PLC - Extensions to Education Central Office - Comparison to JiT Quality Circles

Prior Background

Starting in the early 1980's, US manufacturers implemented Just-in-Time (JiT) and Six Sigma data-driven strategies. One of methods employed was named Quality Circles. Professional Learning Communities, PLC's, can be considered variations of Quality Circles. Analogously to a Quality Circle, a PLC focuses a school on identifying problems and responding to (student) needs quickly by using data and teams. Furthermore, the twin overarching goals of JiT are reducing cost and increasing responsiveness by eliminating waste - waste of time, waste of effort, and the waste of resources and materials. In short, distractions and disruptions kill profit and responsiveness. The overarching goal for schools is student learning. All activities that detract from this goal are waste.

It should be realized that Quality Circles have a exceptionally high failure rate in business. They need a sustained level of support and guidance. PLC's are no different.

Lack of Real Support is a Reason for Failure

While most Quality Circles fail because the teams don't function well; others fail because they need real support, in the change of administrative functions, from superiors. Real Support can be unpleasant. Consider a manager getting a request from a Quality Circle: "Your policy is stupid... Do it this way... Now!" Consider pilots, graduates of military academies, listening to poorly educated soldiers: "you missed again" or "you just targeted us, you @#$@##@$@." Support means many things, including a change in methods by the boss. Letting Quality Circles die can be pleasant!

As long as PLC's don't ask the central or district office for bureaucratic change, PLC's can be very popular with central offices. This can be seen by the paucity of research and boilerplate statements on what district offices do in increasing student learning. District offices can easily forget that their role in increasing student learning must include eliminating their waste: waste of time, waste of money, and waste of focus on bureaucratic impulses.

Typical PLC-Generated Concerns for a District Office

• Instead of tracking cuts in attendance; track and act on absences; since an absence is an absence (lost time) to student learning.
• The same course number used for two different classes violates the most basic data organization rules. A year long class with the same course number where each semsester is graded independently confuses everyone in remedial course assignments, credit issuance, and transcript analysis.
• Combining district data-analysis software with mandatory test-design software may actually inhibit collecting local data. Integrated databases are a priority, but its the responses to the questions, that require analysis and tight integration. Flexibility in question design (not just multiple-choice) and the student front-end are separate concerns that are about ease-of-use. Neglecting these limits data collection.
• Separating a district SIS from an external grade book, when both are frequently integrated, is the denial of necessary database integration. The structure of PLC's and the routines of RTI coexist poorly with a whimsical district-centered approach to student data.
• Keeping outdated student software, such as six-year-old web browsers, as standard inhibits technology implementations. Stating that this is for security, when the district office uses newer software, creates distrust and signifies that PLC is merely a sideshow at the district level.
• Standardizing textbooks across the district for all skill levels and expecting differentiated instruction to compensate is actually a non-PLC focus. Standardization within a school or school zone takes priority. District driven standardization is a distraction from the main goal of student learning. Student learning for all does not mean the same modified teaching for all. The stereotypical assembly line became obsolete 50 years ago. It serves poorly as a metaphor for education today. Claiming that a court settlement forces this is not true and lessons respect for the district.

Literature

2008's Revisiting Professional Learning Communities at Work dedicates 40 of its 519 pages to the role of a district. Key points include:

• Remove competing programs and requirements.
• Do not leave school improvement to the schools alone.
• Install systems to ensure priorities are addressed in schools.
• Focus on improvement, not on rankings.

However, there is no mention of how the district should be manage itself. This lack of requiring self-reflection in organizations contradicts the need for continuous self-reflection in the schools and the teaching staff.

Conclusions

• It's important for district personnel to be seen as working intelligently toward the goal of student learning, not going through bureaucratic motions. This isn't just for PLC morale, but for enhanced student learning.
• From a PLC perspective, the units of interest are the individual child, the school, and for vertical articulation, the school zone. Surprisingly, other school zones in a district really are no different than school zones in other districts. Districts are legacy agencies, LEA's-only, in a world of state standards and state money.
  
• Districts need to be lean and mean. Delays in providing services, due to only internal district issues, are truly unacceptable. Any district usage of funds denies funds needed for student learning; unless spent carefully. Expending money on schools is the default.

Living By Chemistry - Key Curriculum Press - Ninth or Tenth Grade Chemistry for Everyone

Background

The University of California/Lawrence Hall of Science/NSF ESI-9730634 generated curriculum Living by Chemistry, with Dr. Angelica M. Stacey as the lead writer raises inquiry-based, high school Chemistry to an incredibly accessible level. It simply allows more students with different backgrounds time to practice being a scientist while learning standards. Obviously, it can be adopted as an alternative text at many schools, but its greatest impact could be felt by convincing many students to take Chemistry in ninth or tenth grade, and, possibly, reducing the number of dropouts.


ACT research clearly shows that taking Physics, Chemistry, and Biology in high school correlates well with graduating college. Leon Lederman has convincingly argued that a sequence beginning with Physics First works best. However, with Biology being the 10th grade NCLB test in California, a sequence of Chemistry - Biology could serve students and that state adequately. From an opportunity-cost standpoint, the current practice of ordinary students taking ninth grade Earth Science or Integrated Science does not correlate with college graduation. In effect, ninth grade non-core science requires that students complete four years of science. Yeah, that happens. Bluntly, students in non-core ninth or tenth grade courses do not graduate college from a statistical basis. However, the core science alternative is beset with problems; since many students have weak backgrounds that preclude success using conventional Chemistry texts. Living by Chemistry offers light, engaging paperbacks with numerous experiments to drive students into classes. It helps solves the rigor/engagement problem.

Goal

Keeping students in school with interesting academics and supporting teachers with easy-to-use materials are the purposes behind the Living in Chemistry curriculum. Typical students and science teachers can thrive on the small texts, detailed teacher guides, and exercise kits. More interestingly, practicing Chemistry is real and different from other courses. It gives students a flavor of real academic work. It's risk entices. More students in Chemistry may correlate with the holy grail of increased rigor concommitant with a higher graduation rate.

Implementation

Designate one teacher to offer one to two sections of Chemistry with ninth graders having priority. Make sure texts are approved for full year piloting or satisfy whatever rules are necessary. Try not to issue a new course number - Chemistry standards are Chemistry standards. The next Chemistry class to students would be AP Chemistry anyway.

Debug the course over the year. If successful, add additional sections as more teachers and classrooms become capable of teaching the course. In California, an Earth Science teacher has to pass on Chemistry CSET, but this isn't about eliminating Earth Science, but increasing the number of students taking the core science courses. Remember, ninth grade Biology was rendered obsolete with the advent of molecular Biology 50 years ago. It's time to change. The world has. Taking Chemistry before Biology enriches the curriculum for all.

Why Singapore Math

In 1983, Singapore ranked 17/26 in TIMSS.  Singapore then adopted a new national curriculum for all schools.  In 1995, Singapore ranked 1/41.  Singapore has remained in the top 1 or 2 since.  Hong Kong SAR is the main challenger with Finland close.

Singapore has recently adopted a heavily revised curriculum that is more focused on problem-solving.  The impact of the revision, particularly on calculation/number sense, isn't clear at this time. "Singapore Math" refers to the 1994 revision, with modifications for California.

Singapore Math can be seen as having these distinguishing features:

  1.  Going in depth on a few topics for mastery learning
  2.  Extreme emphasis on building Number Sense
  3.  A coherent, longitudinal approach in the use of modeling to solve word problems

Instruction follows a basic sequence of Concrete - Pictorial - Abstract - Mental Math. One hour per day with little homework is employed.

Mental Math means that students learn to add, subtract, multiply, and divide internally.  Flash cards are barely known as existing!  Calculators are unnecessary.  For example, 15 is seen as 10+5, which means that students may determine internally that 9+6 = 9+(1+5) = (9+1)+5 = 10+5 = 15 or 28-13 = (28+2)-(13+2) = (20+10)-(10+5) = (20-10)+(10-5) = 15. One way isn't mandated, but students must explain their process.  In short, place value and the use of tens are paramount to an extent that is unknown in the United States.  Abstract algorithms such as multiply and carry or long division are delayed for as long as feasible.

Developing models, as precursor for algebra, follow an orderly progression, by doing 1-3 daily word problems.

     K-1 Manipulatives
        2 Base 10 blocks
     3-4 dots/disks
     5-6 Rectangles         

Each word problem is solved following the same form:  Model - Equation(s) - Sentence answer - (scratch area).  Neatness and completeness matter in this MES system.

One implication of Singapore Math is to ask parents not to help!  Americans teach the wrong methods too early.
_________________________

The above words are edited notes of a presentation by Corrine Khoo-Lieu (Palo Alto) of the Pi Project on March 28 in Los Angeles.  Extensive demonstrations of activities were performed.  One of several small training consultancies on Singapore Math.  Richard Bisk (Massachusetts) is another highly sought after consultant.
_________________________

The SmartMath software, written in Hong Kong, used in the CRO, mimics much of Singapore Math. If a district wanted to implement Singapore Math, a rollout works best, but K2 can be done easily at one time. 3-4-5 could follow year by year or one year after K2.

Alternative Attendance Measure in Instruction

Reducing cuts is important. However, contacting parents or student for excuses after a student's return makes less sense now than in the past.

Before a PLC (Professional Learning Community) emphasis, teachers would issue zeros for missing work if students cut. The reward for bad behavior was no work, followed by more poor behavior because students quickly realize that zero's force them to fail in a standard 0-100 point system, which creates more hassle and costs for the school system as a whole and dropouts. Now, students must complete their work: attendance is irrelevant for grading, but vital for learning. More subtlely, the joy of being sick goes away to the student. This approach has been used successfully in summer school for years: excuses are irrelevant. The metric that matters is attendance, not the reason. The three-days-to-change-a-cut rule remains somewhat useful for awards, but no reminders to students and parents to clear a cut need or should be made. Getting students to school is the issue, not asking them or parents for an excuse when they arrive or afterwards.

Furthermore, sadly, there is a correlation between poor attendance and disruptive behavior. Since students can be transferred at no, or little charge, to a County ACCESS High School after four full days of cuts, it actually behooves schools and the majority of students within them to have absences marked as cuts. It gives schools more flexibility in dealing with, frankly, dangerous students.  Reminding returned students or requiring excuses before students return to school is self-defeating and wasteful of everyone's time. It's merely going through the motions of improving attendance.

In short, attendance is the only issue. Excuses are irrelevant. Higher attendance does not result by administratively pressuring ourselves to reduce the number of marked cuts. The enemy to learning isn't cuts, but excused absences! Working this number down would have positive effects.

Possible Metric

a. ID the number of First Period Absences in last semester as a baseline.
b. ID the number of Full Day Absences in last semester as a baseline.
c. Record the number of First Period Absences and Full Day Absences this semester.
d. An increase in First Period, but a decrease in Full Day means a real system improvement has occurred.
e. Decrease/Increase in all absences is the obvious main statistic.
f. Trend the two numbers above and single period skips.

When Multiple Choice Becomes Continuous Assessment with Positive Reinforcement

Multiple-Choice, MC, assessments inhibit long term learning. As a rule, they may work for summative assessment, but not formative. Furthermore, in mathematics, since guessing can yield correct answers, false positives usually cloud software responses. As a result, more MC problems are needed for students to solve in online classes, which usually decelerates learning. One of the secrets of better adaptive math software, such as ALEKS and Carnegie Tutor, is that they employ only a few constructed response questions. They allow a student to show mastery faster than most multiple-choice programs which struggle to compensate for false positives; especially since quick guessing is a common strategy with low achieving students. MC programs generate unexpected student responses because they are too ready to help.  XLPrep and possibly Study Island, are examples of MC software that may frustrate student learning because their response to errors or successes don't demand that each student needs to want instruction at that moment and struggle through it! While at first counterintuitive, pretty instruction is merely a time-killer for many low-achieving students. ALEKS and SmartMath offer simple explanations only after a student, somewhat reluctantly, asks for it, knowing that he or she, will have to read to understand. This may also be a problem with the constructed-response software iPass. It's detailed instruction is beautiful, but students eyes wander during the videos, because they are forced to watched.

However, multiple-choice software doesn't have to suffer from the conventional maladies. In particular, SmartMath from Encyclopedia Brittanica (USA) and Planetii (Hong Kong) demands students answer 30 MC questions in a row without error! Random guessing is automatic test failure, not just a missed question. Students can earn stars, actually limited insurance, to save themselves from immediate failure by doing many problems correctly during earlier practice sessions. Adapting to a rapid train of MC questions seems to turn the problem of inhibited long term learning on its head. Instead of letting distractors interfere with their learning, students quickly seek them out to discard them in the search for a correct answer. Distractors seemingly concentrate thinking, not dissipate it. Finally, the active decision-making on choosing to earn zero to six stars, which allow 30 out of 30 to 30 out of 36 (a missed question generates an equally difficult question) involves the students responsibly in their own learning. They have to decide when to take the test because earning six stars takes a long time. This engagement and active self-assessment is the secret behind SmartMath, which allows issues with multiple-choice to evaporate.

After using many different brands of software in classrooms using during semester trials over the last four years, two programs have worked well together for full class coverage: SmartMath and ALEKS. The results of a quick assessment place students into SmartMath or ALEKS. While SmartMath has a rapid mastery option, students can take a Billy Madison approach: they try to spend only 1-2 weeks per level (six levels total) and start at Level One, which is a tough first grade! With cute, spinning avatars jumping for joy with correct answers, students march through the curriculum feeling their way through the inherent difficulties. As a subtle extra motivator, stressing that SmartMath was originally developed in Hong Kong also raises the importance of each individual's success. Students realize that they are being evaluated from an international perspective. Success matters more.

The Key Results of the NMAP Report.

The tables and what readers infer from them in the National Math Advisory Panel Report are what truly matters.

A streamlined curriculum means that mandated topics need not be 100% of a math course. This is the great unwritten benefit of the report. Without stating it, NMAP agrees with the Core Knowledge, CK, method of using a core curriculum: the core hovers around 50% of a course in a CK classroom. The actual percent of time spent on streamlined curriculum will depend on students and their groups, which is a difficult issue to address in print. This allows enrichment and remediation to occur in real-time, while staying on an acknowledged, understood national path.

The Benchmark Table is what regulates math instruction. The table implies that mastery learning be implemented within a streamlined curriculum and its assessment. It's about learning, not teaching!

The School Algebra Table, California Algebra 2 without conics, adjusts the pathways of the high school math curriculum, striking a balance between rigor and realism. Algebra 2 is absolutely necessary, but High School Geometry, isn't! Knowing how to determine the measures of inscribed angles isn't really vital. Yes, A1-G-A2 may be the standard and wonderful, but A1-A2 works.

All of the comments and responses on research methods, etc. are embarrassing. They really are beside the point. Words on research-based are merely buzz or rants of the chattering class, but a reasonable, streamlined curriculum that demands mastery learning - now that's something special. Are there any comments that the tables of the NMAP Report are unreasonable or a poor starting point? No. In short, opponents of the report, need to ask themselves: are we bricks in the wall? (with thanks to Pink Floyd)

Donation from Costa Mesa Community Foundation

Times are tough, but the people of the Costa Mesa Community Foundation believe in helping students stay in school by completing their math requirements - math failures equals dropouts.  Please thank them for helping sustain ALEKS use in Newport-Mesa. ALEKS is the fastest way to mastering math.