Education Innovation

Questions of Accountability for Professional Learning Communities

Roger Connors and Tom Smith have written a new book called “How Did That Happen Holding People Accountable For Results The Positive, Principled Way.” What I love about great books is how they frame subjects, even ones we think we know a great deal about, in new ways. That is the case with this book.

Accountability is such a buzzword in education circles. According to the National Conference on State Legislatures, “In recent years, all 50 states have implemented accountability measures in response to increasing concerns about the quality of American education.” With the increasing availability of state, county, district, school, and teacher data, accountability is becoming more of an issue for all educators. Professional Learning Communities are not immune. Connors and Smith explain that we need to understand and examine three axioms of accountability.

The Accountability Fallacy
“…captures a common mistake people make when they assume that other fail to follow through because there is something wrong with them. This false assumption comes easily to most of us because we so clearly see the evidence that convicts the culprits of not caring enough or not working hard enough to get the job done the way we expect them to get it done. Basically, we assume people to be guilty until proven innocent.”

When Professional Learning Communities fail to complete the necessary work of gathering evidence of student learning, or developing strategies to meet the needs of students, examining data, or applying new knowledge team members and administrators often feel there is something wrong with the “offending” member or team. We assume the worst and end up with the worst.

But as Connors and Smith point out, “Real accountability always requires us to begin by looking at ourselves for anything that might be missing.”

Is it possible the Professional Learning Community and it’s members did not have a clear understanding of expectations, or maybe they were focused on the wrong things, or they do not posses enough training, or are struggling with time management issues, or there are personality conflicts, etc. The team has the best intentions, but these “other” factors might be getting in the way of the work.

Real accountability means looking for factors and issues that are at the root cause of problems and not looking for people to punish. Be it team members or administrators, we need to solve and fix problems, and not find “suspects” to “convict.”

The Accountability Assumption
“…dictates the you should always begin with the assumption that, in any given circumstance, people are doing their very best to fulfill your expectations. This assumption, consistently applied, will start the whole journey toward holding other accountable on a positive and principled track.”

Nobody, educators included, want to fail. Professional Learning Communities want to meet expectations and do the work needed to increase student success. But many factors could be getting in the way of this goal. But if you assume that they want to accomplish the goal, that members want to help each other, and teams want to succeed, you can focus on solving issues instead of punishing people.

“The Accountability Assumption allows you to begin with the view that people want things to work just as much as you do.”

The Accountability Truth
“…that when things go wrong, there is usually something wrong with what ‘I’ doing. When you embrace this principle, you take control of future outcomes and internalize the continual need to improve your effectiveness with respect to holding others accountable.”

Each members needs to ask, “Is there something I could have done?” Administrators need to ask, “How might I be contributing to the issue?” When we start asking ourselves these sorts of questions, then we can develop true accountability. Accountability that communicates, aligns, and inspects the goals of the PLC and solves problems.

“When you see yourself as part of the problem, you empower yourself to join the team that will do whatever it takes to solve it.”

CTQ: Change The Question
“With the Accountability Truth in mind you can imagine that asking the question, ‘How did that happen?’ does not generally produce an overly productive conversation. Certainly, understanding what went wrong is important, but this question usually places full accountability on those who fail to deliver and shed little, if any light on what you could have done to keep things on track. That’s one reason you should consider asking a better, more effective question when you feel that people have let you down: ‘How did I let this happen?’”

Often in the group dynamic of Professional Learning Communities, members make assumptions about what has been agreed to, or believe that all have the same expectations of the work to be done, when in fact there is not. Members might not be clear on what common assessment is to be given, what data is to be collected, etc. When the breakdown occurs, team members are quick to want to the offending member held accountable for letting the team down.

Members might try asking themselves, “How did I let this happen?” and discover that they might have bee able to prevent the mistake or issue from happening in the first place. As a “community” member accountability starts with themselves first.

Often administrators are not aware that the messages they are sending their Professional Learning Communities is not the one he or she intended to send. Many times administrators assume that teams understand what it is they want from them, when the teams do not. Unclear expectations, or making assumptions leads to failure. The administrator naturally wants to hold team members professionally accountable, but they key is to ask themselves first, “How did I let this happen?”

“Those two additional words can make a big difference. First, adding ‘I’ to the equation shifts the focus from what everyone else didn’t do to what you can do to improve the situation.”

Changing the question from, “How did this happen?” to “How did I let this happen?” creates positive benefits for Professional Learning Communities and school administrators alike.

Connors and Smith explain that there are 5 powerful benefits to including yourself in the accountability question.

1. “Creates more positive relationships where people feel that you deal fairly with them and acknowledge the whole story and not just the part that emphasizes what they did or did not do.”

2. “Helps you learn from your experiences when things go wrong because you no longer attribute the reasons for failure solely to someone else.”

3. “Gets the process of fulfilling expectations back on track because you are willing to look objectively at ‘what else’ you can do to ensure the outcome now and in the future.” 

4. “Develops a culture where everyone on the team can follow your example and become part of the solution, not just part of the problem.”

5. “Establishes a positive work environment where people give their best effort because they feel motivated by principles that feel right and fair.”

Understanding that there is more to just holding someone to blame for the failure of a Professional Learning Community is going to be a key driver in increasing your school’s PLC effectiveness. Thanks to Roger Connors and Tom Smith, we have a better understanding of accountability and our approaches to it.

Overcoming “The Transfer Barrier” In Professional Learning Communities

This is the fourth in a series of four posts about barriers to collaboration in Professional Leaning Communities.

According to Berkley and INSEAD professor Morten T. Hansen, author of Collaboration: How Leaders Avoid The Traps, Create Unity, and Reap Big Results, “The Transfer Barrier” concerns people who are unable to transfer knowledge easily from person to person, from team to team, from school to school, or from district to district.

“People run into problems in transferring expertise, know-how, and technologies when people from different units do not know how to work together. This transfer problem is not about motivations but about abilities: people can be highly motivated to work together, but they find it difficult to do so.”

The transfer problem is commonly manifested in three different ways.

1. Tacit Knowledge
“This type of knowledge makes transfer hard. Tacit knowledge refers to information that is hard to articulate orally—in writing, in manuals, in equations, and in software code.”

Teaching has a great deal of tacit knowledge. Many people can be taught to write a lesson plan, but to teach that lesson plan effectively requires tacit knowledge of instructional pace, classroom management, checking for understanding strategies, and many other things that make teaching an art.

English Language Learners often lack the tacit knowledge of the language they are learning. Knowing vocabulary or the rules of grammar does not mean one is able to “speak the language.” There is a great deal of tacit knowledge required to truly speak a language.

“It takes time to learn and master tacit knowledge.”

According to Hansen, “Several studies demonstrate the challenges of transferring tacit knowledge. It’s easier to collaborate when people deal in straightforward, well documented, technical knowledge…”

Professional Learning Communities may have a great deal of tacit knowledge that to outsiders is not known. Articulation between differing departments, grade levels, and schools can be hampered when all involved do not share the same tacit knowledge. Differing levels of knowledge and varying ways in which curriculum, strategies, how to use data, common assessments, etc are implemented can hamper collaboration if all members do not share the same tacit knowledge of these things.

It is one thing to know what a common assessment is or types of student data available, it is something entirely different to understand the nuance of how to create common assessment, when to use them for greatest effect, how to interpret results, and how to respond.

2. No Common Frame
“People who do not know each other have no common frame—an understanding of each other’s working habits, subtle ways of articulating something, a liking of each other, and an appreciation for each other’s moods.”

This commonly happens when Professional Learning Communities bring new members on to the team. Especially if team members have been working with each other for a length of time. Members naturally have an understanding of each other’s habits, moods, communication styles, and unwritten expectations. New members will struggle due to not having a common frame with the rest of the team.

Professional Learning Communities should anticipate the “no common frame” issue and take steps to mitigate it, so as not to hamper collaboration.

3. Weak Ties
“People find it hard to transfer knowledge when they don’t know each other well (a weak tie). They need strong ties—relationships where people talk often and have a close working association. Weak ties create havoc when people need to transfer tacit knowledge.”

In other words, Professional Learning Communities need to be “communities” A place where people feel like they are welcome. PLC members should be open, sharing, and communicative. Creating strong ties creates community.

Professional Learning Communities experience the transfer barrier because what we know is hard to share and explain, or we don’t how to work with each other, or simply don’t really know each other. PLCs need to overcome these issues by understanding that there is much knowledge they posses that isn’t always clear to those we are collaborating with. We need to expose our tacit knowledge and anticipate what other may not know. Further, PLCs must expose their unwritten habits and subtleties to new member to create common frames from which to collaborate. Finally, PLC must become true communities by creating strong ties through close working relationships.

Parts 1-3

Part 1: Overcoming the "Not-Invented-Here" Barrier in Professional Learning Communities

Part 2: Overcoming the “Hoarding” Barrier in Professional Learning Communities

Part 3: Overcoming “The Search Barrier” in Professional Learning Communities

Overcoming the “Hoarding” Barrier in Professional Learning Communities

This is the second in a series of four posts about barriers to collaboration in Professional Leaning Communities.

Some Professional Learning Communities struggle with team members who do not share ideas, do not share knowledge, do not share data, and seemingly do anything they can not to participate or cooperate with the rest of their team members. They are “hoarders.”

I previously addressed this barrier to collaboration in my post “A Hoarding Culture vs. A Sharing Culture.” In a hoarding culture, teachers and schools keep their expertise, their knowledge, their ideas, and their innovations to themselves.

According to Berkley and INSEAD professor Morten T. Hansen, author of Collaboration: How Leaders Avoid The Traps, Create Unity, and Reap Big Results, “Unlike the not-invented-here barrier, where people do not want to ask others for input, the hoarding barrier concerns people in the opposite role: those who might provide help but do not offer it.”

Professional Learning Communities and Professional Networked Learning Collaboratives are built to share. Not only should members be asking for help, members should be constantly sharing and offering their help, ideas, strategies, knowledge, and expertise. This is why we call them communities or collaboratives.

According to Hansen, the “hoarding” barrier is manifested in four typical ways.

1. Competition
“Competition inside a company undermines people’s willingness to collaborate.”

Schools that put individuals teachers against one another in a competition for resources, for status, or for test scores are creating a culture of competition and creating a barrier to collaboration. When teachers, schools, or districts believe they are in competition with others, then they are going to hoard their ideas, creativity, innovation, data, research, knowledge, expertise, and wisdom.

All students suffer when educators compete against each other. Professional Learning Communities and Professional Networked Learning Collaboratives leverage their ability to increase student achievement on their abilities to collaborate. Competition prevents this. Competition has no place amongst our schools and our teachers.

2. Narrow Incentives
“When people are rewarded only for how well they do their jobs, they tend to focus attention on their jobs exclusively.”

Teachers or schools that are only acknowledged or esteemed for high-test scores unwittingly sabotage their ability to further raise student achievement through greater collaboration. If it is only about the test score, if a single score for a single test is how teachers will be judged and evaluated, they natural result is that they will turn inward and focus on themselves and “hoard” their best from the rest of the group.

It is absolutely essential that Professional Learning Communities, Professional Networked Learning Collaboratives, and administrators reward and judge each other on sharing and collaborating, rather than a narrow test score.

3. Being Too Busy
“Paradoxically, the emphasis on performance management over the past decade has created what Harvard Professor Leslie Perlow calls a ‘time famine’ at work.”

Every single educator I know is suffering from time famine. Educators are being asked to teach more standards the same amount of time or even less time. Educators always feel behind in the classroom and then have the added burden of outside meetings, trainings, etc. Time famine is running rampant.

“As people are pressured to perform, they feel that they don’t have the time to help others; reasonable requests for help are seen as burdens that put them behind in their own work. So people are faced with a trade-off—to do their own work (but not help others), or to help others (but get less work done).”

The current economic crisis has forced many schools and districts into layoffs and reductions of support staff, district staff, etc, but the work still needs to be completed. The pressure to keep up and complete just one’s job responsibilities is increased when those you work with and depend on are laid off or transferred.

Time saving measures need to be pursued vigorously. Further, instruction time and collaboration time need to guarded jealously. It will take creative thinking and innovative solutions, but time famine must be defeated to increase collaboration time.

4. Fear of Losing Power
If knowledge is power, then the one with the knowledge has the power. And those with power are often loath to give it up.

“…why share that knowledge with others and thereby make oneself less powerful and ultimately redundant? If people fear they will become less powerful and less valuable to the organization by spreading their wisdom, they will be inclined to hoard it.”

Professional Learning Communities and Professional Networked Learning Collaboratives must overcome the collaboration barrier of the fear of losing power by ensuring that all members are empowered through access to data, information, knowledge, expertise, and wisdom. Empowered teams do not fear losing power, but rather feel empowered when their share their knowledge. Sharing is empowering, hoarding is disempowering. When PLCs or PNLCs share, they overcome the fear disempowerment. They empower collaboration and reap its rewards.


Professional Learning Communities and Professional Networked Learning Collaborative must overcome the “hoarding” barrier and create a culture of sharing. Sharers know that their fellow teachers, their fellow principals, and their fellow schools should benefit, can benefit, and will benefit from their knowledge, ideas, creativity, and information. Sharers get a “reward” out of helping others benefit from what they know. Sharers attempt to overcome silos by sharing with others so that the entire school or school district can benefit.

Also see:

Part 1: Overcoming the "Not-Invented-Here" Barrier In Professional Learning Communities

Overcoming the "Not-Invented-Here" Barrier in Professional Learning Communities

This is the first in a series of four posts about barriers to collaboration in Professional Leaning Communities.

Professional Learning Communities and Professional Networked Learning Collaboratives must confront and overcome for typical barriers to collaboration. According to Berkley and INSEAD professor Morten T. Hansen, author of Collaboration: How Leaders Avoid The Traps, Create Unity, and Reap Big Results, these four barriers to collaboration are common in most organizations. Schools then, would be no different.

The Not-Invented-Here Barrier

“…the not-invented-here barrier, which arises when people are not willing to reach beyond their own units to input and collaborate.”

PLCs and PNLCs need to develop a collaborative culture that is open to ideas from outside of their teams, schools, districts, etc. Typically, the not-invented-here barrier will manifest itself in 4 typical ways.

1. Insular Culture
“People who work together can develop an insular culture. As they spend time with each other to the exclusion of outsiders, they restrict the influx of new viewpoints and reinforce their own beliefs.”

Schools are especially susceptible to this problem. Typically grade level members or subject level members spend a great deal of time together in PLCs. But they also eat lunch together, talk to each other before and after school. There is not the same level of interaction with the rest of the staff and almost zero interaction with teachers from other schools in the district, and near non-existent interaction with teachers from other districts. This creates a very insular culture. Professional Learning Communities should understand this problem and seek proactive ways to break out of these “silos.”

The reason I strongly advocate the Professional Networked Learning Collaborative is because it is built on the premises that information, expertise, knowledge, data, research, superior methods and practices, can be found outside of the typical PLC. The PNLC is designed to network and reach out of the typical PLC “silo” and connect with “useful outsiders” all around the school, district, state, or globe.

It is human nature that the, “…more close-knit a group becomes, the more the members turn inward and close themselves off from the world.”

An insular culture is lacking in cognitive diversity and perspective. PLCs must look for ways such as the PNLC or others, to free themselves from the problem of an insular culture to view ideas from out as a resource to be leveraged. “Not-invented-here” could actually become a reason to embrace a new idea, instead of a reason to ignore a new idea.

2. Status Gap
“If individuals think that they might have higher status than others, they will not reach out to collaborate with those ‘less worthy’ human beings.”

Fortunately, most educators at a school enjoy equal status, with the exception of those that are viewed as unprofessional, lazy, or inept by their peers, and those whom administrators tend to favor.

Occasionally I have discovered that within Professional Learning Communities members begin to feel like their ideas do not have merit. These people tend to feel like they are a lower status than the rest of the group. Consequently, the problem of “Information Cascades” can develop. These members do not feel comfortable to share with the group because of their perceived “lower status.”

Professional Learning Communities must ensure that all members enjoy equal status in the team.

3. Self-Reliance
“When a norm takes hold that says, ‘You should fix your own problem,’ people tend to resist reaching out for input.”

This is absolutely contrary to the purpose of the PLC and the PNLC. The purpose is to help each other solve problems and work together to better student learning. If the students belong to everybody, then so do the problems.

Professional Learning Communities must recognize that many have a deep-seated belief that they need to stay quiet about their problems and struggles so as not to burden others. These beliefs must be rooted out, exposed, and dealt with. No team member can be allowed to believe they must go it own their own because they would be a burden.

Further, the belief that “I know it all and don’t need others help,” is equally damaging. This belief must be confronted and dealt with if the PLC or PNLC is to have a truly collaborative culture.

4. Fear of Revealing Shortcomings
“Reaching out to someone and saying, ‘We’re not doing well in this area and need help,’ can be interpreted by others as failure: ‘These guys are not very good.’ People sometimes fear exposing their weaknesses to others, especially to experts. By asking for input, people expose their vulnerability, allowing others to stand in judgment.”

Judgment, failure, and weakness are very emotional terms. Most educators I know are very capable and very committed, but never the less, at some point, we all need help and we all have something to learn. A strong culture of collaboration does not judge, does not interpret calls for help as signs of failure. To the contrary, strong PLCs and PNLCs need members who are willing to ask for help and feel comfortable doing so because a safe emotional environment has been created in the team.

No one wants to reveal shortcomings, but that is small price to pay if students will benefit in the long run. All educators need to realize that by opening up and confronting their shortcoming, they can strengthen themselves as professionals by learning from our peers and in the case of PNLCs, those in our extended Personal Learning Networks.

While we give many assessments through the year to become very familiar with the shortcomings and needs of our students and make efforts to help them overcome them, we as educators are judged on the results of but a few high stakes tests. Can we afford to wait to overcome our shortcoming until after the fact?


Professional Learning Communities must develop a collaborative culture that overcomes insular cultures and silos, is status neutral, overcomes the tendencies of self-reliance, and eliminates fear and judgment. PLC and PNLC that have done that will be able to overcome the not-invented-here barrier to collaboration.

Curriculum and Literacy in the Digital World

Author David Weinberger, in his book Everything Is Miscellaneous, asks, “Suppose that now, for the first time in history, we are able to arrange our concepts without the silent limitations of the physical. How might our ideas, organization, and knowledge itself change? "

In my previous post, Successful Student Thinking In The Digital Age I described how I believed successful student thinking in the digital age is "lateral" and "miscellaneous."

I wondered what are the implications for curriculum and literacy in the digital world if we are not limited to the, "silent limitations of the physical."

Some characteristics of the digital world are…

“…in the digital world everything is only a few clicks away.”
Or as Tom Peters would say, “Distance is dead.”  Students can use the web to instantly reach out to any part of the planet to talk with people, or find information on anything that interests them, or collaborate on projects. They can work with the person at the desk next to them or a student on the other side of the globe. Information, once warehoused in libraries, is now a few clicks away. Student collaboration is a digital world is very scalable. Student groups can grow from the classroom room to the globe.

“Instead of being the same way for all people, it can instantly rearrange itself for each person and each person’s current task.”
It is not possible to differentiate instruction and learning to the level that is possible when a student does it for their particular individualized needs. The web makes it possible to match a student with his or her interest and ability far easier than one teacher alone could. Each click brings the student just what they need in the way they need it. Learning that is truly customized and differentiated on demand. The digital world will bend to your needs when you want it, where you want it, and how you want it. That is the future of learning.

“Instead of being limited by space and operational simplicity in the number of items it can stock, the digital world can include every item and variation…”
The digital world will provide a near infinite number of resources and combinations of resources that the physical realm of the school or classroom cannot provide. These digital resources can do what no classroom resources can do. They can remain current, right up to the minute. They can be interactive and participatory. They can be easily edited, modified, and shared. They take up no space. They can be replaced with something better or different with a click. What textbook can do that?

“…they (items) can be classified in every different category in which users might conceivably expect to find them.”
Infinite subjects unbounded by budget, space, and availability, combined in infinite ways. Unmatched variety. Best of all, the digital world avails itself to being searched unlike the physical world. In the physical world you have to know exactly what you are looking for. In the digital world you search or stumble across what you are looking for because there are so many ways to find it. For example a student working in social studies can use the index of his or her book or look a shelf of books in the library. But, the same student can search the digital way using tags that come to his or her mind. Students can search by Egypt, ancient history, pharaohs, the Nile, ancient Africa, the pyramids, etc.

“Instead of living in the neat, ordered shelves…items can be jumbled digitally and sorted out only when and how a user wants to look for them.”
The digital world allows a student access to virtually unlimited amounts of resources that can be discovered any way the student chooses to think about the subject. Going back to the social studies example, a student can search for pyramids when thinking about ancient Egypt, but the same student can search pyramids when thinking about architecture, or geometric shapes. It is all how the student chooses to approach the subject and the digital world allows them to access resources though multiple routes.

Curriculum and literacy in the digital age will be personalized, customizable, discoverable, remixable, combinable, interactive, participatory, and scalable.

Successful Student Thinking In The Digital Age

In his fantastic book Everything Is Miscellaneous, David Weinberger takes the reader through a tour of the digital order that is changing how we approach knowledge and information. This new digital order, built on bits, not atoms, allows students to think about information and knowledge in different ways. In a way, it is very similar to what Edward de Bono spoke of in his book Lateral Thinking, which was first published 37 years ago, in 1970.

Edward de Bono compared vertical thinking with lateral thinking.

“Vertical thinking is analytical, lateral thinking is provocative.”
The physical world requires that we spend a great deal of time developing a very structured set of codes, rules, and organization so information can be found. The digital world make it possible to organize information any way that makes sense to us. We are not limited to the space on a card catalog or a label. We can put as much information into a digital bit of information as we can imagine.

“With vertical thinking one has to be correct at every step, with lateral thinking one does not have to be.” Make a mistake in the card catalog or reading a label and you are not going to be successful in your search. But, as we know, there are multiple ways to search for something in search engines. Make a mistake, and you simply change your approach. You are never out of the game in the digital world because other people like you may have thought about your subject in the very same way. Our students need to learn that there are multiple approaches to a problem or an issue.

“Vertical thinking is sequential, lateral thinking can make jumps.” The physical world of information is very sequential because of the limits of physical space. The digital world allows us to jump around to look at subjects loosely related to the information one is seeking or to quickly jump to tried and true resources or new resources that have never been viewed before. It just takes a click.

“With vertical thinking one uses the negative in order to block of certainty. With lateral thinking there is no negative.” The physical world of atoms allows very few ways to organize information, while the digital world allows virtually unlimited ways to organize it.

“With vertical thinking one concentrates and excludes what is irrelevant, with lateral thinking one welcomes chance intrusions” The digital world welcomes more information, even it seems irrelevant to most. It may be very relevant to a few. Therefore as Weinberger says, “… solution to the overabundance of information is more information.”

“With vertical thinking categories, classifications and labels are fixed, with lateral thinking they are not.” For example, a type of dog, say a Rhodesian Ridgeback can be classified only so many ways in the physical world or card catalogs, charts, and shelves. Usually, following biology terms such as vertebrate, mammal, etc. Space limits what you can do. But without the limits of space, such as in the digital world, the same dog could be tagged as things with four legs, things that chase cars, things that eat dog food, things that have a tail, things that have paws, or things that bark. The choices are almost limitless. It all depends on how one chooses think about the subject, which allows one to be very creative in their approach.

“Vertical thinking follows the most likely path, lateral thinking explores the least likely.”
Anyone who has spent anytime on the web can tell you they reached some cool website or found a great book, but they have no idea how they got there. Click after click after click we follow our thinking down “the rabbit hole” and discover what we might be looking for in very odd ways. This isn’t true for a library. It will be very predictable. It will be the “most likely path.”

“Vertical thinking is a finite process, lateral thinking is a probablistic one.” I want to find a book, I look on the shelf and there it is. In the digital world though, I find the book I am looking for and 5 others that are related to the first. I then investigate one of those and discover pictures, video, and music all because someone else thinks it relates. As I continue probing I gain even more information and resources which to use.

Quite possibly, Edward de Bono wrote 37 years ago about the type of thinking that would actually allow us to be even more effective in the digital world of bits described so wonderfully by David Weinberger.

Successful student thinking in the digital age is "lateral" and "miscellaneous."

2 Ways Professional Learning Communities Can "Think Better"

I spend a lot of time working with Professional Learning Communities. I am always striving to ask catalytic questions that will help PLCs creatively approach the instructional issues they face with their students.

Two of the most powerful questions I use with PLCs are…
“What’s up?”
 “In what ways might we…?”

U.P. and I.W.W.M.W.

For example, I was working with a first grade PLC when one of the teachers mentioned that she has a parent volunteer work with students one-on-one to practice their addition and subtraction facts. The rest of the team pointed out that won’t work in their classroom because they have no parent volunteers.

When struggling with an issue or question, it is often important to get to the underlying assumption. Tim Hurson, author of Think Better, calls this “What’s U.P.?” What is the underlying principle? I pointed out to the PLC that in this case the underlying principle with having a parent volunteer was not access or lack of access to a parent volunteer, but the concept or idea of one-on-one practice with addition or subtraction facts. In other words, “What’s U.P?” with parent volunteers is students getting one-on-one practice.

So I asked, “In what ways might we create opportunities for students to have one-on-one practice with addition or subtraction facts without parent volunteers? In what ways could we automate the process so that parent volunteers where not necessary?

One teacher quickly pointed out that she could have student work together as partners with flash cards. Another said students could use the computer center and an addition or subtraction program. The teacher with the parent volunteer said she would ask if the parent could visit other classrooms on different days. Other ideas were offered up as well. 

The bottom line is that the PLC moved from a problem that seemed to be insolvable to coming up with and sharing ideas by first identifying the underlying problem, asking themselves, “What’s Up?” After discovering the underlying principle, they then asked themselves, “In what ways might we…?”

Great questions lead to great results.

Catalytic Questions:

1. In what ways might you help your PLC to be more creative in their thinking?

2. When was the last time you asked your PLC to try a new thinking or creativity technique?

3. In what ways might you “sell” the idea of trying new thinking or question generating techniques?

4. How might the PLC change if one day you only allowed them to ask question. No statements, just questions?

5. If your PLC fail to ask enough questions of each other, in what ways could you ensure that they do? Tally number of questions asked? Mandate a certain number of questions?
What might it look like when you ensure questions get asked?

6. How might your PLC respond if you instructed them not to ask any questions? How would they feel about the need for questions if they were not allowed to ask any?

7. What patterns typically arise in your PLCs that prevent or discourage questions being asked? How can you anticipate and prevent these patterns from developing?

8. How would your PLC processes or protocols benefit from a fresh look at them?

The Anthropologist- Observing Your Professional Learning Communities

As educators, we are always learning and always observing. When it comes to improving your school’s Professional Learning Communities, one approach that will give you fresh insight into how your PLCs behave and provide you with information about how to drive improvement or fix problems is to play the role of the anthropologist.

The Anthropologist is one of the three learning personas from the Tom Kelley's The Ten Faces Of Innovation. In order to gain knowledge and information about how your PLCs behave it is important to gather information and data from which to work from. To accomplish these goals the anthropologist generally displays or implements the following 6 characteristics in PLC meetings.

1. Anthropologists practice the Zen principle of “beginner’s mind.”
The anthropologist is, “unusually willing to set aside what they ‘know,’ looking past tradition and even their own preconceived notions. They have the wisdom to observe with a truly open mind.”

You know what you expect to see in a PLC. But what if you can set aside these assumptions and simply view what is happening as if you were a beginner. What kinds of questions would you ask yourself?
What are they meeting for?
Why now? Why here?
What are they talking about? What type of language are they using?
Why is no one asking questions?
Who is doing all the talking? Who isn’t talking?
Who is sitting next to whom?
Who arrive late? Who arrive early?

If you imagined that you did not know what you know about PLCs, what might you ask yourself? How might that drive improvement? It takes an open mind. I have found that you need to practice the art of un-listening, that is listening to what is being said without getting your mind involved in the issues they are discussing. You might be surprised with the knowledge and data you discover.

2. Anthropologists embrace human behavior with all its surprises
“They don’t judge, they observe. They empathize. Lifelong students of human behavior develop a genuine love of watching and talking to people…”

When playing the anthropologist in your PLCs it is important to empathize. Get a feel for how the teachers see things from their perspective. What issues are they struggling with? What sorts of emotions are coming to the fore? It not about solving it so they can move on, it’s about understanding the issues, emotions, problems, etc., that teachers are dealing with in the PLC from their perspective. Once you understand it from their vantage point, then you will be in a better place to help them solve the issues and problems they face. By playing the role of the anthropologist, the solutions maybe different than if you had just tried to solve them without the knowledge and data you gathered during your observations.

3. Anthropologists draw inferences by listening to their intuition.
“Anthropologists are not afraid to draw on their own instincts when developing hypotheses about the emotional underpinnings of observed human behavior.”

You know all the theories. You know what people in the PLCs are telling you. But your intuition is a valuable tool in analyzing your observations. If you have watched your PLC with a “beginners mind” and without judgment, your intuition might be telling you something about what you saw and heard. Don’t be afraid to act on it.

4. Anthropologists seek out epiphanies through a sense of “Vuja De.”
“Everyone knows the feeling of déjà vu, a strong sense that you have seen or experiences something before, even if you never really have. Vuja De is the opposite—a sense of seeing something for the first time, even if you have actually witnessed it many times before.” “Anthropologists have the ability to ‘see’ what’s always been there but has gone unnoticed—what others have failed to see or comprehend because they stopped looking too soon.”

You have been in PLC meetings before, but seeing things with fresh eyes, with a sense of “Vuja De” is a powerful way to gather knowledge and data about what is happening in the PLCs.

I have watched for things such as:
Facial expressions.
Who speaks first?
Who asks questions? How many questions are asked?
Do they challenge each other? Do they defend each other?
What types of material do they bring to PLCs?
How do they arrive at decisions?
Who takes notes? Do they rotate roles?
Do they always meet in the same place?
Do they always sit in the same seats?
How do they begin meetings? How do they end meetings?

You might be surprised what type of insights can be gained from seeing what has always been there, but seeing it with fresh eyes.

5. Anthropologists keep “bug lists” or “idea wallets.”
"Anthropologists work like novelists or stand-up comics. They consider their everyday experiences to be good potential material, and write down bits and pieces that surprise them, especially things that seem broken. A bug list focuses on the negative—the things that bug you—while idea wallets contain both innovative concepts worth emulating and problems that need solving.”

There are all sorts of ways to track what you are seeing when you are in PLCs. I usually have my email open and type notes as drafts that I can latter use to create formal emails back to teams. I also use NoteTaker and Evernote to help me collect my ideas and thoughts about what is bugging me and ideas or questions that come to mind.

6. Anthropologists are willing to search for clues in the trash bin.
“The anthropologist looks for insights where they are least expected…even in the garbage, if that’s where learning is to be found. They look beyond the obvious, and seek inspiration in unusual places.”

Often one of the best places to look at to find knowledge or data on your PLCs is not in the PLC but back in the classrooms, in the lounge, or the parking lot. Look for evidence that what is being planned or discussed in the PLC is actually taking place in the classroom. Ask teachers how things are going when you run into them in the lounge or in the parking lot. Look at the notes they take. And, as always, examine student achievement data. Be it hard data or anecdotal notes; keep your eyes peeled for knowledge and data on your PLC outside of the meeting.

Playing the persona of the Anthropologist is a powerful way to “see” and gather knowledge about the behaviors, effective or ineffective, that are occurring in your school’s Professional Learning Communities.

Essential Education: A Whole New Mind

To complete your Essential Education take a few minutes to watch friend Steve Cunnigham's great video summary of the book A Whole New Mind by Daniel Pink

New Global Students Will Have The F.A.C.T.S

Maya Frost’s book The New Global Student has been such an interesting and inspiring read. Maya uses the mnemonic FACTS to describe the 5 key qualities that “…will guarantee students will be successful in whatever they choose to do in the wild and wooly world of global work. In addition to being able to read, write, speak, calculate, and analyze proficiently, bold future leaders share the following characteristics.”

F Is For Flexible

• They adapt quickly to their surrounding and make new friends easily wherever they go.
• They speak more than one language fluently.”
• They are free—and eager—to travel or live abroad and are not hampered by massive college debt, a  lack of confidence, or insistence upon a particular lifestyle.
• They think independently and are no attached to a certain “right way” of doing things.

A Is For Aware

• They read and can discuss—intelligently—a wide variety of subjects ranging from economics to e-learning.
• They’ve lived abroad, see their own culture with greater clarity, and can represent their country in a respectful way.
• They’ve seen firsthand the inequities of the world and show compassion and respect for those who are struggling.
• They understand the need to focus on sustainable ways of living, and they incorporate environmental awareness in everything they do.

C Is For Curious

• They have a natural interest in a variety of topics and enjoy learning on their own.
• They know how to ask question in order to gain knowledge and create stronger connections with others.
• They don’t wait for opportunities to appear—they are actively engaged in research in order to discover their best options for learning, travel, and work.
• They know how to use a variety of tools to both create and distribute information, and they continue to learn as new systems and gadgets are developed.

T Is For Trustworthy

• They know that in a global economy there are thousands of people who are willing and able to complete any given task, and they recognize the increased importance of being dependable in order to gain trust and greater opportunities.
• They know how to collaborate with others and can create a sense of community without the benefits of face-to-face meetings.
• They hone their professional writing and speaking skills and can convince other of their integrity and commitment remotely.
• They complete their work on time and to the best of their ability, and they stand by their work without making excuses.

S Is For Self-Directed

• They are extremely good at establishing and moving toward their goals.
• Their work ethic and motivation are internalized—they don’t count on competition from their colleagues in the next cubicle or sit-down sessions with the management to light a fire under their seats.
• They can focus on the tasks at hand whether they are in a work environment that is solitary and silent, social and distracting, or chaotic and stressful.
• They have abiding passion for what they are doing, tremendous energy and enthusiasm, and a clear desire to improve their skills while doing their best work.

Maya explains that students, if allowed to step out into the world with some “reasonable concern” from their parents, and parents not letting their fear and ego, AKA “fergo” get in the way, will develop FACTS naturally.

From an educator’s perspective, I wonder if I, or my fellow educators are capable of producing global students who have the FACTS?

Are we helping to create or hindering the development of flexible, aware, curious, trustworthy, and self-directed students?

Thanks to Maya for showing us the power of global students having the FACTS.

Also See:
The Global Student - Old School vs. Bold School