An Unexpected Evolution
by Matt Johns
Four
years ago I was passed over twice for a departmental promotion within my high
school for candidates who possessed masters degrees. While I led committees and was on the forefront of teaching
English as a Second Language Students and Inclusion Students, others were
teaching traditional classes and completing their masters programs. I had always valued formal education
but had a relatively poor taste in my mouth towards educational courses from my
undergraduate days. My perception
of educational programs was of them being overly theoretical, inapplicable in
real classroom settings, and taught by people who had not been in a classroom
for years. The inability to
advance without pursuing a master’s degree led me to Michigan State University
and the MAED program. What I
perceived as a necessity for promotion has led to my professional growth as an
educator, educational leader, and a basketball coach. Just as importantly, I have a newfound respect and
admiration for the merits of the study of education.
My first course within the MAED program was TE800, Educational Inquiry by Dr. Steven Weiland. The course hooked me early by beginning with a look at the historical roots of education as well as exploring some of the classic writings of John Dewey. We read the work of some of today’s most influential educators such as Howard Gardner and Vivian Paley. I was exposed to the “hyper-preparation” of national spelling bee contestants as well as cultural learning within communities. Studying classroom practices was examined through readings about action research. We finally explored learning and educational inquiry through the immersion and observational methods of a cultural anthropologist.
I was profoundly impacted by Dr. Weiland’s course. It provided me with the tools necessary to critically consider educational reforms that were just starting to sweep through my district. It gave me a head start on nearly every teacher in my building when we began to engage in action research studies as part of a Classrooms for the Future technology initiative. Eventually my teaching role changed and I have served as an instructional coach for teachers of ESL students. The cultural anthropological method of providing feedback by observing the class, observing the teacher, and providing the teacher with feedback combining observations and my thoughts has been very well received by teachers. A number of teachers noted that it was the first time they had been observed in that manner and it allowed them to approach my comments as they would a conversation rather than as a criticism. Dr. Weiland prepared me to be a more critical learner and a student of education.
Two courses into my MAED program and the department chair positioned reopened in our high school. I reapplied and was able to emphasize that I was currently taking EAD882, Shared Leadership in School by Dr. Susan Printy. The taking of the course was timely and fortuitous. It could not have come at a better time nor have provided me with a stronger foundation of methods to be an effective educational leader. Visibility and building relationships with co-workers was stressed from the start. At times I found the course content incredibly frustrating. It often contradicted many of the leadership concepts that I saw displayed by the principals and assistant principals within my building. They were closeted in their offices. They sought little input from staff when facing challenging decisions. There was little recognition of the efforts made by teachers and acknowledgments of the challenges teachers were facing. Dr. Printy exposed me to a book entitled “Seeing Systems” by Barry Oshry that has helped me improve the dialog between teachers within my department and administrators.
Two more specific applications of my learning from Dr. Printy’s class truly stand out. One was the application of the norm development process for our Building Leadership meetings. The other was utilizing capacity building as the leader of a two-year, building-wide professional development plan. Three years ago, a young assistant principal proposed having monthly meetings for department chairs and building administration. The meetings were begun with little form, planning, and no norm building. An agenda was created but rarely followed. The overwhelming emotion felt by participants was frustration. By the third meeting department chairs were dreading the meetings and there was little sentiment to continue them. However, others and myself recognized the new openness the meetings represented between administration and the faculty. They also offered an opportunity for the faculty, through the department chairs, to participate in problem solving within the building. Surprisingly, norm building had never been done by our group to provide common language, expectations, and rules for the meeting. Fifteen people cannot simply have a free and open environment and expect it to be functional. I started with four core, like-minded teachers and approached them with the idea of norm building. With their support I approached the principal leading the meetings and presented her with a plan for norm building to help make the meetings more productive. I was apprehensive about bringing her my plan for fear that she would feel that I was overstepping my bounds. She was actually relieved that others were engaging in problem solving and that our goal was to preserve the meetings not eliminate them. My final step was to meet with the rest of the department chairs individually to problem solve norms and get them on board the movement. I went to two of the most challenging teachers first so that they felt included early rather than singled out. These teachers were also relieved that teachers were being empowered to problem solve. Two weeks later our next content specialist meeting commenced with a reading of the discussion of ten norms for our group to follow. Our meetings since have been efficient, effective, and amicable for all department chairs and administration. Dr. Printy’s course was the catalyst for this tangible improvement in my building.
The second clear application of my learning from this course was the concept of capacity building within a faculty. In fifteen years of teaching I have seen numerous professional development plans launched within a district. Some are intended to be short term to address an immediate need. Others intend to fundamentally change teaching practices. Unfortunately, they are rarely implemented to engage the maximum number of participants nor do they allow for maximum by in from the faculty. When presented with the challenge to lead a professional development plan to address the teaching of English as a Second Language students within content classrooms, it was clear to me that I needed to build capacity within each department and distribute the responsibility for sharing knowledge and leadership throughout the faculty. I settled on a “train the trainer” model in which departments would receive their professional development within the departments, from a department member who I trained. It provided me with an advocate within each department. It allowed the trainers to focus on the unique needs of each department. Teachers felt their needs were being addressed and that their content areas were being respected. Additionally, since teachers were serving as the trainers, participants were less resistant and skeptical of the professional development curriculum. I also built capacity by including at least one other teacher from each department in other ESL professional development opportunities over the past two years. As we approach the end of the two-year program, language acquisition level appropriate strategies are being used by every department in the building. There are advocates for ESL students throughout the building. Teachers felt their teaching was supported by our professional development rather than challenged and questioned. Just as importantly, the faculty worked together to dramatically improve our ESL students’ WIDA-ACCESS scores across the board. I cannot say this would have been accomplished without the strategies I learned in Dr. Printy’s class.
Dr. John Dirkx and his course, EAD863 Training and Professional, was also integral in my implementation of a building-wide professional development plan. His course covered the essentials from identification of needs, delivery of instruction, pedagogy for adult learners, and acquisition of feedback to determine success and additional programming. My experiences as a teacher had exposed me to a myriad of different professional development programs. However, there is an enormous difference between being a participant and being the planner and implementer. Dr. Dirkx's class addressed every building block of a professional development plan. Some of my knowledge regarding what is best practice for adult learners was confirmed. Adult learners do need to talk out their learning. They do need to make connections between their beliefs and the content of the professional development plan. Even a train the trainer model must be tailored to fit a specific group of learners. These were all concepts that were incorporated into our building plan.
On the other hand, I was less familiar with data gathering, the acquisition of participant feedback, and with reviewing the success and limitations of a professional development plan. Dr. Dirkx's resources provided a number of tools to create questionnaires to obtain feedback. I was able to use them as a model to help formulate questions and a google survey form for our faculty. When making recommendations to my administration I had hard data to refer to when positioning for additional resources. Another form of gathering feedback was through participant interviews. I engaged in teacher group interviews to get additional information regarding the impact our professional development plan was having within the classroom and with the students. This feedback was much more personal than the data gathered via the survey and allowed us to gauge where some of our most important personal support needs were. It was clear that I needed to address writing strategies and support our math teachers in working with Arabic speaking ESL students. These were two areas of concern that may not have arisen if teachers had only completed an impersonal survey online. It was only when groups of people talked about a year’s worth of successes and failures were they able to articulate some common concerns. As I look back upon my nearly two years as a staff development leader I am thankful for the leadership strategies I acquired from Dr. Printy and the professional development and programming concepts of Dr. Dirkx.
I benefited from all the courses I took via the MAED program and it is difficult to only share the impact of one more. However, I would be remiss if I did not share the impact of the KIN855 Psychosocial Bases of Coaching by Dr. Marty Ewing. I have been exposed to sport psychology before. Everything I knew was from readings that I located, from reading books by college coaches, and through online sources. Dr. Ewing exposed me to Robin Vealey’s Coaching for the Inner Edge. The manner in which Dr. Ewing laid out sport psychology through Vealey opened my eyes to the role that any coach can plan in helping his/her players develop mental toughness, focus, and manage the arousal/anxiety that accompanies competition. Prior to this course I asked players to focus but did not know how to guide them in that process. I did not know how to assist players in narrowing their attentional focus during competitions so that they can block out excess stimuli. Another added bonus was Vealey’s look at the physical impact of athletic arousal and anxiety and how they can impact the performance of an athlete. Knowing the impact of being “overexcited” for competition helped me manage that in my players this year.
This year our team had a skilled player struggle with the mental aspect of basketball. He was fully prepared physically to compete in games but his performance swung widely from highly successful to gripped with anxiety and unable to perform on the court. The head coach talked intermittently with the player and parent regarding the performance and decided to back off the player in hopes to decrease his anxiety. It did not work. I advocated utilizing some of Vealey’s inventories and developing a four step intervention utilizing positive self talk, imagery, attentional focus strategies, and sport psychology inventories to help the player become more aware of himself as a competitor. As we approach the off-season I have been given the go ahead to begin working with player to improve his psychological approach to the game. So many of my other courses helped me become a stronger educational leader. I indirectly benefited students through the professional development I was able to offer and via assisting teachers in working with their students. Dr. Ewing’s class will be directly benefiting the players I work with this off-season and all my future athletes.
I cannot believe my formal educational journey with Michigan State University and the MAED is coming to a close. I entered into it desiring to learn but more focused on an end goal than on the process. I leave it profoundly better as an educator, leader, coworker, and coach. I expected to learn from my courses but was unprepared for the degree of evolution that I experienced. I learned a variety of inquiry methods to help me assess educational trends and my own practices. I was supported by my courses in the implementation of a building wide professional development plan that I would never have conceived of leading when I enrolled at MSU. Finally, I learned more about mentally supporting my athletes in one semester than I had learned in fifteen years of coaching. My educational journey still has many stops and will weave a winding unforeseen path. I am confident in my ability to maneuver and thrive no matter what direction I take.
My first course within the MAED program was TE800, Educational Inquiry by Dr. Steven Weiland. The course hooked me early by beginning with a look at the historical roots of education as well as exploring some of the classic writings of John Dewey. We read the work of some of today’s most influential educators such as Howard Gardner and Vivian Paley. I was exposed to the “hyper-preparation” of national spelling bee contestants as well as cultural learning within communities. Studying classroom practices was examined through readings about action research. We finally explored learning and educational inquiry through the immersion and observational methods of a cultural anthropologist.
I was profoundly impacted by Dr. Weiland’s course. It provided me with the tools necessary to critically consider educational reforms that were just starting to sweep through my district. It gave me a head start on nearly every teacher in my building when we began to engage in action research studies as part of a Classrooms for the Future technology initiative. Eventually my teaching role changed and I have served as an instructional coach for teachers of ESL students. The cultural anthropological method of providing feedback by observing the class, observing the teacher, and providing the teacher with feedback combining observations and my thoughts has been very well received by teachers. A number of teachers noted that it was the first time they had been observed in that manner and it allowed them to approach my comments as they would a conversation rather than as a criticism. Dr. Weiland prepared me to be a more critical learner and a student of education.
Two courses into my MAED program and the department chair positioned reopened in our high school. I reapplied and was able to emphasize that I was currently taking EAD882, Shared Leadership in School by Dr. Susan Printy. The taking of the course was timely and fortuitous. It could not have come at a better time nor have provided me with a stronger foundation of methods to be an effective educational leader. Visibility and building relationships with co-workers was stressed from the start. At times I found the course content incredibly frustrating. It often contradicted many of the leadership concepts that I saw displayed by the principals and assistant principals within my building. They were closeted in their offices. They sought little input from staff when facing challenging decisions. There was little recognition of the efforts made by teachers and acknowledgments of the challenges teachers were facing. Dr. Printy exposed me to a book entitled “Seeing Systems” by Barry Oshry that has helped me improve the dialog between teachers within my department and administrators.
Two more specific applications of my learning from Dr. Printy’s class truly stand out. One was the application of the norm development process for our Building Leadership meetings. The other was utilizing capacity building as the leader of a two-year, building-wide professional development plan. Three years ago, a young assistant principal proposed having monthly meetings for department chairs and building administration. The meetings were begun with little form, planning, and no norm building. An agenda was created but rarely followed. The overwhelming emotion felt by participants was frustration. By the third meeting department chairs were dreading the meetings and there was little sentiment to continue them. However, others and myself recognized the new openness the meetings represented between administration and the faculty. They also offered an opportunity for the faculty, through the department chairs, to participate in problem solving within the building. Surprisingly, norm building had never been done by our group to provide common language, expectations, and rules for the meeting. Fifteen people cannot simply have a free and open environment and expect it to be functional. I started with four core, like-minded teachers and approached them with the idea of norm building. With their support I approached the principal leading the meetings and presented her with a plan for norm building to help make the meetings more productive. I was apprehensive about bringing her my plan for fear that she would feel that I was overstepping my bounds. She was actually relieved that others were engaging in problem solving and that our goal was to preserve the meetings not eliminate them. My final step was to meet with the rest of the department chairs individually to problem solve norms and get them on board the movement. I went to two of the most challenging teachers first so that they felt included early rather than singled out. These teachers were also relieved that teachers were being empowered to problem solve. Two weeks later our next content specialist meeting commenced with a reading of the discussion of ten norms for our group to follow. Our meetings since have been efficient, effective, and amicable for all department chairs and administration. Dr. Printy’s course was the catalyst for this tangible improvement in my building.
The second clear application of my learning from this course was the concept of capacity building within a faculty. In fifteen years of teaching I have seen numerous professional development plans launched within a district. Some are intended to be short term to address an immediate need. Others intend to fundamentally change teaching practices. Unfortunately, they are rarely implemented to engage the maximum number of participants nor do they allow for maximum by in from the faculty. When presented with the challenge to lead a professional development plan to address the teaching of English as a Second Language students within content classrooms, it was clear to me that I needed to build capacity within each department and distribute the responsibility for sharing knowledge and leadership throughout the faculty. I settled on a “train the trainer” model in which departments would receive their professional development within the departments, from a department member who I trained. It provided me with an advocate within each department. It allowed the trainers to focus on the unique needs of each department. Teachers felt their needs were being addressed and that their content areas were being respected. Additionally, since teachers were serving as the trainers, participants were less resistant and skeptical of the professional development curriculum. I also built capacity by including at least one other teacher from each department in other ESL professional development opportunities over the past two years. As we approach the end of the two-year program, language acquisition level appropriate strategies are being used by every department in the building. There are advocates for ESL students throughout the building. Teachers felt their teaching was supported by our professional development rather than challenged and questioned. Just as importantly, the faculty worked together to dramatically improve our ESL students’ WIDA-ACCESS scores across the board. I cannot say this would have been accomplished without the strategies I learned in Dr. Printy’s class.
Dr. John Dirkx and his course, EAD863 Training and Professional, was also integral in my implementation of a building-wide professional development plan. His course covered the essentials from identification of needs, delivery of instruction, pedagogy for adult learners, and acquisition of feedback to determine success and additional programming. My experiences as a teacher had exposed me to a myriad of different professional development programs. However, there is an enormous difference between being a participant and being the planner and implementer. Dr. Dirkx's class addressed every building block of a professional development plan. Some of my knowledge regarding what is best practice for adult learners was confirmed. Adult learners do need to talk out their learning. They do need to make connections between their beliefs and the content of the professional development plan. Even a train the trainer model must be tailored to fit a specific group of learners. These were all concepts that were incorporated into our building plan.
On the other hand, I was less familiar with data gathering, the acquisition of participant feedback, and with reviewing the success and limitations of a professional development plan. Dr. Dirkx's resources provided a number of tools to create questionnaires to obtain feedback. I was able to use them as a model to help formulate questions and a google survey form for our faculty. When making recommendations to my administration I had hard data to refer to when positioning for additional resources. Another form of gathering feedback was through participant interviews. I engaged in teacher group interviews to get additional information regarding the impact our professional development plan was having within the classroom and with the students. This feedback was much more personal than the data gathered via the survey and allowed us to gauge where some of our most important personal support needs were. It was clear that I needed to address writing strategies and support our math teachers in working with Arabic speaking ESL students. These were two areas of concern that may not have arisen if teachers had only completed an impersonal survey online. It was only when groups of people talked about a year’s worth of successes and failures were they able to articulate some common concerns. As I look back upon my nearly two years as a staff development leader I am thankful for the leadership strategies I acquired from Dr. Printy and the professional development and programming concepts of Dr. Dirkx.
I benefited from all the courses I took via the MAED program and it is difficult to only share the impact of one more. However, I would be remiss if I did not share the impact of the KIN855 Psychosocial Bases of Coaching by Dr. Marty Ewing. I have been exposed to sport psychology before. Everything I knew was from readings that I located, from reading books by college coaches, and through online sources. Dr. Ewing exposed me to Robin Vealey’s Coaching for the Inner Edge. The manner in which Dr. Ewing laid out sport psychology through Vealey opened my eyes to the role that any coach can plan in helping his/her players develop mental toughness, focus, and manage the arousal/anxiety that accompanies competition. Prior to this course I asked players to focus but did not know how to guide them in that process. I did not know how to assist players in narrowing their attentional focus during competitions so that they can block out excess stimuli. Another added bonus was Vealey’s look at the physical impact of athletic arousal and anxiety and how they can impact the performance of an athlete. Knowing the impact of being “overexcited” for competition helped me manage that in my players this year.
This year our team had a skilled player struggle with the mental aspect of basketball. He was fully prepared physically to compete in games but his performance swung widely from highly successful to gripped with anxiety and unable to perform on the court. The head coach talked intermittently with the player and parent regarding the performance and decided to back off the player in hopes to decrease his anxiety. It did not work. I advocated utilizing some of Vealey’s inventories and developing a four step intervention utilizing positive self talk, imagery, attentional focus strategies, and sport psychology inventories to help the player become more aware of himself as a competitor. As we approach the off-season I have been given the go ahead to begin working with player to improve his psychological approach to the game. So many of my other courses helped me become a stronger educational leader. I indirectly benefited students through the professional development I was able to offer and via assisting teachers in working with their students. Dr. Ewing’s class will be directly benefiting the players I work with this off-season and all my future athletes.
I cannot believe my formal educational journey with Michigan State University and the MAED is coming to a close. I entered into it desiring to learn but more focused on an end goal than on the process. I leave it profoundly better as an educator, leader, coworker, and coach. I expected to learn from my courses but was unprepared for the degree of evolution that I experienced. I learned a variety of inquiry methods to help me assess educational trends and my own practices. I was supported by my courses in the implementation of a building wide professional development plan that I would never have conceived of leading when I enrolled at MSU. Finally, I learned more about mentally supporting my athletes in one semester than I had learned in fifteen years of coaching. My educational journey still has many stops and will weave a winding unforeseen path. I am confident in my ability to maneuver and thrive no matter what direction I take.