Separating the Wheat from the Chaff

This time of year I sometimes have to remind my younger colleagues to take a breath and not get too worked up about what is going on in Des Moines. As one of the more 'seasoned' in the group, I know too well that we can run ourselves ragged trying to keep up with all of the bills that are filed during the early part of the legislative session, some of which are downright ludicrous. Inevitably, the neighbor of a legislator doesn't like how School District 'X' handles a particular situation in their school district, so the obvious solution is a legislative fix. More often than not, the proposed solution is quite the doozy and the legislator who filed the bill probably agrees. They are just being responsive to a constituent and realize that bill won't see the light of day. Unfortunately these bills oftentimes become the source of a great deal of stress and ill advised emails to said legislator. Admittedly, as a young superintendent I often fell for the trap until bequeathed the gift of experience. Until we reach the first funnel deadline it is a little bit like the wild west in the halls of the capitol. The statistic I heard recently was that somewhere in the vicinity of 1,500 bills will be filed in advance of the first funnel. According to the latest bill tracker on the Iowa Department of Education website, there are more than 75 bills with a direct impact on education. But alas, only about 10% will ultimately reach the finish line. As of last Friday, February 18th we have met that first milestone.

The funnel is meant to begin separating the wheat from the chaff. In order for a bill to stay alive for consideration, it must clear a committee in the Chamber of origin. The process goes a little bit like this. A bill is introduced, and then assigned to a subcommittee of three legislators. The majority of those legislators (two) have to agree to forward it to the full committee. The full committee votes, and if the majority agrees it clears the funnel and remains 'alive' for consideration. In all honesty, this is a pretty low bar. But, it is also a signal to start paying a little more attention. For me, up to this point I have been a pretty casual observer of the legislative process. I'll pay attention from the distance. If I think feedback will be helpful for legislators to understand the impact of a particular bill, I'm happy to oblige. However, I'm not commenting on every 'tin foil hat' idea that is proposed. What I have learned over the course of my tenure is that my opinion isn't really relevant or germaine to the debate. Facts on the other hand, well they can have an impact, particularly if they come from the genuine position of wanting to help. So I don't focus on the silliness, choosing to ignore that completely. We have folks in Des Moines representing us whose primary mission is to seek out and kill these bills. (That's a pro tip for the youngsters who may be following this blog.)

Granted, whatever has met that first low hurdle still has quite a way to go before it gets to the governor's desk. It is incredibly hard for a bill to become a law! Nevertheless, it is a signal to become a bit more attuned to what is transpiring in Des Moines. 

As we have previously discussed, property tax reform continues to be an area of priority this session and I am continuing to monitor those bills. But now that we are through the first funnel, I'd like to spend a bit of time today discussing a few bills that stick out to me and to consider some emerging themes. 

For starters, there are a number of bills with overlapping ideas; which suggests this is a priority area in the legislature this session. Among them are very prescriptive proposals for content that would become required in schools. Now, I understand the desire to add graduation requirements for such things as computer science or adding an additional unit of civics. I can also recognize the noble intent of adding additional physical activity requirements for recess at the elementary. But. Yes there is always a 'but'. Notwithstanding the fact that all of these proposals are unfunded mandates (despite the final paragraph of the bill proclaiming they are not), the one variable that is immovable no matter what: is time. Our school day is 405 minutes long. Each of those minutes has a purpose, whether designated as literacy time, physics class, lunch, recess, or even passing time between classes. Fitting something else into our day is more than an unfunded mandate. It means something else will need to go. Unfortunately, proposals never say, "Stop doing 'X' so you can start doing 'Y'".

One bill that I am particularly interested in learning more about is HF2451. This bill aims to limit the amount of 'school digital instruction limits' that elementary students (those as defined in grades K-5) are permitted. The proposals would mandate students could use these type of devices for no more than 60 minutes per day. Rumors had circulated prior to the start of the legislative session this would be a topic and the next logical step after the promulgation of state law one year ago restricting student cell phone access during instructional time. 

Even though we have reached the first funnel deadline and 'winnowed the field' so to speak, there is still a long way to go before any of these proposals end up state law. We've reached one milestone with many more to go. I'll continue to monitor their progress and keep you apprised. In the meantime, let's not get too worked up about anything yet!

Strategic Hiring-In Search of the Unicorn

In Jim Collins' book, 'Good to Great' he talks about this concept of getting the wrong people off the bus and the right people on the bus. Then, once we have the right talent on board, we have to ensure they are in the right positions where they can provide the most value. That seems like a great place to start our conversation today because, you see not all teachers are interchangeable insofar as to what seat they sit on the bus. Some teaches have specialized credentials, meaning they are only licensed to teach within a narrow content area. Others may be limited to specific grade bands. 

For the most part, those who teach elementary school are considered generalists. This means someone who is an elementary teacher can be employed as a kindergarten teacher or a sixth grade teacher and anything in between. Granted, someone who has experience or desire to teach sixth grade isn't likely to aspire to kindergarten (or vice versa), but the credential remains the same. This type of teacher provides a great deal of flexibility, particularly when dealing with bubble classes. For example, one year you may need three sections of one grade level, and the next year you may need four. In these instances, a teacher can float up or down without any license restrictions. At this level (and at the secondary level for that matter), they are unable to teach art, music, physical education, or reading as a stand-a-lone course, because those also take a very specific license. 

Because of this, hiring at the elementary level typically attracts a larger pool. There is much more elasticity when it comes to placement, and we have greater odds to ensure that we have the 'right people in the right seats'. Now, I certainly don't want to diminish the thoughtful and deliberate work that Mrs. Betts and her team have put into hiring over the last handful of years, but it has been relatively straightforward. Sure, it takes a lot of time, consensus building, and just plain hard work! But things get a bit more complicated once the hiring shifts to seventh grade. 

That's because we are no longer hiring generalists. Now, we are hiring content specialists. You see, a seventh grade teacher can't just teach eighth grade writ large. Once we get to the secondary level, teachers are credentialed by content area. In other words, a 7th grade teacher is licensed in a content area; let's say math. This means they are licensed to teach any math class from grades seven through twelve. Furthermore, when considering science and social studies it becomes a bit more fragmented. Just because a teacher is licensed to teach biology does not mean they can also teach physics-unless they have an additional endorsement. 

This is where hiring practices become a bit more strategic. When looking for content area specialists, we cast as wide of a net as possible. Science teachers who are endorsed in 'all sciences'. Social studies with the same 'all social sciences' endorsement. Even when hiring some of the 'upper elementary' teachers we look for those with a broad range of endorsements in math, science, social studies, and the all important reading. This is because, not only can they teach in the general education setting, if they have a specific content endorsement, we can fill their day teaching that content. The trouble of course is these endorsements must be earned, they aren't just giving them away. And endorsements cost money, money that young people in search of a Bachelor's Degree don't always have. It makes the candidate pool smaller, and when those with multiple endorsements are discovered we call that 'finding the unicorn'-while not like the mythical creature, it is very rare-and incredibly valuable. Once we find that rare unicorn, the decision may be whether or not it makes sense to hire that person early knowing that, while we don't necessarily need someone with those endorsements right now, two or three years down the road we will. For reference we talked about the concept of Looking Around the Corner a few weeks back when it comes to financial decisions for the district, which is undoubtedly used to shape our long term strategy. It helps us to inform our ability to make those long term strategy decisions. 

Complicating the matter a bit further is the organizational structure of the instructional schedule and how our building(s) are utilized. 

Instructionally, our day is organized into eight periods. Teachers at the secondary level (7-12) typically have a class load that fills of seven of those eight periods with instruction, with the eighth period designated as a 'prep' period. This period is for exactly what it states: to prepare for instruction. It may include planning lessons, responding to email, collaborating with colleagues, or meeting with the principal. The challenge becomes obvious once our first four section grade level enters the seventh grade. At that point, we will need four sections of seventh grade and three sections of eighth grade. With our current staffing model, we should be able to make that work. It will require us to 'shave off' a few study hall options but staffing it should work. The follow on year: 2030-2031 is when we start to have some issues. Minor issues, but issues nonetheless. This is when the ability to staff our 'exploratory schedule' and some electives at the high school begin to be impacted. We will begin to notice that we are short one section in one content area. Each succeeding year out to the 2034-2035 school year it compounds. The trouble being that no one is looking for a job teaching one section of math. Or one section of social studies. And on and on. The solution? The elusive unicorn. 

If the primary issue is staffing the program, then the secondary issue is building utilization. Indeed this puzzle has two parts. While unlocking the paradox of the unicorn, we also need to determine where these teachers (and students) are going to live. This take a great deal of thought to map out a coherent strategy. Our building utilization models need to run out to 2034-2035. The class of 2035 is currently in third grade. This would represent a scenario where the district could potentially be considered a four section district in grades K-12. Will they all fit? Our current analysis suggest...maybe. Truthfully we need to take our time to arrive at the answer. Luckily we have ample runway with which to make this decision!

As our deliberations evolve insofar as building utilization is concerned we'll work on the primary problem: chasing the unicorn.