Hello again to everyone, 

I would like to respond to the question regarding buy in from reluctant
participants and/or resistance to change.  The first lesson I have learned
is patience - it takes time!!!  Not something I was really very good at in
the beginning.  I'm not sure I've really made a lot of progress in this
area over five years but I have made some. At the risk of sounding too
simplistic, these are my thoughts on how buy in has taken place (and still
in the process of taking place) in Oklahoma.

Oklahoma started with four pilot programs using an application process so
it was the local program's choice to participate from the beginning.  We
spent a lot of time (at various meetings) emphasizing that we wanted
programs that wanted to participate.   We received applications from five
programs and ended up with four programs after an introductory meeting.

Each year we have added programs to the process but always on a voluntary
basis.  With that in mind, we have consistently had 4 to 6 new programs
start the 3-year training process each year and will have at least four of
our remaining 10 programs begin the process next year.  Each year
directors talk to directors and teachers talk to teachers (finding out
what it was like to participate in the training, how much work was
involved, etc.)  before they decide to start the process.  Participants
are honest and express mixed feelings about how much work is involved in
the training and in lesson planning. Everyone does agree that it is pretty
overwhelming the first year - a lot to process.  However, almost all of
the programs report increased student retention and student goal
achievements in classes that are integrating standards-based instruction. 

Several program directors have told me (usually after the training is
over) that they decided to begin the process only because another director
or other teachers encouraged them to participate.  They have also told me
they were advised that it was a lot of work, overwhelming in the
beginning, gets better as you go along, don't try to change too much too
fast, etc.  Programs were trusting of other programs who had been through
the process - this was important. Many of our programs have started a
second team through the process as a way to expand the training to other
teachers or new teachers in their program.  


>From the beginning the state felt that it was critically important that

the training be a positive and successful experience for the participants
since the field was the key to moving standards-based instruction forward.
 For this reason, we ask for feedback each year.
The field has been honest with us about the training process whether it be
in general terms or in specific areas of reading, math, or writing.  The
state has tried hard to listen and has made changes from year to year
based on their suggestions (and still are making changes) without
compromising the integrity or depth of the training.  This is always
challenging.  You must remember (and I constantly have to remind myself of
this) that this is a PROCESS that takes time.  I have seen programs get to
the third year of training and suddenly say "this is really starting to
make sense now" or "I finally understand how to put all these pieces
together."  This is why we are just now to the point where we feel we are
ready to collect example lesson plans and maybe even video examples of
standards-based instruction taking place in the classroom to use as models
for future participants.  EFF has videos available but our participants
have asked for models from within our state.  Another project we plan to
work on.   

I can't say that we have total buy in from all our programs or teachers
who have been EFF trained; however, I do feel confident that we have more
buy in than resistance at this time.   Programs are now saying to me that
in the beginning they were skeptical that this was just the "latest thing"
the state wanted them to do and it would soon pass; however, time has
proven that content standards are here to stay and that the state is going
to continue to invest in this process.

In summary, the main points I would share are:
 Our EFF National Trainers are experts in their fields so the training
participants receive is excellent and our programs acknowledge this
excellence.
 The state's message regarding EFF and standards-based instruction has
been consistent and continuous over the last five years in an effort to
assure programs this was not just "the latest thing the state wants us to
do." 
 Local program participation has been on a voluntary basis so buy in has
come slowly, steadily, and over time.
 Participants are all over the performance continuum, learning "light
bulbs" come on at all different times, so don't make assumptions and be
patient!!
 The state listened to feedback regarding the process each year and made
changes the following year based on participant's suggestions.
 This is an ongoing process that the state will always be involved in.

When directors tell directors and teachers tell teachers about the changes
they are beginning to see in retention, achievement, student involvement
and ownership in the learning process - even before they have documented
evidence - buy in starts to take place in ways we could never orchestrate
from the State level.  

Thanks and have a great week-end.

Pam

Pam Blundell, Assistant Director
Lifelong Learning Section
Oklahoma State Department of Education
2500 North Lincoln Blvd. Room 115
Oklahoma City, OK 73105-4599
405-521-3321
1-800-405-0355
pam_blundell at sde.state.ok.us