Category: Branding and Buzz

Branding and Buzz

Honoring Controversy – The Series

One of the truly challenging parts of leading large-scale school change is how upset some people can be about the change. Large-scale school change, especially paradigm shifting change, invariably generates controversy. The question is how to deal with it…

School Administrators working on controversyOne of the truly challenging parts of leading large-scale school change is how upset some people can be about the change (School Change Truth 2 reminds us that people seem to abhor change). Large-scale school change, especially paradigm shifting change, invariably generates controversy.

The question is how to deal with it. Understandably, many of us don’t like confrontation and would rather not deal with it or hope that it will simply go away.

But this is one instance where ignoring the situation will not make it go away and will likely make it worse. What to do?

The Series:

How well your initiative deals with controversy and critics will depend on how calm you remain, how productively you listen to your critics, and how good you get at determining when to simply acknowledge a critique and when to do something about it.

How We Listen Matters

When dealing with controversy, it is important to listen closely to your critics (even when how they say things makes it hard to listen!). They may tell you what you need to say and haven’t yet and which words you’re using are helping your cause and which are hurting your cause.

Adding the “barking dogs who bite” parent, mentioned in the previous post, to the design team taught us something else about dealing with controversy. The way critical community members deliver their message, especially when they are forceful or angry, can keep us from listening productively to their message.

For example, we certainly intended to use iPad apps to reinforce letter formation and spelling. The way angry parents were telling us we shouldn’t use tablets to teach young learners had us dismissing them (and their message) as extremist.

But then a small statement in an otherwise enflamed tirade made me realize that they thought we were going to teach students to handwrite only using the devices!

It had never occurred to us that we should be directly stating that the correct way (the only way) to properly teach handwriting was with pencil and paper. Once we made that statement, they cooled quite a bit. We were debating the benefits of using apps to reinforce letter formation when what no one had said (and needed to be said) was that handwriting needed to be taught with pencil and paper. It was so obvious to us, we never thought to say it.

But listening productively to the critics (even when it’s hard) told us the message we should be sharing.

Similarly, when working with a middle school to implement interdisciplinary, project-based learning, our group talked a lot about problem-solving, connecting learning to the students’ world, and active learning. Critics were angry because they saw us throwing out the curriculum and dismissing Math, English, Science, and Social Studies. It was a lesson in how listening productively to your critics can also tell you when you’re using the wrong words or wording.

Of course we were teaching Math, English, Science, and Social Studies!

But in our excitement about the learning power of connecting subjects and using projects and active learning, we had said nothing about the content students would be learning. Our critics quieted and were less frequent when we started talking about how we could make Math more meaningful by using it to address issues in Science and Social Studies, and how applying reading and writing to solving real world problems makes learning the reading and writing skills more meaningful to students, and how active, hands on learning strategies, help students better learn Math, English, Science, and Social Studies.

Our critics helped us know what we were not saying that would be helpful and what terms we were using that were generating less buy-in, than other terms that helped promote buy-in.

Barking Dogs and Barking Dogs Who Bite

When folks from the school community are expressing their concerns around your initiative, you need to decide quickly if they simply need to be listened to, or if additional action is needed. You must decide if they are “barking dogs” or “barking dogs who bite”!

Thinking of school change from the framework of being intentional and rational about moves and counter moves, as mentioned in the previous post, can be helpful. Remember, a confrontational and forceful community member perceives their job as saying whatever it takes to have you NOT make the school change you are in the process of making.

Part of thinking through moves and counter-moves is knowing when you can and should ignore the issue, or take no action, and when you must do something, perhaps quickly. You have to be able to distinguish between “barking dogs” and “barking dogs that bite.” Many of the critics of the primary grade iPad initiative in Auburn said their piece, then went away. But we had one parent who kept returning to the school committee and to other community groups to blast the initiative. Her arguments were starting to gain traction, even though to those of us implementing the initiative none of them had any credence or basis in fact. She had become a barking dog that bites.

My superintendent was surprised by my solution. I put the parent on our design team. My superintendent wasn’t so sure about the move but trusted that I knew what I was doing. I’m not so sure that I knew what I was doing at the time (and frankly, part of it was the old “keep your friends close and your enemies closer”), but my instinct proved correct. The parent saw how decisions were made and saw that “what was good for children” was at the heart of what we were doing.

She also had a voice in our decisions (as did every design team member) and was now in the position of not being able to pontificate at a board meeting about what she thought we should or shouldn’t do, but now had to work with the team to convince us to do what she thought was right. When her ideas were what one might call extreme or crazy, she was only one voice and her ideas didn’t go far. When her ideas were on point, we collaborated on finding the right way to address the idea. She made quality contributions to the design and implementation of the initiative and even became a cautious supporter, advocating for continued funding for the project at budget time!

Dealing with Controversy Requires the Right Mindset and Temperment

Ignoring the situation will not make controversy go away and will likely make it worse. What to do? How should we react?

As discussed in the previous post, large-scale school change, especially paradigm shifting change, invariably generates controversy. The question is how to deal with it. Understandably, many of us don’t like confrontation and would rather not deal with it or hope that it will simply go away. 

But this is one instance where ignoring the situation will not make it go away and will likely make it worse. What to do?

The first step is, to the greatest extent you can, to not take it personally. If you care deeply about your initiative, which is often the case when you play a strong role in designing or implementing an initiative, it’s hard not to take the criticisms and concerns personally, especially the ones that seem unrealistic and crazy or when the community member is so angry or forceful in their convictions. It’s almost impossible to avoid taking it personally when they make it personal about you (I once had a parent at a school committee meeting attack me by name and try to shame me for supporting our work).

It’s critical to remain calm. This is not simply an issue between you and the angry community member. There are others watching. Some will agree with the community member. Some will think that the community member is being unreasonable and will sympathize with you (perhaps feeling bad that you have to sit through this onslaught!). In many cases, you can simply thank them for sharing their perspective and let their comments (and how they were delivered) stand on their own.

If you respond too strongly, sharply, or angrily, no matter how justified you may be to feel these things, you are the one whose argument loses every time. It doesn’t matter that the community member thinks they are correct and is being angry or forceful, when you lose it, you lose your supporters. It is for them and for you that you remain calm, no matter what.

If possible, provide a counter example. When Maine decided to be the first 1-to-1 laptop initiative in the country (The Maine Learning Technology Initiative, MLTI) by providing all 7th and 8th grade teachers and students laptops, WiFi, and training (probably the largest middle school initiative in the country!), teachers, principals, and tech directors were highly anxious. At the time (2001), no other state was doing this. Few schools across the country were doing this. Then-Governor King got calls saying that if he wanted to improve Maine’s economy, he should give every middle school student a chainsaw, not a laptop. He even got death threats!

Even caring educators’ imaginations were rife with worries about all the bad things that might happen: students going to inappropriate sites, students being distracted from focusing on learning activities, equipment not working properly when needed, laptops going missing. As a new initiative, it’s hard to counteract supposition because there may be no counter-examples to point to. Fighting supposition with supposition is difficult (”My belief it won’t happen should be stronger than your belief it will happen!”).

But he had the advantage of having one middle school, Piscataquis Community Middle School in Guilford, Maine, who had initiated 1-to-1 laptops with their eighth grade earlier that year.

When a critic shared their worst fears about what would happen when every seventh and eighth grade teacher and student had an internet-connected laptop, Governor King could publicly turn to the Guilford teachers and say, “I see this person’s concern. Has this been an issue with your program?” The teachers could then state that it has not been, or if it had, what the scope of the problem had been and what their solution was. It also helped that the response came from someone other than the governor. It wasn’t just the program advocate’s response, but a response from someone who is already doing the work. Bottom line, those teachers, in this instance, had more credibility with the critics than the governor did.

Keep in mind, too, that your critics aren’t trying to ruin your day. Initiatives are “initiatives” because they are new. They haven’t been done much (if at all) before. They aren’t “tried and true.” And they are unlikely to be what your stakeholders and learning community have experienced in school. As I pointed out previously, all they have to work from is supposition and their imagination, both of which are charged by emotion. And without real counter-examples, you are fighting an uphill battle. Trying to debate an emotional worry without real counter-examples is simply a debate of opinions and in the end will simply give credence to the critic’s concern. I’m reminded of a Facebook meme: “That is a very well laid out rational point, but I will still hold to my emotional opinion based on no facts or evidence.” 

In such a situation, remaining outwardly calm and simply thanking them for sharing and letting their comments stand on their own is the only practical path forward for you.

That can be quite discouraging, feeling like you have no way to parry what you perceive to be an irrational assault on your initiative. Maybe this will help. I was working with a small group creating a career academy for challenging and at-risk students in a mid-sized city. It became quite a political hot potato, and, as the superintendent’s project, a pawn in battles between the superintendent and other groups (having little to do with the school itself). My colleague had friends–who were not connected to the school project–over socially one evening and was telling them about our challenges in that district. One of the friends was a veteran combat pilot now working as a commercial airline pilot. He told my colleague, “You know, they only shoot at you when you’re over the target.” It became a metaphor that has energized me through this and other initiatives since!

I also find it helpful to think of implementing an initiative in the midst of controversy a bit like chess, as a complex game of moves and counter-moves to win the game. I don’t so much want you to start thinking of implementing your initiative as a game or to turn this into another situation where someone wins and someone loses. But the framework of being intentional and rational about moves and counter moves is a helpful one. Remember, a confrontational and forceful community member perceives their job as saying whatever it takes to have you NOT make the school change you are in the process of making.

In the next post, we’ll explore sizing up the individuals expressing concern about your initiative.

School Change Generates Controversy

School Change can generate quite a bit of angst and controversy among the school community.

One of the truly challenging parts of leading large-scale school change is how upset some people can be about the change (School Change Truth 2 reminds us that people seem to abhor change). Some parents worry their children won’t do as well as they do now. Some teachers worry about the work and adjustments they’ll have to make with the change, or fear they’ll fail at the initiative or that it’s another initiative they’re expected to implement well without adequate training or support. Some just think that the initiative doesn’t look “like school,” so you’re clearly doing it wrong!

Parents will resist and fight back against the change. Teachers will resist and fight back against the change. Community members will resist and fight back against the change. Some directly: telling you –or your superintendent or the school committee–exactly what they don’t like about the initiative or what their worries and concerns are. Others are less direct, telling you what they think will make you stop or change your mind, rather than telling what they really fear, or that they don’t want to put the effort into the change. And if your initiative is the kind that few others have implemented to date, and you have no examples to point to, then your stakeholder group has only their imagination, good and bad. And some of those stakeholders will rail against the worst their imaginations can come up with! Without counter-examples, you have no proof they are wrong.

When Auburn Schools ventured to be the first district to have a district-wide 1-to-1 kindergarten iPad initiative, there were no other kindergarten iPad initiatives to point to. We had educators and partners who were excited about the opportunity. Our imaginations told us about all the good that was possible from such an effort. But we also had some angry community members who came to testify at school committee meetings about all the worst things their imaginations could conjure:

  • We would reduce the number of teachers and just teach students through online learning
  • Students would spend all their time on the tablets and would no longer play outside, draw with crayons, sculpt with clay, sing songs, or sift through sand
  • Predators would get to the children through the cameras on the devices
  • The kindergarteners would spend all their time playing games they downloaded or going through Facebook instead of doing the learning activities
  • Students eyes would go bad using the tablet screens, and they would all need glasses
  • The children would never learn to write with pencil and paper

Many years later, none of these predictions came to fruition. But that didn’t stop them from being hot topics in the beginning. (In fact, back then I blogged, “Rumor of our Locking Students in Closets with iPads Are Greatly Exaggerated!“)

Large-scale school change, especially paradigm shifting change, invariably generates controversy. The question is how to deal with it. Understandably, many of us don’t like confrontation and would rather not deal with it or hope that it will simply go away.

This series will help address how to deal with the controversy your initiative generates.

Communicating with the Community: Getting the Message Right

I attended messaging training this summer while at the Association for Middle Level Education Affiliate Summit. The training was put on by the Learning First Alliance, a partnership of 16 leading education associations all focused on improving learning in America's schools.

I know we are facing some communication challenges presently, and I suspect some of you are, too, so here are my notes on that session (cleaned up a little).

Key Questions to Shape Your Messaging:

  • What's your issue/messaging challenge?
  • Who should you be reaching out to?
  • What's your ask?

Key Findings from National Public Opinion Polls and Survey Data

  • Recent growing support for teachers
  • A belief that there is a lack of adequate funding
  • Rank local schools high but think country's schools are in trouble
  • Parents want to know how their child is progressing

Common Assumptions (from that national data)

  • The community can be influenced primarily by parents, students, teachers
  • Top education problems & issues: motivation, character, discipline, effort
  • Student success and teacher effectiveness = caring
  • Choice is good
  • Reforms need a lot more money
  • Everyone should have the opportunity to go to college
  • Individualization is needed to strengthen basics (not for innovation)
  • Education is a limited commodity (there is only so much to go around)

Common Agreements (from that national data)

  • Public schools are key to a nation's economic future
  • High quality pubic education is a right, not a luxury
  • Public education benefits society
  • Innovation is important, but don't experiment on my children – we need improvement
  • Goal of pubic education is the preparation needed to support our country's quality of life

Values That Work in the Community (from the national data)

  • Education is a shared investment
  • The current system needs updating to prepare students to live in a rapidly changing world
  • Improving education requires a practical set of iterative steps toward an ultimate goal
  • Issues of equity are about the distribution of resources, not about bad people (maybe about unlucky people, not bad people)
  • Don't say “my child” say “every child”

 

QR Codes & Fostering a Strong Home/School Connection

Mauri Dufour is one of our kindergarten teachers in Auburn, an early adopter of iPads in primary grades, and is an Apple Distinguished Educator. Over the past year, Mauri has explored the role of QR codes in her classroom.

Last March, she took some time to tell me about how she uses QR codes to connect with her students’ families.

Highlights from Mauri’s video:

  • Each Friday, her students each make a video for his or her family about that week’s literacy center
  • Students must explain the “why” of the lesson, as well as, what they did in the center
  • The QR code makes it easy to share the weekly video with the family
  • This has helped foster a strong Home/School connection
  • Mauri describes how she worked with parents to make this happen

Despite working in a high poverty school, the QR codes have helped create much stronger parent involvement and communication than might otherwise be expected.

Introduction to Twitter for Educators: 12 Resources & Strategies

The irony is that at the same time my district has banned Facebook and has a team working on a social media policy, our administrators are learning how to use Twitter for both Branding and Buzz and their own professional development.

(Well, maybe it isn’t irony. I think maybe it is exactly the Yin and Yang of social media that has schools confused about what to do with it. On one hand social media seems to lead to distraction and bullying. On the other hand, it is a powerful marketing tool and tool for building a professional learning community.)

Auburn’s administrative team will soon get a brief Introduction to Twitter inservice. These are the resources I will be sharing with them.

What other resources would you share? (please add your suggestions in the comments)

 

Getting Started with Twitter:

 

Leveraging Twitter as Your Professional Learning Community:

 

Leveraging Twitter for Building Branding and Buzz Around Your School:

 

Leveraging Twitter for Teaching and Learning

 

Is Middle School All About Grade Configuration?

There is a new study out which concludes that students take an academic plunge when they go to a 6-8 school rather than a k-8 school. The article is called The Middle Level Plunge.

At first glance, it seems to be a reasonably well designed study comparing student performance in a 6-8 school to those in a k-8 school (the old grade configuration dilemma!). Their fallacy is in essentially equating the 6-8 grade configuration to “middle schooling,” and actually say “Our results cast serious doubt on the wisdom of the middle-school experiment that has become such a prominent feature of American education.”

Here is the response that I posted as a comment on their article:

Thanks for adding to the research on the impact of school grade configuration. I especially appreciate that you didn’t just study the grade configurations, but also tried to control for various explanations, including teacher experience, school characteristics, and educational practices. You have defined each of these clearly in your article.

I am concerned, however, with your using the term “middle school” to mean the 6-8 configuration schools. You are clear that this is your definition in the article, but in middle level education circles, the term means something very different, and I fear your conclusions about 6-8 grade configuration will be misinterpreted as conclusions about middle school practices. Readers should be able to make their own distinctions, especially when the writing is clear, as your article is, but you and I both know that in our “sound bite lives” there are too many people who will see the words “middle school” and think that your definition is the same as my definition.

For middle level educators, “middle school” is essentially a set of developmentally appropriate educational practices applied in the middle level grades (generally considered grades 5-8), without regard to the grade configuration of the school housing those grades. Readers may find helpful the numerous resources available on the Association for Middle Level Education website (http://www.amle.org).

Further, the school characteristics and educational practices you examine are not those that define middle school practices. I would have looked for the characteristics defined in AMLE’s This We Believe (http://tinyurl.com/865xggv), or the Turning Points 2000 recommendations (http://www.turningpts.org/principle.htm).

Again, I am not criticizing your study or the clarity of your writing, but simply sharing the unfortunate possibility of confusion for school decision makers trying to make informed (especially research informed) decisions based on your article and the use of the term “middle school.”

Perhaps, I could invite you to refer to the schools in your study as “6-8 schools,” instead of “middle schools.”

So, my big objection is defining “middle school” as a grade configuration, and seeming to conclude that “the middle school experiment has failed” and the possibility that decision makers will interpret this as if it were our definition of middle school…

I want to be clear, though. It is right and proper for researchers to select a term, define it, and use it in their article as they define it. It is expected that the reader will read such an article closely and critically. The authors of this study have done nothing wrong. Could it have been better (more clear to a wider audience) if they had done it differently? Yes.

But it is also right and proper for a reader to add their critique (politely and professionally) to the conversation though avenues such as comments on posts.

(For those of you exploring the Lead4Change model, this is a Branding and Buzz issue. Situations like these go directly to the issue of public perception of our initiatives and what role we play in communicating our vision. It is on us to try to correct misperceptions and to work toward the integrity of models we subscribe to.)

 

It’s Your Turn:

Are you a middle level educator or advocate? What are your thoughts about this study? I often ask you to post your comments here, but perhaps this time, you could post your comments on their article. And maybe you’d pass the word to your circle of middle grades contacts and they could comment, too…

 

7 Social Media Articles to Help Your School’s Communication Impact

Schools and educational organizations are starting to realize that even though they are doing great work, they need to get that message out to their parents, communities, members, and constituents. “Branding and Buzz” is one of the “Supporting but Necessary” components of the Lead4Change Model, and encourages schools and organizations to state their case for the work they are doing, communicate with their community and beyond, tell their story, and present their evidence.

So begins my recent Bright Futures blog post on schools using social media to get their message out.

The post points readers toward the Social Media Examiner, a wonderful resource for helping organizations leverage social media. In particular, I highlighted 7 articles focused on getting the most from Facebook, Twitter, and blogging.

A lot of schools already have a Facebook page. Some are even using twitter. Others have administrators or teachers who blog. But are they using these avenues to connect with parents, communities, and colleagues as effectively or with as much impact as they could?

I think these 7 articles can help insure that schools do. The articles share wonderful tips from folks who are getting the most from their social media. Where can a school start?

Use the post as a jumping off point. Do a deep dive into one or the articles, or have your staff or leadership team jigsaw a couple of them. Your school could take what they learn and decide on a couple things that they want to try out.

The Bright Futures Partnership did just that. We read the article 26 Tips For Writing Great Blog Posts, and decided on 5 or 6 things we were going to try (look for changes coming to the Bright Futures blog and see if you can spot which tips we put into action!). By the way, reading the article also allowed us to pat ourselves on the back for 5 or 6 things we were already doing!

 

It’s Your Turn:

What are your best strategies for getting your school’s or educational organization’s message out via social media?

 

Auburn’s iPad Research Project on the Seedlings Podcast

Seedlings is a great little podcast that, although about educational technology, is really about good teaching and learning.

So I felt honored when the Seedling hosts invited me to return to talk about Auburn’s research on their Advantage 2014 program, best known for giving iPads to Kindergartners. You can download that podcast and access related links here.

This was a follow up to the previous podcast, where we talked both about Advantage 2014, and Projects4ME, the statewide virtual project-based non-traditional program, where students can earn high school credit by designing and doing projects, instead of taking courses.

Responding to Critiques of Auburn’s iPad Research Claims

When we announced our research results last week, Audrey Watters was one of the first to cover it. Shortly thereafter, Justin Reich wrote a very thoughtful review of our research and response to Audrey’s blog post at his EdTechResearcher blog. Others, through comments made in post comments, blogs, emails, and conversations, have asserted that we (Auburn School Department) have made claims that our data don’t warrant.

I’d like to take a moment and respond to various aspects of that idea.

But first, although it may appear that I am taking on Justin’s post, that isn’t quite true (or fair to Justin). Justin’s is the most public comment, so the easiest to point to. But I actually believe that Justin’s is a quite thoughtful (and largely fair) critique from a researcher’s perspective. Although I will directly address a couple things Justin wrote, I hope he will forgive me for seeming to hold up his post as I address larger questions of the appropriateness of our claims from our study.

Our Research Study vs. Published Research –
Our results are initial results. There are a lot of people interested in our results (even the initial ones – there are not a lot of randomized control trials being done on iPads in education), so we decided to share what we had so far in the form of a research summary and a press release. But neither of these would be considered “published research” by a researcher (and we don’t either – we’re just sharing what we have so far). Published research is peer reviewed and has to meet standards for the kinds of information included. We actually have more data to collect and analyze (including more analyses on the data we already have) before we’re ready to publish.

For example, Justin was right to point out that we shared no information about scales for the ten items we measured. As such, some of the measures may seem much smaller than when compared proportionally to their scale (because some of the scales are small), and we were not clear that it is inappropriate to try to make comparisons between the various measures as represented on our graph (because the scales are different). In hindsight, knowing we have mostly a lay audience for our current work, perhaps we should have been more explicit around the ten scales and perhaps created a scaled chart…

Mostly, I want my readers to know that even if I’m questioning some folks’ assertions that we’re overstating our conclusions, we are aware that there are real limitations to what we have shared to date.

Multiple Contexts for Interpreting Research Results –
I have this debate with my researcher friends frequently. They say the only appropriate way to interpret research is from a researcher’s perspective. But I believe that it can and should also be interpreted as well from a practitioner’s perspective, and that such interpretation is not the same as a researcher’s. There is (and should be) a higher standard of review by researchers and what any results may mean. But practical implementation decisions can be made without such a high bar (and this is what makes my researcher friends mad, because they want everyone to be just like them!). This is just like how lawyers often ask you to stand much further back from the legal line than you need to. Or like a similar debate mathematicians have: if I stand some distance from my wife, then move half way to her, then move half way to her again, and on and on, mathematicians would say (mathematically) I will never reach her (which is true). On the other hand, we all know, I would very quickly get close enough for practical purposes! 😉

Justin is very correct in his analysis of our research from a researcher’s perspective. But I believe that researchers and practitioners can, very appropriately, draw different conclusions from the findings. I also believe that both practitioners and researchers can overstate conclusions from examining the results.

I would wish (respectfully) that Justin might occasionally say in his writing, “from a researcher’s perspective…” If he lives in a researcher world, perhaps he doesn’t even notice this, or thinks it implied or redundant. But his blog is admittedly not for an audience of researchers, but rather for an audience of educators who need help making sense of research.

Reacting to a Lay Blog as a Researcher –
I think Justin has a good researcher head on him and is providing a service to educators by analyzing education research and offering his critique. I’m a little concerned that some of his critique was directed at Audrey’s post rather than directly at our research summary. Audrey is not a researcher. She’s an excellent education technology journalist. I think her coverage was pretty on target. But it was based on interviews with the researchers, Damian Bebell (one of the leading researchers on 1to1 learning with technology), Sue Dorris, and me, not a researcher’s review of of our published findings. At one point, Justin suggests that Audrey is responding to a graph in our research summary (as if she were a researcher). I would suggest she is responding to conversations with Damian, Sue, and me (as if she were a journalist). It is a major fallacy to think everyone should be a researcher, or think and analyze like one (just as it is a fallacy that we all should think or act from any one perspective, including as teachers, or parents, etc). And it is important to consider individual’s context in how we respond to them. Different contexts warrant different kinds of responses and reactions.

Was It The iPads or Was It Our Initiative –
Folks, including Audrey, asked how we knew what portion of our results were from the iPads and which part from the professional development, etc. Our response is that it is all these things together. The lessons we learned from MLTI, the Maine Learning Technology Initiative, Maine’s statewide learning with laptop initiative, that has been successfully implemented for more than a decade, is that these initiatives are not about a device, but about a systemic learning initiative with many moving parts. We have been using the Lead4Change model to help insure we are taking a systemic approach and attending to the various parts and components.

That said, Justin is correct to point out that, from a research (and statistical) perspective, our study examined the impact that solely the iPad had on our students (one group of students had iPads, the other did not).

But for practitioners, especially those who might want to duplicate our initiative and/or our study, it should be important to note that, operationally, our study studied the impact of the iPad as we implemented them, which is to say, systemically, including professional development and other components (Lead4Change being one way to approach an initiative systemically).

It is not unreasonable to expect that a district who simply handed out iPads would have a hard time duplicating our results. So although, statistically, it is just the iPads, in practice, it is the iPads as we implemented them as a systemic initiative.

Statistical Significance and the Issue of “No Difference” in 9 of the 10 Tests –
The concept of “proof” is almost nonexistent in the research world. The only way you could prove something is if you could test every possible person that might be impacted or every situation. Instead, researchers have rules for selecting some subset of the entire population, rules for collecting data, and rules for running statistical analyses on those data. Part of why these rules are in place is because, when you are only really examining a small subset of your population, you want to try to control for the possibility that pure chance got you your results.

That’s where “statistical significance” comes in. This is the point at which researchers say, “We are now confident that these results can be explained by the intervention alone and we are not worried by the impact of chance.” Therefore, researchers have little confidence in results that do not show statistical significance.

Justin is right to say, from a researcher’s perspective, that a researcher should treat the 9 measures that were not statistically significant as if there were no difference in the results.

But that is slightly overstating the case to the rest of the world who are not researchers. For the rest of us, the one thing that is accurate to say about those 9 measures is that these results could be explained by either the intervention or by chance. It is not accurate for someone (and this is not what Justin wrote) to conclude there is no possitive impact from our program or that there is no evidence that the program works. It is accurate to say we are unsure of the role chance played on those results.

This comes back to the idea about how researchers and practitioners can and should view data analyses differently. When noticing that the nine measures trended positive, the researcher should warn, “inconclusive!”

It is not on a practitioner, however, to make all decisions based solely on if data is conclusive or not. If that were true, there would be no innovation (because there is never conclusive evidence a new idea works before someone tries it). A practitioner should look at this from the perspective of making informed decisions, not conclusive proof. “Inconclusive” is very different from “you shouldn’t do it.” For a practitioner, the fact that all measures trended positive is itself information to consider, side by side with if those trends are conclusive or not.

“This research does not show sufficient impact of the initiative,” is as overstated from a statistical perspective, as “We have proof this works,” is from a decision-maker’s perspective.

We don’t pretend to have proof our program works. What is not overstated, and appropriate conclusions from our study, however, and is what Auburn has stated since we shared our findings, is the following: Researchers should conclude we need more research. But the community should conclude at we have shown modest positive evidence of iPads extending our teachers’ impact on students’ literacy development, and should take this as suggesting we are good to continue our program, including into 1st grade.

We also think it is suggestive that other districts should consider implementing their own thoughtfully designed iPads for learning initiatives.

More News on Auburn’s iPad Research Results

The other day, I blogged about our Phase 1 research results on the impact of Advantage 2014, our literacy and Math initiative that includes 1to1 iPads in kindergarten. Now the press and blogosphere is starting to report on it, too.

Auburn’s press release, the research summary, and slides from the School Committee presentation are here.

It’s Your Turn:

Have you found press about this elsewhere? Please share!

What I Wish The Union Had Said

Maine has had two sets of educational announcements in the last month.  One was for the Commisisoner’s plan, focused on customized learning and a performance-based diploma.  The more recent came jointly from the Governor and the Commisioner, and focused on four proposed pieces of legislation: allowing public funding be used toward (certified) private religious schools, school choice, teacher evaluation and accountability, and greater focus on career and technical education.

Chris Galgay (president), and Rob Walker (executive director) from the Maine Education Association were at both announcements.  News stories focused, not just on the announcements, but on how the teacher union was critical of the announcements.

Nationally, teacher unions have developed quite the reputation of blocking any kind of educational advancement and have become the villain in tales of attempts to improve education for all students.

I have mixed feelings about teacher unions.  I think unions should be the defenders of the profession, negotiating contracts favorable to their membership, insuring good working conditions, monitoring evaluation procedures so they are fair and reasonable.

But the reputation teacher unions have is not for defending the profession, but for defending the least professional teachers, protecting mediocre performance, and preserving the right of teachers to do as they wish, not that that is needed to be done.

I suspect that this reputation is somewhat undeserved, but I also know I have experienced myself actions that reinforce this reputation.  At a special purpose, project-based learning school I was part of creating, several teachers in the union told us they wouldn’t implement the educational program because the union told them they didn’t have to. When we had a workshop day, had bought all the teachers lunch (which we did as a nice gesture), and told them what time lunch would be served, several teachers came to us and told us that we couldn’t require them to come to lunch because it violated union rules (who had required anyone to do anything?  We had just done something nice…)

And I worry that dour expressions of the MEA leadership and the news reports of their critical and negative message are reinforcing that image, as well.  And yet, my wife is involved in some very progressive projects of the MEA that demonstrate a very different kind of defending and preserving the profession…

Here is what I wish I had heard from the union:

The MEA and our membership are working hard to insure that every zip code has a great school, so families indeed choose their local school. – I heard the union say they didn’t like school choice because it would take resources away from local schools.  A long time ago, in the early 90’s when charter schools were first proposed in Maine, a teacher told me he was against charters because the public schools would just be left with the least desirable students.  Yet, these issues would only come to fruition if the local schools were schools people wouldn’t choose.  Is the MEA defending undesirable teaching, educational programs, and schools rather than promoting their own vision for creating “Great Public Schools for Every Maine Student“?

The MEA and our membership are working to propose a teacher accountability and evaluation system that is fair to teachers, uses multiple measures, and is based on best practice. – In the past, I have heard the union say that they are against teachers being evaluated based on the performance of their students. This sounds too much to me that the union doesn’t believe that workers (including professionals) should be expected to be effective in their jobs.  I fail to see how this helps defend and protect the profession. This also seems rather counter to their own efforts.  The Instruction and Professional Development Committee has been working for a while on adapting an evaluation system based on the MTA Teacher Evaluation program, endorsed by Charlotte Danielson and Linda Darling Hamond, and connected to the inTASC Model Core Teaching Standards. The MEA’s own position statement on teacher evaluation reads, “MEA wants a meaningful, high quality evaluation process that is based upon sound pedagogical criteria and multiple evaluation tools. It is in the best interests of students, programs, and career educators.”

Teachers ought to be given the training, support, and resources needed in order to do the job they are being asked to do. – With these new announcements, I heard Chris Galgay say that the MEA is against ineffective teachers being placed back on probation. Again, is the union really claiming that if you aren’t good at your job there should be no consequences? How does this give the message that teachers are professionals? On the other hand, it is a travesty when a teacher who needs help to get good or better at their job is not offered that assistance.  Every teachers deserves professional development, coaching, and support, especially is this day of educational change.  And it is right and proper for the MEA to be the organization that champions this on behalf of teachers.

In all fairness, I’m responding to what was reported on the news.  MEA leadership might have said these exact things and the reporters chose not to include them in their reports.

But I still believe that an organization would earn more power and cred by taking on the issues of the day and being the ones proposing quality solutions, rather that appearing to defend the least common denominator and waiting around for others to propose solutions and publicly denounce them. The MEA is doing some very progressive work, insuring that teaching be a quality profession contributing to the changing educational landscape.  But at the same time, they are getting the most press for when they simply criticize other’s work to improve education.

Or is perhaps the MEA simply caught between the days of the old unions that defended their workers no matter what, and the new unions that are trying to create a quality profession…