The Hayes Mizell Reader
Remarks by Hayes Mizell on May 21, 2003 at the Corpus Christi Independent
School District's "Middle School Leadership Team Retreat." Approximately
60 middle school educators and school system leaders attended the two-day
meeting. Mizell is the Distinguished Senior Fellow of the National Staff
Development Council. He is currently closing out his 16-year tenure as Director
of the Program for Student Achievement at the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation.
The program focused its work on middle grades reform.
Imagination and School Reform
At the church I attend, each Sunday's order of worship includes time for
what we call the "Prayer of Confession." This prayer is always
written in the church bulletin, and the congregation always reads it in
unison. While the text of the prayer differs each Sunday, it acknowledges
that during the previous week we have in some ways not lived as we should
have. We may have done some things we should not have done, such
as acting in ways that hurt others or abusing our God-given gifts. We may
have also failed to do some things we should have done, such as not
helping people in need or neglecting our relationships with members of our
own families.
Several months ago, the Prayer of Confession included one sentence that
startled me. I had never seen a statement quite like it: We confess that
we have downplayed imagination and given up its possibilities for furthering
our work in new ways.
But what is "imagination"? The dictionary defines it as "the
act or power of forming a mental image of something not present to the senses
or never before wholly perceived in reality." Many people from different
walks of life have testified to the power of imagination. Albert Einstein
said, "Imagination is more important than knowledge." Napoleon
said, "Imagination rules the world." Muhammad Ali said, "The
man who has no imagination has no wings." Richard Wagner said, "Imagination
creates reality." Somerset Maugham said, "Imagination grows by
exercise, and contrary to common belief, is more powerful in the mature
than in the young."
Because imagination is so important, it was absolutely appropriate for my
church's Prayer of Confession to acknowledge that the congregants had fallen
short. Notice that the statement did not merely say that we had not used
our imaginations. No, our offense was more severe than failing to put to
use our God-given ability to imagine. There were two more serious counts
against us. We had both "downplayed imagination" and "given
up its possibilities for furthering our work in new ways." This
confession is one we should extend to school reform.
We downplay imagination in education
In too many cases, teachers and administrators in public schools have "downplayed
imagination" and "given up its possibilities" for furthering
their work in new ways. This is one reason why there is more school reform
coming from the top down than from the bottom up.
It is not to say, of course, that educators never put their imaginations
to work. We all know teachers who use their imaginations to develop more
engaging and effective instruction. A few teachers use their imaginations
to develop assessments that produce more detailed and timely information
about students' levels of proficiency than do standardized tests. Some administrators
imagine how their schools could provide more time for teachers to learn
together and from one another, and the principals organize their schools'
master schedules to produce that result.
But if we are honest about the cultures of most schools and most school
systems, they downplay imagination, particularly among adults. Schools and
school systems do not encourage teachers and administrators to form, as
the dictionary definition states, "a mental image of something..never
before wholly perceived in reality."
If we are honest about the cultures of most schools and most
school systems,
they downplay imagination, particularly among adults.
If anything, schools are mired in reality.
If anything, schools are mired in reality. Most educators are
consumed with the immediacy of tasks, events, and people they face each
day. Students have to be safely transported to school. School buildings
have to open and close, and meet standards of safety, cleanliness, lighting,
and heating and air conditioning. Students have to move quickly from activity
to activity with relative order. Teachers face class after class of students
who are very different from one another, and whose preparation and motivation
to learn fluctuates not only year-by-year and day-by-day, but also sometimes
hour-by-hour. Like rowers in the holds of ancient ships, public school educators
respond to the incessant drumbeat of "operations" and at the end
of the day are similarly exhausted.
These daily realities have a power all their own, so much so that they often
crowd out imagination as a wellspring for ideas and actions that can not
only improve student performance but also activate educators. Some people
might argue that this is really not a problem because educators are not
hired to imagine. Their job descriptions say nothing about their imaginations
or using them to further their work "in new ways." School systems
employ educators to carry out only specific delineated functions. It is
not surprising, therefore, that many educators limit themselves to the minimum
expectations of their job descriptions.
This, of course, is precisely what the Prayer of Confession referred to
when it stated, "we have downplayed imagination and given
up its possibilities." Most school systems and schools do not really
want educators to use their imaginations. They want them to follow policies,
regulations, rules, procedures, and curricula. Imagination, after all, may
sometimes be at odds with such directives. Most school systems and schools
want evidence of educators' good character, education, state certification,
experience, and ability to work with others, but imagination is not a trait
they seek. In spite of this, in every school system there are few positive
deviants who manage to slip through the screen. They frequently become outliers
whose performance exceeds that of their peers.
Many educators hold imagination at bay
It is not fair, however, to lay all the responsibility at the feet of school
systems and schools. Educators themselves are partly to blame. Many do not
look for or do not respond to opportunities to use their imaginations, and
those of their students, to further their work in new ways. In fact, many
educators constantly seek more specific direction so they will not
have to use their imaginations. They want principals, central office and
state department of education staff, and policy makers to tell them exactly
what to do, perhaps because they want others to be accountable for results,
or lack of them.
Contrary to popular belief, lockstep obedience does not guarantee improved
academic outcomes. It is only when educators employ their imaginations that
they either achieve results that forestall the need for more directives,
or they breathe life into the directives and use them to advance the learning
of their students. On the other hand, it is the failure of educators to
use their imaginations that ensures the directives will keep coming. At
each level of education administration above the classroom, there are people
ready and willing to spell out in greater and greater detail what they believe
front line educators must do to either improve test scores or be more compliant.
Only when educators imagine how their students can learn and perform at
higher levels, and only when educators imagine how they can change their
practice to achieve that result, is there hope for learning that energizes
both teachers and students.
Only when educators imagine how their students can learn and
perform
at higher levels, and only when educators imagine how they can change
their practice to achieve that result, is there hope for learning that
energizes both teachers and students.
There is a lot of justifiable concern these days about "the achievement
gap," but there is little attention to "the imagination gap"
that is partly responsible for the disproportionate performance levels among
different groups of students. On one side of this gap are teachers and administrators
who confidently imagine that nearly all their students can and should perform
at higher levels. These educators imagine that through their leadership,
effort, and appropriate instruction, nearly all their students can and should
master the subject matter they need to continue their education after high
school.
On the other side of the imagination gap are teachers and administrators
who cannot imagine that certain students can possibly achieve very much.
These educators' imaginations are limiting rather than empowering. They
imagine the futures of students as less a product of the educators' and
students' combined efforts, and more a result of the students' skin color,
the incomes of their families, and their proficiency in speaking English.
Solving the achievement gap depends in part on solving the imagination
gap.
Putting our imaginations to work is not easy. Quite often, we confuse "imagination"
with "wishful thinking." Authentic imagination prompts positive
action, but wishful thinking lulls us into a dreamy state that depends on
others to act. There is a lot of wishful thinking in public education,
and in most cases it leads to nothing but frustration. Teachers wish their
students would pay attention and take their schoolwork more seriously. Principals
wish the superintendent would provide schools more money and authority.
Superintendents wish their school board members would behave. It is possible
to achieve all these things, but not through wishful thinking.
Imagination provides the means to visualize a different reality that we
help create. It generates the excitement of new possibilities that prod
us to shape what we have imagined. When imagination is authentic,
it fuels us to act and sustains our tenacity in the face of daunting
odds.
Imagining a different course
If schools can acknowledge that they have "downplayed imagination and
given up its possibilities to further [their] work in new ways," how
can they chart a different course? The first step is for schools to permit
and expect teachers and administrators to imagine a new, more productive
future for themselves and their students.
For most educators, this process will be so alien, so unconnected to their
daily realities that school leaders will have to encourage and guide their
colleagues to get in touch with their imaginations. After all, how many
times have we have heard the phrase, "I can't imagine...." Indeed,
one of the greatest barriers to school reform is educators' inability to
imagine how their schools and classrooms could possibly be different than
they currently are. This is an important element of the crisis in educators'
self-efficacy.
One of reasons many educators believe they cannot make a difference is because
they cannot imagine how things could be different. This is
because in many schools there have been very few significant reforms educators
have generated from within their schools. They have not experienced
the positive impact of reforms they have initiated, so they cannot
imagine reforms they could bring to fruition, or their benefits. It will
take effort to help these educators put their imaginations to work.
One of reasons many educators believe they cannot make a difference
is
because they cannot imagine how things could be different.
This is because
in many schools there have been very few significant reforms
educators have generated from within their schools.
Teachers and administrators will never unleash their imaginations unless
it is safe for them to do so. Schools may delight in students' poems, science
projects, essays, and art that are the products of youthful imaginations.
Schools may even relish the imaginative pedagogy of a few highly effective
teachers, even though most schools do nothing to help other teachers become
more effective by making greater use of their imaginations. But when it
comes to the schools' governance, management, structure, curricula, assessment
and professional development, there is less enthusiasm for imagination.
Perhaps this is because schools fear there will be imagination run amok,
with so many competing ideas for reform that it will breed conflict. However,
most schools are far from becoming cauldrons of bubbling imagination.
If a school's leadership team encourages and facilitates educators to make
greater use of their imaginations to further the school's work in new ways,
the results are far more likely to be positive than negative. This leadership
occurs far too infrequently because many schools place more faith in routinized
procedures than in the imaginations of their educators. Every day, teachers
and administrators get powerful messages from their supervisors that what
school systems and schools value is compliance with directives and procedures.
In this environment, many educators do not feel it is safe for them to develop
and use their imaginations. That is why they are so often dispirited.
In the best of circumstances, educators bring experience, knowledge, and
skills to their classrooms and schools, but that is only part of equation
that yields higher levels of performance. Most teachers and administrators
succumb to the cultures and conventions of their school systems and schools
and thereby give up the possibilities of using their imaginations to further
their work in new ways. In effect, they cut themselves off from one of the
most valuable and affirming resources they have, their own imaginations.
This cannot change, it will not change until school systems and school leaders
create environments in which imagination is understood, valued, and applied
as one important means to increase the performance levels of educators,
students, and schools.
School Reform = knowledge * imagination * evaluation * action
I am not suggesting it is possible for a school to imagine itself out of
dysfunction, or for a teacher to imagine herself or himself out of ineffective
practice. Much more than imagination is necessary to support and sustain
the kind of changes that must occur if schools and educators are going to
achieve at higher levels. It requires knowledge. It requires skill. It requires
a commitment to seek out and understand the implications of data and hard
truths few people want to acknowledge and discuss. It requires hearing and
actively considering points of view different from your own. It requires
thinking differently and acting differently. Most of all, it requires hard
work. Imagination is not a substitute for these things, but it can fuel
a person's determination to acquire and apply them.
Dave Morrison, an organizational futurist, has properly placed imagination
in an equation he uses to describe innovation. We can adapt his equation
to describe school reform. Morrison said, "Innovation is knowledge
times imagination times evaluation times action." We can say, "School
reform is imagination times knowledge times action times evaluation."
The experiences you have gained during the past decade as a result of your
association with the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation and its grantees provide
you a solid base upon which you can imagine and build even more dramatic,
more difficult, and more effective school reforms. I am encouraged that
you are anticipating "life after Clark," and took the initiative
to organize this retreat as another step towards accelerating systemic,
standards-based reform at the middle level. You have begun to use your imaginations
to consider how you will advance your work in new ways. You are able to
do this because unlike many other school systems and schools in the United
States, you have embraced reform, even if you have not yet mastered it.
When resources are tight there is the temptation to revert
to old, unproductive practices. You may forget that you have learned
that what really matters most is investing in the professional development
of educators at the building level.
You might even say you have wallowed in school reform; it has gotten
in your mouth and in your ears and up your nose. You have experienced its
highs and its lows, and you have concrete evidence that it has benefited
both students and educators. You now understand that big changes are necessary
to achieve big results. You also know how difficult it is to make the right
choices about the reforms that will yield the greatest gains, and how even
more difficult it is to implement reforms so they significantly increase
students' academic performance levels.
As you put your imaginations to work, and encourage your colleagues to do
so, you will face challenges that may jeopardize the gains you have made
and that you are capable of making in the future. When resources are tight
there is the temptation to revert to old, unproductive practices. You may
forget that you have learned that what really matters most is
investing in the professional development of educators at the building level.
For those of us who have come to know CCISD well, there has been a longstanding
worry that the school system has sometimes assumed that if the central office
formalizes something in writing it will result more productive behaviors
by teachers and administrators. CCISD has produced or purchased a lot of
things that are in print--directives, memoranda, curricula, manuals, guides,
assessments--but very little of it has produced the improvements in teachers'
and administrators' performance necessary for students to meet the standards
of the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills. It is important not to
confuse tools that may assist adult learning with actions
that cause adult learning.
This reminds me of a recent conversation I had with my eight year-old grandson.
I asked him how things were going in school, but he was not eager to reply.
His mother signaled me from across the table that there had been a problem
with his last report card. I asked him if he was having trouble with math.
He shook his head, meaning "no." I knew he was already reading
way above grade level, so I pressed him for an answer. What was the problem
area on his report card? Finally, in a barely audible voice he muttered,
"Habits." He meant, of course, talking in class or not paying
attention.
I tried to reassure him that even adults have problems with "habits."
If he had been capable of understanding, I could have also said that many
school systems have problems with their habits, primarily the habit
of producing or purchasing materials, or issuing directives they hope will
improve the instruction of teachers and the leadership of principals. That
is seldom the result, but bad habits are hard to break.
Investing in better results
Let us imagine two different ways of operating. First, the radical approach:
Order each person in the central office currently working on producing,
reviewing, or purchasing written materials to stop all such activity for
three weeks. Assign those people to schools for three weeks to carry out
whatever tasks principals designate, giving priority to activities that
support instruction. Then assess what schools have gained and what they
have lost as a result of having fewer materials and memoranda but more people.
A second approach would be to create a small committee of high-performing
middle school teachers and principals, eight people or less, who the central
office would convene regularly to review proposals for new materials and
major directives the school system would expect to disseminate to schools.
A simple majority of the committee would vote thumbs up or thumbs down on
the proposals and their recommendations would be binding, subject only to
the superintendent's personal veto. After the school system has tried this
for one academic year, the school board would review whether teachers and
administrators are better or worse off because of this approach.
The issue here is where the school system chooses to invest its money, effort,
and time. There is a certain comfort in producing printed materials. You
can hold them in your hand. They can be put on shelves. They look impressive.
They are concrete representations of good intentions. No one assesses their
results. But they rarely cause or even help principals become better leaders,
or teachers become more effective instructors. It is time to imagine a different
way of operating that emphasizes greater professional collaboration and
internal accountability.
There is a certain comfort in producing printed materials.
You can hold them in your hand. They can be put on shelves.
They look impressive. They are concrete representations of good intentions.
No one assesses their results. But they rarely cause or even help principals
become better leaders, or teachers become more effective instructors.
As "the more accountable schools" are demonstrating, when
administrators and teachers work together to learn more about the results
of their own practice, and when they hold themselves accountable
for changing what they do and how they do it to achieve better results,
students benefit. This is not a process you can hold in your hand or put
on a shelf, but it is one that has produced demonstrable results.
In some schools many more students are reading at higher levels than several
years ago. The more accountable schools will be the first to admit they
still have a lot to learn, and that their limited but very real successes
are not secure. In truth, their innovations have been modest, though hard
won. For their students to demonstrate even higher levels of performance,
the schools will have to develop continuously more sophisticated understanding
about the types of instruction students need to become proficient. The schools
will then have to translate that understanding into daily practices that
they refine and assess.
The question now is whether the school system will take what it has learned
through the experiences of the more accountable schools, and use those lessons
to make systemic changes that will benefit all schools. Can the school system
imagine that while all schools should operate well and cause nearly all
students to perform at the proficient level, there will always be some people
at every school who want to push the envelope of professional practice and
aim higher? Can the school system imagine disproportionately supporting
a group of such people at each school to create small centers of research
and development that increase CCISD's capacity to foster and support reform
at all schools? Can the school system imagine temporarily cross-assigning
small numbers of teachers, coaches, and administrators to these school-based
R&D centers for short-term residencies, thereby using the research
and development teams as incubators for the improving the practice of key
educators who staff other schools?
Can the school system imagine using middle schools as prototypes of stability
by making a commitment to maintain the leaders of these sites so long as
they are effective in causing their schools' faculties to improve their
practice, and so long as students make adequate yearly progress towards
performing proficiently? It will be tempting for the school system to cannibalize
the early and limited successes of its most productive middle schools, but
can it imagine a new way of operating that provides incentives for a small
group of teachers at each school to create and lead research and development
centers?
The importance of critical feedback
Your association with the Foundation has been so longstanding that perhaps
you will have trouble imagining relationships with new partners who both
support and critique your work. The fact is that CCISD, like many other
school systems, pays most attention to difficult and unpleasant issues when
it receives critical feedback from external partners. It does not always
follow through effectively on the comments it receives, but on the whole
it is better off for receiving them. In spite of the value of such "critical
friend" partnerships, most school systems do not seek them. They have
a low tolerance for any relationship that is less than affirming. But one
of CCISD's virtues is that it is willing to actively participate in and
sustain such relationships, even if it sometimes falls short in getting
the most out of them.
I want to now encourage you to imagine a new relationship. For the past
several years, the Foundation has supported an initiative at the Southern
Regional Education Board (SREB) called Making
Middle Grades Work. One of SREB's goals for its 16 member states during
next decade is, "Achievement in the middle grades for all groups of
students exceeds national averages and performance gaps are closed."
Making Middle Grades Work is SREB's primary means of helping states and
schools achieve this goal. This unusual venture currently involves 14 state
departments of education and 100 middle school sites in those states.
SREB describes the initiative this way: Making Middle Grades Work is
a network of schools, districts and states committed to implementing 10
essential elements in a comprehensive improvement framework. SREB provides
member states and schools with technical assistance, publications, assessments
and networking services. As school sites identify the help they need to
implement the framework, SREB links them to specific professional-development
resources. A summer conference enables sites to learn what works with other
middle grades and high schools and to plan further actions to improve student
achievement.
A strength of Making Middle Grades Work is periodic technical assistance
visits to the participating school sites. These visits include a SREB staff
member, a state department of education staff person, and selected educators
from the central office and other schools of the school system. SREB subsequently
provides the site with a candid written report and recommendations based
on the visit. Each year, sites also administer SREB-designed assessments
and surveys which SREB then scores and reports the results to the participating
sites. This data provides sites with information about issues that demand
their attention, as well as the means to track their progress over time.
Although Texas is a member of SREB, Texas is not one of the states participating
in Making Middle Grades Work. However, this initiative is not static and
it welcomes new states and school systems at any time (even those outside
the Southern region). I encourage CCISD to do whatever it takes to explore
with SREB how it could participate in Making Middle Grades Work. Let me
know if I can help. Such a relationship would be the closest the school
system and your middle schools could come to an association with an external
partner similar to that you have had with the Foundation.
Another approach would be for the school system to contract with the National
Forum to Accelerate Middle Grades Reform to send a team to CCISD each
year to review and critique your progress towards becoming "Schools
To Watch." If a team of five or six Forum members could come to the
district annually, spend several days visiting schools, and subsequently
prepare and submit to you a written report with their findings and recommendations,
it could help you keep middle school reform on track.
Whatever approach you take, do not wait until someone asks CCISD if it wants
to participate. Instead, imagine a new way of working in which you aggressively
seek the external relationships you know you need to continue to
advance reform in your middle schools.
Student performance is still the bottom line
Once again, I have imposed on your hospitality to share these thoughts with
you. I have not acknowledged the many things CCISD has done right, but your
school system and middle schools have indeed made substantial progress during
the past decade. There is, of course, a long, long way to go, as your data
so starkly reveal. You should draw strength and hope from reflecting on
what you have achieved to date, but you should be humble about your accomplishments.
Your quest is still about student performance. That is and must be the bottom
line. No matter how good you feel about your progress, the only achievement
that really counts is your students' demonstration of greater proficiency
in the core content subjects.
Frankly, you task is very difficult. You live in a conservative, close-knit
community where mediocre expectations and maintaining personal relationships
prevail over making the painful changes necessary for students to perform
at much higher levels.
But hear this: The achievement of your students will not increase significantly
until CCISD educators hold themselves to higher standards of performance
and accountability. This is more a moral problem than it is an educational
problem. Neither the state test, nor new curricula, nor recent training
will solve it. You will only achieve what you say you want when the leaders
in this room begin to behave differently and insist that your colleagues
do the same. You have to chain yourselves to student results. When more
students perform at higher levels, it means you are performing at
higher levels. When student performance stagnates or declines, it means
your performance is far from satisfactory.
Can you imagine holding yourselves, individually and collectively,
accountable for higher levels of professional practice? Can you imagine
not accepting with a shrug or a wink the inadequate performance
of people you supervise, and those who supervise you?
You constantly tell students that they must learn their actions have
consequences. You have to learn this as well. Student performance is a direct
consequence of what you do and do not do. When you tolerate mediocre, perfunctory,
half-hearted performance by yourselves and your colleagues, you can expect
as a consequence that your students will perform in similar ways. When you
demand the highest levels of performance by yourselves and your colleagues,
you can expect the consequence that your students will perform at levels
higher than you once thought possible.
Can you imagine it? Can you imagine holding yourselves--individually and
collectively--accountable for higher levels of professional practice? Can
you imagine not accepting with a shrug or a wink the inadequate performance
of people you supervise, and those who supervise you? Can you imagine
supporting each other in making difficult and unpopular decisions to sever
professional relationships because of teachers' and administrators' performance
that is persistently mediocre? Can you imagine chaining yourselves to student
performance, and accepting the consequences when student achievement lags?
Can you imagine adopting "no excuses" as a practice rather than
as rhetoric?
You are all wonderful people with a generosity of spirit that is rare among
school systems. I wish that were enough to ensure that all your students
will perform at the levels necessary for them to become productive, independent
adults. But it is not. You have to make even greater progress than you have
made during the past decade. You have to perform at higher levels than you
think possible. Can you do it? Will you do it? I believe you can,
that is why I keep returning to Corpus Christi, but only you can decide
if you will.
Thank you.
Hayes Mizell's most recent article is his "Forum" commentary in
the Spring 2003 issue of JSD:
The Journal of the National Staff Development Council (p. 80).
The Edna McConnell Clark Foundation has published a collection of Mizell's
speeches in the book, Shooting for the Sun. Copies are available
without cost while supplies last by sending an e-mail request to info@emcf.org.
The complete book can also be downloaded in PDF format at
this webpage.
Back to
the Hayes Mizell Reader index