|
posted by:
|
Jane Hazen Dessecker
on May 19, 2003
at 10:28AM
|
|
subject:
|
capacity for continuous improvement
|
Legacies versus sustainability as the major result of LSCs! What a
thought provoking article. I would like to see this idea discussed in
depth at a PI meeting to see if it is as reaffirming to others as it is
to us. It is something I have thought about since our first
elementary science LSC ended two years ago. As we currently have a
secondary science LSC in its last year and now have begun our MSP to
scale up mathematics, I have spent much time thinking of the true
value of what we have been working on. Our elementary LSC was
successful in increasing student achievement, but as we enter a new
phase with new state standards, new state tests, we begin the
curriculum process all over again.... I think the outcome will be
favorable to hands-on, minds-on science, but there are some saying they
can not provide the professional development that is needed now that
the LSC funding is over. If we lose in program (curriculum) what we
accomplished in the last eight years (loss of sustainability), there
will still be significant legacies that our LSC contributed to:
ENHANCED LEADERSHIP CAPACITY will benefit our community for many many
years. Our elementary project was designed by six classroom teachers
and myself in 1992. All six stayed with the project leadership team
for the entire effort (2001)....almost ten years. Everyone changed
positions in the county, but they stayed with the project. Four of the
six teachers became the curriculum directors in their districts- the
top instructional leadership position. I moved from science consultant
to the director of instruction for the county as well. This year one
person that became a curriculum director, became a superintendent. The
impact these indviduals are having on guiding the leadership for all
disciplines and all districts in phenomenal. I could repeat the same
type of examples for the next two levels of teacher involvement:
teacher coach and lead teachers. For both a significant number have
moved in leadership positions: principals, curriculum coordinators,
gifted coordinators where their ideas about learner centered
instruction can impact many more teachers than their sole classroom.
The impact and legacy of our hands-on minds-on science program will be
felt for a long time. These individuals in district and county wide
leadership positions have a belief in the lead teacher model and the
involvement of teachers in on-going study groups. We now have a lead
teacher network for all four core disciplines: science, math, social
studies, and language arts. We replicated the model because it is a
model that works! Our LSC also began with after schools study groups
of teachers who met to work on CI and were paid a stipend. We have
moved to study groups for all teachers that are occuring during the
regular school day. Professional learning communities have been
recognized by administators as the way to make continuous improvement
of student achievement. Over 75% of our buildings have regular time in
the day for teacher teams to meet. I think this model will increase
and will be sustained for a long time.
When I think back about our first LSC, the legacies it has left in
terms of impact on individuals who increased their ability to make an
impact on others is the true value of the initiative. The spin-offs in
terms of additional projects (a second LSC and a MSP) has also been
very valuable.
|
|
