PLC Blog

Building Consensus for Change

August 4, 2010

By George Knights, PLC at Work™ associate and principal at Newhart Middle School

Change involves managing the complex matrix of relationships and beliefs that exist in an organization and aligning them toward a mission of higher learning for all. In my career, there is no better example of this approach than when I recently implemented a new bell schedule to accommodate some critical interventions as part of my school’s PRTI efforts. Bell schedules and busing seem to be two sacred areas in public education, but they also serve to bubble up core beliefs and create healthy dissonance within a staff. Although difficult and time consuming, the effort was “well worth it” in the end because change happened; however, more importantly, clarity of our mission for learning and ultimate commitment to the change was the result.

The Intervention Committee, our guiding coalition in this effort, realized quickly that the current bell schedule was an obstacle for providing timely intervention for students who struggle to learn. The current schedule had a Silent Sustained Reading period just after lunch. The committee realized three things: 1) the SSR period was not being implemented with fidelity and coherence, 2) the allotted time was not long enough, and 3) being after lunch, students who struggled in the periods at the end of the day had to wait until the next day to get help. I had been through a feisty bell schedule change at a high school a few years earlier and warned the committee of the impending conflict this proposal would cause. I front-loaded this effort with a statement to the committee that it was critical to draw from the staff a mandate to provide this necessary piece of learning in our bell schedule. We followed Rick DuFour’s recommendation for consensus: “Do not move forward until all voices are heard and the will of the staff is clearly evident to all, even to those who most oppose it.”

The team, (the Intervention Committee and I), made a plan to draw out every voice on this subject. Our worst nightmare would have been in the end if a staff member said, “I had no idea we were changing the bell schedule.” We were after more than just knowledge; we wanted complete emersion of what was at stake. We fleshed out every voice in a myriad of ways–small groups, site visits, reports, department teams, common course teams, professional literature reviews, online discussion groups through Schoolloop, after-school “town hall” meetings, PTA meetings, email threads, student government, and department chair personal interviews with every member of his or her department. In each forum of discussion, some sort of summary document was produced to record the outcome of the discussion, supportive or otherwise, and published for all to digest. Revealing discussion came from the staff as this subtle process of alignment toward our mission for learning became central to the discussion.

As one could imagine, this was emotional for some folks. Some wanted to keep things the same; after all, we are a high-performing school and “should leave well enough alone.” Others felt we should rally to improve SSR rather than abandon this six-year effort. Some felt too many precious minutes were being shaved from the CORE instruction and it would hurt learning in the end. The intention of the team was not to come up with a new fancy bell schedule but to support learning, and we agreed to insert this distinction into every discussion. Team members also did some local research and interviewed teachers and administrators from other similar schools for input, advice, and guidance. These findings were also published for the staff. We coined the final document that contained every option for bell schedules, pros and cons for each, and opinions from every staff member. The “Voices” document was printed and placed in the hands of each and every staff member. There was no escaping this discussion. You had to be on a “leave of absence” to not know what was at stake.

Before the final “will of the staff assessment” was taken, the faculty was given a series of statements in advance of the meeting. Besides the single proposal of the final bell schedule (not multiple schedules), a statement was included that read in part, “My voice was heard and I had the opportunity to express my view.” The staff was also given a five-statement continuum from “I veto,” to “I can live with it” and “I’m all in!” Each staff member came to the meeting, signed in, and anonymously expressed his or her view. Two staff members (including the union rep) received the views (expressed on paper) and the staff members met with their common course teams in other rooms. The two staff members placed dots on a huge poster that included the statement and represented each view on the continuum.

Once completed, the staff returned to see a visual representation of the will of the staff on the posters. As they entered the room, they were given a final dot and instructions to place the dot on the final poster that contained the following statement, “It is clear to me that the will of this school has emerged regarding this proposal. The staff has given a mandate to move forward with this bell schedule to begin in the school year of 2009-2010.” The continuum was “I see clear disagreement and we should not move forward” to “Although I see reservation, the overall will of the staff to move forward is evident” and “It is clearly the will of this staff to move forward with this proposal.” Although only a few dissenting dots were placed, the team was prepared to revise the proposal and go through the process again had there been clear dissention.

My intention as principal was not just to get a new and improved bell schedule; rather, I desired to continuously bubble up the core beliefs and fundamental values associated with our mission for learning at Newhart Middle School. Since change is just as much about building relationships as it is alignment of values and core beliefs, I knew that I could accomplish both. As a result, there is absolutely NO resistance to implementation of the interventions. Although some clearly disagreed, they respected the fact that the process allowed their voices to be heard, and the chances of them undermining implementation efforts decreased dramatically. Lastly, this change process exposed the “voices” that are fundamentally NOT aligned with the agreed-upon mission of the school. These staff members are beginning to make choices to respectfully transfer to other schools that more closely align with their core beliefs. There are no hard feelings–just clarity. At our final staff meeting before summer, one staff member did his traditional end-of-the-year slide show. Admittedly a bit of a tearjerker, he added one photo of the dots on the consensus statement with the subtitle, “How Change Happens at Newhart!” (Click to enlarge image above right.)

I could not think of a better way to end the year.

Which School-Improvement Approach Works?

June 23, 2010

By Rick DuFour

It seems to me that there are three competing approaches to school improvement in the United States today that are based on very different assumptions.

1. We’re okay; they are not okay.
This approach operates from the assumption that educators are doing a superlative job and need not consider making any substantive changes either to their professional practice or the structure and culture of their schools. The problems lie elsewhere. Society must solve the cycle of poverty. State governments need to pass more enlightened educational policies and provide more funding. Parents need to become more involved in the education of their children. Students need to become more responsible. Continue Reading

Open House Webinar: Master’s Degree in PLCs

June 10, 2010

Free Open House Webinar
Hosted by Richard and Rebecca DuFour
Presented by the National Institute for Professional Practice and Wilkes University

Monday, June 28, 2010
5:00 p.m.–6:00 p.m. EDT
Register today!

You are invited to learn about the master’s degree in professional learning communities, which is based on the research of Richard and Rebecca DuFour.

Self-Directed Teams Contribute to Sustainability

May 27, 2010

By Rick and Becky DuFour

We received a question from a school where teachers were upset that the administration seemed to be dictating what was to occur at their team meetings. Teachers resented being micromanaged, and administrators felt that teams needed specific directions and focus to ensure teachers used the time productively. Here is how we responded: Continue Reading

Upcoming RTI Webinar Hosted by Austin Buffum

May 24, 2010

Free Webinar

Pyramid Response to Intervention Webinar
Hosted by Austin Buffum

Wednesday, June 2, 2010
5:00 p.m. – 6:00 pm EDT
Register today!

For educators working in PLCs, RTI is nothing new. Timely, targeted, and systematic interventions are built into daily practice. Austin draws from the best-selling book Pyramid Response to Intervention to explain how RTI is sustainable and highly effective when aligned with PLC concepts.

Join the conversation with Rick and Becky DuFour

May 20, 2010

Just a reminder that this is the second day of our conversation which ends tomorrow. Click here and join in using VoiceThread. If you do not have an account, create one for FREE! Then you can comment, ask questions, or just listen in.

Read moderator Bill Ferriter’s summary of day one on his blog here.

You might also be interested in Bill’s set of directions on how to make digital conversations work for you and this set of directions about how to sign up for a VoiceThread account.

Special Education

May 12, 2010

By Rick and Becky DuFour

Isn’t the system of interventions what special education is designed to do?

Some people think the PLC concept is just another version of special education. They suggest, “If the kids can’t cut it, why not just put them in special education? That’s why we have it.”

Veteran educators will quickly acknowledge that student failure is often not a result of a disabling condition, but rather is a function of student indifference to school, unwillingness to do the work, or a host of personal problems that interfere with a student’s ability to do what is necessary to be successful in school. Continue Reading

Tracking Team-Based Interventions

May 4, 2010

By Bill Ferriter, teacher and PLC associate

Preparing for our upcoming conversation with Rick and Becky DuFour on the steps that highly functioning professional learning communities take to provide enrichment and remediation opportunities for every child has gotten me thinking a ton about the intervention efforts of my own learning team. Continue Reading

Collaboration Empowers PLC Process

April 29, 2010

By Rick DuFour

We received an inquiry from a teacher who was attempting to lead the implementation of the PLC process in her school. She wanted to provide each of the teams in her elementary school with possible common assessments that teams could use. Her hope was to lighten the teachers’ workload and convince more reluctant teachers to participate. She asked where she might go to gather common assessments. Here is my response: Continue Reading

Book Review: Raising the Bar and Closing the Gap

April 27, 2010

By Bill Ferriter, teacher and PLC associate

In preparation for our upcoming conversation with Rick and Becky DuFour on the steps that schools can take to develop effective systems of intervention that reach beyond the classroom, I just finished reading their newest book, Raising the Bar and Closing the Gap. Here’s my review Continue Reading