School leaders will go a long way to building believers on the faculty if they take two steps to change the existing paradigm.

     Both Steven and Tom are developing fixed mindsets.  Steven, because good test scores are coming easily; Tom, because they seem out of reach.  In my last post, I described my hall of fame third grade teacher, Mrs. Bensen.  I would argue that if these students had been with Mrs. Bensen forty years ago, things would have been far different.
     One key question leaders face today in education is how do we encourage teachers to be more like Mrs. Bensen?  With testing pressure and so-called accountability standards pushing teachers toward test preparation, away from engaging, problem based learning; is it even possible to emulate Mrs. Bensen?  Yes, it is, but it takes authentic leaders who provide great communication, supportive teams, frequent positive reinforcement, and a well designed plan.  It simply will not happen with half measures, top-down edicts, and mixed messages.  The talk is easy, walking the talk, persuasively, is difficult for school leaders.
     In our state, and most states, we now have teacher evaluation systems putting heavy weight on student test score improvement.  In this environment, asking a teacher to set aside this fact of life comes across as duplicitous.  It will take more than an occasional pep talk to move a teacher out of the relative comfort of the teaching style they are in, whatever it may be.  The fact is, the school leader is, in all likelihood, asking the teacher do something he or she never had to do as a teacher.  They both know it; and they may both have their doubts.  At a minimum, it is uncomfortable for both.
     School leaders will go a long way to building believers on the faculty if they take two steps to change the existing paradigm.  First create horizontal and vertical teams whose mission it is to build and support the process.  When teachers see the peers with whom they work on board with them, they see that they are not alone on the journey, not being singled out, and perhaps emboldened, sensing that "they cannot afford to lose all of us."  Horizontal teams put teachers of the same grade level or course together.  Vertical teams put teachers together who will share student cohorts longitudinally over time and are in the same general discipline.  Vertical teams benefit greatly by working out plans for prerequisite skills and sharing data and experiences with specific students.  Horizontal teams are actively engaged in real time with the same children across or within disciplines, providing flexibility for differentiation and just-in-time remediation.  Some schools think they have teaming, when what they have is tribes.  There is a difference.
     The second step in changing the paradigm is planning success.  Success can be designed.  We need the will to create and execute the plan; but success can be designed.  Plan design in this case will require a clear definition of process.  Leaders must include the teachers in the plan from the beginning.  In fact, the plan must be the teachers' plan.  The role of the leader is to keep the team focused on student-centered learning for engagement and problem solving.  The leader does this by asking process questions that challenge the team to create an innovative plan that everyone truly shares and cares to implement.  A key question for the leader to ask is, "What roles do you want me to play?"  Another is, "How will we know our process is on track in the first week, second week, and beyond?"  By asking these questions, the leader is visibly transferring ownership of the process and its oversight to the team of teachers.
     This is about changing habits and building new ones.  Even the most committed teachers will struggle with the change of habits.  Outcomes follow process.  The process is the focus.  Early, consistent implementation of the agreed process steps is essential.  Everyone on the team must own both implementation and oversight.  The leaders role is not oversight of the process, it is support.  Oversight must be truly owned by the teachers as a self-managing team.  The team needs to hear questions from the leader that asks them to reflect on their plan and process implementation.  The team needs to see and feel the leader supporting them, not telling them.  Teachers in this scenario will be skeptical in the early weeks, expecting the leader to be the first to cave in.  In a future post, I will suggest an alternative to teaming as the first step.  Perhaps a slower path with the same ends in mind.