Time is Mutually Exclusive – Educators Beware!

I am a retired educator, but I was a civil engineer and financial director before diving into public education in my mid-thirties. So, I was trained both at university and in professional work to think and behave differently toward performance and outcomes.  If I had no prior experience with a task, or I am not improving at a task, I recognized I need assistance.  I aggressively search and have searched for someone that knows what to do to help me improve.

98 percent of the time and regardless of the issue, there is someone that knows how to solve the problem you are having.  In fact, YouTube videos exist for this very reason – it only comes down to finding that pundit or in the case of YouTube, the video. However, it is of vital importance that an ‘expert’ demonstrates that methodology visually (a video), or they possess an empirical track record of heightened success over time.  Thus, they are not a charlatan pundit based on their title, professional position, or the fact that they have been ‘hanging around’ for a number of years.  Basically, what specifically makes them an expert on the topic of interest?  (Note:  If nothing else is garnered from reading this blog, the last 5 sentences of this paragraph can alter one’s overall success in everything they do – via awareness and applying this empirical truth in all aspects of their life.)

However, a person seeking improvement must be curious, humble and willing to keep their ego in check – and then, ultimately, be open to accepting advice from someone who possesses empirical and results-based expertise.  Above all, an educator must value improvement and performance, and above all, be willing to expend the required effort. Easy, right?  Unfortunately, I have known many educational colleagues over the last 40 years that did not recognize that they need help, or they would not seek assistance when they were struggling with a task or an assignment. Generally, in public education, when it comes to improvement, management paralysis occurs more often than any other professional white-collar field.  

So, what is occurring in public education with its management practices compared to other professional fields? Let’s jump into this public-school phenomenon for a deeper dive. In general, unsuccessful educators usually do one of four (4) things when they struggle at a management or academic reformation task at their campuses. 

First, a majority of educators – well over half in my experience – keep repeating their go-to ineffective practice despite a lack of desired results. Why? Unless there is painful accountability to them personally or professionally, they are risk adverse, or they acquiesce to the situation and convince themselves via external excuses that no one can do better than what they are currently doing. In my opinion, these educators are in the wrong professional capacity at their school and removal must be strongly considered.  Again, this modus operandi ‘do it all over again’ despite little or no improvement usually changes the minute there is accountability for their performance.  Then, an administrator is more open and willing to implement effective measures and attempt to improve their campus’ chronic and anemic academic situation or face the adverse professional ramifications, up to and including termination.

Second, another large group of educators (approximately 25%) are willing and do change, but they can’t let go of their practices that led them to a lack of success in the first place.  This leadership situation is death by a thousand cuts since “Time is mutually exclusive.”  An educator is afforded a finite amount of time during the instructional day and continuing to spend minutes on non-performing curriculum or pedagogy will result in, at most, only a small increase in student outcomes. But, overall, it is a school day of designed busyness and motion which can be deceptive that something academically positive is occurring. 

It is important to note that the sacred cow, ineffective programming may compete with newly implemented curriculum and actually diminish its efficacy.

Third, a smaller group of educators – around 20 percent – change to do the right thing.  These principals realize that they are not doing well after an extended period and conclude it’s time to adjust.  In short, they know they need help.  They research effective (external) reformation measures that are effective, knowing that their central office is ideologically driven and has never produced results.  They set up global schoolwide stop-gap academic numeracy and literacy systems, and they correctly implement programming that will produce heightened performance changes.  They have only one failing as an administrator.  They lack discipline and consistency.  Within three to five weeks, their efforts resemble a New Year’s resolution, and they quit and revert to their old ways that failed in past school years.  However, at the end of the year, when questioned on continued poor student outcomes, these administrators invariably state as a justification to their ending of any reforms, “Those programs did not work with our children.”

Fourth, the final group of administrators is exceedingly small in number.  They are the only successful group of Title 1 principals that lead their schools to high academic performance on par with their more affluent non-Title 1 counterparts.  These principals do what the third group above did, but they are disciplined and consistent.  They stick with it.  Press every day.  Ask questions of outside experts when things stall or they are unsure of what to do next.  However, these educators rarely survive in the traditional public school system.  To improve the academics at their campus, they must operate against the ideological curricular grain of their district.  The reaction from central office varies to these principal’s reform efforts, but it may include involuntarily displacement to a different professional capacity, discreditation of their work, passed over for promotion, lower retirement benefits due to a reduced salary, or they are willfully ignored. In contrast, these types of administrators survive in a charter public school system since those organizations usually value academic performance more than traditional school systems.  It is important to note that these principals have egos, as all principals seem to do, but they want to produce.  They demand results.  Once their schools are successful, they must be careful what programming they add to their instructional day, because a principal must be acutely aware, “Time is mutually exclusive.”   In the end, a successful academic Title 1 elementary principal knows what matters and what does not achieve results.

Final Thoughts

Knowing what is important and what is not is the key to success in all aspects of a human being’s life. A parent who puts quality time into their children, as my parents did with their family has a high probability of producing independent and financially successful adult children.  A Title 1 administrator that is part of the fourth group mentioned above goes to their campus and leaves each evening knowing they did right by the students that attend his or her campus.  Those principals, for all practical purposes, are de facto parents with as many as a thousand children.  They know and can take pride in the fact that their students transfer from their elementary school academically prepared for their middle and high school years.

The takeaway from this short writing: There is no reason for the continued failure of so many elementary students in math, literacy and science.  The principal must do what matters to aggressively attack the academic numeracy and literacy gaps.  If you are interested and desire results, go to the home page of this website and start reading.  Call us.  Ask questions.  It is all free.  Low-income children and families win in the end.  A noble goal, indeed!

Link to All Blogs on this website