Speed Counts When Making Successful Changes Across Your District or School—
When to Go Slow and When to Go Fast
Dear Colleagues,
Sometimes the smallest step in the right direction can be the biggest step of your life.
Naeem Callaway
_ _ _ _ _
Introduction
The process of change. . . especially in education. . . is emotional.
For some, the emotions involve anticipation, excitement, and exhilaration when new systems to help students, staff, and schools are implemented and successful.
For others, the emotions involve anxiety, fear, and sometimes anger that “the current, comfortable ways” are being cast aside, and people are made to. . . literally. . . change how things are done.
Sometimes change is mandated and educators, technically, have no choice.
This occurs, for example, when federal laws change—for example, when the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) or the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) are reauthorized.
It also occurs when state laws change. . . as, for example, when many states previously required the Common Core Standards, or now require some other set of state academic standards.
At the district or school levels, however, educational change is needed most times when the “current system” is not producing—effectively and/or efficiently—needed student, staff, or school outcomes.
_ _ _ _ _
But. . . whether initiated at the federal, state, or local levels. . . when educational change is needed, there is—to echo Goose and Maverick in the almost 40-year-old Top Gun movie (sorry, folks, we’re getting old. . .):
“The Need for Speed”
On the Need for Speed. . .
Earlier this month (October 1, 2024), K-12Dive published an interview with Mike Miles, the state-appointed (by the Texas Education Agency) Superintendent of the Houston Independent School District (HISD).
In this interview, titled “For Houston superintendent, there’s nothing piecemeal about school turnarounds,” he implicitly discussed the importance of speed in the educational change process.
K-12Dive: When you’re coming into a state takeover or district turnaround, what is the first thing that you prioritize?
Miles: The biggest problem over the last decade or two, and the reason why we as a profession have not been able to do better by our kids, is this notion of incremental, piecemeal reform. I believe the answer to that is wholescale systemic reform. That’s what we’re doing in Houston — large-scale, comprehensive, far-reaching reforms done all at one time.
In its simplest form, wholescale systemic reform looks at six components. . .
We use a unique instructional model that combines grade-level instruction with scaffolds and a highly differentiated model of instruction.
The second is the quality of instruction. Instruction is key for us. We do a lot of on-the-job coaching. We do a lot of short spot observations and immediate feedback. We do a lot of training on what grade-level instruction looks like for principals and teachers and executive directors. We insist on that continuous improvement mindset.
The third thing is high-quality instructional materials. We have designed our own curriculum for the wholescale systemic reform. . . which means we also provide the teacher with the PowerPoint, the quizzes—or what we call “demonstrations of learning”—the lesson objective, the differentiated assignments. They’re tightly aligned with the standards, and they’ve been vetted.
Fourth is staffing. Our staffing model’s a little bit different. We have teacher apprentices, we have learning coaches, we have smaller class sizes. And then we have just a lot of focus on ensuring that anybody who steps in the classroom, whether it’s a teacher apprentice or learning coach, is prepared to teach well.
Then there’s leadership. We have principal apprentices. We have a principal’s academy of about 70 people who are learning to be principals, and they get paid just to learn how to be principals for that year. And then they become a principal or assistant principal at the end of that.
And then there’s culture—and culture is not innovative. Culture is just something we actually do instead of just say. Culture is high accountability with lots of support, because accountability without support is just fear. But there’s lots of support, higher expectations and continuous improvement. All of those things we insist on, and we support.
_ _ _ _ _
Last year—Miles’ first in the District—they implemented the systemic reforms above in 85 of HISD’s 274 schools. This has expanded, this year, to 130 of the 274 schools—meaning that almost half the district is now engaged in wholescale systemic reform.
Now clearly, Miles was hired with a mandate to change the academic and social, emotional, and behavioral outcomes in the District’s schools as quickly as possible. And in fact, in one year, the HISD went from 121 D- and F-rated campuses to 41 D- and F-rated campuses, while it also went from 93 A- or B-rated campuses to 170 A- and B-rated campuses.
But. . . is the speed of the systemic reforms implemented by the HISD sustainable, will the District retain its newly-trained staff, what is it doing to prevent educator burn-out, and. . . most important. . . should other districts use the same “warp” speed for their needed reforms?
The Relativity of Speed
The answer to the latter question above is “No.”
No. . . the relative speed needed to implement systemic reforms is largely related to “how broken and how low-performing the district (or individual school) is.”
Indeed:
- For districts or schools that are functioning reasonably well, and that need to renew or reinstall one or two pieces of their “organizational puzzle” (for example, a new literacy instruction curriculum or system; a new school-wide Tier I social skills program; and new student Code of Conduct and behavior management system). . .
They probably need to “Go slow to go fast.”
_ _ _ _ _
- For districts or schools that—like HISD—need to make dramatic changes due to dysfunction, disregard, or just plain-old poor administrative leadership or choices. . .
They need to “Go fast to go fast.”
BUT. . . in the first case. . . “Going slow to go fast” does not mean implementing change at a glacial pace.
Because when districts or schools move too slowly in the change process, the process drags, lags, and eventually sags.
That is, the initiative does not attain the momentum needed to facilitate and sustain staff learning, skill, enthusiasm, excitement, implementation fidelity/integrity, and. . . most importantly. . . outcomes.
And when educators do not see demonstrable and meaningful outcomes for their “return on investment,” the initiative “sags” or just outright stops.
So. . . sometimes, speed kills. . . whether too fast or too slow.
But how should districts and schools decide the amount of speed for their change process or initiative?
The Key Variables that Inform the Speed of Change
“Change is the end result of all true learning.”
Leo Buscaglia
_ _ _ _ _
The best research recognizes ten interdependent variables when deciding what speed to use during a change process... at the beginning, middle, and end of the process. . . at both the district and school.
These variables are:
- Leadership History: Districts that have experienced many Leaders in a short period of time or one Leader for a long period of time (or in between) need assurance, transparency, and “proof” that “Leadership” can and will see the change initiative process through.
_ _ _ _ _
- Initial Pitch and Impression: First impressions count, and staff want to know—at the outset—if the change process will benefit them and their students.
Important here is how the change initiative is introduced (and by whom), how the needs and outcomes are presented, what time and training is anticipated, and what will be eliminated to make “room” for the initiative.
_ _ _ _ _
- Stakeholder Engagement: Involving teachers, parents, students, and community members early in and during the planning of the process helps ensure buy-in and smooth planning, training, implementation, and evaluation.
_ _ _ _ _
- Resource Availability: Assessing and securing a “critical mass” of financial, human, and material resources is crucial. This includes budgeting for new materials, training, and ongoing support.
_ _ _ _ _
- Professional Development: Providing continuous, high-quality professional development, coaching, and technical assistance for staff to understand and effectively implement the reforms is essential.
_ _ _ _ _
- Data and Evaluation: Systems, tools, timelines, and resources/staff for data collection and evaluation to monitor progress and make necessary adjustments need to be explicit and available.
_ _ _ _ _
- Policy Coherence: All new reforms need to align with existing policies and practices (or these policies and practices need to be retired or changed) to avoid confusion and resistance.
_ _ _ _ _
- Capacity for Change: The district must determine and have the capacity to manage and sustain change, including leadership stability and the ability to support staff—and, especially, new staff—through transitions.
_ _ _ _ _
- Timeline and Phasing: A realistic timeline that allows for phased implementation, giving time for adjustments and feedback, must be developed. As noted throughout this Blog, “speed counts.”
_ _ _ _ _
- Communication: Clear and consistent communication throughout the process to keep all stakeholders informed and engaged must be sustained.
_ _ _ _ _
As part of the Needs Assessment that should precede their change process, districts and schools need to factor the ten variables above in their strategic planning process. The results should both (a) indicate their readiness for change, and (b) determine the speed of implementation for that change.
A Brief Case Example
Earlier this week, I did the first of three in-services for a district that I am helping. . . through a Needs Assessment process. . . to rethink and renew its school safety and discipline, classroom management and student engagement, and student social, emotional, and behavioral self-management processes.
When I landed that evening after my plane trip home, I had an e-mail from a staff member who had attended the workshop.
In the e-mail, she expressed disappointment and concern. . . on behalf of some unnamed colleagues. . . that they—leaders of the current school discipline initiative in their school—were not involved in the Needs Assessment process or the planning of the in-service.
In my response to her (copied to both district administrators and her school’s principal), I attached the results of her school’s June staff evaluation of the current discipline system. This anonymous survey showed that many of her building colleagues believed that the existing system was not working.
This evaluation. . . and those from the other schools in the district that largely echoed the beliefs above. . . were exactly why the district decided to initiate the Needs Assessment and change process.
_ _ _ _ _
In my e-mail response, I also delineated all of the work—that she appeared unaware of—that had gone on during the summer to map out the Needs Assessment process—including a staff focus group to help plan the in-services. And I noted that I had already visited the district for three days in September doing school walk-throughs and interviewing different staff constituencies. . . including student focus groups from Grade 4 to 12.
Finally, I shared the list of building discipline leaders—from across the district—who had been invited to the very first meeting on Day 1 of my on-site visit.
In closing my e-mail, I respectfully noted:
While I understand that change sometimes is anxiety-provoking and challenging. . . I believe it is important to not let people's emotional attachment to a program. . . that is not providing the outcomes that our students, staff, and schools deserve. . . become a barrier to needed change.
In her follow-up response to my e-mail, the staff member acknowledged and agreed with the “systems change” comments above. Moreover, she shared that her school’s discipline leader was invited to my Day 1 meeting the month below, but could not attend.
She then acknowledged that—if she had attended that meeting—she probably would have “felt more at ease with the comments” I had made at the in-service.
She closed her second e-mail by saying:
Like you said before, change can be anxiety-provoking and sometimes the truth hurts. But to consider that these staff members did not have previous knowledge made the blow a little harder for them. I know we can both agree that our goal is to have unity and buy-in for all. Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to working together!
_ _ _ _ _
If you look at the Ten Principles in the Section above, you can see how many are addressed when districts engage in a sound Needs Assessment process.
You also can see the importance of (and how, in this Case Example, I needed to use):
- Stakeholder Engagement: Involving teachers, parents, students, and community members early in and during the planning of the process helps ensure buy-in and smooth planning, training, implementation, and evaluation; and
_ _ _ _ _
- Communication: Clear and consistent communication throughout the process to keep all stakeholders informed and engaged must be sustained.
- - - - -
Critically, this district is not in crisis like the Houston Independent School District.
After the Needs Assessment is complete, I am sure that we will largely “Go slow to Go Fast.”
But, as above, I still know that the district’s next steps must move at a healthy pace, build momentum, and implement the planned and needed school discipline processes in a strategic and timely way.
Remember, glaciers that move too slow, melt.
As Dan Millman wrote in his 1980 novel, Way of the Peaceful Warrior:
The secret of change is to focus all of your energy, not on fighting the old, but on building the new.
Summary
In any given moment we have two options: to step forward into growth or step back into safety.
Abraham Maslow
_ _ _ _ _
This Blog emphasized that the success of a district or school’s change process or initiative rests on the speed of its implementation.
We noted that some change processes need to be implemented slowly and sequentially, while others need to be implemented quickly and simultaneously.
Said a different way, some change processes need to “Go slow to Go fast,” while others need to “Go fast to Go fast.”
To demonstrate this, we quoted from an interview in K12Dive where Mike Miles, the state-appointed Superintendent of the Houston Independent School District described the six fast changes that he needed to make—in his very first year in the district—in order to turn-around hundreds of failing and near-failing schools.
He said, “The biggest problem over the last decade or two, and the reason why we as a profession have not been able to do better by our kids, is this notion of incremental, piecemeal reform. I believe the answer to that is wholescale systemic reform.”
The Blog then discussed the characteristics of districts that need quick change processes versus those that need slower change processes, and it summarized the ten variables to determine which is which.
A Case Study involving a district engaged in a Needs Assessment of its school discipline and classroom management practices concretized these points.
We encourage districts and schools to analyze just one of their current change initiatives, compare them with the ten variables, objectively evaluate the progress and outcomes of the initiative, and decide how to move “to the next level of excellence.”
We expect that the speed of implementation will be a pivotal factor in either your current successes or the next steps toward your inevitable successes.
_ _ _ _ _
I hope that this Blog has been interesting, relevant, and useful to you.
If you would like a “private Zoom session” with me for you and your team to discuss how the Blog can be applied to your district, school, or educational setting, please e-mail me to schedule your free “analysis and application” consultation session.
I hope to hear from you soon.
Best,
