultants Janice Tobin and Rush Sabiston Frank to begin to develop an implementation plan. At the same time, training for mindfulness, empathetic listening, gender diversity, and suicide prevention continued apace.
Over the past couple of years, the number of teachers integrating cultural competency and social justice topics into their courses has increased considerably. This group, therefore, conducted an inventory of current and emerging classroom practices, studied institutional supports and barriers to equitable educational experiences, consulted with Wayne Au from the University of Washington, Bothell, and began to draft a set of program recommendations and suggestions for the school.
Disciplinary thinking has great value, as it represents long-developed, deeply held ways of making meaning of the world. However, organizing a school exclusively by discipline has some negative consequences, as the world is not neatly organized into seven academic categories. Contemporary challenges require hybrid thinking, the application of multiple disciplines to complex problems. This also prepares students better for university, where interdisciplinary departments are burgeoning, and schools offer up to 100 majors. This team has asked the school community to suggest opportunities for interdisciplinary courses, both in the required and elective parts of the program.
U Lab is the team that organized around student agency, connections with the city, and entrepreneurship. This group tackled the longstanding question of the culminating senior experience at UPrep. We have now approved the UPrep Launchpad, an individual, student-designed, two-week senior project in the Seattle area. The U Lab has also supported the student-led Social Entrepreneurship class, which has designed a social venture called U Box, a “give one, get one” care package program that serves families of college students and the homeless population.
This group has undertaken to redesign the school schedule and calendar in order to reduce student stress, support deeper learning, and use time more effectively. Our current schedule does not fully support the way we teach today, never mind the aspirations of our Next Generation Learning initiatives. The team collected masses of input from families, students, teachers, and staff members, examined the schedules of 25 peer schools locally and nationally, and received a customized analysis and report from Roxanne Higgins of Independent School Management. 30 teachers, staff members, and students serve on this team. We plan to announce schedule finalists for community consideration in the first week of December.
As we reach the end of the first year of Strategic Plan 2020, we are proud of accomplishments realized to date, anticipate the closing reports of Year 1 Research+Design teams, and look forward to kicking off Year 2. The teams have been designed to last for one year at a time, providing the opportunity to retire, reconstitute, replace, or divide teams at the new year. Team leaders have the opportunity to continue or cycle out, so that others may assume and exercise leadership. We also look forward to fleshing out the five-year plan for each initiative, determining a sequence for major rollouts, and developing evaluation metrics in collaboration with the board. It’s been a fulfilling journey so far, and we anticipate equally significant steps in the future.
Originally published on the NAIS Annual Conference Online Community.
I experienced an inspirational story of innovation at the NAIS Annual Conference last week that filled me with optimism about the future of educational change in our schools. Doris Korda and Scott Looney (Hawken School) described an alternative high school program built around entrepreneurship and then unveiled an ambitious new project to reinvent the high school transcript and convince colleges to learn how to use it. I left feeling that we are indeed experiencing a moment of significant transition in independent schools that will help more students fully realize their potential. Then, I walked across the street to the Metreon.
Moscone Center’s giant, floor-to-ceiling east windows face the Metreon. You are forgiven if you think that it is just a Target, but the giant company only recently arrived. In 1999, Sony opened the Metreon in order to reinvent the urban mall as an entertainment/education center. It was a bold, unique pilot project. Original tenants included the first Sony Store, the first Microsoft store, an educational exhibit titled “The Way Things Work,” and a theme park-esque food court and play area based on the Sendak book, Where the Wild Things Are. The architecture was modern, and technology was everywhere. Kids danced on an interactive game projected on the floor, and kiosks sold the latest tech gadgets.
Despite much fanfare, the project stumbled out of the gate. Within a year, some stores left and were replaced. In 2006, Sony sold the building to Westfield, and in 2012, the mall company remodeled the space into a more recognizable form. An upscale, international food court and the aforementioned Target swallowed up the spaces formerly devoted to technology showcase stores, and the Wild Things gave way to a plainer, rentable, event space. Only the multiplex movie theater on the top floor and two of the food court options survived to this day. The building exterior now features red bulls-eyes, marking Target’s current experiment in downtown retail spaces.
Where did the Metreon go wrong, and what lessons can schools take away for their own innovative projects? Though my expertise lies in schools, not urban retail, I can see likely reasons. Sony invested huge dollars, $85 million according to SFGate, in the high stakes gamble. This must have led to massive pressure for the project to bear financial results right away. Successful innovations start small, with low-cost, low-risk pilots, to protect the innovation in its early stages and allow it to flounder, improve, and mature.
The financial model was apparently flawed from the start. In 1999, showcase stores did not make money (at least not until Apple Stores broke through). The added entertainment value of educational exhibits and storybook restaurants work in venues that charge admission, such as theme parks and museums. While design for innovation must welcome creative ideas, it’s equally important to confront practical realities later in the process and have a viable business model.
Sony attempted to change deeply embedded cultural habits of people wholesale and quickly. Even if Sony had protected the innovation longer, and the project was based on a better financial model, people’s shopping and entertainment habits still would not have changed in a short time. Successful innovations take a more personal, and longer-term approach to cultural change.
Will Hawken’s entrepreneurship program last? Will the mastery transcript consortium redefine the college application? We have learned a lot about innovation in education in recent years. I suspect that they have a better chance than that mall across the street.
Metreon’s shattered dreams (SFGate)
San Francisco Metreon 2.0: ‘Mall Of The Future’ Gets A Face Lift (Huffington Post)
Originally published on University Prep
On February 18, University Prep hosted a public screening of the film “Beyond Measure,” which was attended by about 80 U Prep families and members of the public. The film visits several schools across the country to tell the stories of students who are disengaged from conventional forms of schooling, in which standardization, testing, and content coverage feature prominently. The students speak eloquently of the difficulties of staying motivated and working hard in such programs, as their teachers and principals grapple with how to fully realize the potential of their students.
These school leaders, as well as one enterprising student, find examples in innovative schools such as High Tech High in San Diego and the New York Performance Standards Consortium. Throughout the film, experts such as Sir Ken Robinson, Linda Darling-Hammond, and Yong Zhao share their thoughts on the best ways to teach for intellectual courage and global citizenship. Individualized learning, student-designed projects, and alternative programs are highlighted, and the students featured in the film find both inspiration and academic success.
After the film, Head of School Matt Levinson, senior Matan Arad-Neeman, English Department Head Christina Serkowski, and Science Department Head Brent Slattengren fielded questions from the audience. The discussion explored the ways in which University Prep has been upholding some of the film’s recommended practices, including teaching for depth over breadth, assessing students on a performance rubric, encouraging student presentation, designing interdisciplinary projects on contemporary topics, and fully supporting teachers to collaborate and innovate.
The panelists also explored University Prep’s ongoing efforts to develop further changes to the schedule and calendar, interdisciplinary learning, social and emotional learning, online learning, and student-designed projects. The school’s newly adopted strategic plan features Next Generation Learning as one of its three key components, and several faculty-student working groups continue to research and design options and opportunities for program innovation at University Prep.
Do I shun responsibility by saying “yes?” Hardly. For one, if a teacher or program director brings forth an idea that lies far outside the mission and norms of the school, then I say so. However, the message is not that I personally disapprove of the idea but rather that it does not have a strong chance of success given the nature of the school. Most people take such feedback well. If they persist with their idea despite such feedback, then either they are right, or their idea will ultimately not pass muster with others.
I will be co-leading this summer’s seminar on Innovative Leadership, offered by Santa Fe Leadership Center and Hillbrook School Center for Teaching Excellence. It would be great to see you there. This seminar is a great opportunity to engage deeply with ideas of innovation, risk, creativity, and school change, within a retreat setting, and along with 40 thoughtful colleagues from other schools. Seminar leaders include Carla Silver, Greg Bamford, Ryan Burke, and me. Guest presenters will include Jump Associates, The Grove Consulting, and Patricia Ryan Madson.
June 23-27, 2013 :: Silicon Valley, CA
The theme of innovation pervaded this year’s NAIS annual conference. Keynote speeches looked toward a different future, some schools shared innovative projects, and more responded enthusiastically and expressed the desire to participate. Does this mean that significant numbers of independent schools are substantially changing their educational programs, or not? Brad Rathgeber thinks so. Kevin Ruth says, “not so fast.”
How would we know whether school innovation, speaking broadly, is a movement or a fad? How high will adoption peak, and then how far will it fall? One way is to track stories about school innovation. However, this dialogue seems insufficiently complex to allow one to understand the mechanics or results of innovation. Many reports of innovative practice feel similar. A singular leader invents a brilliant idea, an unknown number of teachers embrace it, and students are transformed by the experience. The focus of the presentation is usually on the idea itself, and the argument for effectiveness is often circular and unsubstantiated.
Another approach is to find quantitative studies. These take years to develop, but as we have seen with studies of youth and social media, the results can be extremely compelling. I am not aware of significant quantitative studies of program innovation in independent schools. Are you?
A third is to gather the wisdom of others. Many colleagues have worked in our schools for decades and may speak authoritatively about whether schools are substantially different from before. Speaking personally, I hear them say that schools have changed significantly on the surface but the core values have remained pretty much the same. Thinking more broadly, some scholars suggest that secondary education in the U.S. has not changed for decades.
I would love to hear about rigorous study of independent school innovation, quantitative reports of broad trends, or other useful information on this topic. Specific information about this innovation trend will surely help us facilitate the best of it within our schools.
The Innovator’s DNA (Christensen, Dyer, and Gregersen) offers an uncommon combination of pop corporate storytelling and research study results. Lessons learned from their analysis of innovative leadership practices may be applied to education settings.
In contrast to their own title, the authors find identify seven critical discovery skills that can be developed. They are not unchangeable qualities of innovators.
Networking particularly offers new potential in an information age. Active participation in electronic networks increases one’s connectedness to professionals in other institutions, leading to more powerful professional development opportunities, school visits, and personal connections.
Interestingly, the authors find immersion in a foreign culture to be a common trait about innovative CEOs. Living in another country increased leaders’ abilities to connect disparate ideas and imagine new possibilities.
Associating—or the ability to make surprising connections across areas of knowledge, industries, even geographies—is an often-taken-for-granted skill among the innovators we studied. … Conceptually, as innovators increase the number of building-block ideas, they substantially increase the number of ways they might combine ideas to create something surprisingly new.
Christensen et al find that creativity is not a fixed trait. Rather, one can develop it through practice. In addition, behaviors precede changes in attitude. Frequently engaging in discovery skills leads to conceptual change. This is one model for how a leader can develop a culture of innovation in one’s school.
In independent school discussions, creativity and innovation are sometimes mentioned in the same breath. This may lead to a focus on the arts as the principal source of instruction for creativity in the school. The authors find that creativity alone does not necessarily lead to innovation. Innovative leaders desire to change the status quo and take strategic risks put creative ideas into practice. Schools should therefore see innovation as a school-wide initiative, perhaps led by an interdisciplinary team but certainly not based in just one discipline.
Why do institutions resist change? The authors fault the “status quo bias, the tendency to prefer an existing state of affairs to alternative ones.” Innovative leaders shun the status quo, whereas delivery-oriented leaders focus on execution and risk aversion. Certainly this is true in most schools, where administrators, teachers, parents, and students find comfort in long-held models of what education should look like.
In schools, aversion to failure may also have to do with the costs of mistakes. Failed classroom experiments affects kids’ learning. However, I would personally rather model bold experimentation and occasionally hit the jackpot with a transformative learning activity than consistently organize good but uninspiring lessons.
Though most of the book’s analysis applies equally well to education as to business, the book’s treatment of education itself leaves much to be desired. One paragraph alone describes The Met’s internship-based program, one of my favorite examples of reimagining school. Sir Ken Robinson earns a mention.
School change starts with a reassessment of educational purpose. Why do we teach children, and what ultimate goals should we have for their education? Jakarta International School has taken that step.
With knowledge expanding exponentially and technological access to that knowledge morphing daily, schools are reassessing their essential structures and roles. Recent brain research has converted some hunches into certainties, while throwing some challenging questions to educators the world over. In short, we are learning about how students learn best. Some forms of learning are almost universally effective, and some need to be tailored to individuals’ unique styles. We must therefore convert our schools, perhaps fundamentally, to allow for new and appropriate methodologies of learning.
“Convert our schools.” That’s pretty strong stuff, embracing change to ensure the continued relevance of an educational program. I would love to learn more about how the school reached this point, how pervasive is the commitment to this vision, and what it looks like in practice.