Anne Jolly's Diary

Entry 66: The team leader raised her eyebrows and her face broke out in a "You must be kidding!" look. "No," she stated half-apologetically. "Our Impact Team isn't meeting this week." I expected as much. As I drove to school this morning, optimism had briefly overtaken common sense. "The Impact Team meetings will go on as usual during the next two weeks" the idealistic, impractical half of my brain had chirped. "You must be kidding!" retorted the realistic, "pour-on-the-cold-water" half.

That's because tomorrow marks the first day of The Test. For the next two weeks every student in the school will hunker over a high-stakes multiple-choice exam. (High stakes for the school and teachers - not for the kids.) This annual Alabama ritual turns class schedules upside down and eliminates or shortens teacher planning periods. So - not much chance that Impact Teams will meet during the next two weeks. Then, following The Test, Spring Break zaps another week out of the schedule. I briefly conjured up a picture of teachers getting together during Spring Break for an Impact Team meeting. Clearly, I'm loosing touch with reality. But, time's getting short. The school year's winding down. I feel like someone who's running a race and is too far from the finish line to reach it within the time limit.

Entry 67: The principal's obviously giving the Impact Team process a lot of thought. He suggests we do some restructuring next year, based on information we have from the process in place this year. He sees a need for more structure so that teams will know what is expected of them - not so much of a "laissez-faire" approach. Some teams have worked well this year, but he feels other teams are not taking enough initiative in setting and accomplishing team goals. At least one team has made no real effort to accomplish anything.

His trial scenario looks like this. Collectively, the faculty would focus around academic needs identified through data analysis, like they did this year. During their team meetings, teams would continue to work on ways to overcome problems in those areas. However, next year the principal would give teams more direction in how to deal with these problem areas. For example, all teams might be instructed to address the academically weaker areas through a focus on student learning styles. That would involve teachers in collecting additional data on students (learning styles inventories) and in using a wider variety of teaching strategies. Teachers could become more proficient in tailoring their teaching to the learning styles of individual students.

As part of this process, teams would need to engage in in-depth research about learning styles. The school would provide teams with materials and resources, and would also provide outside training and assistance, as needed. Team members would work together to develop and implement some common strategies based on students' learning styles, and would support each other in implementing these in their classrooms.

My initial gut reaction is that additional structure would help the teams. And I don't think it will frustrate the teams who are off and running with the process now, since most of them have already adjusted their action plans to include a focus on ways of addressing individual student needs.

Entry 68: "And just what makes you think THIS school is having Impact Team meetings?" chided my cold-water brain as I turned into the parking lot of Pillans Middle. Remembering The Test, I admit to a moment of misgiving. But optimism had the last laugh this time. Seated in the too-small student desks in one of the classrooms, the collegial group of language arts teachers had their heads together over a set of Gold Files. The team leader paused the meeting to give me an update on their Impact Team faculty presentation. In a nutshell, they suggested that next year the whole faculty consider using the Impact Team process. For this school, they suggest a departmental approach rather than an interdisciplinary team approach, with each department working together on strategies to improve teaching and learning within that discipline. Different school - different needs - different direction for next year. I like the flexibility of this process.

Teachers also talked about items to include in a team survey to give me feedback on the process at the school year's end. Things these teachers most wanted me to ask them: What have you done differently as a result of this process? What have you learned? What is the hardest part of the process? What good or bad things would you tell other teachers about the process? I can't wait to hear their answers - both the "warm glow" answers and the "wish-it-were-better" responses.

Entry 69: Okay, so let's look at the possibilities for next year. In corner #1 we have the Burns teams. All teams would engage in a research-based instructional approach with strong ties to content areas. Teams would be interdisciplinary and all teachers would teach the same students. The process would involve a marriage between total freedom (do whatever your team decides) and structure (but do it through a focus on learning styles). Teams would meet once a week during their common planning period.

In corner #2 we have the Pillans team. Impact Teams would be departmental and would meet after and/or before school. Team members would engage in research and develop strategies to address data-driven needs within specific subject areas. Possibilities exist here for teachers at different grade levels to collaborate to ensure smoother transitions for kids from a subject at one grade to that subject at the next grade level.

Who's the winner? Both! Once teachers develop the habit of collaborating, planning, reflecting, and holding conversations around instructional issues, the process can bend and flex to fit a lot of different scenarios.

Entry 70: Time for another "quick think" about the process. Where, exactly, are we? As I see it, teachers are learning to work in groups rather than in isolation - they've started talking to one another about students and instruction. Teachers are learning to be researchers - a different role for them. Most teachers have accepted, if not embraced, this new process. Both schools have increased the availability and use of research and training materials. Even the "strugglers" are hanging in there and going through the motions. The school climate at Burns has undergone changes in some areas. For example, faculty meetings revolve around an instructional purpose and focus. The process is beginning to permeate the school culture.

The Impact Team idea is also making inroads as a system process. Some central office personnel are increasingly interested, especially in view of the latest round of cut-backs. As one administrator put it, "This is a 'poor mans' staff development with a lot of possibilities."

Some times I think we've come a long way. Then I reread the project proposal and my eyes bulge at how far we are from where I thought we would be. If this were a race, would I be winning or losing?