cedes it by engaging in the escalation (an escalation can’t occur with only one participant).
So how do educators build positive learning environments? The answer is simple—with intentionality, or, in other words, on purpose. My experience in classrooms has proven that having an effective classroom policy (expectations, not rules) and the opportunity for students to learn from their actions (consequence plus instruction) ensure the positive learning environments teachers desire. This often requires a culture shift in a school. In this chapter, we will examine the relationship between culture and structures in a school, reflect on the importance of collective commitments to changing culture, and consider how teams should assess their current reality to make the necessary cultural changes.
Understanding Culture and Structure
Culture describes the assumptions, beliefs, values, and habits that guide the work of educators within a school. Structure, on the other hand, includes the policies, procedures, rules, and hierarchical relationships that exist within the school. Factors internal to the school may mostly drive culture, while factors external to the school influence structure. Great debate often ensues in schools and districts around which of these matters most for improving student learning outcomes. Some may argue that a strong, consistent structural approach will provide the stability that is a precursor to creating positive learning environments. Others may argue that the culture of the school, the way the adults treat each other and their students, and the consistency of instructional approach will lead to the desired learning environment.
What is clear is the notion that a school won’t have success implementing structural change if the culture doesn’t believe in change. Education researcher Phillip C. Schlechty (1997) states, “Structural change that is not supported by cultural change will eventually be overwhelmed by the culture, for it is in the culture that organizations find meaning and stability” (p. 136). If the existing culture does not have as an absolute that all students can learn at high levels, it is moot to have dialogue about some of the most effective teaching tools (formative assessment, response to intervention, and collaboration), as they won’t produce the desired results in such a culture. Educational consultant Anthony Muhammad (2018) offers an even starker reality when he suggests:
Terms like research-based and best practice have been no match for the deeply ingrained disbelief in student ability that cripples many struggling schools. In fact, I have had the opportunity to study several schools where pessimistic faculty members are eager to prove that new strategies or programs aimed at raising student performance do not work in order to justify and solidify their hypothesis that not all students are capable of achieving academic excellence. (p. 24)
If the prevailing culture devalues some students, clamping down on structure will do nothing to improve the outcomes for those students. This seems straightforward yet remains elusive in many jurisdictions. Muhammad (2018) provides some insight when he states:
Cultural change is a much more difficult form of change to accomplish…. It takes knowledge of where a school has been, and agreement about where the school should go. It requires an ability to deal with beliefs, policies, and institutions that have been established to buffer educators from change and accountability. It is a tightrope act of major proportion. (p. 25)
This might lead one to think that the school or district leader should just decide how things ought to be done in a school and enforce this cultural change. However, Bryan Walker, partner and managing director of IDEO, and Sarah A. Soule (2017), professor of organizational behavior, suggest the exact opposite is really what needs to occur:
Culture change can’t be achieved through top-down mandate. It lives in the collective hearts and habits of people and their shared perception of “how things are done around here.” Someone with authority can demand compliance, but they can’t dictate optimism, trust, conviction, or creativity.
Collective commitment driven by meaningful dialogue is the precursor to any effective conversation about culture as well as structure. For example, a school may need to contemplate adding some additional behavior intervention time to produce the desired results, as behavior may be the single biggest deterrent to a student learning in the school. Educators gaining clarity on the culture (beliefs) will allow for the structure (schedule) change to succeed. Effective leaders understand this and build the collective commitment with their team, not for their team. Researcher Carol S. Dweck (2006) states these leaders “surround themselves with the most able people they can find, [and] they look squarely at their own mistakes and deficiencies” (p. 110). These types of leaders are not concerned with being the smartest person in the room or with achieving compliant behavior. They are concerned with growing their team’s skills through a collective commitment, which impacts the growth of all students.
Ensuring that all staff members create and own the mission to serve all students is a critical component of the success in managing learning. Schools cannot address the needs of all students if there is misunderstanding, miscommunication, or misappropriation of the mission. It must be collectively established and reviewed annually in order to fully entrench the cultural changes required for successful, schoolwide ownership of managing learning.
Making a Collective Commitment to the Cultural Change
If we are going to change the culture, we have to understand this change doesn’t take place overnight. Real change is a process, not a declaration—and it requires a collective commitment. Educational consultant Kenneth C. Williams and Tom Hierck (2015) suggest:
Collective responsibility means much more than clichés, slogans, and catchphrases. It requires that the moral imperative (the why of your work) be embedded in every aspect of a school’s culture—through every decision, behavior, and action taken as a school. (p. 9)
We can’t think the culture has shifted just because we’ve created a fancy slogan that says we are about learning for all students, and posted it around the school. We need to focus on the space between posters and practice.
Change takes time. Sustainable change takes more time! I often suggest to schools that they should prepare for a three-year journey at a minimum. Year 1 is always about clarifying your purpose, your strengths, your journey, and your capacity. Schools must ask themselves if there is a collective commitment that all staff have created and own, or whether they have merely adopted a previous mission of the school that was handed down to them. It’s important that staff actions and commitments are reflected in the mission they create. All educators need to be a part of this review of the mission and surface all their beliefs during this process. Modeling the expectations is a vital part of the work.
Year 2 is about aligning your behavior with the commitments you’ve made. Staff reflect on whether their policies, procedures, and practices align with the behaviors they are exhibiting. In content- or subject-area collaborative teams, teachers should review all that is occurring in their classrooms to see if it aligns with what is being espoused. Leaders should review with the entire faculty before considering or making changes.
Year 3 is about monitoring and celebrating. Educators need to reflect on what is working and what is not, and themselves—whether they can defend the work they are doing without becoming defensive. There also is a need for celebrations to occur as recognition of growth toward achieving the desired goal of managing learning. Every time there is a move forward, teams should intentionally acknowledge what has occurred. Here, they can begin to see the benefits of their efforts and know that what they are doing is working. For more information on the different roles, responsibilities, and stages involved in this process, with specific actions and steps different stakeholders can take to plan, manage, and nurture the collective work toward cultural
