Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model Handbook for 21St Century School Transformation by Kim D

Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model Handbook for 21st Century School Transformation by Kim D. Alexander - Gary E. Briers - Glen C. Shinn Corresponding authors: [email protected] // [email protected] // [email protected]

Table of Contents

Abstract ...... 2 Acknowledgements ...... 6 Prologue ...... 7 Purpose of This Handbook...... 8 Target Audience ...... 8

Part I. Transformation in a Sea Change ...... 9 Chapter 1. Trends shaping the future of education ...... 9 Chapter 2. Comparing present and future education ...... 14

Part II. Planning and Preparing for Change ...... 30 Chapter 3. Clarifying community values and social influences ...... 30 Chapter 4. Aligning financial and strategic planning ...... 33 Chapter 5. Planning and preparing for change: Roles, responsibilities, rewards ...... 39

Part III. Beyond the Idea: Executing the Plan ...... 50 Chapter 6. Cultivating aspirations, expectations, hope, and grit ...... 50 Chapter 7. Creating an environment for innovation...... 54 Chapter 8. Scaffolding the change process ...... 61 Chapter 9. Transforming curriculum and instruction ...... 69 Chapter 10. Transforming innovation to practice ...... 73

Part IV. Assessing Achievement ...... 78 Chapter 11. Evaluating progress and measuring outcomes ...... 78 Postscript ...... 88

Abstract Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model Handbook for 21st Century School Transformation Our Mission The mission of the Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model is to transform public education for all students, especially for those in small rural schools, to provide affordable access to college- ready, career-ready preparation leading to higher education and industry-recognized certifications and to serve as a state and national resource for such efforts. Our Vision Our P-20 vision for achieving this mission is to: • Break the cycle of generational poverty by creating a sense of high aspirations and expectations for college and career success among students, families, and communities, especially in STEM- based workforce shortage areas critical to solving global challenges. • Provide affordable access to relevant, rigorous education that leads concurrently to 90% attainment of students earning a high school diploma/associate degree and industry- certifications, 90% earning a bachelor’s degree, and 90% of that group earning postgraduate degrees and certifications. • Strengthen a spirit of innovation to transform and extend educational best practice, advance rural school research, and promote P-20 faculty preparation, reward, and professional development. Our Purpose To review the technological-social-economic-cultural change and resulting challenges to traditional education systems, particularly in small rural schools. Examine strategies to increase student aspirations, engagement, fulfillment, performance outcomes, and college and career readiness. Discuss accommodations to advance academic-workplace competence. Consider elements to boost innovation. Examine financial needs for powering transformation. Assess impact and learner achievement over time. Target Audience The target audiences of the Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model include early adopters, school boards of trustees, school administrators, parents, students, teachers, community college partners, senior college partners, and charitable foundations.

Overview of Chapters Part I. Transformation in a Sea Change Chapter 1. What we know about trends shaping 21st Century education and workforce skills. Things are changing. Five megatrend indicators are population growth, the impact of technology, environmental degradation, migration-immigration, and global terrorism. “There is substantial evidence…that the public education system has reached the point where continued improvement will not be possible absent significant changes...” Ascione, L. (2017). These are the top 10 workforce skills students will need by 2020. eCampus News. Retrieved from https://www.ecampusnews.com/2017/06/20/top-workforce-skills-2020/ Bersin, J. (2017). Catch the wave: The 21st century career. Deloitte Review, Issue 21. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/deloitte-review/issue-21/changing-nature-of-careers-in-21st- century.html Chapter 2. Comparing present and future education using a constant-comparative rationale. The effects of build structures, infrastructures, and educational deserts. Importance of community investments, demographics, ownership, and access. Implications for transformation implementation and scalability. Creating pathways to produce productive, active, and social members of society. Guiding questions include changes in 21st century life skills, students, teachers, instruction, assessment, curricula, and learning technologies. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press. Witt, R., & Orvis, J. (2010). A guide to becoming a school of the future. National Association of Independent Schools. Retrieved from https://www.nais.org/Articles/documents/NAISCOASchools.pdf Part II. Planning and Preparing for Change Chapter 3. Clarifying community values and social influences. Defining community core values and social forces and creating vision, mission, timelines, access, engagement, and business plans while remaining responsive to workforce-career needs. Recognizing assumptions, benefits, and constraints. Alexander, K. D. (2016). Five-year education plan, 2016-2021 Collegiate Edu-Vet—A veterinary teaching hospital. Retrieved from http://www.roscoe.esc14.net/page/open/1289/0/Pamplet%20Private%20Collegiate%20Edu- Vet%20Teaching%20Hospital%20Business%20Plan.pdf Kaplan, R. S. (2017). A balanced approach to monetary policy. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. Retrieved from https://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/kaplan/2017/rsk171127.aspx Chapter 4. Aligning financial and strategic planning. Education as an investment in human capital. Comparing past, present, and anticipated educational policies, patterns, legal, financial standards, controls, categories, and income sources. Texas trends and macro vs. micro finances. Unemployment rates and earning by educational attainment. Rural school-level issues. Financing the transformation. Identifying and sequencing interventions that increase performance outcomes and college and career readiness. College Board. (2017). Trends in higher education. Retrieved from https://trends.collegeboard.org/ Lopez, L. (2018).Texas public school finance overview. Retrieved from https://tea.texas.gov/schoolfinancecommission/ Chapter 5. Planning and preparing for change: Roles, responsibilities, rewards. Recognizing and applying adoption-diffusion theory. Steps in coordinating and facilitating internal/external stakeholders. Critical roles and responsibilities of change agents. Rewards of active

communication channels. Establish strategic workforce partnerships—including Collegiate Edu- Nation and emerging business and industry partnership opportunities. Hora, M. T. (2017. February 1). Beyond the skills gap. National Association of Colleges and Employers. Retrieved from http://www.naceweb.org/career-readiness/trends-and-predictions/beyond-the-skills-gap/ Texas Education Agency. (2018). Rural schools task force. Retrieved from https://tea.texas.gov/Texas_Educators/Educator_Initiatives_and_Performance/Rural_Schools_Task_Force/ Part III. Beyond the Idea: Executing the Plan Chapter 6. Cultivating aspirations, expectations, hope, and grit. Essential, consistent ingredients include aspirations and expectations that are crucial for school transformation and community sustainability. The learning/development of the adults in the system is critical to its success and sustainability. Addressing the internal development of leadership while acknowledging the natural in-out flow of critical players is a fundamental element of a sustainable model. Organizational behavior shows that innovators/early adopters typically have short attention spans and move on to the next project quickly. Successional adopters/leaders sustain innovation. It is at this stage that successful adoption and scaling occurs. Duckworth, A. (2016a). Grit: The power of passion and perseverance. New York, NY: Scribner. Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2010). The other side of innovation: Solving the execution challenge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing. Chapter 7. Creating an environment for innovation. Shifting attention to the task of executing innovation. Matching operating environments with models. Building the right team. Dividing the labor. Running a disciplined experiment. Reducing risk and the fear of failure. Creating mutual respect. Recognizing incompatibilities within the system. Sustaining what works while building something new. Dempsey, M., & Brafman, O. (2017). Radical inclusion: What the post-9/11 world should have taught us about leadership. Berkeley, CA: Missionday. ISBN 978-1-939714-107 Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2013b). How Stella saved the farm: A tale about making innovation happen. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Chapter 8. Scaffolding the change process. Review 30 years of scaffolding literature as a method for identifying and using strategies, modeling, practice, and mastery. Scaffolding used for the content, task, and material acquisition. Scaffolding scenarios for preschool through higher education with non-negotiable interventions. Pinantoan, A. (2013). Instructional scaffolding: A definitive guide. Sydney, Australia: InformED: Open colleges. Retrieved from https://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/teacher-resources/scaffolding-in- education-a-definitive-guide/ Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Chapter 9. Transforming curriculum and instruction. Four questions to guide the principles of curriculum and instruction. Dewey’s cycle of learning guiding problem-solving. Implications for college-ready, career-ready learners equipped with foundations, associate degrees, baccalaureate degrees, career development, early college, entrepreneurship, industry internships, industry- recognized certifications, lifelong learning, planned development, public-private partnerships, STEM themes, and STEM/Early College curricula. Camins, A. H. (2015, February 12). What’s the purpose of education in the 21st century? The Washington Post. Answer Sheet. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/02/12/whats- the-purpose-of-education-in-the-21st-century/?utm_term=.67d00f402a63 Tyler, R. W. (1949, 1969, 2013). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/B/bo17239506.html Chapter 10. Transforming innovation to practice. Recognizing innovations that affect education. Building on adoption-diffusion theories. Identifying, nurturing, and rewarding innovation in schools, programs, and classrooms. Horn, M. B. (2014). Why public schools struggle to innovate. GettingSmart. Retrieved from https://www.gettingsmart.com/2014/07/public-schools-struggle-innovate/ World Bank. (n.d.). Innovation definitions and fundamentals. The Innovation Policy Platform. Retrieved from https://www.innovationpolicyplatform.org/content/innovation-definitions-and-fundamentals Part IV. Assessing Achievement Chapter 11. Evaluating progress and measuring outcomes. Evaluation is the alpha-omega for educational transformation. Recognizing the purpose, value, and types of evaluation are critical. Identifying stakeholders and the importance of communication. Continuous feedback/revision cycles of setting objectives, selecting learning experiences, organizing instruction, and evaluating progress. Progress can be measured by adopting rubrics for students, parents, teachers, and school outcomes. Aspirations/expectation trends (of students, parents, and teachers). Collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data to guide decision-making, policies, and practices. College-ready, Career-ready indicators. Long-term measures include social mobility, income parity, employability, and adult literacy. Reporting performance to stakeholders that explains the underlying complexity of achievement and contributes to the collective vision and purpose. Cody, A. (2009, May 25). Five good assumptions about school change. Education Week. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2009/05/five_good_assumptions_about_sc_1.html Guskey, T.R. (2003). How classroom assessments improve learning. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/feb03/vol60/num05/How-Classroom- Assessments-Improve-Learning.aspx

Acknowledgements Poverty runs deep in the heart of rural Texas and rural America. Although the causes of poverty are complex, persistent, and numerous, lack of access to postsecondary education is a significant factor. In the Spirit of Texas, six groups rallied around an emerging vision of the Collegiate Edu- Nation P-20 System Model and its potential to transform public education for all students and to extend affordable access to college-ready, career-ready preparation leading to higher education and industry-recognized certifications. 1. The citizens of Nolan County and the RCISD district are given special appreciation. Citizens consistently supported bold initiatives and the transformation to a 21st-century educational model with their votes, dollars, and engaged collaboration. 2. The Roscoe Collegiate Independent School District (RCISD) Board of Trustees is appreciated for empowering a Bold Vision and defining and redefining possibilities for the future of its children and the community. 3. The faculty and staff of RCISD contributed invaluable knowledge and support while nurturing students, embracing change and empowering innovation throughout the curriculum. Without their commitments, the transformation would be unachievable. Thanks to each of you! 4. The RCISD STEM Advisory Committee actively demonstrated a commitment while providing valuable advice and support. 5. Appreciation is extended to the multiple businesses and industry partners who joined forces in the evolution of the Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model. Business partnerships include Bayer Crop Sciences, Collegiate Chiropractic and Wellness Center, Edu-Drone, Educate Texas, Edu-MakeIt, Edu-Realty, Edu-Vet, Edu-Weld, Global Consulting Solutions, Hoofstock Genetics, MAYA Consulting, New Amsterdam Global Solutions, Office Depot, R.A. Brown Ranch, Surefoot Studio, Under Armor and the list of business and industry partners continues to grow. 6. Initial members of the Roscoe Collegiate System Model were Western Texas College and Texas State Technical College as two-year postsecondary education partners. As the vision evolved, additional partners include Angelo State University, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service, Texas A&M AgriLife Research, Texas A&M University, Texas Tech University, and West Texas A&M University.

Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model Handbook for 21st Century School Transformation

Prologue While holding to its social contract, American public education continues to evolve in its frameworks and expectations. When plotted over time, the rate of change, both in knowledge and technology, is accelerating. In 1647, Massachusetts decreed every village of 50 families must hire a schoolmaster, and towns with 100 families must have a grammar school to prepare students to attend Harvard College (Sass, 2018). During the next 300 years, American education broadened from availability primarily for the socially elite to the provision of post-war public opportunities for veterans using the 1947 G.I. Bill. Schools, curricula, and teacher qualifications improved continually during the next seven decades. However, advancements in knowledge, ever-changing population demographics, and smart digital devices, coupled with increasing complexity, rising costs, and scaling issues, challenge traditional educational paradigms in new and profound ways. Existing paradigms (e.g., entrenched cultural beliefs, traditions, technologies, and processes) have failed to reduce generational poverty, increase social mobility or deliver college- and career-ready students. The old conceptions of either college-ready OR career-ready are no longer sufficient. We must embrace a model of college-ready AND career-ready. We cannot wait another 300 years to achieve that goal. By using a series of contextual strategies, the P-20 System Model is designed to transform traditional education for all students, especially those in rural schools. Strategic workforce partnerships with existing and emerging business and industry add relevance and rigor to the curriculum. The P-20 expectation is for ALL students to progress from pre-kindergarten through planned educational experiences leading to post-graduate degrees and industry-recognized certifications. Student aspirations rise to the challenge when intentional scaffolding, mentoring and apprenticeships are in place. Internal leadership development and succession planning at the school level is an essential component in the Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model. While the natural in-out flow of critical leaders affects sustainability in all systems, it is particularly the case in rural school settings. Policies, practices and funding are thorny issues, but resolvable. Processes for recognizing and managing intentions, processes, and constraints are integrated into the system. In addition, incentivizing innovation and growth are fundamental to the P-20 deployment mindset. Our Mission The mission of the Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model is to transform public education for all students, especially for those in small rural schools, to provide affordable access to college- ready, career-ready preparation leading to higher education and industry-recognized certifications and to serve as a state and national resource for such efforts.

Our Vision Our P-20 vision for achieving this mission is to: • Break the cycle of generational poverty by creating a sense of high aspirations and expectations for college and career success among students, families, and communities, especially in STEM- based workforce shortage areas critical to solving global challenges. • Provide affordable access to relevant, rigorous education that leads concurrently to 90% attainment of students earning a high school diploma/associate degree and industry- certifications, 90% earning a bachelor’s degree, and 90% of that group earning postgraduate degrees and certifications. • Strengthen a spirit of innovation to transform and extend educational best practice, advance rural school research, and promote P-20 faculty preparation, reward, and professional development. Our Purposes for the Handbook To review the technological-social-economic-cultural change and resulting challenges to traditional education systems, particularly in small rural schools. Examine strategies to increase student aspirations, engagement, fulfillment, performance outcomes, and college and career readiness. Discuss accommodations to advance academic-workplace competence. Consider elements to boost innovation. Examine financial needs for powering transformation. Assess impact and learner achievement over time. Target Audiences The target audiences of the Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model include early adopters, school boards of trustees, school administrators, parents, students, teachers, community college partners, senior college partners, and charitable foundations. References for Prologue Evans-Greenwood, P., O’Leary, K., & Williams, P. (2015). The paradigm shift: Redefining education. Australia: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. Retrieved from http://landing.deloitte.com.au/rs/761-IBL- 328/images/deloitte-au-ps-education-redefined-2015-050715.pdf Sass, E. J. (2018). American educational history: A hypertext timeline. Retrieved from http://www.eds- resources.com/educationhistorytimeline.html

Part I. Transformation in a Sea Change Chapter 1. Trends shaping the future of education Key Words: Access, Career-ready, College-ready, Life skills, Megatrends, Organizations, Structures, Transformational change, Workforce As we embark on an effort to design better futures for our children, we are compelled to forecast what those futures might hold. Yet, we must engage in such prognoses with caution. To that end, past and present trends in education can help guide us as we think about the future. Webster’s Dictionary describes “trend” as a noun; “a general direction in which something is developing or changing;” and as a verb, “the subject of many posts on a social media website (Twitter) within a short period.” Although Satchel Paige warned us “don’t look back, something might be gaining on you,” we are undertaking a bold task as we look back while looking ahead. Lao Tzu (ca. 500 BC) said, "Those who have knowledge, don't predict. Those who predict, don't have knowledge." Taleb (2011) also warned of the black swan impacts of the improbable. Taleb said “you always control what you do; so make this your end” (¶ 2). In SMU (2013), Phillips warned, “No one really understands trends but everyone sees one in a cloud of data” (¶ 1). Further, Phillips said, “Humans see trends because they see order in disorder. It reflects the need to see order” (¶ 1). Mark Twain advised, "Prophesy is a good line of business, but it is full of risks.” We are undertaking a bold task as we look ahead while mindfully attending to the accomplishments and mistakes of the past. Let us thoughtfully review relevant past events and trends, and thus, make salient inference regarding the future of education, which will most assuredly shape the futures of our children and their children. What we know about 20th Century education. The 19th century was a period of growth for the U.S., from opening land settlement in the western states to civil rights, industrialization, and higher education. By the turn of the 20th century, the basic principles and foundations of schooling had been set. The concepts of free, universal, and compulsory education developed deep cultural roots along with public cognitive bias. Although the principles for public education formed the framework for an educational revolution, private education enterprise continued to flourish. Education was viewed as power, with the prospect of improved livelihoods for all who engaged. Institutionalized education underwent continuous change, commensurate with understanding of child development. The first half of the 20th century established concepts of gender and race equity in education. Teacher preparation evolved from basic competence to minimum academic standards to state certifications and licensures. The percentage of high school diplomas rose from 7% of America’s youth in 1900 to 92% in 2017. College enrollment increased from being atypical in 1900 to 70% of 2016 high school graduates. However, dropout rates remained excessive. The completion of the bachelor’s degree account for 36% of 25 to 64-year-old adults, less than one-half of those enrolled six years before.

The U.S. Department of Education’s performance report (NCES, 1999) for secondary education included four goals: 1) Help all children reach challenging academic standards, so they are prepared for responsible citizenship, further learning, and productive employment. 2) Build a solid foundation for learning for all children. 3) Ensure access to post-secondary education and lifelong learning. 4) Make education a high-performance organization by focusing on results, quality services, and customer satisfaction. Despite best efforts from the U.S. Department of Education and improved high-school graduation rates, there is still work to be done in moving beyond the status quo. What we know about the 20th Century careers. The 20th century saw a dramatic shift from “blue-collar” to “white-collar” jobs and services. The market share for professional, managerial, clerical, sales, and service workers grew from 25% to 75% of total employment between 1900 and 1999 while jobs for laborers, household workers, and farmers declined over that same period. In addition, world wars and volatile economies affected job security. Consequently, both employee loyalty and job security were prized. Mechanization, technological advancements, and the increasing size and complexity of organizations coupled with rapid growth in healthcare, education, social services, and the expanding role of government contributed to dramatic vocational shifts. The advent of the Internet and the worldwide web set the stage for rapid social and technological change. As jobs shifted, so did the perceived value of formal education. What are the trends of 21st Century education? Gary Marx (2014) forecasted 21 trends for the 21st century. A sampling of some of those trends particularly germane to education include depth, breadth, and purposes of education; diversity; ethics; ingenuity; jobs and careers; poverty; sustainability; and technology. Any conversation about the trends in education must take into account such trends in larger social contexts. In general, education has tended to follow social-vocational trends, moving from a blue-collar- centric paradigm toward a white-collar focus. Peter Drucker (1959) and Stephen Covey (2007) described this shift to a “knowledge worker” environment. Yet, due to the bureaucratic nature of the larger educational enterprise, that alignment has historically lagged behind social-vocational trends. Exacerbating the drag on that lag time is the fact that education is typically funded through governmental entities, which have their own bureaucratic resistance mechanisms in relation to any kind of change. Further, “hard braking” is virtually guaranteed when one proposes any approach that might be described as “transformational.” Marx (2015) advised that the breadth, depth, and purposes of education would constantly be clarified to meet the needs of a fast-changing world. With cautious certainty, this handbook encourages and invites those who wish for better futures for students to learn together in collaboration toward those ends. Kotter (2011) chided, “Working, working, working—never letting up until the vision becomes a reality, and even then, institutionalizing it ultimately into the culture. That is not what we've been taught to do; it's not what organizations do. They're going to

have to learn to do it.” Govindarajan and Trimble (2013) validated reluctance frequently in business organizations. What are trends about 21st Century careers? The world appears to be in the early stages of a fourth industrial revolution—one of cyber-physical systems—which promises to have a tremendous impact on the future of education employment worldwide. The poster child of rapid change was framed in Moore’s Law (1965), predicting that the number of transistors in an integrated circuit would double every year. Ten years later, Moore (1975) adjusted the projected doubling growth to two years. Fifty-four years later, the trend continues as an accelerating pattern of technological and social change. Richard Smalley, a Rice University Nobel Laureate, (2003) boldly recognized “10 problems of humanity for the next 50 years.” Those determinant trends included energy, water, food, environment, poverty, terrorism and war, disease, education, democracy, and population. These megatrends and associated problems continue to plague humanity and are shaping career transformations. We argue that the problems/challenges of the future do have and will continue to have a powerful effect on the global marketplace (and thus, on education). Kotter (2011) identified an eight-stage process for transformation: establishing a sense of urgency; creating the guiding coalition; developing a vision and strategy; communicating the change vision; empowering employees for broad-based action; generating short-term wins; consolidating gains and producing more change; and anchoring new approaches in the culture. These stages challenge the status quo. More recently, Ascione (2017) articulated 10 workforce skills needed by students by 2020, which include: 1) Sense making 6) New media literacy 2) Social and emotional intelligence 7) Transdisciplinary 3) Novel and adaptive intelligence 8) Design mindset 4) Cross cultural competency 9) Cognitive load management 5) Computational thinking 10) Virtual collaboration While one can tease out the connection between these skills and some of the prescriptions found in most state curriculum documents, there are most certainly elements among the Ascione list that transcend what is normally articulated as intended outcomes for traditional schooling. Far more dexterity is needed along cognitive, interpersonal, and creative dimensions than has been the schooling paradigm of the past. Arguably, those beyond-the-state-standards elements are exactly the kinds of cognitive, behavioral, and dispositional attributes that suit one well for success, both personally and professionally. Not an easy transformation. Friedman (2016) concluded that 2007 was a watershed year for changes in a half-dozen technologies, including the iPhone, Android, and Kindle, that put knowledge within easy reach of almost everyone. No longer just a telephone, the smartphone technology included a suite of technologies that affect today’s careers. How, then, do we ensure that future workers (our children) acquire the attitudes, skills, and knowledge needed to succeed in the 21st century workplace? Will employers hire and train workers who initially lack critical skills? What happens to workers laid off from obsolescent jobs at age 45? Do they get training in new technologies or are they stuck in

lower-wage employment or do they languish in a perpetual state of unemployment? How do we ensure that people with disabilities have access to the technologies that facilitate their participation in the workplace? How will artificial intelligence, machine learning, and e-commerce impact employment? Indications are these technologies are already having powerful and significant shaping effects on the social and vocational contexts. Not easy questions or quick solutions. Rising skill requirements, juxtaposed with a shortage of workers possessing aligned competencies, are creating a growing mismatch between the capabilities of the workforce and the needs of the economy. The United States (2019) is currently experiencing high rates of productivity growth, thanks in large measure to a robust economy and technological innovation. As that trend continues, it will lead to higher incomes, improved standards of living, and security for the segment of the American workforce that is sufficiently prepared. But what are “the shock-absorbers” in the event of a down market? So, what about these 21st century career trends? The rate of change will likely continue to increase. A narrow skill set is vulnerable to outsourcing or automation and can become obsolete in a short time. Jobs and careers depend on continuous learning and development, now more so than ever. To reiterate Marx (2015), “The breadth, depth, and purposes of education will constantly be clarified to meet the needs of a fast-changing world.” Indeed, and the needs of our world seem only to accelerate. If this is true, how do educational leaders anticipate, respond, and create pathways to produce productive, active, and social members of society? How do we assure that communities, especially rural communities, sustain themselves? References Ascione, L. (2017, June 20). These are the top 10 workforce skills students will need by 2020. eCampus News. Retrieved from https://www.ecampusnews.com/2017/06/20/top-workforce-skills-2020/ Bersin, J. (2017, July 31). Catch the wave: The 21st century career. Deloitte Review, Issue 21. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/deloitte-review/issue-21/changing-nature-of-careers-in-21st- century.html Covey, S. (2007). Leading in the knowledge worker age. Retrieved from https://501cweb.wordpress.com/2007/02/24/leading-in-the-knowledge-worker-age/ Drucker, P. F. (1959). The landmarks of tomorrow. New York, NY: Heineman Publishers. Evans-Greenwood, P., O’Leary, K., & Williams, P. (2015). The paradigm shift: Redefining education. Australia: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. Retrieved from http://landing.deloitte.com.au/rs/761-IBL- 328/images/deloitte-au-ps-education-redefined-2015-050715.pdf ESPAS. (2015). Global trends to 2030: Can the EU meet the challenges ahead? Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/epsc/sites/epsc/files/espas-report-2015.pdf Friedman, T. L. (2016). Thank you for being late: An optimist's guide to thriving in the age of accelerations. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Co. Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2013). Beyond the idea: How to execute innovation in any organization. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Herman, A. M. (1999). Futurework: Trends and challenges for work in the 21st century. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1 &article=1066&context=key_workplace Kotter, J. (2011, July 19). Can you handle an exponential rate of change? Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkotter/2011/07/19/can-you-handle-an-exponential-rate-of- change/#6b000e774eb0

LaSalle, M. (2003). Nobel prize winner calls for energy overhauls. Retrieved from http://www.geni.org/globalenergy/library/media_coverage/ColumbiaDailySpectator/NobelPrizeWinnerCall sForEnergyOverhauls/RichardSmalley.shtml Lynch, M. (2016). How the 20th century changed American education. The Edvocate. Retrieved from http://www.theedadvocate.org/20th-century-changed-american-education/ Marx, G. (2014). Sneak peek: Twenty-one trends for the 21st century. Education Week. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/marketplace/books/sneak-peek-21-trends-for-the-21st-century-gary-marx.html Micklethwait, J. (2016). The Message of Thomas Friedman’s New Book: It’s Going to Be O.K. New York: The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/books/review/thomas-friedman- thank-you-for-being-late.html Moore, G. E. (1998, January). Cramming more components onto integrated circuits. Proceedings of the IEEE, 86(1)84. Retrieved from http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~fussell/courses/cs352h/papers/moore.pdf Moore, G. E. (1975). Progress in digital integrated electronics. Technical Digest: IEEE. Retrieved from http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~agrawvd/COURSE/E7770_Spr07/READ/Gordon_Moore_1975_Speech.pdf Naisbitt, J. (1984) Megatrends: Ten new directions transforming our lives. New York, NY: Warner Books. NCES. (1999). Table 187: College enrollment rates of high school graduates, by sex: 1960 to 1998. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d99/d99t187.asp NYU Steinhardt. (2018). Teacher education reinvented. NYU Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development. Washington Square Campus. Retrieved from https://teachereducation.steinhardt.nyu.edu/teacher-training-evolution Pink, D.H. (2012). To sell is human: The surprising truth about moving others. New York, NY: Riverhead Books. Sass, E. J. (2018). American educational history: A hypertext timeline. Retrieved from http://www.eds- resources.com/educationhistorytimeline.html Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Wakhungu, P. K., Yuan, X., Nathan, A, & Hwang, Y. (2016, September). Time to degree: A national view of the time enrolled and elapsed for associate and bachelor’s degree earners (Signature Report No. 11). Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. Retrieved from https://nscresearchcenter.org/signaturereport11/ Smalley, R. E. (2003, May 3). Top ten problems of humanity for the next 50 years. Energy & NanoTechnology Conference, Rice University. SMU. (2013, September 25). Making sense of trends and data. Retrieved from https://www.smu.edu.sg/perspectives/2013/09/25/making-sense-trends-and-data Taleb, N. (2010). The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. New York, NY: Random House. Taleb, N. (2011). When missing a train is painless. Retrieved from https://whenindoubtgetout.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/when-missing-a-train-is-painless-by-nassim-taleb/ Witt, R,. & Orvis, J. (2010). A guide to becoming a school of the future. National Association of Independent Schools. Retrieved from https://www.nais.org/Articles/documents/NAISCOASchools.pdf

Chapter 2. Comparing present and future education Key Words: Assumptions, Community, Demographics, Gen Alpha, Infrastructures, Realignment, Rural, Scaling, Sustainable, Technology Where have we been? Where are we going? Those are always important questions for leaders to keep in the forefront of their minds. When considering the future of our children, and thus, our society, it is imperative that we pursue these questions in the most deliberate fashion possible. It is also important to engage with children about their aspirations and expectations. Witt and Orvis (2010) conducted a comparison of education present and future. Their analysis focused on nine interdependent considerations that impact education today. These factors include built structures and infrastructure, community investments, community-global demographics, educational access, implementation, scalability, sustainability, technology, and creating pathways to produce productive, active, and social members of society. Implications for such considerations must include contextual elements such as 21st century life skills, assessment, curriculum, instruction, learning technologies, students, and teachers. In a classic 2006 TED talk, Sir Ken Robinson spoke of the necessity to rethink teaching, realigning it in such a way that we nurture the inventiveness and curiosity of our students. In today’s 21st century knowledge economy, all students need new higher-order skills for academic, career, and social responsibility. When contrasting past and future, schools have not changed while the world has. As the global economy changes, failing to give all students these higher-order skills leaves today’s youth–and our nation–at a competitive disadvantage. Slowly, schools have become obsolete—even the ones that score best on standardized tests. Wagner (2014) wrote obsolescence is a very different problem requiring an altogether different solution. In typical Army candor, Eric Shinseki, a retired four-star general, predicted, “If you dislike change, you’re going to dislike irrelevance even more.” Today’s Gen Z students, born after 2000, are “digital natives” who are intimately familiar with technological devices. Prensky (2009) argues, “Our students have changed radically. ‘Future’ content is to a large extent digital and technological” (p. 1). An entire field of learning theory— constructivism/connectivism—has emerged around this reality. Researchers and theorists in this field believe that a significant amount of student learning is now attributable to the interface of the learner with digital content and the accompanying digital social networks. Prensky’s (2009) answer to the question “What is the purpose of education?” is that education should now empower youth to improve their communities and the world while also unleashing the energy, creativity, and compassion of students and teachers in ways we have never imagined. Our challenge, as school leaders, is to raise student aspirations and to offset immediate gratification with a mindset that an investment in learning (along many dimensions) pays immeasurable and long-term dividends. Comparing present and future education—Built structures and infrastructures. Horn (2015) contends that schools should renovate structures and infrastructures from freestanding New Deal-era public work projects in order to become more integrated into community life. This new design could be part of multi-use buildings and shared public learning spaces with private business ventures that complement relevant learning and help revitalize communities. Rural schools with declining downtowns may repurpose vacant storefront spaces into learning spaces, built with an intention to create engaging structures that stimulate creativity and adaptive learning.

We should rethink the architecture of education, both in terms of systems as well as physical structures, to maximize the benefits of blended learning, where a portion of the content is distributed digitally with shared teacher-student control over pace, path, place, and time. Recent research indicates that build structures explain a significant amount of learning. More designers and architects are beginning to think about how schools can be designed to better enlighten the path moving us from yesterday’s egg-crate boxes to designs fit for the digitally interconnected workplace of the future. Thanks to significant improvements in mobile and cloud technologies, fixed and wireless digital networks have renovated the educational infrastructure (EdUHK, 2016). According to Cisco’s Virtual Networking Index, by 2020, global internet traffic will be 92 times greater than it was in 2005 (Cisco, 2017a). Mobile data traffic has grown 18-fold since 2014. Emerging 5G internet promises significant increases in speed and capacity in the next five years. Schools at all levels— rural and urban—are in need of modernized technologies. High-speed internet has expanded the confining walls of the local school into a worldwide learning community, rendering the historical limitations of time and geography passé. Comparing present and future education—Community investments. In a competitive global marketplace, the U.S. demands a well-educated labor force. Comparing the 2017 U.S. unemployment rates and earnings by education attainment, Litaker (2017) found adults with professional or doctoral degrees had a 1.5% unemployment rate, with median weekly earnings of $1,836 and $1,743, respectively. Adults with bachelor’s and master’s degrees had unemployment rates around 2.5%, with weekly earnings of $836 and $1,173, respectively. Adults with high school diplomas and less than high school had a 4.6 and 6.5% unemployment rates while weekly earnings were $712 and $520, respectively. Nationally, about 67% of adults 25 years or older have at least some college education. However, a much smaller number have completed postsecondary degrees. Without question, higher educated and more highly qualified workforces portend to more robust economies—locally, regionally, and globally. A more highly qualified rural population implies a sustainable community. Comparing present and future education—Community demographics. In public education, community demographics play a critical role in schooling. Demographics have an enormous influence on all levels and functions of the school system. Myriad factors may be included as community attributes. Every Texas community is different, but perhaps the primary demographic influences in rural communities are age, ethnicity, social mobility, and socioeconomic status. Steve Murdock (2017) predicted, “By 2050, Texas will be much younger and more diverse than the rest of the country. More than half of the state’s residents will be Hispanic; one-third or fewer will be white. If elected officials want to ensure that the Lone Star economy is sound and that society is functional, they must invest in the rapidly growing Hispanic population and close gaps in educational achievement between Latino students and their white peers” (¶ 2). Headlines regularly report Texas is the second largest land size and has the second largest population, estimated at 28.70 million in 2018. Texas also has the nation’s largest rural population. The 2015 unemployment rate was 4.5% with 17.2% living in poverty, and the labor force participation rate was 64.7%. By 2040, Texas is projected to have a population of more than 45

million. The Census Bureau forecasts the U.S. will have a majority-minority population by 2043 (Williams, 2014); Texas experienced this population shift in 2011 (Aaronson, 2012). Comparing present and future education—Educational access.

As a noun, access is “the ability, right, or permission to approach, In Figure 1, education deserts enter, speak with, or use.” As a verb, it means “to make contact encompass 295 commuting zones with or gain access to.” Access has been and continues to be a spanning across every census region. Many rural counties in West limiting paradigm in education, particularly in higher education. Texas have educational deserts that Hillman and Weichman (2016) noted that analogous to food limit access to higher education. deserts, “there are educational deserts where college opportunities are quite literally few and far between” (p. 4). Rural Texas counties are often educational deserts. Wexler (2016) reported, “The majority of incoming freshmen attending public four-year colleges and universities enroll within 50 miles of their home…. And the farther students live from any particular college, the less likely they are to enroll” (p. 1). Hillman (2016) concluded, “Most of the conversations today overlook the working-class student and prioritize the upper-class student. It’s just really frustrating from the academic side—and even more frustrating from a policy angle.” The assumptions that undergird this debate miss an important reality: educational outcomes for minority children are much more a function of their unequal access to key educational resources, including skilled teachers and quality curriculum, than they are a function of race (Darling- Hammond, 1998). Wexler (2016) concluded, “The crux of the problem is a misalignment of expectations: from policy makers’ perspective, students would attend college at whatever institution is best for them.” (p. 1). However, for some students, location is non-negotiable—and often, that means their options are dramatically limited. As a result, public community colleges play a significant role in delivering opportunities to residents within education deserts. The role of community colleges cannot be overstated: they enroll more than half of all students who live in education deserts. Turley (2009) stated, we “should stop treating the college-choice process as though it were independent of location and start situating this process within the geographic context in which it occurs” (p. 126). Finding an accessible and affordable institution near home or work will become even more critical for tomorrow’s college students, particularly first-generation college students (Scheijbal, 2012). Comparing present and future education—Implementation. Rapid innovation and technological progress are changing the face of work in Texas. Higher education must prepare students for this reality. It must also prepare them to adapt to job market changes. Implementation calls for new ways of thinking about higher education. Colleges and universities must rethink how to meet the social and economic needs of Texas, not only today but in the future. The digital generation is challenging a century-old, institutionalized curriculum model.

Schwan and McGarvey (2012) share a story about the genesis of the current educational format: “The Committee of Ten, a group of educators mostly from colleges and universities, was asked by the National Education Association to make recommendations regarding the standardization of an American high school curriculum. The year was 1892, somewhat before cars and long before computers and the internet. Their recommendations: Twelve years of education, eight years of elementary education, followed by four years of high school. Teach English, mathematics, and history or civics to every student every academic year in high school. Teach biology, chemistry, and physics respectively in ascending high school academic years.” Schwan and McGarvey go on to make a compelling case that we now have the technological tools to customize the educational experience to better fit the needs of the learner as an individual, rather than as simply one among a massive herd. Furthermore, they assert that in the context of current social structures, it is high time we do so. Anyone who has observed a teenage Gen Z, or a Millennial, or even many Boomers, in recent years knows that they/we live much of our lives in a virtual world. Zhao (2009) argues, “…the virtual world is as real as the physical world, psychologically, economically, politically, and socially. What happens in the virtual world has a significant effect on the physical world” (p. 128). To perpetuate an educational model that disregards such realities is dooming itself into student- perceived irrelevance. Unlike in Vegas, what happens in the virtual world does not stay there. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF, 2014) in concert with McKinsey & Co., reported, “Today’s higher education students are different from college students 25 years ago. A new student majority—low-income students, first-generation college students, and students of color—have replaced the traditional college goer” (p. 1) —and the percentage is increasing. With this ever- diverse student population comes new demands, requiring more personalized interventions and technologies to address their changing needs and goals.” In the BMGF (2014) “perspectives from the field,” Nancy Zimpher, Chancellor of SUNY, concluded that transformation would change the profile of higher education. In the higher education transformation model, BMGF recognized that most leaders acknowledged a one-size- fits-all strategy is no longer sufficient to be successful or sustainable in today’s world. Likewise, institutions must define a differentiated value proposition and be deliberate in the execution against it—which usually means making tough, non-traditional choices and tradeoffs for its students. Leaders highlighted promising decisions certain institutions are making to ensure student results. In this context, a value proposition clearly identifies what benefits a user will receive by adopting a particular goals or functions in the model.

Ten issue areas in the graphic are coupled to the hub of value proposition:

Select Desired Feature Characteristics

Traditional Students; High Ability to Pay; Traditional Students, Lower Ability to Pay; Student Profile Non-Traditional Students/Adult Learners, Lower Ability to Pay

Knowledge Development; Advancing Primary Student Skills/Careers Focus Value Low; Moderate; High Affordability Proposition Self-Directed; Institutional-Directed Student Support

Classroom; Community; Remote Locus of Learning

Book; Applied; In-The-Field Mode of Learning

Traditional Bundled Including Research; Traditional Bundled Excluding Research; Faculty Roles Unbundled Roles

Created; Co-Created; Curated Content Creation

Credit-Hour; Primarily Competency-Based Crediting Model

Highly Selective; Open Access Selectivity

Adapted from Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2014a). Higher education transformation.

BMGF (2014a) posted an embedded graphic that illustrated a framework of issue areas to ensure leaders make decisions that best align with their institution’s goals and organize and operationalize a value proposition. Retrieved from https://postsecondary.gatesfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/McKinsey-Article- Condensed-11.25.14.pdf

The graphic above illustrates a framework of issue areas for institutional leaders to consider explicitly and in relationship with each other to ensure they make decisions that best align with their institution’s goals, and help each institution organize and operationalize a value proposition. (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2014a) Retrieved from https://postsecondary.gatesfoundation.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/11/McKinsey-Article-Condensed-11.25.14.pdf BMGF criticized institutional leaders who resist dramatic reshaping of their institutions. While almost all colleges and universities are experimenting and tweaking their models, few institutions have radically restructured the postsecondary experience. BMGF recognized that transformation is not natural: “It is a long, challenge-filled process that requires unwavering dedication and visionary leadership” (p. 2). The leaders interviewed suggested a set of recommendations to help institutions overcome hurdles they might face during

strategic changes, such as engaging stakeholders early and often, using data to communicate and provide validity, and prioritizing what matters most for the institution and students, among others. The Governor’s Tri-Agency Workforce Initiative (Abbott, 2016) reports the intent of 60x30TX is to have a diverse and educated workforce that can adapt and compete at the highest levels to maintain a strong Texas economy. By 2030, 60% or more of all new jobs will require some level of higher education or industry certification. In step-by-step progression, Texas set statewide goals of 48% of 25 - 34 year olds to hold postsecondary credentials by 2020 and 54% to hold postsecondary credentials by 2025. Only 42% of young Texans between the ages of 25 and 34 have an associate degree or higher in 2019. We are behind the curve. Two-year institutions can support the effort to reach the goal of 60% by 2030 by strengthening connections and partnerships with local and regional organizations. Four-year institutions can also help by building similar relationships. It will take energy and creativity to reach the postsecondary credential goals of 60x30TX (THECB, 2018a). Moreover, everyone in Texas will have a role to play. Success depends on choosing bold actions and then working together to create and expand promising higher education practices. Only together can we fulfill the four student-centered goals of 60x30TX. Specifically, the plan drives more students toward higher education with its student-centered goals of 1) completing credentials, 2) gaining marketable skills, and 3) limiting student debt. The three goals, in turn, move the state toward its overarching fourth goal of 4) building a highly educated and skilled workforce. Although they missed their expected date of full implementation—having predicted that 50% of high school courses would be delivered online by 2019—Christensen et al. (2012) saw the day soon coming when students would become the prescribers of their own learning needs after having diagnosed the same. In effect, they would behave as patients who have the tools to heal themselves. Bold pursuit of the 60x30TX goals, we believe, bodes well for just such an eventuality. Comparing present and future education—Scalability. In the late 1800s, Ralph Waldo Emerson was credited with saying, “If a man can write a better book, preach a better sermon, or make a better mousetrap than his neighbor, though he built his house in the woods, the world will make a beaten path to his door.” Today, adoption and diffusion requires more than a good idea and a path to draw traffic. The International Development Innovation Alliance (IDIA, 2017a) is an international community of practice that identified six stages and eight good practices to take an idea to wide-scale adoption. The six stages span the architecture of scaling innovations, beginning with the ideation and ultimately reaching sustainable scale, as shown below:

Stage 1: Stage 2: Stage 3: Stage 4: Stage 5: Stage 6: Ideation R&D Proof of Transition to Scaling Sustainable Concept Scale Scale

Defining and Further When the When The process of The analyzing the developing intellectual innovations replicating sustainable development specific concept behind that have and/or wide-scale problem and innovations an innovation demonstrated adapting an adoption or generating that have is field-tested small-scale innovation operation of an potential potential to to gain an success across large innovation at solutions address the early, “real- develop their geographies the desired through problem. world” model. and level of horizon assessment of populations for scale/exponent scanning of its potential. transformation ial growth. existing and al impact. new ideas.

The innovators and early adopters of the P-20 System Model recognized the importance of moving through the six stages as part of the transformation process. The first three stages of scaling the P- 20 System Model are well developed. Ideation, research and development, and proof of concept are works that continue in progress but are reasonably advanced. Roscoe Collegiate Independent School District (RCISD) officially launched the recognition of the problem and the generation of potential solutions in 2007. Research and development continued to recognize, organize, and integrate specific innovations, such as AVID (Advancement Via Individual Determination)—an academic intervention model designed to support students who are traditionally non-privileged but have potential. The proof of concept, still a work in progress, emerged as a field test to provide affordable access to college-ready, career-ready preparation while strengthening a spirit of innovation. Transition to scale is the fourth stage. Currently, the P-20 proof of concept has demonstrated small- scale success and is attracting partners to help fill gaps in their capacity to scale. Work is underway through Collegiate Edu-Nation to identify and support early-adopters. Scaling, at the fifth stage, involves “replicating and/or adapting the innovation across large geographies and populations for transformational impact while maintaining the integrity of the framework” (IDIA, 2017c, p. 7). Stage 6 is identified as sustainable scale. This final stage involves “the wide-scale adoption or operation of an innovation at the desired level of scale/exponential growth, sustained by an ecosystem of actors.” Good practice includes the measurement of the progress and impact of the scaling process and applying the learning. However, diligence is essential to prevent good intentions from heading south.

Using adoption-diffusion strategies (Rogers, 2003) and Gartner Hype Cycle (Fenn & Raskino, 2008), scaling is both a science and an art. Rogers identified five adopter categories spanning innovators to laggards and five stages in the adoption process from knowledge to confirmation. Rogers noted, “Adoption is an individual process detailing the series of stages one undergoes from first hearing about a product (knowledge) to finally adopting or confirming it.” Diffusion, on the other hand, signifies a group phenomenon that suggests how innovation spreads. Diffusion occurs along the adoption curve as the number of adopters reaches a critical mass and approaches self-sustaining status. Gartner, an information technology company, developed an alternate viewpoint and graphical representation of the five-lifecycle stages from conception to maturity and the pathway for widespread adoption. The Hype Cycle is a branded tool created by Gartner. Bringing an innovation like P-20 to scale requires a design that is flexible enough to be used in a variety of contexts and robust enough to retain effectiveness in those settings. Designing an innovation for sustainability and scale is a multi-stage iterative process that involves teachers as co-evaluators and co- designers. Ideally, educators will use adaptive strategies for sharing their successes. Comparing present and future education—Sustainability. Sterling (2010) wrote, “Sustainability implies the survival, the security, and beyond these, the well- being of a whole system” (p. 512). While sustainability may take on several meanings ranging from education systems to climate, this handbook focuses on the survival of public education codified as the P-20 System Model and spanning pre-kindergarten through professional degrees. Proponents of education reform are committed to the idea that all children should receive a high- quality education, and that all children can learn and grow, regardless of ethnicity or economic circumstances. Phi Delta Kappan International (Richardson, 2017) conducted an annual poll of attitudes on public education for 49 years. As editor and PDK Poll Director, Richardson (2017) highlighted findings from the 2016 poll. Public schools get their highest grades from those who know them best: public school parents. The proportion of public schools receiving an A grade is its highest in more than 40 years. Fifteen percent—one in seven Americans—give their local schools an A, up from 9% a decade ago. The report also showed: ● Americans overwhelmingly want schools to do more than educate students academically. ● Americans want schools to focus on career and personal skills to ensure that students are prepared for life after high school.

● Broadly, the public strongly endorsed college-ready, workforce-ready curricula. ● Conversely, the public pushed back against standardized testing. ● Most public school parents expect their child to attend college full time, but that may not mean a four-year college. ● Most parents say schools should provide wraparound services for students and seek additional public money to pay for them. Kotter (1995) notes, “In the final analysis, change sticks when it becomes ‘the way we do things around here,’ when it seeps into the bloodstream of the corporate body. Until new behaviors are rooted in social norms and shared values, they are subject to degradation as soon as the pressure for change is removed.” Transformational leadership challenges the status quo, draws out the issues, navigates through conflict, and mobilizes people and resources to do the adaptive work necessary to create and sustain effective change. Comparing present and future education—Technology. Mostly gone are many of the key technologies that made education work in the 20th century: 3- ring binders, Apple II computers, and overhead projectors. Arriving are key technologies that make education work in the 21st century: cloud-based files and storage, G Suite apps, smart phones, and electronic gradebooks. Hang on; schools, much like the 200-foot tall, 70 mph Six Flags roller coaster, are picking up speed. From group instruction, rows of desks, and Big Chief tablets to project-based learning, open classrooms/laboratories, and digital tablets, the evolving technologies portray the transformation of education. There is a good chance in the next two decades we will see schools change in big ways, much like the difference between today and the close of the 20th century. As with all education technology tools, however, the benefits of intelligent tutoring systems will be realized only if they are equitably accessed and effectively integrated into and coordinated with complementary learning activities such as group problem solving and project-based learning. This shift in technology puts a premium on innovative teachers. The development, adaptation, and use of technology innovations are considered requirements within the context of a robust research and development ecosystem to ensure accessibility, inclusiveness, and effectiveness of tools in particular contexts and to serve diverse learners. To realize the benefits of education technology, educators themselves need to be collaborators in the research and discovery process, with their schools, alongside universities, serving as “incubators of exploration” (U.S. Department of Education, OET, 2016, p. 1). The effective use of technology in education will come from the combination of technology with the human element, where researchers and practitioners work and learn together, “seeking new knowledge, and constantly acquiring new skills alongside their students” (U.S. Department of Education, OET, 2016, p. 1). Our nation has persistent inequities in access, participation, and success in STEM subjects that exist along racial, socioeconomic, gender, and geographic lines, as well as among students with disabilities. STEM education disparities threaten the nation’s ability to close education and poverty gaps, meet the demands of a technology-driven economy, ensure national security, and maintain preeminence in scientific research and technological innovation. Robust technology most certainly can, and does, facilitate the delivery of content. However, simple delivery of content is not sufficient. It is a learning experience, both the cognitive and affective

that defines quality educational engagements. Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Stanford University have both recognized this for more than two decades now and are making their content available for free online. Future schools must have the dexterity to deliver content regardless of time/place constraints and do so with the benefit of a meaningful learning experience (which usually translates into substantive interaction with other learners and experienced and competent teachers/mentors). So, what about comparing present and future education? The rate of change will likely continue to increase. A narrow skill set is vulnerable to automation and can become obsolete in a short time. Jobs and careers depend on continuous learning and development. Marx (2014), one more time, “The breadth, depth, and purposes of education will constantly be clarified to meet the needs of a fast-changing world.” Creating pathways to produce productive, active, and social members of society. Measures of success are social mobility, income parity, literacy, and innovation. The Committee on Schools of the Future (Witt & Orvis, 2010) distilled seven “essential capacities for the 21st Century” from current literature: adaptability, initiative, and risk-taking; analytical and creative thinking and problem-solving; complex communication—oral and written; digital and quantitative literacy; global perspective; integrity and ethical decision-making; and leadership and teamwork. Dede (Witt & Orvis, 2010) regards this strategy as flawed. He asserts, “You can’t just sprinkle 21st century skills on the 20th century doughnut. It requires a fundamental re-conception of what we are doing.” That is a challenge. Kruchoski (2016) projected, “By 2040, many of the children born this year will be joining the workforce. The world they find will be very different from ours today. How we work and live will be shaped by artificial intelligence, autonomous vehicles, synthetic biology and many other emerging technologies” (p. 1). Zhao (2009) articulates five “Core Assumptions for Educating Our Children: 1) We must cultivate the skills and knowledge that are not available at a cheaper price in other countries or that cannot be rendered useless by machines. 2) Creativity, interpreted as both ability and passion to make new things and adapt to new situations, is essential. 3) New skills and knowledge are needed for living in the global world and the virtual world: global awareness and multicultural literacy. 4) Cognitive skills such as problem solving and critical thinking are more important than memorization of knowledge. 5) Emotional intelligence – the ability and capacity to understand and manage emotions of self and others – is important.” (pp. 150-151).

As part of the World Economic Forum, the Global Agenda Council on Education (Kruchoski, 2016) spent two years exploring how to build more innovative education systems. The Global Agenda Council reduced the system to nine plays in their playbook. Play 1: Provide a compelling vision of the future Play 2: Set ambitious goals that force innovation Play 3: Create choice and competition Play 4: Pick many winners Play 5: Benchmark and track progress Play 6: Evaluate and share the performance of innovations Play 7: Pair greater accountability with autonomy Play 8: Invest in and empower agents of change, and Play 9: Reward successes and productive failure Success comes from students, teachers, community, and peers. At RCISD, 100% of third- through 12th-graders participate in inquiry-based learning with research poster presentations. Harvard Rounds find 90% of students engaged in high-order cognition. Ninety percent of graduates earn associate degrees concurrently with high school diplomas. Students consistently express hope, optimism, and feelings of connectedness. Student success spans co-curricular experiences such as 4-H, FFA, Skills USA, UAV pilot and veterinary assistant certificates, robotics, and other UIL events. In the transformation, RCISD and its trustees attract and retain highly qualified professionals. Collaborative faculty have consistently increased their qualifications to teach college-level courses. Seven agencies tout RCISD for innovations to reduce poverty and increase aspirations and expectations among stakeholders. The community contexts of agriculture and engineering led RCISD to provide critical pathways in biomedical sciences (clinical, laboratory, business certificates) and engineering (FAA-licensed UAV pilot, CNC, robotics certificates). RCISD currently has 18 education-business partners. Are you convinced that the Collegiate Edu-Nation model of future-centric education is replicable across many geographies and contexts? If so, why not begin building that rocket ship NOW? References Aaronson, B. (2012, May 17). On the records: Texas one of five “minority-majority” states. Texas Tribune. Retrieved from https://www.texastribune.org/2012/05/17/on-the-records-majority-texas-minority-races/ Abbott, G. (2016). Governor’s Tri-Agency Workforce Initiative issues report on education and workforce integration. Retrieved from https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/Governors_Tri- Agency_Workforce_Initiative_Issues_Report_On_Education_And_W Barber, M. & Klein, J. (2016). Unleashing greatness: Nine plays to spark innovation in education. World Economic Forum: Global Agenda Council on Education. Retrieved from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_WP_GAC_Education_Unleashing_Greatness.pdf Barr, S. K., Cross, J. E. & Dunbar, B. H. (2014). The whole-school sustainability framework. Ft. Collins, CO: Institute for the Built Environment, Colorado State University

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2014a). Higher education transformation. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from https://postsecondary.gatesfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/McKinsey-Article- Condensed-11.25.14.pdf Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2014b). Higher education transformation. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://postsecondary.gatesfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Higher-Education- Transformation_SAILS.pdf Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2018). Educational attainment for workers 25 years and older by detailed occupation. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/educational-attainment.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2018b). Employment projections. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Johnson, C. W. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies. Cisco. (2017a). Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data Traffic Forecast Update, 2016–2021 White Paper. Retrieved from https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual- networking-index-vni/mobile-white-paper-c11-520862.html Cisco. (2017b). VNI Global Fixed and Mobile Internet Traffic Forecasts. Retrieved from https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/index.html#cloud- forecast Comen, E., Frohlich, T.C. & Sauter, M.B. (2016). America’s most and least educated states: A survey of all 50. Retrieved from https://247wallst.com/special-report/2016/09/16/americas-most-and-least-educated-states-a- survey-of-all-50/ Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Unequal Opportunity: Race and Education. Brookings. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/articles/unequal-opportunity-race-and-education/ EdUHK. (2016). Top 6 trends in education today. The Education University of Hong Kong. Retrieved from https://www.topuniversities.com/courses/education-training/top-6-trends-education-today Fenn, J., & Raskino, M. (2008). Mastering the hype cycle: How to choose the right innovation at the right time. Boston: Harvard Business Press. Retrieved from https://www.gartner.com/imagesrv/books/pdf/mastering_hype_cycle_excerpt.pdf Fischer, K. (2018). Can a Huge Online College Solve California’s Work-Force Problems? The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Can-a-Huge-Online- College/244054?cid=wsinglestory Hillman, N., & Weichman, T. (2016). Education deserts: The continued significance of "place" in the twenty- first century. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. Retrieved from https://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Education-Deserts-The-Continued-Significance-of-Place- in-the-Twenty-First-Century.pdf Horn, M.B. (2015). The Past, Present and Future of School Design. EdSurge. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2015-07-06-the-past-present-and-future-of-school-design IDIA. (2017a). Good Practice Guides for Funders Scaling Innovation. International Development Innovation Alliance. Retrieved from https://static.globalinnovationexchange.org/s3fs- public/asset/document/Scaling%20Good%20Practices%20Guide%20DIGITAL%20COPY_0.pdf?N3Cbt.x nipYorAzdq_3fn4VCL4McFPjB IDIA. (2017b). Insights on Measuring the Impact of Innovation. International Development Innovation Alliance. Retrieved from https://static.globalinnovationexchange.org/s3fs- public/asset/document/Measuring%20Impact%20DIGITAL%20COPY.pdf?L.Ce3Y4iVEc7CWtA1W0x0U Y8aSVDJdAl

IDIA. (2017c). Insights on Scaling Innovation. International Development Innovation Alliance. Retrieved from https://static.globalinnovationexchange.org/s3fs- public/asset/document/Scaling%20Innovation%20DIGITAL%20COPY.pdf?C719lAFtMThwNbUpdcs4Te Yl5vYa2u9p Katz, M. B. & Rose, M. (2013). Public education under siege. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Kotter, J. (1995, May-June). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved on September 26, 2018, from https://hbr.org/1995/05/leading-change-why-transformation- efforts-fail-2 Kruchoski, P. (2016). Nine ways to make education fit for the 21st century. World Economic Forum. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/07/9-ways-to-make-education-fit-for-the-21st-century/ Litaker, G. (2017). Does the US get a good return on its investment in education? Talent Economy. Retrieved from https://www.clomedia.com/2017/04/18/return-investment-education/ Marx, G. (2014). Sneak peek: Twenty-one trends for the 21st century. Education Week. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/marketplace/books/sneak-peek-21-trends-for-the-21st-century-gary-marx.html Murdock, S. (2017). Texas Demographer Has Given the Same Speech for 25 Years. Is Anyone Listening? Texas Observer (April 2017). Retrieved from https://www.texasobserver.org/minding-the-gaps/ Myers, G. (2018). Who Lives in Education Deserts? The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/interactives/education-deserts?cid=wsinglestory_hp_3 Population. (2017). 2018 Texas population. Retrieved from http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/texas- population/ Prensky, M. (2009).The digital native – myth and reality. Aslib Proceedings, 61(4), 364-379. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530910973776 Prensky, M. (2011a)."Digital natives and digital immigrants: getting to know each other", Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 43 Iss 7 pp. 460-466 https://doi.org/10.1108/00197851111171890 Prensky, M. (2011b) "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 2: Do They Really Think Differently?" On the Horizon, 9: pp.1-6, Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424843 Richardson, J. (2017). The 49th annual PDK poll of the public’s attitudes toward the public schools. PDK International. Arlington, VA Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0031721717728274 Richmond, E. (2017 August,). What the public wants from schools. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/08/what-the-public-wants-from-schools/538335/ Robinson, K. (2007). TED talk: Do schools kill creativity? Retrieved from https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-sz-002&hsimp=yhs- 002&hspart=sz&p=Robinson%2C+K.+%282015%29.+TED+Talk#id=1&vid=8407080b117623c9db7cd0b b04bbe5bd&action=click Robinson, K. & Aronica, L. (2019). You, Your Child, and School: Navigate Your Way to the Best Education. New York: Penguin Random House. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press. Schejbal, D. (2012). In Search of a New Paradigm for Higher Education. Springer: Innov High Educ DOI 10.1007/s10755-012-9218-z Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10755-012- 9218-z.pdf Schwan, C., & McGarvey, B. (2012). Inevitable: Mass customized learning. Self-published. Shinseki, E. (2001). Marines Turned Soldiers. National Review Online, December 10, 2001. Retrieved from http://wist.info/shinseki-eric/38802/

Sterling, S. (2010). Learning for resilience, or the resilient learner? Towards a necessary reconciliation in a paradigm of sustainable education. Environmental Education Research, 16(5-6), 511–528. Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group. DOI: 10.1080/13504622.2010.505427 Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504622.2010.505427 THECB. (2018a). 60X30TX. Retrieved from http://www.60x30tx.com THECB. (2018b). Goal Four - Student Debt at a glance. Retrieved from http://www.60x30tx.com/goals/goal- four-student-debt/ THECB. (2018c). Goal One - 60x30: Educated Population at a Glance. Retrieved from http://www.60x30tx.com/goals/goal-one-60x30-educated-population/ THECB. (2018d). Goal Three - Marketable skills at a glance. Retrieved from http://www.60x30tx.com/goals/goal-three-marketable-skills/ THECB. (2018e). Goal Two - Completion at a glance. Retrieved from http://www.60x30tx.com/goals/goal-two- completion/ Turley, R. N. López. (2009. College Proximity: Mapping Access to Opportunity. Sociology of Education, 82(2), 126–146. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Innovation and Improvement. (2016). STEM 2026: A Vision for Innovation in STEM Education. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://innovation.ed.gov/files/2016/09/AIR-STEM2026_Report_2016.pdf VanderStel, A, (2014). The Impact of Demographics in Education. Grand Valley State University. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article =1306&context=honorsprojects Wagner, T. (2014). The Global Achievement Gap: Why Even Our Best Schools Don’t Teach The New Survival Skills Our Children Need – and What We Can Do About It. New York: Perseus Books Group. Wexler, E. (2016). Geography matters. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/02/03/when-students-enroll-college-geography-matters-more- policy-makers-think Williams, J. P. (2014, September 22). College of Tomorrow: The Changing Demographics of the Student Body, U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/news/college-of- tomorrow/articles/2014/09/22/college-of-tomorrow-the-changing-demographics-of-the-student-body Witt, R. & Orvis, J. (2010). A Guide to Becoming a School of the Future. National Association of Independent Schools. Retrieved from https://www.nais.org/Articles/documents/NAISCOASchools.pdf Wyatt, I. D., & Hecker, D. E. (2006, March). Occupational changes during the 20th century. Monthly Labor Review. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2006/03/art3full.pdf Zhao, Y. (2009). Catching up or leading the way: American education in the age of globalization. Alexandria, VA: Association for Staff and Curriculum Development. Supplemental readings for Chapter 2 Bird, K. (2007). The intergenerational transmission of poverty: An overview. Working Paper 99. Manchester: IDPM/Chronic Poverty Research Centre (CPRC). Retrieved from www.chronicpoverty.org/resources/cp99.htm Bird, K. (2016). How is poverty transmitted intergenerationally and what might be done to stop it in its tracks? Retrieved from http://www.chronicpoverty.org/uploads/publication_files/bird_IGT_synthesis.pdf Fisk, D. M. (2003). American Labor in the 20th Century. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/cwc/american-labor-in-the-20th-century.pdf Freiberge, S. (2017). 5 emerging trends in 12st-century education. Retrieved from http://www.gettingsmart.com/2017/07/5-emerging-trends-in-21st-century-education/

Handelsman, J. & Stulberg, E. (2016). An agricultural workforce for the 21st century. Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2016/07/20/agricultural-workforce-21st-century Lasalle, M. (2003). Nobel Prize winner calls for energy overhauls. Columbia Daily Spectator. Retrieved from http://www.geni.org/globalenergy/library/media_coverage/ColumbiaDailySpectator/NobelPrizeWinnerCall sForEnergyOverhauls/RichardSmalley.shtml Naughton, J. (2016). 2007, not 2016, is the year the world turned upside down. The Guardian. Retrieved from htps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/27/2007-not-2016-year-world-turned-upside-down- rapid-technological-change OECD. (2017). Key issues for digital transformation in the G20. Berlin. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/g20/key-issues-for-digital-transformation-in-the-g20.pdf Rotherham, A. J. & Willingham, D. (2009). 21st Century Skills: The Challenges Ahead. 67(1) 16-21. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept09/vol67/num01/21st-Century-Skills@- The-Challenges-Ahead.aspx Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2016). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach. Pearson Education Limited. Retrieved from http://thuvien.thanglong.edu.vn:8081/dspace/bitstream/DHTL_123456789/4010/1/CS503- 2.pdf Sass, E. (2019). American educational history: A hypertext timeline. Retrieved from http://www.eds- resources.com/educationhistorytimeline.html Schneider, J. (2016). America's not-so-broken education system: Do U.S. schools really need to be disrupted? The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/06/everything-in-american-education- is-broken/488189/ Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Wakhungu, P.K., Yuan, X., Nathan, A, & Hwang, Y. (2016). Time to Degree: A National View of the Time Enrolled and Elapsed for Associate and Bachelor’s Degree Earners (Signature Report No. 11). Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. Retrieved from https://nscresearchcenter.org/signaturereport11/ Wikipedia. (2019). History of education. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education#Recent_world-wide_trends Wyatt, I. D. & Hecker, D. E. (2006). Occupational changes during the 20th century. Monthly Labor Review. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/mlr/2006/03/art3full.pdf

Part II. Planning and Preparing for Change Chapter 3. Clarifying community values and social influences. Key Words: Assumptions, Change, Community, Constraints, Demographics, Values Brackemyre (2015) described the influence of education on democracy and community values in the rise of public education in early America. As advocates of education and a democratic society, both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson advocated the general diffusion of knowledge and public schooling. Jefferson argued that a functional democracy requires an educated citizenry and went so far as to say “a little rebellion now and then is a good thing.” Nonetheless, most people agree that when knowledge is disseminated and integrated by the public, society realizes multiple benefits. Huckle and Sterling (1996) argued that for education to fulfill its potential as an agent of change, attention must be given to the subject of change itself and that education must be transformed to be transforming. What are “your” community core values related to education? Let’s begin with the basics. Consider the current state of education, and, through discussion, consider the community’s values including access, poverty, democracy, opportunity, respect, and responsibility. The discussion should begin with educational policy leaders but ultimately extend throughout the fabric of the community. As a broader set of civic values, the City of Livingston, California (2018), stated, “Community values are the non-negotiable core principles or standards that the community’s citizens wish to maintain” (¶ 1). Further, the City confirmed, “community values guide the community’s vision, mission, strategic plan as well as its goals, objectives, activities, capital projects, budgets and service levels” (¶ 1). Their vision and values are inspiring. Perrucci and Perrucci (2014) suggest that in a more focused discussion series on educational values with educational policy leaders, consider first identifying a set of core social values the community would endorse—values that may include social mobility, income parity, adult literacy, and innovation. Using round-table discussions, brainstorm strategies using nominal group technique (NGT) or Round-Robin Brainstorming to produce objective group consensus out of a collection of opinionated views. Provide brief follow-up discussions with reflections and adjustments. After reconciling a core set of educational values, the group should describe the behaviors that would likely advance those values. A non-confrontational round-table approach may be useful to reduce bias or anxiety. Behaviors may be linked to specific value outcomes (e.g., using social mobility to describe the behaviors such as increasing aspirations, educational expectations, student and parent engagement, or educational credentials). Communication is difficult. As these values and behaviors are recognized, engage stakeholder groups to include parents, teachers, key community members, and others who can adopt or endorse the values and legitimize the behaviors. At this point, a clearly understood message should build into a planned campaign led by a small team of potential supporters who can build advocacy for the goals. The outcomes should begin to represent censuses of the value set and expectations for the community at large. A realistic timeline and activities should be identified and adopted. At this point in the process, it is important for the group to establish common talking points that capture the main point or points that the group wants to portray moving forward. It is crucial that every person involved is conveying the same message.

The assumption is that when a broad citizenry endorses a set of core values and acts in a way that sustains those values, the divided parties will respond with clarifications. For ultimate success, it is crucial that divided voices are heard with reason. After due discussion, a series of public town hall presentations should advance ideas and strategies consistent with the core values and social norms and would help to create a college-ready, career- ready student. What assumptions underpin our community core values? The development of public policies that can unify individuals and groups depends upon the existence of core social values and shared social norms to realize those values. In a search for a “good society,” Perrucci and Perrucci (2014) wrote, “We proceed by first identifying a set of core social values that we believe most stakeholders would endorse, and then present a set of guides for behavior that would advance those values. Finally, we propose a series of public policies that are consistent with the core values and social norms and that would help to create what we have called the ‘good society.’ Our assumption is that when a citizenry endorses a set of core values and acts in a fashion that supports those values, the usually divided political factions will be compelled to respond with real solutions.” (¶ 1) Assumptions, defined as things that are accepted as true without proof, are crucial for clarifying community values and social influences. Although assumptions are accepted, they should be carefully tested. When assessing educational change, it is important to examine the underlying assumptions. The following four assumptions provide an entry point to discuss assumptions related to educational transformation: ● Assumption 1—Students, parents, and the community will increasingly value and support quality education as a sound investment. ● Assumption 2—Every child can learn and be successful. ● Assumption 3—School personnel are caring, competent professionals. ● Assumption 4—Schools will continue to respond to public need. The Collegiate Edu- Nation P-20 System Model and its curriculum are responses to public need (Alexander, 2016). Simultaneously, it is important to examine the underlying assumptions about assessing the desired benefits. Consider the four assumptions that can influence anticipated benefits. Anticipated benefits, set in the context of hope, are defined as an inherent advantage. The eight proposed benefits provide a platform for analysis matched against community core values. ● Benefit 1—Small schools are nimbler for structural change. ● Benefit 2—Elevated teacher satisfaction. ● Benefit 3—Increased student participation and ownership. ● Benefit 4—Increased daily attendance and student engagement. ● Benefit 5—Rural schools are the stimulus of small communities. ● Benefit 6—Rural schools encourage student participation and ownership. ● Benefit 7—Rural schools foster a sense of ownership and community.

● Benefit 8—Rural schools serve as community centers. Finally, what anticipated constraints form the third set of essential assumptions? Anticipated constraints are limitations that pose as restrictions to social change and educational transformations. In the discussion of clarifying community values and social influences, it will be important to consider carefully the following four constraints and the possibilities of other constraints that may affect a new educational model. ● Constraint 1—Politics often change the focus of the curriculum and student achievement measures without sufficient attention to academic aspiration, performance, and development. ● Constraint 2—Short-range economic changes influence long-range missions and strategies that compel schools to do more with less. Poverty makes it difficult for families to provide the resources children need. ● Constraint 3—There are diseconomies of scale between large schools and small schools. ● Constraint 4—Societal and cultural constraints in rural areas include safety, nutrition, health, crime, drugs, and limited public-private partnerships. Do you have consensus on the community values as non-negotiable principles? Is there a general agreement on the assumptions, benefits, and constraints? If so, you are ready to address a transformation to align the financial and strategic planning designed specifically to produce college-ready, career-ready, life-ready graduates. References Alexander, K. D. (2016). Five Year Education Plan, 2016-2021 Collegiate Edu-Vet — A Veterinary Teaching Hospital. Retrieved from http://www.roscoe.esc14.net/users/0001/Collegiate%20Edu- Vet%20docs/Brochure%20CEVVTHP%20Education%20Plan%20Booklet%2020May-5.pdf Bennis, D. (n.d.) What is Democratic Education? IDEA. Retrieved from http://democraticeducation.org/index.php/features/what-is-democratic-education/ Brackemyre, T. (2015). Education to the masses. U.S. History Scene. Retrieved from http://ushistoryscene.com/article/rise-of-public-education City of Livingston. (2018). Community values. Retrieved from http://www.livingstoncity.com/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7B1476A705-58D2-4F07-944B- 384BA40EC0E6%7D&DE=%7B20458B60-C1D9-4C0E-A93A-F9B452776A5A%7D Huckle, J., & Sterling, S. (1996). Education for sustainability. New York, NY: Earthscan. Kaplan, R. S. (2017). A balanced approach to monetary policy. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. Retrieved from https://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/kaplan/2017/rsk171127.aspx Palmisano, S. (n.d.). A business and its beliefs. Retrieved from http://www- 03.ibm.com/ibm/history/ibm100/us/en/icons/bizbeliefs/ Perrucci R., & Perrucci, C. C. (2014) The good society: Core social values, social norms, and public policy. Sociological Forum 29(1). doi:10.1111/socf.12078 Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia. (2015). A little rebellion… The Jefferson Monticello. Retrieved from https://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/little-rebellionquotation

Chapter 4. Aligning financial and strategic planning. Key Words: Assumptions, Community, Cost/Benefit, Demographics, Finance, Interventions, Lifetime earnings, Realignment, Rural, Sustainable, Trends Optimistically, a majority of citizens believe education is an investment in human capital that pays long-term dividends—that is an assumption. Many citizens also recognize that Texas public school finance system remains in flux—that is a constraint. In addition, reducing long-standing expansion of complex state and federal compliance-related requirements and deadlines likely reaches consensus. Anything else will probably continue to find a smaller agreement. This chapter introduces basic concepts of public school finance to stimulate discussion and seek solutions for an educational transformation. Local recommendations are beyond the scope of this handbook, but with long-term planning, solutions are possible. Educational finance is a challenging, dynamic, and controversial topic. Texas trends. Schools district expenditures, like cost of living and birthday candles on a cake, increase over time. Moreover, the trend has been to push funding responsibilities down to the local district. Both the TEA and the National Education Association track per-pupil funding. But their numbers do not always match. FY 2006 reported $43.4 billion expended with per-student spending of $9,629 by Texas public schools. That expenditure rose to $61.0 billion with per student expenditure of $11,704 in FY2015. This issue is widespread. Raikes and Darling-Hammond (2019) reported, “In Illinois, per-pupil funding ranged from $8,500 to $32,000 in 2016.” (¶ 7) Funding sources come from state formula, local funding, state non-formula, and federal programs. Some “wealthy districts” have additional sources to enhance the foundational school program. Texas average daily attendance (ADA) is growing by 80,000 each year while maintenance and operational (M&O) costs are increasing at higher rates. Technology costs less but more of it is needed. Debt services continue to rise. Other costs associated with increased financial and business mandates include the need for more outside specialists and consultants. Historically, as the local cost share increased, the state share decreased. The per-student funds generated by small district adjustment (SDA) and mid-size district adjustment (MDA) formulas increase as enrollments decrease. The complexity stems from funding weights, district size, cost of education index, ESL, and property values, and Tier II schools generally split the state vs. local share. A penny of tax effort varies significantly between “property poor” and “property wealthy” districts. Villanueva (2017) contended that Texas relies too much on local taxpayers to fund public education, but sustainable solutions are hard to find. Still pending at the close of the 86th legislative session, property tax rates levied by school districts may drop by an average of 8 cents per $100 property valuation in 2020 and by 13 cents per $100 valuation in 2021. If local property tax relief is [BGE1] fully realized, the state share of education funding will reverse a trend of decreasing its share and increase from 38% to 45%. As an engaged stakeholder, are you familiar with the specific situation in your local school and community?

Macro vs. micro finance. In a capitalistic economy, there are elastic variations of supply and demand. However, there is no shortage of opinion on financial strategies related to educational planning and budgeting. Financial advisers caution there are several methods for financial planning, and clear thinking is required. Some stakeholders and managers choose a macroeconomic assessment method while others want a microeconomic accounting view. Some examine opportunity costs—the loss of potential gain— from other alternatives when one alternative is chosen. Still, others prefer a comparative cost- benefit analysis approach to estimate the strengths and weaknesses of alternative educational models or projects. The microeconomic details of income sources and performance outcomes are beyond this discussion. In the scope of this discussion, perhaps a macroeconomic analysis that considers issues that affect the state and national economy as a whole is the best strategy. Economic data vary due to several essential variables and contexts. However, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics can provide a point in time view. In 2016, Janet Yellen (2017), the chair of the Federal Reserve, advised, “Whenever I am asked what policies and initiatives could do the most to spur economic growth and raise living standards, improving education is at the top of my list.” Macroeconomics looks at the performance, structure, behavior, and decision-making of an economy as a whole. Microeconomics looks at the income/expense ledger of school operations— specifically about how those decisions affect the utilization and distribution of scarce resources. Some stakeholders choose an accounting view while others choose an economic assessment. Still others prefer a cost-benefit analysis approach to estimate the strengths and weaknesses of alternative educational models or projects.

Unemployment rates and earnings by educational attainment, 2017 Unemployment Median weekly Median Lifetime Earnings by Education Highest Educational Attainment, rate (%)* earnings ($)* 2009 Dollars** Doctoral degree 1.5 1,743 3,252,000 Professional degree 1.5 1,836 3,648,000 Master’s degree 2.2 1,401 2,671,000 Bachelor’s degree 2.5 1,173 2,266,000 Associate degree 3.4 836 1,727,000 Some college, no degree 4.0 774 1,547,000 High school diploma 4.6 712 1,304,000 Less than a high school 6.5 520 973,000 diploma *Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/emp/images/ep_chart_001.png **Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2011/collegepayoff.pdf

As a comparison of output benefits, considering the influence of educational attainment provides a useful frame of reference. Ma, Pender, and Welch (2016) reported, “In 2015, median earnings of bachelor’s degree recipients with no advanced degree working full time were $24,600 (67%) higher than those of high school graduates. Bachelor’s degree recipients paid an estimated $6,900 (91%) more in taxes and took home $17,700 (61%) more in after-tax income than high school graduates.” (p. 3) Carnevale, Rose, and Cheah (2011) concluded, “The data are clear: a college degree is a key to economic opportunity, conferring substantially higher earnings on those with credentials than those without” (p. 1). Further, a bachelor’s degree is worth $2.3 million on average over a lifetime vs. $1.3 million for a high school diploma (p. 3). A case of one. Moving from national data to inferences for a small rural Texas school in 2019, consider a graduation class of 20 with 18 (90%) earning an associate degree at high school graduation. Consistent with the P-20 expectations, the added (above high school degrees only) career earnings impact is more than $7.5 million. Move one step forward with 16 of the 20 earning bachelor’s degrees. The combined additional economic impact of the 16 over their careers rises to $15.4 million. You can do the math when 14 of the 20 earn master’s degrees; the career bonus is more than $19.1 million. Now consider the impact when a high percentage of students choose to remain within the community for a career. That’s priceless. Rural school-level issues. House Bill 21, passed in the 85th Texas Legislature, (TEA, 2018), established the Texas Commission on Public School Finance to develop and make recommendations for improvements to the current public-school finance system or for new methods of financing public schools. Although still in flux, following the 86th legislative session, Texas HB 3 is expected to deliver $4.5 billion to Texas schools and add $2 billion to teachers’, librarians’, nurses’, and counselors’ salaries over two years, 2019-2021. The actual salary adjustment may vary widely district by district. With HB 3 legislation, base per-student funding will increase from $5,140 to $6,160 but will also vary district by district. The work continues. Issues range from early childhood education through permanent school fund distributions with a strategy to divide, study, and report. The 86th legislative session increased funding for full day prekindergarten offered to eligible students. The Commissioner’s Rural School Task Force reported issues of teacher recruitment, teacher retention, teacher shortage, lack of interest in becoming a teacher, affordable housing, salary, no career path for advancement, and teacher burnout. Leo Lopez (2018) provided insights on school finance trends from an agency perspective, identifying some 25 key formula inputs from base allotment through charter funding levels. Further, Lopez identified six methods of finance for the foundational school program ranging from local property tax to lottery proceeds. Using 2017 PEIMS data, Lopez reported that instruction, curriculum, and staff development accounted for 60% of all public education expenditures in Texas. Four other cost categories were student support (16%), plant maintenance and operations (13%), school and instructional leadership (7%), and general administration (3%). Lopez reported a negligible amount for community services. Within the 60% by instruction, curriculum, and staff development, Lopez

reported allocations for students with disabilities (15%), accelerated education (5%), state compensatory education (5%), career and technical education (4%), athletics (3%), bilingual and special languages (2%), pre-kindergarten (2%), gifted and talented (1%), high school allotments (1%), and alternative education (1%). Nonetheless, Texas general funding per student was 16% below the state formula funding for 2008. Local school district expenses may vary from these. Swaby (2018) reported the trend for school funding seems to expect schools to do more with the funding they have, and some argue, “there’s enough money in the system and that adding more will not show results—that districts are essentially spending the money incorrectly.” (¶ 5) In the debates regarding educational costs and property taxes, Samuels (2018) wrote, “During the 2008 fiscal year, the state covered roughly 48.5% of the cost of public education, according to the Legislative Budget Board. By the 2019 fiscal year, it will support closer to 38%.” (¶ 2) The Texas public school finance system is under construction. Financing the transformation. In the meantime, thinking about financial planning, like time-management, can be overwhelming. Many financial/time managers like Alan Lakein (1973) recommend sorting the laundry list into a priority list of ABCs and then work first on the As. Counting economic costs (expense) and realizing economic benefits (income) is a necessary part of the sorting process. Identifying costs/benefits that increase performance. Use the values identified by the community that lead to college-ready, career-ready graduates. Our experience with Roscoe Collegiate ISD demonstrated that early interventions lead to greater success. When RCISD partnered with Western Texas College, students were more successful in Early College. Learning was more effective when teachers participated in Harvard Instructional Rounds and students used Cornell Note-taking techniques. AVID techniques resulted in students and parents with higher aspirations and expectations. Students who used project-based and inquiry- based methods were more engaged in learning. Curiosity and self-directedness increased when students experienced Montessori methods. These inputs must be examined and sequenced in preparation for the P-20 transformation. Using flowcharting techniques often provide graphic insights, documentation, analysis, and collaboration. The Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model has several supplemental costs that must be recognized. Similarly, estimating benefits from interventions will affect the investment decision and sequence. Identifying and sequencing interventions that increase performance outcomes and college and career readiness. Phase I. ✔ Increasing Aspirations and Expectations of Students and Parents/Guardians ✔ AVID—Advancement Via Individual Determination Phase II. ✔ Common Instructional Framework and Creative Problem-solving ✔ Cornell Note-taking System ✔ Early College coupled with extended learning time

✔ Harvard Instructional Rounds ✔ Instructional Coaches and Common Instructional Planning; Learning Pathways ✔ Partnering with Community Colleges to Access Associate Degrees and Certificates ✔ Project-based Learning and Inquiry-based Learning in relevant STEM areas—Engineering and Biomedical Science/Schoolwide 4-H ✔ Specialized Staffing ✔ The third-90 (recognizing 90% poverty needs) ✔ School-business partnerships and school-based entrepreneurial endeavors to provide student apprenticeships and opportunities to learn, work, and earn. Phase III. ✔ Montessori Pre-K–early elementary ✔ Partnering with Universities to Access Distributed Bachelor’s Degrees and Certificates RCISD began a stepwise addition of about 13 interventions, each with added varying supplemental costs. Current costs, along with options, are available on many of the intervention websites. AVID annual membership is approximately $4,000. New AVID districts are required to enroll in AVID District Leadership (ADL) training. ADL training is an intensive cycle of five trainings providing the AVID District Director with the tools and skills needed to leverage the AVID System in the district. District Directors receive a variety of benefits including ongoing support and coaching, the AVID Library package, and ongoing Summer Institute registration. The 2018-2019 three-year secondary cost projections can be determined using the AVID pricing sheet. Many interventions, such as the Cornell Note-taking System (2019), are available as internet- delivered self-study. A number of interventions, including project-based learning and inquiry- based learning, are described in the literature and add minimal direct costs to implement. References AVID. (2018). AVID path to school wide 2018-2019: professional learning options. Retrieved from https://www.avid.org/cms/lib/CA02000374/Centricity/Domain/1043/2017- 18_Path_PricingSheet_11102017.pdf Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M. & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3&4), 369-398. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653139 Carnevale, A. P., Rose, S. J., & Cheah, B. (2011). The college payoff: Education, occupations, lifetime earnings. The Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. Georgetown, DC: Georgetown University. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2011/collegepayoff.pdf College Board. (2017). Trends in higher education. Retrieved from https://trends.collegeboard.org / Cornell University. (2019). The Cornell note-taking system. Retrieved at http://lsc.cornell.edu/notes.html Hirth, M.L. Review of American Public School Finance 2nd Edition (2013) William A. Owings and Leslie S. Kaplan. Journal of Education Finance. Retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu/article/539780 Lakein, A. (1973). Getting control of your time and your life. New York, NY: New American Library. Leachman, M., Masterson, K., & Figueroa, E. (2017). A punishing decade for school funding. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Retrieved from https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/a-punishing- decade-for-school-funding/

Lopez, L. (2018). Texas Public School Finance Overview. Retrieved from https://tea.texas.gov/schoolfinancecommission/ Ma, J., Pender, M., & Welch, M. (2016). Education pays 2016: The benefits of higher education for individuals and society. New York, NY: The College Board. Retrieved from https://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/education-pays-2016-full-report.pdf Owings, W. A., & Kaplan, L. S. (2013). American public school finance. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Raikes, J. & Darling-Hammond, L. (2019). Why Our Education Funding Systems Are Derailing the American Dream. Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/blog/why-our- education-funding-systems-are-derailing-american- dream?utm_source=ctt&utm_medium=mc&utm_campaign=ldhraikes Samuels, A. (2018). Local taxes in Texas have been rising to help pay for education. Who is to blame? The Texas Tribune. Retrieved from https://www.texastribune.org/2018/02/16/whos-paying-more-texas- education-state-or-local-taxpayers/ Swaby, A. (2018, March 16). Will Texas school finance panel tell schools to do more with less? Some members think it’s predetermined. Texas Tribune. Retrieved from https://www.texastribune.org/2018/03/16/school- finance-efficiency/ TEA. (2018). Texas Commission on Public School Finance. Retrieved from https://tea.texas.gov/schoolfinancecommission/ Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. Retrieved from https://documents.sd61.bc.ca/ANED/educationalResources/StudentSuccess/A_Review_of_Research_on_Pr oject_Based_Learning.pdf Villanueva, C. (2017). Texas relies too much on local taxpayers to fund public education. Center for Public Policy Priorities. Retrieved from http://bettertexasblog.org/2017/07/texas-relies-much-local-taxpayers- fund-public-education/ Wolla, S. (2016). Invest in human capital to build a better future. Retrieved from https://www.stlouisfed.org/annual-report/2016/invest-in-human-capital-to-build-a-better-future Yellen, J. L. (2017, Jan 12). Welcoming remarks. At the Conversation with the Chair: A Teacher Town Hall Meeting, Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/yellen20170112a.htm

Chapter 5. Planning and preparing for change: Roles, responsibilities, rewards. Key Words: Change agents, Communication, Community, Obstacles, Realignment, Responsibilities, Rewards, Roles, Rural, Sustainable The literature is replete with theories and strategies for change—change in organizations, change in personal behaviors, change in thought. Amazon lists 83,000 titles for “change management” literature. No doubt, you are familiar with several strategies. Many schemes are grounded in attitudes, skills, and knowledge. Couched as “ASK,” change benefits from a proactive approach. Perhaps the most important step is to begin. Kurt Lewin (1947) promoted change as three-steps. This — ““CATS” framework that begins with “unfreezing—changing—refreezing.” Ronald Lippitt (1958) spawned the CATS technique into a five-step framework of 1) develop need for change; 2) establish change relationships, 3) work toward change; 4) stabilize change; and 5) achieve terminal relations. Building on this approach, John Kotter (1995) outlined eight steps when transforming an organization. Kotter’s principles expand the core of successful change efforts: 1) increase urgency; 2) build a guiding team; 3) get the vision right; 4) communicate for buy-in; 5) empower action; 6) create short-term wins; 7) don’t let up; and 8) make change stick. Cummings, Bridgman, and Brown (2016) provide a comprehensive analysis of Lewin’s classic work on group dynamics, change, and organizational development. Each iteration of the CATS technique provided better footing and a checklist for establishing a framework for change. Everett Rogers (1962, 2005) introduced the concept of change agents as people who “introduce innovations into a client system that they expect will have consequences that will be desirable, direct, and anticipated.” (p. 32) Stephen Covey (1989) transformed leadership study into the “habits of highly successful people,” and formulated seven steps, advising people to “be proactive” and concluding finally with “sharpen the saw.” As with Covey’s habits, the educational transformation process needs a series of habits if transformation is to be successful. Yet with all the rhetoric about educational change, many external observers believe schools have changed little during this century. The Chinese fortune cookie warned, “Everyone likes progress; nobody likes change.” What are the steps in preparing for change? Ryerson University (2011) reported a 2006 study by Harvard Business Review that found 66% of change initiatives fail to achieve their desired business outcomes. Why is change so difficult? The five most common obstacles to change are listed in the table below. Note that the three italicized obstacles are those that you, as a leader, can influence and overcome/mitigate/reverse.

Obstacles Experienced during Major Organizational Changes Employee resistance 76% Communication breakdown 72% Insufficient time devoted to training 44% Staff turnover during transition 36% Costs exceeding budget 32% * Retrieved from Ryerson University, 2011, p. 6

There are four key roles in the development of the mission/vision who serve as internal change agents. They are: 1) Board of Trustees and Administration Team. 2) Curriculum and Instructional Team. 3) Teacher Champions. 4) Parents and Community Stakeholders. Ryerson University concluded, “Human motivation and behavior helps to explain what motivates behavior in people with different personalities or temperaments. Who is engaged by change, who wants stability and values past practice, who focuses on relationships or prefers a compelling argument for the change initiative?” What are the critical roles and responsibilities of internal change agents? Characterized as “inside-out,” the internal team consists of administrators, board of trustees, consultants, staff, and teachers. As a group, they share many of the roles and responsibilities for the transformation of the traditional K-12 model to the new P-20 System Model. Clampitt (2005) recognizes three responsibilities for managers: 1) managing the data-information relationship, 2) managing the information-knowledge relationship, and 3) managing the knowledge-action relationship.

Title Role Responsibilities* Creates original ideas about what the future will or Visionary could be like Implements change strategies that influence the Administrators Advocate organization Acts as a change agent for long-term organizational Catalyst change Advises and nurtures original ideas about what the Visionary Board of Trustees future will or could be like Policy-maker Authorizes a principle of action or operation Provides analysis of issues that fall within the Adviser executive’s purview Consultants Assists with implementing changes and answering Coach change-related questions; follows up to provide individualized feedback

Curriculum & Provides sequenced materials; .facilitates adoption; Instructional Planner provides feedback. Team Staff Promoter Liaising with the organization and its activities Moves the organization forward, not allowing it to Leader stagnate Offers feedback on issues that fall within the Teachers Adviser executive’s purview Provides influence to students, staff, volunteers, and Motivator stakeholders * Clampitt, P.G. (2005). Communicating for managerial effectiveness

What are the critical roles and responsibilities of external change agents? In a similar characterization, an external team, made up of community members, educational agencies, elected officials, and more, could be viewed as “outside-in” and may influence communication, culture, community ideals/beliefs, knowledge of curriculum, knowledge of monitoring/evaluating, resources, situational awareness, social relationships, and visibility.

Title Role Responsibilities * Communicates and operates from strong ideals Ideals/Beliefs and beliefs about schooling Advocate Is an advocate for the school to all stakeholders Community Fosters shared beliefs and a sense of community member Culture and cooperation Demonstrates an awareness of the personal Spokesperson aspects of teachers and staff Educational Is indirectly involved in the design and agency (TEA, Policy-maker implementation of curriculum, instruction, and ESC) assessment practices Elected official Advocate Is an advocate for the school to all stakeholders Advocate Is an advocate for the school to all stakeholders Demonstrates an awareness of the personal Spokesperson Parent/guardian aspects of teachers and staff Has quality contact and interactions with Stakeholder teachers and students Professional Advocate Is an advocate for the school to all stakeholders association Registered voter Advocate Is an advocate for the school to all stakeholders Special interest Is willing to actively challenge the status quo Change agent group * Adapted from Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005).

What are the obstacles facing transformational change? Faculty resistance, communication breakdown, and faculty turnover are persistent obstacles to transformational change. Resistance to change is the most substantial obstacle that leaders face when initiating a change effort. It can be damaging to the process and potentially stall efforts to move forward if not addressed appropriately. There are many reasons an employee may resist change and so as a “leader of change,” you will need to be sensitive to how individuals respond while keeping in mind that the process of commitment and acceptance will take time. William Bridges (2019) developed a model that reviews the emotional impact of change over time and the leader’s role in this. He described the difference between change and transition. Change is situational and will happen without the people, whereas transformation deals with the psychological impact on the people. He further said, ● When you do not have answers, don’t give answers. ● Remember that change is a fast-breaking story. Sometimes you will hear the news from management; sometimes you will listen to it from employees. ● Even your silence will be interpreted—and probably not favorably. The grapevine will fill gaps. Dempsey and Brafman (2017) recommend that as a leader, you should force yourself to the front lines. This appearance will boost morale. What are the rewards of active communication channels? Schools use several channels of communication for internal and external message sharing. Each channel has strengths and weaknesses that you must understand to optimize organizational communication. Change management is the continuous process of aligning an organization with its marketplace—and doing so more responsively and effectively than competitors. Effective communication brings huge benefits while miscommunication can create negative publicity that lingers for years to correct. Effective communication recognizes and rewards excellence. Multiple communication channels inspire, promote optimism, build self-confidence, and celebrate small victories. Short-term wins nourish faith in the change effort, emotionally reward hard workers, and build momentum. Progress is achieved, and people are inspired by creating short-term wins and being honest with feedback. Clampitt (2005) reminds managers to require and reward innovation, saying, “…the size of the reward matters less than the meaning of the recognition.” (p. 250) With multiple communication channels from which to choose, your selection should consider phasing central distribution or leader presentation as a mass distribution, either horizontal or vertical (organizational hierarchy), and using synchronous and asynchronous methods. It is important to organize communication to keep track of past conversations using threads. Dempsey and Brafman (2017) recommend radical inclusion and connecting with the “edge” of the organization. (I honestly got lost in all the terminology- are these terms commonly known or should you offer further explanation of them? Or at least mention “see chart below” here to keep the reader pressing on?)

Channel Type Example Good Way To: Pros Cons

Central Dropbox Builds consensus Scalable Difficult to gauge communications Email Update/Inform a Reaches multiple impact (one to many) Intranet post large group about stakeholders Impersonal an issue of concern Memo Documentation, Limited opportunity to Press release clarify

Leader CEO video/blogs Make important Content focus Audience often presentation (one Media interview announcements Good way to intimidated to ask to many) address issues questions Press conference Motivate and energize audience Highly credible One-way Town halls source communication Personal Organizational hierarchy

Manager cascade Communication in Inform/update on Personal Manager not (one to few) team meetings team specifics or Trusted source familiar/brought-in Emails sensitive matters Message often fails to get through

Manager dialogue Group discussion Problem Drives behavioral High variability in (interactive) Manager one-on- solve/gain change managers one feedback Helps resolve communication Translate strategy issues skill into action Time intensive

Mobile and social Company blogs Humanizing the Ease of access to If not done media updates (one Company company information properly, the to many) Facebook Time sensitive Tracking sentiment company can be seen as phony Intranet information updates/alerts SMS mobile Twitter

Social media Blogs Creating a dialog Builds engagement Little control of participation Discussion forums Engaging in Gives a human their (Interactive) Twitter debates face to the communication YouTube Sharing company Possible rejection viewpoints of company agenda

Enabling advocates Employees Builds reputation Trusted sources Ability to find (many to many) Suppliers Reaching out to High resonance suitable advocates Customers skeptical High “stickiness” Time sensitive audiences Spread viral message

Synchronous Face-to-face Builds consensus Consensus Expertise Methods Forums Update/Inform a building Impersonal Large meetings large group about Content focus Large audience size Panel an issue of concern Controversial Time sensitive. Small meetings Issues Symposium Expertise Individual needs Process-oriented Relationship focus.

Asynchronous Blog Reach diverse Documentation Consensus building Methods Dropbox audience Large audience Content focus Email Make important size, Technical Controversial Issue Facebook announcements expertise Small audience Instagram Motivate and Personal. size, >Expertise Messenger energize audience Process-oriented Newsletter Relationship focus Time sensitive. Twitter YouTube Website.

Adapted from https://www.gartner.com/en/marketing/insights/articles/how-to-choose-the-right- communications-channel

What is the role of teacher in the larger socio-cultural context in planning and preparing for change? There is no shortage of theories explaining the interaction of factors influencing student achievement. Certainly, teachers play a critical, productive role in developing students’ value systems, including aspirations and expectations, self-regulated learning, and personal responsibilities. Although research often shows the teacher has significant effect when explaining achievement, many variables, including more substantial community engagement, can also impact transformation. Teachers cultivate a work ethic along with parents, employers, extracurricular clubs, youth sports organizations, mentors, and peers. To be active change agents, teachers benefit from communicated policies, clearly expected outcome, and support in adopting curriculum changes. More specifically, political will is required to support teachers, so they can acquire the knowledge, skills, and disposition to become confident change agents in times of uncertainty. Venkateswarlu (2018) answers the question, “What is (the) role of teacher for an ideal school?” by depicting a well-qualified professional who is honest, punctual, and confident and shares

knowledge, invites creative thoughts from students, mentors, and creates a disciplined classroom environment. Accommodating this “ideal” will require systematic professional development in content, methods, and assessments. Transformation will move educational method from a teacher-centered to learner-centered environment seeking to develop collaborative skills necessary to engage in designing and implementing project-based learning. Jensen (2009) discusses a professional development program that is hard-wired into the schools’ systems and is integrated into the workspace rather than on personal time. Overall, the research showed that promoting innovation through education requires context- specific, proactive strategies that address structural drivers of increasing post-secondary preparation, access, persistence, and degree completion for rural students in pre-K through postsecondary education (P-20). What are the roles of private-public education stakeholders in planning and preparing for change? The Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model connects private-public education stakeholders in conscious engagement. A related area here is the research on developing partnerships in and with a school’s community. A number of researchers have conceptualized the process of developing partnerships in and with the community in terms of a lifecycle, moving from a looser structure and more informal relationships in the earlier stages, to a tighter structure and more formalized relationships in the later planning and delivery stages. Kilpatrick et al. (2003) identified five stages in this change process: • trigger; • initiation; • development; • maintenance; and • sustainability. This five-stage process is conceived as a cyclical process rather than linear, in that the knowledge gained from each stage is then fed back into the partnership-development process. ● Triggers, or triggering events, are circumstances that act as catalysts to organizational learning. Generally organizations do not learn proactively but react to change that it usually results from a "disorienting dilemma" which is triggered by a major transition. (Mezirow, 1991) Organizations tend to overinvest in exploiting existing knowledge and underinvest in learning or developing new knowledge to respond to changing environments. (Marsick and Watkins, 2003). ● During the initiation stage, the seeds of collaborative leadership are sown (Chrislip & Larson 1994). At this stage, the process is still informal, as potential stakeholders are identified, and community meetings are held to build support for the initiative.

● The development stage represents a clear shift from informal meetings and gestures of support to a more formal relationship between partners (Kilpatrick et al. 2002). During this stage, relationships become more structured, usually through the formation of a management committee, reflecting a greater shift in ownership from individual leaders to the stakeholder group. During the development stage, a good deal of time and attention is given to matters such as the location and structure of partnership meetings, to ensure support for the partnership at both a managerial and operational level (Cumming 1992). ● Research (Kilpatrick et al 2003) suggests that during the maintenance stage, stakeholders take time to critically reflect on the identity of the partnership and its collective efficacy in terms of outcomes, and to celebrate some interim successes. This sense of shared identity is central to the development of community social capital (Falk & Kilpatrick 2000). ● As noted in Kilpatrick et al (2003), during the final sustainability stage, school and community members renew their vision and goals and scan for opportunities and new problems in relation to the school-community linkage. At this stage, there is evidence of ownership of the leadership process by all stakeholders, and clear evidence of a shift from narrow self-interests to broader community concerns, as described by Chrislip and Larson (1994), Miller and Miller (n.d.) and Mulford, B. (2003, p. 22). Stakeholders cultivate an independence of spirit to explore new roles, ideas, and strategies. Heifetz and Laurie (1997) recommended, “Instead of orienting people to their current roles, leaders must disorient them so that new relationships can develop. Instead of quelling conflict, leaders have to draw the issues out. Instead of maintaining norms, leaders have to challenge ‘the way we do business.’ ” (p. 58) They can do this by asking questions like: ● How must it change, and how can we accomplish this? ● What do advances in brain research and the cognitive sciences teach us about the learning process that we did not know before? ● What are the implications for our hiring practices? How do we best facilitate our teachers’ evolution to contemporary teaching and learning? ● Does 21st century learning demand a renewed attention to inquiry, relevance, and/ or project/problem-based learning, or are these alternate approaches too problematic to adopt wide-scale? Can the curriculum balance the teaching of core academics and 21st century skills? ● Does contemporary learning require a larger role for laptops and other digital tools in the classroom, and what are the pros and cons of wired classrooms? What are the advantages of private-public education stakeholders in planning and preparing for change? Change is a complex and often contentious process that involves a variety of advocates and advisers as well as critics and competitors. These advocates are key to the change process because they: ● Build trust and support for the process and product; ● Share responsibility for decisions or actions;

● Create solutions that are more likely to be adopted; ● Lead to better, more cost-effective solutions; ● Forge stronger working relationships; and ● Enhance communication and the coordination of resources. (Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2015)) What are the challenges of private-public education stakeholders in planning and preparing for change? Typically, a primary challenge of stakeholder involvement is dealing with critics and competitors who may have “false” information. These problems are reduced when the rationale behind the change is better understood and discussed using several channels of communication. to deal effectively with people who may create impediments to reaching consensus and transforming traditional strategies: ● Stakeholders are more likely to be active and cooperative when roles are understood, and participation is transparent. ● Use advance organizer techniques to communicate the scope of the meeting and to set expectations and timelines. ● Establish the agenda and processes at the beginning of the session. ● Model a positive and receptive attitude ● Address objections or concerns directly and involve the group in dealing with them ● Seek to understand all points of view by asking probing questions (e.g., How is the situation affecting your group?). In previous readings, you have examined the sea change that is shaping the 21st century and thought about the planning necessary for change. Executing on the plan is an essential next step. References Bann Seng Tan (2004). The consequences of innovation. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 9(3). Retrieved from http://www.innovation.cc/peer-reviewed/tan-9-3.pdf Bridges, W. (2019). Navigating the transitions of change. Retrieved from http://www.strategies-for-managing- change.com/william-bridges.html Center for community health and development. (2019). Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas. Retrieved from https://ctb.ku.edu/en/about-the-tool-box Childress, S., Elmore, R., & Grossman, A.S. (2006). How to manage urban school districts. Harvard Business Review. (November 2006). Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2006/11/how-to-manage-urban-school-districts Chrislip, D. & Larson, C. (1994). Collaborative leadership, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Clampitt, P. G. (2005). Communicating for managerial effectiveness (3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. ISBN: 076193099X. Corporate Executive Board. (n.d.) Manager’s toolkit for managing change. Learning and Development Roundtable. Retrieved from https://engagelms.scranton.edu/learn/pluginfile.php/54952/mod_resource/content/1/Managers_Toolkit_for_ Managing_Change.pdf Covey, S. R. (2004). The 7 habits of highly effective people. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Cummings, S., Bridgman, T., & Brown, K. G. (2016). Unfreezing change as three steps: Rethinking Kurt Lewin’s legacy for change management. Human Relations, 69(1), 33-60. Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0018726715577707 Ford, J. D., & Ford, L. W. (2009). Decoding Resistance to Change. Harvard Business Review (April 2009) Heath, C. & Heath, D. (2008). Made to stick. New York, NY: Random House. Heifetz, R. A., & Laurie, D. L. (1997). The work of leadership. Retrieved from http://smgrp.com.au/wp- content/uploads/2016/09/The-Work-of-Leadership-Heifetz.pdf Hora, M. T. (2017). Beyond the skills gap. National Association of Colleges and Employers. Retrieved from http://www.naceweb.org/career-readiness/trends-and-predictions/beyond-the-skills-gap/ Hora. M.T. (2017). Beyond the skills gap. National Association of Colleges and Employers. Retrieved from http://www.naceweb.org/career-readiness/trends-and-predictions/beyond-the-skills-gap/ Jensen, E. (2009). Teaching with poverty in mind: What being poor does to kids' brains and what schools can do about it. ASCD Store. Retrieved from https://shop.ascd.org/Default.aspx?TabID=55&ProductId=1090&Teaching-with-Poverty-in-Mind:-What- Being-Poor-Does-to-Kids%27-Brains-and-What-Schools-Can-Do-About-It Johns, S., Kilpatrick, S. Falk, I, & Mulford, B. (2000). School contributions to rural communities: leadership issues. University of Tasmania. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/2891654/School_contribution_to_rural_communities_Leadership_issues Kilpatrick, S., Bell, R. & Falk, I. (1999). The role of group learning in building social capital. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 51(1). Kneece, R. (2015). Five tips to create effective internal communications with your team. Fast Company. Retrieved from https://www.fastcompany.com/3045455/5-tips-to-create-effective-internal- communications-with-your-team Kokemuller, N. (2018). Advantage & Disadvantage of the Different Types of Communication Channels. Retrieved from https://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/advantage-disadvantage-different-types-communication- channels-15774.html Kotter J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), 59–67. Kudray, L. M., & Kleiner, B. H. (1997, May). Global trends in managing change. Industrial Management, 39, 18. Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; equilibrium and social change. Human Relations, 1(1), 5–41. Lippitt, R. (1947). Kurt Lewin, 1890–1947. Adventures in the exploration of interdependence. Sociometry, 10(1,), 87–97. Lippitt, R., Watson, J., Westley, B., & Spalding, W.B. (1958). The dynamics of planned change: A comparative study of principles and techniques. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace. Marsick, V. J. & Watkins, K. E. (2003). Demonstrating the value of an organization's learning culture: The dimensions of the learning organization questionnaire. Advances in Developing Human Resources. 5; 132. Retrieved from http://www.richardswanson.com/textbookresources/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/TBAD- r9b-Watkins.-DLOQ-Demonstrating-Value.pdf Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results. Retrieved from http://www.nysed.gov/common/nysed/files/principal-project-marzanos-21-responsibilities- of-the-school.pdf Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Miller, W. R. & Miller, J. P. (n.d.) Leadership Styles for Success in Collaborative. Retrieved from https://www.leadershipeducators.org/Resources/Documents/Conferences/FortWorth/Miller.pdf

Mulford, B. (2003). School leaders: Changing roles and Impact on teacher and school effectiveness. A paper commissioned by the Education and Training Policy Division, OECD, for the Activity Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers. Ramaley, J. A. (2013). The changing role that education plays. The Journal of General Education, 62(2-3), 144- 159. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/jgeneeduc.62.2-3.0144#r20 Reeves, D. B. (2009). Leading Change in Your School: How to Conquer Myths, Build Commitment, and Get Results. ASCD. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109019.aspx Rogers, E. M. (1983, 2005). Diffusion of innovations (3rd ed). New York, NY: The Free Press. Retrieved from https://teddykw2.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/everett-m-rogers-diffusion-of-innovations.pdf Ryerson University. (2011). Change management leadership guide. Human Resources. Retrieved from https://www.ryerson.ca/content/dam/hr/manager-resources/docs/change-management-leadership-guide.pdf Sayed, Y. (2016). Teachers have a crucial role to play in building social cohesion, The Conversation. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/teachers-have-a-crucial-role-to-play-in-building-social-cohesion-60823 Showalter, D., Klein, R., Johnson, J., & Hartman, S. L. (2017). Why rural matters 2015-2016: Understanding the changing landscape. Rural School and Community Trust. Retrieved from http://www.ruraledu.org/user_uploads/file/WRM-2015-16.pdf Singer, A., & Pezone, M. (2003). Education for social change: From theory to practice. Workplace: A Journal for Academic Labor. Retrieved from http://louisville.edu/journal/workplace/issue5p2/singerpezone.html Texas Education Agency. (2018). Rural schools task force. Retrieved from https://tea.texas.gov/Texas_Educators/Educator_Initiatives_and_Performance/Rural_Schools_Task_Force/ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2015). Getting in step: Engaging and involving stakeholders in your watershed. Tetra Tech, Inc. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015- 11/documents/stakeholderguide_0.pdf Venkateswarlu, T. (2018). What is the role of teacher for ideal school? Quora. Retrieved from https://www.quora.com/What-is-role-of-teacher-for-ideal-school Wiles, J. (2017). How to Choose the Right Communications Channel. Gartner. Retrieved from https://www.gartner.com/en/marketing/insights/articles/how-to-choose-the-right-communications-channel Witt, R., & Orvis, J. (2010). A guide to becoming a school of the future. National Association of Independent Schools. Retrieved from https://www.nais.org/Articles/documents/NAISCOASchools.pdf

Part III. Beyond the Idea: Executing the Plan Chapter 6. Cultivating aspirations, expectations, hope, and grit. Key Words: Aspirations, Communication, Community, Grit, Locus of Control, Obstacles, Resilience, Rewards, Sustainable What characteristics explain the success of learners while other learners give up? The literature is replete with coaching strategies and practices, sometimes confounded by the ambiguity of labels You can't raise the aspirations of a child and then and theories. Certainly, aspirations and leave them hanging. Poverty can't be solved by a project. It's solved by a relationship, collaboration. expectations—creating a new reality for learners of all ages––are crucial for school transformation and community sustainability. Nonetheless, it is complicated but essential. Aspiration is defined as a strong desire to achieve something high or great (Merriam-Webster) or as a strong hope or wish for achievement or success (Cambridge). Aspirations are primarily internalized and must be converted to meaningful practices (Bourdieu, 2010). An expectation, on the other hand, can be both internal and external. Students may have high aspirations for post-secondary education but low expectations of accomplishing a goal. When these low expectations exist, students often seek the lowest common denominator and resign their efforts to achieve the goal. Expectation is defined as the feeling or belief that something will or should happen (Cambridge) or a state of expecting (Merriam-Webster). A Case Review: In 2007, a junior-level upperclassman in a university held high aspirations for attending graduate school. Her high To me, the most shocking thing about grit is how little we aspirations turned to regular positive know, how little science knows, about building it. Every conversations with her adviser/mentor. day, parents and teachers ask me, 'How do I build grit in Correspondingly, her mentor recognized her kids? What do I do to teach kids a solid work ethic? How aspirations, consistently encouraged her do I keep them motivated for the long run?' The honest efforts, and often described scholarships and answer is, I don't know. Angela Duckworth grants that were available. After several months of dialogue and exchange, the student suddenly and sternly said to her adviser, “Do not tell me again about scholarships!” She confessed that although she continued to hold aspirations, she had come to believe she would never receive an award for postgraduate study. She knew of the announcements, but she did not know of a single peer who had received one. “It is impossible!” she said. The mentor’s strategy changed to continue supporting aspirations while introducing a small-step strategy for achieving her postgraduate goals.. Time passed. In 2016, the student completed her doctoral dissertation while on a scholarship. Her success hung on several traits and failures, but aspirations, expectations, grit, and resiliency were major contributing mindsets. So, what are the practical steps in cultivating student success and transforming the environment into a P-20 System Model? Much like the student in the case above, aspirations begin internally but can be encouraged or diminished by external sources. The conversation begins early with a non-judgmental dialogue about dreams and locus of control. An internal locus of control promotes a belief that one can control one’s own life. Conversely, an external locus encourages a belief that life is controlled by outside factors that the person cannot influence, or that chance or fate controls

their lives. Encourage students to verbalize and visualize a created future while encouraging a discussion on the internal locus of control. Regular conversation and student journaling may promote a more positive self-evaluation and self-esteem and reduce the feelings that outside factors or chance control their lives. Regularly ask students, “Is today better than yesterday?” and have them describe the factors that shape their response. Leverage aspirations with communication. When students think the future will be better than the present, they will start working harder today. A first small step encourages reflection on recent events and their effects. Insight is improved using a short but repeated student questionnaire that probes aspirations. Concurrently, a parallel questionnaire for parents links student and parent aspirations and expectations and can reveal continuities or gaps that influence success. The questionnaire may be unique in the school or selected from the literature, but comparisons over time are beneficial. Regular dialogue with the student should be comfortable and safe. After aspirations began to stabilize, introduce expectations and juxtapose expectations with aspirations. It is one thing to aspire to become a concert violinist and quite another to expect to achieve first chair in a symphony orchestra. A sustained, encouraging dialogue is essential to developing a small-step strategy to help students achieve their goals. This exchange must occur at the personal level but also permeates throughout the entire student body, from pre-K through post-graduate degrees and certifications. It is also beneficial for the faculty to engage in similar dialogues as they develop their own aspirations and expectations. The learning and development of the adults in the system are essential to Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model’s success and sustainability. A fundamental element of a sustainable model is addressing the internal development of leadership and acknowledging the natural inflow and outflow of critical players. Aspirations, expectations, and internal locus of control are significant but not isolated factors. Abramson, Seligman, and Teasdale (1978) believed that how people explained successes and failures in their lives related to whether they attributed these to internal or external factors, short- term or long-term factors, and factors that affected all situations. No single variable explains student success—or teacher success for that matter. Hope is defined as “the process of thinking about one’s goals, along with the motivation to move toward those goals (agency) and the ways to achieve those goals (pathways)” (Snyder, 1995, p. 355). The literature demonstrates that hopefulness is a more significant predictor of academic success than intelligence. The Gallup Student Poll (2015) found that a more positive school culture builds engagement and creates and measures hope for the future. Cambridge defines hope as to express the feeling or wish that something desired will happen. Merriam-Webster defines the transitive verb hope as to desire with expectation of obtainment or Hard work beats talent fulfillment and as an intransitive verb as to cherish a desire with when talent doesn’t anticipation or to want something to happen or be true. Measuring work hard. (Anon) hopeful thinking can be a great tool for increasing student success as well as identifying individuals who are low in hope and may benefit from special assistance. However, cultivating hope is complex and involves “setting clear and attainable goals, identifying multiple strategies to reach those goals, and maintaining motivation.” (Zakrzewski, 2012)

Grit, on the other hand, is defined as bravery and strength of character (Cambridge) while Merriam-Webster defines grit as firmness of mind or spirit or unyielding courage in the face of hardship or danger. Duckworth (2018a) contends that one can grow grit from the inside out by leveraging interests, practice, purpose, and hope. Duckworth developed an online 10-item “grit scale” that is self-scored. Duckworth also recognized the value of outside forces like parenting, the community, and culture. In both engineering principles and human nature, resilience is defined as “the capability of a strained body to recover its size and shape after deformation caused especially by compressive stress.” (Merriam-Webster) You likely have experienced this strain while considering pressures of educational change. The ability to bounce back after a disappointment is crucial to success, especially student success. Yeager and Dweck (2012) reported that mindsets that promote resilience can be developed: “When adolescents have or are taught a mindset in which people have the potential to change their socially relevant traits—even if those traits are difficult to change— then they can be more resilient in the face of victimization or exclusion.” (p. 310) When asked how to cultivate aspirations, expectations, and hope and build grit, Duckworth said, “The honest answer is, ‘I don’t know.’ ” Nevertheless, we are confident that when we create a positive learning environment by listening carefully to students’ and parents’ aspirations, channel internal locus of control, reinforce realistic expectations, and nurture hope and resilience through tough situations, students’ tomorrows will be better than their yesterdays. References Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. E. P., & Teasdale, J. D. (1978). Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 49-74. Bourdieu, P. (2010). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. New York, NY: Routledge. Callina, K. S., Johnson, S. K., Buckingham, M. H., & Lerner, R. M. (2014). Hope in context: Developmental profiles of trust, hopeful future expectations, and civic engagement across adolescence. Journal of Youth Adolescence. doi:10.1007/s10964-014-0096-9. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kristina_Schmid_Callina/publication/260211581_Hope_in_Context_ Developmental_Profiles_of_Trust_Hopeful_Future_Expectations_and_Civic_Engagement_Across_Adoles cence/links/0c960537b5d4c8a8e8000000.pdf Colan, L. (2014). 3 ways to better execute your plan. Retrieved from https://www.inc.com/lee-colan/3-ways-to- better-execute-your-plan.html Day, L., Hanson, K., Maltby, J., Proctor, C., & Wood, A. (2010). Hope uniquely predicts objective academic achievement above intelligence, personality, and previous academic achievement. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 550–553. Retrieved from http://www.pprc.gg/uploads/hope.pdf Duckworth, A. (2016a). Grit: The power of passion and perseverance. New York, NY: Scribner. Duckworth, A. (2016b). Grit Scale. Retrieved from https://angeladuckworth.com/grit-scale/ Gallup, G. H. (1976). Human needs and satisfactions: A global survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 40(4), 459– 467. Retrieved from https://academic.oup.com/poq/article-abstract/40/4/459/1872209 Gallup Student Poll. (2015). Gallup student poll 2015 results. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/reports/189926/student-poll-2015- results.aspx?g_source=link_NEWSV9&g_medium=TOPIC&g_campaign=item_&g_content=Gallup%252 0Student%2520Poll%25202015%2520Results Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2010). The other side of innovation: Solving the execution challenge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2013). Beyond the idea: How to execute innovation in any organization. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Green, S., Grant, A., & Rynsaardt, J. (2007). Evidence-based life coaching for senior high school students: Building hardiness and hope. International Coaching Psychology Review, 2(1), 24-32. Retrieved from http://groups.psychology.org.au/assets/files/icpr_2_1_march07.pdf#page=24 Greenaway, K. H., Margaret Frye, M., & Cruwys, T. (2015). When aspirations exceed expectations: Quixotic hope increases depression among students. Retrieved from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0135477 Hart, C.S. (2017). How do aspirations matter? Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 17(3). Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19452829.2016.1199540 Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J., & Schmeck, R. R. (2009).. Role of the big five personality traits in predicting college students’ academic motivation and achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(1), 47- 52. Lopez, S. J. (2009). Gallup student poll national report. Retrieved from http://www.americaspromise.org/sites/default/files/d8/legacy/bodyfiles/GSP%20National%20Report.pdf Robison, J. (2013). Making hope a business strategy. Business Journal. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/businessjournal/160361/making-hope-business-strategy.aspx Snyder, C. R. (1995). Conceptualising, measuring and nurturing hope. Journal of Counselling and Development, 73, 355–360. Snyder, C. R., et al. (2002) Hope and academic success in college. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 820-826. Retrieved from http://www.ofyp.umn.edu/ofypmedia/pdfs/highered/fye/hope_and_academic_success_snyder.pdf Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302–314. Retrieved from https://sfbuild.sfsu.edu/sites/default/files/Yeager%20and%20Dweck%20 (2012).pdf Zakrzewski, V. (2012). How to help students develop hope. Greater Good Magazine. Retrieved from https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/how_to_help_students_develop_hope

Chapter 7. Creating an environment for innovation. Key Words: Change agents, Cognitive bias, Communication, Community, Disciplined experiment, Inclusion, Innovation, Obstacles, Risk aversion, Rural Public schools aren’t built for the execution of innovation. Govindarajan and Trimble (2013a) recognized this limitation in business organizations as well. They concluded that organizations are built for continuing operations and more and more of the same. Yet in rapidly changing times, more of the same gets less of the same. Eric Shinseki (2001), a retired four-star general, predicted, “If you dislike change, you’re going to dislike irrelevance even more.” Given the changes in our emerging educational operating environment, innovation is an appealing task—but it evolves into hard work quickly. The list of innovators is lengthy. Thomas Edison is the poster child for innovation. Lee Iacocca built Ford Motor Company’s most successful car since the Model T as a skunkworks project in a backend shop. Clayton Christensen (1997) coined disruptive innovation when entering a low-end market and progressively taking market share. Peter Drucker has been cited more than 12,000 times for his 2014 book Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Govindarajan and Trimble (2016) have spent more than 30 years studying how to move from ideas to execution using a “3-shoebox strategy.” No one said it was easy. A Google search for “innovations in business” found 27 million citations compared with only 110,000 for the “innovations in education” search. One site explains innovators in education are “anchored in its commitment to school leadership as a collective responsibility—or shared leadership” (Innovators in Education, 2018). In Chicago Parent, Carrie Rodovich (2018) explains the ways local schools are innovators in education and that innovation is a distributed discovery enterprise across the Chicago school system with little policy or market presence. Childress, Elmore, and Grossman (2006) noted, “One of the biggest management challenges anywhere is how to improve student performance in public schools.” (¶ 1) Yet the problem remains more than a decade later. Childress, Elmore, and Grossman concluded that “urban school systems are vastly more complex than businesses, yet the knowledge about how to manage them is amazingly sparse.” (¶ 4) Matching operating environments with models. Schachter (2013) reviewed Govindarajan and Trimble’s book Beyond the Idea. Govindarajan and Trimble suggested three distinct models for effectively executing innovation initiatives. Model 1 is for small schools but the problem is scaling. It is extremely difficult to coordinate these slivers of improvement coming from many people. So, the focus must be on modest or small improvements in people’s area of responsibility. The challenge for central administration is motivation—keeping change agents inspired to innovate and cope with risk. Govindarajan and Trimble recognized a second model selected for repeatable initiatives that can be duplicated and are predictable. The model must manage the uncertainty in a series of stages that screen out initiatives that seem unlikely to be successful. The management challenge is process management and maintaining consistent protocols across the organization. The third model is customized. By creating a special team where work is done and recognized and rewarded and failures are not punished. People’s roles and responsibilities change, thereby altering regular structures and hierarchies. Govindarajan and Trimble recognize agility as a critical

attribute. Schachter advises, “You simply don’t get breakthrough innovation without breakthrough organizational design.” (¶ 12) Given these frameworks, it is important to match the model with the local operating environment while recognizing assumptions and limitations. Dempsey and Brafman (2017) explain that rapid changes within operating environments are largely due to media speed, technologies, and shifting organizational culture and expectations. New forms of social media produce “digital echoes,” described as narratives that are often factually inaccurate. Drucker argued that technology is a vehicle of change in attitudes, values, and behaviors. However, new technologies require advanced training to integrate into a “learning management system.” Peter Senge (1990) called the transformation a “learning organization,” but it has been slow to be adopted. A shift in organizational cultures may blossom when opinion leaders are less risk-averse and have vested proprietary interest in fostering change. When matching operating environments with models, it is crucial to recognize the effects of culture and context, which can influence the speed of change and decision-making processes. Inclusion and building the right team. Dempsey and Brafman (2017) discussed three central points to harness power including the cost of exclusion, bringing a cause to pre-existing communities, and inclusion as participating, personalizing, and purposeful. The point made that although you need to know a lot, you also need to know what you do not know. A more reliable set of facts and narratives is known when information is collected from the edge of the organization and throughout the community. Listening is a key to learning while amplification creates team expectations and inclusion empowers the membership. Here’s how: ● Communicated purpose, shared goals, community, perceived order, and predictability increase inclusion and innovation. ● Transforming research findings into compelling narratives resonate within the community and bring consensus. ● Connecting evidence-based practice increases the impact when connected through community leaders using a decentralized approach. Build a team with a very particular structure, one that makes it possible to build simultaneously something new while sustaining what exists. Govindarajan and Trimble (2013b) described the process in How Stella saved the farm: A tale about making innovation happen. Their advice is to carefully select and implement the best model for moving from ideas to action. In a complex, changing, and competing environment, leaders aspire for trust and confidence. To pass on confidence, Dempsey and Brafman advise to begin by revealing self, then promoting individual potential, and finally interconnecting within the team—large or small. Dividing the labor. Daft (2017) examined the role of administrators and employees in the process leading to innovation adoption. A marked division of labor was found. The evidence indicated that two distinct innovation processes—bottom-up and top-down—can exist within an organization but internal and external communication requires special effort. These findings propose a dual-core model of organizational innovation.

Run a disciplined experiment. Three decades of research convinced Govindarajan and Trimble that a disciplined experiment is the best strategy to integrate innovation into organizations. The challenge often is how to continue the work and maintain a peaceful environment while executing the innovation. Using a parable, Govindarajan and Trimble (2013b) cast 11 characters to describe “How Stella saved the farm.” Given the cast, you can often identify the characters within your organization and strategies for inclusion. Govindarajan and Trimble (2013b) recommend: ● Building a team with a very particular structure, one that makes it possible to simultaneously build something new and sustain what exists. ● Implementing an appropriate model for moving from ideas to action. Reducing risk and fear of failure. Risk aversion and risk-seeking span a range of behaviors from absolute aversion to participating to manic exhilaration with complete disregard to consequences. Individuals may favor the chance of reward while others avoid the potential of negative outcomes. van Dorresteijn (2017) found several demographic factors that influence risk-tolerance including education and wealth being less risk averse while age, gender, culture, race and religion appear to have a minor impact. It is complex behavior but with large effects. So, how can we mitigate risk while integrating educational innovation in our system? Literature suggests focusing on three components: people, processes, and the organization. Encouraging dialogue allows people to challenge the status quo and consider new possibilities without negative consequences. Dempsey and Brafman (2017) present six tools including developing a bias for action. Simultaneously, Dempsey and Brafman identify valued dispositions as “listen; amplify, and include.” Unconscious bias influences decision-making and ranges from conformity bias to confirmation bias. Dimara et al., (2015) identifies a taxonomy of 154 cognitive biases organized in 7 main categories that describe systematic patterns of deviation for norms of judgement. Dempsey and Brafman recommend inclusion processes to gather information from the edge of the organization. They note listening and collaboration have always been essential elements but are more critical in today’s educational environments. Today’s rapid change is due to media speed, advancing technologies, and shifting organizational cultures. They describe “digital echoes” as messages passed from one to another but often distorted in the process. Tensions exist between verifiable truths and foggy distortions. Dempsey and Brafman also recognize that a fear of losing control promotes exclusion—and quickly advise that exclusion is the wrong course of action. With the Deepwater Horizon explosion fresh on their minds, Kaplan and Mikes (2012) summarized that “risk management is too often treated as a compliance issue that can be solved by drawing up lots of rules and making sure that all employees follow them. … But rules-based risk management will not diminish either the likelihood or the impact of a disaster.” (¶ 1) Reducing risk-avoidance requires consistent, timely communication strategies. People are different in their levels of tolerance and organizations instinctively resist change. Wayne Gretzky countered with the philosophy “You’ll always miss 100% of the shots you don’t take” but also advised, “Skate to where the puck will be.”

Creating mutual respect. Building relationships involve respect, communication, trust, and boundaries. Martin-Egge (1999) recognized the unique cultures in today’s global communities and the need to demonstrate respect for differences while building on commonalities. Creating respect has a multitude of suggested strategies but may be reduced to listening, trusting, helping, and encouraging. So, how can we create and maintain mutual respect among partners? A Google search for “how to create mutual respect in the workplace” generated 72 million results. Repeating the search for “how to create mutual respect in the classroom” generated more than 10 million. No shortages here. Repeating the Google search for “how to implement mutual respect among colleagues and stakeholders” generated 5.8 million. Evidently, the process becomes less understood—at least less written about. Topping the list is “listening to each other without judgment.” Communication is at the core of human relationships, and it should be no different among colleagues. You should regularly show colleagues that you care about their well-being, help each other, and encourage each other to be himself or herself and accept who they are. Success or failure often hinges on actions that make people feel like they belong. Research by Clarke and Mahadi, (2015) concluded, “Our findings suggest mutual recognition respect is an important form of respect in workplace relationships that can bring benefits to both the individual and the organization…” (Abstract) Finding the list of recommendations is easy. Implementing the recommendations into everyday relationships is not as easy. Sustaining what works while building something new. With more than three decades of experience, Govindarajan and Trimble, along with a score of co- authors, concluded that business must continue while transforming for the future. When the two camps—maintainers and transformers—are separated and isolated, conflict is inevitable. Govindarajan and Trimble (2010) conclude the best approach is to “set up a partnership between the innovation team and the team who maintain excellence in ongoing operations.” (p. 7-8) Further, nearly all innovation builds on a firm’s existing resources and knowledge. Govindarajan and Trimble recommend three steps to make the joint venture work. First, identify ongoing tasks the maintaining team can handle and assign only those tasks that flow along the same path as current operations. Next, Govindarajan and Trimble recommend assembling a dedicated team to begin the step-by-step transformation. They advise bringing in outside perspectives and creating new cultural norms. Finally, listen carefully and proactively manage conflicts while they are still small. The key is having an innovative leader who can collaborate well with the maintenance faculty and a principal who supports the dedicated team, prioritizes the organization’s long-term interests and adjudicates competition for resources. Create an environment for sustainable growth. Disraeli (1867) said, “Change is inevitable in a progressive country. Change is constant.” Later John C. Maxwell (2009) said, “Change is inevitable. Growth is optional”—but the same could also be said about success. So, by this time, the question isn’t about “if” but rather about “how.”

How do we manage sustainable growth? Govindarajan (2016) proposed a three-box strategy separating past, present, and future boxes. The framework suggests “forget the past,” and create the future while managing and optimizing the current business. From a different context and perspective, Dempsey and Brafman (2017) reduce the process in three steps: 1) understand the operating environment, 2) include the community from the core to the edge, and 3) establish and maintain trusting relationships. Consider how these steps would work in your environment. Understanding the culture and context of the operating environment is crucial for creating and maintaining growth. Sustainability depends on collecting, validating, and sharing information throughout the organization while separating facts from narratives that pass through the community but may become distorted. Ultimately, what the public wants creates and sustains change. Include the community in the adoption process with innovators and early adopters and add early majority and late majority to the campaign quickly thereafter. Ultimately, add laggards or non-adopters while providing insights to the transformation rationale. A sense of belonging is crucial to organizational sustainability. The diffusion and sustainability of innovations are measured sequentially through the individual decision-making beginning with awareness, interest, evaluation, trial, and adoption. Ian Maxwell (2009) in an economic analysis reported, “It is now widely recognized that innovation is a key growth driver and, therefore, a high priority for senior executives worldwide.” (p. 1) Maxwell provides ample evidence by comparing Apple to General Motors, showing that innovation and growth are inextricably linked. Maxwell further demonstrates that waves of innovation are shorter and have become more compact during the past century. Dempsey and Brafman, Govindarajan, and Gratton and Erickson agree that building collaboration and trust are essential in ensuring and managing sustainable growth. Although the actions are continuous and intertwined, by relinquishing control, using an instinct for inclusion, and building collaboration and trust, leaders can shape and sustain influential organizations. Ambidextrous leaders, those who are both task-oriented and relationship-oriented, sustain growth by describing what they want accomplished but allowing flexibility in how to do it. Providing role models of collaboration builds bonds among the faculty, students, parents, and the community. John C Maxwell (2009) said, “If we are growing, we are always going to be outside our comfort zone.” Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527) adds to our discomfort reminding us, “There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success than to take the lead in the instruction of a new order of things.” Stephen Covey (2004) advised us to “begin with the end in mind.” That end-in-mind construction plan often requires scaffolding to protect frameworks until the new structure is secure. References Childress, S., Elmore, R., & Grossman, A. S. (2006). How to manage urban school districts. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2006/11/how-to-manage-urban-school-districts Christensen, C. M. (1997, 2000, 2016). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing. Retrieved from http://claytonchristensen.com/key- concepts/

Clarke, N. & Mahadi, N. (2015). The significance of mutual recognition respect in mediating the relationships between trait emotional intelligence, affective commitment and job satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 105(15), 129-134. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886916309813 Clarke, N. & Mahadi, N. (2015, June). Mutual recognition respect between leaders and followers: Its relationship to follower job performance and well-being. Journal of Business Ethics, 141(1). Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281180988_Mutual_Recognition_Respect_Between_Leaders_an d_Followers_Its_Relationship_to_Follower_Job_Performance_and_Well-Being Covey, S. R. (2004). The 7 habits of highly effective people. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Daft, R. L. (2017). A dual-core model of organizational innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 21(2). Published Online: 30 Nov 2017 https://doi.org/10.5465/255754 Dempsey, M. & Brafman, O. (2017). Radical inclusion: What the post-9/11 world should have taught us about leadership. Berkeley, CA: Missionday. ISBN 978-1-939714-107 Dimara, E., Franconeri, S., Plaisant, C., Bezerianos, A., & Dragicevic, P. (2015). A task-based taxonomy of cognitive biases for information visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics. Retrieved from http://visualthinking.psych.northwestern.edu/publications/DimaraTaxonomy.pdf Disraeli, B. (1867). Change is inevitable in a progressive country. Change is constant. speech at Edinburgh, England. 29 October 1867, in Times 30 October 1867. Oxford Essential Quotations (5th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191843730.001.0001/q-oro-ed5-00003685 Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2010b). Stop the innovation wars. Harvard Business Review, 88(7-8). Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2010/07/stop-the-innovation-wars Govindarajan, V. (2016). The three-box solution: A strategy for leading innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2010a). The Other Side of Innovation: Solving the Execution Challenge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.tuck.dartmouth.edu/uploads/content/other-side-of-innovation-sample.pdf Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2013a). Beyond the idea: How to execute innovation in any organization. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2013b). How Stella saved the farm: A tale about making innovation happen. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Gratton, L., & Erickson, T. J. (2007, November). Eight ways to build collaborative teams. Harvard Business Review. November. Innovators in Education. (2018). About us. Retrieved from http://www.innovatorsineducation.org/about/history Kaplan, R. S. & Mikes, A. (2012, June). Managing risks: A new framework. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2012/06/managing-risks-a-new-framework Kaplan, R. S., & Mikes, A. (2012, June). Managing risks: A new framework. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2012/06/managing-risks-a-new-framework Martin-Egge, S. A. (1999) Creating an environment of mutual respect within the multicultural workplace both at home and globally, Management Decision, 37(1), 24-28. https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/00251749910251996?journalCode=md Maxwell, I. E. (2009). Managing sustainable innovation: The driver for global growth. New York, NY: Springer. ISBN 978 0 387 87580 4. Retrieved from http://www.doc88.com/p-943562463056.html Maxwell, J. C. (2007). The Maxwell daily reader: 365 days of insight to develop the leader within you and influence those around you. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson. Maxwell. J. C. (n.d.) Change is inevitable. Growth is optional. Retrieved from https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/68.John_C_Maxwell

McCollum, B. (2017, June 2). Aretha Franklin took 'Respect' to the top, 50 years ago this week. Detroit, MI: Detroit Free Press. Retrieved from https://www.freep.com/story/entertainment/music/2017/06/02/aretha- franklin-respect-50-anniversary/363439001/ Rodovich, C. (2018). The ways local schools are innovators in education. Retrieved from https://www.chicagoparent.com/the-ways-local-schools-are-innovators-in-education/ Schachter, H. (2013). Three ways to move from idea to innovation. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/careers/management/three-ways-to-move-from-idea- to-innovation/article15387933/ Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York, NY: Doubleday Shinseki, E. (2001). Marines Turned Soldiers. National Review Online, December 10, 2001. Retrieved from http://wist.info/shinseki-eric/38802/ van Dorresteijn, F. (2017). Which socio-demographic factors determine risk taking behaviour of investors? Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Radboud University School of Management. Retrieved from https://theses.ubn.ru.nl/bitstream/handle/123456789/4908/MTHEC_RU_Floor_van_Dorresteijn_s4208943. pdf?sequence=1 Wikipedia. (2019). List of cognitive biases. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

Chapter 8. Scaffolding the change process. Key Words: AVID, Common Instructional Framework, Early College High School (ECHS), Harvard Instructional Rounds, Montessori components, Project-Based Learning, Scaffolding, STEM, Strategies Scaffolding has several definitions depending on the context. In construction, scaffolding is a temporary structure for holding workers and materials during the erection, repair, or decoration of a building. Educational scaffolding is the temporary supports teachers provide for learners as they work from dependence toward independence. The concept is consistent even when the context is different. During both construction and learning, support is needed until the structures are secured. Occasionally, you find a published work that is appropriate—that fits the intentions and structure for implementing the P-20 System Model. Andrianes Pinantoan (2013) authored a definitive guide for instructional scaffolding and published it in InformED. With permission of Malini Das, editor of Open Source and InformED, we present his work here in its entirety. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Andrianes Pinantoan (2013) wrote, “Educational (or Instructional) Scaffolding is a teaching method that enables a student to solve a problem, carry out a task, or achieve a goal through a gradual shedding of outside assistance. It was first coined by researchers David Wood (Nottingham), Jerome S. Bruner (Oxford), and Gail Ross (Harvard) in their 1976 report, The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving.” “According to its original definition, scaffolding enlists the instructor as an ‘activator’ whose role is to facilitate the student’s incremental mastery of a concept. ‘Fading’ is the process of gradually removing the scaffolding that was put into place for the student until he internalizes the information and becomes a self-regulated, independent learner.” “Two years after their initial report, in 1978, the researchers revisited the work of famed psychologist Lev Vygotsky and found reason to revise their definition. Vygotsky writes in ‘Mind and Society’ (Harvard University Press) that there are two levels of learning that need to be recognized as distinct: 1) the actual developmental level, “that is, the level of development of a child’s mental functions that has been established as a result of certain already completed developmental cycles;” and 2) the potential development level “as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers.” The difference between these two levels is called the student’s ‘proximal zone of development.’ ” “Since 1978, scholars have come to agree that, in order for educational scaffolding to succeed, instructors needed to target each student’s proximal zone of development. And, because a student’s proximal zone of development continually changes as she gains knowledge, educational scaffolding must continue to be individualized accordingly.” The 1980s. Pinantoan (2013) continued, “In the 1980s, University of Albany-SUNY professors Arthur Applebee and Judith Langer expanded the theoretical practice of scaffolding to include the following five features:

Intentionality Appropriateness Structure Collaboration Internalization

The learning task The learning tasks Modeling and The instructor’s External is fueled by a clear pose problems questioning response to scaffolding for the overall purpose; that require activities engage a student work learning task is any auxiliary outside assistance natural sequence recasts and gradually activities but can eventually of thought and expands upon the withdrawn as the contribute to this be mastered by language. student’s efforts student purpose. the student alone. without rejecting internalizes what she has conceptual accomplished on patterns. her own. The instructor’s primary role remains collaborative rather than evaluative.

“Applebee and Langer took the theory formed by Wood et al. and Vygotsky and embedded it in a general framework of language-learning. Reading and writing, they claim in “Reading and Writing Instruction: Toward a Theory of Teaching and Learning,” are extensions and reformulations of earlier language-learning processes: “One does not simply learn to read and write: one learns to read and write about particular things in particular ways.” In comparing the language-learning scenario between an adult and a child to the task-learning scenario between an instructor and a student, Applebee and Langer make a case for discourse acquisition as a vital part of educational scaffolding, and vice versa.” The 1990s. Pinantoan (2013) wrote, “With the next decade came a tighter focus on application theory. Five methods of Educational Scaffolding based on the work of Hogan and Presley (1997) were presented as follows: ● modeling of desired behaviors ● offering explanations ● inviting students to participate ● verifying and clarifying student understandings ● inviting students to contribute clues” “In 1999, Zhao and Orey argued that educational scaffolding could be analyzed for application through six general elements: ● sharing a specific goal ● whole task approach ● immediate availability of help ● intention assisting

● optimal level of help ● conveying an expert model” Pinantoan (2013) discussed the applications of general elements of Zhao and Orey’s general elements: “Sharing a Specific Goal—Although it is the instructor’s responsibility to establish a shared goal, the learner’s interests should be considered and catered to as much as possible throughout the lesson. Zhao and Orey suggest achieving this through inter-subjectivity, or the sharing of intentions, perceptions, feelings and conceptions; assessing the goal in terms of the student’s prior knowledge; being aware of some of the unique, unusual, and often ineffective problem-solving techniques that students use; and allowing input from the student in order to enhance intrinsic motivation.” “Whole Task Approach—The Whole Task Approach spotlights the overall goal to be attained through the learning task. The task is conceptualized as a whole instead of defined by the elements that make it up. This does not mean that the elements are ignored or rendered irrelevant; rather, each feature of the lesson is presented as it relates to the whole. This approach demands less cognitive effort than its alternative, since the overall concept is reinforced with every feature instead of grasped as a final conclusion. The approach is not effective, however, if the material strays too far beyond the student’s proximal zone of development.” “Immediate Availability of Help—If a student is unable to carry out a task on her own, how is she supposed to remain motivated or interested if she doesn’t receive assistance in an efficient manner? Students experience far less discouragement and frustration if someone is there to help them proceed with the learning process. Any success of an instructor is a success of a student, and enhances her drive to learn more (and more independently).” “Intention-assisting—Inherent in the scaffolding process is the act of understanding a student’s present focus (another way to view their zone of proximal development). In order to provide an optimally productive learning environment, educators must relate and confer information according to the student’s own current intentions.” “Sometimes it becomes necessary to redirect the intentions of the learner if she does not have an effective strategy for completing the task. If her current strategy is effective, however, the instructor should not try to change it. It is the essence of scaffolding to help the learner proceed with the least amount of assistance possible.” “Optimal Level of Help—The learner should be given just enough guidance to overcome her current obstacle; the level of assistance should not deter the learner from contributing and participating in the learning process. In other words, the instructor should only offer guidance through the areas of a task that the student cannot accomplish on her own. No intervention should be made if the current task is within the learner’s grasp.” “Conveying an Expert Model—A task can be demonstrated with an expert model, either explicitly or implicitly. In an explicit demonstration, the expert model clearly conveys how to accomplish the task. In an implicit demonstration, the information is outlined around (or implied by) the expert model.”

The 2000s. Pinantoan (2013) acknowledged several methods of educational scaffolding that were introduced in the 2000s. “Based on the work of Hogan and Presley, educational strategist Verna Leigh Lange stated in her 2002 article on Instructional Scaffolding that there are two major steps involved in the process: (1) “development of instructional plans to lead the students from what they already know to a deep understanding of new material,” and (2) “execution of the plans, wherein the instructor provides support to the students at every step of the learning process.”” “Larkin (2002) suggested that teachers could employ the following effective techniques in scaffolding:” “First, boost your students’ confidence. To improve self-efficacy, begin by introducing students to tasks they can perform with little or no assistance. Provide enough assistance to allow students to achieve success quickly. This will help lower frustration levels and ensure that students remain motivated to advance to the next step. This will also help guard against students giving up due to repeated failures.” “Second, help students ‘fit in.’ Students may actually work harder if they feel as if they resemble their peers. Avoid boredom. Once a skill is learned, don’t overwork it. Look for clues that the learner is mastering the task. Scaffolding should be removed gradually and then removed completely when mastery of the task is demonstrated.” Application General tools. Pinantoan (2013) described “Facilitative tools:” ● “Break the task into smaller, more manageable parts. ● Use ‘think alouds,’ or verbalizing thinking processes, when completing a task. ● Use cooperative learning, which promotes teamwork and dialogue among peers. ● Use concrete prompts, questioning, coaching, cue cards, or modeling. ● Other tools might include activating background knowledge and offering tips, strategies, cues, and procedures.” Pinantoan (2013) recognized “the following example scenarios have been adapted from ‘Scaffolding’ by Lipscomb, Swanson, and West of the University of Georgia.” Pre-school. Pinantoan (2013) sourced Morelock, Brown, and Morrissey (2003) (who) “noted in their study that mothers adapt their instruction to the perceived abilities of their children. By modeling or prompting the typical behavior of their children (or behaviors slightly more mature than typical), mothers ‘scaffold’ their guidance in an effort to engage them.” “For instance, a very young child is playing with blocks by stacking them on top of each other. The mother attracts the child’s attention and models how to ‘build’ a wall or bridge by stacking them in a different way and using a toy person or truck to climb the wall or ride over the bridge.

She then watches and assists as needed until the child appropriates the skill or loses interest and moves on to something else. She will try again the next time the child is playing with the blocks or try another construction which she feels will be more attractive to the child.” “The study further suggests that the mother will adapt her scaffolding behavior to the needs of her child. If she sees that the child is imaginative and creative, she will then scaffold beyond the apparent skill level exhibited. Conversely, if she perceives that the child is less attentive or exhibits behaviors which are not easy to decipher, she will then demonstrate new skills instead of extensions to the skills already present. The authors suggest that this could be a possible early indicator for giftedness.” Pre-K-5th. “An elementary math teacher is introducing the addition of two digit numbers. She first solicits the students’ interest by using a ‘hook’ such as an interesting story or situation. Then she reduces the number of steps for initial success by modeling, verbally talking through the steps as she works and allowing the students to work with her on the sample problems.” “An overhead projector is a great tool for this activity because the teacher is able to face the class while she works the problems. She can then pick up non-verbal cues from the class as she works. The students’ interest is held by asking them to supply two digit numbers for addition, playing ‘Stump the Teacher.’ She takes this opportunity for further modeling of the skills and verbally presenting the process as she works through these problems.” “The students are then allowed to work several problems independently as the teacher watches and provides assistance where needed. The success rate is increased by providing these incremental opportunities for success. Some students may require ‘manipulatives’ to solve the problems and some may require further ‘talking through’ the procedures. These strategies may be applied individually or in small groups.” “More challenging problems can then be added to the lesson. Further explicit modeling and verbalization will be required. Some students will be able to work independently while some will require more assistance and scaffolding. The teacher will begin to fade the scaffolding as soon as she is sure that the students can effectively function alone.” 6-12th. “Banaszynski (2000) provides another example of instructional scaffolding in his article about a project in which a group of eighth-grade history students in Wisconsin examined the Revolutionary War from two points of view—American and British. He began by guiding his students as they undertook a sequential series of activities in order to thoroughly investigate the opposing reactions to causes of the war. Then students contributed to a class timeline, which detailed causes, actions, and reactions. Banaszynski describes how work continued:” “After the timeline was completed, the students were arranged in groups, and each group did a critical analysis of primary-source material, focusing on the efforts each side made to avoid the war. This started students thinking about what the issues were and how each side handled them. The next step was to ask a question: Did the colonists have legitimate reasons for going to war against Great Britain? [I] asked each group to choose either the Patriot or Loyalist position and

spend a day searching the internet for primary sources and other materials to support their positions.” “The instructor continued scaffolding by interviewing the groups to probe for misconceptions, need for redirection, and re-teaching. Students later compared research and wrote essays that were analyzed and evaluated by fellow students using rubrics; groups then composed essays that included the strongest arguments from the individual works.” “The project, Banaszynski says, was an enormous success; students began the unit working as individuals reliant upon him for instruction. As work proceeded, the feedback framework was altered so that students were guiding each other and, in turn, themselves. Banaszynski’s role in guiding the research and leading the reporting activities faded as the project continued and requirements became more complicated. As a result, students were able to appreciate their mastery of both materials and skills.” Adult and Higher Education. Pinantoan (2013) sourced Kao, Lehman, & Cennamo (1996) (who) “postulated that scaffolds could be embedded in hypermedia or multimedia software to provide students with support while using the software. They realized that soft scaffolds are dynamic, situation-specific aids provided by a teacher or peer while hard scaffolds are static and specific. Thus, hard scaffolds can be anticipated and planned based on typical student difficulties with a task. With these two aspects in mind, they developed a piece of software called ‘Decision Point’ and tested it with a group of students.” “They embedded three types of hard scaffolds: conceptual scaffolds, specific strategic scaffolds, and procedural scaffolds. The conceptual scaffolds assisted the students in organizing their ideas and connecting them to related information. The specific strategic scaffolds were included to help the students ask more specific questions and the procedural scaffolds were useful to clarify specific tasks such as presentations. Examples of these types of embedded scaffolds include: interactive essays, recommended documents, student guides, student journal, and storyboard templates.” “This type of software would be very useful in higher education and adult learning because it is portable, could be used asynchronously, and allows the learners more independence. One or two initial face-to-face sessions would be required to teach the basics, establish learning communities and relate the class expectations and timeline. The students could then proceed at their pace while working within the framework of their group and the class expectations. The instructor would provide feedback to groups and individuals, be available for assistance and scaffold specific students at their point of need.” “If software with built in scaffolds is not available, then the instructor could provide a similar environment by having an open classroom in which the students are provided with the expectations and a timeline at the onset. They may then choose to attend face-to-face classes, work independently, or work in groups. The more knowledgeable students, as well as the instructor, could then provide scaffolding in and out of the classroom. The hard scaffolds could be provided with textbooks, references, and links on the class website. The instructor would still provide feedback on assignments and class work, be available for assistance, and scaffold specific individuals or groups at their point of need.”

“Appropriately, more responsibility is placed on the adult learner. Motivation comes from within and is based on the learner’s goals and objectives such as advanced degrees, career opportunities, and increased pay. Ultimately, the learner assumes a dual role in that they are students and peer instructors as they scaffold their classmates.” Challenges and benefits. Pinantoan (2013) noted, “As with any other learning theory or strategy, there are challenges and benefits to educational scaffolding. Understanding and comparing both will assist the educational professional or trainer in their assessment of the usefulness of the strategies and techniques as well as allow for comprehensive planning before implementation. The challenges are real but can be overcome with careful planning and preparation.” Pinantoan (2013) posited six challenges: ● “Very time consuming ● Lack of sufficient personnel ● Potential for misjudging the zone of proximal development; success hinges on identifying the area that is just beyond but not too far beyond students’ abilities ● Inadequately modeling the desired behaviors, strategies or activities because the teacher has not fully considered the individual student’s needs, predilections, interests, and abilities (such as not showing a student how to ‘double click” on an icon when using a computer) ● Full benefits not seen unless the instructors are properly trained ● Requires the teacher to give up control as fading occurs ● Lack of specific examples and tips in teacher’s editions of textbooks” Pinantoan (2013) noted, “When assessing the benefits of scaffolding, it is necessary to consider the context in which you wish to implement the strategies and techniques. Additionally, you must know the learners and evaluate their particular needs first.” Pinantoan (2013) posited nine benefits: ● “Possible early identifier of giftedness ● Provides individualized instruction ● Greater assurance of the learner acquiring the desired skill, knowledge or ability ● Provides differentiated instruction ● Delivers efficiency—Since the work is structured, focused, and glitches have been reduced or eliminated prior to initiation, time on task is increased and efficiency in completing the activity is increased. ● Creates momentum—Through the structure provided by scaffolding, students spend less time searching and more time on learning and discovering resulting in quicker learning ● Engages the learner ● Motivates the learner to learn ● Minimizes the level of frustration for the learner”

References Pinantoan, A. (2013). Instructional scaffolding: A definitive guide. Sydney, Australia: InformED: Open Colleges. Retrieved from https://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/teacher-resources/scaffolding-in- education-a-definitive-guide/ Doolittle, P. E. (1997). Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development as a theoretical foundation for cooperative learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 8(1), 83-103. Retrieved from http://www.proactiveteaching.org/pdfs/91.pdf Pinantoan’s References Applebee, A. N., & Langer, J. (1983). Instructional scaffolding: Reading and writing as natural language activities. Language Arts, 60(2), 168-175. Banaszynski, J. (2000). Teaching the American Revolution: Scaffolding to success. Retrieved February 10, 2004, from Education World: The Educator’s Best Friend Website: https://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/curr218.shtml. Benson, B. (1997). Scaffolding (Coming to terms). English Journal, 86(7), 126-127. Hogan, K., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (1997). Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues. Cambridge, MA: Brookline. Lange, V. L. (2002). Instructional scaffolding. Retrieved on September 25, 2007 from https://condor.admin.ccny.cuny.edu/~group4/Cano/Cano%20Paper.doc Larkin, M. J. (2002). Using scaffolded instruction to optimize learning. Washington, DC. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No E639). Vygotsky, L .S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Psychology and Psychiatry, 17. Zhao, R., & Orey, M. (1999). The scaffolding process: Concepts, features, and empirical studies. Unpublished manuscript. Athens, GA: University of Georgia.

Chapter 9. Transforming curriculum and instruction. Key Words: associate degrees, baccalaureate degrees, career development, early college, entrepreneurship, industry internships, industry-certifications, public-private partnerships, STEM, Early College curriculum Curriculum matters. It matters because of its potential impacts on students, teachers, and administrators while reflecting democratic community values. The curriculum is the foundation and cornerstone for learning, schooling, and democracy. In today’s society, high-order cognition along with affective and psychomotor skills are increasingly important. When planning educational experiences, the curriculum should integrate previous and future experiences that provide relevance, give direction, and lead to desired results. This balance should recognize affective, cognitive, and psychomotor learning and harmonize ethnic, cultural, and contextual backgrounds to produce personal and community identity. A Feb. 12, 2015, headline from the Washington Post asked, “What’s the purpose of education in the 21st century? The blogger, Valerie Strauss, reported the work of Arthur H. Camins and his analysis of the question. The fundamental purpose of curriculum development is to ensure that students receive integrated, coherent learning experiences that contribute to their personal, academic, and career development. Further, the curriculum is a series of experiences, both in the classroom and the world that children have in order to meet “objectives,” or abilities and habits that people need for success in life. Although curriculum theorists have many interpretations, John Dewey (1938) put a premium on meaningful experiences in learning and participation in classroom democracy. The Collegiate Edu- Nation P-20 System Model follows the Dewey philosophy. Dewey argued that curriculum should be relevant to students’ lives and that “learning by doing” and engagement are crucial to education. Miller (2018) draws on Dewey’s cycle of learning for a brief and general overview (p. 97). Dewey cycle of learning: 1. An interruption in routine action 2. Problem definition and conceptualization 3. Definition of a working hypothesis problem-solving, return to routine 4. Inference and thought experiment 5. Experimental action that is adopted as an idea or concept or returned to routine problem-solving. Miller, R. (2018). Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000264644 Contrary to orthodox thinking, curriculum planning is a continuous, cyclical process that needs to be fine-tuned to produce outcomes with lifelong value. Like many structural foundations, scheduled maintenance and renovation are needed rather than waiting for insider dissatisfaction or external public pressures. An innovative graphic from the 2019 World Economic Forum illustrates the interdependencies of innovation with education and skills with a ring of economic, social, technological, and governance issues. (World Economic Forum, 2019a, 2019b). The complexities of global interdependence are juxtaposed with a 21st century curriculum.

Tyler’s four questions. Much has been written about transforming curriculum and instruction but seldom so simply and effectively as Ralph Tyler and his 1949 version of Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Tyler organized the transformation into four sections focused on setting objectives, selecting learning experiences, organizing instruction, and evaluating progress. Tyler's theory is based on four guiding, fundamental questions: Question 1. Tyler’s pragmatic approach begins with the grounding question, “What educational purposes should the school seek to attain?” Tyler recognized sources for answering the first question might come from internal or external sources. Learners themselves are a source of purpose based on natural, spontaneous experiences. Proponents for this approach use methods promoted by Dewey, Gardner, Montessori, Piaget, Vygotsky, and others. Although the research and development were done somewhat separately in America, Italy, Switzerland, and Russia, the theorists agreed on the importance of experience and learning by doing. Like classic recipes, each method has unique and non-negotiable elements. These approaches unite visual, auditory, and kinesthetic modalities—encouraging the child to work independently and interdependently while nurturing the joy of self-discovery. Tyler advises, “The educational and social philosophy to which the school is committed can serve as the first screen,” (pp. 33-34) recognizing that context and environment are important. He recognizes subject specialists as another source for curriculum development. Specialists’ advice is particularly useful as the learner begins to focus his or her interests around career pathways or clusters or to complex physical or social problems. Question 2. What educational experiences can be provided that are likely to attain these purposes? In his second question, Tyler delineates “learning experiences” from “content” or “activities.” Tyler, like Dewey, focuses on the “interaction between the learner and the external conditions in the environment to which he can react.” (p. 63) “Conditionally, the learner must be given the opportunity to practice the kind of behavior implied by the objectives” (p. 63) to obtain “satisfactions from carrying on the kind of behavior implied” (p.66) within the range of the student’s ability, and the experience will bring about several outcomes.” (p. 67) Careful observation and patience are recommended by all our consulting experts. Similarly, Montessori methods focus on key developmental stages that encourage child-centered cooperative play. The emphasis is on concrete, rather than abstract, learning, as the child works on stackable activities that teach language, math, culture, and practical life lessons. As a pediatrician, Dr. Montessori advised teachers to “observe—observe—observe.” Dewey (1938) proposed a theory of experience and its relationship to education. Sound educational experience involves both continuity and interaction between the learner and what is learned. (p. 10) Thus, Dewey posits that experience arises from two principles: continuity and interaction. All experiences, both past and present, are carried forward and influence future experiences and decisions. (p. 35) Thus, one might say, “I am a victim of my most recent experience.” Interaction refers to the objective and internal conditions of an experience. (p. 42)

Question 3. In the third question, Tyler asks, “How can these educational experiences be effectively organized?” At the “kitchen level,” the chef can select techniques to produce either scrambled eggs or a soufflé. Creatively sequenced techniques determine the output. Tyler identifies three organizational criteria as continuity, sequence, and integration. Continuity provides recurring and continuing opportunity for these skills to be practices and development.” (p. 84-85) Practice with feedback. Tyler argues sequence goes beyond continuity as it increases the complexity, breadth, and depth of experience to be purposefully step-by-step. Concurrently, Tyler’s organizational integration refers to the horizontal relationship of the curriculum experience.” (p. 85) Dewey’s strategy for sound educational experience involves both continuity of the learning experience and the interaction between the learner and what is learned. (p. 10) Dewey’s principle of continuity proposes that all experiences—past and present—are carried forward and influence future experiences and decisions. (p. 35) Dewey’s principle of interaction refers to the object and internal conditions of an experience. (p. 42) Dewey claims that when an educator views experiential education as a social process, he or she will no longer work in the position of an authoritarian, but will begin in the role as leader of group activities. (p. 59) Tyler allocates six pages to illustrate the organization and reminds that “good teaching always involves a synthesis of several elements.” (p. 94) Question 4. Finally, Tyler asks, “How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained?” Evaluating curriculum and instruction takes several dimensions; formative/summative, criterion/norm, sample/population/product/process, and others. Each takes on a specific purpose and may have internal conflicts. Regardless, Tyler reminds that evaluation becomes a process for finding out how far the learning experiences, as developed and organized, are actually producing the desired results and the process of evaluation will involve identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the plans.” (p. 105) Concluding, Tyler advised, “We must expect to use evaluation procedures to determine what changes are taking place in students and where we are achieving our curriculum objectives and where we must make further modifications in order to get an effective educational program.” (p. 125) Readers must come away with a firm understanding of how to formulate educational objectives and how to analyze and adjust their plans so students meet the objectives. Tyler recommends to: 1. Ask questions and define problems that need to be solved; 2. Develop and use models that represent relevant testable features of scientific explanations or design solutions; 3. Plan and carry out investigations that test, refine or replace existing explanations; 4. Analyze and interpret data; 5. Use mathematics and computational thinking; 6. Constructing explanations and designing solutions; and

7. Engage in arguments based on evidence. Sometimes planning takes on trendy vocabulary. However, the simple question of purpose has significant implications well beyond trends and traditions. By probing the question across various stakeholder groups, a balanced framework may emerge. The P-20 System Model proposes a purpose to prepare learners for life, work, and citizenship—to be college-ready, career-ready, and life-ready. These questions imply that the rate of change will continue to accelerate. So, brace yourself for the many changes coming that will continue to improve education—and our world. References Camins, A.H. (2015). What’s the purpose of education in the 21st century? Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education: Stevens Institute of Technology. Retrieved from http://www.arthurcamins.com/?m=201502 Dewey, J. (1938). Experience & education. Kappa Delta Pi. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experience_and_Education_(book) Fishman, T. D., Ludgate, A., & Tutak, J. (2017). Success by design: Improving outcomes in American higher education. Deloitte Consulting LLP. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/industry/public-sector/improving-student-success-in-higher- education.html Gardner, H. E. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Perseus Books Group. Gardner, H. E. (2006). Multiple intelligences: New horizons. New York, NY: Perseus Books Group. Miller, R. (2018). Transforming the future: Anticipation in the 21st century. UNESCO: Paris and Routledge, New York. Retrieved from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781351047999 National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://nap.edu/13165 Strauss, V. (2015). What’s the purpose of education in the 21st century? The Washington Post. February 12, 2015. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/02/12/whats-the- purpose-of-education-in-the-21st-century/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.90f786aaaae2 Tyler, R. W. (1949, 1969, 2013). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/B/bo17239506.html World Economic Forum. (2019a). Mapping global transformations. Davos. Retrieved from https://toplink.weforum.org/knowledge/insight/a1Gb0000000LrSOEA0/explore/summary World Economic Forum. (2019b). Transformation Maps. Davos. Retrieved from https://toplink.weforum.org/knowledge/explore

Chapter 10. Transforming innovation to practice. Key Words: Community assets, culture, demographics, equity, hope, innovation, infrastructures, poverty, structures. When Solomon wrote, “There is nothing new under the sun,” he obviously did not own a smartphone or a hybrid car with self-driving technology. Today, it seems there are always new things. Azoulay (2017), the Director-General of UNESCO, wrote, “There is no debate that we are living at a time of exceptional innovation.” Innovations vs. inventions. Friedman (2017) warned that new technology platforms are “reshaping everything from how we hail a taxi to the fate of nations to our most intimate relationships.” (inside cover) Technology has already changed learning—we just didn’t notice. For many of us in rural America, it is difficult to believe that our “digital native” children are now in high school and that it is still challenging to get high-speed internet in rural schools. Perhaps the first task in the transformation is to define and describe an innovation. Merriam- Webster (2019) defines it simply as 1: “the introduction of something new,” and 2: “a new idea, method, or device.” Further, M-W explains, “Innovation is the act or process of introducing new ideas, devices, or methods. So, what may be an innovation for one may not be innovative to another. Rogers (2005) says, “Innovation is an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption.” (p. 12) Gosnar (2012) concluded, “Innovation is crucial to a company’s survival. Innovation itself is a very extensive concept that can be comprehended in a variety of different ways. Various scholars have defined innovation to different magnitudes relating to their research industries, businesses or subjects.” (p. 1) Though often interchanged, innovations are not inventions. Innovations change the value, usefulness, and functionality of a product or service for the user. Inventions are the creation of a new product or process and are subject to intellectual property laws. Created in 1790, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issues patents to inventors and businesses for their inventions, and trademark registration for product and intellectual property identification. Each year, the USPTO issues more than 150,000 patents, mainly business focused, that offer 15 years of protected ownership and use. Patent-pending applications offer temporary owner protection in the interim. Clearly, innovations are not inventions. A review of innovation literature finds business organizations with the majority of attention. Today, conversations involve emerging businesses like Tesla, Amazon, or Netflix. A Google search found 27 million “business innovation” results. A similar search for “education innovation” produced 22 million results. The U.S. Department of Education, Office of Innovation & Improvement (2019) describes high-quality STEM teacher-leader networks organized in a layered context. Broadly, educational innovation may be at the federal, state, school, program, classroom, or student/teacher level. Innovations may relate to clusters, ecosystems, platforms, policy, practice, or themes. Theory of change is tied explicitly to Funnell and Rogers’ (2011) theories of adoption- diffusion of innovation. The World Bank (n.d.) says, “Innovation may be characterized by several dimensions including (1) the degree of novelty, (2) the type of innovation (product and process innovation), (3) the

impacts of radical and incremental innovation, and (4) the source of innovation (technological and non-technological innovation.” (¶ 6) Why is innovation difficult? Michael Horn (2014) asked, “Why do public schools struggle to innovate?” Horn argues that organizations, public or private, begin with a value proposition and add a set of resources using a described process to get things done. Horn says, “…The revenue formula defines how much money the organization must bring in to break even and be sustainable. That, in turn, determines the kinds of value propositions that the business model can and cannot offer, which means that these four elements become interdependently locked very quickly.” (¶ 5) Horn recognizes the elements as a value proposition, resources, processes, and culture. Horn adds five unique challenges to traditional public schools—politics, fixed models, non-consumption, risk aversion, and diverse needs in a complicated ecosystem. Two rewards of public school innovation are political mandates and new funding streams. Horn and others recognize that innovation in education is not easy. He also realizes that business and education operate in different ecosystems. How can schooling and education innovate to increase hope, engagement, wellbeing, and future employment? Kaplan (2017) continued that reforms [innovations] could include “improving early childhood literacy and overall college readiness in order to increase the percentage of students who graduate from college in six years or less…” Structural reforms would “improve educational attainment levels to help our citizens better thrive in a world that increasingly demands greater education, training, and adaptability.” (p. 7) The goal of the P-20 System Model is to: 1) drive and sustain educational innovation in education, and 2) create a P-20 demonstration site in Roscoe Collegiate ISD (RCISD) as a trial and adoption center. Our vision is to break the rural poverty cycle, strengthen innovation in public education, and provide access to post-secondary degrees and credentials, thus growing the state’s workforce and increasing its global competitiveness. In this project, three risks emerged: 1. Kindling and maintaining innovation with the community of parents, teachers, administrators, and taxpayers; 2. Coping with generational poverty in a Chapter 42 district while needing to invest in infrastructure essential for a P-20 System Model; and 3. Developing private-public enterprises to address the economic and employment needs of rural Texas and the educational needs of all students to attain “career readiness.” When rewards outweigh risks of failure, then innovation will grow and blossom. Today’s questions include: 1) How do we measure innovation results and outcomes and motivate the organization to deliver across all stages of the process? 2) What metrics are best to measure innovation performance? and 3) How can these results be documented over time? Transforming innovations to practice. Spanning over a dozen years, the Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model has added eight program-level innovations that transformed the traditional K-12 school system. Among many choices, the RCISD-adopted, school-level innovations included Texas A&M AgriLife Extension

Service and 4-H participation, AVID, Common Instructional Framework, Early College High School, Harvard Instructional Rounds, Montessori, project-based and inquiry-based learning, and the STEM Academy. In keeping with the mission, RCISD believes all students will learn and be successful, regardless of their previous life experiences. We believe it is the purpose of our school to educate all students to their highest level of academic performance while nurturing positive growth in social/emotional skills. The Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model recognizes that innovation also occurs at the classroom level and may be selected by one or more teachers independent of school wide innovation. The intention recognized that innovation is the process of ideation, evaluation, selection, development, and implementation of a new or improved process, method, service, or program. RCISD also recognized the phases of innovation of ideation, evaluation, and selection are used to evaluate individual innovation opportunities under consideration. Ryan and Gross (1943) identified five stages for the diffusion of an innovation. Rogers (2005) described the stages as: 1. Knowledge—person becomes aware of an innovation and has some idea of how it functions; 2. Persuasion—person forms a favorable or unfavorable attitude toward the innovation; 3. Decision—person engages in activities that lead to a choice to adopt or reject the innovation; 4. Implementation—person puts an innovation into use; and 5. Confirmation—person evaluates the results of an innovation-decision already made. A 2019 survey found 73 RCISD instructional staff who identified and considered more than 150 innovations for adoption (trial) as an educational practice. From that collection, more than 70 innovations were adopted during the 2017-2018 school year. The innovations ranged from a Montessori teacher who “chose to implement more hands-on activities that would foster critical- thinking skills and would allow for individual growth as well as build cooperative learning skills.” Another teacher wrote, “The fifth-grade teachers strive to connect students’ learning in each subject area using novels. I feel that students need to understand that the subjects are not separate, but are carefully woven together.” A secondary teacher chose to “lower my voice. This changed the whole tone of my classroom. This aspect allows better focus on the student’s part.” Recognizing innovation does not exist in a vacuum, the instructional staff was asked how they consider sources of ideas. They collectively ranked peers, experts, digital, colleges or universities, print, and social media in declining order. Because the staff members range from innovators, early adopters, early majority, and perhaps even late majority and laggards, individuals relied on different sources for information about innovations and to assist them in their adoption decisions. When considering an innovation, the instructional staff ranked the factors Rogers (2005) lists as characteristics of innovation that affect their rate of adoption: relative advantage, observability, complexity, compatibility, and trialability. Ajzen’s (1991, 2006) theory of planned behavior proposes that a person’s intention to perform a behavior is the central determinant of that behavior because it reflects the level of motivation a person is willing to exert to perform the behavior.

Although the rationale is not clear, Rogers (2005) describes these factors in the following order: 1. Relative Advantage— to which you see the innovation as better than the idea, program, or product it replaces; 2. Compatibility—how consistent the innovation is with your values, experiences, and needs as a potential adopter; 3. Complexity—how difficult the innovation is for you to understand and use; 4. Trialability—the extent to which you can test or experiment with the innovation before you have to commit to adopting it; and 5. Observability—the extent to which the innovation provides tangible results. The RCISD faculty collectively rank-ordered the factors that influenced their adoption as 1) relative advantage, 2) observability, 3) complexity, 4) compatibility, and 5) trialability. As you prepare for innovation, you will not know ahead of time what it is schools or teachers will try, or how well it will work. Nevertheless, by seeding a culture of innovation with incentives— reasons plus opportunities—and by reducing the fear of failure, it is incredible the number of innovations that will develop and be adopted/adapted. References Alexander, K., Briers, G., & Shinn, G. (2017, Fall). A view from a rural superintendent’s corner of the world: Small town, big dreams. Insight, 32(3), 16-20. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/tasanet/docs/fall17?e=11039933/55901079 Alexander, K., Briers, G., Coulter, N., & Shinn, G. (2018, Spring). A view from a rural superintendent’s corner of the world: BOLDness required! An invitation to action for rural schools. Insight, 33(1), 34-37. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/tasanet/docs/spring18?e=11039933/60192786 Ajzen I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. Retrieved fron https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/074959789190020T Ajzen I. (2006). Attitudes, personality and behavior, (2nd ed.). New York: NY. McGraw-Hill Education. Azoulay, A. (2017). In Miller, R. (2018). Transforming the future: Anticipation in the 21st century. Paris, France and Routledge, NY: UNESCO. Retrieved from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781351047999 Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Johnson, C. W. (2011). Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. New York, NY: McGraw Hill. Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (2006). Educational innovation and the problem of scale. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan. Retrieved from http://www.sii.soe.umich.edu/documents/CohenBallScalePaper.pdf Friedman, T. L. (2017). Thank you for being late: An optimist’s guide to thriving in the age of accelerations. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Funnell, S. C., & Rogers, P. J. (2011). Purposeful program theory: Effective use of theories of change and logic models. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Gosnar, A. (2012). The classification of innovations: The case of Apple Inc. Ljubljana: University of Ljubljana Faculty of Economics. Retrieved from http://www.cek.ef.uni-lj.si/magister/gosnar795-B.pdf Hines, A. (2009). The future of innovation is provoking innovation via the future. In A. Trifilova, & B. von Stamm. (Eds.), The future of innovation, (pp. 50-51). Burlington, VT: Gower. Hines, A., & Bishop, P. (2015). Thinking about the future: Guidelines for strategic foresight. Houston, TX: Hinesight.

Horn, M. B. (2014). Why public schools struggle to innovate. GettingSmart. Retrieved from https://www.gettingsmart.com/2014/07/public-schools-struggle-innovate/ Miller, R. (2018). Transforming the future: Anticipation in the 21st century. Paris, France and Routledge, NY: UNESCO. Retrieved from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781351047999 Mitra, J. (2017). The business of innovation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. O’Sullivan, D., & Dooley, L. (2009). Applying innovation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. OECD. (2014). Measuring innovation in education: A new perspective. Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264215696-en. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/Measuring-Innovation-in-Education-USA.pdf Orr, G. (2003). Diffusion of innovations by Everett Rogers: A review. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/class/symbsys205/Diffusion%20of%20Innovations.htm Rogers, E. M. (2005). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: NY. The Free Press, Simon & Schuster Inc. Taleb, N.N. (2010). The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Random House Trade Paperback. Taleb, N.N. (2012). Antifragile: Things that gain from disorder. New York, NY: Random House. Texas House Bill No. 1842. (2015). Retrieved from https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/84R/billtext/pdf/HB01842F.pdf TEA. (2015). Districts of innovation. Texas Education Agency. Retrieved from https://tea.texas.gov/Texas_Schools/District_Initiatives/Districts_of_Innovation/ U.S. Department of Education, Office of Innovation & Improvement. (2019). Building STEM teacher leadership. Retrieved from https://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/stem/building-stem-teacher-leadership/ World Bank. (n.d.). Innovation definitions and fundamentals. The Innovation Policy Platform. Retrieved from https://www.innovationpolicyplatform.org/content/innovation-definitions-and-fundamentals

Part IV. Assessing Achievement Chapter 11. Evaluating progress and measuring outcomes. Key Words: Assumptions, Benefits, Change agents, Community, Constraints, Formative, Key Performance Indicators, Obstacles, Rubrics, Rural, Summative, Sustainable “Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted” is often credited to Albert Einstein. Later, Peter Drucker was attributed with a proverb, “What gets measured gets managed” and improved. Regardless of who gets the credits, we can agree that evaluating progress and measuring outcomes are essential for successful transformation. Merriam-Webster defines evaluation as the “determination of the value, nature, character, or quality of something or someone: the act or result of evaluating.” Evaluate is “to determine the significance, worth, or condition of usually by careful appraisal and study.” M-W also notes to evaluate “suggests an attempt to determine relative or intrinsic worth in terms other than monetary.” Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), in revising Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy, reported “evaluating” as a high-order cognition below only “creating.” Anderson and Krathwohl noted, “In the newer taxonomy, evaluating comes before creating as it is often a necessary part of the precursory behavior before one creates something.” What gets measured gets managed is an essential principle for improvement. Evaluation is applied in several contexts or levels: institutional, program, course, teacher, or student. Our primary focus is institutional, but each level is interconnected and interdependent. Institutional effectiveness is integral to the maintenance and development of high-quality academic and service programs as well as to state, regional, and professional accreditation. The Texas Education Agency (2018) accredits public schools in Texas at the district level for grades K-12. TEA awards an accreditation status to each public school district and charter school. TEA does not provide oversight for private schools or vocational (trade) schools in Texas. The accreditation status is based on the academic accountability rating and financial ratings from the Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas. A district or charter must be accredited by the state to operate as a public school. Program evaluation can be defined as “the systematic collection of information about the activities, characteristics, and outcomes of programs to make judgments about programs, improve the program effectiveness, and/or inform decisions about future programming.” (Patton, 1997, p. 23) During the evaluation life cycle, there are five types of evaluation—each with unique contributions.

The purpose of any evaluation is perhaps one of the most critical decisions to make and affects the type of evaluation and methods selected. When thinking about the purpose, involve stakeholders and provide them with formative and impact data. Formative evaluations take place at the classroom, school, and district level and may use informal or formal formats. Either format provide a priori information and insights. Both formats need proper alignment, thorough feedback, and introspective assessment. Formative evaluations help stakeholders understand what matters, the influence of policies, and how to accomplish desired outcomes. Objective impact data help the district plan and incorporate tools and techniques to achieve better outcomes. Historical data provide insights into the social, cultural, and economic benefits to the student, school, and district. Although it is difficult to quantify these social benefits, a systematic analysis would improve the understanding of the full effects of education and provide a basis for considering related policies. A key question is “Are we better today than yesterday?” As in the transformation of a classic 1965 Mustang, photos before the restoration, during the process, and at the rollout are valuable after-action reflections. Outcomes and impacts come over time as the transformation is measured. You cannot capture the progress unless you take the “photos” of the work. Important assumptions about school change. Cody (2009) identified five assumptions about school change that will replace some flawed thinking. Cody said, “The best way to improve student performance and close the achievement gap is to turn each school into a powerful community of learners, where a stable core of teachers model collaboration and creative problem-solving as they improve instruction as a team. This school community extends beyond the walls to include the parents, families, and businesses in the

area so that education is supported by everyone, and learning is connected to the aspirations of the community.” (¶ 4) This assumption can change the trajectory of transformation. Further, Cody declared in his second assumption, “The most powerful assessment is that which is done in the context of learning, within the classroom … But classroom-based formative assessment, connected to ambitious authentic learning, can provide students and teachers with valuable information needed to grow.” (¶ 7) Assumption number three stated, “We need to retain and develop the capacity of the best teachers, and transform them into leaders of strong collaborative communities, where the best practices are developed and shared.” (¶ 9) This assumption is a cornerstone for quality. Further, “Our schools should offer students opportunities to develop in the areas where they are gifted, and encourage the pursuit of needed occupations through scholarships for advanced study.” (¶ 11) Ownership and engagement are strong influencers. Cody concluded, “Students need to feel a direct connection between their education and their future, and that needs to begin before middle school and continue through graduation. Mentors, role models, and community connections can bring students an awareness of how a solid education can help their families in the future. Students should be aware of the many pathways to success, from community college and four-year universities to on-the-job training and entrepreneurship.” (¶ 13) The Collegiate Edu-Nation P-20 System Model argues that the connection needs to begin early and continue in career-long learning. Thus, long-term measures should include assessment of social mobility, income inequalities, and adult literacy. Planning tools. A logic model helps staff, participants, and other stakeholders better understand how programs expect to create change. It essentially a roadmap of a program, showing how it is supposed to work. You can set up a logic model using a flowchart template that includes inputs, outputs (both activities and participants), and short, medium, and long-term outcomes. In addition, the template should identify any assumptions and external factors. The University of Wisconsin-Madison (2019) website also provides an example of a “local evaluation project: building capacity in program evaluation.” A logic model should also include key performance indicators (KPI), which are quantifiable measures used to evaluate the success of an organization, school, program, teacher, or student in meeting objectives for performance. A four-round Delphi panel was used to identify key performance indicators of P-20 student success. The 15-member Delphi panel identified 64 statements in an opening round that have the potential to establish and sustain innovation in small rural schools. The second convergent round reduced the KPI number to 29 and identified instruments that measure KPIs for sustained innovation, diffusion, and early-adoption. A third round cut the KPI number to 23 using the two- thirds threshold as being important (4) or very important (5). Eight of the 23 KPIs achieved a ‘very important” rating and benchmark the performance of P-12 students in the Collegiate Edu-Nation System Model. These eight KPI are: 1. A feeling of personal safety using a confidential, ethical repeated assessment measures; 2. Adult mentoring using a student-identified mentor and sustaining high-impact engagement;

3. Engagement in academic, technical, and arts programs using a student e-portfolio; 4. Mastering grade-level outcomes using repeated assessment measures; 5. Math scores charting repeated measures of progressive numeracy; 6. Reading scores charting repeated measures of progressive comprehension; 7. Student resilience and perseverance using a repeated measures GRIT instrument; and 8. Writing proficiency charting repeated measures of staged acquisition. This formative evaluation process is being used in one pilot. Additional early-adopter schools may identify and benchmark other KPIs based on their culture, community, and student needs. Using rubrics. Rubrics are helpful guides to describe performance in several contexts including architecture, design, baseball, and education. Brookhart (2013) defines an educational rubric as a coherent set of criteria for students’ work that includes descriptions of levels of performance quality on the criteria. The rubric has two major aspects: a coherent set of criteria and descriptions of levels of performance for these criteria. Useful rubrics have appropriate criteria and well-written descriptions of performance. Rubrics may be used to assess processes or products. Research shows increased achievement when rubrics are used in formative evaluations. Two examples of writing rubrics follow: Basic Writing Rubric* Exceeds Growth in Needs Feature Proficient Expectations Progress Improvement Establishes a Develops a focus clear focus Uses some Uses descriptive descriptive Attempts focus language language Lacks focus and Ideas Ideas not fully Provides relevant Details support development developed information idea Communicates Communicates creative ideas original ideas Attempts an Establishes a adequate Some evidence of strong beginning, introduction and Little or no a beginning, middle, and end ending organization Organization middle, and end Demonstrates an Evidence of Relies on single Sequencing is orderly flow of logical idea attempted ideas sequencing

Uses effective Diverse word language choice Limited word choice No sense of Uses high-level Uses descriptive Expression sentence structure vocabulary words Basic sentence Use of sentence structure variety Sentence variety

Has some Little or no Few or no errors Some errors in difficulty in evidence of in: grammar, grammar, grammar, correct grammar, spelling, spelling, Conventions spelling, spelling, capitalization, capitalization, capitalization, capitalization or punctuation punctuation punctuation punctuation Easy to read Readable with Difficult to read No evidence of Properly spaced some due to spacing/ spacing/forming Legibility spacing/forming Proper letter forming errors letters formation errors

*Cox, J. (2018). Writing rubrics. ThoughtCo. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/writing-rubric-2081370

Writing rubric demonstrating criteria and descriptions of levels of performance Exceeds Category Proficient Growth in Progress Needs Improvement Expectations Essay relevant to Essay relevant to Essay somewhat Essay not tied to topic topic. relevant to topic topic Original and creative Communicates Lacks originality No central idea, ideas central idea Central idea unclear rambling thoughts Clearly Demonstrates rambling thoughts Imitative thought communicates central cleverness of thought Unoriginal thought Lacks clarity in its idea, limited enough Demonstrates some thesis to be manageable Demonstrates complexity in its simplicity in its thesis Includes Demonstrates thesis Lacks internal contradictions; lacks sophistication of Acknowledges logical implications thought consistency or logical contradictions and implications Does not provide Demonstrates follows logical sources or terms appropriate implications Unrelated sources Words lack precision complexity in its Evaluate sources Fails to define thesis terms.\Chooses or specificity Defines terms Acknowledges words with general Sentence style contradictions, or Chooses appropriate meaning and mismatches purpose limits and follows words and uses a specificity Sentences lack Writing logical implications generic level of Sentence style structure Long run-on Performance specificity Critically evaluates mismatches purpose sentences sources Sentence style fits Sentences are long Frequent spelling, purpose Limits and defines and rambling punctuation, and terms Sentences are Free of spelling, grammatical errors unnecessary, loosely Chooses words for punctuation, and Passive voice structured, and tend grammatical errors their precise meaning to ramble Difficult to read and uses an Passive voice appropriate level of Difficult to read specificity Minimum spelling, punctuation, and Sentences are varied, grammatical errors clearly structured, and carefully focused Active voice Free of spelling, Challenging to read punctuation, and grammatical errors Active voice Appropriate grade- level reading score

Testing assumptions that influence achievement, benefits, and constraints. Assumptions are the foci for any idea and thus any untested system. Assumptions are things that may be accepted as true or as certain to happen, often without proof. It is important that assumptions are made explicit, and that the number of assumptions is sufficient to describe the experience.

When assessing achievement at the classroom, school, or community level, it is important to examine the underlying assumptions about achievement. Consider the following six assumptions as they apply to your context: ● Assumption 1—Achievement stems from parents, families, and businesses so that everyone supports education, and aspirations of the community are connected to learning; ● Assumption 2—Assessment is coupled with ambitious authentic learning. Learning through creative projects and assignments demonstrate relevant learning to the public and open the school’s walls, so learning is visible; ● Assumption 3—Assessment recognizes the value in developing and retaining effective teachers and supporting them as leaders of strong collaborative communities where best practices are developed, shared, and rewarded; ● Assumption 4—Community connections reinforce how a solid education reduces generational poverty and supplies critical STEM workforce needs; ● Assumption 5—Effective schools provide students with college-ready career-ready options through scholarship and advanced study; and ● Assumption 6 – Preferred outcomes happen through engaged learners. Are there other assumptions that may influence achievement as you evaluate progress and measure outcomes? Important assumptions about assessing benefits. Simultaneously, it is important to examine the underlying assumptions about assessing the desired benefits. Consider the following four assumptions influencing anticipated benefits: ● Benefit 1—Assessments are a vital component for the improvement of educational outcomes; ● Benefit 2—Assessments are an integral part of the instructional process and a central ingredient to help students learn; ● Benefit 3—Assessments help teachers improve the quality of their classroom instruction and align their assessments with valued learning goals and standards; and ● Benefit 4—Assessments provide diagnostic information, guide corrective instruction, and provide students with opportunities to demonstrate success. Important assumptions about assessing constraints. Finally, what anticipated constraints form the third set of essential assumptions? Consider the following 10 assumptions constraining the evaluation process: ● Constraint 1—Diseconomies of scale between large urban schools and small rural schools; ● Constraint 2—Politics often change the focus of the curriculum and student achievement measures without sufficient attention to academic aspirations, performance, and development; ● Constraint 3—Short-range economic changes impact long-range strategies compelling schools to do more with less. Poverty makes it difficult for families to provide the resources children need;

● Constraint 4—Societal and cultural constraints include safety, nutrition, health, crime, drugs, and limited public-private partnerships; ● Constraint 5—Large-scale assessments are expensive while small-scale assessments lack reliability; ● Constraint 6—Assessment must be aligned with curriculum and instruction if it is to support learning; ● Constraint 7—Assessment must connect cognition, observation, and interpretation and be designed as a coordinated whole; ● Constraint 8—Assessments are used for multiple purposes, and each purpose may be compromised; ● Constraint 9—Assessments model how students represent knowledge and develop competence in the subject domain, which allows one to observe students’ performance, and serve as an interpretation method for drawing inferences from the performance evidence thus obtained (p. 2); and ● Constraint 10—Authentic assessment often includes messy, complex real-world situations and their accompanying constraints. The final step is to test these assumptions, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Are these valid assumptions? What additional constraints are unique to your community achievement as you evaluate progress and measure outcomes? The challenge is to consider these assumptions on the basis of three parameters—severity, probability, and cost of resolution. This may require more than one cup of coffee. References Alexander, K. D. (2016). Five Year Education Plan, 2016-2021 Collegiate Edu-Vet — A Veterinary Teaching Hospital. Retrieved from http://www.roscoe.esc14.net/users/0001/Collegiate%20Edu- Vet%20docs/Brochure%20CEVVTHP%20Education%20Plan%20Booklet%2020May-5.pdf Alexander, K. D., Briers, G .E., & Shinn, G. C. A view from a rural superintendent’s corner of the world: Small town, big dreams. Retrieved from http://www.roscoe.esc14.net/users/0001/P- 20/Rural%20Superintendent.pdf Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., et al (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. (Pearson Education Group). Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J,; Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay Company. Bonner, N. R. (2006). Baseball skills assessment: Stand structure for baseball tryouts and skills assessment. Retrieved from https://www.zachevans.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Baseball_evaluation_form.pdf Brookhart, S. B. (2013.) How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. ASCD: Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/112001/chapters/What-Are-Rubrics-and-Why-Are-They- Important%C2%A2.aspx Buriak, P., & Shinn, G. C. (1989). Mission, initiatives, and obstacles to research in agricultural education: A national Delphi using external decision makers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 30(4), 14-23. Buriak, P., & Shinn, G .C. (1993). Structuring research for agricultural education: A national Delphi involving internal experts. Journal of Agricultural Education, 34(2), 31-36. Center for Disease Control. (2018). Types of evaluation. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/std/Program/pupestd/Types%20of%20Evaluation.pdf

Cody, A. (2009). Five good assumptions about school change. Education Week. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2009/05/five_good_assumptions_about_sc_1.html Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (2003). The student evaluation standards: How to improve evaluations of students. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press. Cox, J. (2018). Writing rubrics. ThoughtCo. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/writing-rubric-2081370 Govindarajan, V. (2016). The three-box solution: A strategy for leading innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2010). The other side of innovation: Solving the execution challenge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.tuck.dartmouth.edu/uploads/content/other-side-of-innovation-sample.pdf Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2013a). Beyond the idea: How to execute innovation in any organization. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2013b). How Stella saved the farm: A tale about making innovation happen. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Guskey, T.R. (2003). How Classroom Assessments Improve Learning. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/feb03/vol60/num05/How-Classroom- Assessments-Improve-Learning.aspx National Research Council. (2001). Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from https://www.nap.edu/catalog/10019/knowing-what-students-know-the-science-and-design-of- educational Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pinantoan, A. (2013). Instructional scaffolding: A definitive guide. Sydney, Australia: InformED: Open Colleges. Retrieved from https://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/teacher-resources/scaffolding-in- education-a-definitive-guide/ Texas Education Agency. (2018). 2018-2019 Accreditation Statuses. Retrieved from http://tea4avcastro.tea.state.tx.us/accountability/accreditation/2018_2019_accreditation_statuses.html Tyler, R. W. (1949, 1969, 2013). Basic principles of curriculum and Instruction. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. University of Minnesota (2019). Evaluation instrument search. Retrieved from https://cyfar.org/search_evaluation_instruments University of Wisconsin-Madison. (2019). Local evaluation project: Building capacity in program evaluation. Retrieved from https://fyi.extension.wisc.edu/programdevelopment/files/2016/03/LocalEvaluationproject.pdf University of Wisconsin-Madison. (2019). Templates, examples, bibliography. Retrieved from https://fyi.extension.wisc.edu/programdevelopment/logic-models/bibliography/ University of Wisconsin-Madison. (2019). Logic models. Program Development and Evaluation: Division of Extension. Retrieved from https://fyi.extension.wisc.edu/programdevelopment/logic-models/ Wilson, L. O. (2016). The second principle. Anderson and Krathwohl-Bloom’s taxonomy revised. Retrieved from https://thesecondprinciple.com/teaching-essentials/beyond-bloom-cognitive-taxonomy-revised/

Postscript Bob Dylan wrote, “The times they are a-changin’.” Trends are shaping the future of education, and the transformational changes have been partially examined. We are convinced that the rate of change is accelerating and that innovations are critical in the equation. Among the 21st century trends, community demographics, educational deserts, increasing costs, and technologies are demanding issues vital to survival of small, rural schools. Innovation and strategies for adoption- diffusion are creating pathways to produce productive, active, and social members of society. We are undertaking a bold task as we look back while looking ahead. We recognize that community core values related to education are essential in the process of planning and preparing for change. The community’s values may include access, reduction of poverty, democracy, opportunity, respect, and responsibility. Each value must be identified individually by each school and then widely communicated. Resistance to change comes in many forms; faculty resistance, communication breakdown, faculty turnover, and others. Resistance to change is the most substantial obstacle that change agents face even when they fully understand the theory. Everyone, including public and private stakeholders, has a role in moving the needle. Educational finance is a contentious issue in a capitalistic system, but investment in human capital pays long-term dividends. Earnings and unemployment rates show inverse relationships—when one goes up, the other goes down! An individual with a high school diploma is five times more likely to be unemployed than the holder of a post-graduate degree. Those post-graduate degree holders have three times the lifetime earnings. Even armed with this evidence, moving the “educational ladder” is difficult and requires steady scaffoldings. Executing the plan begins with cultivating aspirations, expectations, hope, and grit. A key performance indicator (KPI) related to student success is resilience and perseverance—a willingness to persist and manage self-doubt and to cope with difficulties and failure and recover quickly. That is a characteristic of successful students and of educational change agents. However, Govindarajan and Trimble (2010, 2013a, 2013b) recognized that business organizations, as well as educational organizations, are built for continuing operations—more and more of the same. An old axiom says, “More of the same gets you less of the same.” Yet, risk aversion is a powerful magnet that locks out good ideas. There are at least three proven models for executing innovation initiatives. Success is more likely when opinion leaders are less risk-averse and have vested proprietary interest. Similar to quality suits and dresses, one size off the rack does not fit all. Like construction of buildings, students benefit from scaffolding for learners as they work from dependence toward independence. During both construction and learning, support is needed until the structures are secured. As an example of support, InformED-Open Colleges provided full access to the Pinantoan (2013) journal article. As the transformation scheme unfolded, RISD recognized dramatic changes in the landscape and that it was unlikely that “more of the same” would create a promising future. Consequently, RISD changed their school name to Roscoe Collegiate ISD and increased exploration for promising innovations and a demonstration center as a proof of concept. That exploration brings us to the first and last steps toward 21st century school transformation—continually testing assumptions, evaluating progress, and measuring evidence-based outcomes. Are you ready? T. S. Eliot posited, “We shall not cease from exploration / And the end of all our exploring / Will be to arrive where we started / And to know the place for the first time.”

References Eliot, T. S. (1943). Little Gidding. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace and Company. Govindarajan, V. (2016). The three-box solution: A strategy for leading innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2010). The other side of innovation: Solving the execution challenge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.tuck.dartmouth.edu/uploads/content/other-side-of-innovation-sample.pdf Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2013a). Beyond the idea: How to execute innovation in any organization. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2013b). How Stella saved the farm: A tale about making innovation happen. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.