An Evolving School Culture

My school counselor is a gift from heaven.  When everyone has gone home for the day, we will occasionally have time for lengthy chats in my quiet and cozy office or hers.  She has the kind of innate sensitivity to how the world works that helps me put my tiny problems into perspective, allowing me to see patterns and solutions and giving me the peace of mind that collaborative reflection can bring.

I was talking with her one day about the idea that bullying behavior is a natural part of evolution and ubiquitous in our culture.  Since my daughter is eight, I overhear her favorite shows and even with the current social and political climate condemning bullying behavior, I see examples of it in the story lines of children’s programming.  (On a side note:  principals in these shows are often portrayed as dim-witted enemies of children which is irritating, but that’s a post for another day.)

While all educators I know do not condone bullying behavior and do everything possible to get all students the help they need, it is troubling how individuals and groups are shunned overtly and otherwise for our entertainment and the impression that this leaves on our children.  Any number of tv shows and movies model this for adults and kids. We view bullying as a problem exclusive to schools and neighborhoods, a problem experienced by young people that gets better as you get older, while not always recognizing the ways in which as adults we contribute to or are ourselves targets of bullying behavior. 

Consider the social dynamics of the workplace.  What I used to think was a phenomenon exclusive to the public school setting I have now realized is not our own.  The informal culture of any organization can be racked by power hierarchies and complicated social connections that stifle both the work of the system as a whole and the individual growth of those working within it.  When reflecting upon the disfunction within their own organization, people may often say, “Well, you’ll have some of that everywhere,” as if a pervasive problem results in no problem at all.  I’ve believed for a long time that we can create something better because my school counselor did what she does best and made me think of things differently:  it may be the case that it is natural for humans to develop hierarchical structures that can isolate and disempower others but we are called to do better.

In a Ted Talk I viewed recently, psychologist Dan Gilbert says, "Human beings are works in progress that mistakenly think they're finished."   If there is one place where we need to embrace this idea and become transparent about what it looks like in our interactions, it's our schools.  What strategies can we employ as principals to surface relational issues between adults in our schools?  Can we be transparent about these problems while still maintaining the dignity of those staff members who are not fully embraced and respected by their peers?  How can a principal lead a staff in understanding that power structures are common within all organizations and, in our system, we will rise above?  What are the consequences if we don't?  The impact on all employees and on students is profound. Consider this research cited in the September 2011 edition of Educational Leadership and the potential that it could be generalized to schools where adult "bullies" are popular:

It's well worth asking whether today's schools are characterized by a democratic or autocratic social climate and whether differences in school climate are related to bullying. Classrooms with more egalitarian social status hierarchies, strong group norms in support of academic achievement and prosocial behavior, and positive social ties among children should deprive many socially connected bullies of the peer regard they require (Ahn, Garandeau, & Rodkin, 2010; Frey, Edstrom, & Hirschstein, 2010; Pellegrini et al., 2010; Rodkin & Gest, 2011). In contrast, even children who are not bullies themselves will form probullying attitudes in classrooms where bullies are popular (Dijkstra, Lindenberg, & Veenstra, 2008).

Let's acknowledge that these structures are pervasive in organizations and a part of human nature, and then let us remember that we're still evolving and we can and must do better!  Students, adults and our systems can thrive when we embrace an inclusive mindset and consciously eliminate structures that provide fertile ground for social hierarchies to grow.

Being human is hard.  Just when I'm deep in thought about the last conversation I'd had with my counselor she hits me with a little gem of truth about criticism when she shares that criticizing is the simplest way for our brain to think about a problem or idea.  Of course the timing of this was perfect as I was passively listening and actively, although silently, criticizing an idea.  Shame on me.  Thank goodness we are just works in progress along an evolutionary journey but these conversations are making me feel like a Neanderthal.  

No more write.  Me go sleep.  

Danger: PLCs Ahead

I remember reading Professional Learning Communities at Work in my first year of graduate school over a decade ago.  Having spent time in a district where collaboration was commonplace, I didn’t foresee the potential for it to be as seminal as it has become.  I clearly remember telling my classmates that the text was “nothing earth-shattering”.

Fast forward and now the PLC machine seems unstoppable.  It seems that for a moment in education we perhaps are all thinking similarly.  Whether this is a great-minds-think-alike moment or an if-everyone’s-thinking-the-same-thing-someone’s-not-thinking one, I encourage my fellow principals to proceed with caution.

Why proceed with caution?

Because the “Copyright PLC” machine seems unstoppable too.

Attending a PLC training is costly.  (As a side note, there’s no denying that the main PLC trainers deliver consistent, quality content that is well-facilitated and learning that is relevant and important for all educators).  However, when a district makes an effort to bring PLCs “to scale”, there may be little money left in the budget for other endeavors because of the cost.  This wouldn’t be a huge problem because focus is good.  But when the money’s tight and the training is sparse, it’s convenient for us to use the absence of formal PLC training as an excuse for not making progress toward working collaboratively.

Because we use “PLC” as a noun, a verb, and an adjective but it’s mostly a state of mind.

Every teacher in our school is part of a PLC.

That work doesn’t seem very PLC.

On Wednesday there’s a faculty meeting but on Thursday we’ll PLC.

Principals, it’s our job to ensure the kind of culture where teachers see students’ success as an interdependent endeavor.  We can use PLC as whatever part of speech you want but without a doubt:  if we don’t figure out how to work and learn together, there’s a percentage of students in every school who will fail.  With an established collaborative culture, we can withstand such setbacks and potential delays as losing our “PLC time” or new staff needing “PLC training”.   

Because what seems to be the typical work of most PLCs is only a portion of the necessary work of schools.

We want very much for our work in collaborative groups to be as efficient and objective as possible and, consequently, teams functioning within the guidance of the Four Questions of PLCs often examine data that can be analyzed efficiently.  They select strategies that can be calibrated efficiently.  They consider structures that can be established efficiently.  This is good news.  But it’s just a portion of the work that we need to get good at.

The other half involves rich conversation about more sophisticated pedagogy and authentic learning.  This takes more time, more complex training, and more conversation.  

When the primary function of PLC teams is to sort students into intervention, at standard, and advanced groups (whether that group membership is flexible or not), we are simply greasing the gears of the conveyor belts that keep our factory model going.  If those PLC teams fine-tune their instruction to decrease the number of students in need of intervention, we get a step closer.  When PLCs work together to make learning experiences authentic and increas student ownership and commitment, we are even closer.  But for systemic change, every PLC needs to be working toward innovation and reform.   

Sometimes You Win, Sometimes You Learn

An anonymous staff member at my school posts inspirational quotes where everyone is sure see them and maybe even have a couple of seconds to reflect:  in the staff bathroom.  (This, of course, is only on days when there is actually time for a bathroom break.)  The latest bathroom words of wisdom from our mystery motivator is "Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn."  Beautiful.

Indeed this is the case with our school's PBIS journey.  If you read my previous post in this blog (which is now a few years old), I wrote about the dangers of the rapid growth of PBIS in our state.  I still worry about the rapid implementation of PBIS in Iowa but here are a few things we've won and a few things I've learned in our Year One Implementation within the context of my old post:



"Originally I understood [PBIS] to be a system for common language, instruction, and clear expectations for pro-social behaviors.  As I have heard, more often than not, that this instruction is connected to tiered positive reinforcement, I'm worried."

Sometimes you learn
It IS a system for common language, instruction, and clear expectations for pro-social behaviors. Without a systemic approach to teaching and reinforcing expectations at a building level, frustration grows among both staff and students.  Creating that systemic approach and monitoring its effectiveness requires staff input and a data collection process.  The approach doesn't need to involve bribes or extrinsic rewards and the core instruction alone, when done well, can be streamlined and is sufficient to reach at least 80% of students.

Sometimes you win
We spent a lot of time developing a common philosophy and sharing our fears of implementing PBIS.  Doing so allowed us to boost the level of staff input and ownership while avoiding some of the common pitfalls with PBIS implementation.



"Even without the positive reinforcement system, PBIS is still potentially problematic because it gives us, as educators, permission to use something other than an engaging task to get students to do what we want them to do."  And, eh hem, if that wasn't enough..."If students are not engaged in the work that they are being asked to do or are unable to see purpose in demonstrating positive behavior (beyond "character tickets"), it's our fault.  Implementing PBIS creates another system that students don't need and stalls our work toward figuring out what they do."

Sometimes you learn
Ensuring that students are engaged in meaningful work in every classroom all of the time is a career-long goal.  We MUST continue to strive to develop the kinds of tasks and the instructional methods that motivate students in authentic ways and, while we're doing that, we need to put systems into place to ensure they can engage productively in the kinds of experiences we offer them now.

Sometimes you win
We have structures in place to monitor and increase the frequency of authentic tasks and instruction.  Through Authentic Intellectual Work teams and collaborative structures where teachers are able to push one another's thinking, we're making progress here while being able to build a self-sustaining PBIS system.  This self-sustaining system will give us more time to focus on the harder stuff: increasing authenticity.



"[PBIS] superficially reinforces skills that are critical to students' future success:  the development of moral and performance character.  It rewards compliance to authority."

Sometimes you learn
PBIS rewards compliance to authority when implemented poorly or when implemented on top of culture and climate problems.  In an environment where the adults in the school rely on positional authority instead of healthy relationships, PBIS can become gimmicky at best and counterproductive at worst.  However, when implemented in a place with a strong culture and climate where staff have healthy attitudes toward and relationships with children, everyone appreciates being acknowledged for their contributions and as our PBIS trainers remind us: "If it's important enough to correct, it's important enough to acknowledge."

Sometimes you win
Our staff participates fully in random and meaningful acknowledgement of students and each other. We focus on recognition of students and not rewards.  Our classroom teachers make social-emotional instruction on as a responsibility of their core teaching.  All staff members take responsibility for our collective efforts with PBIS and are cautious to protect the nuances that make it an inclusive, positive structure.



Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn.  How are we winning and learning in our statewide PBIS implementation?