Emerging from the interview were commentary alignments related to diagnosing learners. The teacher often quantified learners in an 80/20 percent split, whereas as she described the most motivated and highest achieving learners in “the top 20 percent” and all remaining students as “the other 80 percent.” She elaborated on her perceptions of how CYHS is handling two separate categories of students:
“I sort of feel that our district is increasing the achievement gap. We have a program here that I think caters to the top 20 percent of kids and excludes the other 80 percent, and I feel that the 80 percent from the bottom to the middle are the ones that we really need to focus on. The AP and honors-based will always find its way home so to speak, but the middle of the road kid or the kid that finds education to be the vinegar, I find that no one’s talking about them.”
While her concern was expressed for “the other 80 percent” of students, the teacher did indicate that she has observed changes. She stated her opinion that many teachers at CYHS have really reflected on the profession, have looked at what they are teaching, and decided ‘how can I individualize this for particular kids?’ She described hands-on projects that her colleagues have chosen to create for students to undertake in lieu of research papers in an effort to “make learning more meaningful and more relevant for the kid.” She stated, more than once, that she was concerned about creating an achievement gap within CYHS and that teachers are doing their best to eliminate areas where that could happen. Specifically, she stated, “Don’t increase the achievement gap by creating that in your school, and then catering to it; cater to the kids who need you the most.”
From the discussion on diagnosis of relevant learner characteristics, the teacher’s comments indicate perceptions best described as GS4 #14 “Ensure that every learner has appropriately challenging material for his/her skill level that is not the same as every other student,” and GS4 #15 “Adjust tasks for students’ varying interest levels.” She described
5.7.3 Optimized targets
From the context of the teacher’s interview, only one guiding support from the Optimized Targets category emerged from the dialogue. There were no alignments to Interdisciplinary Instruction (GS6), but rather an exclusive discussion on Collegial School Culture (GS7). The subsection below will outline the teacher’s perceptions and descriptions of this particular guiding support. A visual representation of the data collected in the Essential Starting Points for the teacher is displayed in Table 18.
Table 18. Optimized Targets – Coding to the Teacher’s Interview OPTIMIZED TARGETS Interdisciplinary
Approaches (Code: GS6)
Collegial School Culture Influencing Systemic Change (Code: GS7)
No data observed in interview.
26. Engage in collegial support to empower and enhance individual classroom practice
29. Have a shared vision among teachers and administrators regarding professional goals for present and future
5.7.3.1 Collegial school culture influencing systemic change (GS7)
Related to GS7 #29, “Have a shared vision among teachers and administrators regarding professional goals for present and future,” the teacher described a concern about the professional goals of CYHS, as stated in this scenario:
“I had a child yesterday who was concerned about a local placement test at the local community college. She has not taken math in almost a year, and I said, ‘Well, what
have you been doing to study?’ She said, ‘Well, I only have one class, [teacher]. I go home, and I sleep!’ So what are you doing to that child? She’s not going to college. She is going home. She is sleeping. She is not raising herself to the next level. Now, she is probably going to have to take a remedial college course, which you know costs as much as a regular college course. We have put her behind. We may have even pigeonholed her by not holding her to a certain standard. Whereas on the assembly line, there is a certain quality, or it doesn’t get passed.”
To summarize, the teacher described a disconnection between the message received by the students and the professional goals of CYHS. She elaborated on a need to create a shared vision, as many of her colleagues are not buying into the current learning model that has been presented. When asked how she perceives how the administrators have supported her, she responded, “gotten out of the way; stayed out of the way; allowed teachers to do what they need to do in their classrooms.” She went on to say that there is definite teacher authority in the classroom. This comment supports GS7 #26, whereby the school would “engage in collegial support to empower and enhance individual classroom practice.” She encouraged the notion that some faculty members are engaged in superior practices in an effort to “give the district what they want,” but are not getting the affirmation and merit that has been earned. In our next interview, we will hear an administrator’s perspective.
5.8 INTERVIEW #2: PRINCIPAL
The principal is currently employed by Central York High School (CYHS). On the survey, he indicated that he has 16-20 years of total public-school experience and further indicated that he has been working at CYHS for the past 6-10 years. He has earned a doctoral degree.
5.8.1 Essential starting points
The focus with the principal includes extensive reflections on professional development and opportunities for students to have access to technology via a learning management system. A visual representation of the data collected in the Essential Starting Points for the principal is displayed in Table 19.
Table 19. Essential Starting Points – Coding to the Principal’s Interview ESSENTIAL STARTING POINTS Professional Development for Teachers
(Code: GS1)
Readily Available Technology for ALL
Students (Code: GS2) 1. Engage in intra-district professional development to support
personalized learning
4. Participate in professional development aligned to my own professional goals and interests
8. Use technology to individualize instruction
5.8.1.1 Professional development for teachers (GS1)
The principal’s discussion of professional development was solely focused on what CYHS has provided, rather than other sources of training. He spoke to “developing capacity” and providing
internal meetings that scaffold learning for teachers possessing different levels of knowledge with personalized learning practices. As he stated, “the idea is that they [teachers] can go back after the day, talk to their colleagues, and then they can implement into their classrooms. Developing capacity, again, is our biggest hurdle and challenge moving forward.” He characterizes such meeting opportunities as professional learning spaces full of contestation and inquiry, rather than formalized professional development activities.
When probed about how external influences impact professional development at CYHS, he stated the following:
“We have gone to different conferences where Mass Customized Learning is the focus. Those, for us, have been more affirmation that we are already doing most of the things that other school districts are; so, there have been other workshops, other conferences to go to that are focused on Mass Customized Learning, so yes. There is professional development around that, but not as robust as some other things that are out there.” He continued to describe opportunities for professional learning as “assigned” as mandatory engagement, but specified that all of his colleagues have a choice in what they want to study, or how they might serve via committee, while working in the district. The principal explained that opportunities for colleagues to assemble and discuss personalized learning occur approximately once per month, but a core group of building representatives then go to the district level to engage in a “holistic conversation, K-12.”
opportunity for collaboration and communication to occur among colleagues, even though the description appears to be more collegial-learning minded than formalized and planned professional development.