Ch 6 Learning How to Lead Improvement: Professional Learning That Engages Participants

Chapter 6 on Learning How to Lead Improvement ... was particularly interesting to me in my role as principal. The topic on principal well being is often discussed but I felt this is the first time that anyone has hit the core of what can assist ie examine the Theory of Action ToA and the resulting actions and consequences. It is easy to see also how this structure can be incorporated into other forms of professional learning in the school. I found when writing this blog I could have written pages so instead I have commented on a few aspects.

The first thing I found useful was examining the ToA as a reflection of my own leading.  I could not help but 'check in' if I believed and valued the same aspects as presented in the examples given. One of the key points ie responsibility, is one that is visible in many of our governance documentations and this can become overwhelming if one does not remember that you are surrounded by highly competent, intelligent leaders and teachers. I also agreed with the analysis that whilst the report on principal well being revealed some patterns re time use, in the original approach, it did not examine the reasons for those patterns Eg ToA This is often the approach I feel) Overall this chapter explained well a reference structure for most Professional learning. Good explanation of when bypass can be used (pg 107)

There were many statements in this chapter I feel worth highlighting eg:

'There is compelling evidence that investment in teacher and leader knowledge and skill has a far bigger effect on student outcomes than investment in such things as school architecture, computers or extra staffing (Hattie, 2009)

This is a belief that I have always felt to be true. I remember when I first came to the school we discussed as a staff that our greatest asset are the teachers; supported by other members of staff. Taking our time to continue to up skill over the years and then slowly supporting the learning with appropriate resources is key. I feel that if we were to create a school design together for the future we are now better equipped to do it together with significant engagement. I can now see why some of the early models of Flexible Spaces had no chance of working to its optimum because to be fair there was not the time to engage in peoples ToA

'...a substantial part of the course needed to be devoted to teaching participants how to reveal, evaluate, and revise the ToA that explained their current patterns of ...' Pg92

This led me to ask, How much time do we spend on this skill with teachers? Input from others can then be used as a resource. It is definitely doable.

Final message:

' A leader must listen and be ready at any time and for any aspect of an improvement process to switch from bypass into engagement mode, whether it be for a few deep conversations or, as in this case, for most of the design process.'

Chapter 6

Sorry to Blog first as it is not my week, but I have a full day today and wanted to submit my thoughts early.

Although this chapter focused heavily on the Principal of a school and the importance of an engagement approach that allows Principals to help teachers make the links between the problems they are trying to solve and the belief and values that explain those actions. I personally made a connection between this and my and others ideas of best practise when teaching writing.

When we teach reading we follow our shared practise of modelled/shared reading, guided reading, followed by independent reading tasks. This time is used for students to practise the skills learnt through modelled, shared and guided sessions. However in writing, I feel educators can strengthen the learning involved throughout the guided writing step. In our shared practise of writing we model and share writing strategies that are designed to suit the needs of the students. Our shared practise in writing sees teachers complete a guided writing session with a selected number of students after the modelled/shared writing session. However, most students are left to work independently. We assume students understand the modelled/shared strategies and we ask students to “apply it” on their own. We therefore ask students to figure out how to integrate new strategies into their existing theory of action. This has me questioning the effectiveness of our guided writing sessions with one group of students a day. I am asking myself is this enough to assist students with their preconceptions of writing, or is there a better way we can assist students through the guided writing process? Should be expect students to be able to apply these strategies independently? I’m interested to get your feedback.

Chapter 5: Learning How to Lead Improvement: Coaching That Engages Principals

This chapter draws together the previous chapters with strategies on how to engage in change from a collaborative point of view. It also emphasises the fact that change, in all likelihood, will not be successful if imposed on others. It models the impact of Leadership Coaching as an effective tool, provided the coach already has their own ideas, knowledge and skills based around the propsed change, so that coach and Principal can dialogue between their two theories, leading to a shared theory. For this partnership to be successful and truely collaborative they need to enact the values of respect, truth-seeking and internal commitment.

Engaging in others thinking assists the Principal to avoid bypassing the thinking of their staff. In the example given the Principal had no understanding of the teachers thinking around their current practice but only focused her thoughts on the proposed change. To engage the teachers the principal needs to:
                         1. understand their beliefs
                         2. articulate her own and
                         3. create a conversation between the 2.
This in turn helps to make the Principal's thinking transparent.

The words 'substitute rather than add' resonated with me too. In much of our school PD we have asked teachers to let go of something they had been doing and substitute it with something new. We cannot keep adding to what has 'always' been done. On p84 it alludes to the fact that any change requires a shared journey; can the Principal do anything differently that will assist teachers with the proposed change?  This can only be done through engaging with rather than bypassing others theories of action.

Chapter 4 Phase III and IV

Many things in the chapter made me reflect on my own practise as a leader. When I read the section on the leader's role as an evaluator I agreed that often we confuse this term 'evaluation' with 'judgemental' and being judgemental stops a leader being open to discussing the views of others and being open about how learning is being evaluated.
We need to look at all the competing theories when making a decision on the criteria to be used to evaluate change. If we don't we will not engage all the stakeholder. The five steps for agreeing upon a set of evaluation criteria were clearly delineated but the main point that resonated with me was that improvement will only happen if the problem is analysed and the criteria used to evaluate the solution are closely aligned and as it states later in the chapter monitored within a selected time frame.
I found the section where leaders were in a 'communication tangle' caught between an honest evaluation and a personal/professional relationship also extremely interesting and the conflict between a leader's 'thoughts/ what they might say/ how they should say it ' very honest. One sentence I identified with was: "not to tone down or withhold the words but to change the thinking that produces such a judgemental evaluation." I could be more open minded in checking that my evaluation matches that of the teacher.
In phase IV, the implementation of a new shared theory of action, made me think that when we do introduce new actions do we offer enough support? do we ask teachers if they still have concerns? do we ask if they are implementing these new actions in their teaching and how do we ask this? Each teacher needs to attended to individually. It is true that as leaders we want all students to improve not just those students who happen to be in the class of a teacher who will more readily change their practice.
Figure 4.5 summed up the last section succinctly and I think we need to make it very clear to teachers that as a part of regular classroom observations, classroom walk throughs and instructional walks what leaders are looking for when they give a respectful critique and as teachers that they can ask for feedback in an area they seek improvement or an area in which they have become more confident. 

Chapter 4: The Four Phases of Theory Engagement

Bypass Approach to change - characterised by persuasion and or incentives + accountabilities. This is compliance but not engagement. It doesn't develop a sense of vested interest in the change.
The illustration on page 39 sums up the Four Phases:

I liked the quote preceding this diagram,
          ". . . the following description greatly oversimplifies its iterative, dynamic and messy nature."

Phase 1: Agree on the problem to be solved.

Here Robinson identifies that there needs to be collective wisdom behind a change. It needs to be something that is sought after not merely because someone 'says' that it is best practice but because it is understood that to make the change would have a significant positive impact. It must also be something that is seen as possible, not merely a lofty, idealistic goal.
The challenge for change comes from data. In particular comparative data showing how a shift in approach might benefit student outcomes.
Constructive Problem Talk
"agreeing that there is a problem provides no guarantee of agreement about its causes and possible solutions." The common ground of the agreement allows for movement towards a next step without blame.
Avoiding or playing a blame game when dealing with an issue is more common but ineffective.
"A problem is defined as a gap between a current and desired state of affairs. People can agree to reduce the gap whether or not they agree on how large it is." p.45

Phase 2: Inquire into the relevant theory of action.

What was done or not done? = the action component of a theory in use.

Why was that done or not done? = beliefs and values explaining the above.

What happened as a result? = consequences

"To listen to and acknowledge a theory of action does not signal agreement with it." Relational trust.

Resistance = not a personal opposition to a leader but a "rational response to a perceived threat to what is held dear" p.54   = "theory competition"

Phase 3: Evaluate the merit of the current and alternative theories of action.

People may evaluate theories of action very differently because they do not agree on the criteria against which the theories are evaluated. 

For myself the question arises What if my theory of action is correct, even in part, and I am influenced to change? Can data be manipulated to reflect the worth of any theory? This speaks again to the whole initial idea that this is a messy process and reinforces the need to have relational trust while ongoing evaluation can be undertaken.

Evaluative Criteria is a crucial component of any attempt at change or recognition of validity of current practice. 

"Engagement requires both parties to have access to each other's thinking." p.60

My earlier question here was addressed by the "I am right" idea later developed in the section. Having access to each other's thinking also needs to be considered in terms of whether one person in the discussion is perceived as in a position of power or as an equal in finding a potential solution to a perceived problem.

Phase 4: Implement and monitor a new, sufficiently shared theory of action.

The emphasis on frequent feedback as being core to improvement was clear. Allowing a change project to run without constant checking in, on progress in implementation as well as outcomes, would lead to a potential waste of invested time. Collection of ongoing data is crucial.

Every child every day does not just apply to focus 160. Educational improvement once adopted as a program in the school need to have widespread application. Where this is not present, or perceived so, data should be referred to and evaluated. This evaluation should occur as a matter of course regardless of success or other. This leads to timely and appropriate support.

"The point is . . . to get timely information that people agree is sufficiently trustworthy . . . to judge progress, identify unanticipated stumbling blocks and make decisions about any needed revisions to the new theory of action." p.69