LISTEN NOW HERE…

WATCH NOW…

Schools are caught between too much pressure (think: endless monitoring, weaponized data, and stressed-out teachers) and too much support with zero urgency (a.k.a. “We’ll get to it someday”). And let’s be real—sometimes, it feels like there’s neither pressure nor support, just a vague hope that things will magically improve.

In this episode, we explore the critical balance between pressure and support when implementing sustainable math improvement plans. 

Achieving widespread change and full adoption of strategies or resources requires skilled facilitation and clear role definition. We discuss how to ensure every stakeholder—leaders, coaches, and teachers —understands their part in driving progress. 

You’ll leave with actionable insights to build momentum, foster alignment, and create lasting impact in your math program.

What Listeners Will Get From This Episode:

• An understanding of why balancing pressure and support is essential for sustainable math improvement.

• Strategies for skilled facilitation that drive alignment and progress.

• Insights into the roles of leaders and coaches in achieving widespread change.

• Actionable ideas to foster collaboration and clarity among all stakeholders.

• Tools to measure progress and maintain accountability throughout the improvement process.

Resources:

• Register for the Make Math Moments Virtual Summit
• Make Math Moments Problem Based Lessons & Units

Attention District Math Leaders:

Not sure what matters most when designing math improvement plans? Take this assessment and get a free customized report: https://makemathmoments.com/grow/ 

Ready to design your math improvement plan with guidance, support and using structure? Learn how to follow our 4 stage process. https://growyourmathprogram.com 

Looking to supplement your curriculum with problem based lessons and units? Make Math Moments Problem Based Lessons & Units

FULL TRANSCRIPT

Jon Orr: Let’s talk pressure and support. And I think this topic comes from, you know, many of our topics come from the conversations we have with, with math coordinators, math coaches, district leaders who are part of our, our district program, but also coaches and consultants and coordinators reach reach out to us to ask us our opinions on on different topics in math improvement plans they’re creating.

We’ve been we’ve been talking a lot about pressure and support lately with these with these teams and thinking about what is the necessary pressure and who who is responsible for some of the pressure when we’re trying to coordinate math improvement plans, from the district level down to the classroom level. And then how does that support look?

And, and what is the right balance that we want to create between and the pressure that we we kind of nudge people on? But also the support that our educators are needing and getting, and it’s kind of like, let’s, let’s figure out and let’s talk about, say, the balance that we need to create between pressure and support.

So we’ve got, give us, give us some, some, some kind of guidelines here, like let’s, let’s first talk about like when we say pressure. What does that mean when we say support. What does that mean?

Yvette Lehmen: Okay, that’s a great question because the way that I was thinking about it is, you know, what does it look like when there’s too much pressure and not enough support? So let’s kind of paint a picture of what that looks like. It’s there’s, you know, new mandates coming in. We have testing coming up for students. We’re doing teacher performance appraisals or some type of evaluation.

And we’re throwing all of these expectations on the backs of educators. And I actually heard, you know, a leader or a coach recently use the language like we’re using data and it’s being weaponized. So there’s, you know, a lot of expectation, a lot of monitoring, a lot of, measurement happening and feedback to educators. But without the support in place to help empower them, help them feel validated.

And so what that leads to is burnout, frustration. It also impacts retention of educators in the field, which we know is a problem in many of our districts in North America. You have likely a very toxic work environment where educators are feeling overwhelmed and demoralized. So that’s a scenario where there’s a lot of pressure, the expectations are high, the monitoring of teacher performance is high, the monitoring of student achievement is high.

But there aren’t the right systems or structures in place for educators to feel supported in the work.

Jon Orr: Would you say that that feels more the norm these days than the other side, which is too much support and not enough pressure?

Yvette Lehmen: You know, this is going to be a bold statement. And I hate to make generalizations because I think that there’s, you know, it would be unfair.

Jon Orr: But it sounds like you’re going to make one anyway.

Yvette Lehmen: I wonder if there’s not enough pressure and not enough support.

Jon Orr: You got it. Like tell me more. Tell me more.

Yvette Lehmen: Okay, so let’s talk about the opposite scenario, which is actually what we hear about often because when we’re meeting with coaches, you know, coaches are in the role to support. Yes. And so they’re they’re leading with support and they’re, they’re trying to create spaces where they are responsive to educator learning needs. And they’re and we always say, you know, there’s there’s always value to working One-On-One with teachers.

Right. But what happens when there’s support but no pressure. You know, you have a lack of urgency. You have complacency. You have a lack of collective efficacy where you’re working together towards a common goal. There’s a lack of accountability. And oftentimes what we hear from the coaches that are in this situation where the support is there, but the pressure is not, is that they kind of feel aimless.

They feel a little bit lost. They’re not sure what their impact is, and they’re almost seeking more clarity, more clear communication, more alignment, more support, or let’s say, pressure from leadership.

And I guess so when you said, what do we what do we think most often, I don’t know, I wonder sometimes if in a lot of our districts right now, because of the push toward strengthening literacy, the math might be on the back burner. And as far as pressure and support in some spaces. And again, I’d hate to make that generalization because I think every district is in a different place.

Jon Orr: Yeah. See, when I think about the two, I, you gave some examples about like what pressure is and you know, and I sound a lot like, I think kind of like oversight and monitoring and check ins and make sure like I had this image of like one of the districts and, you know, when we met with them a couple of years ago, they were like, you know, these teachers were responsible for every lesson to turn in, their lesson to their, you know, assistants, a principal for them to about, you know, you know, like, there’s like this, this kind of monitoring and, and oversight and as a pressure, pressure examples.

And so when I think about, like, the pressure and support, it’s like, I don’t think it’s about how much because I think it’s about like the types and the quality or the instead of like the quantity of the pressure. And same with the support is like you can have you can have a lot of support because just be bad support or like not, not quality support for teachers in the right way.

So when we think about pressure, if I go back to think about like how much is the right pressure or the types of pressure we want to think about is, is is there? Because what you were saying to is, is that there’s this lack of like when we don’t have the right support or pressure then or in, in the as much pressure you were saying, like there’s like not enough focus and it’s like, I don’t know what to do.

And really that’s like the type of pressure to me because it’s like there’s no goal, there’s no vision, there’s no there’s probably not being communicated, clearly to the people who are, say, supporting or doing the work or are responsible to do the work. So there’s like the pressure of like we feel, you know, but there’s also like a guidance as a in terms of pressure as well as like where, where are we structuring the work that we want to do.

We. One example you just reminded me of before we hit record is one of the districts that we helped kind of start, you know, in the early stages of the coordination component or stage two of our program and thinking about optimizing their structures that that example of, of that, that district, who in one respect, they were looking at professional development in terms of data, data monitoring and in teachers, where we’re bringing, say, samples of assessments in and they’re coordinating and they were they were looking at how do I unpack this to use in the classroom for feedback?

But then they also had coaches who were supporting teachers, but the coaches weren’t using the data to help coordinate the support that was happening in the classroom. And there’s there’s a mismatch of what’s happening here. And and when you think about the pressure level, it’s like, okay, we’re we’re looking at, you know, making sure that both say arms that are responsible for the support need to know where the pressure is, is put, which means like where’s the measurement.

Like are we focused on the right things or are we not coordinated here. And and when we have that same misalignment, then it’s, it’s clear that there’s not the right pressure and not necessarily too much pressure or not enough pressure. I like to think about it as like we need the right types of pressure in order for the support to actually work.

Yvette Lehmen: So we’ve kind of talked about the extremes. You know, when there’s too much pressure, when there’s too much support with no pressure, or maybe neither are happening because the priorities have shifted elsewhere. So let’s kind of describe why it’s important to have both, and what some of the ideals, let’s say, might look like in a district. So we need both because as you alluded to, the pressure is what allows us to remain focused.

It creates clear alignment. There’s transparency at different levels in different for for different stakeholders to know what is the work that is important right now across the district. And then we have these monitoring tools or accountability structures to help us measure our progress towards that goal. And those monitoring tools can be used to empower, to celebrate. They don’t have to be just like assessment in the classroom.

The purpose isn’t necessarily to be punitive. It’s to celebrate our growth and to ensure that we are putting the right support in the right places. So we definitely need that pressure. And we’re going to talk a little bit about, you know, some specific examples, but also how do we assign the roles in response abilities around pressure. Like whose job is it to to ensure that the appropriate 

pressure is in place.

Jon Orr: And I think this is what we’re seeing with the districts that we’re speaking with and in supporting is, is that we might set goals. So let’s say let’s say we we realize that a vision for mathematics instruction is is important. And it is extremely important to have a clarified vision for effective mathematics instruction at all levels. So at the district level, at the administrator level, at the teacher level, in the classroom, like we need to have that coordinated effort.

And then let’s say, let’s say you created your plan. Let’s say you have an improvement plan and you’ve you’ve accounted for different support systems, you’ve accounted for different goals, you’ve got some key results that you’re going to monitor. But then it’s like this is where we’re seeing I think a lot of this, this balance is out of whack because because when you have the goals, if you have not yet assigned a role or a person to be accountable for a particular key result.

And this is when we’re talking, say at, say, the coordinator level or the administrator level or the superintendent level, then these initiatives or these goals get lost. And we’re seeing that we’re seeing that all over the place when say, a team creates a set of goals but then starts to rule them out, and then one person’s thinking, well, I thought the administrators were putting pressure on the teachers to account for this goal.

And then we’re going to say own the school level goal. And I have that. And therefore the superintendent was responsible maybe to convey that information down to the principals. And whereas the principals and maybe someone else thought that the coaches, at the school level or at the district office level were responsible for communicating this or for rolling this out or supporting this, like, this is what we’re seeing a lot of is this mismatch of saying, well, I’m not an administrator, I’m a coach.

And but I can’t say tell the administrators exactly how to run their programs. I could, but I don’t have the right pressure to do like I’m not the pressure point to get that done. We need some other pressure point. So in a way, if we are creating a set of key results, you’re creating goals. You’re creating improvement plans that are effective.

You do need to make sure that you’re assigning, you know, the right pressure to the right person so that the work can can roll out. And everyone has to be aligned and know who that person is, or who that type of person is or that role is so that we can lean on them when the pressure is needed.

Because a lot of times it’s like we’re we’re in that coach trying to put pressure on something to get done. But, you know, you can’t because it’s just feels wrong in terms of your role.

Yvette Lehmen: So you made a really good point. And I’m going to make another bold statement. You know.

Jon Orr: Just being bold today.

Yvette Lehmen: Yeah. I really don’t think it should ever be solely the responsibility of the math team or the coaches to be putting pressure on teachers, because they’re also trying to build relationships and build trust. And if the relationship feels in any way evaluative, it’s going to impact the environment that they can actually engage as a think partner. So that’s why, to your point, it’s like we need to, in our plan, clearly delineate what pressure is going to look like.

And again, pressure that is productive in and empowers not punitive and evaluates. And then we need to get really specific who and when. So we should have the role defined as well as a timeline line. Because without the timeline, again, there’s just there’s no urgency to do this work. And there can be a lot of stagnation and complacency.

So let’s actually paint a picture. Sure. So imagine that one of your action steps. So you’re looking to let’s say improve student fluency. And you’re supporting the implementation of problem strings as a fluency routine. That’s going to result in increased student fluency okay. So now you need support. You need to have professional development for teachers to understand what a problem a string is and how to use it and when to use it, you need to again, and that’s not just a one time professional development session.

That means ongoing support. You need to create communities of learners. So a professional learning time where teachers can collaborate. So maybe it’s like I get to go into your classroom tomorrow to watch you do a problem string, give you feedback. You’re going to come into mine the next day. How are we creating communities of collaboration? Are there opportunities for coaching support?

Are we highlighting spaces where great things are happening, and building the capacity of that informal leader to maybe share with their peers? Are we ensuring that teachers have access to the right resources? So do we have the problem strings resource in their hand so that it’s at their fingertips when they go to deliver this lesson within their their larger lesson structure?

So imagine all of those supports are in place now. We need the pressure right. So the pressure might look like the administrator says, you know, I’m coming in at the end of the month to observe a problem string in your classroom. This is the checklist that I’m going to be using, because we all have a common understanding of the characteristics of an effective problem string.

This is not, you know, evaluative, but this is for the purpose of growth. It’s for me to understand what this looks like when it’s being done effectively. It’s to provide you with feedback and identify any opportunities for growth for you. You know, can you please select a date that works for you, that you would be comfortable having me come in and, and do you need any support in advance of that visit?

And maybe, you know, the first time through that the administrator also needs support. So they’re partnering with a knowledgeable other who’s going to be coming in there going into some, you know, the the the facilitator or the coordinator has identified some bright spots so that they can go in and practice with their checklist, observing a really effective problem string in advance. But regardless, it’s like this is all coordinated.

Jon Orr: It has to be coordinated.

Yvette Lehmen: Timelines. We have roles. We have a common goal. We’ve removed barriers for implementation. We’ve put the right support in place. And now we’re all on board. And we’re working collectively toward this change that we want to see in practice.

Jon Orr: Exactly like that. The administrator knows what is the priority here on on this particular routine. We know that that is an outcome that we’re trying to change. They have it written down. They have it in part of their school improvement plan that that that change is going to be captured. And we know exactly how or what measurement technique or tool we’re going to use to capture that.

If it is to walk through, and we’re using to say that rubric or checklist that we’ve developed with the teacher or with the coach or with both or hopefully, that says this is what it looks like when we’re doing and performing, say, this particular routine. Well, this is where we are now, and we’re trying to use it as a growth tool, and we’re going to use that to actually measure our change this year.

And that’s going to define our success when the administrator knows that, when the coach is also coordinated in this effort, and then the teacher is involved in this process, this is where the right pressure with the right support makes a dent. And you can those of you listening right now are thinking about your own programs and trying to think about where the mismatch is or where this whole the holes are in their own programing and going like, is my coach coordinated with the administrators so that the pressure is applied in the right spots?

Do we even have a goal picked out for the work that we’re doing? Or or are we having the, you know, the right support, but no pressure because if it’s like I’m just going in and I’m just going to ask the teacher about where, where do you want to work this year? And like, what are we going to move approve on then that’s great.

But then you’re missing the pressure point that actually helps the growth. You know, the helps the growth move the way it needs to move so that we can we can strengthen this up for the students sitting in front of us. Because you’re right. Like without that pressure timelines lag. And this is why we, we we have long, long timelines in education.

We say, oh it takes forever. It part of the it’s going to take a long time. It’s just it could be a little bit more streamlined if we have the right pressure in place, which really comes down to saying, are we aligned in the work that we want to achieve, and have we defined the work that we want to work on and strengthen this year?

If we could answer that, then you can forward momentum the work to make sure the alignment is there, the coordination in in the in the in the key stakeholders to kind of carry this out. That’s that’s how we change, math instruction in our classrooms.

Yvette Lehmen: So I guess, John, my question, you know, for our community and for us on this, you know, on this episode right now is what if you’re a coach and you recognize that this is the reality, you know, you recognize that, yes, you can support to the best of your ability, but you’re just you’re not aligned. There are clear goals.

We don’t have accountability routines in place. We don’t have, you know, common understanding at all levels by all stakeholders. What would you advise those coaches do given you know that, like you said at the beginning of this episode, you know, maybe they don’t have any authority to direct administrators and how they leverage their time. So what would be a next step for coaches who may be feeling this frustration?

Jon Orr: I think I think what it is, and I think this is probably what coaches are doing right, is, is to think about, okay, I know I don’t have that already. And therefore I’m going in and I’m in. I’m I’m working with teachers and I’m just going to, you know, I’m going to work with the teachers that want to work with me, and I’m going to provide the support where they want to see support, where I can help with support, which in and if you know that the coordinator because if you know that the coordination can’t be there and maybe that’s the individual that you’re, you know, in the in the school that you’re seeing and

there’s no way that you can even create alignment there. Is is that having those goals and having those objectives yourself can help strengths start strengthening up from the inside out to go. These are the these are the objectives that I know are important for math classroom. And I have a clear vision. And we’ve communicated that to the teacher.

And then when there’s opportunity you to start to having discussions with, say, the next tier up or the support at the administrator level and being, you know, making yourself open to having those vision and support talks about how important it is to have a clarified, unified, aligned vision of ineffective instruction, and then having those questions about like, how have you measured, measured this in the past to hit your school improvement goals?

Because every principal has to have their school improvement goals. It the question becomes like, how have you measured? Because when you ask that question, they tend to say, I’m going to use student results on standardized tests to measure those things. And then we say, what does that actually measure that change or after. And you can’t you can’t say it does.

So now you get an opportunity to say, let’s co-develop a measurement technique or tool or system that we can implement where your you, me and the teacher are now aligned in the work that we’re going to do. So, you know, in a way it’s like when you’re trying to lead, when you don’t have authority, part of it is really just making sure that you have your ducks in a row and you just do fabulous work.

And so that all of a sudden, when there’s opportunities arise, you can have honest, important discussions with, with those who are in authority so that now all of a sudden alignment can happen. What about you? What’s your what’s your recommendation?

Yvette Lehmen: I was just going to yeah. I think you made that makes a lot of sense. It’s like if we don’t have the authority to impact at the district level, the superintendent level, to create this ideal alignment across the district, maybe we just start in an individual department or an individual school.

And that’s, you know, that’s going to be a win for us this year given our position or the relationships we’ve established. And as always, we also encourage people to jump on a call with us. Right. These are problems that we love to solve. Because we are passionate, of course, about creating alignment, creating action steps that have measurements and that are realistic.

But by the end of the year, you can see real change. That’s not only impactful, but also sustainable for sure. So yeah, if you are listening today, you’re, you know, feeling you relating to the the problem that we’re identifying. We absolutely encourage you to reach out.

Jon Orr: Yes. You can head on over to make math moments.com. Forward slash discovery. And in that link there, there is there’s a book, a call button. You can book a call with us. We can chat about what’s going or what have you been structuring, where, where have you, you know, what are the goals and, say, the pebbles that are rattling around in your shoe?

We want to hear your pebbles so that we can together kind of pluck them out of there. We do that every day, with, the leaders that we support on a on a regular basis. So, you can be one of those as well. Event. Any last big takeaways, thinking about pressure and support here today for our listener?

Yvette Lehmen: I think that really the big idea is that we need both, you know, like this balance of both, but at at the core of this balance of pressure and support is a shared vision and clear objectives. And so that’s kind of where we need to start.

Jon Orr: Yeah. Like you said is, is it happens at every level. Right. So it can happen at the district level. But if it can’t it can happen at the say at the coordinator level. And if it can, it can happen at the school level. And if it can, it can happen at the department level. And if it can happen in the classroom level.

Right. It’s just about being clear on your affect, you know, on on a vision for effective instruction. And, and making sure that you are coordinating the support efforts around that vision. For that, that you can you can make sure that, you’ve set some goals around your improvement. So if you’re a, a coach or a teacher listening, you can do that too.

And, and set some goals and set some things that you’re going to say. These are the, these are the successes I’m going to define this year. And here’s how I know I’ll hit them. And then work to get the support you need to get those goals. So if you’re at the classroom level, it can even it can even work.

So all levels, wherever you are, you want to be asking yourself those questions, which, you know, when we think about the six components of our effective PD planning and effective classrooms, you know, we’ve talked a lot about, structure here today, which is thinking about, you know, the, the leadership, which is the trunk of our classroom, our leadership tree, or our district level tree that we think about when we grow a math program.

The trunk is our vision and our leadership and our goals in our in our kind of pressure component that we talked about here. And then we also talked about the, the limbs of our tree, which is the professional development structures that we have access to. So coaches and are they coordinated and what support are we providing and how do we optimize that support.

Those are two of the six. And in our podcast, you know, weekly every, you know, twice a week. We’re trying to give you nuggets ideas, information on how to strengthen all six of those components up. So each week, well, you know, today we talked about the trunk and today we talked about the limbs. You never know.

Next episode will, you know, we might be talking about the resources, which is the leaves of our tree. And or maybe, say, the soil or water, the sunlight, which is our mindset, in, in the mindset of our students, the mindset of our teachers, about our students. There’s six components, and each of them matters. And if you want to know more about those six components, head on over to McMath moments.com/grow.

Make math moments.com/grow. Until next time MathML makers. We’ll catch you soon. Take care.

Thanks For Listening

• Book a Math Mentoring Moment
• Apply to be a Featured Interview Guest
• Leave a note in the comment section below.
• Share this show on Twitter, or Facebook.

• Leave an honest review on iTunes. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one.
• Subscribe on iTunes, Google Play, and Spotify.