Leaders for Learning

The roles of administrators in Nebraska and across the nation have changed. Never before have our leadership priorities been as clearly defined. We are focused on student learning and the appropriate and accurate measurement of that learning. The priority focus on assessment results has shown us that quality assessment data can and should inform instruction in classrooms. This new emphasis on student performance has challenged us to become "Leaders for Learning" in our school districts.

Nebraska administrators have had unique opportunities to provide the needed local leadership for learning. Nebraska is the only state where assessment legislation honors educators and trusts the professional judgment of its teachers and administrators. The opportunity to make local decisions about whether or not our students are meeting standards has brought with it the responsibilities of developing quality local assessment systems, of ensuring the data collected in those local assessment systems are accurate, and of using the data to inform quality instructional practice in our classrooms. These responsibilities have further reinforced the need for us to become "Leaders for Learning."

As a former classroom teacher, a district administrator, and now facilitator of the statewide assessment process, I have had many opportunities to see the local assessment building process through different lenses. I have seen the good, the bad, and the ugly. Building local assessment systems, I have learned, is NOT about testing; we must move beyond that mistaken notion. If we don't, we run the risk of allowing ourselves to be "hung up" in the assessment tree – and miss the forest – the real reason we have been developing local assessment systems in our districts. Building a local assessment system is about appropriate opportunities for students to meet learning targets (standards), the validation of teachers' professional judgment through those opportunities (assessment), and the use of assessment information for making a difference for kids in classrooms (accountability). The School-based Teacher-led Assessment and Reporting System is about teaching, learning, and system-wide school improvement.

Much information about the assessment practices in Nebraska school districts has been gathered in the state during the last three years. This research has been collected from large and from small schools. This information came from every corner of the state and includes formal and informal interviews with teachers and administrators, surveys, focus groups, correspondence, and observations. Based upon this information, it is now possible to identify successful practices, processes and strategies that build high quality assessment systems and practices that are less than successful, in fact, practices that are detrimental to school districts and the students in those districts. In every case where districts have implemented the promising practices successfully, the leaders in those districts modeled, lived, and believed that they were, are, and continue to be "Leaders for Learning."

The Six Promising Practices found in Nebraska school districts where high quality local assessment systems have been developed are described below. There is no priority order to the listing of the six practices because each is important. In some districts all six practices have been implemented. In some districts more successful practices are found than in others; in some districts no evidence of the named successful practices was evident. Each practice looks different in individual districts, was initiated and was implemented in a fashion appropriate to the size and circumstance of the individual district. However, in every case these promising practices for building local assessment were initiated, led, and/or supported by Nebraska's "Leaders for Learning."

Promising Practice One: The vision for building local assessment was endorsed by key leaders and shared throughout the K-12 school system.

In the school districts where the vision and the purpose of assessment as part of teaching and learning was endorsed by key leaders and shared among all K-12 teachers in the entire district, the assessment process was positive and productive. Total staff involvement was a priority. If only 4th 8th, or 11th grade teachers or a small group was singled out to build the process or if no one understood the vision and purpose of the process, negative emotions were present. The "Leaders for Learning" in the successful districts understood the vision of the local assessment building, communicated that vision and purpose clearly, and reinforced those beliefs through their actions with everyone in the system.

Promising Practice Two: Professional development was provided for all staff.

Professional development and the skill development of teachers and educators was evident in successful districts. Adult learning included both teachers and administrators. Students were not the only learners in those districts. Assessment literacy became a priority for all staff in successful districts. Although administrators may or may not have been directly involved in all of the districts in the development of the assessment process, they were assessment literate and supportive of the needed professional development. The "Leaders for Learning" in the successful districts participated either directly or indirectly in skill building and the professional development opportunities.

Promising Practice Three: Student benefit was the primary incentive for building local assessment.

The educators in districts building quality local assessment systems knew why and how their work was being done on behalf of their students. And they said so. The primary motivation in these districts was to do this "in the best interest of our kids." In the districts where the purpose and vision was student centered, Leaders for Learning were motivated to use quality assessment data for the improvement of student learning and for the benefit of the students. "Leaders for Learning" in these districts were the persistent voices about quality assessment working on behalf of the students. Through this process, opportunities for students and their performance would improve.

Promising Practice Four: The local assessment process was integrated into the regular curriculum and not a separate layer.

The school districts most successful with the assessment development process had integrated their assessments into the teaching and learning process and had not designed their assessment system as something separate from teaching and learning. Staff in these districts did not talk about having to "stop teaching in order to test." Staff in the districts where integration had occurred did not see the state required assessment as merely compliance to a state regulation but as a natural part of gathering information about how well their students were doing with the instructional program. These staff members were letting the assessment results guide their instruction. "Leaders for Learning" were providing this encouragement and this vision for an integrated process.

Promising Practice Five: The assessment development process provided opportunities for collaboration.

In all of the successful school districts, across the district conversation and collaboration had occurred. This dialogue was within grade levels, across the K-12 district, across subject areas, in multiple districts, or in consortium settings. All of the evidence supported the need for collaboration and working together, but the effectiveness of the collaboration was determined by how it was structured, whether or not the participants in the collaboration understood the purpose of the task, and the support felt by those participants in the collaboration. "Leaders for Learning" were initiating, supporting, and participating in those conversations across the district, districts, grade levels and subject areas.

Promising Practice Six: The assessment development process was brought back to the "Big Picture" of School Improvement.

In the districts where the assessment process was recognized as the data source for the improvement of learning, the focus on the bigger picture, that of "school improvement" was maintained. In those successful districts, the local assessment system was seen as the means to data, the information that would guide continuous school improvement. If the purpose of the assessment system was not viewed as the data source for school improvement, a disconnect occurred. "We have been so busy with this 'assessment stuff,' that we have put school improvement on the "back burner." "Leaders for Learning" in successful districts were providing the connection between local assessment data and its purpose in the big picture of school improvement efforts.

No one has ever said building local assessment was easy, including those "Leaders for Learning" in Nebraska districts. No one district has worked through all the issues, and no one district has all the answers. The challenges of building quality local assessment systems are real and are many. Nebraska's "Leaders for Learning" met these challenges head on, realized failure as well as success, and continue to work their way through them building upon the leadership of all staff within the district. There are no magical or quick fixes. Building local assessment systems to be the source of quality assessment data for school improvement is a labor-intensive and time-consuming process. The complexity and diversity of building local assessment is not to be underestimated, but it can be accomplished, and has been accomplished wonderfully well by Nebraska school districts who have relied upon the expertise, integrity, and risk taking of Nebraska's "Leaders for Learning."

"Leaders for Learning" are found in all the educational roles: teachers, principals, curriculum directors, central office staff, staff developers, and superintendents. And, although each role varies in its direct connection with the students, all of the roles are in support of students and their learning. Therefore, a worthy goal for all of us to work at achieving is to become a "Leader for Learning." Our leadership matters; our "Leadership for Learning" makes a difference to kids. That is why we became educators.

About the author

Pat Roschewski, Ph.D., the Director of Statewide Assessment in Nebraska, has been a Nebraska educator since 1969. Pat was a teacher and administrator with one school district for 26 years, spending 20 of those years in a middle school classroom. When she left that district, Pat was serving in the role of Director of Curriculum. Pat worked extensively at the local district level with classroom and school-based assessment and agreed to coordinate statewide efforts in developing local assessment systems beginning in 2000. Pat earned her curriculum and administrative degrees from the University of Nebraska at Lincoln including her doctorate in 2002. Her dissertation title was "Promising Practices, Processes and Leadership Strategies in Building Quality Local Assessment." You may contact Pat via email at proschew@nde.state.ne.us.

For permission to redistribute, please go to:
New Horizons for Learning Copyright and Permission Information