Interview with Earnie Lewis
Principal of West Canyon Elementary School, Idaho
Jackson Consulting: Tell us about your school: including student and teacher population, community involvement, your district's history of literacy, instruction methods and student performance prior to your implementation of a literacy program.
Earnie Lewis: Our school has 675 students in Pre-K through 5 with four teachers per grade. In the primary grade there are five teachers; our Pre-K is a special ed class. We are a Title I school.
Our school community is very rural, with students coming from as far as 20 miles away; every child is bussed both ways. We have other challenges: 28–30% of the student population is Hispanic and 20% having limited English. Parental support is complicated by the language gap as well as other issues such as extreme poverty – 60% of our students live under the poverty line and qualify for free or reduced breakfast and lunch – and students are living in homes with so many people, it's impossible for them to have structured homework time. These are among the factors that make many aspects of school/community support difficult.
In the past West Canyon was a Success For All school through the mid-90s. But the district could not sustain support because of lack of funding. During that time there was a reading coach, intervention for students in need and instructional support for teachers. When the funding was cut off, well, we just bled literacy for three years. We were thrown into the desert without professional development. We knew that 20-30% of our kids needed help – and we knew better than to not have a program in place, but there wasn't anything we could do. We didn't have the support at the higher levels.
As for my role, I have been the principal of West Canyon for 25 years.
JC: Why did you have to make a change in literacy instruction in you school?
EL: The state mandated improved reading skills with its Idaho Reading Initiative even before No Child Left Behind was passed. And we needed help; in the district, our school is the most rural, has the highest LEP, the most poverty – we were the most qualified and our test scores supported that.
JC: How did you get started?
EL: When the Idaho Reading Initiative was passed [before No Child Left Behind] I was aggressive about getting the Title I grant written for Reading First. I had buy-in from almost all the teachers in K-3 and intended to carry the Reading First techniques through 4th and 5th grade. Only two teachers were dubious at first.
JC: What were the "non-negotiables" of literacy instruction that you set up in order to ensure student success?
EL: Support from the superintendent.
A weekly collaborative meeting among principal, building's reading coach and grade level teachers.
Everyone in the building – including custodians, PE instructors, kitchen staff and office staff in addition to the teachers – had to support the program instruction. That means there are no interruptions, no assemblies during the 2 ½ hours of instruction time – 90 minutes of instruction and an hour for intervention and/or extension work.
Support from the kitchen if kids are late – they are never denied breakfast, if they need a snack we provide it. The message is we are always there for all the child's needs: physiological, educational and emotional.
JC: Was there any point during our school's transformation that you thought "forget it! It's not worth it!"? What kept you going?
EL: There's not been a point when I didn't think the effort was worth it. The first two years of the program was getting up to the level of performance – each took professional development. After six to eight months of training, we had to personalize for the individual instructors – make it their own. Now we work on training for sustainability. The people on our teams are strong enough in the program for the introduction of new team members.
JC:Did you spend time or money on something that, in the end, didn't benefit you like you had hoped?
EL: We bought components to support the Core program, but some programs didn't align well with the core program. We ended up selling those programs to another district. We made a couple of mistakes in year one with implementation and teachers were upset about investing so much time and energy that was lost.
JC: Who were your key players in supporting and sustaining the efforts when the going got really tough?
EL: The state director for Title I, the Title I director for our district, the Reading First Director, my reading coach and myself were the core for sustaining efforts. When Jill Jackson came to Idaho to work with us we knew we had found the right person for our professional development.
JC: How does instruction, student performance and leadership look differently now?
EL: We can predict performance now. With instructional tools and progress monitoring we can predict how a child is going to perform; using these predictors and diagnostic tools, far fewer children fall into the bracket of needing intense help (tier 3). In the three-tier model addressing instruction, previous to Reading First we had 20% of students in tier 3 (replacement program) instead of the 5-10% that would be the norm. Now 80% of our students are in tier 1 and only about 7-8% in tier 3.
JC: What do you wish you would have known then that you know now?
EL: How important finding the right specialist to help in professional development is. The right specialist has to not have a pre-set agenda to bring to us, but needs to spend some time diagnosing the needs before offering any solutions. It's so important to find the right person to address your specific needs according to who you are, the dynamics of your staff, etc. I also wish I would have known four years ago, that the struggling readers who needed this program's support in order to reach proficiency would likewise need no less support to sustain their proficient performance. These are typically our tier 2 students. They won't do well if they only get the 90 minutes of instruction in homeroom instruction unsupported with small group support during workshop and/or intervention.
JC: What advice do you have for schools that need to make significant improvement in their literacy scores, but have not yet begun to make adjustments?
EL: The first piece is: This is our job. Don't waste time trying to place blame for these problems, just address them. We educators are paid to do this. Too many educators say it's a hopeless case and have the attitude of no hope or there is no solution. Start at the beginning outlining where you will start and with what materials supported by the right professional development and assessment pieces. Remember, every child is worth it. This final statement is primarily for elementary schools: do away with judging student's performance with a letter grade, but track learning by success. A "grade" rarely motivates and even if it does motivate, it doesn't define any next steps needing to be taken.
JC: So now what? Where does your literacy focus remain at this point? When do you think you'll be done and can rest?
EL: We are far enough into this to have an abundance of staff trained in the core reading program as well as with the right support pieces. Our right next step is now sustaining this learning for new staff coming aboard, making adjustments for new students who continually enroll with differing needs, etc.