|
RTP School
Administrators
All of the authors of these articles have seen,
first-hand, how important a committed administration is
to the success of the process. Their thoughts are taken
from Chapter 19, Discipline For Home And School, Book
One, Third Edition.
-Ed Ford
Dave
Anderson
Principal
Sahuaro Elementary School
Washington Elementary School District
Phoenix, Arizona
Wow! What a ride it has been. We've been implementing
RTP at Sahuaro School for five years. As I look back,
there have been both great triumphs and stiff
challenges. From my point of view, there have been a few
key elements that have helped pave the way.
From the beginning, we took Ed Ford's advice and formed
an RTP Core Team made up of teachers and parents. This
group has made all the difference. Although the role of
the Core Team has become less important in our later
years of implementation, it played an essential role at
the onset. I remember our first task as we were
preparing to open the RTC in January of 1998. The 10 of
us sat down and drafted a parent brochure outlining what
RTP at Sahuaro would be like. Although the intent of
creating a brochure was to provide parents with vital
information, a secondary result, equally important, was
the solidification of the process in our own minds. As
we were writing that document, we were forced to discuss
and process the information we were learning. Screening
the procedures and policies through the perceptual
control theory filter was an invaluable learning
experience.
As we got into the implementation of RTP, the Core Team
took on a monitoring and adjusting role. Our weekly
meetings were full of discussions about what was working
and what wasn't. We brainstormed solutions and presented
them to staff and parents. Fifteen-minute time slots for
RTP issues at staff meetings blossomed into 45-minute
discussions. Looking back, I think this was exactly what
needed to happen. With the Core Team's leadership, the
faculty was given opportunities to massage the process
to fit Sahuaro School and to learn the new way of
thinking that is RTP.
Ongoing staff training was another key factor. As with
any school-wide change, a point is reached where it
appears easier to go back to the old way of doing things
than to forge ahead and overcome the problems of
implementing the new process. Because the process was
new, staff proficiency in using RTP was at a low level.
Comments such as "this isn't working" were heard often
from staff and parents.
During the first two or three years, we conducted RTP
training every month. We formed an RTP Mentors Group for
teachers new to the school; the Group met twice a month
for an hour after school, reading and discussing
chapters from the RTP books. Sometimes we just talked
about actual situations from that day and how RTP could
be appropriately utilized. The Core Team also spent time
discussing chapters from the RTP books during the first
15 minutes of each Core Team meeting. We found that it
is important for the Core Team to have a high level of
knowledge in order to help solve problems.
The development of the RTP Intervention Process was one
more milestone in the development of RTP at Sahuaro. We
didn't even attempt to conduct intervention meetings
during our first year of RTP, since our focus was
entirely on the basics. But, starting the second year,
this process was continually refined and improved.
Kym Wilson, our Serv-ices Specialist, has been
instrumental in developing and implementing the
Intervention Process. During the 2002- 2003 school year,
71% of students referred for intervention improved
significantly (remember, these students included some of
the most disruptive students on our campus).
The whole thrust of an RTP intervention is to provide
support to students. It is not about how we can make
students do what we want them to do. It is about putting
our heads together as adults to figure out what a
student might be thinking and then offering support
tailor-made for that student.
There is a big difference between an RTP intervention
and a traditional one. Let me give you this example to
illustrate the difference. In one intervention meeting,
we were examining the evidence attempting to discover
what a student was thinking when he was disrupting.
After gathering and analyzing the data, it appeared that
the student desired more quality time with his parents,
and that his disruptions were his means of obtaining
that time. At one point in the meeting, the mother of
the student suggested that if her son would not disrupt
in school for one week, she would offer to spend
additional time with him. This type of approach assumes
that the child's behavior can be modified by holding out
a carrot to lure the child into the behavior the adults
want to see.
The RTP approach is drastically different. In RTP, we
recognize the child's desire for more time with his
mother. Is that a bad thing? I think not. The support we
offered to this student was to have his mother offer
opportunities for quality time with him regardless of
his behavior at school. The offer was given
unconditionally. This is a big difference between RTP
and other interventions: we are not trying to force
students to act the way we want them to act; instead, we
offer support, based on the best evidence available to
us, that they can utilize to reach their goals without
disrupting others.
Bobbie
Hodgins
Assistant Principal
Philadelphia Elementary School
Philadelphia, Mississippi
In 1992, I developed a Special Education discipline
program for students with serious behavior and emotional
challenges at the Choctaw School District in
Philadelphia, Mississippi. I had researched several
residential and alternative programs to determine which
one would best meet the needs of Choctaw children with
severe emotional issues. A majority of the discipline
programs I considered were using variations of token
economy or level systems. I had limited knowledge of
these types of programs, but I decided to incorporate
their methods of behavior modification. Little did I
know at the time what a disaster these methods would
generate for the program!
The program started in the fall of 1993 with a small
staff and only a few students. The teaching staff had
prior experience working with challenging students and
were generally very familiar with behavior modification.
As with any new program, I knew we would run into
several obstacles and expected we would learn from them
and move on. But the students proved to be very
challenging and became too stressful for the staff to
"control" with the behavior modification methods in
place.
The students showed by their actions that they could
care less about earning points or prizes/rewards they
might receive. As I reflected on the problems we
encountered, I decided there had to be a better
discipline method, one in which children took
responsibility for acts of misconduct. In the summer of
1995, I attended a conference in Colorado and heard Ed
Ford speak on his discipline process. I realized RTP was
in line with my personal values and beliefs. The ideas
made sense that children should be responsible for their
own behavior, that teachers should have the right to
teach, and that students should have the right to learn.
I immediately bought Discipline for Home and School.
After reading Ed's book, I was so excited that I
couldn't wait to discuss the process with the entire
staff and get their reaction. As an administrator, I
knew I had to sell the proc-ess to the staff, or it
would not work. I first had a meeting with the Choctaw
assistants to see if they thought that RTP would be
appropriate for a Choctaw population. The fact that this
process taught respect and responsibility made more
sense to them than using punitive measures. They felt it
fit more with the Native American culture than any of
the other discipline methods that had been used in the
past. I then discussed the process with teachers, and
they were more than ready to try anything that would be
less stressful for them and the students. My next step
was to buy RTP books for the staff. In the meantime, the
RTP question cards were given to the staff.
I would like to note here that this is not the best way
to start the process. My first step should have been to
have Ed Ford come and train the staff, but, at the time,
I didn't know any better, and I was excited about
beginning the process as soon as possible. I decided
that the staff and I would learn together by reading and
following the steps outlined in Ed's books. I had two
weeks to get things organized before the students came
back to school. We were able to set up the RTC and have
the procedures in place. We knew things would not be
perfect, but it was a start, and it was going to be a
learning process for all of us. As the administrator, I
was determined to see RTP work, which meant I would be
modeling and observing in classrooms, in the RTC, and,
yes, even on school buses. I sent letters to the parents
explaining our new discipline process.
When the students arrived the first day of school, we
went over the rules and the new discipline process. I
felt it was very important for the students to
understand fully what was expected of them and which
questions they would be asked to give them a chance to
think about the rules they had broken and decide if they
were ready to cooperate or not. I encouraged the staff
to go over the rules and RTP during the first part of
class each day and then gradually repeat the pattern two
or three times a week, or as needed. As part of the
curriculum, we had social skills lessons that were
taught each day using the Boy's and Girl's Town program.
One of the main problems we saw with some students was
that they lacked social skills. We found these students
had not been taught how to act or what to do in certain
situations in which they found themselves. This resulted
in getting into fights, cursing, or, even worse,
becoming violent. We had several very distraught
children who needed someone to care about them, whom
they could trust. As a staff, we found RTP not only
reduced stress, but RTP also became our social skills,
counseling, and intervention technique.
The following summer, Ed Ford and Tom Bourbon came to
train the staff. The training helped each of us develop
a better understanding of perceptual control theory and
answered questions concerning the problems we had
encountered initially. We came through the first year
feeling good about the process. The staff felt less
stressed and could see the children beginning to think
more about their situations, showing more respect to
others. It wasn't easy for any of us in the beginning,
and it was difficult at times to change our old habit of
verbally ordering instead of asking in a calm way. We
learned from our mistakes, and each year we improved, as
we understood more about the process and always kept our
RTP "bible" (Discipline for Home and School) at our
fingertips.
As the administrator, I encourage the staff to share
their ideas and frustrations with me on a daily basis. I
feel it is important to let the staff know that you care
about them and their views, just as we do with the
students. I have always used the team approach to work
with the staff. I have stated many times to the staff in
meetings that it is very important to have everyone be
on the same page and to be consistent with the
discipline process. I use the school district's
evaluation and the RTP evaluation forms at the end of
each school year with the staff. I ask them to write
plans for areas they note as needing improvement. We
then discuss what they write, and how I as an
administrator can better support them in their own
plans.
I basically use the same process with them that I use
with students. When-ever I have a situation that
presents a problem with using RTP on a consistent basis
or any violation of the staff handbook, I use the same
questioning process with them, by asking "What does the
handbook say about coming to work on time?" or "What
does our discipline process say we are to do/say?" These
methods have proven to be particularly helpful to them
and to me as an administrator. I have my perspective of
the situation, but having them tell me what they think
gives me their view of the situation without causing any
unnecessary stress or irritation.
I truly believe that we have to treat others as we want
to be treated.
There will be times when you have staff who are not
willing to cooperate or choose not to believe in the
goals of RTP. In such situations, what worked for me was
to ask the person "Is this job/process what you really
want to do?" I always preface that question by saying
"It's OK if this is not for you; it's not for everyone."
I would rather have staff determine what is best for
them to be happy. I believe we have to ask the questions
to help people think about their situations in order to
be satisfied with the results of their decisions.
Since I have become involved with RTP, it has changed
the way I think about things and people-it has become a
way of life. Once you truly believe in this process and
see the wonderful results that come from those who use
it, you will never be able to go back to the old ways of
trying to control others. I also had to learn that not
everyone will see this process as the only way to treat
others with respect. When you come to a situation in
your life or job when you are asked to change, and it
goes against everything you believe in, then you have to
make a decision to move on and find a place where what
you believe is more readily accepted.
I want to conclude by saying that the administrator is
the heart and the driving force of the process. It is
imperative that the administrator believe in the
process, the students, the staff, and the parents. If
this does not happen, the process will fail in the end,
no matter how hard the RTC teacher tries to keep it
alive, or how much the teachers and parents want the
process. I have been attending the yearly RTP
conferences for the last five years; each year I have
learned new ways of managing the discipline process and
have reached a better understanding of perceptual
control theory. Ongoing training and reading literature
or viewing DVD's on RTP are essential to having an
effective process. The more you are perceived as a
caring administrator and as someone who believes in
children and adults, the more likely students and staff
will find ways to get along and work together. It worked
for me and for those with whom I have worked. It will
work for you as well, if you are truly committed!
Frank
Hoefling
Principal,
Eagle Elementary School
Eagle, Nebraska
Eagle Elementary is located in Eagle, Nebraska
(population 1,100). Approximately 250 students in
kindergarten through fifth grade attend the school,
which provides serv-ices for students in nearby
communities and the surrounding rural areas.
Our first step toward implementing RTP was to recognize
what we were doing that was not successful. Eagle
Elementary did not have many serious discipline
problems, but we found that students were not learning
from their mistakes. Students who were talking in class,
not following directions, and exhibiting poor social
skills continued to do so. The old methods of lecturing,
telling, and threatening were not eliminating student
disruptions.
You will notice that I use the word "we" many times.
This is because it is critical that a shared vision is
present in the building. Every building has its leaders,
and their support is essential.
Our next step was to gather information about what was
going on in other schools across the country. Five
teacher leaders and myself attended a conference, and it
was there we learned of Ed Ford and his RTP. When we
returned from the conference, we asked all teachers to
read Discipline for Home and School, Book One. We then
invited Ed to Eagle Elementary, and the first of three
training experiences began. This took place in August,
before school began. We began to understand the theory,
PCT, behind RTP. We also began to learn how to use the
RTP questions. This was accomplished through the use of
role-playing.
When the training was completed, we developed procedures
for students who fail to follow the rules and go to the
responsible thinking classroom. Teachers ask the RTP
questions. After the second infraction, those students
who continue to fail to follow the rules go to the RTC.
The principal and guidance counselor have assumed the
roles of the RTC teachers at Eagle Elementary.
Under the supervision of the counselor or principal,
students develop plans and are then taken to the
teachers for negotiations. This has worked well for us.
Data collected over the past three years indicate that
we average three to four students per day in the RTC.
Students who do not follow their plans and again go to
the RTC for the same disruptions can be placed on
self-monitoring plans. Parents are often asked to become
involved and assist with the development of student
plans.
Ed Ford returned to Eagle a few months later, in
January. Again he worked with teachers; we also began
the process of training classified staff, including
teacher assistants, cooks, and the school secretary. In
retrospect, these people should have been included at
the beginning, since the key to the process is
consistency. It was during Ed's second visit that we
asked him to give a presentation about RTP to parents,
whose support has been very important.
Ed returned again in August and met with teachers,
classified staff, and administrators. School board
members and the superintendent also attended. Their
support and under-standing of RTP is important, since
continued training is needed, requiring both financial
and time commitments.
Our school counselor offers parenting classes each year.
The Responsible Thinking Process is the major theme of
the class. Parents meet six times during the first
semester. They are given copies of Discipline for the
Home and School. They are given reading assignments and
role-playing to practice at home. During class, they
discuss the chapters in the book and also perform their
role-playing. They are also asked to identify problems
at home to work on with their children; later, they
report progress on resolving these issues. A great deal
of class time is devoted to role-playing. There are
times when students are invited to attend the class;
they assist with role-playing and discuss RTP and the
RTC.
We have also identified some social skills we believe
all students should have. These social skills include
how to disagree, how to accept criticism, and accepting
"no." We have a Special Education teacher who
specializes in working with students who have special
behavioral needs. She identifies two social skills each
month to emphasize. She then visits all classrooms and
teaches those social skills. This is done through
role-playing. Through our monthly newsletter, parents
are made aware which social skills are being taught.
They are encouraged to reinforce this instruction at
home. We believe it is very important to be pro-active.
All students at Eagle Elementary receive instruction
focused on the social skills identified. This helps
provide students with skills which can help them when
they encounter difficult situations.
We continue to learn about the process and fine-tune our
procedures, based on continuing discussions and
training. RTP is on the agenda when teachers return from
the summer break; RTP is also discussed at leadership
meetings within the building. Unit leaders conduct
role-playing at their team meetings. The guidance
counselor conducts parenting classes each fall; RTP is
the major focus of these classes. Statistics are
provided to all faculty and staff at the end of each
quarter.
You might be asking why a small school with few serious
discipline problems would need the Responsible Thinking
Process. Our answer is that all children need to be
taught how to think responsibly. This process has worked
very well for us. It has given faculty and staff a very
positive, consistent, and non-confrontational way to
work with students. It has provided parents with the
skills needed to support the school. Most importantly,
it has provided students with the skills to take
responsibility for their own behavior.
Sheila
Pilmore
Principal,
Breckenridge Middle School
Breckenridge, Michigan
I had been at Breckenridge Middle School for two years
when we started looking for a new type of discipline
program. One of our teachers heard about the Responsible
Thinking Process. We were ready for a change, and this
was a good place to start. We formed a committee to look
into RTP and contacted Al Kullman in Evart, who was
using the process. Shortly after, we moved toward
implementing RTP in our district.
Over the last four years, I have found that being the
lead administrator in the process has many roles. I am
the defender of the process, the enforcer of the
process, a facili-tator of the process, and an advocate
for the process. As we move through the various stages
of becoming an RTP-ac-credited school, I see the
importance of the administrator in all these aspects.
As the defender of the process, I have found that the
administrator must stand by the process with staff,
students, parents, and other administrators. Everyone
wants to "tweak" the system. Staff ask "Why can't we
just send students to the RTC and not ask the RTP
questions?" Students ask "Why do we have to write a
plan?" Parents ask "Why do we have this program?
What was wrong with the one that was here when I was in
school?" The answer always is: if we do not use RTP as
it was intended to be used, we will ruin the integrity
of the process. The process was not meant to be tweaked
or changed. It was developed to help students become
more responsible by thinking through their actions. It
was also developed to immediately give disrupting
students the tools to think through their situations so
that next time they will not be disruptive.
As the enforcer of the process, I find that I am helping
the RTC teacher and students keep other teachers and
staff in line with the RTP questioning process. I have
taken students back to teachers who have not asked the
questions, and believe me, the students know the
questioning process very well-usually better than the
teachers. I have also intervened when a teacher is
making it difficult for a student to set a negotiation
time. And I have had to enforce the process with parents
who do not want to cooperate. Some parents do not want
to bring their students back to school after being
suspended; they want to send them back and not take
their part of the responsibility. That is when the
administrator must take a stand for RTP and simply say
"When you can come in with your student, the student may
return."
As a facilitator of the process, the administrator must
listen to teachers as they work themselves through the
procedures of RTP. Some teachers embrace RTP and others
resist it, but all teachers must have time to practice
and learn RTP. I find myself listening to teachers and
brainstorming with them about how to use RTP better. I
had one teacher who felt that students were staging
disruptions one after another to push her over the edge.
The students might have been trying just that-when one
student was questioned after disrupting, another student
would begin to disrupt.
When we had the opportunity to talk through the
situation, we found that the teacher did, indeed, follow
the RTP procedures. She simply questioned each student
as they disrupted. This took her a while, but she
continued to question students as others disrupted.
Eventually, some of the students went to the RTC to
write plans, but the others settled down. The process,
used consistently and reliably, worked even in this
difficult case.
Another way the administrator can facilitate RTP is by
meeting for approximately five to 10 minutes each
morning with the counselor and the RTC teacher. Such
meetings were suggested by Ed Ford and George Venetis
during one of their visits to our school. At the
meetings, the RTC teacher presents concerns about
students or teachers. The counselor is informed about
students who seem troubled in the RTC and should be
talked with to find out whether they are having a bad
day or there are other problems that need to be
addressed. The counselor also is informed if the RTC
teacher feels an intervention is needed. The counselor
then will talk to the appropriate teachers and set up
the intervention, if necessary. The administrator's role
in these meetings is to help teachers identified by the
RTC teacher who might be having trouble with the process
or in negotiations. The meetings have been very valuable
at Breckenridge Middle School in helping to identify
areas of student and teacher need.
As an advocate of RTP, the administrator must
continually promote the process throughout the school
and community. Students need to see the administrator
using the process. If a student disrupts to the point of
going home, the administrator must become involved when
the student is going home as well as when student
returns to school. The administrator must be willing to
answer the questions and concerns of parents and
community members as they become involved in the
process, again promoting the process.
Being the administrator of a RTP school makes discipline
much easier as students, parents, and teachers become
responsible for their actions. Students think their way
through the process and learn responsibility in school
situ-ations, preparing themselves for eventual work
situations. Parents are asked to be responsible for
their own children, and teachers are asked to use a fair
and reasonable discipline process with students. The
Responsible Thinking Process has made our school a
calmer place, to the point that visitors such as student
teaching supervisors and substitute teachers notice the
difference and compliment us on it.
Steve
Smith,
Retired Principal
Boyne City Middle School
Boyne City, Michigan
As I look back on my past eight years as a middle school
building administrator using RTP, I reflect on the many
twists this journey has taken.
Early on, we heard that administrators had to lead the
process and take a very active role. Surely this did not
mean I should force the staff to incorporate this new
process? Was this truly a district directive that we
would be a Responsible Thinking Process School, and
those who did not follow would be left to their own
devices? No. Actively driving the program means modeling
the process and understanding the basic PCT concepts
upon which it is based.
The most important thing I did was to be consistent when
using the process, both with students and staff. PCT has
shown us that students are living control systems,
processing their inputs in relation to their existing
reference levels. We cannot "make" students change their
perceptions, but we can continue to provide new
information and experiences that allow students to
re-evaluate their standards and to self-adjust, based on
how they want things to be for themselves.
Lecturing, telling, and/or making judgments about what
you think they are doing wrong all have the potential to
make things worse for students. The same goes for
dealing with staff. Administratively, the goal is to
have RTP become a consistent, natural way of interacting
with others. Therefore, the role of the administrator
becomes much like the role of the teacher when using RTP
with their students. The administrator needs to be the
"guide on the side," asking appropriate questions,
providing new learning opportunities, and not being
judgmental-instead, respecting where others are with
regard to the process.
At least five critical roles should be assumed by
administrators who lead the process:
1. Because RTP and, in particular, PCT are not parts of
many adults' prior experiences, it is important to start
slow, be patient but persistent, and take the time
necessary to allow staff to develop an understanding of
and a comfort level with this process. I believe one of
the best things we did was spending almost a year
learning, discussing, and planning for RTP before we
began implementing the process.
2. Another important factor is the need for the key
people (especially the administrator leading the
process) to develop a thorough understanding of PCT. It
was not until I felt I had such an understanding that I
was able to ask the appropriate questions and
consistently model the process on a daily basis.
3. The administrator must involve the community. This
begins with making sure there is support from the Board
of Education and Central Office. These play important
roles in setting the tone for the overall community and
making sure the resources necessary will be available.
Next, and most importantly, are the parents. Parents, as
well as Board members and community members, were
included in our initial training and development of the
process. We continue to include them in ongoing
training, and we send out communications to them at
least monthly. The administrator must also be willing to
commit the time and energy to working one-on-one with
parents when necessary, and to accept that occasionally
there will be parents who just cannot support this
process.
With these ingredients in place, we still had our ups
and downs. Staff became frustrated with frequent flyers,
the concept of self-referral was tested, a few staff
still not accept the process, new teachers came on
board, it was difficult to develop intervention plans
for all students needing them, quality time to negotiate
was not always available (and negotiating was not always
given priority when time was available), and key
positions such as the RTC teacher and the Student
Success Coordinator changed.
4. Of critical importance is the administrator's
commitment to holding regular staff meetings for further
training, for role-playing, or just to listen to
concerns, questions, and problems. One RTP strategy that
staff use with students is the classroom meeting;
similar meetings are also needed with staff, especially
to consider issues with which some staff might not be
comfortable.
5. The administrator also needs to ensure that all staff
(including paraprofessionals, bus drivers, secretaries,
custodians, and other support staff) are involved and
have the same opportunities for training and processing
that are provided to teachers. These people work very
closely with students, and some of them do so away from
school buildings, without many opportunities for
immediate help or support.
There can be difficulties because some of them do not
fall under the direct supervision of the building
administrator or do not see themselves in the same roles
as classroom staff. But again, patience and persistence
are key. Remember, we are striving for consistency in
using this process, and these people are often the first
and/or last contacts with students each day.
I have just completed 26 years as a building principal
and will retire this summer. As I reflect back, I
conclude that the first three roles are the most
critical, while the last two need the highest level of
commitment, as they are ongoing and never-ending and, I
know, are the areas in which we should have done even
more. Overall, I can honestly say that the last eight
years have been some of my best. In large part, this is
due to our use of and success with RTP. It has been a
lot of work and a major commitment, but well worth our
efforts.
Kathy
Welsh
Principal,
Villa de Paz Elementary School
Pendergast Elementary School District
Phoenix, Arizona
As I look back over the last three years and reflect on
the Responsible Thinking Process, I realize there are
important elements necessary for the process to be
implemented successfully. One very important element is
the need to give teachers the same opportunities the
students are given- time and situations for problem
solving. Also, teachers as well as students need to be
given the opportunity to express ideas, talk through
questions, and get feedback on problems. Otherwise,
everyone isn't at the same level of understanding of the
process, its impact on students, and how students are
learning to take responsibility.
When I started the process at Desert Mirage School, the
faculty discussed the process and voted to implement
RTP. One reason why the process was successful at Desert
Mirage is because the teachers had the opportunity to
decide whether to accept the process and to discuss how
the process would be implemented. Upon reflection, I
think this common level of understanding was an
important factor for success.
The summer I transferred to Villa de Paz as assistant
principal, I presented RTP to the discipline committee,
which decided to implement the process. The staff as a
whole did not make the implementation decision. Looking
back, I would not want to do it that way again. I think
all staff members need an overview of the process and an
opportunity to discuss it, express their ideas about
discipline and any concerns they might have, and discuss
how they think the process will impact the school. If
90% of the faculty approve it, RTP should be
implemented.
It is important to have
buy-in. Teachers need to agree that implementing this
process is a positive way to impact student behavior. I
wouldn't implement the process based solely on research
by a committee. Instead, I would present the research to
the faculty and have all of the teachers involved in the
final decision, even if it meant waiting until January
or until the beginning of the next school year to start
using the process.
I was very positive about the process and its success at
Desert Mirage, so I thought it would be just as
successful at Villa de Paz without all of the steps
needed to ensure its success.
During Villa de Paz's first year of implementation, I
was very involved and supportive of the process, just as
I was at Desert Mirage. The second year at Villa de Paz,
I was named principal. That was a learning year for me.
I didn't realize how many demands would be made on my
time as a first-year principal with no assistant
principal. My involvement with the process was very
limited, and although I still supported RTP, I was
unable to meet regularly with the RTC teacher or have
group discussions with the teachers.
Since I believed so much in the process, I thought most
teachers would see RTP working similarly to the way I
envisioned it working. But that isn't necessarily what
happens when there is no dialogue taking place. When
teachers are under stress and receive little ongoing
support from the administrator, teachers tend to use
discipline techniques that are familiar to them.
If there isn't ongoing discussion throughout the year
about the process, what is happening in classrooms, and
what is happening in the RTC, then the process probably
will not be successful. Without meetings to discuss RTP,
I left teachers without the support necessary to work
through the process, answer their questions, and solve
problems they were facing.
To ensure success with RTP, there must be ongoing
discussion about what is working, what is not working,
and changes that need to be made. There must be open
dialogue and questioning, with opportunities for all
staff members to express themselves. There must be
consistent and open communication over time, with
everyone working together to solve problems, identify
students who need help, and just take time to talk
through the process. Time needs to be given at faculty
meetings and grade level meetings, and time also needs
to be made for regularly scheduled meetings of the
principal with the RTC teacher and counselor.
|