This week kicked off the start of an exiting new year in my district. On Tuesday, we welcomed our newest colleagues with an introduction to the district and a connection to our ever-growing, ever-improving mentoring program.  Each of these teachers had been carefully selected with through a two-tier interview process focusing on the tenets of our PLC and our strategic plan.  Their nervous excitement was palpable as we began the day, and their enthusiasm and questions assured us we had made the right decisions.  Now it was up to us to nurture that enthusiasm and support these teachers as they become integral members of our team.

On Wednesday we welcomed back our entire faculty and staff.  We began the day with a welcome address from the Superintendent, School Committee, and Central Office Team.  New faculty and staff at every level of the organization were introduced, appreciation for summer work of teachers and dedication and support of the custodial and support staff was given. The message was clear, the people sitting in front of us are the most important resource that the district has to support learning, to support our students, to empower all students in our district to excel.  The direction was clear, we will focus on re-building and strengthening our PLC through our work with systems thinking, collaboration, and hard work.  We will improve our assessment skills, develop quality curriculum and implement with fidelity, enhance our communication, empower our students to own their learning, and integrate technology into pedagogy and as a tool to support all areas of our work.  We were reminded again of Fullan, this will be an "undeniably difficult, but definitely doable" journey and we would support each other along the way.

On Thursday and Friday, we began the work together as a collaborative PLC.  I was privileged to lead the learning for several teams; however, I was not alone in my work. Teachers and administrators from across the district showed tremendous leadership as they led teams of teachers in professional development activities designed around the focus areas noted above. Our promise to the teachers moving forward: more opportunities for teacher to teacher sharing and learning, more opportunities for teacher leadership, and more opportunities to celebrate and support the amazing work that is going on in the district.

What does next week bring?  The reason we are educators.  On Monday, we welcome our students back from their summer vacation.  

I just finished a year-long study of the math Common Core State Standards (CCSS) with the elementary teachers in my district as we developed our new curriculum.  I provided professional development, workshops, opportunities to attend conferences, and time for collaboration. We learned, we studied, we stressed, and we developed a solid, rigorous, and authentic curriculum.  The year was coming to a close, and we searched and we searched and searched some more for resources to support the quality work we had developed and the instruction we were ready to deliver.  Every text we opened, every program we explored, every option we uncovered fell short. We made the difficult decision not to purchase anything knowing that this would place extreme pressure on our teachers to develop quality materials and resources each and every day. 

We had been lurking on the Engage NY website, and we were impressed with what we saw. Highly trained mathematicians and teachers were working side by side to develop high quality, aligned math units and lessons.  We desperately wanted to be a part of that collaborative work.  Lurking transitioned to phone call after phone call, and finally Eureka!  We were introduced to the professional development coordinator from www.commoncore.org, Sandra Elliott, or Elliott as she is called.  Elliott welcomed us to the table for training and provided an opportunity for us to purchase the same resources developed and used through the Engage NY project.  For districts outside New York, these materials are known as Eureka! Math.

We poured over the pdf releases.  We shared the documents with our teachers.  We tried the lessons.  We needed more training.  Elliott welcomed us to the table again; however, it would require a trip to Yuma, Arizona.  Hot, distant, Yuma could not have been further away; however, the district serving 10,000 students had also decided to adopt the aptly named Eureka!  I couldn't control my enthusiasm.  Before I knew it, several other districts were interested as well, one of which even opted to take the cross-country trek along side us.  

The university conference room was packed with teachers from across the Yuma District as well as other interested "lurkers" from Illinois, Rhode Island, Louisiana, and Douglas, Arizona and the full resources had not even gone public yet.  Why the excitement?  Training was not about a program, but about shifts in mathematical instruction, embedding practices into instruction, and using models.  Strategies were immediately presented that could be used the first day of school with students.  The problems were authentic, the learning was visual and kinesthetic, and the learning was fun.  As a curriculum director, I would not be with the students teaching, coaching, facilitating and debriefing on a daily basis, and I found myself feeling envious of the teachers sitting next to me.  I decided that when I grew up, I wanted to be a math teacher.  I wanted to return to the classroom and watch the faces of students as the look of discovery crossed their faces. I wanted to be a teacher in a classroom where students thought math was fun, and asked for more.  I wanted to experience students solving higher-order problems, creating solutions, collaborating with their peers, and debriefing and owning their learning. 

Since, I will not return to my district as a math teacher, I will return to train my teachers to use these materials and I will celebrate the successes of their students with them.  I will visit the classrooms often to see practice in action. So, maybe I will not grow up to be a math teacher after all, but I will be there to support them along their amazing work!

For the past few years, Twitter has be an important and integral part of my professional learning network (PLN).  I first began using Twitter to develop my PLN during the ISTE2011 Conference in Philadelphia at the encouragement of some outstanding educators like Vicki Davis @coolcatteacher, Steve Hargadon @stevehargadon, and Collett Cassinelli @ccassinelli. Although I was already an advocate for purposeful integration of technology with a focus on pedagogy first, it was at that conference that I began to truly understand what it meant to be a "connected educator."

I remember attending a forum entitled "Leadership Vision".  In fact, I still have my notes:
Leadership ISTE Forum
6.25.11
Facilitated by: Scott McLeod (University of KY and Castle)
Notes: Paula Dillon
What are we doing for our leaders?
❒ Technology needs to be rooted in the pedagogy
❒ Don’t assume that every teacher in the building is ready to use
❒ Build a demand for it
❒ Need to create a mission and a vision for the school/district and define everything in 
terms of that vision/mission
❒ Training for the administrators and have them use it in their own practice as 
instructional leaders
❒ Talk about the application not the technology 
❒ Must be part of a long-range plan
❒ How does it improve student learning has the be the essential question
❒ Model and allow visits to where it is working well
❒ Use the “look for” walk-through model to have conversations that are reflective and 
not evaluative in nature 
❒ Move away from a tool focus to a teaching and learning focus

After introductions, it was evident that I was one of a small minority of administrators present. The majority of the attendees in that session were teachers who passionately wanted to engage the leadership in their district in creating a vision where technology was embedded into practice transforming teaching and learning.  I came back from that conference promising myself that I would support my district in this transformation; that I would be an educational leader who collaborated with teachers to make that vision a reality.

Fast forward two years, and I am still working on that vision in collaboration with my technology director, superintendent, finance director, administrative team, teachers, parents and students.  Are we there yet?  No.  Will we get there?  We have a vision, we have a plan, and so yes, I am confident that we will.  I am surrounded by like-minded administrators who have varying degrees of comfort and expertise with technology, yet a common understanding of the need to support the integration of technology in teaching and learning.  In district there have been and will continue to be drop-in technology sessions, flipped professional development sessions, teachers teaching teachers, collaborative team times, and curriculum writing sessions where embedding technology is a focus area.  In addition, we will be adding on un-conferences and student led sessions for parents in the upcoming year.  We will be asking our professional learning communities to answer the following essential question as an umbrella for decision-making, "How do our curriculum and instructional strategies ensure that our students can create and innovate, collaborate, communicate, and think critically?"

So if I am confident about my district, why am I writing this blog?  To be honest, I was at first taken aback and then very concerned after participating in an #edtechchat on a recent Monday night facilitated by @katarinastevens.  Katarina asked very relevant questions and the level of participant engagement was high.  The resources and suggestions for implementation suggested were strong.  So why the concern? Again, I was one of a minority of administrators present, and the overall reaction of the group was that a major struggle in effectively embedding technology into instruction is lack of support by administrators.  Is this the current reality or a perception caused by other factors? Whether it is reality or perception, how do we as administrators change that image and become a support to a very organic move by teachers to integrate technology into their practice?  How do we help ensure that our students have both the basic skills and the 21st century skills to compete globally in a rapidly changing world?  How do we become partners in education in true Professional Learning Community fashion?  What are our shared missions, visions, goals and how will we improve education for all of our students at high levels?  

To be done well, we will need to build a strong culture of trust and collaboration as outlined by Richard Dufour and Michael Fullan.  To be done well, we will need to value pedagogy and what can be learned from the meta-analysis of John Hattie and Robert Marazano and the studies of Andy Hargraves and Michael Fullan.  To be done well we need to work as a team with a common purpose.  To change follow Dr. W. Edwards Deming's advice and, "Plan, Do, Study, Act."

I have been a avid reader and follower of the works of Michael Fullan and Rick Dufour throughout my career in education.  It seemed to me that there was a natural connection between the theories and practices in systems thinking and change leadership and the theories and practices of Professional Learning Communities.  I was so excited when I saw Solution Tree's feed on Twitter announce the publication of their joint effort, Cultures Built to Last, that I immediately downloaded it to my Kindle.  I couldn't stop reading it, and must have read the entire text three times over the course of that Saturday.  I messaged our Superintendent and my colleagues at the district office and the excitement elevated.  We could see ourselves on each and every page and where we needed to go as a community. The question was, how do we embed these ideas as we build our own culture?

At the same time, we were in the process of developing a year long-journey aimed at building teacher leaders and maximizing on the ability of our administrators to be strong instructional leaders.  We could immediately see the connection, and contacted our coach, Brenda Clark, to share our thoughts.  She was immediately on-board and our planning began.  Borrowing from the text, Clark reminded us that work is "definitely doable, but undeniably difficult." The commitment from all levels of our district was immediately evident and contagious. Educators have been communicating, collaborating, and working together as a team all summer to design and begin this important journey.  

July 17th kicked off the journey at the district and building leadership level.  Clark and her colleague, Denise Holliday, questioned, pushed, coached and supported us through the beginning efforts to gain insight and baseline data into our current reality.  To borrow from Jim Collins, she emphasized that we sought her assistance in helping us move "from Good to Great" and that this was only the beginning of the hard work on a journey with no finish line. After a difficult, reflective, and exhausting two-days, I am more energized than ever!  I can feel the same passion from my colleagues and I cannot wait to bring our teachers together for the first time under this shared message and benefit from their partnership, collaboration, support, and insights.  We have the skeleton of a collaborative Professional Learning Community (PLC ) defined by the work of the Dufours and ongoing professional development, and now we will have the systems to define the goals, measure the outcomes, and build capacity beyond the life-cycle of any one leadership team.  

Clark and Holliday left us with very specific homework that they will coach us on virtually until our next session in August.  It is important that we develop the mission, vision, and goals of our PLCs aligned to our district strategic plan and school improvement teams.  Each team needs to understand their goal in order to measure their effectiveness and outcomes.  In order to do this, we need to assess our plans and ensure that we are targeting and measuring a small number of objectives.  Clark is coaching us to have all of our collaborative teams understand and own this, along with the importance of the Plan, Do, Study Act cycle.  As best stated by Andy Hargreaves and Michael Fullan, "High performing systems have virtually all of their teachers on the move.  It's a school thing, a professional thing, and a systems thing. The only solutions that will work on any scale are those that mobilize the teaching force as a whole- including strategies where teachers push and support each other" (Professional Capital 21).  We will continue this journey with coaching and support at all levels of our system this year building our capacity to continue the work, and strengthening our skills in embedding the work in our culture so that it truly is built to last.

I have embedded videos below from Fullan, Dufour and Hargreaves below as well as an introduction to Clark and Holliday. 

Brenda Clark was an administrator from Iredell-Statesville Schools under the leadership of Superintendent Terry Holliday, now Commissioner of Education in Kentucky.  Together, using a systems approach to continuous improvement, they  improved teaching and learning in Iredell-Statesville Schools.  In  2008 their district was awarded the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award in Education in 2008.  Holliday and Clark have co-authored Running All the Red Lights: A Journey of System-Wide Educational Reform outlining their journey toward continuous improvement.  


Denise Holliday was a teacher and administrator for the Iredell-Statesville Schools.  Her focus on teaching and learning under the structures of strong PLC models assisted the school district in their cycle of continuous improvement.  They were able to reach their goal of being in the top ten schools in the state by 2010 two years early, moving from one of the lowest performing districts in the state.  

Clark and Holliday are now national consultants, coaching school districts as they begin their journey toward continuous improvement and systems change.  

As we are coming to the end of another interview season, I can’t help but reflect on the process. As a special education director and assistant superintendent for curriculum, instruction and assessment, I have been a member of teams selecting and interviewing candidates for teaching and leadership positions in two districts over the past five years.  Based on this experience, I have been invited to sit on a panel at a local college to provide advice to new teachers and graduate students who are preparing for job searches.  In my opinion, this is an area that warrants greater focus from teacher preparation programs, including coaching and mock interviews. I wonder how many fabulous candidates are never invited to the table as a result of weaknesses in their application packet. Further, of the candidates invited to the table, I wonder how many are not invited back due to lack of preparation for the interview. I have created a list of seven considerations that I hope will assist you in the application and interview process.


1.  The Cover Letter

For most teaching positions (at least in my state), districts receive anywhere from
200 to 400 applications per position, especially at the elementary level. It requires a significant amount of time to evaluate each candidate’s packet. As a result, the cover letter is probably the single most important letter you will ever write. A cover letter that catches a reviewer’s interest and convinces them to review the remainder of the application packet is well-written, allows a glimpse into you as an educator and a person, shows passion, indicates that you have done some research on the district, and connects your beliefs to the vision of the district.
Common Cover Letter Mistakes

• Grammatical and Spelling Errors
• Flat and Impersonal
• Is addressed to or mentions a different district

2.  The Resume

The resume should highlight specific activities that set you apart from your competition. What did you do as a grade 4 teacher that you know the district you are applying for would be interested in, is currently engaged in or is moving toward, and would benefit from your specific training.
Common Resume Mistakes

• List of experiences that do not help you standout
  

3.  The Packet

If an employer asks for certain documentation in your application, do not apply until you have a complete packet. Incomplete packets are typically not considered. To prepare for this, order extra official transcripts, copies of your certification, and copies of your teacher exam results. Ask your references for signed copies of recommendations that you can easily access and provide.
Common Packet Mistakes

• Incomplete Packet
  

4.  The References

Your references should be those that have seen you teach and can speak directly to those qualities when possible. It is best to have at least one reference from someone who is or was a direct supervisor. The more well-respected your reference, the greater it will weigh in your favor. If you have more than three references to select from, choose the references that help you shine. Flat and impersonal letters of reference will actually have a negative impact on your application.
Common References Mistakes

• Letters are not included in the packet
• Letters chosen are flat and impersonal
• You indicate, please do not contact this employer for a position where you are no longer employed

5.  The Common Application

In my state, most districts use a common application service, www.schoolspring.com. Although this is a very convenient service and allows you to easily apply for multiple positions within seconds, it also makes it more difficult for you to stand out from the crowd. As indicated above, the cover letter should be a major priority for you. It is your first introduction to the district. Consider adding a link to a digital portfolio in the letter, and strategically draw attention to an accomplishment highlighted in that portfolio that you know will be of particular interest to that district. For example, if you know the district adheres to Responsive Classroom, and you have evidence of successful implementation, draw attention to your portfolio by mentioning that in the cover letter.
Common Application Mistakes

• Missing Documentation
• Not Standing out from the Crowd
• Forgetting to personalize your cover letter for each district, or even worse, leaving the cover letter for another district attached to your common app

6.  The Interview

Once you are asked to interview, the real work begins. Research everything you can about the district. Talk to peers who may work there. Visit their website. Visit the state website and review their data. Understand their strategic plan and vision.  If possible, watch a few school committee meetings. Build sample questions based upon what you find.  Ask a friend or family member to interview you using those questions. Select a few prime examples of your work that make you stand out, and place them and your application packet in a well-organized folder. If a question related to your portfolio piece is asked, weave the document into your answer.  Dress professionally and arrive a few minutes early. Shake everyone’s hand when introduced. Take notes during the interview if you need them to maintain focus.  

It is important that you remain positive throughout the interview. You may have concerns about state or federal initiatives. You may be leaving a position that was not a match for you. Talk about opportunities not obstacles. Do not throw your current or former employer under the bus. This will cause the team to wonder what you would have to say about their district in the future. Use this one, and possibly only, opportunity to demonstrate how you are a solution-driven, positive, team-player who has the creativity and skills necessary to support the students in achieving success.
Common Interview Mistakes

• Not being prepared with information about the district
• Not preparing through mock interview
• Plopping a huge portfolio on the table, especially with the statement, “Here is my portfolio if you want to look at it.”

• Focusing on obstacles rather than opportunities
• Failing to connect your skills to moving the district forward
• Speaking negatively, especially about a previous employer

7.  Ending the Interview

Most frequently, you will be asked if you have any questions at the end of the interview.  This is not a “throwaway” question, and may actually be the most important question that you are asked. Although you may want to jump to asking about the next steps in the process, don’t.  Be prepared for this question.  After you have researched the district, come up with some questions that you are really interested in learning more about. For example, if the district is moving toward  BYOD, ask about where they are with the process and how they are going to help prepare the teachers, students and parents.  Questions like this show that you have done your homework and that you are interested not only about getting a job, but that you are interested in that particular district.  Be genuine, and only ask about what you really want to know.  At the end of the interview session, if the next steps are not explained, then feel free to ask that question.  Once you return home, send a brief thank you, highlighting one point about why you the best candidate and why the position excites you.
Common End of Interview Mistakes

• Asking Next Steps without asking questions of interest
• Asking about step/pay or contract - most likely, this team is not the team that will have that information and this is not the appropriate time for that conversation

8.  Internal Candidates

Internal candidates should know and understand the vision and then mission of the district more than any other candidate.  Over the year, I have found that many internal candidates do not fully understand the importance of being prepared for the interview.  I think that there may be a misconception that because the team knows them that they do not need to demonstrate why they are the best candidate for the position.  My advice for an internal candidate, is to follow all of the above considerations, but take it to the next level that only an internal candidate could.  Demonstrate the professional development and growth since you were initially hired.  Highlight positive accomplishments over an and above your job description that you have engaged in to move the district forward. I witnessed a great example of this recently, where internal candidates connected their vision for the position to the vision and objectives of the strategic plan.  
Common Internal Candidate Mistakes

• Assuming that everyone on the interview teams knows what you are capable of or what your vision for the future is
• Stumbling the interview because you did not prepare with a mock interview
• Not asking critical follow-up questions to determine if your vision is a match
• Assuming the job is yours just because you are an internal candidate

One final note, know your digital footprint. You are seeking a position in a school district, and whether or not you agree with it, your private life is not private when you post everything that you do or think during your free time. Conduct a Google search on yourself. Do you like your public image?  Will an employer?  Again, turning obstacles into opportunities, conduct a makeover of your digital self.  Create a professional learning network on Twitter. Join and follow blogs of note.  Create a website or blog that demonstrates all of the fabulous talents that you have to offer a district.  Remember you may be one of hundreds competing for the same position.  Make it count.  Connect. Learn. Engage. Shine.  Welcome to your new position!

There is a misconception that a common curriculum now known as the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) exists in the United States as a base that all states and public school districts are required to follow. This misconception is exacerbated by concerns that one curriculum for all equates to one of two extremes; either dumbing down the curriculum, or creating one so rigorous as to be inaccessible. In fact www.corestandards.org states, “no state in the country was asked to lower their expectations for their students in adopting the Common Core. The standards are evidence-based, aligned with college and work expectations, include rigorous content and skills, and are informed by other top performing countries. They were developed in consultation with teachers and parents from across the country so they are also realistic and practical for the classroom.”

It is important to note that the CCSS are standards and are not curriculum. Often the two terms are used to mean the same, but separately they are very distinct. Standards are measures that allow educators to build curriculum units and lesson plans to a common, measurable goal. While, the curriculum units and lesson plans are unique in the way each curriculum team determines the best instructional methods and resources used to teach students to meet those standards. Quality curriculum plans are designed around essential questions and objectives that outline what the students should know and be able to do at the end of each lesson and unit. In addition, the plans include learning progressions that outline what students entered that grade with, what they should currently be working on, and where they are going in the next grade. The learning progressions allow curriculum teams and educators to provide scaffolds or differentiation for those that need support. Extensions are provided to push learning for students that have already mastered the standards presented in that unit or lesson. These elements do not result in a one size fits all curriculum that dumbs down or limits accessibility.

The Common Core State Standards was developed by a talented pool of educators and leaders from across the country through a joint efforts created by the nation’s governors and education commissioners and their representative organizations: the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).  Once released in 2010, each state had the opportunity to adopt and determine how best to roll-out the standards.  As of June 30, 2013, 45 states have adopted the standards (www.corestandards.org).  Some states have decided to develop a statewide curriculum while others have granted autonomy to the districts. In Rhode Island, the Commissioner of Education, granted each district the autonomy to develop and adopt their own curriculum aligned to the CCSS.  Grant funding to support this work has been provided through Race to the Top (RTTT), and districts have opted to engage in this curriculum revision and transition process in two distinct ways.

I was fortunate to be a part of two districts with two different approaches, allowing me to speak from experience that “common doesn’t mean same” (Sarah Brown Wessling, Teaching Channel). In my first district, we opted to work with a consortium of districts to develop a common curriculum that would be used in all participants. The work was supported by RTTT funds and led by the University of Texas, Dana Center. Participants spent sessions learning the standards deeply and then working together to create units of study. Upon completion, these districts selected resources, created lessons, individualized the curriculum documents to meet their unique needs, and provided roll-out sessions for all teachers. In my current district, we opted to work in-house to complete the work outlined above. After providing initial training to educators on the standards, curriculum teams worked with content experts to further study the standards, develop units of study, select resources, create assessments, and develop exemplar lesson plans. This template was created by our team to meet our goals and objectives, and teachers had a voice in every decision along the way.  Our new curriculum is just that, it is ours. It addresses our goals and our objectives aligned to the measurable standards of CCSS. The educators involved in both projects are talented individuals who understand their content and the needs of their students. They were thoughtful in their decision-making processes and creative in their approach. I am both proud and confident of the curriculum work of these educators, and can assure you that, as indicated by Sarah Brown Wessling in her Teaching Channel CCSS video overviews below “common doesn’t mean same.”