Blog

Applying Lean Methodology to K-12 (Part I): Developing an MVP

Preface

A week ago Thursday, June 28, the LessonCast team attended an edtech event hosted by New Schools Venture Fund and Imagine K12. Eric Ries shared his lean startup methodologies and how they relate to education startups. (Katrina compiled a great list of 10 takeaways in her blog.) Among the gathering of education companies, new and veteran, Eric Ries spoke interview-style with Jennifer Carolan to share his lean startup methodologies and discuss how they relate to education startups. The prevailing theme seemed to be that every sector (including education) thinks that it’s special, and every sector (including education) isn’t. Lean startup principles work the same for edtech startups as they do for other companies.

I have noticed, however, that the conversation about how to apply lean thinking to K-12 innovation is just getting started. Recently, Jennie Dougherty in her Beta Classroom blog wrote a letter explaining the need to develop lean methods for researching the efficacy of education innovations. From my experience, the core principles remain the same, but what does a case example in the K-12 setting look like? How can lean methodology be applied to help schools create/find innovations and measure the impact on student learning? And how can this process move as fast as the innovation itself? Given the journey that I’ve travelled over the last two years (founding an education startup and applying lean principles to measure impact in a school environment), I figured I’d share the lessons I’ve learned in the K-12 sphere. I’ve divided the journey (which is still a work in progress) into several segments:

I. Developing an MVP for K-12 Innovation
II. What to Build
III. How to Measure Impact
IV. What We Learned & When to Pivot
V. What I’d Do Differently Knowing What I Know Now

Part 1 – Developing an MVP for K-12 Innovation

The first step in applying Lean Startup Methodology is figuring out the problem that needs to be solved. As an assistant principal in a large middle school, one of my chief responsibilities was to focus on improving student achievement in reading. (Side note: Yes, the State measures improved achievement through student scores on high-stakes tests, but I also value developing within students higher levels of comprehension to promote lifelong learning). Working with the principal, department chair, and teacher leaders, we looked at student data and noticed that our students struggled most with applying general reading process strategies to support comprehension. We also noticed a trend that our scores dipped in the sixth grade and slowly improved in grades seven and eight. After surveying broader data, we realized that this trend was statewide. We developed several hypotheses about the cause, including the thought that most elementary schools spend 90 minutes to 2 hours (or more) on literacy instruction, while our students have a 45-minute language arts/reading class. Our strategy was to help teachers implement reading strategies across the curriculum to provide more time for literacy instruction and authentic reading comprehension experiences.

Developing an MVP was the key step that differentiated our journey from other data-driven improvement initiatives. Eric Ries defines a minimum viable product (MVP) as “that version of a new product which allows a team to collect the maximum amount of validated learning about customers with the least effort.” It’s essential because it fuels the build-measure-learn loop (more details in upcoming entries). Developing an MVP is not formulaic and actually quite difficult in its normal context of launching a new product. Not one to back down from a challenge, I sought to apply this thinking to launching the implementation of a new instructional idea in a school environment.

First, we identified a handful of reading strategies that would support comprehension across content areas, but specifying the strategies was not enough. We needed to be concrete – and in agreement – about what we expected to happen in the classroom as a result of implementing a specific teaching practice. How else could we consistently measure impact?

I developed an outline for breaking down the essential components of an instructional idea, and this outline developed into the LessonCast framework. We used the framework to boil down the what, why, and how of each reading strategy. We defined what essential elements needed to be present for effective implementation and what aspects could vary according to student need and teaching style. Focusing on one strategy at a time, we developed a compact, concrete, common understanding of what we were going to do and what we wanted to see in the classroom.

In my mind, I began thinking about the MVP as the minimum viable practice, and each lessoncast served to clarify what elements of an instructional idea needed to be in place to collect the maximum amount of learning about teacher implementation and student progress. At times, the LessonCast framework helped us to realize that what we were calling a “strategy” was in fact too broad to effectively define and measure. We had to break down each strategy into components that were specific, actionable, and measurable.

All of the lessoncasts that were created for our school initiative are available for viewing in the LessonCast gallery. I’ll include more details on how we used the MVP – minimum viable practice – to cycle through the build-measure-learn loop in my next entry on What to Build.

The Adult Learner (Applying Malcolm Knowles)

mastermind

Adult learners have different needs than our students, so we need to design professional development differently.  (Think andragogy vs. pedagogy. This piece, focusing on Malcolm Knowles, will be the first of several that examine different theoretical lenses about teaching the adult learner while keeping them practical. )

When designing professional learning, I try to consider the following five adapted from Malcolm Knowles’ assumptions (in italics) about the adult learner because they still feel relevant today:

1. Adults need to know the reason for learning something (relevance). Teachers and administrators need to know from the beginning what and why they should take the time and energy to learn something new. For example, how will it make them more effective teachers? Are there new professional expectations, such as the Common Core State Standards?  Will this new learning help them understand a new evaluation system? Will they be able to reach more students than they did before?  The context for professional learning should be shared upfront and should be clearly relevant.

2. Adults are interested in learning content that has immediate relevance to their jobs or personal lives (readiness to learn and orientation to learning).  Early in life—during college years for example—people are more comfortable learning information that they may use later. Adults, on the other hand, need their learning to be immediately applicable and practical. Adults live complex lives with multiple responsibilities, so they don’t feel they have the luxury of learning lots of theory without direct application.

When designing professional learning, make sure it connects directly to classroom use. I always ask myself, have I given them everything—the what, why and how, and the resources–that they need to be able to implement the strategy being introduced and/or adapt it for their students?

3. Adults bring a wealth of experience to the learning process (experience). It’s important to remember to acknowledge the range of experience in the room. Going further, we need to design multiple opportunities for educators to share their experiences in meaningful ways during professional learning. Adult educators can enrich professional development experiences for all participants if given the opportunity.  The collective wisdom of the room far outweighs any one individual, including the presenter.

4. Adults are more self-directed in their learning (self-concept and motivation to learn).  Knowles’ discussion of mature learners becoming more motivated by internal incentives applies to professional learning in that we should provide opportunities for choice and for participants to work out aspects of the learning for themselves. Allow time for participants to problem-solve during the professional development session. Adults don’t respond well to having others tell them what they should do instead of involving them in the process.  Whenever possible, I also try to involve participants in defining the goals of professional learning initiatives during initial planning stages.

5.   Adults need a collaborative, respectful environment.  Children need collaborative, respectful environments as well, but it’s important to establish an environment where teachers feel that their expertise is respected and where there’s a high comfort level with sharing and expanding on each other’s ideas, a place where it’s also safe to admit not knowing the answers. Most adults crave a social aspect to their learning; so much of teaching is solitary that teachers appreciate the time to learn and collaborate with their colleagues.

Essentially, we need to provide professional learning opportunities that are relevant, collaborative, immediately applicable, job-embedded and make extensive use of the rich experiences participants bring. 

Equity In Education: More Than Equal Funding

american-flag-2a

As a country do we truly believe in independence, freedom and equality for all? On this Fourth of July, my thoughts run to the traditional topics but I tend to see everything through an education lens, so today is no different.

I fundamentally believe that a person is not free until he or she has equal access to high-quality educational opportunities. When we speak of the achievement gap, what we really mean is an opportunity gap, which I’ll continue to write about more fully.

When we think through funding equality, we need to think beyond numbers if we truly want equal access to opportunity.

Our county, for example, assigns the number of counselors at a school based on student numbers. At first glance this seems reasonably fair. Until you look the realities of the schools. Several of our schools have over 50% mobility rates, which means those counselors are processing significantly more students who are also likely to have significantly higher needs.  Each of those students receives less individualized attention because counselors are assigned “equally” based on numbers.

In an elementary school where students come to school hungry and unprepared with the skills needed to interact successfully in a school setting, the same number of counselors and teachers are assigned as a school in a higher socioeconomic neighborhood. Again, on the surface it looks like equal treatment because the numbers are the same. However, for those children in lower socioeconomic areas to truly have equal access to the educational opportunities, they need more supports initially.

We need to think about equity and access to opportunity more complexly than simple number calculations. How far are we willing to go to provide real access?

Ten Takeaways from Eric Ries’ Chat on EdTech

target-green-arrow

On our return trip from ISTE, our LessonCast team stopped over in San Francisco for an EdTech Meetup featuring Eric Ries. Wayee Chu from New Schools Venture Fund and Alan Louie from Imagine K12 began the event by introducing companies that launched through their respective incubators—great to see friends from Junyo, GoalBook, ClassDojo, and Remind101 all in the same room.  Also reconnected with friends from MySciHigh, KidblogNoRedInk and Plickers. (Missed my friend from alumn.us!)

Jennifer Carolan, from New Schools Venture Fund and longtime friend of Eric Ries, interviewed Ries before opening the floor to questions from startup teams.  This was the 3rd time I’ve heard Eric speak, so though the fundamental philosophy was not new, it was good to hear his theories applied to EdTech.

Reis began the event by sharing that “magazine profiles are all lies—they make it seem like a founder has a great idea and boom it takes off,” and his case is no exception. It’s what I call the movie montage effect—all of the hard work blurs by moving the audience from great idea to success. Social Network implies overnight success through its mid-movie montage–when in reality all of these ideas take work, sometimes years of work. (The same effect exists in music; bands routinely do the circuit for 2 years before they’re “discovered” and become an “overnight success.”) Americans are in love with the mirage of rags to riches stories.

Assuming a basic understanding of lean startup thinking, here are a few of my takeaways from this chat:

1. Do we have enough courage we need to maintain our laser focus and not get distracted by good ideas? I love this question because I’m prone to being pulled by lots of intriguing ideas, which can distract from an absolute focus on testing our main idea.  Jason Fried, cofounder of 37signals recently shared a similar strategy in the July/August edition of Inc Magazine as his company decided to retire some profitable ventures because they took away from their main focus. Sometimes the decision to put aside a fabulous idea is the prudent call.  Keeping a board with cool ideas to test later has helped me maintain focus without feeling like I’ll forget an idea I want to remember later.

2. No matter what you do, you will be embarrassed by your first product. Reis further stated that “if embarrassment bothers you, then you’re in the wrong business.” Ries clarified that an MVP does not mean low quality however. Instead it’s more about releasing a product in its simplest form. Ries somewhat jokingly argued that early adopters essentially have mental illnesses or defects, though he acknowledged that sometimes it’s more because the problem is too big and they’re willing to try anything. The traditional early adopters actually prefer a product that isn’t quite perfect because they want to feel special.  The MVP is more about creating opportunities for real learning than it is as much about releasing a product. Reis argued that any work that’s beyond what early adopters require is a waste.  You should have released it sooner if it has more than the early adopters required.

3. People are “predictably irrational,” which means we have to submit everything to empirical testing, even if logic dictates a particular response. I was particularly struck by the discussion around business models. Too many companies, especially in EdTech, believe that if you get teachers and students on board, then the districts will buy it. Ries acknowledges that this is logical, but asks is that how it really works? Does the district care what teachers and students think? It’s important to test the question.

Working in the central office of a large district (with over 100,000 students), I know from personal experience that this kind of logic does not dictate district-buying decisions. The process is far more convoluted and often disregards what teachers want entirely. Companies that are relying on a student/teacher adoption to lead to district adoption don’t truly understand how the system functions in reality.

Ries stressed that we have a mental model of how the world should work/does work but that’s never based in reality. We must ground our work in reality without abdicating our responsibility to hold our vision as entrepreneurs. We need to hold two contradictory ideas in our heads. Great entrepreneurs can one day believe they have the best idea ever, then the next day share the data and realize “they’re doomed.”  Well, I’ve certainly felt both, sometimes all in the same day!

4. We don’t need viral growth across everywhere. We really only need to put pressure on one school, one district to see if the premise holds. Then test from there.

5. How do we learn in a high stakes environment like classrooms? So glad that this issue was raised! As a lifetime educator, it’s important to me that companies recognize that students are not simply laboratories to be exploited. In addition, public school teachers are also under a very trigger-happy gun with the increasing federal expectations for student achievement.As NCLB moves to 100%, schools are panicking and will be reluctant to deviate from established practices. (Charter and independent schools offer opportunities for EdTech, as long as we recognize that the results may be entirely different in a public school environment. The charter and independent school market are limited.)

Ries suggested that one option is targeting the students who are already not fitting into the system.  When early on in my career, I first began teaching in a low-performing school in North Philly, I was given essentially free reign with my students because my particular students had been unsuccessful in traditional environments. The school administration really only cared that my students weren’t disruptive. Anything beyond that was a plus. Within this context, I was able to be creative about reaching these students—this early experience makes me believe that the strategy of targeting students on the margins may work because the risk is lower for schools.

At first glance, it might seem that what you’re really testing would only apply to high-risk students but the reality is that much of what is successful in alternative education programs is really just good teaching. These practices are just effective, if not more so, with “traditional” populations. The real difference is that many traditional students have been trained to put up with mediocre teaching, so they don’t resist.

6. Be wary of the false sense of familiarity with the education market because we all went through school. Ries acknowledged that if you’re actually a domain expert in one of these education markets, then you can skip some of the steps because you know the answers.  As an “actual domain expert,” I still recognize though that what is true of the districts/schools where I’ve worked may not be true of districts and schools across the US. I still learned much from testing our ideas with a wide range of folks.

Ries also reminded us that we need to know all three groups really well—students, teachers and administrators, for ex. It’s a complicated model and to be successful we need to know all components well, not just one or two.

If organizations don’t have insider knowledge, outsiders can sometimes use this outside perspective to advantage by playing the “naïve questioner.”

7. Avoid the trap of success theater by “only making promises to investors about things you care about—be specific about what you want to learn, and then be clear about what you did learn.”   Too often entrepreneurs aren’t clear about setting realistic goals and measurement accountability posts, then find themselves wasting time and energy making themselves look like they’re meeting the expectations they set.  Just be realistic and specific from the beginning.

8. Don’t repackage bad ideas within lean jargon when pitching to investors. It doesn’t work, and you’re missing the point.

9. Khalid Smith, my cofounder of LessonCast and global leader for Startup Weekend EDU, raised one of the most important questions for me: Are students learning? In the education space, we should not simply be concerned with customer acquisition, but our focus should also be on whether or not we’re making things better.

Ries acknowledged this issue in other domains as well—too often businesses simply focus on whether or not their customers are happy, not necessarily if their services are making them more effective. In other businesses, this may not be as important, but in education children are the end users, so we can’t simply make them happy or make their parents happy or make their teachers happy. We can’t lose sight of the goal to make teachers more effective and to make sure that what we’re offering helps students learn. Otherwise, we’re failing our kids. 

10. Final advice: don’t listen to Eric Reis or any other expert.  As Ries shared, most advice is anecdotal; experts who suggest a theory are more useful because the theory can be tested in on a micro-scale. Everything we do should be based on real data, real empirical evidence, not simply someone else’s advice.

Thanks again for all of the organizers of this event!

How I am Going to Change the World

2:15 pm on the first full day of ISTE 2012. I grabbed an exorbitantly priced Naked juice and slid into a seat to hear Adam Bellow’s presentation, “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Future.” I am among hundreds of other educators packed in the room waiting for the presentation to begin.

At first, I’m impressed by the mood music and gripping slideshow, highlighting powerful quotes related to the state and purpose of education. As the presentation launches – if you have seen Adam launch is an appropriate word – my impression shifts to intimidation. Back story: This is my first year presenting at ISTE. We have multiple sessions, but I’m most nervous about Wednesday morning. At our last check, 180 people were signed up for our BYOD session. How are we going to compare to this amazing fast-paced, high-energy, entertaining and informative presentation?

Then my heart stopped pounding and my chest exhaled as I read the words Adam projected across the screen: sharing = caring. With this trip to ISTE, I’ve gathered the gumption to share. Share what I’ve found to work in my school community, with the hope that maybe our presentation can help other educators as well. My intimidation shifted to inspiration to take on the challenge of changing the world. Yes, I can continue to learn and grow and share what I’ve learned and how I’ve grown.

While I’m still nervous about bearing my story in front of a hundred strangers, I’m also bold enough to believe that by sharing my practice I can change the world. Adam, thank you for the pep talk (and the kick and the butt) that I needed to believe.

Can Technology Solve Education’s Woes?

tv magic

About 26 minutes into his weekly podcast with Audrey Watters, Steve Hargadon asks the astute question: Are there times when we’re tricked into thinking that technology is going to solve problems that are not easy to solve? As much as we want to believe, the perfect tech tool is not going to be developed that will solve all of our education problems. Why not?

Because changing teacher practice is hard work; changing practice on a school level is even more difficult.  Education companies that promise to solve all student achievement problems without consistent change in practice truly don’t understand what it takes to transform a school.  Fundamentally, they don’t understand what makes great teaching.  If the public believes that technology can bypass a teacher or make learning “teacher-proof,” then we’re devaluing the incredibly difficult craft of teaching and of leading a school.

It takes years to become a good teacher, even more years to become a great teacher.  Every classroom is different, every child is different. Teachers must plan for and adapt to the changing needs of students, often on the spot when a lesson takes an unexpected turn. Technology cannot replace this accumulated wisdom.

So, What Can We Expect Technology to Solve?

Technology can offer solutions to time-intensive processes that are less about teaching and more about administrative tasks. Technology can provide easier access to a wider range of resources, including human resources. Data that can be used to drive instruction can be collected and displayed more efficiently with tech tools. Technology can provide tools to help facilitate tasks.

While I was turning over these ideas in my head, the podcast conversation turned to innovative approaches to professional development, my deep passion. Steve Hargadon shared that he loves the idea of teachers filming themselves, but recognized that this could only really work well in a focused community, such as a school, that would provide safety and the time to do this. (Our research shows this to be true; in fact, most teachers are very uncomfortable with seeing themselves on camera.)

As I was nodding my head in agreement, Audrey advocated for technology to help shift professional development from lecture style to more hands-on, and then—pleasantly surprising– she mentioned LessonCast as one edtech company innovating professional learning.  She nailed our belief that professional learning must be consistent, job-embedded, tied to clear initiatives, and chunked so as not to become overwhelming.

Audrey also shared one of our secret learnings: the process of creating a lessoncast is a form of professional development in itself because what makes great teachers and great instructional leaders includes time for thoughtful reflection and collaboration.  Creating a lessoncast fosters reflection, and sharing a lessoncast provides a compact focus for collaboration with meaningful conversations about how strategies can be adapted for the specific needs of each set of students.

Technology becomes transformative , not when it replaces the work and the relationship building, but when it facilitates what we already know to be good practice.