I was dismayed to find out that only three Houstonians have registered for the NSRF Winter Meeting in Philadelphia, and when I looked at the coaches clinic offerings from last winter, I saw that no Houstonians presented clinics. This makes me sad because I know that a lot of great things are occuring in our CFG communities here in Houston. By this time, we should be leading the work--and getting national recognition for the work that we lead.
So why is this? Houston used to be represented by dozens of CFG coaches at the Winter Meetings.
Some of the blame has to go to lack of money. Now some districts have placed bans on out of state travel. There's a lot of penny-pinching going on--some of it at the expense of teacher development.
Probably the Winter Meetings lost the interest of some Texans because the meetings in Fort Lauderdale(2000) and Houston(2001) seemed stale and irrelevant. However, I'm excited about this year's format. I hope to learn a lot from the clinics. Maybe I'm more excited because I am in a new role and truly have a lot to learn from my peers.
One of my goals as the CFG Support Consultant will be to increase Houston participation in these national events. How can we encourage leadership--even demand leadership--from teachers in Houston? It seems that schools that are still receiving grant money (aren't all the high schools?) should support the develpment of CFG coaches beyond sending a few teachers to the 5-day seminars to get trained.
Maybe Houston A+ can offer some travel scholarships to CFG coaches. However, I don't just want us to attend, I want Houstonians to be leading clinics, facilitating home groups, and making an impression!
Posted by Donna at November 9, 2003 08:53 PMAs I recall when the NSRF Winter Meeting was in Houston a few years ago, we had a rather chilly reception from some of the powers-that-be. There was an unspoken vibe that the work in Houston was not respected by national authorities.
Perhaps that is why Houstonians are not supporting the Winter Meeting.
Posted by: Paul Gray at November 15, 2003 03:47 PMI remember about a year ago, Shadi Tayarani and I had submitted a proposal for the Coalition of Essential Schools. We were accepted, but I didn't like the fact that they waived registration for only one of us. I lost interest after that.
A travel scholarship is a great idea. I would be willing to facilitate with someone, if most of the expenses were paid.
Posted by: Marilyn Cameron at November 17, 2003 10:44 AMRE: Paul's Comment
I'm wondering what sort of evidence we in Houston have to counteract that "unspoken vibe". How do we know that CFG work is having a positive effect on teachers and students?
In addition to the numerous school portfolios that document CFG work on at least six area campuses, Pedro Reyes and Joy Phillips have written several times that they found CFG work to be critical components of school reform. Reyes and Phillips also wrote in the final Annenberg Evaluation that teacher leadership was one of the unforeseen results of the challenge grants. Many of those teacher leaders were directly involved in the CFG work and continue to be in one form or another.
Reyes and Phillips also noted that beacon schools and lamplighter schools outperformed their peer groups on standardized testing. Professional learning communities were cited as one possible cause of the statistically significant differences in student achievement as measured by TAAS scores. (If you haven't read the text of the final Annenberg evaluation report, you really should-- it is very telling what others saw in the culmination of our five years of work! There is a link to it from the Houston A+ website.)
What other evidence do we have, in our own stories, that links CFG work with student learning?
Posted by: Paul Gray at November 24, 2003 06:34 PM