I continue to work in this school and believe that the CERI’s work will continue to decrease the rate of teacher turnover and improve student achievement. I also have a strong sense of commitment to the students in my building. They deserve quality, experienced teachers, and my leaving doesn't help them. The bond between the teachers helps most of us to return to the "trenches" and work to give an at-risk population a quality education.

Katherine C. Pope
Charlotte, NC
August 8, 2002

I eventually had some control over my classes, and I felt I had learned how to teach my students, especially in writing. At the end of that year, the administrator said she was not sure I should be granted tenure, so she had prayed about it and decided to grant it to me. Needless to say, it took all the self-esteem I could muster to keep me coming to work everyday, but I made it through the year (although I looked around at other jobs that summer) and decided to continue teaching. 

During my second year at the low-performing school, I vacillated between being determined to stay and wanting to do everything I could to get out of there. When I heard about national board certification, even though I had only taught for three years, I decided to pursue it. I wanted to prove that I was a good teacher, especially given my first years of being vulnerable to the decisions made by school leaders. I had started year two at the low-performing school with several ideas that proved effective. In addition, our principal had received my previous year's students’ writing scores, which were five points above expected. I went from barely being granted tenure to becoming the school’s teacher of the year. I also received national board certification for my work at the low-performing school. 

Halfway through the year, I decided I would devote myself to making a difference in the lives of the overwhelming number of needy students in my care; however, toward the end of the year, my resolve dissolved. I simply could not take it any more. I had only one AG student and more than one third of my students were slow learners (IQ: 70-89). I had very little support from parents, and my administration continued to have few ideas about how to support instruction. Although I had several wonderful students and families, the sheer numbers of problem students and families combined with the poor leadership at the school level and at the system level drove me away. 

What I cannot understand is why these schools even exist? In my school distract, we have the capability of busing as well as many other resources. Why do we have schools with a majority of low-performing, at risk, needy children? Why aren’t these students more evenly divided throughout the district? All children can learn, but the reality is that some children are harder to teach, and many do not have the skills to function well in school. These students not only need excellent teachers, they also need the benefit of middle class role models (i.e., fellow students and their families) to translate middle class norms to them. One of the biggest problems at my low-performing school was that there were very few positive role models. As a result, the standard for behavior was based on the norms presented by the dysfunctional majority. Unless we find a way to shift the communities’ will to include more equity in school assignment, we will find no great solutions to staffing low-performing schools. Great teaching and great programs cannot solve the overwhelming reality of majority rules. 

Sheryn Northey 
Charlotte, NC
August 9, 2002

I am currently in my 17th year of teaching. I have always worked at low-performing and hard to staff schools. I was at my first school for 12 years. It was a terrible situation but I felt I was making a difference with my students. I finally left because I was being menaced by a parent. He knew how to work the system, and my principal wouldn’t support me (“I don’t want to get involved”). The police told me that, basically, whatever this man wanted to do to me he would do to me, and nothing could be done until that happened. They suggested that I leave. So I left and went to another low-performing school in another impoverished neighborhood. You see, I was still making a difference.
I have worked under a variety of administrators, men and women, with a variety of styles. “Rich man, poor man, beggar man, thief” is putting it mildly. These administrators ranged from despot, invisible, thief, tyrant, sexual predator, incompetent, self-serving and clueless. Notice that I did not write that I worked with any of these administrators; I worked under them. Also notice that not one trait listed was cooperative, compassionate, collaborative or dedicated.

Extremely disillusioned and morally offended, I have been trying to quit teaching. More accurately, I have been desperately looking for a reason to stay in teaching. I must really want to stay because I have come up with some of the lamest reasons (i.e., convenient parking, it’s near Costco). I may have just found a real reason.
This reason is in the form of an administrator who, if she is allowed to do so, may make a difference. This is a person who encourages collaboration, stresses high standards (personal and professional), and—more importantly—is willing to listen and willing to learn from others. This person can also slip into "tyrant mode." However, she knows this about herself and tries to maintain a balance.

The leadership is what matters most. You can staff a school with the best and the brightest, but if you have a leader who is afraid (heaven forbid!) to learn something new, or to let anyone else shine, or try something new (even if the old approaches were failing), then the best and brightest just won’t matter. 

Allison Demas
NYC
August 11, 2002

Gail R.
FCPS

Gail V. Ritchie, MEd, NBCT
"Believe in what you do; do what you believe"
Fairfax County, VA
August 12, 2002

My first years of teaching were spent learning how to be a teacher; I was blissfully ignorant of the chaos outside my classroom door. I was thrilled someone gave me a program and a class of kids to teach. Later, I became aware that there were serious problems at our school manifested in the low morale of staff and students and dismal passing and attendance rates. However, I thought I could survive if I managed to contain the dysfunction and disorder outside my classroom door. Naturally, the door offered my students and me no protection from the mismanagement of funds, misprogramming of students, overcrowding of classes, and violence. I joined a few committees aimed at trying to improve our school only to see the majority of our ideas thwarted by bureaucracy and pessimism. Attempts at change seemed futile. 

I decided to seek a teaching position at an alternative school to see if the grass was truly greener. It was. At my present school, teachers have a voice in decision-making at the school level. The fact that I am involved in school decisions and setting policy makes me more vested in the success of the school as a whole. There are various factors that contribute to the success of our school. Leadership is one. At my former school, the principal (sent to our school by way of the superintendent’s office – unknown to staff), insecure in his position, dictated school policy and lectured to staff. At my present school, the principal (a well respected teacher and counselor who worked at our school), acts more as a facilitator and works to help staff reach consensus. Another key factor is school size. My new school has 450 students; my old school had approximately 2000 – both schools serve students with special academic needs. These numbers mean that the smaller school has the opportunity to become a functioning, effective community for both students and staff; whereas the large school is doomed to be an institution.

Carol Tureski
NYC
August 14, 2002

I have taught at two different schools. Both schools are in a "hard to staff" district in NYC. When I started teaching in the first school, it had the most stable staff in the district. Many teachers spent almost their entire teaching career in the school and were well respected by their colleagues and parents. The administration was mostly "top down.” Teachers helped other teachers, but on an individual basis. Decisions of how to teach were made by the administration and the district. The school was run well, but there was little room for innovation. I was told by my administrator that "we don't believe in "big books" here. Then came another principal. She believed in innovation, but was a weak leader. Teachers were used to being told how to teach and the administration would solve the "problems." The school discipline became lax. I tried to convince the teachers that we could form committees to make changes we thought were necessary and then implement them. The principal believed in teachers collaborating, making decisions, and carrying them out. The teachers said that was the principal's job. The principal was forced out and replaced with an administrator that was intimidated by experienced, respected teachers. She totally undercut highly effective experienced teachers and drove them out. Fifty-four staff members left in two years. I was forced out when I became the union chapter leader and spoke up at school leadership meetings. My reading recovery program was "ended" over the summer and the district placed me in another school. I was in the school for 11 years.
I have been in my "new" school for 2 years now. What a difference. The principal is supportive of the staff and encourages innovations and teacher learning to improve student outcomes. She believes that staff members should be involved in making school decisions. She has helped facilitate an after school workshop on "guided reading" and wants teachers to form "reading/study groups" to discuss different teaching methods and ideas. She brought in a program that helps teachers "coach" each other. We have a high number of "uncertified" teachers and there is a somewhat high turnover rate of teachers, but the principal has only been in the school for two and a half years. I am hoping that as we are able to create a more "collaborative" atmosphere and provide the training teachers need to feel successful, more teachers will stay. 

The administration of hard to staff schools is extremely important. Schools with many inexperienced and often uncertified teachers need a principal that is a "learning leader." Teachers must feel supported in their struggles to "learn" how to teach, at the same time they are encouraged to try new methods and learn to help each other in a collaborative community.

Lisa North 
Brooklyn, NY
August 15, 2002