important to acknowledge that lengthy and labor-intensive processes like implementing necessary cultural changes may not appeal to all school community members. Change can be daunting. The alternative—continuing to do the same things and get the same results—must be less desirable than the hard work ahead, or else schools won’t move forward. Economist John Kenneth Galbraith (2001) frames this challenge best when he says, “Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof” (p. 241). Implicit in Galbraith’s statement is the common argument I often hear from educators facing change initiatives: “We don’t have the time.” Few would disagree with this understandable argument; educators’ time is stretched thin. Yet, if we are to achieve the necessary change, we must have the willingness to find a way. Unfortunately, the school community may always include those who will resist this work. Blank stares, foot dragging, and yeah-buts are the anchors that prevent any change in school. This is the behavior of the group Muhammad (2018) identifies as the Fundamentalists:
Fundamentalists are the vanguards of tradition and protect the status quo. They are relentless in their attempts to discourage change and protect a system that has allowed them to function and thrive, and they organize to protect this traditional way of practice…. They view change itself as an enemy; therefore, anyone who challenges the system is a threat to the system and a threat to the Fundamentalists. They are the most aggressive and vocal combatants in this war of ideology. (p. 77)
Convincing Fundamentalists to change may seem insurmountable, but don’t abandon hope. I do not believe anyone got into the education profession to be marginal or ineffective. If people have landed on those behaviors, it’s often because someone condoned their behavior. Although the change process may be lengthy, time is on our side when we behave as a collaborative team that owns its collective commitment.
It’s important to recognize how professional learning community (PLC) principles such as working in collaborative teams can support systems thinking elements and Unstoppable Learning principles. Collaboration enhances creation and analysis of these lists to ensure teachers share with each other what is working well with their students. As PLC architect Richard DuFour (2011) suggests:
[Team members] share their expertise with one another and make that expertise available to all of the students served by the team. They establish clear benchmarks and agreed-on measures to monitor progress. They gather and jointly examine information regarding student learning to make more informed decisions and to enhance their practice. (p. 59)
Mutual trust borne out of a collective commitment results in open dialogues and a desire to add whatever practices it might take to mange learning. This needs to occur across all departments and grade levels, as DuFour (2011) reminds us when he describes how, in a PLC, “The school creates a systematic process that ensures that students who are struggling receive additional time and support for learning” (p. 61). When educators do this, all students will grow in their behavioral dispositions as well as their academic content.
Not only do educators work collaboratively in a PLC, but one of the big ideas driving the PLC process is that educators must “take collective responsibility for the success of each student” (DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, Many, & Mattos, 2016, p. 11). As educational consultant Jenni Donohoo (2017) states:
When teachers believe that together they and their colleagues can impact student achievement, they share a sense of collective teacher efficacy…. Collective efficacy is high when teachers believe that the staff is capable of helping students master complex content, fostering students’ creativity, and getting students to believe they can do well in school. (p. 3)
It’s essential that every educator bear the commitment to any change initiative. We can no longer operate (and probably never should have operated) as individuals, each giving our best while trying to move all students forward.
The familiarity that educators have with established school routines, procedures, and practices can present a challenge to working collaboratively in teams and embracing change. If an individual feels he or she is well-versed in these aspects, and his or her results are “good,” that person may find it difficult to accept that others have something else to offer. When I first started teaching, most teachers operated as independent contractors. They showed little desire to share best practice or to engage in cross-grade or cross-content conversations. I truly entered the profession being expected to figure things out for myself, and I suspect I am not alone in that experience. Unfortunately, this leads to a school of independent contractors whose only commonalities are the parking lot and the faculty lounge refrigerator. It creates districts of independent schools instead of coherent school districts, resulting in entirely different approaches to learning within the same jurisdiction.
It is simply impossible for any one staff member to be as smart, proficient, and effective as the collective staff. I can look back over my career and state unequivocally that anything we did was vastly superior to anything I did. Autonomy should reside in your method of delivery, not in what you deliver. Further, the strong desire to function as a team facilitates the move to talking about our students instead of my students. A strong, committed team will overcome challenges that a loose affiliation of individual talent will never surmount. Healthy and productive relationships among staff facilitate a positive school climate and learning environment and build healthy relationships among students and between students and staff. The strength of a team is that it becomes an unstoppable force, but an uncommitted individual can sink any team. All members of a team must buy into the analysis of the current reality and be part of the commitment to take the next step.
Assessing Your Current Reality
Clinical professor of educational leadership Marsha Speck (1996) has identified some key questions that I like to refer to as a test to see where schools would currently place themselves in terms of their collective commitments, especially those schools or individuals who have used the “lack of time” defense to stop progress. Following are some of the questions.
• What is the school vision?
• What are the skills or capacities needed to change?
• What are the incentives or motivations to change?
• What are the resources available to change?
• What is the action plan for change?
• What modifications need to be made during the change process or implementation of the action plan?
• How will the action plan for change be reviewed, evaluated, and revised?
These questions serve as a good assessment for educators to gauge their progress individually and collectively. If you ask the same questions and give the same answers as you did twenty years ago, it might be time to change how you assess your reality.
While beginning the change process will always require time, the adults in a school will realize that effort (and more) when they align their work in service of all students’ learning. Schools exist as learning centers for children, not employment centers for adults. We cannot spend our time on proving why students can’t learn or living on past glory. We must spend it on ensuring all students learn and we hold the keys to making that a reality.
Aligning the Classroom Culture
While every team member needs to be on board with the work ahead, it is equally important that every team member shares a common understanding of the team goals and aligns his or her practice to have consistency with all other team members. However, achieving consistency across
