a struggle for survival can generate a feeling of urgency, but that feeling is likely to be short-lived. Motivation for change will last only until the crisis is averted. More enduring catalysts for change are a powerful sense of purpose, a widely shared vision of what an organization might become, and a collective commitment to act in a way that will make that vision a reality. A culture of continuous improvement does not require a persistent state of panic. Schools can certainly become organizations that are characterized by a consistently high state of urgency and the absence of complacency if they are guided by a compelling picture of a future that is clearly superior to the status quo. The concept of the professional learning community can provide that compelling picture.
Summary
Managing the change process requires the ability to operate within a myriad of paradoxes. Those who attempt to transform their schools into professional learning communities should recognize that change is difficult but not impossible. They must be prepared for the anxiety, the discomfort, and the ongoing conflict that always accompany change initiatives, particularly in the early stages of the process. According to Kotter (1996), the most common mistakes in the change process include:
1. Allowing too much complacency.
2. Failing to create a sufficiently powerful guiding coalition.
3. Underestimating the power of vision.
4. Undercommunicating the vision by a power of 10.
5. Permitting structural obstacles to block the change process.
6. Failing to create short-term wins.
7. Declaring victory too soon.
8. Neglecting to anchor changes firmly in the culture.
Some contend that schools will never change unless those within them feel a sense of urgency. These critics call for doomsday strategies that threaten the very existence of public education. But while such a struggle for survival can generate a feeling of urgency, that feeling is likely to last only until the crisis has passed. A more enduring catalyst for change is a compelling picture of what the school might become—one that projects positive images and practical alternatives that are clearly superior to the status quo. The concept of the professional learning community can provide that picture.
Chapter 4
Building the Foundation of a Professional Learning Community: Mission and Vision
The most important question in any organization has to be “What is the business of our business?” Answering this question is the first step in setting priorities.
—Judith Bardwick (1996, p. 134)
There is no more powerful engine driving an organization toward excellence and long-range success than an attractive, worthwhile, and achievable vision of the future, widely shared.
—Burt Nanus (1992, p. 3)
Imagine that the school as a professional learning community rests on a foundation of four building blocks or pillars that support the school and give direction to the people within it. Each of these building blocks takes its shape and form from the answer to a specific question addressed to the people in the school. If these people all take the time to consider the questions, engage in deep discourse about them, and reach consensus on how the questions are to be answered, the foundation of a learning community will have been established. Much work will remain, but the reconstruction work will have the benefit of a solid foundation.
The First Building Block: Mission/Purpose
Why do we exist? The mission question challenges members of a group to reflect on the fundamental purpose of the organization, the very reason for its existence. The question asks, “Why do we exist?” “What are we here to do together?” and “What is the business of our business?” The focus is not on how the group can do what it is currently doing better or faster, but rather on why it is doing it in the first place. Addressing this question is the first step in clarifying priorities and giving direction to everyone in the organization.
Mission statements are nothing new to schools. Many states have passed legislation that requires schools to have a mission statement. Even in states without this legislative mandate, mission statements for local schools or school districts are commonplace. A cursory review of these statements reveals that they sound much the same. The generic mission statement for North American schools solemnly proclaims:
It is the mission of our school to help each and every child realize his or her full potential and become a responsible and productive citizen and life-long learner who is able to use technology effectively and appreciate the multi-cultural society in which we live as we prepare for the challenges of the twenty-first century. (DuFour, 1997a).
The similarity of mission statements is not necessarily a cause for concern. Whether their schools are in Miami or Vancouver, the province of Ontario or the state of California, educators seem to acknowledge that schools serve a common purpose—to help every child lead a successful and satisfying life and make a contribution to community and country. This idea of success for every student so eloquently articulated in mission statements across the country is closely linked to another affirmation that “we believe all kids can learn.” In fact, that phrase has become something of a cliché, a mantra chanted unthinkingly by educators across the country. Few contemporary teachers or principals would challenge this assertion that all children are capable of learning. In fact, answers to the question, “Do you believe all kids can learn?” reveal very little about the beliefs, expectations, or practices of the educators in a given school. The more relevant and useful questions to ask when trying to build a shared sense of purpose are:
1. If we believe all kids can learn, exactly what is it that we will expect them to learn?
2. If we believe all kids can learn, how do we respond when they do not learn?
Below are descriptions of four schools that operate under very different assumptions. Even though the educators within these schools would contend that they believe “all kids can learn,” they would respond to students who are not learning in significantly different ways.
We believe all kids can learn …
… based on their ability. The extent of students’ learning is determined by their innate ability or aptitude. This ability is relatively fixed, and as teachers, we have little influence over the extent of student learning. It is our job to create multiple programs or tracks that address these differences in ability in our students and then to guide students to the appropriate program. This ensures that students have access to the proper curriculum and an optimum opportunity to master material appropriate to their abilities.
… if they take advantage of the opportunity to learn. Students can learn if they choose to put forth the effort to do so. It is our job to provide students with this opportunity to learn, and we fulfill our responsibility when we attempt to present lessons that are both clear and engaging. In the final analysis, however, while it is our job to teach, it is the student’s job to learn. We should invite them and encourage them to learn, but we should also honor their decision if they elect not to do so.
… and we will accept responsibility for ensuring their growth. Certainly it is our responsibility to help each student demonstrate some growth as a result of his or her experience in our classrooms. But the extent of that growth
