Failure is Not An Option

Final Reflections and Recommendations

Melissa Carruth
EA 740
Dr. Klein
Fall 2013
1


Introduction
Village Oaks Elementary School is a neighborhood school that has been serving the Novi
community for over three decades. It is one of the five kindergarten-4
th
grade elementary
schools in Novi that has an enrollment of 491 student; 246 females, 245 males. It has the
second highest enrollment of the Novi K-4 elementary schools and is the most diverse
elementary school of the five. Village Oaks has an ethnicity breakdown of 56.21% white, 4.07%
Hispanic, 15.68% African American, and 24.03% Asian American. Village Oaks has more
students that are white, African American, and Hispanic compared to that of the district
average. The district average of the following subcategories are 51.6% white, 2.5% Hispanic,
8.6% African American, and 35.3% Asian American. It is one of the two Title One schools within
the district, as it serves 19.75% students who receive free and reduced meals. This is also
above the district average, which is 5.3%. It is not a school of choice for residents that live
outside of the district, with the exception of children of staff members. Additionally, we are not
a school of choice to parents within the district. Students attend their home elementary
school. After fourth grade, the students of all five elementary schools will feed into Novi
Meadows, which is a grade five six building.
Sue Burnham is the principal that leads Village Oaks Elementary School. Under the
principal, there are four kindergarten, first, second and third grade classrooms. There are five
fourth grade classrooms. The school has two special education resource room teachers and two
special education paraprofessionals. There is a full-time speech teacher. A special education
teacher consultant and a special education social worker are on-site two days a week. A
general education social worker is on site three days a week. Village Oaks has gym, art, music
and media teachers that are highly-qualified, and provide the classroom teachers with common
planning times for 55 minutes each day. A literacy teacher is on-site four days a week. A Title
One and an ELL teacher work part-time in the building. A physical and occupational therapist
come to Village Oaks on an as needed basis as they are out-sourced to service the children
who require PT and OT accommodations as stated in their IEP. The custodians are privatized
and one custodian works during the day and two work in the evening. Before-school and after-
school CARE are offered to working parents. The CARE program is run through Novis
Community Education program. One full-time secretary and a second part-time secretary are in
the front office and a technology paraprofessional is in the building two-three times a week.
Thirty of the staff members have a masters degree or higher. All but three classroom teachers
have a higher education degree.
Alan Blanksteins, Failure Is Not An Option, is a book based on the premise that
education of children hasnt been taken seriously enough. He places the challenge on schools
to treat the school environment, like a highly reliable organization or HRO where you
2

willingly do anything within your power to ensure that failure never takes place as the results
could be catastrophic. Blankstein believes that the failure of a student in our educational
system is so catastrophic that it should not be allowed to happen. He believes that to ensure
that failure will not occur; examining a school should be done following Blanksteins six
principles. In the remaining sections of this book, Village Oaks Elementary is examined using
Blanskteins six principles. After analyzing how Village Oaks measures to the principles,
recommendations will be made to ensure that failure is not an option to the students of Village
Oaks Elementary School.

Principle #1
Alan Blanksteins Principle 1 is based on the premise of a common mission, vision,
values and goals (MVVG) within an educational setting. Before creating, implementing and
reflecting on the MVVG premise, the culture needs to be in place to ensure the effectiveness of
the MVVG. The culture needs to have, teachers working collaboratively with the principal,
therefore, lead to the greatest gains for students (Brown, Choi, & Herman, 2011; Wallace
Foundation, 2011), and the guiding force for effective collaboration is the leadership team.
(Blankstein, 2013; Hope Foundation). In looking at Village Oaks Elementary School in Novi,
Michigan, the culture is in place. The leadership team that works collaboratively with the
principal is the Continuous School Improvement (CSI) team. This team is a two-year
commitment for staff and is comprised of the principal, one member of each grade level, one
special education, one special teacher (i.e., gym, art, music and media), one paraprofessional,
one secretary and two parents. The team meets on a monthly basis, and the information that is
created and shared in the CSI meeting is then rolled out to the grade level meeting and then
shared at our weekly staff meeting. Additionally at a bottom-to-top approach, one member of
the CSI team and the building principal is part of the district CSI team and then shares the
information at the district meeting at the school CSI meeting. Major ideas begin with the CSI
team which is chaired and co-chaired with teacher leaders. The agenda of each CSI meeting is
set by the principal and the two chairs and shared with staff in advance of the meeting. With
this teacher leadership environment set, open communication about ideas and feedback of
staff is shared comfortably and freely amongst all members of this leadership team. Rarely is
an issue presented to staff at our weekly staff meeting that has not been shared at a CSI or
grade-level meeting. With the blind-sided approach eliminated amongst staff, trust is
instilled. Additionally, the two-year commitment allows for ideas to not become too stagnant
amongst staff and allows for multiple staff to share in the role of teacher leaders. School
culture is a strength of our school. With the collaborative approach and the freedom to work
together, it allows for staff to have more ownership and allegiance to the new ideas and
3

concepts that is being implemented within the school. When the common language and
framework for analysis, conversation, and action is in place, Village Oaks is able to work
through ideas and come to a consensus to move our school in a prompt fashion.
Eight years ago, Village Oaks had a change in leadership with a new principal. She
treated the first year as a year of observation of the procedures and lay-out of the existing
structure of the school. In the second year, she began our welcome back professional
development days to serve as our time to create a mission and vision of our school under new
leadership. A mission and vision were never part of the school community and a new concept
for the school. It was at the same time when the DuFour premise of Professional Learning
Communities and their vocabulary became embedded into our school. So it was natural that
our staff began the year coming together to work on our core and establish a mission and vision
of what we believe. The mission was established first. We carried it out under a snowball
method amongst staff by looking at other districts mission statements to derive one that
mirrored our school best. In the end, our school created the mission of Village Oaks Elementary
is to create and maintain an educational environment that supports academic achievement,
consistent with district, state and national standards to meet all students' learning needs. In
reflecting on our mission statement, with Blanksteins Principle #1, this statement states what
we want to do and what we will do to ensure success, but the mission statement lacks on the
component of how will we know if we are succeeding. Our goals include the how component
of our mission, but our mission does not state it. The mission is the essential to the
organization and the questions should not be defined in the goals, but in the mission also. This
mission is revisited each year with staff to ensure this is what we still believe in. Additionally,
our monthly school newsletter, the Village Voice, includes our mission and we have the mission
displayed in the hallway at the entrance of the school. With all of that being said, the mission is
still a statement that I believe staff is unfamiliar with. Four years ago, the district defined their
MVVG and asked schools to join their mission and vision. Village Oaks did not feel that they
could just switch their MVVG to appeal to the district since no stakeholders at Village Oaks
were asked to be a part of the district MVVG. Though as the years progressed and a Quality
Assurance Review or QAR team came to the district, staff across the district started to buy in
to the district mission and vision. Posters were made for each building, all staff has the district
mission on their e-mail signature line and staff is more familiar with the verbiage of this district
mission statement more than the school mission statement, which states Developing each
students potential with a world class education. At the same time the mission statement
was set, the vision was also created. This was also done in a snowball method amongst all
staff. A vision is to paint a picture of what we can become and to guide behaviors on a long-
and short-term basis. This is the area that Village Oaks is most confused by as the district
mission statement is now the vision of Village Oaks and then to paint the picture of the school,
a belief statement was created that states,
4

We believe thatVillage Oaks families are an integral part of the educational
process. We believe that students deserve clear educational targets. We believe in
celebrating success with our students. We believe every child can be successful given
the correct instruction. We believe differences should be celebrated. We believe that
assessment drives our instruction.
In the end, Village Oaks is confused as to the difference between a mission, vision, values and
belief statement. Currently, the vision is too vague, but combined with the belief statement it
adds more compelling details. The district mission, or school vision statement, is hanging in the
lobby and is also stated on the monthly school newsletter for all stakeholders to be made
familiar with. The beliefs statements are only shared at the beginning of the year with families.
Values are the attitudes and behaviors an organization believes in. Neither Village Oaks
nor the district do not have their values defined amongst all the stakeholders. As mentioned
above, the school has a belief statement that could be used for values as they are few in
number, direct and simply stated, focused on behaviors, and linked to the vision statement, but
unfortunately they are stated with I believe. When writing values, beliefs need to be left
behind and they will need to be changed to say, we will do and how we will behave.
Additionally, these beliefs are not stated to the stakeholders that they are our values and not
beliefs. So many teaching practices have changed in our school, so it will be a simple task. The
values that are shared across the district are stated in our School Improvement Plan that is
posted on the school website, but it is not shared and clearly stated to staff that these changes
in our teaching practices are our values, rather our strategies.
Goals are short-term targets that schools go through to help schools to reach their
vision. This is an area of strength for Village Oaks. We have three goals at Village Oaks that
align with the districts four goals. The district has 4 goals:
1. Students will make one-years growth in one years time.
2. All students will achieve at a high level.
3. Evaluate and enhance opportunities while maintaining 10% fund equity.
4. Improve organizational quality and customer service.
These goals will be reached as students and teachers walk together through the pillars of the
monument as pictured below.
5


These goals and our monument are everywhere, all staff has it in their classroom, and the
website has it posted at the district and school level. Staff shares it with parents during our
curriculum nights. There is a picture of it in the lobby of the building as well. At a building
level, Village Oaks took the first goal of Students will make one years growth in one years
time and made their three school-wide goals to be:
1. All students at Village Oaks Elementary will demonstrate one years growth in one time
in Reading.
2. All students at Village Oaks Elementary will demonstrate one years growth in one time
in Writing.
3. All students at Village Oaks Elementary will demonstrate one years growth in one time
in Math.
Each goal has 4-7 strategies associated with each goal helping staff to see how the goals can be
achieved and carried out. These strategies can be our values as they begin with the phrase,
the teacher will. These goals carry some of the components of SMART goals. They are
specific and strategic, results-oriented and time bound. The drawback to them is what does
one-years growth look like? Some have said it is 12 points with the NWEA. Some have stated
there will be a secondary marker along with the NWEA. Also attainable is in question too. All
students are the audience, but is it realistic? Think of students that move in, students that are
exposed to personal crisis, or students that are in the high-end of the spectrum, how can you
move them 12 points too? In the end, the goals are clear throughout the district, school and all
stakeholders. Children are even aware of their goals using their data notebooks as a guide and
a great way to bring all of the common practices together.
6

In sum, Village Oaks has a foundation to their MVVG. There is a strong start of all four
components, but there are components that need to be redefined to ensure that the strong
climate of teacher leadership can continue to ensure students success and achievement.
Principle #2
Principle 2 is devoted to ensuring achievement for all students. This statement is simply
put, but as the words are few, the idea is massive. This is achievement amongst all learners
from the highest of the high to the lowest of the low and being able to put in place the
necessary interventions needed for the learners and ensuring that all staff members believe
that the intervention makes a positive impact on the learner and to act on the information for
that learner in a sustained, concerted, and systemic manner. This premise can only happen
when the school communitys belief system regarding low-performing students is universal and
that the systems for intervention will assure student success.
Before systems can be put in place, a uniformed belief needs to be put into place about
what are considered low-achieving and high-achieving learners. At Village Oaks, we follow the
district plan for identification of students eligible for academic intervention. It is a K-12 form
that is filled out by staff when they feel a student is starting to fall behind. To come to the
conclusion that this student needs to be referred and taken through the rubric, data is
measured and assessed by the staff and informal and formal observations and conversations
happen. The conversations fall on Thursdays in our building and set-up by the Teacher
Consultant. There are various levels for conversation about a student from simply first informal
conversations on trying new teaching strategies all the way to formal IEP meetings. The only
necessity in advance to that meeting is that data has been reviewed on the student. The data
in our district follows the same assessment calendar that is developed by the Director of
Student Growth and Accountabilities Office and carried out by staff across the district. These
assessments vary from NWEA, district writing samples, blueprinted district assessments, MEAP,
Fountas and Pinnell running records and Dibels assessment, to name a few. These assessments
are all given at the same time across the district and the curriculum is followed through Atlas
Rubicon following the same timeline stated on the district assessment calendar. The delivery of
the informal assessments varies from classroom to classroom, but the formal assessments are
universal. Once the data is there, the Identification of Students Eligible for Academic
Interventions rubric can be used, to deem a students eligibility for support. When the rubric is
tallied, Thursday conversations can happen and eligibility for intervention is determined. The
cut-off scores are the same from school to school as to which reading level allows you into
reading support, Title 1 and ELL support. Significantly low data over time and lack of growth
can begin the movement to qualification in special education.
7

As fluid and clear as the process seems in our district, the delivery is still carried out in a
drastically different manner from school to school. First, the rubric was to be used across the
district and it was not until I served on the Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) committee
when it was learned quickly that few schools use the rubric, few schools follow the district cut-
off scores, few follow-through with the district initiatives from building to building. Village
Oaks seems to be the rule followers across the district and sometimes that works to a
disadvantage as support in our school becomes less and less each year. With this trend
happening, reflection to the questions of is it because we are being too honest with our school
data or is it that our students are showing the necessary improvements that do not require us
to have as many services as in years past? Though continuity and clear direction and process
need to be instilled across the district, but at a building level, it is very clear when students
qualify for services.
Once data is reviewed by staff within the classroom, grade level and school, discussions
can begin. Our principal does a wonderful job meeting with all grade levels within the first
week of school to help draw your attention to the lowest performing students according to the
previous years spring NWEA assessments. These students are deemed your priority learners at
the beginning of the year, until data from the fall proves differently. This system works out well
to help staff bring a baseline to their students before the first day of school.
Data and cuts for support are not the only measures that occur immediately, the school
culture also plays a role at the beginning of the year. At our school, our culture and
connections that the school makes with kids is our biggest strength. Teachers dont look at
their class as, My Kids, but rather Our Kids. The belief of our school is that it takes an army
to move a building. Working in isolation does not get you there. Cones are set in the hallway
to ensure students walk on the right-hand side of the halls. Teachers are reminded by the
principal to greet their students each morning and say good-bye to them each evening at their
classroom door. Class mission statements, following Coveys 7 Habits, are created in each room
and the school offers a school-wide Bucket Filler program. Transition conversations happen
between the 4
th
and 5
th
grade teachers to help assist in the transition process to the new school
for the children and classroom teachers make up the class lists for the following year. All of
these systems help to create a community where behavior problems are at a minimum and
most problems are resolved within the classroom. Occasionally, a problem does require a
principals attention, but our principal has stated each year how appreciative she is for the
amount of problems that are being handled in the room.
With the culture in place, trust occurs and students feel safe to start taking risks and
challenges with their learning, but there are times when the students are not showing growth
and intervention needs to occur. On the other spectrum, some students are showing such high
8

levels of learning, enrichment programs need to take place. Currently, there is no district-wide
Response to Intervention (RtI) or MTSS across the district. Work on this tiered approach began
last year, but there is still a lot of work ahead and a plan is nowhere on the radar to be
implemented any time soon. Without a district policy, schools become creative with their
programs that help to provide support or enrichment with our learners. At my building, we
offer tutoring before school by classroom teachers, Title 1, and reading support are the
programs in aiding our low learners and math pentathlon and Destination Imagination are
offered to our students before and after school. The systems are there, but there is no tiered
approach, nor fluidity within the support. Once you are in a program, you are in for the year
and if you qualify later or there are move-ins within the district, typically there are little to no
help for you as slots fill quickly. Enrichment is lacking greatly in our district too. A gifted and
talented program was to begin this year across the district. With the first month under-way;
this program seems to be an idea that will be tabled for yet another year. There are
enrichment opportunities once the students hit 5
th
grade and higher, but nothing at the K-4
level. The workshop model is implemented across all classrooms for both math and reading,
that hopefully, some classroom teachers are providing differentiated instruction for their high
learners.
In serving on the MTSS committee last year, it became apparent that all Novi schools are
offering their own version for intervention and they vary across all the schools and their culture
towards their low and high learners vary greatly across the district.
Principle #3
A collaborative culture that is focused on teaching and learning is the central idea
behind the success in high-achieving schools. In order to succeed, a building must commit to
the idea, theory and belief of a true collaborative culture. This collaboration can only happen
when time is provided, full staff buy-in and everyone is on the same page as to what the goal is
behind the collaboration. When these ideas are in synch, success can happen due to the
collaborative culture that is established within the school.
School culture, in terms of collaboration, needs to be examined within a school before
the process can begin. In looking at Village Oaks Elementary School, it is a contrived collegiality
that is working towards the collaborative culture. At our school, teachers appear to be
collaborating. Common planning is preserved. Mandated weekly grade level meetings are
maintained. Weekly school staff meetings are held. Monthly school improvement meetings
are carried out.
The time is preserved for collaboration, but the focus of deeper issues related to
teaching and learning are not quite there. At Village Oaks, teachers are collaborating at the
9

surface, but are not challenging one anothers beliefs or approaches to teaching and learning
enough. We are not a Balkanized culture where we are cliques, but rather a school
environment filled with Sunny South personalities that follow the idea, Cant we all just get
along? Not that collaborating causes an argument to ensue, but it takes very confident
professionals to truly examine their own practices and the practices of others to bring about
the idea of change and what is best for students. Staff, grade and school improvement
meetings are all focused around the idea of What is Best for our Students? Data is shared
and examined, trust is established amongst each other, commitment to action with embracing
new practices and evaluation is all there, but it is still missing the analysis of the deeper issues
related to those four ideas are missing. Lets investigate this further..
In setting up collaborative teams, all the components are in place at Village Oaks.
Professional practice forums are in place with the idea of Learning Labs. They are optional and
too often literacy and math coaches are begging for staff to participate in this idea. Classroom
observations are also implemented in our district. iObservation requires all of us to observe
one classroom each year and our contract allows for a day devoted to examining other
classrooms both in and outside-of-the-district. In reflecting of our first year of conducting
observations, the principal was encouraging all of us to reach outside our comfort zone and
observe a teacher that is not anywhere connected to your grade level.
Curriculum planning is carried out. We all carry out the same material, at the same
time, K-12 amongst all schools in thanks to our curriculum being mapped in our Atlas Rubicon
system. All staff is expected to follow Atlas and to have it serve as your guiding component to
instruction. Late starts were in place for the last few years to help with this Atlas venture, but
too often our late starts were used for other principals, not curriculum planning, so the late
start days have been eliminated from our district calendar this year.
Vertical teaming takes place 3 times a year. This is the one area that has produced the
deep level of thinking and challenged beliefs that are needed in a collaborative culture and the
result from vertical teaming has brought about the most change amongst our staff. Some
things that came out of our vertical teaming meetings was the elimination of looping classes
with 1
st
and 2
nd
and the use of common language K-4 with math, reading and writing.
Professional study groups happen each year with our book study at staff meetings, but
the book is chosen by our principal and we all read it whether you have interest in the topic or
not. Grade-level meetings happen each week for one purpose, to plan. There are times when a
new idea is established out of the meetings, but mostly it is to plan. Students are rarely
discussed, nor how the students handled the grade-level common assessments. Leadership
teams are established with our continuous school improvement teams and our principal does
do a great job encouraging staff to present and lead each other on areas of expertise. Few take
10

her up on this opportunity; typically she approaches staff to encourage us to jump into the
various leadership opportunities.
As you can see, the areas of collaboration are present, but the deeper thinking is not
quite there, but there are glimmers of hope that we are there. New to this year, we are
bringing students for discussion during one-staff meeting a month to go through the
Collaborative Teaming Process with students as writers. We will be taking the priority students
through the entire process that was described as the Consultation activity in Fort Wayne.
These students will be discussed three different times a year. Each staff will need to bring one
priority writer to discuss. Also new this year is for one staff meeting a month to be totally
devoted to collaboration with our grade level. It is another time that is preserved for
collaboration. Village Oaks is so at the cusp of a true collaboration culture, it excites me in
knowing the foundation is there, now lets foster and grow this idea.
In looking at the distinct characteristics of schools where collaboration is a norm, Village
Oaks has meet most of them. Village Oaks does a great job with school-wide staff meeting and
the continuous school improvement meeting to set the agenda and maintain and follow the
items that are stated. It is clear to all in advance of what is expected at these meetings, but
within grade level meetings the organization and direction becomes lost and more time is
wasted than work carried out. Data is examined and brought to our attention, but rarely is the
data used to drive instruction. The data wall was established last year and is being carried out
this year in a deeper level where staff will be challenged to the inconsistency between the
MEAP, NWEA, F&P and STAR reading scores from student-to-student, just to name an example.
Good is in our schools horizon, but it is not the correct characteristic to name our school, just
yet.
In sum, Novi Community School and Village Oaks has done a tremendous job of having
our curriculum mapped out clearly K-12 for the first time. Additionally, time is still preserved
amongst all buildings for collaboration. These two components are essential to the growth of a
collaborative culture. Without those, it cant happen, but with those in place, collaboration can
now begin. Now lets start with the deep-level collaboration. Village Oaks is ready!!
Principle #4
When the phrase 4 Cs is presented in connection with education, it typically relates to
the idea of 21
st
Century Learning; critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity.
Though there is another way to look at the 4 Cs through a different set of lenses, lenses that
revolve around data-based decision making that helps schools to use data successfully so that
continuous improvement for the school can occur. With data-based decision making, the 4 Cs
stand for Creating the climate and culture of trust for effective data use, Collecting, sorting and
11

distributing data in the form of reports, Capacity building for analysis of data, and Committing
to and achieving consistent implementation of data-based decisions.
Data-based decision making is the principle of all of Blanksteins principles that have
grown the most for Village Oaks Elementary. Eight years ago, the school went through the
motions of carrying out common, informal and formalized assessments. When the tests were
over, they were scored and sent home or shipped to the state and that was the end for another
year. Data was not collected, data was not analyzed, assessments were not aligned to the
curriculum, pre-and post-assessments were not instituted. Over the course of 8 years, the
district has made major strides in moving this principle to a strength, but with any true
collaborative culture, growth with data-based decision making still needs to occur.
Currently at Village Oaks, there is a district-wide assessment calendar that all teachers
follow. Formalized assessments are given each year; the MEAP for grades 3 & 4, the NWEA for
grades K-4, and the STAR for grades 1-4. The MEAP is carried out in the fall and results are
shared in the winter and the NWEA is given in the fall and the spring, results are ready within
24 hours. The STAR reading assessment is administered 3 times a year; September, January
and May. Informal assessments are also on a district-wide assessment calendar. End-of-the
unit common assessments, both pre-and post-assessments are shared across the district for
math, science and social studies. The timeline when units should be carried out are also stated
on the Atlas Rubicon site. With writing, genre units of study are laid out in Atlas Rubicon, with
the formal district writing assessment being carried out fall and spring, but written on different
genres; the fall is a personal narrative, the spring is informational. Finally, reading assessment
is given in the form of a Fountas & Pinnell assessment. This is given three times a year for all
students and four times a year for your priority readers. Throughout the year, math, writing and
reading workshops are happening in the classrooms. This strategy allows for teachers to
conference with students on a regular basis as to their learning progress. The progress from
these conferences is logged in the teachers classroom binder, or Pensieve. Goals/Targets are
set from each conference with the student. This Pensieve is a building mandate. Finally,
students track their own data in their data notebooks. This helps students know how they are
progressing through their learning. The students log their progress with their STAR reading,
F&P level, personal goals, and math common core standards.
Outside of the classroom, data is collected with our parents and community. At the
beginning and the end of the year, the superintendent asks for members of the community to
complete a zoomerang on-line survey detailing their thoughts to the district mission and vision.
At a building level, Sue Burnham, principal of Village Oaks, collects data throughout the year.
She asks for parents to complete a paper survey when they attend curriculum night. At our
Celebration of Learning, parents are asked to fill out a school-wide survey. Finally, students are
12

asked to complete a school-wide survey as to their thoughts on Village Oaks. The results of this
data is compiled by our principal and shared at VOICE meetings and with staff at the CSI and
staff meetings.
As you can see, the data is there. There is enough data to analyze and partake in
discussions with staff to start using data to help with the decision-making for continuous school
improvement. Now lets return to our 4 Cs. First is creating the climate and culture of trust for
effective data. With all the strengths Village Oaks shows with their data collection, this is the
one area where Village Oaks needs to focus their attention. With the new evaluation system in
place, 25% of the staffs performance is now based on their students data. Luckily, the data is
not collected from only one source, but allows for staff to use 2 different assessments to show
one-years growth with their students. Since the stakes are high, fear and panic set in with
teachers. The climate of trust was present in the school with data, until now as the climate is
now one of misunderstanding and fear. Teachers are worried that their data will depict their
chance of having a job or not at Village Oaks.
Despite the culture and lack of trust teachers are having with the use of assessments,
they still think highly of using assessment and therefore, the capacity building for analysis of
data is a strength at Village Oaks. Teachers have been trained as to the clarifying accuracy of
the data and therefore multiple means in the main cognate areas are in place. Additionally,
there are multiple data sources carried out with the learners so the amount of data is high.
With so many assessments being web-based combined with a data expert on staff, grade level
and class charts and graphs are created immediately to give a visual representation for the staff
in an attempt to understand the data. The staff at Village Oaks understands the majority of the
information presented on a report. There are still quite a few holes with the staff to
understand the data in its entirety. Staff still does not use the data to drive instruction, but the
conversation is happening school-wide. On the CSI team, staff works together to analyze the
data, look for trends and areas of weaknesses. It is from that team, where decisions are made
to improve the school. For example, last years MEAP showed a low level of computation with
math facts. As a result, a school-wide parent math fact program was instituted with all 1
st
-4
th

graders that performed low in computation, according to the MEAP.
If you ask teachers, they will feel as though too much data is collected. In fact some
teachers feel we are overassessing the students. The first marking period is hard because
there is so much data collected, but the data that is collected provides the evidence of
systemwide, schoolwide, and classroom-level achievement and helps identify students need
for additional support and interventions. The tiered intervention system is not in place, but the
interventions that are provided; special education, Title I, reading support, and ELL support all
13

deem children eligible by their assessments. As indicated in Principle 2, there are set cut-off
scores and rubrics to follow based on the common assessments that are given.
With all of this data collected, staff now needs to make sense of it and bring the data to
life. There are a few ways that we have in place to help the teachers become familiar with
dissecting the numbers associated with the data of their students. The first way is through our
school data wall. Each student K-4 is on our school data wall. At this time, we only use the wall
for reading. Each student has a card on a colored paper that coordinates with their grade level.
On the card, they are coded by the following; gender, ethnicity, SST request, interventions that
are provided, STAR score, F&P level that showed where they started at the beginning of the
year, and if they are in the bottom 25% on the NWEA. Then the students are placed under their
current F&P level on the board and move through the levels on the board. This has served as a
great visual for teachers to see the trends by grade level and it also has made it hard for
students to slip through the cracks. Additionally, grade level and staff meeting time is
devoted to discussing NWEA and MEAP scores so that the staff is well versed to the outcomes
of these assessments well in advance of the teachers. This allows for teachers to be prepared
for any communication that may arise from these assessments.
In sum, we were a building of fear from data, but in the end, data has really followed the
Continuous Improvement Model of Plan, Do, Study and Act at a building-level. As a building,
data has become a driving force behind some of our best initiatives: math parents to aid in
computation, implementing a new writing program entitled Blueprint for Exceptional Writers,
and mandating math and reading workshop in all classrooms. At the building level, Village Oaks
is innovating with using data to make decisions on continuous improvement. As strong as we
are at the building level, at the classroom level, we are just beginning. The Pensieves has
helped teachers to truly understand their learners and are giving pre- and post- assessments
with their cognate areas of study.
Principle #5
Gaining active engagement from family and community is one of the most imperative
principles in order to achieve success as a school; the greater the parental involvement, the
higher the levels of student achievement. Additionally, student behavior, truancy, and
irrespective of socioeconomic and ethnicity also improves. Village Oaks is a school under the
Novi Community School District. The district name says it all, Community. It strives to be a
community of schools that follow a district motto of We are Novi. There are many ways that
the district turns to stakeholders in the community and due to that sense of community; Novi
Community Schools performs at a high level. At the school level, Village Oaks feeds the lowest
socio-economic population for the district. Even being the lowest socio-economic, most
diverse, including the highest African American population in the district, and the highest
14

percentage of single-family or dual-working parents, Village Oaks still has data that shows it is
competitive with the other schools in the district. I believe this happens for two major reasons,
Village Oaks truly is a community for their parents and we have great leadership.
Village Oaks has a parent-teacher organization or PTO at the school level. It is a 2-year
term for each position and a great organization that raises a lot of money for the school. The
members are all parents and they are elected positions. They raise money, but in a respectful
manner, as parents within the school, have a hard time even realizing that they are giving to the
PTO. Our building collects money for three different events, Spring Fling (or school carnival),
Little Caesars pizza kits, and a cash drive in the fall where you can anonymously give to the
school. The cash drive allows for parents to give any amount of money to the school. We have
had families that clean out their change cup and give to the school and they feel they still
donated, but at their level of comfort and we receive over a 90% donation rate. Parents
appreciate that there are no other fundraisers where they feel they have to give and purchase
fundraisers for the school or their child does not feel left out if they dont participate in the
fundraisers. In the end, PTO collects enough money, so that each year, they purchase our
building one big ticket item, like walkie talkies, they pay for all of our grade level field trips (one
per grade level), provide teachers with $250 in the fall for back-to-school supplies, free family
fun nights (four a year, like Bingo Night) and maintain our school fish tank, to name a few. This
organization does a wonderful job living by their motto, Village Oaks Interested Citizens and
Educators or VOICE.
On top of VOICE, there are other committees and opportunity for parents to become
involved at the building level. There are spirit wear, yearbook, media center helpers, classroom
helpers, class room moms, spring fling, student directory, MEAP snacks, book fair, teacher
luncheon, and reading month committee. All the committees vary in time and commitment,
but provide opportunity for our working parents to still help out at the building level in some
capacity, even if they cant be at school during school hours.
At a district level, there are ways for parents to also become involved that support our
demographics and the principles that our district stands for. We have PAASN for our African
American families to have a Voice. Another area is LAN-Novi where parents can help with
legislature actions at a district level trying to have our voice heard at the state level. The
Japanese School of Oakland County is housed in our district each Saturday. We also have a rich
Community Education program that provides clubs, programs and before and after-school CARE
for our students.
On top of all the ways parents can become a part of the community, Village Oaks also
provides support to our families in need. We have a general and special education school social
worker that works with families who may need financial support for a variety of things: school
15

supplies, turkeys, and Christmas support. Recorders are free to our students receiving free and
reduced lunches3rd & 4th grade students and every 4
th
grader is given a yearbook as a
memento of their time at Village Oaks.
Outreaching with our community is also an area that we work on. Stuarts ice cream
and local restaurants work with our school to provide discounts and family events in the
evening. Parents in various careers come to our school to bring real-life application with our
students. Parents of the military come for Paragraph Boot Camp. Resident doctors come
during science and local politicians visit for our social studies curriculum. The Novi Public
Library works with our media specialists for the district-wide summer reading program and to
provide free family events for our students.
To reach our at risk population, we noticed that a majority of these students were
part of our low socioeconomic population who were not able to pay for services that are
provided at a community level, so Village Oaks created programs to meet their needs. We
provide free tutoring in the morning before school. It starts at 8:15 and goes until the start of
school. Tutoring happens up to 4 days a week, based on the students needs. Teachers in our
building tutor the students and it is funded with Title 1 money. Additionally, summer school is
provided at our school 2-days a week throughout the summer for grades 1-4. It is in the
morning and in the evening as a way to provide the time frame that works best in the parents
schedule.
Finally, communication with parents is another way Village Oaks attempts to attempt to
earn trust and build on the strong and positive relationships that are in place. The principal
holds curriculum night each fall for all grade levels in the evening and asks parents for their
preferred means of communication (i.e., facebook, twitter, e-mails, or paper). When it is made
apparent that we have a family where electronic resources are not an option, paper copies are
provided of all communication. Each Monday, the principal sends out a News You Can Use
helping to provide communication with parents. Grade levels also send out a weekly
newsletter either on Friday or Monday. The Village Voice is sent out monthly hi-lighting the
schools month ahead. Conferences occur two times a year and provide conference times in
the afternoon and the evening. Staff also is willing to have a phone conference or home
conference if coming to school is not feasible for the parent. 100% conference participation is a
mandate at our building for the fall. Staff is encouraged by our principal to call parents for
positive reasons throughout the year to establish the relationship, so when tough conversations
need to happen, the relationship is created where a solution to the problem can occur with
relative ease. In the spring, the school holds a Celebration of Learning where students
showcase their data notebooks with their parents. If a parent is unable to attend, the data
notebooks are sent home and the student shares with them at home and then the teacher
16

follows up with the parent to their reflections of the data notebooks. Once again, 100%
participation is mandated.
In the end, Village Oaks is a welcoming environment for parents and students alike. A
true partnership is established and cultivated between school and home. When you look at the
National PTA list, Village Oaks works high with all standards. Village Oaks is welcoming to all
families in the school community, communication is effective and strong, teachers support
student success, power is shared between parents and staff, and the collaboration with
community to connect is apparent. With all the wonderful connections and relationships that
are established, in the end, speaking up for every child is still a weakness.
Principle #6
Blankstein leaves the idea of teacher leadership for the last chapter of the book. It is an
interesting choice to have this as principle #6, rather than principal #1. This is stated because
teacher leadership is the fundamental component that is one of the driving components
towards student success. When teacher leadership is active in a school, student achievement
improves. When teacher leadership is done in isolation, student achievement is not school-
wide, but rather in pockets of success. In the end, principles #1-5 cannot work or improve
unless you have teacher leadership. Leadership that uses the words, leadership, capacity and
sustainability to emphasize the importance of continually developing the human resources of
the school community so that success can last well beyond the initial implementation of school
improvement efforts (Blankstein, 2013) is the key to success for schools.
In looking at our district, there are many opportunities for teacher leadership. It never
used to have these opportunities provided for teachers to lead. When entering the district
eight years ago, the leadership had been in place for a long time. The principals had all worked
together for fifteen plus years, the superintendent had established a legacy and everyone
worked in isolation or as a teaching team of two. Five years ago, the district leadership
completely changed and the district took over a major overhaul that asked teachers to find
their leadership drive and lets move each other towards the new initiatives for the district. All
that has been and will be accomplished could not have happened without great teacher
leadership.
The first task that was charged was to map our curriculum. It was housed using Atlas
Rubicon. The grade levels or content areas were broken up into Content Area Leaders (CALs)
and Content Area Team (CATs) from across the district. Timelines and clear guidelines were set
by administration, Oakland Schools and the school board about this target. All CALs and CATs
were made up of teachers only. The district celebrated all of the work with this venture by
17

sharing our Atlas site with parents, which is the first district who allowed this to their parents,
and teachers revisit the curriculum every June.
Additionally, Novi Schools is spearheading the task of being a Lighthouse School District
with the Leader in Me program. There was a Leader in Me committee of teacher leaders who
were trained by Franklin Covey leaders and then in turn trained their colleagues. All teachers K-
6 were trained. Data notebooks, common language and full district buy-in was in place.
Administrators were even trained by our teacher leaders with the Leader In Me program.
Literacy coaches and learning labs were also instituted. The literacy coaches were
teachers in our district that had a skill for teacher leadership. They moved into the coaching
position to aid staff in working together to make necessary changes in instruction and help to
institute new curriculum initiatives. The labs were not set up for the coach to tell you how to
teach, but rather the group of teachers all working together to see each other teach and come
together collaboratively with strategies of effective ways to meet their learners needs.
Other opportunities at the district level where teacher leaders are called upon have
increased in numbers over the last four years when the new assistant superintendent of
curriculum came to our district. He created a district CSI team comprised of administrators and
staff from across the district from all buildings. They ask the teacher leaders to share the
findings of the district CSI meeting at the building level. The MTSS committee is compiled of
teacher leaders across the district to be charged with a new RTI model for the district. Finally, a
new report card system and moving from trimesters to quarters all happened from the district
report card committee. This committee was compiled with teachers from around the district
who created the new report card system and trained their staff with the changes and compiled
their feedback to share back with the committee.
At a building level, we have revamped our reading and writing workshop models. The
entire school has adopted the CAF strategy for readers workshop and the Blueprint for
Exceptional Writers (BEW) for writers workshop. Both programs were presented to staff by
teachers in the building that lead us through being trained in these initiatives. Additionally, the
Continuous School Improvement (CSI) team also is led by teacher leaders in the building.
Teachers set the agenda for the CSI meetings and report out to their grade levels as to the
happenings of the CSI committee. School Improvement Plan, state standard reports and new
directions or programs for our school all stem from the CSI team. This team is made-up of one
member from each grade level, a special ed representative, a specials teacher, a secretary and
two parents. The committee rotates on a 2-year commitment to help ensure that stagnant
behavior will hopefully not ensue. New technology initiatives are taught by teachers in the
building. Some examples were SmartBoard, Google docs, and iPad training. When hiring takes
place, staff is represented to sit on the hiring team of new staff, as well as, ask pertinent
18

questions that ensures the new candidates would fit the climate of the building. Student
placement is done by the teachers at the end of the year. The current grade level makes class
lists for the upcoming school year. The principal does a glance-over to make sure that ethnicity
is equally distributed, as well as, all classrooms being equally compiled of high- and low-
achieving students. Rarely are changes made to the class lists.
As you can see, teacher leadership is encouraged at the district and building level. The
building principal understands that trying to operate as a sole leader of the school can be
challenging. Teachers feel as though their voice is being heard and that their leadership
opportunity has helped to strengthen and grow the building. It has been empowering to learn
from each other and the buy-in has been greater when staff lead each other rather than it
being delivered from a top down approach. To encourage the teacher leader model, they have
embedded a teacher leader strand on our new evaluation system that encourages staff to make
opportunities to serve in the teacher leader role in some capacity, whether it is at a school level
or a district level.
Even more empowering, has been the fact that the initiatives that the teacher leaders
have rolled out to the staff have stayed over the course of time. These initiatives dont just
come and go. Staff is trained. They implement and encourage reflections and changes to the
initiatives in the upcoming year. The initiatives are written into our CSI plan and encourage
teachers to integrate them for the students. At the building level, the roll out is always done
slowly so that staff feels as though they are digesting small sections of the change over time,
not a complete transformation overnight. For example, when CAF was instituted, the principal
paid for all of us to see the creators of the CAF model in Ann Arbor. The upcoming school
year, we made the CAF book be our book study. That entire year, staff was encouraged in
trying strategies that they are comfortable with. Time was given at staff meetings for CAF so
teachers could share out strategies that are working in their room and reflecting on strategies
that are challenging for others. The second year of the initiative, CAF was written in our
school improvement plan where all teachers had to use it. Again, reflection was given at staff
meetings to ask what was working, what was not. A Pensieve team of teachers were created to
pilot the on-line program for monitoring the students and then in the third year of the program,
all teachers had to be using some sort of a book/binder/on-line record keeping that housed
their conference communications with students during the various workshops. Teacher
leadership is very healthy at the school level. Sustainable leadership is a strength as depth of
knowledge and real achievement from new initiatives are happening over time. At no time, do
new initiatives get thrown at the teachers to figure out or you must do. When a new
initiative comes out at the building level, teacher buy-in is usually high since the trust and
climate is in place.
19

At a district level, teacher leadership opportunities are encouraged but rarely are the
initiatives rolled out effectively. Unfortunately, the decisions are in the end made by
administrators and the suggestions by staff in the committees are rarely used. The
administrators that are in charge of the various committees have their own vision in place
before teachers even play a role, so when the end product is rolled out, too often the feedback
from the teachers are lost and credibility and buy in for the program are gone. For example, for
two years staff worked together on the report card committee. Information and feedback was
hashed out and recommendations were stated. Work was unfinished at year-end last year, but
come the fall the new report card was rolled out to staff. The committee was hurt that their
work and feedback were not taken into consideration and two-years of work and credibility and
buy-in from staff was lost. In the end, teachers complained and changes were made for this
school year and will change again next school year and that could lose the buy-in from parents
and community. Too often the committees at a district level are not lead by great leaders from
administration and so coming to a conclusion on a district meeting are extremely challenging.
As strong as it is at a building level, it becomes lost at the district level. They always say that
our motto is, We are Novi. We are a district working together, not a district of schools.
Though with the higher up roll out of new initiatives and the lack of respect of teacher leaders
input, this is what is happening. Schools are creating their own version of how to roll out the
initiatives, instead of us all being on the same page.
In looking at the ten things for sustainability to occur, according to Blankstein, the
recommendations were very easy to create. At the building level, things are working really
well. Staff is changing their teaching with new initiatives and more importantly the staff is not
working in isolation and teacher leadership is embraced.
Recommendations
This section is devoted entirely to the recommendations that would benefit Village Oaks
to ensure that failure is not an option for each student. The following recommendations are
stated for each of the six principles.
Principle one is for schools to have a common mission, vision, values and goals. As for
the MVVG, for each, the what do we want to do and the what will we do to ensure success
are stated, but the how is not stated. Moving Village Oaks mission to the district mission is a
step that needs to be made soon. It is that common language that needs to happen within a
district and we would not want Village Oaks to appear that they are not following the belief of
the remainder of the district. In the future, Village Oaks will need to revisit this discrepancy in
the vision statement to ensure that the picture is painted clearly to all of its stakeholders in the
school. Additionally, school-wide common language and best practice amongst the K-4 have
been fine-tuned the last few years. The school has shared the same strategies for each grade.
20

These strategies could easily be the goals for the school, rather than be called as strategies for
the School Improvement Plan. These strategies are clearly stated and created with ease and
align around our mission and vision. As easy as it sounds to turn the strategies into our goals,
the goals are not measurable as the term, one-years growth is not defined. This phrase
shows in each of the goals. So adding a measurable component to the goals is an imperative
change.
Principle two is ensuring achievement for all students. This is the area that is in need of
the largest improvement for Village Oaks. It is the area of weakness with our building and our
district. A tiered approach that is systematic, comprehensible and manageable is the most
critical unanswered question of the district and one that needs to be addressed soon to further
move the district and continue to ensure a common language and achievement and growth for
all learners. Currently there is no RTI model and there needs to be to help the students to be
able to progress fluidly through the tiers to ensure success for the students. Additionally, there
are no gifted and talented programs for the high-achieving students. The high-achieving
students need their needs, just as much as the low-achieving students. In the end, a tiered
approach needs to be instituted to help all students achieve.
Principle three is collaborative teaming focused on teach for learning. As stated, the
collaborative time is preserved and instituted for all grade teachers to meet. Unfortunately,
rarely is time devoted to look to each other and within each other to admit that there are areas
of instruction that could be better and allowing for data to drive the change. That is the
component that is the biggest missing piece that keeps Village Oaks Elementary away from
being a true collaboration culture. Data should drive instruction, not just to be used for
identification of students who need to be eligible for support.
Principle four is data-based decision making for continuous improvement. This principle
aligns well with principal three. Therefore, again, teachers need to make a conscious effort to
look at their teaching to ensure that reteaching, reassessing, and acting on their data happens.
Continuing with the Caf and Workshop model will help to ensure the time that is built in the
classroom to allow for reteaching to occur. Also using a Penseive to track your students
progress and reteaching opportunities is a great way to help achieve this weakness.
Principle five is gaining active engagement from family and community. Village Oaks has
the highest percentage of African Americans across the district. With that being said, more
needs to be done to meet the needs of learners. It is imperative because in looking at our data,
our African American population is a sub-group below all others at our school. Village Oaks
needs to find a way to better connect with these families to make a difference with our learners
in the African American population. We have a program called PAASN, or Parents of African
American Students in Novi. Reaching out to this group is a great place to start. This program is
21

already in the district, but our schools families are not participants. This alliance could provide
our school with strategies to reach out to their community and to our teachers that need better
strategies to reach our African American students in need.
The last principle is building sustainable leadership capacity. To strengthen this
sustainability of teacher leadership, forming a three-sided partnership and collaborating with
schools across the district is something that does not happen. When schools come together it
is to implement district initiatives, not to create a partnership where we share ideas and work
together to help strengthen the sustainability across the district. This would be so empowering
so the communitys idea that some schools are better than other schools become lost and all
schools would be advocating for each other and sharing common language, initiatives and
programs. There are five elementary schools and a 5-6 school. It would be easy to split the six
buildings in groups of three to make a partnership. In time, the partnerships should switch to
ensure that all six end up working with each other. How empowering would that be for schools
and teacher leaders coming together to ensure common language and teacher instruction?
In sum, educators must ask the same thing of themselves that we ask of our students:
learn, take risks, reflect, set goals, accept change, work harder, and do better. Village Oaks has
the culture set and the trust in place, now lets take these recommendations and ensure that
failure is not happening at this school.
References
Brown, S., Choi, K. & Herman, B. (2011, March). Exploratory study of the HOPE Foundation
Courageous Leadership Academy: Summary of findings. Washington, DC: American
Institutes for Research.
Blankstein, A.M. (2013); Failure is not an option: 6 principles for making student success the
only option. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin and Hope Foundation.
Wallace Foundation. (2011). The school principal as a leader: Guiding schools to better teaching
and learning. New York: Author.