©  2012  SAIS  www.sais.org  

   

the  conversation  continues  inside  of  

SAISconnect  http://saisconnect.sais.org  

 

ANCHORS,  DAMS,  AND  SILOS  Grant  Lichtman’s  Wrap  Up  By:  Holly  Chesser,  SAIS  Published:  December  2012    If  you  read  Grant  Lichtman’s  blog,  The  Learning  Pond,  chronicling  his  educational  journey  across  the  nation  in  pursuit  of  innovating  schools  in  the  hopes  that  you’ll  discover  a  template  for  innovation,  you’re  likely  to  be  disappointed.    What  he’s  learned  through  his  travels  is  that  there  is  no  easy  tool-­‐kit  for  schools  to  use,  no  simple  “Innovation  for  Dummies”  approach  to  ensure  sustainable  and  systemic  change.        Instead,  as  he  explained  in  his  Lunch  and  Learn  presentation  at  SAIS  headquarters  last  month,  each  school  has  chosen  its  unique  path  to  innovation  based  on  the  mission  of  its  school.      Nevertheless,  each  school  does  share  a  common  impetus  for  action:  a  recognition  that  the  primary  obligation  of  a  school  is  to  teach  its  students  to  become  self-­‐evolving  learners.    Reducing  this  understanding  to  three  words,  Lichtman  asserts,  “It’s  about  Dewey.”    For  all  the  hype  about  21st  century  skills,  America’s  educational  thought  leaders  seems  to  have  forgotten  that  the  wisdom  that  undergirds  this  new   movement  was  expressed  by  Dewey  over  a  century  ago:  the   purpose  of  school  is  not  and  never  should  have  been  the   acquisition  of  a  pre-­‐determined  set  of  skills  or  content   knowledge.    Instead,  Dewey  argues,  education  offers  the   student  the  opportunity  to  realize  his  full  potential  and  the   ability  to  use  the  skills  that  he  develops  for  the  greater  good.  In  The  Child  and  the  Curriculum  (1902),  Dewey  urges,  “Abandon  the  notion  of  subject-­‐matter  as  something  fixed  and  ready-­‐made  in  itself,  outside  the  child’s  experience;  cease  thinking  of  the  child’s  experience  as  also  something  hard  and  fast;  see  it  as  something  fluent,  embryonic,  vital;  and  we  realize  that  the  child  and  the  curriculum  are  simply  two  limits  which  define  a  single  process.”        Some  of  the  educators  in  the  schools  Lichtman  visited  claim  a  moral  responsibility  to  teach  in  a  very  different  way,  asserting  that  they  must  educate  students  for  their  future  instead  of  out  of  the  teachers’  past.  For  others,  the  advent  of  the  Internet,  providing  universal  access  to  information,  has  forced  them  to  relinquish  their  previous  role  as  purveyor  of  knowledge  in  the  “sit-­‐and-­‐get”  paradigm  of  the  19th  and  20th  centuries.  They  now,  according  to  Lichtman,  recognize  the  wisdom  in  Dewey’s  model  and  are  incorporating  real-­‐world  experiences  and  authentic  problem-­‐solving  challenges  into  the  students’  daily  lives,  living  out  Dewey’s  maxim  that  “education  is  a  process  of  living  and  not  preparation  for  future  living.”    Of  course,  each  school  approaches  innovation  through  the  lens  of  its  specific  mission  statement,  but  all  seem  to  ask  the  same  essential  question,  “How  will  the  change  we  undertake  improve  student  learning?”    

Grant  Lichtman’s  three  words:    

“It’s  about  Dewey”  

   

©  2012  SAIS  www.sais.org  

   

the  conversation  continues  inside  of  

SAISconnect  http://saisconnect.sais.org  

 

Traveling  from  his  home  base  in  California  and  completing  his  journey  four  months  later  in  Texas,  Lichtman  visited  over  60  schools,  of  which  roughly  a  third  are  SAIS  members.  He  discovered  in  his  conversations  that  these  schools  have  wrestled  to  acknowledge  and  overcome  three  main  obstacles:  anchors,  dams,  and  silos.      Anchors  revolve  around  issues  of  ego  and  ownership  related  to  subject,  time,  and  space.  Many  teachers  struggle  to  cut  these  bonds  that  make  them  the  center  and  master  of  their  classrooms.    Nevertheless,  as  Grant  explained,  those  that  surrender  authoritative  power  discover  that  “students  fill  that  vacuum  just  like  any  other  vacuum  in  nature.”    The  dam  often  cited  as  the  strongest  challenge  

to  innovation  is  The  College  Board  and  its  role  in  college  admissions.    Wanting  to  approach  subject  matter  as  it  relates  to  student  experience,  many  of  these  schools  are  in  the  process  of  abandoning  the  mile  wide,  inch  deep  nature  of  curriculum  demanded  by  AP  tests.    Believing  strongly  that  their  alternate  models  offer  richer  experiences  and  ultimately  improve  retained  student  learning,  these  schools  have  worked  hard  to  educate  their  communities  and  the  colleges  to  which  their  students  apply  of  the  value  of  the  changes  they’ve  undertaken.    Lastly,  innovating  schools  have  had  to  take  jackhammers  to  the  silos  that  they’ve  imposed  on  themselves  over  the  years.  Divisional  silos  and  discipline  silos  make  collaboration  and  connectivity  impossible.  As  Dewey  himself  explains,  “In  school  each  of  the  subjects  is  classified.    Facts  are  torn  away  from  their  original  place  in  experience  and  rearranged  with  reference  to  some  general  principle.”    Yet  this  practice  is  antithetical  to  real-­‐world  experience,  as  “things  do  not  come  to  the  individual  pigeon-­‐holed.”    In  order  to  make  learning  relevant  and  authentic,  students  need  to  see  the  relationships  between  subjects  and  the  acculturation  that  takes  place  as  they  move  from  grade  to  grade  and  division  to  division.    In  fact,  a  few  of  these  schools  no  longer  even  use  the  word  interdisciplinary,  preferring  instead  to  view  themselves  as  tending  towards  non-­‐disciplinary  learning.      As  Lichtman  found,  pulling  up  anchors,  releasing  dams,  and  busting  silos  are  no  easy  tasks.  In  fact,  he  recalls  a  principal  at  one  school  he  visited  expressing  this  frustration  by  putting  her  head  in  her  hands  and  questioning,  “Why  is  this  so  hard?”  Yet  Lichtman  asserts,  there  is  a  difference  between  what  is  truly  difficult  and  what  is  merely  uncomfortable.  Schools  generally  pride  themselves  on  their  collective  congenial  nature  and  their  respect  for  community.  However,  innovative  change  requires  that  schools  focus  instead  on  building  collegiality  in  the  pursuit  of  student  learning.    Schools  that  want  to  establish  face  validity  for  their  strategic  plans  may  ultimately  need  to  ruffle  some  feathers.    But  if  improvement  efforts  are  aimed  at  and  articulated  as  clear,  concrete  goals  to  promote  student  achievement  and  the  fulfillment  of  the  school  mission,  individuals  and  resources  can  be  aligned  to  produce  dramatic,  sustainable  change.    Although  Lichtman  emphasizes  that  each  school  must  approach  innovation  as  it  relates  to  its  specific  mission  and  vision  statements,  there  are  broad,  shared  themes  that  resonate  through  the  innovative  efforts  of  the  SAIS  member  schools  which  he  visited:  visionary  and  sometimes  even  

Grant  Lichtman  

   

©  2012  SAIS  www.sais.org  

   

the  conversation  continues  inside  of  

SAISconnect  http://saisconnect.sais.org  

 

courageous  leadership,  the  refinement  and  clarification  of  mission  as  it  relates  to  the  individual  student,  the  pursuit  of  a  dream  team,  and  continual,  extensive  professional  development.      As  Jamie  Baker  of  The  Martin  Institute  remarked,  “Excellence  is  never  accidental.  Innovation  requires  leadership,  vision,  and  courage.”  Strong  school  leadership  has  always  been  a  hallmark  of  great  schools,  but  Lichtman  in  his  travels  was  able  to  qualify  the  characteristics  that  define  strength:  humility,  commitment,  insight,  and  communication.  In  2007,  Collegiate  Head  Keith  Evans  issued  his  “Head’s  Challenge,”  encouraging  faculty  members  on  a  volunteer  basis  to  “learn  about  what  was  possible  in  education.”  Three  groups  grabbed  batons,  visiting  schools  of  excellence,  researching  best  practices  in  education,  and  engaging  with  the  da  Vinci  Center  at  VCU  to  study  design  thinking.    Similarly,  Lichtman  reports,  Baylor  Head  Scott  Wilson  travels  with  faculty  members  to  visit  more  than  20  schools,  both  public  and  private,  annually,  asserting,  “I  have  never  walked  into  a  school  and  failed  to  learn  something  useful  and  new.”  Recognized  as  a  visionary  and  humble  educator  by  his  staff,  Lee  Burns,  Presbyterian  Day  School  Head,  recognizes  that  change  cannot  happen  overnight;  instead,  it  requires  the  steady  hand  of  leadership  to  guide  the  full  community  toward  its  inception.  As  Burns  explains,  “We  are  building  an  ethos  and  culture  of  growth,  of  teachers  as  life-­‐long  learners.  We  pose  provocative  questions  to  ourselves  as  a  community  on  subjects  both  within  and  outside  of  the  specific  field  of  education.”  Lichtman’s  blog  is  replete  with  stories  of  headmasters,  other  administrators,  and  classroom  teachers  assuming  the  traditional  role  of  leader-­‐learner  and  guiding  their  colleagues  to  better  understandings  of  how  to  enhance  student  learning.    For  many  of  these  schools,  that  process  leads  to  a  revision  of  the  school’s  mission  and  an  articulation  of  the  characteristics  they  wish  to  develop  in  each  graduate.    After  developing  a  detailed  educational  philosophy  statement  incorporating  NAIS’s  six  C’s  of  21st  century  education,  Randolph  School  (AL)  revised  its  mission  statement,  which  they  expect  the  faculty  to  embrace  as  the  “DNA  of  the  school.”  Revolving  their  current  mission  around  inquiry,  innovation,  and  impact,  Mount  Vernon  Presbyterian  School  (GA)  is  aligning  its  teaching  strategies  around  six  habits  of  mind,  what  they  call  the  “Mount  Vernon  Mind,”  emblazoned  on  posters  throughout  the  campus.  As  one  administrator  explains,  “Everybody  is  part  of  the  mission  statement;  everyone  knows  what  we  are  doing  and  can  speak  to  it.”  Likewise,  Porter  Gaud  (SC)  has  established  its  “Goals  of  a  Graduate”  focused  around  four  major  categories,  which  they  use  both  to  align  curriculum  and  resources  and  to  develop  teaching  strategies.  The  school  has  begun  to  see  a  strong  impetus  to  action,  explaining,  “You  have  to  create  pressure  to  change  or  you  will  never  overcome  the  inertia  of  our  traditions.”  Perhaps  most  remarkably,  Charlotte  Latin’s  (SC)  mission  statement  does  not  even  mention  college  preparation  or  academic  rigor;  instead,  they  focus  on  their  core  values,  believing  that  when  you  create  “a  learning  environment  around  inspiration,  encouragement,  empowerment,  growth-­‐promotion,  and  opportunity,  high  academic  achievement  is  a  natural  result.”    

   

©  2012  SAIS  www.sais.org  

   

the  conversation  continues  inside  of  

SAISconnect  http://saisconnect.sais.org  

 

However,  these  schools  acknowledge  that  moving  away  from  the  structure  that  has  characterized  education  for  the  past  century  has  been  difficult  for  many  people.  Glyn  Cowlishaw,  Head  of  Providence  Day  School  (NC),  noted  to  Lichtman  that  his  school  has  experienced  grief  as  they  let  go  of  the  traditional,  safe  methodology  of  the  past,  a  phase  he  cites  as  a  critical  part  of  organizational  change.  Nevertheless,  he  argues,  “We  want  to  be  on  the  leading,  not  bleeding,  edge.”  Determined  to  refocus  its  mission  from  a  classic  “support  the  whole  child”  independent  school  to  an  innovative  school  that  prepares  students  for  a    “complex  and  interdependent  world,”  Doreen  Kelly,  Head  of  Ravenscroft  School,  concedes,  “In  some  ways  we  have  to  be  less  congenial  and  more  collegial,  more  courageous.    A  few  people  that  we  tolerated  in  the  past  have  had  to  move  on;  for  the  vast  majority  this  is  liberating,  allowing  people  to  be  up  front  and  open  about  what  frustrates  them  and  doing  something  about  it.”  When  Head  Annette  Smith  arrived  at  The  Hutchison  School  (TN)  thirteen  years  ago,  the  board  encouraged  her  to  “plan  with  courage.”  She  did,  and  the  school  endured  four  years  of  30%  teacher  attrition  as  individuals  uncomfortable  with  the  changes  moved  on.  Today,  the  school  boasts  a  committed  faculty  devoted  singularly  to  “what  is  best  for  the  girls.”  None  of  these  schools  takes  lightly  how  difficult  these  changes  have  been  for  many  individuals  in  their  communities.  Nevertheless,  they  remain  committed  to  excellence  in  curriculum  and  pedagogy,  recognizing  that  the  de  facto  purpose  of  school  –  student  learning  –  must  remain  central  to  their  missions.    The  key,  according  to  Lichtman,  is  to  assemble  good  teams  and  to  set  up  systems  to  institutionalize  worthy  ideas.  Presbyterian  Day  School  established  a  Teaching  and  Learning  Committee,  “a  group  of  faculty  with  rotating  memberships  that  acts  as  incubator,  gatekeeper,  and  facilitator  of  innovative  ideas.”  Collegiate  School  has  sent  30  of  its  employees  through  a  leadership  course  developed  by  the  University  of  Richmond  Business  School  that  focuses  on  decision-­‐making,  strategic  thinking,  and  project  management.  Teachers  at  Woodward  Academy  (GA)  created  Woodward  Academy  Innovation  in  the  Classroom,  or  WA,  Inc.,  a  student-­‐teacher  collaborative  effort  to  examine  best  practices  in  pedagogy.  Engaging  in  “judicious  experimentation,”  a  cornerstone  of  its  mission  statement,  Norfolk  Academy  (VA)  created  a  summer  faculty  professional  development  program,  which  pays  faculty  to  design  and  write  curriculum.  St.  George’s  School  (TN)  divested  of  textbooks  years  ago,  and  teachers  have  designed  most  of  their  own  curriculum.  As  one  student  noted,  classes  are  not  “textbook  driven.  It  is  only  relevant  if  I  can  make  connections  to  my  own  life.”  Through  a  faculty/student  collaborative  effort,  The  Lovett  School  (GA)  is  investigating  new  classroom  design  models  that  focus  on  student-­‐generated  content  rather  than  teacher-­‐centered  direction.  The  Randolph  School  requires  every  faculty  member  to  be  part  of  a  professional  learning  committee  (PLC)  and  has  committed  resources  and  training  of  its  leaders  to  ensure  the  success  of  these  committees.  Ravenscroft,  working  with  The  Center  for  Creative  Leadership,  has  instituted  a  professional  develop  program  focused  on  leadership  and  citizenship  skills.  As  Assistant  Head  Colleen  Ramsden  explains,  “Culture  eats  strategy  for  breakfast;  culture  can  wait  out  change,  and  we  could  not  let  that  happen.  We  are  creating  a  common  language  and  mindset  of  what  the  pedagogy  of  leadership  is,  from  adult  through  student  so  every  teacher  feels  confident  about  how  to  infuse  leadership  and  citizen  training  in  their  classroom  and  content  area.  The  faculty  did  not  want  this  focus  on  leadership  and  

   

©  2012  SAIS  www.sais.org  

   

the  conversation  continues  inside  of  

SAISconnect  http://saisconnect.sais.org  

 

citizenship  to  be  another  flavor  of  the  month;  we  wanted  sustainable  training,  which  we  got  with  serious  administration  and  board  support.”        Lichtman  documents  that  these  schools  have  faculty  members  whose  titles  reflect  their  focus  on  innovation:  Director  of  21st  Century  Teaching,  Assistant  to  the  Head  for  Strategic  Affairs,  Lead  of  the  Navigation  Team,  Design  Thinking  Coordinator,  Director  of  Coaching  and  Mentoring  for  Teachers;  one  school  even  facetiously  claims  to  have  a    “Chief  Irritant  Officer,”  so  affectionately  named  by  her  leadership  team  for  her  willingness  to  challenge  the  system  in  the  name  of  student  learning.  Interestingly,  Lichtman  cites  no  school  that  focuses  on  how  many  degrees  its  teachers  possess  or  their  years  of  experience;  instead,  these  schools  want  their  teachers  to  develop  growth  mind-­‐sets  and  seek  adaptability.  In  short,  the  key  to  innovation  for  these  schools  is  assembling  what  many  of  them  call  a  “dream  team,”  educators  committed  to  fulfilling  the  missions  of  their  schools,  researchers  intent  on  discovering  how  students  learn  best,  and  collaborators  focused  on  learning  from  each  other.    As  one  middle  school  student  at  The  Hutchison  School  shared,  “I  think  teachers  are  changing.  Now  teachers  are  more  like  the  lead  learner  in  the  class.  They  are  learning  with  us  but  they  are  just  the  leader.”    In  one  post  on  his  blog,  Lichtman  strays  from  his  daily  showcase  of  innovative  schools  and  offers  “three  easy  steps  to  rapidly  innovate  at  your  school.”  First,  “distribute  the  blog  posts  from  my  school  visits  to  individuals  or  teams  of  faculty,  staff,  and  trustees.  Ask  them  to  think  of  a  bunch  of  questions  that  fit  the  simple  form:  ‘What  if  our  school  did  _____________  just  like  _____________  (fill  in  the  name  of  the  school  they  are  reading  about)  is  already  doing.”  Second,  he  advises,  “filter  the  results  for  innovations  that  would  potentially  add  to  your  value  proposition.”    And  lastly,  he  asserts,  “Just  do  it.”      Is  your  school  ready  to  get  in  the  game?                 Click  here  for  the  list  of  

schools  visited  by  Grant.