Sunday, December 2, 2012

Virtual Learning, Student Choice and Reality of What is Going on Behind the Scenes

The following white paper was written from a teacher's perspective about virtual learning and student/parent choice. Individualized learning is the most important part of StarShine Academy Schools' philosophy. We must grow individual potential if we are to have the world we all hope and pray for. And although StarShine believes kids need to be with other kids ideally in a school environment, to learn how to create meaningful, cooperative, deep human relationships, we also support and use virtual learning within hundreds of home schools.

 
 

 

 

 

Rebel With a Cause

by Sunny Schubert for Wisconsin Interest Magazine
Republished with permission

Virtual schools, viewed skeptically by the educational establishment, have a champion in this veteran teacher.

Kathy Hennings starts her day like any other Wisconsin public school teacher: She’s up, coiffed, appropriately dressed and ready to go.
And then she starts her commute: down the hall in her Cedarburg home from the kitchen to her office. She sits down in front of a bank of two linked computers, and starts going through the 20-plus emails she receives each day from the parents of her students.
Then she and her students settle down for another day of learning—21st-century style—in the Wisconsin Virtual Academy, one of 14 Internet-based online charter schools in Wisconsin.
Hennings has 75 students: 30 first-graders and 45 second-graders. They live in rural areas, villages, towns and big cities all across Wisconsin, from Superior to Stevens Point, from Hudson to Milwaukee.
Their reasons for being in Hennings’ classes are just as varied as their hometowns.
"Some have parents who are really serious about wanting to spend more time with their kids, instead of shipping them off to school for seven or eight hours a day," she explains. "Some children might be advanced learners who want to move faster or in different directions than a regular school curriculum might let them.
Other students might struggle with their studies and benefit from working at their own pace. She also draws kids with special needs or attention-deficit issues. "Others didn’t feel safe in their old school," she notes. "I have at least two who had bullying issues."
The bottom line is this: A virtual classroom can better accommodate a wide variety of learning styles than a regular classroom can.
"It’s all about choice," Hennings says.
That sort of talk that has driven some "brick and mortar" schoolteachers up the wall in the 15 years or so since virtual schools first got a toehold in the educational scene.
In the beginning, the education establishment—notably, the major state teachers union, the Wisconsin Education Association Council, and its political allies in the state Department of Public Instruction—fought virtual schools and online education almost as hard as they fought Milwaukee’s school choice program.
The rancor made Hennings "very sad," she says. After all, "I was a teachers union member for many years."
Hennings graduated from UW-Stevens Point with a degree in elementary education in 1971 and started teaching right away. There were a couple of maternity leaves along the way—her daughters are 31 and 24 now—but she put in 17 years in the Cedarburg schools. She says her big realization was that not even an affluent district like Cedarburg’s could satisfy every child’s learning needs.
Seven years ago, the Northern Ozaukee School District offered her a job teaching in its virtual school, and Hennings jumped at the chance. "I got hooked on technology back in 1996," she says. "I immediately became very excited at the thought of what computers could do to enhance learning. Becoming a ‘virtual teacher’ was an easy transition."
For her, perhaps, but not her colleagues. Her union filed two lawsuits attempting to shut down the Northern Ozaukee virtual school, mostly on the pretext that parents tutoring their children were doing too much of the teaching, and that those parents were not licensed teachers.
"WEAC was suing the school, which was us teachers, and yet they did not ever contact us to find out what virtual education was all about," she says, shaking her head. "It was so sad."
Advocates for virtual education, including Hennings, lobbied the Legislature. Lawmakers from both parties "were far more willing to listen to us than our fellow teachers were," she says. Eventually, a bipartisan-backed bill was signed into law authorizing virtual schools.
Last year, Hennings retired from her Cedarburg job and left the teachers union. She promptly signed on as a teacher for a new online school, the Wisconsin Virtual Academy. The academy is a public charter school operated by an independent board under the auspices of the McFarland School District. It uses an interactive curriculum designed by a Virginia company, K12 Inc., which serves virtual schools throughout the nation.
Hennings explains that the academy’s curriculum was designed to calm the fears about parents acting as unlicensed teachers, while offering families the choice and flexibility that are hallmarks of online learning.
As she explains it, that flexibility can be exercised in a number of ways. A student might choose to work ahead in one subject, like history, and then catch up in another subject, like math or science, later on.
Because attention spans and nervous energy vary widely among children, Hennings says, one student might prefer to work in longer blocks of time than another who needs to get up and move around. Accommodating disparate learning needs could be disruptive in a traditional class, but isn’t a problem in a virtual class.
"Flexibility is the name of the game," Hennings says.
What is not flexible is the curriculum. Each student following the K¹² lesson plans needs a personal computer, which can be provided if necessary. "And then they get boxes and boxes of books shipped to them, and lab equipment, and art supplies," Hennings says.
"Each lesson is very scripted, very spelled out," she adds. "The lessons are designed to teach them key concepts, and that’s what I look for mastery of. They have to show me their work."
The rigid curriculum is designed to ease fears that virtual education is just home-schooling by another name. In contrast to publicly chartered virtual schools, home-schoolers in Wisconsin are not required to follow the state’s curriculum standards, nor take the state’s standardized tests.
Hennings spent the first month of the new school year calling each family and talking to parents and students. Then she began assessing each student’s skills and needs. She identified several students who are particularly good readers and advanced them to second semester in the reading curriculum.
The K¹² reading program for younger students "is really heavy on phonics," she says. "That’s one reason why I like it so much."
She has also broken her two grades into work groups of seven or eight students each, and conducted online "classes" with them. The first-graders, for example, have been discussing the book Sylvester and the Magic Pebble, which their parents read to them, while second-graders discussed Clara and the Book Wagon.
The "classes" are almost the only time all the students are expected to be logged on together, Hennings adds. Classes can be taught via webcams and microphones, so the students can see and hear each other and their teacher.
Hennings says her job is a lot like a regular teacher’s: She is expected to be in her office from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. daily, "and I work on the weekends, and I work in the evenings, but that’s very comparable to teachers in a regular classroom. They work long hours and evenings, too."
Two days every month, Hennings travels to McFarland to meet with her fellow virtual teachers. "It’s very helpful-–the exchange of ideas is just incredible." She says she is paid "very comparably" to regular classroom teachers.
Hennings acknowledges that virtual-school families are different: "One thing all these parents have in common is that they have made the choice to do these lessons at home with their children." That choice shows a level of commitment not always present in the parents of regular-school students.
Ironically, Hennings says, as a mother she would not have been interested in sending her own children to a virtual school.
"I hear that from parents all the time: ‘Oh, don’t you wish there had been schools like this when your own kids were little, so you could have stayed home with them?’ Well...not really," she says with a laugh. "They did fine in regular school."
"But, you know, it was my choice to send them to public school," she adds. "My husband and I were fortunate that if we had wanted to, we could have been able to afford private school, too.
"That’s what this virtual school means to me-–it’s offering parents and students another way to learn...another choice," Hennings says. "And I will stand for this to my dying day: It’s all about choice."

Wednesday, October 10, 2012

This is The STARSHINE EFFECT
Please take the time to read this---our schools are not being managed for the students or teachers---we must change this...Trish 

My technology group and I are constant researchers for what's working best for kids, parents, schools and teachers. The sad part about that is what we continually dig up to prove just how poorly our schools and our politicians who rule them are performing. Our schools are at the mercy of those ruling them (laws and bureaucracy) and almost never in the best interest of the kids or teachers.

Mr. Deming was one of the most influential management leaders of our time and was, in a virtual way, my mentor. I read about much of his work because, having lived in Japan, I was interested in how he had worked with the Japaneses companies to lead them out of the devastation of World War II toward economic dominance. Of course, the U.S. was slow to adopt his innovation because those with the most power did not like his discoveries because it would disrupt their status quo. So it is now in education. Probably his most sited work was "Seven deadly sins of management."

I find it absolutely astounding that today our U.S. education system is following each of these seven proven ways of complete distruction and hardly anyone is objecting. Are we this ill-informed as a nation? Really?

W. Edwards Deming



From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Jump to: navigation, search

W. Edwards Deming
Born(1900-10-14)October 14, 1900
Sioux City, Iowa
DiedDecember 20, 1993(1993-12-20) (aged 93)
Washington DC
FieldsStatistician
Alma materUniversity of Wyoming BSc, University of Colorado MS, Yale PhD
InfluencesWalter A. Shewhart
William Edwards Deming (October 14, 1900 – December 20, 1993) was an American statistician, professor, author, lecturer and consultant. He is perhaps best known for his work in Japan. There, from 1950 onward, he taught top management how to improve design (and thus service), product quality, testing, and sales (the last through global markets)[1] through various methods, including the application of statistical methods.
Deming made a significant contribution to Japan's later reputation for innovative high-quality products and its economic power. He is regarded as having had more impact upon Japanese manufacturing and business than any other individual not of Japanese heritage. Despite being considered something of a hero in Japan, he was only just beginning to win widespread recognition in the U.S. at the time of his death.[2] President Reagan awarded the National Medal of Technology to Deming in 1987. He received in 1988 the Distinguished Career in Science award from the National Academy of Sciences.
 
From a website I use and appreciate:

Seven Deadly Sins of Leadership | Three Sigma Systems

www.3sigma.com/seven-deadly-sins-of-leadership/
 
Seven deadly sins of management according to Deming

  1. Lack of constancy of purpose
  2. Emphasis on short term profits (Overreaction to short term variation is harmful to long term success. With such focus on relatively unimportant short term results focus on constancy of purpose is next to impossible.)

3.      Evaluation of performance, merit rating or annual review (see: Performance Without Appraisal: What to do Instead of Performance Appraisals by Peter Scholtes).

http://www.pscholtes.com/articles/incentiveprogramsareineffective.cfm  9/14/10
To many this will come as a shock. Reward, incentive, motivational and merit programs are sincere, well-intentioned efforts to recognize the good that people do. How could they be the wrong thing to do? How could they be ineffective and even harmful! To read more about this from a valuable resource, with a wealth of rigorous documentation, read Punished by Rewards by Alfie Kohn. I am indebted to Alfie for much of what I write here.

What's wrong with reward, recognition, and incentive systems?

First, they don't work There are no credible data to show that any long-term benefit results from such programs. There are data, however, that show that they do harm.

They often set up a form of internal competition in which people strive to look good and look better than their fellow employees. Sometimes looking good becomes more important than doing well.

  • People pass problems on to others elsewhere and later in the system. "Don't let the problem appear to happen on my watch."
  • People will circumvent the system for personal gain, causing havoc to the system.
  • People will strive to look good even when it may hurt the customers. Sears auto-service personnel -- in order to meet their monthly profit quotas -- provided unnecessary repairs and replaced perfectly good parts. The customers paid dearly so that the repair shops could look good.

The reward programs undermine teamwork and cooperation Employees -- or groups of employees -- competing for a prize (merit pay, contests, rewards, etc.) will regard each other as adversaries. They will act as though they are not part of the same organization, working for common goals, serving the customers together. Instead, they may try to subvert each others' efforts.

Recognition and merit programs often reward those who are lucky and pass by those who are unlucky Far and away the biggest single factor that determines output is the system and its capability. The systems capability is independent of the people doing the work. But not independent of those who design and approve the system.

If everyone in your company did his or her best, day in and day out, you would affect only a negligible proportion of your current quality or productivity problems. Most of your problems are built right into the system. Those who get rewards are those who are lucky enough to work in a system with fewer inherent problems. (The machines work well, the materials are appropriate, the training is good, the policies promote a good work environment, the methods of work are well tested and perfected, etc.) Those who don't get the rewards are -- by and large -- those unlucky enough to work in dysfunctional systems.

Merit and reward systems create cynics and losers In one Milwaukee company, which had an annual "Employee-of-the-Year" award ceremony, I had an opportunity to meet with the year's winner. I was surprised to learn that she was not proud of her award. She was embarrassed by it. She saw the whole ceremony, with all its hoopla and pizzazz, as an occasion invented by managers, so that they could pose as "employee-sensitive." She had two reasons for her cynicism:

  • There were plenty of employees whom she felt deserved recognition as much as or more than she did. She was convinced that the honor was bestowed on her because her boss was the CEO's favorite. The selection process oozed of internal politics.
  • Secondly, she said, "If we were treated with respect and decency on a daily basis, I would not be so skeptical of the sincerity behind this event. On one day a year, management honors its employees. On all the other days, we are treated like objects of utility."

The greatest management conceit is that we can "motivate" people. We can't. Motivation is there, inside people. Our people were motivated when we hired them and everyday, when they come to work, they arrive with the intention of doing a good job. Managers cannot motivate. They can, however, de-motivate. Herzberg established this over 30 years ago (Herzberg, Frederick "One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees?" Harvard Business Review, September-October 1987, pp. 109-120. This is a reprint with commentary, of an earlier classic paper.)

The greatest managerial cynicism is that workers are withholding a certain amount of effort that must be bribed from them by means of various incentives, rewards, contests, or merit pay programs. Most managers are not conscious of such a pessimistic belief, but many of their "motivational programs" are conducted as though this cynical premise were true.

The greatest waste of managerial time is time spent trying to manipulate people's minds and infuse motivation into them. Managers' time would be better spent doing the following:

  • Remove the demotivators. Ask people what gets in the way of their doing work they are proud of. Remove those obstacles to pride in work.
  • Focus on improving the processes. You and everyone in your company need to become more aware of what systems and processes are, and how to study them, and improve them.
  • Focus on customers. Something that provides a lot of gratification and satisfaction to employees is to know that customers are excited about the products and services.

Bring awareness of customers into your organization on a daily basis.

This takes hard work and true leadership. Don't waste any more time or energy on perpetuating myths and pretense. Get on with it!

 

  1. Mobility of top management (too much turnover causes numerous problems)
  2. Running a company on visible figures alone (many important factors are “unknown and unknowable.” This is an obvious statement that runs counter to what some incorrectly claim Deming taught – that you can only manage what you measure. Deming did not believe this and in fact saw it as a deadly disease of management)
  3. Excessive medical costs
  4. Excessive legal damage awards swelled by lawyers working on contingency fees

 

Obstacles to success

Belief that automation computers and new machinery will solve problems

Trying to copy existing solutions without understanding why they work

“our problems are different”

Obsolete business schools that do not teach how to manage

Teaching tools without a framework for using them

Reliance on inspection

Reliance on QC department

Blaming work force for problems when it is really the system

False starts or teaching the latest without a plan of how to use them or their impact or what it will take to get there

Zero defects means nothing unless someone wants to buy it

Inadequate testing of prototypes

Consultants know more than us (they do not, they may have some places for you to go, but they do not know why you are where you are)

 

Out of control action plan  OCAP

 

Action limits (+/- 3 SD) warning limits (+/- 2 SD)

 

Phase I and Phase II  Phase I use Shewhart, Phase II use cumulative sum and EWMA

 

Cusum and EWMA charts for Phase II chapter 5 section 8 and 9 for when detection of small moves in SD are required.

 

Should you use attribute or variables charts?? Variables tell you when you are moving off of desired, attributes are less likely to do so, it is usually easier to find what the problem is from variables data

 

SPC is a passive statistical method for process management, DOE and using distributions to make decisions about causal agent is proactive รจ find the cause of variation

 

 


The Seven Deadly Sins of Management by Lonnie Pacelli

Pride. Envy. Gluttony. Lust. Anger. Greed. Sloth. You either recognize these as the seven deadly sins or as themes for prime-time television. Nonetheless, you were probably taught as a child that these are bad and you shouldn't do them. For purposes of this article, do as you were taught and think bad when you commit these similar sins in the workplace.

As leaders, we are continually being introduced to new techniques and theories. Hammer & Champy's Business Process Re-engineering Model, McKinsey's 7-S Framework, and Kenichi Ohmae's 3C's Strategic Triangle are all examples of strategic models designed to help leaders think about their business in different and innovative ways. What sits on top of all of the models and frameworks, though, are a series of foundational attributes that every leader should possess if he or she is going to have demonstrated, sustained success as a leader.

In my career as a leader, I've been fortunate enough to experience a broad array of leadership situations where sometimes I enjoyed fantastic success, and at other times experienced dismal failure. In looking back at my failures, many of them had nothing to do with a theory, framework, or technology that was utilized. The failures had to do with cracks in my own foundational attributes which left me vulnerable as a leader. I've boiled these down to seven key sins which this article will focus on to help you become a more effective leader.

Sin #1 - Arrogance

Ever known a manager that consistently claimed to know more than the rest of the team? How about one that was unwilling to listen to opposing views? Isn't this just a sign of confidence? What's wrong with that?

Confidence as a manager is crucial as people will look to you, particularly when things get tough. When it runs amok and turns to arrogance, the manager disrespects the team. Show respect and have confidence and you'll do fine. Subtract out respect and you're just an arrogant doofus.

Sin #2 - Indecisiveness

So you have a meeting on Monday and the management agrees on a course of action. On Tuesday, the manager decides to take a completely different course of action. Thursday the manager goes back to Monday's course of action. The following Monday you're back re-hashing through the same problem from last Monday. Blech.

Decisiveness means the manager listens to those around him or her and then makes the best decision for the project that the rest of the team can understand, and sticks to it. While team members may not agree with the decision, they should be able to see the rationale. Decisions without rationale or without listening will ultimately frustrate the team and put a target on your back.

Sin #3 - Disorganization

We've all known the manager that asks for the same information multiple times, keeps the plan in their head versus writing things down, or is so frantic that they're on the verge of spontaneously combusting. Their disorganization creates unneeded stress and frustration for the project team.

The manager needs to have a clear pathway paved for the staff to get from start to completion, and make sure the ball moves forward every day of the project. Disorganization leads to frustration, which leads to either empathy or anarchy.

Sin #4 - Stubbornness

On one of my early project management jobs I was a month behind schedule on a three-month project. I refused to alter the project schedule insisting that I could "make up schedule" by cutting corners and eliminating tasks. Despite the entire project team telling me we were in deep yogurt, I stubbornly forged ahead. I ended up never seeing the end of the project because my stubbornness got me removed as the project manager. Talk about your 2x4 across the head.

The manager may believe his or her view of reality is the right way to go, but it's imperative that he or she balances their own perspective with that of the rest of the project team. Decisiveness without listening to the team leads to stubbornness.

Sin #5 - Negativism

Years back, one of my peer managers, in their zeal to "manage expectations" would consistently discuss the project in a negative light. Either the focus was on what work didn't get done, what the new issue of the week was, who wasn't doing their job. Their negative attitude about the work, people, and purpose of the project sapped the energy, enthusiasm, and passion out of the work. It was a self-fulfilling prophecy; the project failed because the project manager willed it to fail.

This one's simple; a glass-is-half-empty project manager is going to be a horrible motivator and will sap the energy from a team. This doesn't mean that you have to be a shiny-happy person all the time; but that the project manager has to truly believe in what he or she is doing and needs to positively motivate the team to get there.

Sin #6 - Cowardice

Imagine this: the manager who, when pressed on a budget or schedule over-run, will blame team members, stakeholders, or anyone else that could possibly have contributed to their non-performance. Much easier to play the blame game and implicate others because everything didn't go perfectly as planned. What a weenie.

It's perfectly OK to be self-critical and aware of your own weaknesses and mistakes. For a leader to truly continue to grow in their leadership capabilities they need to be the first to admit their mistakes and learn from them as opposed to being the last one to admit their mistakes.

Sin #7 - Untrustworthiness

Simply put, managers that don't display necessary skills, show wisdom in their decisions, or demonstrate integrity aren't going to be trusted. For the team to truly have trust in their leader, they need to believe that the manager has the skills to manage the project, the wisdom to make sound business decisions, and the integrity to put the team's interests ahead of their own. Take any one of these attributes away, and it's just a matter of time before the manager gets voted off the island.

Lonnie Pacelli has over 20 years' experience with Accenture and Microsoft and is currently president of Leading on the Edge™ International. Lonnie's books include "The Project Management Advisor: 18 Major Project Screw-Ups and How to Cut Them Off at the Pass" and "The Truth About Getting Your Point Across". Get the books, leadership products, other articles, MP3 seminars and a free email mini seminar at http://www.leadingonedge.com

 

 


http://www.3sigma.com/seven-deadly-sins-of-leadership/