Vision into Reality Inclusive Collaborative and Culturally Responsive Schools

Vision into Reality—Inclusive, Collaborative, and Culturally Responsive Schools Professor Colleen A. Capper Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis University of Wisconsin-Madison capper@education. wisc. edu

Leading for Integrated, Socially Just Schools and Districts

Session Outcomes n n n Identify characteristics of integrated, socially just schools and districts Understand that integrated, socially just practices apply across ability, language, race/ethnicity, income, and sexual orientation Understand why and how to move beyond separate programs and special interventions to change the core functioning of the school/district

Workshop Framework: Integrated, Socially Just Schools Focus on Equity n Structure: Integrated Environments n High Quality Teaching/Learning: Teacher Capacity n – – n Early Intervention Instructional Design Differentiated Instruction/Collaborative Teams Culturally Responsive Practices and Assessments Leverage Policy and Funding

Literature n Few empirical studies of schools that have significantly raised achievement across student differences n Including students labeled with disabilities and students for whom English is not their home language – not a criterion n Where students learn matters (Sapon. Shevin, 1994; Slavin, et al, etc. )

Research Question for this Session What specific strategies did principals employ to – Increase student achievement? – Make achievement gains in inclusive ways?

Methods n Participants – Significantly raised achievement for students of color, low income students, students with disabilities, English language learners – Did so in inclusive ways – 8 schools – 2 high school, 5 elementary, 1 middle – continue to add to the data base

Methods (cont) n In-depth interview with principal n In-depth interviews with other key staff n Observation n Documents/artifacts n Constant comparative analysis

THE GOAL n Integrated, districts socially just schools and (a) All students, regardless of race, social class, ability, language, sexual orientation achieve at high levels--no gaps. (b) Students integrated with each other-no pull out programs.

Integrated, Socially Just Schools 1. 2. 3. Believe all students can achieve Hold self accountable Imagine a different way of meeting student needs 4. Focus and take action

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT n. Achievement is important n. NCLB may come and go but achievement will always matter

Achievement is the primary inequity and classroom is focus of change “Quality Instruction isn’t everything, it’s the only thing” (Kennewick School District)

1. Believe All Students Can Achieve “. . let not only the city, the state, but the whole country know that you can take a school of so-called poverty, the demographics being probably 90% students of color, free and reduced lunch 90% or 95%. . you can take a group of kids and put them up against any kid in the state and they will compete. If you believe in these kids, they will achieve. . There are no excuses. . I don’t care where these kids come from, when they come in this building, your job is to teach them. ”

2. Hold Selves Accountable Typical educators n Recognize inequities but not hold self accountable n Deficit thinking – blame others, the students themselves, their families for lack of student achievement

Hold Self Accountable (cont) “Now our job is to not leave anybody behind. We want all of our kids, I don’t care if they’re [cognitively disabled], we don’t use that as an excuse. . . This is a no-excuse school. Just because you may be labeled special ed. or you may be labeled ELL, that gives you no reason not to meet the standard or exceed the standard. ”

3. Imagine Different Way of Meeting Student Needs Typical educators n Cannot imagine how general education teachers could be the reading and math experts for literally all their students n Cannot imagine not having special education classrooms, or not pulling out English language learners

4. Focus and Take Action Typical educators n Can imagine it, but not know how to do it. n Get distracted by everything else

Take Action to Raise Achievement n 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Beyond tinkering - Change coherence Restructure staff and re-assign students Provide conditions for authentic relationships among students, regardless of difference Establish school safety Focus on curriculum and assessments Develop teacher capacity

Special Ed Model: Before (Theoharis, 2007) Inclusion: 20+9 Resource Self-Contained: K-5 significant disabilities Resource

Special Ed Model: After (Theoharis, 2007) Inclusive Teaming Inclusive Teaming

ELL Model: Before (Theoharis, 2007) Full time Pullout Half- time Pullout

ELL Model: After (Theoharis, 2007) Fulltime Inclusive/teaming Halftime Inclusive/teaming

1. Restructure Staff and Students n District – Bring back students served out of district (atrisk, alternative, special ed) – Educate all students in school they would attend if they did not have a label (no ESL or special ed specialty schools) – No special bussing/busses

Restructure Staff and Students (cont) School: Goal: Classroom Teacher IS the Expert Goal: Specialists expected to teach all students and general education curriculum (e. g. ESL teacher teaches writers workshop to all students)

Restructure Staff and Students (cont) 1. Assign students to heterogeneous classes (cut tracking, cut “at-risk” classes, cut special ed pull-out) 2. Hire dually-certified teachers (ESL, special ed. , general ed, Title I) 3. Re-assign specialist staff to general ed. classrooms (ESL, special education, Title I, gifted) as classroom teachers or to coteach

2. Provide Conditions for Authentic Student Relationships Across Differences

Example from Practice

Academics n Classroom n “They use the same books as us? ”

“Integration Time” n Lining Up

Lunchroom E E E W W E E E E W W W W W W W W

Music E EEE WW W WE WWWW E EE

Playground Tennis Court WW WW W net E E E E

3. Establish School Safety No name calling/teasing Stop “that’s so gay. ” Teachers themselves make negative comments or anti-gay remarks n School-wide discipline program n n n – Responsive Classrooms – Love and Logic - School-wide incentive program (points for school dances, school events) § Pair with authentic/engaged curriculum and pedagogy

4. Focus on Curriculum and Assessments n n n n Addressed achievement needs not with special pull-out programs (i. e. , homework club, Saturday school, reading recovery, Read 180 etc. ) School-wide curriculum reform School day re-organized to focus on literacy and math blocks (2 hours of structured literacy, daily) Clear standards for student work Clear scope and sequence – teachers know what to teach and when Display student work that meets and exceeds standards Students learn how to assess their own work based on the standard (know current reading levels) All bulletin boards, hall displays show standards and data

Focus on Curriculum and Assessments (cont) “For example, if you were a 6 th grader here, and depending on the teachers the student had, you might do ancient Egypt 3 years in a row. ”

Focus on Curriculum and Assessments (cont) “. . . every teacher really takes each child and breaks down their test scores. . . so they are really designing their lesson plans to reach children where they’re specifically at, so it’s not kind of a stab in the dark where they’re just saying, well, I think kids need synonyms. They really know that these 5 kids tested low in synonyms. . so they will just teach them synonyms for that day. They really try and tweak their lessons to meet exactly where each child is at. ”

5. Develop Teacher Capacity Classroom teachers ARE the experts in reading and math (not special ed. , Title I, etc. ) n On-going professional development on the specifics of teaching n Teacher collaboration as professional development – – Daily individual and team planning time – Weekly planning time with facilitator – Extended planning time (apply for) – Apply for summer planning time n Guidance and social work support teaching teams n

Develop Teacher Capacity (cont) One of the things I told the ELL teachers that they needed to do was they needed to collaborate with the classroom teachers. . . they needed to understand what the whole balanced literacy piece was all about. They needed to teach readers’ workshop, they needed to know how to teach writer’s workshop. . They collaborated with one another so that in the absence of the regular classroom teacher, the ELL teacher would just come right in, so the kids would know them. . . What was interesting about it is the ELL teachers just didn’t work with the ELL kids, they worked with all the kids in the classroom. . . It’s a collaboration piece between the ELL teacher and the regular ed teacher, but that ELL teacher must be able to understand know the curriculum.

Closing “You’ve got to respect them, you’ve got to care about them, and you’ve got to believe in them. . You’ve got to believe that these kids can do it, and now our teachers do. . We care about the kids and we believe in them. Like I told my teachers at the beginning, if you believe in these kids, they will achieve. ”

Closing (cont) “We are on the front lines of a great and truly important civil rights struggle. We are the carriers, the foot soldiers, of a mighty dream of equity in this country. Every day in our classrooms and schools, we are either moving this dream forward or not. . If we are to realize the dream, it really is in our hands. We are the ones who can make the dream come true. ” (Scheurich & Skrla, 2003, p. 27).

Publications Cases of the schools “Educational leaders for social justice” (Capper & Young) (forthcoming, Sage Publishers) n How to do it “Leading for social justice: Transforming schools for all learners” (2007, Corwin Press, Frattura & Capper) “Meeting the Needs of Students of All Abilities: How to Lead Beyond inclusion” (2000, Corwin Press, 2 nd edition, forthcoming, Fall, 2008) (Capper & Frattura) n

Publications (cont) n Articles with further details: Frattura, E. , & Capper, C. A. (2007). New teacher teams to support integrated comprehensive services. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(4), 16 -21. Frattura, E. & Capper, C. A. (2006). Segregated programs versus integrated comprehensive service delivery for all learners: Assessing the differences. Remedial and Special Education, 27(6), 355 -364.

Publications (cont) Capper, C. A. , Rodriguez, M. A. , & Mc. Kinney, S. A. (in press). Leading beyond disability: Integrated, socially just schools and districts. In C. Marshall and M. Oliva (Eds. ), Leadership for social justice: Making revolutions in education (2 nd Ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Publications (cont) n Articles on preparing educators for social justice: Mc. Kenzie, K. B. , Christman, D. E. , Hernandez, F. , Fierro, E. , Capper, C. A. , Dantley, M. , Gonzalez, M. L. , Cambron. Mc. Cabe, N. , & Scheurich, J. J. (2008). From the field: A proposal for educating leaders for social justice. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(1), 111 -138.

Publications (cont) n Capper, C. A. , Theoharis, G. , & Sebastian J. (2006). Toward a framework for preparing educational leaders for social justice. International Journal of Educational Administration, 44(3), 209 -224.

Publications (cont) n Capper, C. A. , Alston, J. , Gause, C. P. , Koschoreck, J. W. , Lopez. G. , Lugg, C. A. , & Mc. Kenzie, K. (2006). Integrating lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender topics and their intersections with other areas of difference into the leadership preparation curriculum: Practical ideas and strategies. Journal of School Leadership, 16(2), 142157. (also suitable for teacher education)