My View
Helping Principals Beat the Clock
BY JOAN McROBBIE
Let’s talk about time. Under new state and
federal policies, most high-need schools we work with at the Community Training
and Assistance Center are implementing more rigorous approaches to teacher
support and evaluation. School districts are equipping principals with
specialized training to conduct classroom observations based on evidence, not
gut feelings, using standards-based rubrics, not simplistic checklists.
The idea is to conduct a prescribed number of formal
observations and informal walkthroughs every year with the goal of improving
instruction. At least twice a year, the observations are coupled with meaty
conversations, helping teachers reflect on their practice and get feedback on
instructional strategies.
When this process is implemented well, principals are
not resistant. “It’s kicked observation up to a whole new level,” enthused one
principal, reflecting a common sentiment.
These principals believe the process provides them
with exactly what they most want — the tools to be instructional leaders.
Suddenly they feel better able to know what’s happening in their classrooms, to
support individual teachers, and to create a more focused and effective
schoolwide instructional approach.
Threat of Overdosing
Yet there’s a catch.
Even the best principals admit that parts of the process tend to fall through
the cracks. Usually what slips is the pre- or post-observation conference,
despite existing policy. Some simply put it off. They may lack confidence in
their instructional coaching skills or fear potential conflict. But such
problems are exacerbated by the clock. The larger the school, the greater the
time challenge, with the squeeze worst in high schools.
“If only I had time to do it all” is the principals’ refrain.
Time-consuming observations are up against an inbox full of tasks. These
demands come with the job. And when crises arise, a forfeiture of valuable
hours, even days, follows.
Given this, when we look at the new observation
process, it’s hard not to see a worthy idea whose execution may doom it. The
focus is right: Principals should give top priority to instructional
improvement. Getting into classrooms more? Talking about instruction with
teachers? All good. But some good things will kill you if you overdose.
So we may need to
think about adjusting the dosage before we flatten our best principals. For
starters, it seems reasonable to ask about targeting their efforts. Does the
principal really need to be a hands-on, one-to-one mentor to every teacher in
the building? Rather than being in every classroom some of the time, why not be
in some classrooms more of the time?
The goal is to have effective teaching schoolwide.
Many teachers already are effective. Some are masterful. These teachers don’t
need the same support as those with lower skills. They need the principal to
orchestrate ways for teachers to connect with and support each other; ways to
share ideas and observe in colleagues’ classrooms; ways for the masters to
mentor those aspiring to mastery.
The principal’s time then can be spent where his or
her expertise is most needed — with struggling teachers. Student success
demands that weak teachers rapidly improve or be counseled out. That
responsibility starts with the principal. It may require being in some
classrooms daily, requiring lesson demonstrations, giving feedback, providing
resources and keeping close track.
Schoolwide Choreography
The principal, in short, becomes a strategic leader.
Rather than micromanaging every teacher, he or she choreographs a learning
environment that attends to every teacher’s instructional growth needs.
This approach helps
avoid burning out good principals. Research suggests that by promoting trust
and teamwork, the principal bolsters teacher motivation and sets the stage for
a powerful impact on student achievement.
This instructional leadership model requires adjusting
current policies on teacher evaluation and support. It means keeping a rigorous
observation process, while making the numbers less prescriptive and the
principal’s role more flexible. Principals still must be accountable for
results. That may require providing additional support and mentoring not only
to strengthen principals’ coaching capacity, but also to help them master the
skills of orchestration.
What we’ve learned
is that success is indeed about instructional leadership, but by a smarter
definition. It’s about tapping the know-how of teachers, not just principals.
It’s about promoting a focused, collaborative, schoolwide dynamic as the pathway
to better student results. It’s about fostering a culture where self-assessment
is routine — “How are we doing?” “How am I doing?” — and no one thinks twice
before asking for help. And for all these things, it’s about time.
Joan McRobbie is senior associate for
national school reform with Boston-based Community Training and Assistance
Center. E-mail: jmcrobbie@ctacusa.com. Twitter: @joanmcrobbie