Game Plan: A Playbook for Developing Winning PLCs at Work by Solution Tree

Plan A Playbook for Developing Winning PLCs at Work™

• Learn why a well-defined game plan is necessary for schools and districts to build solid collaborative relationships and be steadily successful • Study the coaching points featured in each chapter, which highlight a skill or strategy and how to implement it to achieve a critical aspect of a uniform game plan • Assess facilitation guides, conversation prompts, related questions, templates, and rubrics they can use to evaluate and build their game plan • Read quotations that provide real-world links to the described strategies and that can be used for self-reflection

ISBN 978-1-936763-64-1 90000

solution-tree.com

Visit go.solution-tree.com/PLCbooks to download the reproducibles in this book. 9 781936 763641

GA R CÍA ∙ M C CLU SKE Y ∙ TAY LOR

Educators will:

A Playbook for Developing Winning PLCs at Work ™

In Game Plan: A Playbook for Developing Winning PLCs at Work,™ authors Héctor García, Katherine McCluskey, and Shelley — FRO M THE FOREW BY RIC ORD Taylor assert that educators and HARD DUFOU R schoolwide and districtwide leaders can learn a lot from championship-level sports teams. Like a sports team, a school leadership team must develop a uniform game plan to foster a collaborative community of learners, develop a shared focus, and meet growth goals. It takes more than enthusiasm and a few talented individuals to build strong collaborative relationships and be consistently successful. The authors provide a collection of coaching points in order to help teams examine their process, explore change and new concepts of leadership, assemble commitment to PLC principles, and concretely employ these principles in a PLC culture.

GA ME PLAN

GAME

Foreword by Richard DuFour

GAME

Plan A Playbook for Developing Winning PLCs at Work™

Héctor GARCÍA

Katherine MCCLUSKEY

Shelley TAYLOR

Copyright © 2015 by Solution Tree Press Materials appearing here are copyrighted. With one exception, all rights are reserved. Readers may reproduce only those pages marked “Reproducible.” Otherwise, no part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, photocopying, recording, or otherwise) without prior written permission of the publisher. 555 North Morton Street Bloomington, IN 47404 800.733.6786 (toll free) / 812.336.7700 FAX: 812.336.7790 email: info@solution-tree.com solution-tree.com Visit go.solution-tree.com/PLCbooks to download the reproducibles in this book. Printed in the United States of America 19 18 17 16 15

12345

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data García, Héctor, 1970 Game plan : a playbook for developing winning PLCs at Work / Héctor García, Katherine McCluskey, and Shelley Taylor. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-936763-64-1 (perfect bound) 1. Professional learning communities. 2. Teachers--In-service training. 3. School improvement programs. I. Title. LB1731.G28 2015 370.71’1--dc23 2015001351 Solution Tree Jeffrey C. Jones, CEO Edmund M. Ackerman, President Solution Tree Press President: Douglas M. Rife Associate Acquisitions Editor: Kari Gillesse Editorial Director: Lesley Bolton Managing Production Editor: Caroline Weiss Production Editor: Tara Perkins Copy Editor: Rachel Rosolina

Table of Contents

About the Authors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv INTRO DUCTI O N

How Leadership Teams Develop a Winning Game Plan. . . . . . . . . . 1 CHAP TER 1

Bringing Clarity to the Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Coaching Point 1.1: E stablishing Clarity Through a Schoolwide Template . . . . . . . . 7 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Coaching Point 1.2: I dentifying and Evaluating Our Current Reality . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Coaching Point 1.3: Selecting the Right Team Members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Coaching Point 1.4: Building Shared Ownership and Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Coaching Point 1.5: Ensuring Effective Communication Throughout the Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 v

GAME PLAN

CHAP TER 2

Collaborating to Turn Good Teams Into Championship Teams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Coaching Point 2.1: U nderstanding and Supporting the Five Levels of Collaboration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Coaching Point 2.2: S etting Aside the Time to Develop Effective Collaboration. . 35 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Coaching Point 2.3: Developing and Supporting a Strong Team Foundation. . . . 39 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Coaching Point 2.4: U sing Common Assessments to Drive the Collaborative Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Coaching Point 2.5: Creating Opportunities for Singletons to Collaborate . . . . . . 45 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Coaching Point 2.6: Embracing and Fostering Healthy Conflict. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

CHAP TER 3

Increasing Student Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Coaching Point 3.1: Focusing on the Right Curriculum Work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Coaching Point 3.2: Developing Common Assessments That Guide Instruction, Interventions, and Enrichment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Table of Contentsďťż

Coaching Point 3.3: A nalyzing Assessment Data to Effectively Impact Student Achievement and Teacher Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Coaching Point 3.4: Ensuring a Systemic Process in Academic Tier 1 Intervention. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Coaching Point 3.5: Supporting the Development and Implementation of Progress-Monitoring Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

CHAP TER 4

Focusing on Results and Purposeful Involvement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Coaching Point 4.1: Reflecting and Adjusting Through Effective SMART Goals . . 76 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Coaching Point 4.2: Advancing Results Through the Formative Assessment Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Coaching Point 4.3: U sing Powerful Data Discussions to Support Student Learning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Coaching Point 4.4: Examining the Teamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Process to Promote a Continuous Improvement Mindset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Coaching Point 4.5: Validating Progress and Celebrating Success. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

vii

GAME PLAN

viii

CHAP TER 5

Avoiding Pitfalls and Promoting Winning Throughout the Organization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Coaching Point 5.1: Establishing Trustâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;The Cornerstone of Every Successful Team. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Coaching Point 5.2: Moving Struggling Teams Toward Better Performance. . . . . . 97 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Coaching Point 5.3: Developing Talent in a Team Member. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Coaching Point 5.4: Building and Leading a Collaborative Culture Through Leadership Forums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Coaching Point 5.5: Ensuring Long-Term Success Through Powerful Feedback and Support. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 The What . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 The How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

References and Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

About the Authors

Héctor García, PhD, is currently a superintendent for a suburban unit school district in Illinois. He has been an educator for more than twenty years, with a background as a teacher, high school principal, and district administrator in a variety of school settings. Héctor’s educational experiences range from working in a predominantly low-income school to working in some of the most affluent and high-performing schools, including Adlai E. Stevenson High School in Lincolnshire, Illinois. Héctor’s strong belief in developing schools with a culture of high expectations and collaboration has resulted in marked improvement in various schools. He has also worked with educational leaders to make curricula more relevant to minority students as well as countless teachers to raise the academic achievement for all students at both the local and national level. Héctor has presented throughout the United States on topics ranging from PLC implementation to developing a more effective school culture. In recent years, he has been a part of numerous PLC Institutes around the country and has taught graduate courses for three Chicagoarea universities. Héctor received a bachelor’s degree in history from the University of Illinois at Chicago, a master’s degree in education from Northern Illinois University, and a doctorate in education leadership and policy studies from Loyola University. Katherine McCluskey is currently the director of bilingual, foreign language, and English as a second language (ESL) programming for a suburban school district in Illinois that serves grades preK to 8. As a former teacher in K–12 settings, Katherine has worked with students of diverse socioeconomic status in districts of various sizes. She has also trained, coached, and led staff with a wide range of professional experience. As a district administrator, she has led such key initiatives as a K–8 dual language program, foreign language programming for ix

GAME PLAN

elementary school, and ESL and bilingual programming for preschool through twelfth grade. She has also led districtwide curriculum writing efforts, developed response to intervention protocols, and established professional learning communities in preK–12 settings that have resulted in academic success for students. Katherine has presented at local and state conferences, contributed to the All Things PLC site, published research with the Center for Applied Linguistics, and been recognized for her work with English learner students. Katherine’s passion and commitment to student achievement, in particular the achievement of minority and low-income students, has contributed to her ability to establish highly effective and collaborative cultures focused on the success of all students. Katherine earned a bachelor’s degree from Arizona State University and received her master’s degree in administration from Governor’s State University. She is currently completing her doctoral work in educational leadership at Aurora University. Shelley Taylor is a director at the Consortium for Educational Change (CEC) in Illinois, a nonprofit organization that works with teachers, school and district administrators, school boards, and unions to improve student learning and achievement. As the Core Service Director for Teacher Effectiveness, Shelley supports CEC’s work through design, development and consulting training around teacher evaluation, new teacher induction and mentoring, and co-teaching and inclusion practices. Shelley supports CEC member and nonmember school districts with facilitation and professional development training. Recently, Shelley was a remediation specialist assisting districts with the Growth Through Learning teacher evaluation performance training required for prequalification to meet the Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA) mandates as a qualified professional practice evaluator in Illinois. Shelley has sixteen years of diverse experience in K–12 public schools as a teacher, instructional coach, and district administrator. In these roles, she was successful in creating and implementing staff development and mentoring in the areas of RTI, PLCs, instructional coaching, common assessments, balanced literacy, and coteaching. She specifically focused on developing long-term solutions for growth and improvement in these areas. Working to improve the capacity of teachers and school leaders, Shelley has designed tools for implementing the Danielson Framework for Teaching that help support teacher growth and student success. Shelley also has extensive experience in managing grants including the NCLB Consolidated Federal grant.

About the Authors

Shelley received her bachelor’s degree in elementary education from National-Louis University and a master’s degree in teaching from the University of St. Mary. She also holds an educational leadership endorsement from DePaul University and is a National Board Certified Teacher and Exceptional Needs Specialist for ages birth to young adult. To book Héctor García, Katherine McCluskey, or Shelley Taylor for professional development, contact pd@solution-tree.com.

Preface

ame planning has always been associated with sports, yet today the phrase has become ubiquitous with being well prepared and having a strategic plan for success. In every level of athletic competition, highly effective coaches synthesize their philosophy and expectations into a game plan. In essence, they solidify the most critical components into something tangible and easy to follow. Just as with any sports team, a winning season for schools also starts with the development of a game plan and a playbook. Many leaders ponder the question of what holds teams back, and, as a Professional Learning Communities (PLC) at Work™ consultant who speaks across the country and has been a part of nationally recognized schools, Héctor García has found an interesting pattern. The schools that struggle to move forward are unable to translate their enthusiasm into a systematic plan of action with a process for monitoring their progress along the journey, and they quickly become distracted by a new initiative or concept. Schools that consistently make progress are not only enthusiastic about the work but are also methodical about developing a game plan, ensuring that it is deeply embedded in the culture and behaviors of the staff, and guaranteeing that everyone has the necessary guidance to implement the new vision. The concept of winning is pervasive and highly celebrated both in sports and in a PLC culture. To further illustrate our position, we provide the following brief examples of how the characteristics and actions of successful sports teams are similarly aligned to those of PLCs. • In sports, like in education, individuals can operate in quasi-isolation pursuing different goals, or they can work interdependently and focus on a compelling task or vision. The teams that are purposeful and deliberate about establishing and executing a plan of action seem to win much more often than those who believe in stumbling upon success. • Focusing on developing and coaching all players results in higher achievements than investing only in star players or waiting until the top recruits come to campus all at once. • While individual superstars on a team have tried many times to win championships, few success stories come to mind. Yet, there is a litany xiii

xiv

GAME PLAN

of average players who have come together and won championships even against overwhelming odds. â&#x20AC;˘ A clear commitment to collaboration, respect, and hard work will start to produce the sort of culture that is needed to become a champion. â&#x20AC;˘ Coaching requires insightful and deliberate leadership, not just an expectation that great players will intuitively know how to become a championship team. â&#x20AC;˘ Game plans are never developed overnight or quickly put together. A winning strategy must evolve from guided discussions, various perspectives, deliberate action, and most importantly a guiding coalition. It is our hope that this book will help leadership teams at both ends of the spectrum prepare a game plan to develop the level of clarity and focus that is essential in schools, whether their schools are well organized and poised to become elite educational systems with one or two additional elements of effectiveness or just starting the journey of becoming a professional learning community and need a more comprehensive approach. We know that some readers will utilize the resources we have provided simply as they are presented, while more seasoned veterans might use them to challenge their current practices and assumptions. In either case, the book is meant to offer guidance and spur meaningful discussions on the journey to success. We look forward to contributing to your game plan for success!

Foreword By Richard DuFour

arly in my career as a high school principal, I was often struck by the very different ways in which the same person would approach his or her coaching versus teaching assignments. The best head coaches realized that to create a consistently strong program, they needed to have all of the members of their coaching staff working in unison as a team. They wanted the junior high school, freshman, sophomore, and junior varsity coaches to be clear on the goals of the program and the process to be used in achieving those goals. The same offensive and defensive principles would be taught at each level. The staff would work collectively to solve problems that were occurring at any level. These programs typically provided the best examples of teamwork in the entire school because the coaches worked interdependently to achieve common goals for which each member was mutually accountable. These coaching staffs were big on goals. They would set long-term goals at the outset of the season: “We will make the state playoffs,” or “We will win the conference,” or “We will demonstrate improvement in key indicators every week.” They were equally attentive to short-term goals that helped clarify their game plan. “In this game, special teams will not allow a kickoff return beyond the thirty-yard line, we will gain over one hundred fifty yards in rushing offense, we will hold our opponent to fewer than seventeen points, and we will control possession of the ball for at least 60 percent of the game.” Members of these staffs learned everything they could about the challenges they would be facing in the coming week. Advanced scouts were sent to determine the tendencies, strengths, and weaknesses of an upcoming opponent. Practices were purposefully designed to prepare students for the test they would face when they stepped onto the court, field, or pitch later in the week. The best coaching staffs were fanatics about formative assessment. They were constantly—in practice and in games—gathering evidence of their players’ achievement. They would give specific, diagnostic, formative feedback to individual athletes: “This is what we need you to work on to get better at your position so the team can get better at achieving its goals.” They would check for understanding until they were certain their athletes were clear on what was being asked of them. They would pore over sheets of statistics during the game or at halftime and make adjustments xv

xvi

GAME PLAN

accordingly: “We are being badly outrebounded. One of our goals in the second half is to outrebound our opponents, but to achieve that goal everyone must contribute. Our guards must stop releasing and get to the boards, and our front court needs to do a better job of getting a body on the opponent on every shot.” These same individuals who were so committed to collaboration, goal setting, focused preparation, and formative assessments often abandoned these principles when entering their classrooms where they insisted on teaching in isolation. They didn’t set either short-term or long-term goals based on student learning. Many never bothered to even review the high-stakes assessments their students would take to determine if they would be eligible for admission to college. They used assessments to assign grades to students rather than as feedback regarding the effectiveness of their instruction or to identify the needs of individual students. Their very different approach in the classroom was not a reflection of disinterest in teaching. Many of these coaches were excellent instructors and took pride in their relationships with their students. The stark contrast between how they approached their work with athletes versus their work with students spoke instead to the very different cultures of two different worlds—coaching and teaching. The culture of coaching has always supported the principle of people working interdependently to achieve shared goals for which they were mutually accountable. No self-respecting coach would be inattentive to setting goals, advance preparation, or making adjustments in their coaching based on evidence of what was working and what was not. The culture of teaching, on the other hand, has been characterized by isolation. For too long in our profession, teaching has been regarded as closing one’s classroom door and serving as the autonomous ruler of one’s kingdom. Studies dating from the 1970s and continuing to the present have cited this tradition of working in isolation as the major obstacle to substantive school improvement. Game Plan makes clear that what we know about the most successful athletic programs transfers perfectly to what we know about the most effective schools. The quotes from coaches and athletes that the authors use throughout the text ring true for educators at all levels. The best thing about this book, however, is the care the authors take to provide precise tools for bringing concepts and ideas to life in the real world of schools. They are passionate advocates for the professional learning community process; however, they also recognize that even the grandest premise eventually comes down to hard work. To succeed in that work, people throughout the organization need clarity. As Chip and Dan Heath, authors of Switch (2010), write: If you want people to change, you must provide crystal-clear direction. . . . Many leaders pride themselves on setting high-level direction: I’ll set the

Foreword vision and stay out of the details. . . . But it’s not enough. Big-picture, handsoff leadership isn’t likely to work in a change situation, because the hardest part of change—the paralyzing part—is precisely in the details. . . . Ambiguity is the enemy. Any successful change requires a translation of ambiguous goals into concrete behaviors. (pp. 16, 53–54)

This is exactly what Game Plan provides—the details, the translation of ambiguous goals into concrete behaviors. The authors make the complex simple by breaking down concepts into specific, manageable action steps. The facilitation guides, key questions, and discussion prompts that they offer as coaching points are tremendously valuable resources that will benefit any district, school, or team willing to engage in the dialogue these tools are intended to generate. If you are looking for a resource to help bring the professional learning community process to life in your school or district, you won’t find a better one than Game Plan. I highly recommend it.

xvii

Introduction How Leadership Teams Develop a Winning Game Plan

volving education policies and standards across the United States have placed higher accountability and pressure on schools. Strong leadership is needed to navigate, advocate, and implement change in the profession. In past years, school leaders were easily identified as the principal at the building level and the superintendent at the district level. Much in the same manner as we traditionally defined the principal and superintendent as school leaders, we have always thought of leadership teams as those composed solely of administrators. While leadership teams made up exclusively of administrators may still be a viable option, today more and more schools are challenging the traditional notion of leadership teams and are establishing diverse teams in terms of membersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perspectives and job responsibilities. Additionally, policy changes are calling for a redesign of the teaching profession. For the purpose of this book, leader refers to any individual ranging from the superintendent or principal to various administrators, department chairs, specialists, and teachers leading an essential initiative. Thus, rather than limiting leadership roles to one or two administrators in the entire district, any educator in the school system can be a leader. This new emerging vision has created an interesting dynamic in schools. Whereas once upon a time staff members could only hope for marginal input and had a low level of responsibility for the outcome of an initiative, todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s staff members are an integral part of the implementation plan and the success or failure of any new initiative. Now more than ever, there is a stronger pledge among leaders for full implementation of new initiatives, well-thought-out goals that can withstand the test of time, and a deep commitment to collaborating with multiple stakeholders. In order to obtain progress within initiatives, goals cannot just be transferred to greater task lists and disjointed professional development. They need to translate to simple, measurable statements that can be achieved districtwide. Solutions must 1

GAME PLAN

come through developing shared meaning among all leaders. As education writer and researcher Michael Fullan (2001) states, “The interface between individual and collective meaning and action in everyday situations is where change stands or fails” (p. 9). It’s not about creating a large number of goals based on the newest and most innovative educational strategies and hoping for the best. It’s about having the ability for people to stay focused on the most important effort rather than a litany of initiatives. It’s about pushing a school system to increase the number of leaders and teams speaking with one voice to create change throughout the organization. It is about revitalizing the workforce and creating a system in which continuous improvement is the collaborative goal. Ralph D. Stacey (1992), professor of strategic management at University of Hertfordshire in England and management consultant for top executive teams of major corporations, states, “What a group comes to share in the way of culture and philosophy emerges from individual personal beliefs through a learning process that builds up over years” (p. 145). This type of culture shift does not happen overnight, but once embedded and built into the foundation of the organization, it can withstand uncontrollable factors such as principal and staff changes, as well as shifts in socioeconomic demographics. Professional learning community principles will undoubtedly remain timeless and critical for school improvement. Yet, some school leaders continuously struggle to bring the PLC principles to life because they have trouble transitioning from theory to practice. In order to avoid having PLC principles become just another improvement initiative, leadership teams must understand that it takes much more than passion and enthusiasm from leaders or a few staff members to truly implement a new idea or to change long-held beliefs. It requires leadership teams to be crystal clear about their schoolwide game plan for success, using all available staff as leaders. Thus, this book is meant to assist all leaders (district-level leaders, building administrators, teachers, and other staff) in understanding how all staff members can fully embrace a focus on learning versus teaching, collaboration versus isolation, and results versus intent. Leadership teams need to also channel their energy into fully translating their ideas into concrete models that can easily be understood by everyone within the organization. It is not good enough to assume that promising ideas are self-evident or, even more dangerously, to postulate that everyone shares the same perspective. Teams are rarely motivated toward a common goal if it is vague and abstract. Therefore, leadership teams must deliberately plan an effective way of translating such powerful concepts as the three big ideas of a PLC (moving a school culture from a focus on teaching to learning, isolation to collaboration, and intentions to results) into clear and manageable concepts that can spark action and mitigate some educators’ and stakeholders’ resistance to change. Thus, this book will also help leadership teams

How Leadership Teams Develop a Winning Game Plan

examine various ways to discuss or implement key PLC principles to develop and implement strategies for positive winning behaviors to guide their efforts throughout the change process. This does not imply that the work of a PLC is a game or that it is a process that has an end. School organizations are far more complicated than a single sports team, but in both cases, the leadership team is looking to inspire, execute, and, most important, stay committed to the plan. Preparing to implement an effective game plan requires a systematic approach that takes into account the various perspectives of educators. Therefore, in order to ensure all stakeholdersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; needs are met, the leadership team must first collaborate to define the foundational elements of a winning plan with a clear and focused approach to implementation across the entire organization. For example, district leaders need to determine the organizationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s long-term plans, and school building leaders need to develop site-specific goals that are strategically aligned to the district improvement plan, which then correlates to the SMART goals of the individual grade-level or content-area teams. Similar to building a championship sports team, leadership teams must develop an effective game plan, provide team members with a concise playbook of new ideas, build commitment to a different way of working, celebrate results, and ensure alignment throughout the organization. Thus, this book focuses on the critical aspects that seem to derail leadership teams or make implementation a slow and arduous process. This book seeks to help educators at any point in the PLC journey move forward with processes and practices by sharing tools that will spur conversation, ignite interest and debate, and develop new perspectives within an organization. Its purpose is to break down key concepts and most importantly give the leadership team an idea of how to bring staff along on the journey. At times, even organizations that are fully functioning as PLCs could use some retooling to encompass new staff or to readjust their focus. The tools found within each chapter can assist all leaders, from novices to advanced practitioners, as they support, develop, or refine the PLC culture. This book does not focus on the initial foundational stages of PLC implementation but rather looks to provide practical guidance based on the work of Richard DuFour, Rebecca DuFour, and Robert Eaker that will enhance implementation. By providing this guide, we hope leaders and staff members will be better able to guide their schools in the difficult but rewarding work required to create and transform PLCs from contenders into championship teams. The book is divided into five chapters, each addressing specific actionable elements for capacity building within district- and building-level teams. Chapter 1 focuses on bringing clarity to the plan. Chapter 2 discusses the importance of collaboration in strengthening teams. Chapter 3 addresses increasing student learning. Chapter 4

GAME PLAN

emphasizes using data to support student learning. Chapter 5 details how to avoid pitfalls and how to promote winning throughout the school. At the beginning of each chapter, you will see epigraphs to provide leaders with quotes for both self-reflection and application in their work with staff. Many of the quotes pertain to embracing the idea that school teams need to act and function much like a champion sports team, and they also add relevant real-world connections. Each chapter then provides evidence and research to support why a specific concept is needed to achieve full implementation of a game plan. Working models are always helpful to both leadership teams and staff, while abstract ideas and generalizations have been known to hinder leadership teams attempting to develop clarity or meet objectives. For this reason, every chapter suggests coaching points that identify and explain critical concepts and offer processes and tools to achieve the objective. Coaching points are organized into three parts: (1) an introduction and explanation of the critical concept, (2) a description of the process or tool we recommend using to achieve the objective (we call this the what), and (3) implementation guidance for leaders to use with staff (we refer to this as the how). The coaching points also include application tools such as facilitation guides, guiding questions, and discussion prompts. The coaching points are meant to be a starting point for crafting more customized pieces to meet the teamsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; needs. As with any tool, the process of developing clarity through meaningful research, discussion, collaboration, and consensus is far more important to the implementation process than basic adoption of the document or template. Much of the PLC process is about building the teamwork and collaborative culture required in 21st century schools.

Chapter 1

People who are role models for the principles and values of the organization, who buy in and understand the vision of what the organization is trying to accomplish, and have the personality to inspire other people to the vision. You know, that’s what team chemistry and leadership is all about. —Nick Saban, NCAA Champion College Football Coach

ducators are currently embarking on a new journey of accountability measures. They are being evaluated and held accountable through measurements of student achievement like never before. Organizations and leaders alike are feeling the pressure of trying to prepare for these new expectations. There is a need to move away from the traditional work that employees know and are comfortable with toward a new learning structure that needs to be built, not only for students but for teachers as well. Teaching and learning needs to take on a new structure, one that moves away from individuals’ desires to learn something of personal interest to a more collaborative path of districtwide improvement. Why do districts and schools continue to fall short of their goals when the bestintended leaders are on the front lines leading the charge? The answer is simple: the work being done is not focused on or is not derived from a shared understanding. One of the major barriers that schools face in their attempt to successfully implement a culture of learning and collaboration is the inability to convey a shared mission and vision of improvement. Leaders and leadership teams often assume that their well-prepared message or big-picture idea will be easily understood by a wide range of staff members who will intuitively rally around the same cause. Yet, the reality is that people interpret ideas and concepts very differently. Bringing strategic clarity and focus to the work of grade-level or content-area teams will infuse motivation

Bringing Clarity to the Plan

GAME PLAN

Leaders and staff need to share a common understanding of the mission and vision as well as all of the components of the central improvement effort or initiative and to work toward ensuring that every new teacher clearly understands and can live the school’s game plan. To achieve strategic clarity, organizations will need to move away from the question of How are we doing? toward focusing on What steps do we need to take? As 2001 National Teacher of the Year Michelle Forman (2009) writes: Before schools can respond to external pressure for increased academic performance, they must transform themselves from atomized, incoherent organizations to ones in which faculty share an explicit set of norms and expectations about what good instructional practice looks like.

Leaders, teachers, and community members alike need to share in the collective responsibility to produce long-lasting transformation. Effective teachers must see themselves not as passive, dependent implementers of someone else’s script but as active members of research teams—or, as Michael Fullan describes them, “scientists who continuously develop their intellectual and investigative effectiveness” (as cited in Sparks, 2003, p. 57). Elmore (2002) asserts that “the practice of improvement is largely about moving whole organizations—teachers, administrators and schools— toward the culture, structure, norms and processes that support quality professional development in the service of student learning” (p. 15). This process starts with building a shared understanding around current realities while allowing team members to build trust, commitment, and accountability around a shared goal. To that end, in this chapter, we present five coaching points: 1. Establishing clarity through a schoolwide template 2. Identifying and evaluating our current reality

and commitment into any organization. Leadership teams need to be cognizant of the fact that clarity in the mind of the coach or leadership team is worthless if they are not able to effectively communicate the idea to the larger team. Leaving the issue of school improvement to haphazard or partially developed school improvement plans does not result in more effective schools. As Richard Elmore (2010), educational leadership professor and the director of the Consortium for Policy Research in Education, describes, “You can have strong, well-informed leadership, teachers working in teams, external support and professional development, coherent curriculum, a school improvement plan, and everything the literature tells us we should have and yet not be getting the expected growth” (p. 3). Without a coherent and wellunderstood plan, a school will develop pockets of excellence or variance and then struggle to meet the rigorous demands that will impact growth. As Elmore (2004) explains, “Variability in practice produces variability in student learning.”

Bringing Clarity to the Plan

3. Selecting the right team members 4. Building shared ownership and purpose 5. Ensuring effective communication throughout the organization

Coaching Point 1.1: E stablishing Clarity Through a Schoolwide Template As leaders plan the implementation of the PLC practices, they need to ask themselves how this work will make a difference in the progress of their school. Leaders need to ensure that the answer to this question is clearly understood by all stakeholders because, as leadership consultant, coach, and author John Baldoni (2012) states, “Organizations that succeed are those that know where they are headed and why” (p. 2). A clearly communicated target will drive people toward the work and create meaning in what they do. This clarity will help everyone in the organization pull together and build the tools to create change. Early in the implementation process, staff want to hear the three most important components of any initiative: (1) the why, (2) the what, and (3) the how. The template we provide in this coaching point assumes that the school already understands the why—the power behind focusing on learning versus teaching, collaboration versus isolation, and results versus intentions; the why is fairly easy to accept both emotionally and intellectually. Often, it can be more difficult for individuals in the early stages to understand the what and the how. This tool will steer teams in the process of developing the what and the how by clarifying the key elements and creating a guiding template for their PLC work as they engage the staff in the process of creating shared knowledge. It is meant to be a resource for leadership, grade-level, and content-area teams. Some teams may choose to use the resources as they are presented, while others may alter them to meet their more specific needs and goals.

The What In 2013, the San Antonio Spurs were named the best-run professional sports organization in North America (Rishe, 2013). They were the first NBA team to win at least fifty games a season for fourteen consecutive years. How did this team create such championship talent? Their success appears to be attributed to their shared core values and a culture of trust throughout the organization. After all, multiple players

These points are dedicated to specific strategies that any leader can use to build clarity and a shared understanding among all stakeholders to ensure everyone is executing a uniform game plan.

GAME PLAN

have come and gone over the last five years, but the core values or philosophy as well as the results have not changed.

Professional Learning Communities Focus on Learning

Key Elements

Artifact

Key Elements

Artifact

Common knowledge and skills

Time for collaboration

Master schedule

Grading criteria

Common rubrics

Everyone on a team

Collaborative teams

Academic support

Schoolwide interventions

Meeting norms

Team agendas

Enriched learning

Enrichment opportunities

Data discussions

Student and classroom data

Learning targets

Focus on Results

Focus on Collaboration

Key Elements

Artifact

Results oriented

Team SMART goals

Effective feedback

Timely assessment data

Common expectations

Formative and summative assessments

Team progress

Feedback and celebrations

Figure 1.1: Purpose and clarity template. Visit go.solution-tree.com/PLCbooks for a reproducible version of this figure.

Whether it’s a championship sports team or leaders in education, clarity and purpose around the essential elements and tools will bring meaning to the work and spark action. The purpose and clarity template featured in figure 1.1 should be used when leadership teams are struggling to identify the key components of what they mean by the three big ideas of a PLC: a focus on learning, collaboration, and results. The goal of the tool is to develop both clarity and consensus around the big ideas of a PLC with all of the key stakeholders. Please note that this tool has all of the elements and artifacts filled in as an example only. The power of this tool is in teams establishing their own elements and artifacts that match their organization’s mission and vision. This collaborative process should not be overlooked, since—as noted previously—common terms and ideas mean different things to different people. This tool will help leaders and staff come to consensus on the essential elements, allowing all team members to begin taking action.

Bringing Clarity to the Plan

The How

Step 1 As a leadership team, work to establish what key elements will be the anchors of the PLC work within the organization. The elements are written underneath each of the three big ideas of a PLC in order to communicate the clear alignment. Leadership teams benefit from researching each element in order to more effectively support why that element was chosen and how it will be effective within the organization. As part of this step, leadership teams may want to attend a PLC institute; review resources such as Learning by Doing (DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, & Many, 2010) and Revisiting Professional Learning Communities at Work (DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker, 2008); or visit http://allthingsplc.info to consult articles that Rick DuFour, Becky DuFour, and Bob Eaker have written over the years as ways to research the essential elements and practices of a PLC. Understanding the research behind the elements will assist leaders in having deep conversations with the staff about the importance of the chosen elements. This step is critical because it forces the leadership team and school members to establish which elements they consider essential, what they mean, and how they will help the organization become more effective.

Step 2 Next, work with the staff members to determine what artifacts will be used to show that the elements are established and are promoting progress within their team. For example, a school may want to remind staff members of the need for norms by ensuring that they are listed in every agenda. The agreed-upon artifacts should be written into the artifacts section of the purpose and clarity template. In order for a group to decide on what artifacts to include, leaders may want to think about using a consensus tool or process to allow dissenting voices an opportunity to share their perspective while still capturing the will of the group. There are many different

The following steps outline how a school can start to break down the three big ideas of a PLC into actionable steps in the form of key elements and artifacts. As a school starts its PLC journey or is simply trying to better define its PLC work, it is critical to clearly articulate what the three big ideas (a focus on learning, collaboration, and results) mean in terms of everyday life for the staff, thus continuously breaking down a powerful idea into more manageable parts. It is also important to note that this model can be used throughout the school year. While it would be most advantageous to engage the leadership team in the development of the key elements and artifacts at the start of the year, sometimes we canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t wait an entire school year to help staff to transition into a more effective team. Therefore, there is never a bad time to clarify key ideas and unify the focus of improvement.

GAME PLAN

Step 3 Once the artifacts have been established, it’s important for teams to gain clarity around the expectations for each key element. As a district or building team, discuss and come to consensus on the importance of each element and when and how each artifact will be used. Following is a sample of such a discussion. Staff member #1: “Now that we have established the key elements and artifacts of what it means to have a focus on collaboration, we need to look for artifacts that should have a due date.” Staff member #2: “While it is tough to establish your first SMART goal, I say every grade-level team should have one completed by the second week of school.” Staff member #1: “Two weeks sounds reasonable for our first SMART goal, so let’s open this timeline for discussion. Any objections or clarifications to the SMART goal timeline before we move to another artifact? Great, let’s find another artifact that should have a timeline.” These collaborative conversations will help team members feel a sense of ownership over the work and feel valued in the decision-making process. It also helps avoid any misconceptions or varying definitions of what is expected. In order to enhance clarity, some leadership teams may want to add specific dates or a timeline on the actual template, noting when things need to be completed.

Step 4 It is important for leaders to ensure that everyone has had an opportunity to discuss the process, elements, and artifacts and ask any questions they may have. Once the tool has been established, it can be revisited throughout the year to reinforce the elements and expectations. The review process is a great way to discuss and review the artifacts and expectations that have been established as well as monitor progress. Solely establishing schoolwide expectation does not ensure that every content- or grade-level team will follow the “play.” Therefore, it is crucial for the leadership team to widely communicate the new play, align professional development, and periodically meet with every team to discuss their progress. The periodic reviews of

techniques for building consensus. One example is known as “Fist to Five,” which allows team members to show their level of agreement on a scale using a fist to signify no agreement and five fingers to signify complete agreement. Members who signify a two or three need further discussion with the group before they can commit to the decision. Using consensus tools or processes will enable team members to feel heard and more comfortable in moving forward and establishing the key elements and artifacts.

Bringing Clarity to the Plan

Coaching Point 1.2: Identifying and Evaluating Our Current Reality Central to any improvement effort is the process of critically assessing what’s working and what’s not working. In education, we often refer to this practice as selfassessment or checking our current reality. Insights gained from any self-assessment or reality-check process become the building blocks to improve on both collaboratively and individually. Ronald Heifetz and Marty Linsky, coauthors of the best-selling book, Leadership on the Line: Staying Alive Through the Dangers of Leading (2002), describe sustained leadership as requiring the “capacity to see what is happening to you and your initiatives, as it is happening” (p. 73). Just like an athlete, a leadership team must be able to identify areas of strength and areas for improvement both during preparation time or the summer (the off-season) and throughout the year. Athletes and collaborative teams alike must be willing to reflect on both their individual contributions to the overall performance and to the contributions they provide to the whole organization. Richard DuFour, Rebecca DuFour, and Robert Eaker (2008) remind us that the “two areas most essential for a group to review in a discussion of the future of the school or district are 1) the current reality and 2) evidence of best practice” (p. 124). They describe these as point A and point B, respectively. Without an honest assessment of where you might be starting from, it is difficult to reach wherever you are heading. Gathering the facts and information before deciding on next steps will ensure that the group makes informed and intelligent decisions that lead to the end goal. With points A and B clearly defined, achieving the goal and making adjustments along the way become far more manageable. Successful teams discover that establishing a structured, evidence-based technique to identify and assess their own strengths and areas for improvement will create a culture of continuous effort and improvement from all members. Another benefit of

this tool throughout the year will serve as an opportunity to assist struggling teams who are not making progress as well as establish a level of accountability that will help a school make measurable progress focused on student learning. This approach will promote the good work being done throughout the school and provide positive models for those teams that may need assistance. It will also help new staff members assimilate to the culture of a new building in a shorter amount of time because the work for every team and its members is well defined. Also, giving teachers an opportunity to revisit and discuss the elements and artifacts is an invaluable way to continue to establish greater levels of implementation and clarity throughout the organization.

GAME PLAN

a current reality check for a team is to build cohesiveness. Especially true for educators, all members of a team need to recognize how their individual actions impact the goal attainment of the collective whole. The awareness and insight team members might experience when reflecting on the brutal facts of their situation can shift their priorities from individual to collective.

To work effectively, teams must regularly and objectively review the status of their work and current level of implementation. Winning teams focus not only on their strengths but on their challenges as well. An honest assessment of a team’s work will continue to ensure that they stay focused on the overall game plan. The form in figure 1.2 helps teams build a structured process to review how they are functioning and assists them in identifying their improvement opportunities and next steps.

The How This tool can be utilized by leaders of individual teams or at the building or district level. It should be implemented at the beginning of each year so that all team members understand the current reality of the team and can come to consensus on future work. It can also be, as best practice would suggest, implemented throughout the year whenever a team feels like it needs to get a pulse on its current status and discuss the next steps for the collective and individual work.

Step 1 The first step in analyzing a team’s current reality is to have each team member take time to honestly reflect on the team’s progress using the Team Status Check form (figure 1.2). Individual team members rate the team’s progress toward each criterion on a scale of 1–4, including notes that provide evidence for what they feel has or has not been accomplished. The scale is as follows. 1 = Unsatisfactory: The area needs some attention. 2 = Basic: The artifact has been drafted, has been created, or is in the discussion stage, but a consensus for implementation has not been reached. 3 = Proficient: The team has evidence or an artifact that shows they have done work in this area, but results may not have been discussed yet on the effectiveness of the artifact. 4 = Distinguished: The team’s artifact or evidence can be backed up with data that validate the effectiveness of the team’s work.

The What

Bringing Clarity to the Plan

This tool can be used at the beginning of the school year to guide the work of the staff or throughout the year to either continue or adjust the work. Use this tool to spur dialogue between the leadership team and the grade-level or content teams on their progress. Just like in sports, feedback is one of the most important tools for improvement. Who looks outside, dreams: who looks inside, awakes.

Focus on Learning

Notes

1. Learning targets have been clearly established by unit at every grade level or course. 2. Common assessment criteria have been established at every grade level or course. 3. An academic support system exists at every grade level or department. 4. A common strategy or philosophy exists for enriching the learning of students.

Focus on Collaboration 1. The work schedule ensures time for teams to meet. 2. All staff members belong to a team. 3. Teams are productive and effective. 4. Student data are at the core of what teams use to guide their discussions.

Focus on Results 1. Student-oriented goals are established by every team. 2. Formative assessments are used regularly and effectively. 3. Common assessments are widely used. 4. Teams regularly assess or reflect on their overall effectiveness.

Figure 1.2: Team status check. Visit go.solution-tree.com/PLCbooks for a reproducible version of this figure.

â&#x20AC;&#x201D;C.G. Jung

GAME PLAN

Step 2

Step 3 Once consensus has been reached on the team’s current reality, create a plan of action. The team needs to look at the areas that are still challenging the group and create their next steps. These steps should include what the group needs to accomplish, who is responsible, and the expected date of completion. When a team works to understand its current reality, it’s important to remember that being honest about the team’s status is what makes this tool effective. It is not about blaming or criticizing team members for things that have not been done, nor is it about checking a box to say it is completed. Use this tool to monitor the progress of a team, building, or district toward true implementation. Understand, though, that this does not mean that once a team reaches the distinguished level (level 4) in an area, the tool shouldn’t be looked at again. The data that a team analyzes will prove or disprove the continued effectiveness of the artifact. If the data begin to show diminishing results, then the artifact has lost its effectiveness, and the team will need to discuss its revision or refinement.

Coaching Point 1.3: S electing the Right Team Members The heart of any professional learning community lies in a high-performing team. Powerful collaborative teams should be designed to expand the pool of ideas, solutions, and methods that promote shifts in instructional practice to achieve desired results. These teams must have a shared responsibility and a common goal focused on improvement for all. Team design, therefore, should ensure the right members are included to provide critical insights. In professional baseball, managers carefully select team members to provide the best advantage for winning a national championship. All players understand this goal and are each selected for their individual

The purpose of this step is for team members to have an opportunity to compare their various viewpoints and come to a consensus as a team on their current level of implementation. Team members can complete this step through an open dialogue. However, it is important that they feel safe to share their input in order for this tool to be effective. If a team is reluctant to openly share opinions on its status, a leader may want to think about posting an enlarged copy of the tool on the wall or use technology to project the tool so team members can anonymously place their ratings on the tool and then the status can be discussed from a more holistic view instead of by individual feedback.

Bringing Clarity to the Plan

strengths. These distinct individuals, however, need to support each other for the whole team to be successful. This interdependency allows each member to share his or her talents while achieving a common outcome.

DuFour et al. (2008) remind us that “no single person has the expertise, influence, and energy to initiate and sustain a substantive change process” (p. 310). Teaming and reteaming will become a necessity to distribute the capacity of the building, especially for a few of your power players in the building. A power player is a staff member who holds significant expertise that many teams might need for a specific focus. Examples of power players would be ESL teachers, special education teachers, building specialists, and so on. For example, an ESL teacher being placed on a gradelevel or departmental team would be charged with the responsibility of providing the team with the necessary strategies to make learning and assessments accessible to the EL students and assist the team in understanding how to review the data with a laser focus on language acquisition. A power player may rotate among several teams in a week to, as DuFour et al. (2008) explain, “assume the lead in the team’s collective inquiry into best practice” (p. 311) on certain issues while also allowing for different members to demonstrate leadership within the teams. Once team design has been determined, leaders need to make sure a shared understanding is created for the purpose and goals of each team and the roles and responsibilities of individual members. The pitcher on a baseball team has a very clear understanding of what his job is for the whole team. That level of clarity is also needed for the members of a collaborative team. Simply placing the right players on the team won’t guarantee success. As DuFour et al. (2008) explain, leaders “have

Schools are far more complex organizations than a baseball team, but leaders might consider their lineups in a similar manner. Schools have multiple goals that need to be addressed for multiple audiences and with specific time constraints. The challenge for school leaders is that strategic team design is a must, and several teams are needed within a school. The talents of the staff should be leveraged to foster advocacy and inquiry processes for identified purposes. Leaders should resist the danger of being overly inclusive and adding too many people on a team. Business writer Patrick Lencioni (2012) asserts that “the only reason a person should be on a team is that she represents a key part of the organization or brings truly critical talent or insight to the table” (p. 24). Thus, teams should be small enough to be effective while also being large enough to include needed talent. Lencioni advocates for teams to range from three to twelve people to remain effective. Furthermore, a team member must have a natural connection to the task at hand. For example, a guidance counselor would be hard pressed to regularly contribute to a social studies team but would be outstanding on a student assistance team.

GAME PLAN

an obligation to create structures that make collaboration meaningful rather than artificial . . . [and] to establish clear priorities and parameters so that teachers focus on the right topics” (p. 312). Establishing clarity and focus for the team will be just as important as the team design itself.

The What

• What is the purpose of the team? What topics will this team cover? • Which staff need to be on the team? What value-add will each member bring to the collective? • How many times will this team need to meet to be effective and achieve its goals? • What leadership involvement will there be, and how often might that person support the work? Considering which power players to choose for each type of team is another important task. See table 1.1 for a guide that lists the possible team types and helps leaders ensure they are including the appropriate power players on each team. Table 1.1: Power Players for Each Team Type

Team Type

Power Players

Grade-level or content-area team

Co-teachers and teacher aides, ESL teachers, and content specialists

Problem-solving teams

Psychologists, social workers, guidance counselors, ESL teachers, special education teachers, and deans

Vertical alignment teams

Specialists, curriculum experts, special educators, ESL teachers, and department chairs

Intervention teams

Psychologists, specialists, curriculum specialists, special educators, and ESL teachers

Job-alike building and district teams

All ESL teachers, music teachers, specialists, and PE teachers

Visit go.solution-tree.com/PLCbooks for a reproducible version of this table.

We have seen success occur when leaders who are considering possible team structures strategically assess the strengths of staff members and determine what value-add each brings to the organization. The following list of questions is centered on several aspects of team composition to help leaders design the right types of teams to work on critical issues, discover critical roles missing from certain teams, or identify members who are unnecessarily on a team when their talents could be used elsewhere. Each context and team focus will result in different answers. Priority teams (often grade-level or content-area teams) should be addressed first with a commitment to leveraging time for all teams to collaborate.

Plan A Playbook for Developing Winning PLCs at Work™

ISBN 978-1-936763-64-1 90000

solution-tree.com

Visit go.solution-tree.com/PLCbooks to download the reproducibles in this book. 9 781936 763641

GA R CÍA ∙ M C CLU SKE Y ∙ TAY LOR

Educators will:

A Playbook for Developing Winning PLCs at Work ™

GA ME PLAN

GAME

Foreword by Richard DuFour

GAME

Plan A Playbook for Developing Winning PLCs at Work™

Héctor GARCÍA

Katherine MCCLUSKEY

Shelley TAYLOR