On the verge of possibility- schools part 2

“If wishes would prevail with me, my purpose should not fail with me”
Henry V, Act 3, Scene 2

In contrast to the more traditional models I discussed in my last post, Summit Denali was an experience unlike any other. A school in a one level office building, it could appear sterile. I did worry that it almost seemed “all business” and lacked a liveliness that schools possess. But these are conventions and Summit is about breaking conventions.

To me Summit Denali is like a great band tearing down the walls of what’s possible. The record may not be perfect, or even listenable, but it changes the perceptions of what can be done. The name Denali suggests a great adventure and the school represents a provocative statement to educators.

It challenges us to really hand over the reigns, trust kids and get them to invest in their learning. It is true innovation in action- a radically different model that may or may not achieve the desired results. I absolutely loved it.

The school was primarily concerned with teaching kids the soft social skills needed to persevere through a college. It took these skills as being central to any learning and developed a rubric upon which to measure them. It placed the projects that test the skills and application of knowledge at the heart of it’s learning model. Infused with collaboration and creativity these projects are a formidable challenge.

Aside from this the school rethinks the school schedule. Students arrive on a Monday and log into their own Personalized Learning Plan (pictured below). Here they can access information about their progress and mastery of specific standards. The students can then develop a plan for which skills they will attempt to master and how they will do so. This could include personal work time, group work, peer mentoring and 1-1 instruction.

The week then switches between class time, personal learning blocks and project work. On Friday learning goals are reviewed and assessed. Students are then able to see their successes and analyze what didn’t work.

I loved that students were completely in charge of their learning and motivated. Furthermore the school utilizes expeditions to offer real life hands-on learning experiences such as volunteer projects and art projects.

These expeditions allow Summit Denali to offer faculty incomparable PD. Teachers have up to 40 days PD a year. They are fully invested as learners as well as in their role as teachers. In this way Summit has been able to leverage teachers to help in the creation of it’s online platform and programs.

While I worry that Summit does not offer a rounded curriculum, and that students miss many social opportunities without MIddle School mainstays like sports and band, it is impossible to not be impressed by the level of the work going on there. Moreover the honesty and clarity of the faculty we met was notable too, as they articulated the important point that this school is not for everyone. Under such terms it is tricky to critique it as not offering something for everyone.

The school is not a final product but a work in progress. It’s dedication to pivoting and changing it’s model in reaction to realities is admirable. Indeed they have made over 100 documented changes to the model already. That is a staggering commitment to getting things right by a process of measuring the effectiveness of change and honest reflection. Without this dedication to excellence through change and innovation the school would stagnate, as it is the school is moving forward ameliorating its model continually.

All schools need to have such a dedication to constant evolution. We are never done in the process of innovation. Things must continual move and change to keep track with the changes in our world and students.

This Lean Startup style cycle of validated learning brings us neatly on to the final school I wanted to discuss, USC Hybrid High. At this school the faculty and leadership have demonstrated a fearless commitment to innovating to create the best possible school for students. That is to say that they have not changed just to be “technologically advanced”, their modifications to the model are in order to serve their students.

This school is located in an office building (another similarity to Summit Denali). It was such a strange place to enter and find a school. I wonder how this functional decision effects students as they enter a office block rather than the traditional school yard. Does it inspire them to achieve the careers that are practiced nearby? Does it make work like school?

These architectural considerations are indicative of the choices schools must now make. Not all blended models will be best served by the infrastructure of current buildings. We may need to completely reimagine the school in order to fully accommodate the best learning structures.

That discussion aside USC evidenced such incredible teaching. Teachers used playlists and structures online to give children a model for their written English papers. They were able to give great one on one tutoring as each student worked independently. Meanwhile in Biology we witnessed “do nows” giving the teacher an immediate flow of data.

One thing I would have loved to hear more about was how the classes incorporated social and group learning as we did not witness this. One girl I talked with expressed missing the process of discussing books with friends. As I said we were there for 30 minutes so I’m not judging the model, just wondering how learning might happen.

Most impressively though we met with Oliver Sicat the CEO of the school who was installed last summer following the school’s first year. He was brilliant. A clear leader who was engaging, knowledgeable and direct. He inspired but was humble and expressed trust in his faculty. It is clear that the trust between teachers and management has allowed the school to significantly restructure their model for the better.

In their first year teachers were told to use APEX a software that they did not rate. Furthermore a “coffee shop” approach was taken giving students too much freedom over their learning. Sicat sounded out teacher opinion, and by listening to their concerns redesigned the model.

Out went APEX and in came teacher autonomy. Out went complete freedom and in came a mix of accountability and student choice. This meant that days alternated between more traditional A day  and more personalized self directed B days. By building stamina and study skills they have been able to loosen the reigns on this model and give teachers the choice over whether their class is structured or self directed.

This brings us on to the fundamental point of teacher autonomy Sicat described how each teacher has control over their curriculum. They select software and have a budget for technology in their classroom. They may share with other teachers but crucially can tailor the decisions about their classroom to their children.

To this end it is clear that Sicat values teachers as competent professionals with expertise. He also demonstrated this by teaching a lesson as the school began to redesign it’s model then asking for teacher feedback! How I would love to see some Master Educators and Principals do likewise!!

This collaboration and support was defined on clear lines. There is a great respect between faculty and leadership. Sicat described how he was anxious that the school would not fall in to traditional dichotomies between leadership and management- i.e. “You didn’t get results!” “You selected the wrong program for us to teach!” Instead he described working together to develop clear strategies with accountable and measurable goals.

While USC Hybrid High and Summit Denali look less like traditional schools it is clear that culture and leadership continue to be as important as at any school. We cannot hope to innovate without ensuring that schools have such receptive, involved and innovative teams to support the implementation of new models.