Education Innovation

The "Killer App"- Professional Networked Learning Collaboratives

Back in 2002 in his book Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution Howard Rheingold predicted that, “The ‘killer apps’ of tomorrow’s mobile infocom industry won’t be hardware devices or software program but social practices. The most far reaching changes will come, as they often do, from the kinds of relationships, enterprises, communities, and markets that the infrastructure makes possible.”

The prediction, as we now know, was spot dead on. (Nothing new for Howard) The technology has transformed our relationships, how we are able to collaborate, how we now define communities, and what kinds of work we are able to do.

This get to the very heart of the Professional Networked Learning Collaborative (PNLC) No longer is the work of educational teams limited to face-to-face over the table collaboration. No longer is email viewed as the technology of choice for collaboration. No longer are teams limited by geography.

The true difference in the Professional Networked Learning Collaborative does not lie in the technology. First, the technology enables different types of relationships. Virtual relationships are now possible and have become commonplace outside of educational settings. Networks of all sorts (Facbebook, Ning, Twitter, etc.) webcams, etc. have changed the very definition of presence.

Second, technology has changed who is part of the team. Team members can now be virtual. Members no longer tied to geographic limitation can provide input, ideas, and collaborate in real-time for any location on the globe. The Professional Learning Community succeeded because it viewed its membership of the grade level/subject matter and the school. The Professional Networked Learning Collaborative enabled through technology expands the ring of membership to include specialist, consultants, district staff, etc as part of the team.

Further, each member of the PNLC will have his or her own developed Personal Learning Network from which to draw on. As each PNLC member’s PLN network overlaps with other team members it becomes much different from the local context of a community. It Overlapping Personal Learning Networks form a collaborative that is a normal functioning part of the Professional Networked Learning Collaborative. We have moved from face-to-face community of physical space to the technology enabled virtual and physical space collaborative.

Third, the very enterprise of the typical grade level or subject matter team will be different as technology enables networks to allows for new levels of data analysis, planning, lesson design, etc. The reality is that what grade levels or subject matter teams will be able to do compared with what they do right will not just more or better… it will be different.

Finally, the PNLC model it not going to be limited to the technology that currently exists for two reasons.

First, the Professional Networked Learning Collaborative is what I call a “Change is Normal Organization”(CiNO). It is designed to change and adapt. The values of the PNLC of ICE3:Imagination, Innovation, Inquiry, Collaboration, Creativity, Curiosity, Exploration, Experimentation, and Entrepreneurship ensure the PNLC will change.

Second, the technology that we now use to collaborate virtually or network on is going to change. But, the hardware we use to access these platforms is going to move off of the desktop or laptop on to our phones. I describe this as the 4th Way. As Howard Rheingold so presciently foretold in 2002, “These devices will help people coordinate actions with others around the world—and, perhaps more importantly, with people nearby. Groups of people using these tools will gain new forms of social power, new ways to organize their interactions and exchanges just in time and just in place.”

He asks, “How will human behavior shift when the appliances we hold in our hands, carry in our pockets, or wear in our clothing become supercomputers that talk to each other through a wireless mega-Internet?”

Howard provides an answer. He says, “They will enable people to act together in new ways and in situations where collective action was not possible before.” 

The PNLC is not just better…it’s totally different. It's the "killer app."

Crowdsourcing Education Reform Via Twitter and #edchat

Note: This post was originally posted on Edutopia-Igniting Innovation in Education through Collaboration

#edchat's "small sparks"

Keith Sawyer, author of the book Group Genius wrote, "All inventions emerge from a long sequence of small sparks...Collaboration brings small sparks together to generate breakthrough innovation."

Educators need no longer be content to passively wait for others to discover the "small sparks" that are needed to solve classroom or school issues. The technology now exists for educators to share their own "small sparks" at the grassroots level together through networks such as Twitter, and on Twitter that means #edchat.

During the 7/6/10 weekly #edchat my final tweet of the discussion was a fictitious news headline: "Twitter group known at #edchat becomes a powerful source of new directions and innovation in education."

What preceded it was a discussion with others about how #edchat could become a recognized source of educational problem solving, ideas, experimentation, and innovation. For those educators who are on Twitter, #edchat has quickly become the go-to place for discussing educational issues, sharing ideas, links to articles, and posting questions. It is not limited to the Tuesday topic-driven chats, but is happening 24/7. #edchat is producing a lot of "small sparks."

Is it possible that the #edchat conversation on Twitter could evolve into a recognized leader in open source educational ideas, innovations, and solutions? I believe it is.

First, educators need to recognize that #edchat is more than just a Personal Learning Network (PLN) or an on-line Professional Learning Community. It is actually a pNLC- professional Networked Learning Collaborative.

Second, the #edchat pNLC needs to put the ideas, innovation, and solutions into action to produce real tangible classroom or school based results and then give #edchat the credit.

Professional Networked Learning Collaborative- pNLC

The #edchat professional Networked Learning Collaborative (pNLC) will allow teachers access to a greater flow of knowledge and information than ever before. Using a network such as Twitter, teachers will be able to form collaboratives that actually implement the ideas shared via the network. It moves ideas from the digital to the physical.

The essence of the pNLC is that the "who" of potential members and collaborators is increased exponentially because of individual members networking through collaborative technology platforms such as Twitter. Thus, more "small sparks." The pNLC allows educators to "crowdsource."

Crowdsourcing

Jeff Howe, author of Crowdsourcing: Why The Power Of The Crowd Is Driving The Future of Business, points out that there are two shared characteristics of a crowdsourced project. First, the participants are not motivated by money, and second, they are donating their free time. "That is, they're contributing their excess capacity, or 'spare cycles,' to indulge in something they love to do." Clay Shirky would say they are using their "Cognitive Surplus."

The #edchat pNLC is able to crowdsource learning solutions, solve problems, generate ideas, and create innovations for the classroom or school.

#edchat works because virtual teams can form up around educational problems or issues easily. #edchatters are free to pursue their own interests and passions, and thus, are highly motivated. #edchatters can contribute regardless of their professional experience or expertise. That means anyone could provide insight or valuable ideas on a topic or issue they are passionate about. This is why the "p" in pNLC is lower case.

If it is true, as Peter Steiner said, "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog," then in the crowd, nobody cares if you are a credentialed expert. It assumes that everyone participating in the #edchat has something of value to offer. All that matters is that one is motivated and knowledgeable.

#edchat Evolution

Wikis or Google docs could be used to post specific issues teachers are seeking help with. Designated hashtags could be generated for each issue creating a sort of #edchat task force. For example, technology topics could use the hashtag #edchat-tech. California teachers could use #edchat-CA. These collaboartive teams could then divide the labor, focus the ideas, and channel the energy.

Evolving the #edchat hashtag into more focused or specialized topics would not only help to focus energy and ideas, but also attract other people who have an interest in those topics. Results and evidence of the work can be posted as YouTube videos, magazine articles, blog posts, and the main #edchat Twitter conversation.

Serendipity

The simple definition of serendipity is finding what we didn't know what we were looking for. It is unexpected encounters with people and the knowledge they possess. But what if, instead of accidentally stumbling into a serendipitous encounter, you could attract or draw these people to you--a form of purposeful serendipity?

The #edchat pNLC does just that. Participating in #edchat will allow an individual teacher to form a learning collaborative--to reach beyond the walls of their classroom or school and into the "crowd" and gather up all those "small sparks." All it takes is some imagination to see the possibilities.

Six Elements of a Good Decision In A PLC

Professional Learning Communities make decisions everyday. But are they good decisions? How do you know? What makes a good decision?

Here are 6 Elements of a Good Decision from Carl Spetzler, director of the Strategic Decision and Risk Management program at Stanford University and CEO of the Strategic Decisions Group. (Via Kim Girard of Bnet)

1. The right frame — making sure you’re solving the right problem in the first place.

2. Clarity about what you want.

3. Creative alternatives.

4. Gathering the right information, including information about uncertainty, which is essential if you want to choose the best alternative.

5. Reasoning, which includes what you know and what you don’t.

6. A commitment to make it happen, since a decision is no stronger than its weakest link.

3 Barriers to Creative Brainstorming In Professional Learning Communities- And How To Overcome Them

In a previous post (The New Rules of Brainstorming For Professional Learning Communities) I discussed the “New Rules” for brainstorming in PLCs. There are, however, problems that are common to PLCs that can and do interfere with powerful brainstorming.

According to Keith Sawyer, there are 3 possible reasons brainstorming groups are less creative than individuals brainstorming on their own and bringing their ideas to the group to be assembled later.

Problem 1: Production Blocking
“Group members have to listen closely to other people’s ideas, which leaves individual members with less mental energy to think of new ideas. Also, individuals might be distracted from their own ideas by the flurry of idea generation around them. This is why productivity loss is greater with larger groups: Each person has less time to talk as the number of members goes up.”

One cause of Production Blocking is Topic Fixation. “…groups become fixated faster and stay in the same category for longer. The way to prevent topic fixation is by giving group members time periods to work alone, alternating with group interaction.” 

I often ask PLC members, prior to PLC meetings, to develop their ideas, write them down, and bring the ideas with them to the meeting. We then go around the table sharing the ideas they wrote down. Instead of having to think of ideas while at the same time listening to others sharing their ideas, PLC members can devote their energy to listening and considering the value of the ideas.

The other advantage to this is that PLC members share their ideas regardless of what they have already heard. This avoids Topic Fixation. Ideas developed alone or outside of the PLC meeting are not subject to being influenced by the discussion in the PLC. Of course this doesn't mean that ideas can be added to or improved, it just means that the first person to speak doesn't drive the topic in a certain direction.

Sawyer provides two ideas. Electronic Brainstorming and Brainwriting.

Electronic Brainstorming—“…where ideas are typed by each group member into a shared computer screen like a chat room—results in more creativity because topic fixation is reduced.”

I have encouraged many of the PLC teams I work with to use Google Docs, but I have also used bubbl.us, Vyew.com, WiziQ.com.

Brainwriting–“…in which each member of the group takes five minutes to write out his or her ideas alone and then passes the list to the next person..."

Problem 2: Social Inhibition
“This is when a group member holds back an idea for fear of what the others will think.”

There are many reasons for social inhibition within a PLC. Differences in length of teaching experience, types of experiences, training, beliefs, values, etc., are all possible sources of social inhibition.

Sawyer points out that to reduce the negative effects of social inhibition PLC teams must first, “make sure that the team members or the group feel truly equal and that no authoritarian figure is present.” 

This is one reason that principals sitting in PLC meetings can be an issue. If principals inject themselves in an authoritarian evaluative role, social inhibition is likely. If, as an administrator, you feel the need to be in PLC meetings, then it needs to be clear that you will not act the part of the “boss” and will not be using the meeting in an evaluative nature for teachers.

I sit in PLCs 2-3 times a week, but it took a year of building a culture of trust to the point where this became possible without social inhibition. However, I am always conscious how my presence may impact the flow of conversation.

Second, “is to use a trained facilitator to draw people out and to note who is holding back.” This is a great idea if you have someone who can play this role. In most cases, this is the grade level or department chair, but as I mentioned above, if the principal is going to play this role, then trust is paramount.

Problem 3: Social Loafing
“When people are in a group they don’t feel as accountable for the outcomes as they do when they’re working alone; the responsibility is distributed among the group members, so individuals relax a little and perhaps don’t work as hard.”

It is essential that a culture of accountability be developed within your PLCs. One of the very reasons that I ask PLC members to bring their ideas to meetings is to ensure that all members participate. The manner in which meetings are facilitated is also important. If all members are to participate, then meetings need to be facilitated in such a way as to ensure that all members are required to participate.

These 3 problems are common to all PLCs, but if you address Production Blocking, Social Inhibition and Social Loafing, then your PLC teams will be more productive and PLC members are bound to feel that their contributions are being valued, it is a safe place to share, and that all are being held accountable to the same standard.

9 Ways We Respond To Ideas In Professional Learning Communities

One of my favorite blogs is Lateral Action. Contributing writer Rajesh Setty posted about whether bloggers, Twitters, etc. could know if their ideas were succeeding in influencing their audiences in a positive way. His idea is that the audience would “tell them” by the manner in which they responded to the online content.

What I found interesting is this is very much like how we collaborate in our Professional Learning Communities, Professional Networked Learning Collaboratives, Personal Learning Networks, Critical Friends Groups, teams. Rajesh suggests there is 9 ways people respond to content. Spam, Skip, Scan, Stop, Save, Shift, Send, Spread, and Subscribe. Remixing these, I found there are 9 ways we respond to ideas when we collaborate in our teams.

   1. Spam: “If your content does not provide a reasonable ROII (return-on-investment for an interaction) for the reader or is self-serving or simply useless, the reader will mark it as spam. Posting something that may be assessed, as “spam” is the fastest way to losing credibility.”

If your ideas, thoughts and comments do not provide any benefit to your team, or worse, seem self-serving as opposed to meeting the needs of your students, you are going to lose credibility as a member. Make a contribution through collaboration that benefits the team and the students.

   2. Skip: “The reader makes an assessment that he or she won’t lose much by reading it. In this case, the reader has not written you off yet but if you consistently create content that is worth “skipping,” the reader might write you off.”

The worst thing that can happen to you as team member is to have others stop listening and stop giving any consideration to your ideas, thoughts, and comments. If you consistently fail to add to the discussion in a positive way, or focus on yourself instead of students, etc. people are going to consider your ideas, thoughts and comments worth skipping. “Skipping” is a failure in collaboration.

   3. Scan: “The reader thinks there are only a few parts that are of relevance and wants to get right to the core of the content and skip the rest.”

Cut to the chase. The most valuable resource for teachers is time. Don’t waste people’s time. Effectively collaborate by getting to the point, being succinct, staying on topic, driving to the core of the issue, and providing possible solutions or ideas to the issue at hand. If you want team members to stop, focus, consider your ideas, and collaborate on them, get to the core quickly.

   4. Stop: “The reader is touched by the article and stops to think about the article, it’s relevance and what it means to him or her personally and professionally.”

During PLC, PNLC, CFG, or team meetings member hear things that make people stop, take notice, and want to dig deeper. Great ideas, meaningful comments, powerful solutions make teams stop, think, and collaborate to create impact for students.

   5. Save: “The content is so good that the reader might want to re-visit this multiple times.”

Smart teams will save great ideas and revisit them throughout the school year. Smart teams will save the best ideas and look for ways to use and apply them with their students.

   6. Shift: “The article is transformational. The reader is so deeply affected (in a positive way) by the article that it shifts some of their values and beliefs. In other words, this piece of writing will transform the reader and make him or her grow.”

An important aspect of any Professional Learning Community or Professional Networked Learning Collaborative, or Personal Learning Network is the word “learning.” Smart teams are always learning from each other, from current research, from experience, etc. Smart team adjust or shift what they do, how they do it, or what they know when they apply what they have learned.

   7. Send: “The content is not only useful to the reader but also to one or more people in the reader’s network. The reader simply emails the article or a link to it to people that he or she cares.”

When smart teams learn something of value, they share with others to make a bigger impact for the students. Sharing knowledge, ideas, and solutions by “sending” them on to others in their networks is what smart teams do. It is at the heart of collaboration.

   8. Spread: “The reader finds the article fascinating enough to spread it to anyone and everyone via a blog, twitter or the social networks that he or she belongs.”

Spreading ideas through our networks is a characteristic of a Professional Networked Learning Collaborative because technology is viewed as a natural part of how it works. You should take the time to spread ideas through your network, be it a PNLC or a Personal Learning Network. Smart teams spread smart ideas.

   9. Subscribe: “This is the ultimate expression of engagement and a vote of confidence that you will continue to provide great content. When the reader wants to continue listening to your thoughts, he or she will subscribe.”

Subscribing is the end result of trust and credibility. All teams are more effective when there is trust. When you prove you are trust worthy, that you have knowledge and ability, and collaborate with your team, you become credible. Team members “subscribe” to credible team members.

Rajesh Setty gives a few more things to consider that are equally valuable for team collaboration.

1. Understand Your Audience
“…your audience should be the center of the focus and not you. The more you know about your audience, the better you can connect with them.”

The better we can connect with each other in our teams, the better collaboration we will have, and the better results we will produce for students.

2. Check Your Objective

What is the purpose or goal of your team meeting? If you don’t know what you are walking in the door to discuss then you probably aren’t prepared. If you are not prepared you are not going to be able to add your best during collaboration. Know your objective.

3. Unleash Your Creativity

“You know the audience and you know the purpose... Now the next step is to unleash your creativity and create something that will generate the kind of response that you are looking for.”

Unleash your team’s creativity through purposeful collaboration and intentional creativity.

4. Learn from Feedback

Pay attention to the response and feedback you are getting from other members. Notice if they are spamming you, skipping you, scanning you, stopping for you, saving you, being shifted by you, sending you, spreading you, or subscribing to you. Reflect and then adjust your collaboration style to get the results you want.

It really comes down to having a high ROII,"Return on Investment for an Interaction." That's what all PLCs, PNLCs, PLNs, CFGs should be about. ROII.

High ROII, that's Education Innovation.

GEARR Up Your Professional Learning Community

Having the right equipment can make all the difference. Attempting endeavors such as climbing a mountain, scuba diving, flying a plane, racing a car, or painting a great portrait, it is important to have the right gear. The gear we have is important to accomplishing the task.

Professional Learning Communities have their own gear too. Each member brings some unique gear to their PLC and this gear helps the entire PLC accomplish its goal.

When I refer to gear, I am actually referring to GEARR. Each team members' Gifts, Experiences, Abilities, Roles, and Relationships.

Gifts
Gifts are those naturally occuring strengths we each have. Some of us have the gift of leadership, organization, empathy, insight, communication, encouragement, consistency, etc. These gifts give each of us a unique combination of strengths that PLC can leverage to make the team stronger.

Experiences
No two team members will have exactly the same experiences. Experiences is the stuff you have been through that have helped you become the person you are today. Experience is unique to each of us. Each teacher has had experiences as a learner and as an educator. Our experiences as students, as teachers, as parents, etc. give each of us a background the we can draw upon to help the PLC better the meet the needs of our students.

Abilities
These are the skills that we are good at. Some have abilities in technology, others music or art. Some are excellent at collecting and interpreing data. Some can do magic with a spredsheet, while others can draw pictures on a chart perfectly. Other have abilities in making complex ideas simple to understand. Abilities would also include those many skills we have learned along the way in our time as educators. Every staff development session, conference, or training has provided team members wth necessary abilities to be leveraged within the PLC to meet the needs of students.

Roles
Each member of a PLC should have some type of role. Roles can included facilitation, note taking, time keeping, or any thing else the PLC needs to have done. It is through our roles that we share the leadership and the work load of the PLC.

Relationships
Often times we forget just how important the relationships outside of our grade level or department can be. Each member has a network of relationships that can be leveraged to provide insight, help, advice, knowledge, and wisdom to the work of their PLC. The relationships developed by each person can provide a myriad of useful outsiders to help the PLC accomplish its work in improving student achievement.

Every Professional Learning Community has their own GEARR. But, because every PLC has GEARR does not mean they are taking advantage of it. If you leave your gear in the truck it's not going to help you climb that mountain. PLC need to bring their GEARR with them to each and every session. The key is to surface it and then leverage it for maxmimum impact on student learning.

Note: The Professional Networked Learning Collaborative is a powerful model for maximizing GEARR because of the network effect of having many more Gifts, Experiences, Abilities, Roles, and Relationships provided through each members physical and virtual network.

The Physics of a Professional Learning Community

Newtonian Physics says there are 3 laws of motions. Just as these 3 laws of motion apply to objects, they also apply to Professional Learning Communities.

 
^{http://www.flickr.com/photos/brent_nashville/ / CC BY-NC 2.0}

Law 1

Once moving at a steady speed, in a straight line, it will continue moving at a steady speed in a straight line.

In other words, objects in motion tend to stay in motion. The natural default position for most people and teams is to be "at rest." It takes energy, effort, desire and motivation to push forward and overcome inertia. But once a Professional Learning Community begins to see the results of their collaboration and learning reflected in the achievement of their students, they will continue moving with steady speed forward.

Once standing still, it will stay still.

The Professional Learning Community that doesn't collaborate, does not focus on student learning, asks no questions, is unprepared, seeks no data, is neither professional, will not learn, and is not a community. It is standing still.

 Law 2

It accelerates in the direction that you push it.

 Focus on student learning and student achievement will accelerate the professional Learning community in that direction. Once headed in that direction it will produce student-centered results. PLCs that focus on their own planning, calendars, and complaining will accelerate in that direction and will achieve non-student centered results.

If you push twice as hard, it accelerates twice as much

The more a PLC focuses on what they want students to learn, discovering what students are actually learning with data, and developing plans, strategies, and ideas to meet the needs of the students who are achieving and those who aren't; the greater the results will be. The more a PLC focuses on student achievement, the more student achievement they will achieve.

If it gets twice the mass it accelerates half as much

The non-student achievement activities teachers bring to their PLCs the slower the PLC will accelerate. The more we focus on things other than the student, the slower the PLC accelerates.

 Law 3

For every action there is an equal and opposite re-action

When PLCs learn, students learn. When students learn,  PLCs learn.

 When PLCs don't learn then...well you know the rest.

Professional Learning Communities DRIVE Toward Success

When Professional Learning Communities or Professional Networked Learning Collaboratives develop plans and ideas to deal with the multifaceted issues of student learning and achievement, having a clear definition and picture of what success looks like is key. Teams need to know what success looks like so they can recognize if they have achieved the results in student learning and achievement they set out to attain. If you don’t know your destination, how will you know if you have arrived? Developing an observable measure of success is key.

Tim Hurson, author of the book Think Better, offers this useful tool for helping you recognize once you have achieved it. He calls it DRIVE.

 

Do: What do you want your eventual solution to do? What must it achieve?

 

What outcome is the PLC or PNLC looking for? What do you want for the students? What should your students be able to do? The key here is to develop as many ideas as possible without judging them. Create a list of all the things your teams solution should achieve for the students. For example your list might include statements like: increase time on task, help student develop their own questions, include technology, or students should be able to explain the learning goals clearly.

 

Restrictions: What changes or impacts must you avoid?

 

What outcomes should not happen as a result of your plan? What must be prevented so as not to interfere with the student achievement? For example your list might include statements like: don’t confuse students, don’t ignore the high achieving students, don’t talk to much during the lesson, or don’t confuse students with too many strategies.

 

Investment: What resources are you willing to allocate? What are your “not-to-exceeds”?

 

What are the investments of time, materials, etc., that your PLC or PNLC is willing to commit to achieve your goal? Create a list of maximum investments that your PLC or PNLC, those you can’t exceed, that your team is wiling to put into the solution. The list might include things like: 30 minutes of instruction daily, one instructional aide per classroom, science materials for each pair of students, computer lab time, once weekly common assessments, etc.

 

Values: What values must you live by in achieving your solutions?

 

List the values of the school and the team that cannot be compromised in working toward the solution. What can you tolerate? What can you not tolerate? The list might includes things like: standards over curriculum, student need over teacher need, differentiation, must value teacher time, student engagement, etc.

 

Essential Outcomes: What are the nonnegotiable elements of success? What measurable targets must be met?

 

What are all the things that must happen for the PLC or the PNLC to consider the solution a success for students? What specific student achievement outcomes must be reached? What are the non-negotiable student results that must be achieved? Examples might include statement like: all students will master the standard, the student learning will be measurable through a common formative assessment, students will be given multiple opportunities to achieve, etc.

 

When PLCs or PNLCs use the DRIVE tool to create a clear picture and an observable criterion for defining success, they have a greater chance of ensuring that their solution will produce the desired result for student learning and teaching.

Micro Cultures of Professional Learning Communities

In his fine book Culture Making: Recovering Our Creative Calling, author Andy Crouch explains his premise that it is not enough to condemn, critique, consume, or copy culture. The only way to change culture is to cultivate and create it.

Professional Learning Communities, School Leadership Teams, grade level teams, etc. are, in essence, mirco cultures. A micro culture is a small unit of culture within a wider general culture. In other words, the grade level or department level PLC is a micro culture within the great culture of the school site and the school district.

Thus the micro culture of the PLC is subject to problems, difficulties, obstacles, and hurdles that face all cultures. These are things that the PLC could and should be change to improve its effectiveness, thus improving student achievement. Andy Crouch explains that there is a rule that applies when we try to change culture. I call it the cultural rule.

Cultural Rule: “The only way to change culture is to create more of it.”

There are 6 approaches or practices that are typically adopted to change culture. These practices are used by members within their PLCs to change the culture of the PLC for the better. However, 4 of the approaches are not necessarily the most effective way to change culture. As you will see, the first 4 approaches are lacking, while the last 2 approaches have the power to change culture for the better in our Professional Learning Communities.

1. Condemning Culture: “No matter how much we may protest--condemning the cultural goods on offer—unless we offer an alternative, the show will go on.”

Those who condemn the current practices of the PLC will do little to change it for the better. Pointing out that the PLC does not use data properly, or does not follow established PLC protocols is not going to change the culture.

To be sure, as Andy Crouch points out, “Some cultural artifacts can only be condemned.” Some practices within in a PLC rightly need to be pointed out if they are truly damaging to the students, the teachers, and the school. But it won’t change things

Condemning culture also leaves us open to being hypocrites. Be careful to condemn the culture of the PLC, because you might be contributing to it. Remember, it does nothing to improve the culture because it does not create or add anything new.

2. Critiquing Culture: “ To be sure, the best critics can change the framework in which creators are measured. But such analysis has lasting influence only when someone creates something new in the public realm.”

“Some cultural artifacts deserve to be critiqued.”

This may be the most natural approach for educators in Professional Learning Communities. It is very easy to critique, to point out what is wrong and what is not working. This is very natural for some. But it does nothing to change the culture.

Critiquing culture is passive. We are left waiting for culture to, “deliver us some new item to talk about.” When we critique we do not move the culture of the PLC forward. Critics are left waiting for others to create change.

3. Copying Culture: “…imitate it, replacing the offensive bits with more palatable ones.”

Copying culture has the advantage of finding cultural practices in other PLCs and copying those practices for the PLC to imitate. Not bad. Adopting the best practices of others is a smart and effective thing to do.

“Even the practice of copying cultural goods…has its place.”

But, copying too, is passive. We wait for culture to be created to copy. “In fast—changing cultural domains those whose posture is imitation will find themselves constantly slightly behind the times…”

When we wait for others to develop culture change in PLC practices that can be copied and adopted you eliminate the potential to create and shape the culture of your PLC to the specific needs of your team members, grade level, subject matter, school, and school district.

4. Consuming Culture: “…can very rarely consume their way into cultural change.”

“There are many cultural goods for which by far the most appropriate response is to consume.”

Just as copying culture can be effective sometimes, consuming cultural practices of other PLC can be a smart thing to do. But the same problem results.

Consuming culture is passive too. It assumes a posture of waiting. Letting someone else create the culture to be consumed and assuming that that culture is better than your own.

So if condemning, critiquing, copying, and consuming culture are not desirable means to change the culture of a PLC, what is? Cultivation and Creation.

5. Cultivation: “All culture making requires a choice, conscious or unconscious, to take our place in a cultural tradition. We cannot make culture without culture. And this means creation begins with cultivation—taking care of the good things that culture has already handed on to us.”

“One who cultivates tries to create the most fertile conditions for good things to survive and thrive. Cultivating also requires weeding—sorting out what does and does not belong, what will bear fruit and what will choke it out.”

Being a good steward of the current PLC culture will allow the team to pick out what is working, affirm each other, and then weed out what isn’t working, making room for changes to take their place.

Cultivation is not passive. It works with what exists. It is purposeful. It affirms what has come before and makes way for what can come.

To often administrators make the mistake of not taking cultivation approach to their PLCs. Not everything is broken. Acknowledge the positive aspects of the current culture before you weed out the non-desirable practices.

6. Creators: “…people who dare to think and do something that has never been thought or done before, something that makes the world more welcoming and thrilling and beautiful.”

Once non-desirable PLC practices have been weeded out, room will exist for the creator approach to change the culture with new practices, ideas, and approaches.

Approach 5 and 6 can be thought of in the spirit and mindset of a gardener and an artist.

The Artist and The Gardner

The Gardner: “The gardener looks carefully at the landscape; the existing plants, both flowers and weeds; the way the sun falls on the land.” 

“The gardener tends to what has gone before, making the most of what is beautiful and weeding out what is distracting or useless.”

The Artist: “The artist regards her subject, her canvas, her paints with care to discern what she can make with them.”

“The artist can be more daring: she starts with a blank canvas or a solid piece of stone and gradually brings something out of it that was never there before.”

The Key: “Indeed those who have cultivated and created are precisely the ones who have the legitimacy to condemn—whose denunciations, rare and carefully chosen, carry outsize weight. Cultivators and creators are the ones who are invited to critique and whose critiques are often the most telling and fruitful. Cultivators and creators can even copy without becoming mere imitators, drawing on the work of others yet extending it in new and exciting ways…”

“And when they consume, cultivators and creators do so without becoming mere consumers. They do not derive their identity from what they consume but what they create.”

To change the culture of a PLC the team must adhere to the Cultural Rule: To change culture you have to create culture. That is the only way. Allow the spirit of the gardener and the artist to cultivate and create change in your PLC's culture, changes that will improve your PLC's effectiveness and ultimately, your students' performance.

In his fine book Culture Making: Recovering Our Creative Calling, author Andy Crouch explains his premise that it is not enough to condemn, critique, consume, or copy culture. The only way to change culture is to cultivate and create it.

Professional Learning Communities, School Leadership Teams, grade level teams, etc. are, in essence, mirco cultures. A micro culture is a small unit of culture within a wider general culture. In other words, the grade level or department level PLC is a micro culture within the great culture of the school site and the school district.

Thus the micro culture of the PLC is subject to problems, difficulties, obstacles, and hurdles that face all cultures. These are things that the PLC could and should be change to improve its effectiveness, thus improving student achievement. Andy Crouch explains that there is a rule that applies when we try to change culture. I call it the cultural rule.

Cultural Rule: “The only way to change culture is to create more of it.”

There are 6 approaches or practices that are typically adopted to change culture. These practices are used by members within their PLCs to change the culture of the PLC for the better. However, 4 of the approaches are not necessarily the most effective way to change culture. As you will see, the first 4 approaches are lacking, while the last 2 approaches have the power to change culture for the better in our Professional Learning Communities.

1. Condemning Culture: “No matter how much we may protest--condemning the cultural goods on offer—unless we offer an alternative, the show will go on.”

Those who condemn the current practices of the PLC will do little to change it for the better. Pointing out that the PLC does not use data properly, or does not follow established PLC protocols is not going to change the culture.

To be sure, as Andy Crouch points out, “Some cultural artifacts can only be condemned.” Some practices within in a PLC rightly need to be pointed out if they are truly damaging to the students, the teachers, and the school. But it won’t change things

Condemning culture also leaves us open to being hypocrites. Be careful to condemn the culture of the PLC, because you might be contributing to it. Remember, it does nothing to improve the culture because it does not create or add anything new.

2. Critiquing Culture: “ To be sure, the best critics can change the framework in which creators are measured. But such analysis has lasting influence only when someone creates something new in the public realm.”

“Some cultural artifacts deserve to be critiqued.”

This may be the most natural approach for educators in Professional Learning Communities. It is very easy to critique, to point out what is wrong and what is not working. This is very natural for some. But it does nothing to change the culture.

Critiquing culture is passive. We are left waiting for culture to, “deliver us some new item to talk about.” When we critique we do not move the culture of the PLC forward. Critics are left waiting for others to create change.

3. Copying Culture: “…imitate it, replacing the offensive bits with more palatable ones.”

Copying culture has the advantage of finding cultural practices in other PLCs and copying those practices for the PLC to imitate. Not bad. Adopting the best practices of others is a smart and effective thing to do.

“Even the practice of copying cultural goods…has its place.”

But, copying too, is passive. We wait for culture to be created to copy. “In fast—changing cultural domains those whose posture is imitation will find themselves constantly slightly behind the times…”

When we wait for others to develop culture change in PLC practices that can be copied and adopted you eliminate the potential to create and shape the culture of your PLC to the specific needs of your team members, grade level, subject matter, school, and school district.

4. Consuming Culture: “…can very rarely consume their way into cultural change.”

“There are many cultural goods for which by far the most appropriate response is to consume.”

Just as copying culture can be effective sometimes, consuming cultural practices of other PLC can be a smart thing to do. But the same problem results.

Consuming culture is passive too. It assumes a posture of waiting. Letting someone else create the culture to be consumed and assuming that that culture is better than your own.

So if condemning, critiquing, copying, and consuming culture are not desirable means to change the culture of a PLC, what is? Cultivation and Creation.

5. Cultivation: “All culture making requires a choice, conscious or unconscious, to take our place in a cultural tradition. We cannot make culture without culture. And this means creation begins with cultivation—taking care of the good things that culture has already handed on to us.”

“One who cultivates tries to create the most fertile conditions for good things to survive and thrive. Cultivating also requires weeding—sorting out what does and does not belong, what will bear fruit and what will choke it out.”

Being a good steward of the current PLC culture will allow the team to pick out what is working, affirm each other, and then weed out what isn’t working, making room for changes to take their place.

Cultivation is not passive. It works with what exists. It is purposeful. It affirms what has come before and makes way for what can come.

To often administrators make the mistake of not taking cultivation approach to their PLCs. Not everything is broken. Acknowledge the positive aspects of the current culture before you weed out the non-desirable practices.

6. Creators: “…people who dare to think and do something that has never been thought or done before, something that makes the world more welcoming and thrilling and beautiful.”

Once non-desirable PLC practices have been weeded out, room will exist for the creator approach to change the culture with new practices, ideas, and approaches.

Approach 5 and 6 can be thought of in the spirit and mindset of a gardener and an artist.

The Artist and The Gardner

The Gardner: “The gardener looks carefully at the landscape; the existing plants, both flowers and weeds; the way the sun falls on the land.” 

“The gardener tends to what has gone before, making the most of what is beautiful and weeding out what is distracting or useless.”

The Artist: “The artist regards her subject, her canvas, her paints with care to discern what she can make with them.”

“The artist can be more daring: she starts with a blank canvas or a solid piece of stone and gradually brings something out of it that was never there before.”

The Key: “Indeed those who have cultivated and created are precisely the ones who have the legitimacy to condemn—whose denunciations, rare and carefully chosen, carry outsize weight. Cultivators and creators are the ones who are invited to critique and whose critiques are often the most telling and fruitful. Cultivators and creators can even copy without becoming mere imitators, drawing on the work of others yet extending it in new and exciting ways…”

“And when they consume, cultivators and creators do so without becoming mere consumers. They do not derive their identity from what they consume but what they create.”

To change the culture of a PLC the team must adhere to the Cultural Rule: To change culture you have to create culture. That is the only way. Allow the spirit of the gardener and the artist to cultivate and create change in your PLC's culture, changes that will improve your PLC's effectiveness and ultimately, your students' performance.

8 Laws Of Human Nature In A Professional Learning Community

A recent article in NewScientist magazine titled "Five laws of human nature" and adapted by David Becker in a recent post on his blog thinking Cloud inspired me to write this post about these 8 laws of human nature in Professional Learning Communities. 

1. Parkinsons Law of Triviality – the amount of time an organization spends discussing an issue is inversely proportional to its importance.

In the Professional Learning Community setting, teachers are often very happy to talk about planning, page numbers, dates, and the like. These, while not unnecessary, pale in importance compared to examining student learning, reviewing student achievement data, and making informed and effective instructional decisions to meet the needs of all students. While it is easy to talk about what you would like to teach and when you would like to teach, it can be difficult for teachers to share results of their own teaching, their own students, and have the hard but crucial conversations that flow from such sharing.

 Teachers are often reluctant to share their ideas about effective instructional practices to meet the varying needs of students. Often they are afraid that they will be "wrong." Talking about page numbers and dates carries less risk.

 2. Sayre's Law, which states that in any dispute, the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the stakes at issue.

 Arguing over which day to give an assessment or which worksheet should be used is not proportional to the need to openly and frankly discuss how students are doing in meeting their learning goals, what is not working, and what should be done to correct it.

 3. Student Syndrome – Apply yourself to a task only at the last possible moment before the deadline, that people generally underestimate how long a task will be, and generally people miss deadlines because they leave things to the last minute.

 Professional Learning Communities often wait for the last minute or underestimate the amount of time that will be needed to complete their work. It takes time, often more time than anticipated, to do the work of a Professional Learning Community. While the time is well used, it is a common mistake to misjudge the amount that will be needed to thoroughly review student learning, examine data, and make effective instructional decisions.

 Recommend applying Hofstadter's Law, coined by the cognitive scientist Douglas Hofstadter: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

 4. Pareto Principle -The 80/20 rule applies to many situations.

 Sadly, in many Professional Learning Communities, 20% of the members are contributing 80% of the ideas, wisdom, and knowledge to the team. 20% of the members are usually doing the work of researching effective strategies, preparing assessments, etc.

 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.” In a hoarding culture, teachers and schools keep their expertise, their knowledge, their ideas, and their innovations to themselves. I call this the hoarding barrier. It is not a rule that applies to every PLC, but to those it does apply to it is very harmful.

 5. Maes-Garreau Law,  – Any prediction about a favorable future technology falls just within the expected lifespan of the person making it.

 In other words, technology will one day make the work of the Professional Learning Community so much easier. Members express the, "One day our computers will able to take the data and tell us exactly what to do." idea over and over. Maybe it will, but right now it doesn't, so focus on what you are able to do with what you have. Not to say that looking to the future of what technology might bring isn't important, but time in a PLC is so limited, so it might be better served staying focused on the task at hand and leaving the predictions to one's free time.

 6. Rogers’ Experiential Learning Theory -- Rogers lists the qualities of experiential learning as personal involvement, self-initiation, learner evaluation, and pervasive effects on the learner. The theory suggests that learner motivation and the relevance of the topics are keys to successful learning.

 If members of a Professional Learning Community are interested in learning about the data, information, research, and knowledge being shared then they are likely to be involved, want to do something with it, evaluate themselves against what they have learned, and accept and be willing to change based on it. If not, then they are likely not going to take anything or apply anything from the PLC discussion.

 7. Information Cascade- Wikipedia explains, "An information (or informational) cascade occurs when people observe the actions of others and then make the same choice that the others have made, independently of their own private information signals. Because it is usually sensible to do what other people are doing, the phenomenon is assumed to be the result of rational choice. Nevertheless, information cascades can sometimes lead to arbitrary or even erroneous decisions. The concept of information cascades is based on observational learning theory and was formally introduced in a 1992 article by Sushil Bikhchandani, David Hirshleifer, and Ivo Welch"

 Have you ever considered that the first person in a PLC to share an idea, their knowledge, their opinion, or give input to their Professional Learning Community may create a sequence of events that prevent the PLC from making the strongest most informed decisions possible?

 Who speaks in a PLC matters. Who speaks first in a PLC matters too.

 Many Professional Learning Communities succumb to a problem with the information cascade when the fail to get all of the available information from each teacher. If you start with an incomplete picture of what students are achieving, or what the best teaching strategy needed is, then the PLC is bound to end up making a decision that is not a good as it could be because that decision is based on incomplete information.

 Finally, there is one more that I mention only for your awareness and as food for thought.

 8. Peter Principle, which states that in any organization "people reach the level of their own incompetence"

Let's hope this has nothing to do with your Professional Learning Community, but this principle exists for a reason; so just bear that in mind. In your PLC, that person might be you!

And remember, all laws are meant to be broken.