I'm not sure which of us had more fun but it focused more than ever my desire to see Agile in the classroom. You have taken the idea of mapping Agile specifically Scrum roles to existing K school roles further and used a slightly different model than the one I chose, but I think the two can work together.
While you mapped teachers to team members, the principal to a Product Owner you mention ScrumMaster but didn't map the role , I focussed one step lower. In my model, the students are the team members with increasing autonomy in the higher grades , the teachers are the ScrumMasters, and the principal maps to the Product Owner role.
My reasoning is simple: A ScrumMaster's responsibilities include - process advisor, coach, impediment bulldozer, and facilitator. Stated another way: responsible for creating an environment that allows the team to excel. Sounds like the very definition of a teacher's role to me.
The team members responsibilities include - owning their collective commitment to delivering on what they've taken on, working to support one another towards that goal, self-organizing around how to get the work down. Isn't that what teachers would most like to see happen with their students?
is this an appropriate place for children (10-14)?
In scrum, the Product Owner is characterized as the single-wringable-neck. After all, a parent who is not satisfied with what they get from the teacher; who do they go see? The principal.
These two models can co-existing as a scrum-of-scrum model. They compliment one another nicely. Here's my question to you; how can I help you achieve your goals? Great thinking here, Bob.
And nice to know there other folks out there with the same idea. But just as you demonstrated in your work with kids, an adult has to go first. That's really the next step: adapt Agile practices for use by classroom teachers and get a few adults to "go first" just like you did. Agile is ideal for project-based learning, of course, but also for anything that is process-oriented like reading, writing, or math problem-solving. Perhaps most promising of all would be the cultural changes we might see at an Agile school.
Teachers and children applying the same fundamental principles would probably rub off on parents, too. You can see the "good" cascading throughout the entire school community. Steve, In a time when the amount of information created and available daily is more than one can read in one's life time versus T Jefferson's day it seems as though personal accountability can always come under scrutiny because of 'expert' opinions. As an anthropologist and educator I don't think our personal needs Maslow's hierarchy have changed any more than our dentition since the time when it was possible to read all that had been printed.
Developing and supporting interactive teams for honest collaborate seems to me to be essential, and Agile appears to be a human-centered educational tool, spiraling learning in the ways that support differentiated learning needs of adults and children. I agree with the need to develop sprints and repetition of core concepts until internalized by the student including teacher and parent - just like any physical activity, if you want to faster you need to adapt your training. Since we can change the firing pattern of our brains in the cognitive and skill areas we need an effective implementation platform for patterned behavior to be able to change.
Dweck's work with Mindset and Coyle's work in Talent Code support the idea that we can and must think differently AND this is trainable with great coaching. Education is looking for great coaching that will not allow under performance. Fascinating article Steve, and I couldn't agree with you more. This is a process issue, not an end-product result, that needs to be addressed. That in turn produce the product that we're all looking for: meaningful learning for our students and lives of meaning for our teachers.
A couple of insights that I carry around with me: The idea of focusing on the "bright spots", the areas or people or systems where things ARE working and building on them, rather than staring into the abyss of all the things that aren't working and trying to figure out what the hell we should do.
Another is their focus on having a "growth mindset" vs. Too many other good stories and lessons to mention - just read it! I imagine this book would be very helpful in getting educational leaders to make the "switch" to an Agile way of thinking and behaving. Can't wait to see what happens! You are spot on that leaders and teachers are forced to play not to lose. Two years ago, I relocated to DC and took a position as master educator teacher evaluator with Rhee's new evaluation system.
- Dann (CarlsenTaschenBücher) (German Edition)?
- Agile with Families | Growing Agile.
- Charles Darwin - The Inspirational Life Story of Charles Darwin: Fundamentals In The Survival Of The Fittest (Inspirational Life Stories By Gregory Watson Book 3)!
- Le verdi dimore ancora sussurrano pace (Italian Edition).
- From Mourning to Morning:.
Last fall, I transitioned over to the American Federation of Teachers with a focus on supporting districts nationwide on redesigning their teacher evaluation systems. Where do you think evaluations or more importantly, systems for support and growth fall in Agile's human-centric approach? Seeing you are from NC, are you familiar with Eric Hirsch's teacher working conditions surveys?
Get in touch with us
The principles also remind me of Micheal Fullan's work. Wishing you continued success with this project. Seth, I think your last line here is great: "Education is looking for great coaching that will not allow under-performance. Coaching is something we understand very well in education, and something that has improved dramatically in the last years on the athletic field, in the music room, on the stage, in the art studio, etc. But, alas, not in the classroom or in the principal's office. I've often felt that "teaching" is an "individual sport" but that "education" is a team sport. A single "player" or student may have teachers from K And it would be much to everyone's benefit if this group of individual "competitors" could function more cooperatively as a set of "well-coached" teams.
We "coach" kids and other coaches very well. But we tend to teach and to lead poorly in school because we do not have ready access to proven, thoughtful models of building-level and classroom-level coaching. The Agile leadership "frame" is, by definition, a "coaching" frame. It is also designed specifically to improve team performance. Following Agile principles, it's hard not to get better.
The Maninfesto and 12 Principles define the human-centered foundation; the myriad Agile practices provide the essential "coaching" tools.follow link
Raising An Agile Child – Part 1 - Business 2 Community
The result, I think, is something that not only solves a core problem in education -- Why do teaching and school leadership fail to improve while other aspects of schooling succeed in improving? Thank you, Allison, for your kind remarks. I love both "Switch" and "Mindset". You're right that both have a lot to teach us about human change. Agile seems very consistent to me with both of these texts.
Agile Kids Gifts
The nine essential recommendations in "Switch" are all addressed directly by Agile practices. And Agile's bias toward continuous improvement is completely consistent with Dweck's work on the "growth mindset". In fact, one might say that Agile is a "growth mindset" methodology by definition. And that our Industrial Age model of schooling is, unfortunately, premised on the "fixed mindset" view of life.
You're right, too, I think, that the solution to improving schools will be process-oriented by nature rather than product-oriented. While we will continue to develop better and better technology, and to increase the access kids have to it, it will be the ways in which that technology is used that will determine whether or not we prepare our kids effectively for the rapidly changing Information Age world they are growing up in.
We give up a lot of "mindshare" in education to the notion that a new "product" is going to change everything: a new curriculum, a new technology, a new set of resources, but time and again this outlook leaves us disappointed. Learning is a process so it seems logical to me that changing that process directly is the most promising approach. We are all aware nowadays of the incredible amount of technology our kids have access to at home and at school -- and how much they use it.
But despite this, student achievement doesn't seem to have improved very much over the last quarter century, inflation-adjusted school funding has risen dramatically, and educators are working harder than ever.