In the first month, one teacher entered her students, no one
entered an intervention. The next month,
two teachers entered their students, no one entered interventions. We continued in this way all year. Every month we used Continuous Classroom Improvement (CCI)
created by Jim Shipley & Associates a problem
solving technique, to determine if we should keep trying or quit. Every month the team recognized that those
teachers who had entered their data were better able to describe their students
and were more likely to leave with a plan. The team marched on, but with little
improvement.
 |
| Bronze Prizes |
After two years of lack luster results, I began to use
incentives, both verbal and tangible. Teachers could earn Gold, Silver, or
Bronze medal prizes for entering their information into the Google doc. I also began to send “Shout Out!” messages in
the days that led up to the meeting praising those teachers who had entered
their information and rallying the troops to do their part. The rules were: Teachers who entered any students before the
meeting earned a Bronze medal prize. Teachers who entered two students by the
deadline the day before the meeting earned a Silver medal prize. Teachers who
entered in two students and provided an intervention for a peer’s student on
the Google doc, received a Gold Prize. With
this, things improved and 12% teachers entered at least one student before the
meeting, 25% of the teachers were earning a Silver medal, and 12% teachers were
entering interventions.
 |
| Silver Prizes |
We continued to problem solve using CCI, but I noticed that all the
changes suggested were things I had
to do. The suggestions were: “The data
leader should give us more notice in the reminder email; the meeting is coming
up and I don’t have time to prepare.” “The data leader is giving us too much
time when giving us the reminder email; I forgot about the meeting.” “The data
leader only included the Google doc link on 3 of the 5 reminder emails.” At the next meeting, I laid down the
law. I said, “This time when we problem
solve, I want to know what you are going to do, not what I am going to
do.” My team talked to each other and
gained insights from those two teachers who were earning Gold Medals. I continued “Shout Outs!” multiple times daily as the deadline approached,
for teachers who entered their data and for teachers who had entered an
intervention. The next month I had 70%
medal winners (Bronze, Silver, and Gold combined). Our numbers went up and within a year we consistently
had 100% medal winners every month (combination of Silver and Gold).
 |
| Gold Prizes |
The prizes are simple. Teachers simply want to be recognized
for their hard work. Bronze prizes
include candy or fruit, Silver prize include something small like a novelty
stress ball, decorative folder, nail files, or anything else I could find for
less than $1 each, and Gold prizes include teaching workbooks or student
incentives left over from my former career as a special education teacher,
fancy stationary, meditative fountains, gift cards, or other items I could find
for $5 or less). I also gave out
certificates for having a reference (web-site or book) for the intervention you
suggested. All prize winners picked prizes from their prize level plus the prize levels below. For example, a Gold medal winning teacher would be able to pick 1 Gold prize, 1 Silver prize, and 1 Bronze prize.
As a result of using the Google Doc for pre-preparation, we
have very productive meetings. Each team member has already put into words and
numbers their thoughts about their target student and is therefore able to
describe the problem fluently. There is no fumbling through details as the
teacher tries to express the issue, tries to find the data in her notebook, or
remember what the data might be. It is all already written into the Google
doc.
An intervention suggestion has also already been written up
for each student. We actually like to call the Google doc a “Relay” because the
learning or behavioral struggle is “passed” from the teacher to her teammate
for the purpose of finding interventions. After a teacher describes the
problem, the accepting teacher proposes the intervention she has prepared for
the meeting. The original teacher states if she is satisfied with the
intervention or if she would like to open it up to the team for more
ideas. She leaves with a plan.
