Education Innovation

Essential Education: “Awesomely Simple” by John Spence

Essential Education: Lawrence Lessig on Institutional Corruption

Be More Than A School Administrator...Be An Innovation Coach

I have an idea…

"It will never work."
"We don’t have the budget to do it."
"It will take to much time and we just don’t have any to waste."
"The district won’t like it."
"Teachers won’t want to do that."
"That isn’t the way we do things at this school."
"What does that have to do with test scores?"

These are just a sample of the typical answers we in education hear when we have an idea. Don’t scoff to easily, think about it a second. After a few perfunctory, “That’s great” or “Sounds interesting” we generally work our way to some of those responses.

What we need is some principals, directors, managers, and superintendents who encourage and support innovation. If change or improvement is what we seek, then changing what we do or how we do it should be encouraged not discouraged.

Mitch Ditkoff writes at The Heart Innovation, the weblog of Idea Champions, that we need managers who are Innovation Coaches. We need managers and leaders who can encourage and develop ideas.

“Most managers, unfortunately, perceive new ideas as problems -- especially if the ideas are not their own. Bottom line, they don't pay enough attention to the ideas of the people around them. They say they want to innovate. They say they want "their people" to do something different. But they do precious little to support their subordinates in their efforts to do so. They foist their ideas on others and can't figure out why things aren't happening faster.

“That's not how change happens. If people are only acting out somebody else's ideas, it's only a matter of time before they feel discounted, disempowered and... well...just plain dissed. People are more than hired hands; they are hired minds and hearts, as well.”

Coaches empower others to reach within themselves and pull out their best, their best ideas and innovations. We need managers who will coach their people to pull out their best ideas and support them in the endeavor of finding, creating, and developing these ideas into innovative practices that impact their schools and their students. We need school administrators who can become Innovation Coaches.

“If you want to empower people, honor their ideas. Give them room to challenge the status quo. Give them room to move -- and, by extension, move mountains. Why? Because people identify most with their ideas. "I think therefore, I am" is their motto. People feel good when they're encouraged to originate and develop ideas. It gives their work meaning, makes it their own, and intrinsically motivates.

“Who has the power in an organization? The people who are allowed to think for themselves and then act on their ideas! Who doesn't have power? The people who have to continually check-in with others.

“Think about it. The arrival of a new idea is typically accompanied by a wonderful feeling of upliftment and excitement -- even intoxication. It's inspiring to have a new idea, to intuit a new way of getting the job done. Not only does this new idea have the potential to bring value to the company, it temporarily frees the idea originator from their normal habits of thinking. A sixth sense takes over, releasing the individual from the gravity of status quo thinking.”

Nothing is more powerful and unstoppable than empowered and excited teachers. Those are the teachers who can change the world. So we need to be open to and encourage our teachers to bring ideas to us.

“You, as a manager, want to increase the number of new ideas being pitched to you. It's that simple. You want to create an environment where new ideas are popping all the time. If you do, old problems and ineffective ways of doing things will begin dissolving. This is the hallmark of an empowered organization -- a place where everyone is encouraged and empowered to think creatively. Within this kind of environment managers become coaches, not gatekeepers.”

Innovation and change doesn’t happen because you have some catchy vision statement printed on a poster and posted in all the classrooms. That is leadership through lamination. What is needed is leadership through co-creation and co-innovation.

“Creativity cannot be legislated. It cannot be sustained by mission statements and pep talks. What needs to happen is you, as a manager, need to change the way you relate to people. Each encounter you have with another in the workplace needs to quicken the likelihood that their unexpressed ideas will get a fair hearing -- enabling a far greater percentage of them to eventually take root.”

So the next time one of your people comes to you with an idea, be a Innovation Coach and help them develop the idea into something truly innovative.

Mitch suggests…
* "That sounds interesting. Can you tell me more?"
* "What excites you the most about this idea?"
* "What is the essence of your idea - the core principle?"
* "How do you imagine your idea will benefit others?"
* "In what ways does your idea fit with our strategic vision?"
* "What information do you still need?"
* "Who are your likely collaborators?"
* "Is there anything similar to your idea on the market?
* "What support do you need from me?"
* "What is your next step?"

What Would Peter Drucker Say About Education Leadership?

What follows is a quote from Peter Drucker, but with an Education Innovation twist. I have removed words like business, company, executive, and economics; and replaced them with school(s), education, and principal.

“Schools prefer not to abandon the old, the obsolescent, the no-longer-productive; they’d rather hang on to it and keep on pouring money into it. Worse still, they then assign their most capable people ‘defending’ the outworn in a massive misallocation of the scarcest and most valuable resource—the human resource that needs to be allocated to making tomorrow, if the school is to have a tomorrow.”

“Tomorrow always arrives…It is always different. And then even the mightiest school is in trouble if it has not worked on the future. It will have lost distinction and leadership—all that will remain is big-education overhead…Not having dared to take of making the new happen, it perforce took the much greater risk of being surprised by what did happen…And this is a risk that even the largest and richest school cannot afford and that even the smallest school need not run.”

“The principal has to accept responsibility for making the future happen…It is the willingness to tackle purposefully this, the last of the educational tasks in education that distinguishes the great schools from the merely competent one, and education builder from school principal’s office occupant.”

Literacy Challenges of The Social Technographic Ladder

The ladder. Charlene Li and Josh Bernofff have written a great book titled Groundswell: winning in a world transformed by social technologies. In their book they describe The Social Technographics ladder.

“Each step on the ladder represents a group of consumers more involved in the groundswell than the previous steps. To join the group on a step, a consumer need only participate in one of the listed activities at least monthly.”

I believe that each rung of the Social Technographic ladder presents a unique literacy challenge for our students.

As an educator you know the standards, the curriculum, and the methods to bring about literacy. If technology is not part of that you are missing a major component of what our students will need in the coming years. Our students need to be able to climb the "ladder" and it is your job to make sure they get those opportunities.

Top Rung: Creators
These are the people who, at least once a month, publish a blog, put an article online, maintain a website, or upload music or videos. In the United States, about 18% of us on are the top rung or creators.

The percentage is only going to go up. So, what are you doing to prepare your students to be creators? How are you preparing your students to occupy the “top rung” of the Social Technographics ladder?

If you think about it, this is a question of literacy. For example, here are the writing standards for 6th grade in California: 

Narrative
^{write narratives, that(1) establish and develop plot and setting, and choose a point of view that is appropriate to stories
(2) include sensory details and concrete language to develop plot and character
(3) use a range of narrative strategies (e.g., dialogue, suspense)
Expository
Write expository compositions (e.g., description, explanation, comparison and contrast, and/or problem/solution) that
(1) state the thesis or purpose
(2) explain the situation
(3) follow an organizational pattern appropriate to the type of composition (e.g., if problem/solution, then paired)
(4) offer persuasive evidence for the validity of the description, proposed solutions, etc.
Research Reports
Write research reports that
(1) pose relevant questions narrow enough to be thoroughly covered
(2) support the main idea(s) with facts, details, examples, and explanations from multiple authoritative sources (e.g., speakers, periodicals, on-line information searches)
(3) use a bibliography
Persuasive
2.5. write persuasive compositions (or letters for grade 5) that
(1) state a clear position in support of a proposition or proposal
(2) support the position with organized and relevant evidence; and (3) anticipate and address reader concerns and counter-arguments}

The standards seem to say that we want students to be creators. The question I have is; are we preparing our students to occupy the top rung in the groundswell. Remember, the groundswell is: “A social trend in which people use technologies to get the things they need from each other, rather than from traditional institutions like corporations.”

In other words, the groundswell is what is taking place in this new ecosystem called the web where any person, in any place, can be a producer of media. Or, as Clay Shirky says, every person is a one-man media outlet.

So why only 18% participation?  Obviously this is an optional activity. Nobody has to be a creator. In our classrooms we require that our students be creators. We want all of our students on the top rung. We ask that our students create stories, research reports, projects, and narratives. We are teaching the next generation to succeed in this new online ecosystem. The standards seem to suggest we have the right intentions, but do those standards prepare our students for life in the groundswell? I think it depends on the teacher. The greater the teacher's understanding of the power of the groundswell in the online ecosystem, the better the assignments will utilize technology as part of learning and mastering the standards.

The next rung down: Critics
Critics react to what has been created. This is similar to the responding to literature standard.
_{Response to Literature
Write responses to literature that
(1) develop an interpretation which exhibits careful reading, understanding and insight
(2) organize the interpretation around several clear ideas, premises, or images
(3) develop and justify the interpretation through sustained use of examples and textual evidence}

Again, the question becomes, are we properly preparing our students for being a critic in the groundswell?

When I was a student, I was never allowed to comment on what other students wrote. Even in college, my job was to create. The only opportunities I had to be a critic was in writing a book report. Most of us are simply not used to commenting on blogs. We were not trained to do it as students and we had so few opportunities in our academic lives to practice it. But, our students are growing up in the online ecosystem that allows them to comment and critique nearly everything. They can comment on a song, a picture, a video, place a comment on a blog, put a book review on Amazon, or review a product on CNET.

Their world is the world of the critic. Are we as educators equipping them to succeed in this world?  Are we preparing them for life on the second rung? What opportunities do your students have to critique what others have created?

The next rung down: Collectors
Collector collect RSS feeds, save website to Del.icio.us, vote for sites on Digg, and accumulate all forms of created digital media from the online world.

So, what standards address that? How are we preparing our students to be effective collectors of information? What opportunities do our students get to practice the art of selective information collection? How do our students learn to filter information for their select needs? How are we preparing our students to be literate collectors?

The next rung down: Joiners
Members of Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, Orcut, etc. are all joiners. These are the people who maintain profiles on social networking sites. My guess is that most of our students are far ahead of most of their teachers in this aspect. But, how can we teach our students the skills necessary to properly maintain these sites for optimal effect and leverage their power to further themselves via networking?

Our students are natural collaborators and net-workers, but how are we making them literate in the power of networks?

The next rung down: Spectators
Spectators consume what the rest produce. This is the largest part of the groundswell. This is about making choices. What they choose to consume can enhance our students’ education.  So, our students need to make choices that will enhance them as people, as students, as informed citizens, etc. Of course kids will always choose the strange and offbeat, but we can equip them to understand what sorts of media are important for them to consume. What opportunities are your students getting to be selective literate spectators?

The bottom rung: Inactives
These are the people who are not impacted by the groundswell at all. For our students, it might those students who have no access to technology and the web. I still meet students and parents who have no web access. If the school isn’t providing it, and they have no access at home, when are these students given chances to move from inactive to spectator, to joiner, to collector, to critic, or to creator?  We need to think about how we can provide opportunities and resources for them to climb the Social Technographic ladder. It is a literacy issue for life in the 21st century.

Catalytic Questions

In what way is your leadership preparing your school and your students for the literacy of technology?

Is your personal leadership and catalyst or hurdle in the implementation of technologies that will provide opportunities for technology literacy?

In what ways do our current literacy standards meet or fall short of the issues and challenges faced by our students at each rung of the Social Technographic ladder?

In what way can we better prepare our students to be literate creators of information?

How might this look in a classroom?

In what ways can we provide opportunities for our students to be literate critics of created information?

In what ways can we prepare our students to be literate collectors of information?

What might this look like in the classroom?

How might we prepare our students to leverage the power of networks?

In what ways could we prepare our students to make literate choices about the networks they join and the information they place on those networks?

In what was are we preparing our students to be literate spectators of information?

How might we better equip our students to make excellent choices in the information they consume each day?

In what ways can we provide resources or tools to move the non-participating Inactive up the Social Technographic ladder? 

Six Steps To Becoming A Professional Learning Community Coach

I have advised those concerned with the performance of Professional Learning Communities to gain fresh insight into how PLCs behave and 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. See the full post here (The Anthropologist- Observing Your Professional Learning Communities)

According to Kelley, the Anthropologist practices 6 principles
1. Anthropologists practice the Zen principle of “beginner’s mind”
2. Anthropologists embrace human behavior with all its surprises
3. Anthropologists draw inferences by listening to their intuition
4. Anthropologists seek out epiphanies through a sense of “Vuja De”
5. Anthropologists keep “bug lists” or “idea wallets”
6. Anthropologists are willing to search for clues in the trash bin

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. But once you have knowledge to act on, it is time to become a coach.

Steve Roesler, Principal & Founder of The Steve Roesler Group, on his All Things Workplace blog offers great advice on what one can do to become a coach. I have excerpted the entire post because it is excellent advice for coaching Professional Learning Communities.

Do These And You'll Be Coaching

Six Steps to Coaching

1. Stop fixing everyone's stuff.

OK, the next time someone brings you a problem, stop. Do nothing. Then. . .

2. Ask them for more information using open-ended questions.

You already know how to ask questions. (And you may already know the answer to the question. But no one will learn much if they don't learn to think through issues on their own). The trick for "coaching managers" is to click a mental switch that triggers a question instead of an answer. An easy way to develop the questioning habit is to think of yourself as a journalist and start your responses with:

    * Who. . .?

    * What. . .?

    * When. . .?

    * Where. . .?

    * How. . .?

3. Use the bonus question that will automatically buy some time and gather more information: "Tell me more about that?"

4. Listen. (That means "Shut up, don't speak.")

You'll be surprised at how much you'll learn by listening. Once the other person stops talking, give them space to say more. Count silently to 10 if you have to. You'll discover that this block of information will reveal more than the first and often gives them the self-revealing "Aha!" needed. In which case, you'll be a hero.

5. Ask More.

OK, so they didn't get to the heart of the matter in #4. When your person's responses and energy start to fade, that's your cue to ask another open-ended question. Ask it about something they've just told you. Ask anything that will help continue the exploration of the issue. You can't really ask a "wrong" question.

Note. The reason you can't ask a wrong question is this: Your role is to alternate between helping them explore (questions) and being silent (just listen). The act of listening after a question is a gift that few people get. Listening shows respect. When it comes from "the boss" it's an indication of trust in one's ability to problem-solve.

6. Support giving "it" a try. You'll find that the Q&A process will have generated ideas and actions in your person's mind. This is where you help them stretch by suggesting, "Do you want to give that a try and let me know how it's going?"

The “Anthropologist” and the “Coach” are two effective personas and mindsets that can help you make your Professional Learning Communities more effective. David Kelley and Steve Roesler both provide great insight into how we can all make our Professional Learning Communities powerful sources of learning and increasing student achievement.

"Probably my best quality as a coach is that I ask a lot of challenging questions and let the person come up with the answer." Phil Dixon

How Important Is It For Educators To Have "Vital Friends" At School?

Tom Rath, author of the great book Vital Friends, conducted a massive study on the power and impact of friendships, especially friends in the workplace.
Tom asks a series of interesting questions…

"Educating oneself is the foundation of our learning systems, and it’s obviously a worthwhile pursuit. But is there any chance it’s time to add the next element? Have you ever taken a course in friendship? Could a second-grade student, a high school student, a college freshman, your boss, or even you benefit from time dedicated to this pursuit. If we have already spent significant time on self-development, is it possible that most of the magic- our room for rapid personal and professional growth- lies in developing our friendships?” 

Rath defines Vital Friends as

“Someone who measurably improves your life.” and “ A person at work or in your personal life whom you can’t afford to live without.”

Imagine a staff development training session dedicated to helping you make better friends with the people you work with. Imagine a staff development session that focuses on helping you a few of your colleagues develop deep meaningful friendships. Is it important?  You bet! 

I think back to the tragic suicide of an teacher colleague with whom I worked for several years, who felt that life had no meaning because of a lack of true deep friend relationships. They didn't want to go on living without friends. Could it have been prevented with just one vital friend at work?

Some of the findings in Vital Friends include…

• During our teenage years, we spend nearly one-third of our time with friends. For the rest of our lives, the average time spent with friends is less that 10%
• If your best friend has a healthy diet, you are five times as likely to have a very healthy diet yourself.
• 83% of people bring different strengths to the relationship that their best friend does.
• Only 18% of people work for organizations that provide opportunities to develop friendships on th job.
• Without a best friend at work, the chances of being engaged in your job are 1 in 12.
• People with at least three close friends at work were 96% more likely to be extremely satisfied with their life.
• Only 20% of employees dedicate time to developing friendships on the job.
• Fewer than 1 in 5 consider their boss to be a close friend.
• Employees who have a close friendship with their manager are more that 2.5 times as likely to be satisfied with their job.
• 17% of employees report that their manager has made “an investment in our relationship” in the past three months.
• When managers discuss friendships with employees on a regular basis, it nearly triples the chances of employees having a “best friend at work.”

The evidence is from the research conducted by Tom Rath is clear. We are better when we work with people we can call friend.

Principals, how would this knowledge impact your grade level placement of teachers?

Would this change the kinds of things you talk about with your teachers in goal setting or evaluation meetings? 

What kinds of things could you do to help teachers develop relationships with each other and what could you do to improve your relationships with them as individuals?

Teachers, when you consider the number of hours, days, and weeks spent at school, are you thinking about how much you need a friend or friends at school?

What would the impact of vital friends be to Professional Learning Communities?

Listen to an interview with Tom Rath.

Imagine Leadership

The Three Sins of Teamwork at School

If you are creating pockets of teamwork without creating school wide teamwork you creating the wrong kind of teamwork. If you “talk the talk”, but don’t “walk the walk” yourself on teamwork, you are creating the wrong kind of teamwork. If you require teams to do everything, even when there is no need, you are creating the wrong kind of teamwork.

Berkley and INSEAD professor Morten T. Hansen’s, book Collaboration: How Leaders Avoid The Traps, Create Unity, and Reap Big Results, describes what he calls the three sins of teamwork.

Sin 1. Small Teamwork Kill Collaboration
Principals who insist that certain grade levels or teams display teamwork, but then let other grade levels or teams work as a group of individuals kills collaboration. Teachers are going to ask themselves, “Why should I have to work as a team, when they don’t?”

“When managers start instilling teamwork in their own units and not across the rest of the company, it leads to pockets of local teamwork, but not companywide collaboration. The company becomes ‘teamy’ but not collaborative.”

If a principal is going to preach teamwork, then it has to be for everybody. Requiring some to collaborate while letting others continue in a “privatized” or “hoarding” fashion is one sure way to quickly kill collaboration across the campus.

Sin 2. Everybody Do Teamwork Now (Except Those of Us at the Top)

If your superintendent or director communicates that teamwork is way, then he or she better well display him or herself.

“When leaders give a sermon about the value of teamwork to the troops, and then ignore it themselves, they are not promoting collaboration.” Hypocritical leadership is bad enough, but preaching teamwork and being a non team player is going to kill collaboration across the district, among principals, and among other departments.

“To unite a company, the top team needs to be united, too.”

Sin 3. Teamwork Becomes the Point of It All
Not everything at school needs a team to accomplish it. Sometimes, teamwork just winds up complicating the issue. It doesn’t take 5 teachers to make a recess duty schedule or order flowers for somebody’s birthday. Not every decision or task takes a Professional Learning Community to decide or complete it.

“Teamwork, when practiced incorrectly, becomes the sole purpose: ‘The leader says we need to do teamwork, so we better do teamwork, all the time.’ People’s judgment about when to work in teams---and when not to—gets corrupted by a norm that says, ‘You should do teamwork.’ As a result, people work in teams when they shouldn’t, as when there is no compelling reason to team up…”

The bottom line is it’s all about results. Sometimes the team, the Professional Learning Community is the best means to those results, and sometimes not. The goal of collaboration and teamwork is not collaboration and teamwork, but effective outcomes.


School leaders who promote teamwork and collaboration must be careful to avoid these three “sins” of teamwork. People can often hide behind a team and not do what their individual responsibility requires of them. All collaboration all the time can be used as an excuse not to share or do your part, because they assume someone else will share. Leaders need to take care that they look out for and avoid the three sins of teamwork.

Educators need to participate in what I call Ambidextrous Professional Learning Communities. The Ambidextrous Professional Learning Community requires high levels of collaboration and teamwork, but also high levels of personal responsibility and accountability, and avoids the three sins of teamwork.

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.