With the Whole Child in Mind by unknow

Author:unknow
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development
Published: 2018-10-02T00:00:00+00:00

This deep engagement in the daily happenings of the schools informed the development of the Comer Process. Seeing teachers and administrators in disagreement about the schools' goals, for example, helped the SDP team realize that the project, and the schools themselves, would benefit from structures to help school staff coordinate planning and goal setting. Likewise, observing interactions among teachers, staff, and students underscored the high level of distrust between home and school and the importance of positive interactions between parents and school staff.

It was on the basis of these (and other) findings that Comer and his colleagues developed the nine-part School Development Program. Parents were engaged at the school at multiple levels—attending events and school activities and weighing in on governance issues. A group of mental health professionals—including the school psychologist, social worker, and a special education teacher—would gather to address students' behavioral and learning difficulties. The School Planning and Management Team brought representatives of all the adult stakeholders in a school—from principal and teachers to parents and support staff—together to discuss the schools' programs and procedures. When they gathered, the team members strove to make decisions by consensus and focus on problem solving rather than placing blame. And although the principal's authority was acknowledged, school administrators weighed the opinions of others on the team.

From the start, relationships have been at the heart of the model because of the important role that relationships play in creating a positive climate for development and learning. The Comer Process was designed to give the adults in schools the strategies and structures to "work out ways of working together so that [they] met the needs of children," Comer explained. The adults who participated in the SPMT, for example, were tasked with solving problems, but they were also required to do so "while establishing goals and strategies for the entire school that would create a positive school culture that enables the adults to get along with each other so that they were available to support the development of the kids."

The SDP team continued working with King and Baldwin for the next five years. Over that time, both schools saw academic achievement rise to some of the highest levels in the city and behavioral problems noticeably decline (Comer & Emmons, 2006). With the model well instantiated in the school communities, SDP staff turned their attention to expanding the use of the model to other schools in New Haven.

Staff development was a key mechanism for facilitating the expansion. Trainings gathered representatives from districts across the United States, including New Haven, to learn the fundamentals of the Comer Model and facilitate its implementation in their districts. Although the nine parts of the Comer Model remained stable as the model gained traction, schools and districts retained the freedom and flexibility to tailor its use to meet their specific needs.

It was this freedom that first attracted Dietra Wells, who was a teacher at Katherine-Brennan School in New Haven (the third school to pilot the model) before she became Brennan's principal, then New Haven's director of instruction, and later the district SDP facilitator.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.