Instead our teachers needed materials that provided the appropriate scaffolds and language supports. As a principal, it was humbling because I thought I was doing everything "right" by adopting HQIM and providing PD. Turns out there is more to leading than buying books and PD.

I found myself doing everything our PD providers said not to do - rewriting lessons, changing the tasks, because it was what our students needed. At that point I realized that our teachers didn't need more time "internalizing lessons.".

If you've taught the curriculum, you've likely seen the challenges and flaws. It wasn't until several years after adopting our curriculum (and providing lots of PD) I was in the classroom and taught it (over the course of weeks and months) that I saw some of the challenges.

As a school leader, a standards-aligned (#HQIM) curriculum is very attractive. It's easy to get tricked into thinking if I purchase the all green curriculum, and provide the PD, I've done my job as an instructional leader. But the reality is far more complex.

I still have a lot of work to undo the impact of an ill-thought-out adoption on our students. But I've learned a lot, including that "all green" is a brilliant marketing gimmick but doesn't tell us about the the most important thing - the instruction in the classroom. 7/7.

Several years after adopting an inquiry based math curriculum, I read Paul Kirschner and Carl Hendrick's book How Learning Happens, and realized I had led my school astray. 6/7 @P_A_Kirschner @C_Hendrick

Discovery learning is appealing because it -- similar to Balanced Literacy -- codifies a romantic approach to teaching and learning. But it ignores research that tells us what novice learners need. 5/7.

"The model involves students working in small, randomly chosen groups; solving problems standing up at whiteboards; building on small bits of knowledge as they go; and consolidating their discoveries as a class after working through problems." 4/7.

It turns out that a teacher's instruction really matters. The idea that kids learn math by collaboratively "consolidating their discoveries" is simply not aligned with how we know students learn. 3/7

After adopting an inquiry based math curriculum, I watched novice mathematicians (our students) flail away at collaborative learning because they did not have the foundational skills and automaticity to access the beautifully designed tasks. 2/7.

Having led a school through a couple of adoptions of an "all-green" curriculums, I've learned a lot. One is that "all green" simply means it addresses the standards, but has nothing to do with the instructional approach the curriculum takes. 🧵 1/7.

Full disclosure: It took me 40-something years to learn the difference between a long and short vowel. I still have a ton to learn, but if I — the product of whole language instruction in the 80s — can learn about the schwa, any principal can. 10/10.

In discussions (and work) involving literacy principals need to be at the forefront: learning alongside teachers, supporting implementation, and ensuring teaching kids to read is a schoolwide priority. 9/10.

Having good data: A lot of districts don’t prioritize the right early literacy data — a computer adaptive test for a five year old is not good data! Without the right data, it’s hard know how to interpret progress, support teachers, and create meaningful next steps. 8/10.

It’s hard to play the long game and prioritize early literacy when you might not be there in a few years to see that translate onto state tests. 7/10.

State assessments start at third grade — that is the data point often most publicly shared, and therefore becomes the focus. That results in a short-sided focus looking for growth on those assessments. 6/10.

Often time we don’t attend the PDs. We need to start modeling the learning (and teaching) we want our teachers to be doing. Attending a PD is just the start. Getting into classrooms, learning how to teach is even better. And that requires a lot of vulnerability. 5/10.

Why do more principals not get involved with early literacy instruction? I think there are a couple of reasons: Very few principals have early elementary teaching experiences. It’s hard to lead what you don’t understand or haven’t done. Teaching five year olds is scary!.4/10.

We have to move beyond just purchasing a curriculum, finding a PD provider, and saying we are supporting our teachers and students with literacy. Being an instructional leader is much more difficult than submitting that PO for the new curriculum. 3/10.

As a principal, I’ve lived through a lot of initiatives, adoptions and more. If we don’t understand the work and personally invest in learning, the best of plans will fail to get results. 2/10.