Leading Modern Learning [Second Edition] by Solution Tree

L E A D I N G

Modern

Learning A Blueprint for S

Vision-Driven Schools D

“Leading Modern Learning provided the blueprint to the development of a guaranteed and viable curriculum for Shanghai American School’s 400 teachers and 2,800 students. Since we adopted our schoolwide transfer goals, all conversations have been focused on learning that truly matters.”

L E A D I N G

—Emmanuel Bonin, Deputy Head of School and Chief Academic Officer, Shanghai American School

Learning

“Rarely does a book so delightfully blend theory, evidence, and practical application. In this wonderfully interactive format, McTighe and Curtis invite us to not merely read their work but to study it in a collaborative setting. Readers’ investment of time will improve teaching, learning, and leadership, and most importantly, it will propel the engagement of students.” —Douglas Reeves, Founder, Creative Leadership Solutions; Author, Achieving Equity and Excellence: Immediate Results From the Lessons of High-Poverty, High-Success Schools

In the second edition of Leading Modern Learning: A Blueprint for Vision-Driven Schools, authors Jay McTighe and Greg Curtis offer an updated vision of their blueprint of proven ways to effect real, lasting change in education. More than a simple refresh, the latest edition incorporates new and revised insights, experiences, and tools that will help K−12 district, school, and department leaders bring their vision of modern learning into reality.

Understand the necessity and value of updating education for the 21st century classroom

•

Explore systems thinking and frameworks for backward design to develop action plans and guide reform

•

Develop a blueprint for learning to establish a vision and mission, and use it to enhance curricula, refine instruction, design more effective assessments, and improve reporting

•

Read an all-new chapter on change management and strategic planning for district and school leadership

•

Gain insights from the new Notes From the Field feature, which highlights how to avoid potential missteps and misunderstandings that inhibit progress

A joint publication

SolutionTree.com

Visit go.SolutionTree.com/leadership to download the free reproducibles in this book.

McTIGHE | CURTIS

•

Vision-Driven SECOND EDITION

Readers will:

A Blueprint for SCHOOLS SECOND EDITION

Copyright © 2019 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. Visit go.SolutionTree.com/leadership to download the free reproducibles in this book. 555 North Morton Street Bloomington, IN 47404 800.733.6786 (toll free) / 812.336.7700 FAX: 812.336.7790 email: info@SolutionTree.com SolutionTree.com Printed in the United States of America

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: McTighe, Jay, author. | Curtis, Greg, 1950- author. Title: Leading modern learning : a blueprint for vision-driven schools / authors: Jay McTighe and Greg Curtis. Description: Second Edition. | Bloomington, Indiana : Solution Tree Press, [2019] | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018060838 | ISBN 9781947604445 (perfect bound) Subjects: LCSH: School improvement programs--United States. | Educational change--United States. | School management and organization--United States. Classification: LCC LB2822.82 .M395 2019 | DDC 371.2/07--dc23 LC record available at https:// lccn.loc.gov/2018060838 Solution Tree Jeffrey C. Jones, CEO Edmund M. Ackerman, President Solution Tree Press President and Publisher: Douglas M. Rife Associate Publisher: Sarah Payne-Mills Art Director: Rian Anderson Managing Production Editor: Kendra Slayton Senior Production Editor: Todd Brakke Senior Editor: Amy Rubenstein Text and Cover Designer: Laura Cox Editorial Assistant: Sarah Ludwig

Table of Contents

About the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv Foreword by Yong Zhao . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvii Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 About This Second Edition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 About This Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Chapter 1: Creating a Futures-Oriented Vision and Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Developing a Knowledge Base and a Future-Focused Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Engaging in a Community-Based Inquiry Into the Future . . . . . . . . 11 Consolidating a Community-Based and Informed View of the Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Communicating Futures Research With Key Stakeholders . . . . . . . 24 Moving From Vision to Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Chapter 2: From Mission to Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 The Input-Output-Impact Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Backward Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 An Example: Developing Self-Directed Learners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 xi

xii

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

Chapter 3: Curriculum for Modern Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Principles of a Modern Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Curriculum Blueprint. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter 4: An Assessment System for Modern Learning . . . .

56 62

Principles of Effective Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 The Importance of Assessing Transdisciplinary Outcomes. . . . . . . . 94 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Chapter 5: Instruction for Modern Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

113

Learning Principles to Guide Instruction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Backward Design of Instruction at the Classroom Level. . . . . . . . . Backward Design of the Learning Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

139

Chapter 6: A Reporting System for Modern Learning . . . . . .

141

114 118 121

Principles to Guide Reporting of Modern Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Modern Approach to Reporting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

151

Chapter 7: Leadership for Modern Learning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

165

A Definition of Change Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Theory of Action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Principles of Change Leadership. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Abrupt or Incremental Change? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

144

162

166 168 174 185

Appendix A: Sources for Futures-Oriented Thinking Tools and Processes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

187

Appendix B: Sample Sources to and Performance Indicators for 21st Century Skills. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

189

Resources to Develop the Four Cs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sample Performance Indicators for 21st Century Skills. . . . . . . . .

189 191

Ta ble of Contents

xiii

Appendix C: Sample Map of Cornerstone Performance Tasks and Transfer Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

207

References and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

211

Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

219

About the Authors

Jay McTighe brings a wealth of experience developed during a rich and varied career in education. He served as director of the Maryland Assessment Consortium, a state collaboration of school districts working together to develop and share formative performance assessments. Prior to this position, Jay was involved with school-improvement projects at the Maryland State Department of Education, where he helped lead Maryland’s standards-based reforms, including the development of performance-based statewide assessments. He also directed the development of the Instructional Framework, a multimedia database on teaching. Well known for his work with thinking skills, Jay has coordinated statewide efforts to develop instructional strategies, curriculum models, and assessment procedures for improving the quality of student thinking. In addition to his work at the state level, Jay has experience at the district level in Prince George’s County, Maryland, as a classroom teacher, resource specialist, and program coordinator. He also directed a state residential-enrichment program for gifted and talented students. Jay is an accomplished author, having coauthored seventeen books, including the award-winning and best-selling Understanding by Design series with Grant Wiggins. His books have been translated into six languages. Jay has also written more than forty articles and book chapters and been published in leading journals, including Educational Leadership and Ed Week. Jay has an extensive background in professional development and is a regular speaker at national, state, and district conferences and workshops. He has made xv

xvi

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

presentations in forty-seven states within the United States, in seven Canadian provinces, and internationally to educators in thirty-seven countries on six continents. Jay received his undergraduate degree from the College of William and Mary, earned his master’s degree from the University of Maryland, and completed postgraduate studies at Johns Hopkins University. He was selected to participate in the Educational Policy Fellowship Program through the Institute for Educational Leadership in Washington, DC, and served as a member of the National Assessment Forum, a coalition of education and civil rights organizations advocating reforms in national, state, and local assessment policies and practices. To learn more about Jay’s work, visit www.jaymctighe.com or follow @jaymctighe on Twitter. Greg Curtis is an author and independent educational consultant. He is based in Beijing and has spent much of his career working with schools around the world in systemwide capacities. Greg has been a technology director, a curriculum and professional learning director, and a strategic planner for international schools in Europe and Asia. He also works with organizations such as EdLeader21, the New England Association of Schools and Colleges, Jay McTighe & Associates Educational Consulting, Mastery Transcript Consortium, and many schools and districts around the world. His work focuses on long-term, systems-based change and strategic transformation in schools and districts around Impacts and modern learning. He is the author of Moving Beyond Busy and coauthor of Learning Personalized: The Evolution of the Contemporary Classroom with Allison Zmuda and Diane Ullman. Greg holds a bachelor of arts from Wilfred Laurier University, a bachelor’s of education from Queens University, and a master’s of education from the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto. To learn more about Greg’s work, visit www.gregcurtis-consulting.ca or follow @jgcurtis on Twitter.

Foreword By Yong Zhao

he 21st century was once the distant future. Hence 21st century used to be a popular phrase for marketing products, ideas, and policies by evoking hopes and fears that may eventually exist. As a result, 21st century education has become a vision that compels bold actions—actions that ensure a safe departure from the past and guarantee success in the future. The 21st century has arrived. The once-distant future has become our reality. While 21st century education has gained a diverse set of definitions that transcend the scientific meaning of 21st century as simply a reference of time, conversations about 21st century education can no longer be futuristic, driven by bold claims, fanciful imaginations, or fearmongering rhetoric. It is no longer meaningful to argue why we need or why we do not need 21st century education, nor is it productive to continue the debate over how 21st century education may differ from the education in the 20th, 19th, or 15th century. It is time that we delivered a modern education that both meets the challenges and takes advantage of the realities of the 21st century. However, this is not an easy task, because while we are living in the 21st century, the institution of education started in the 19th or 20th century. It was built to meet the challenges of the past. It was built with the resources we had before. And once it was built, society spent the last century perfecting it. As Winston Churchill said, “we shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us”—the already-built institution has shaped our education mindset. xvii

xviii

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

This mindset accompanied us into the 21st century. It continues as a persistent force that shapes our views and defines our actions in education. In essence, we are prisoners of the past. To create a modern institution of education, we have to escape from the past first. We have to look at education with a fresh perspective, a new mindset. This new mindset must be grounded in today’s realities, yesterday’s lessons, and tomorrow’s possibilities. The new education must start with the most recent discoveries about human beings: why they learn, how they learn, and where they learn. It must take into consideration the resources we have, all the learning opportunities we can harness in a globally connected society. It must also consider new outcomes—people not only able to cope with the 21st century but also able to create a better future for all. However, we cannot flip a switch and change our mindset instantly. It takes time to change. But just spending time waiting for the arrival of a new mindset also does not work. We need to engage in real actions that are neither random nor sporadic. They need to be well-organized, carefully designed, and deliberately planned. They also need to be understood and undertaken by all members of an education community. For this to happen, we need a blueprint, just like the blueprints that architects create to guide the construction of modern buildings. This is just what Jay McTighe and Greg Curtis offer in this text: a blueprint for modernizing education. Jay and Greg present a design process schools can follow to redesign education for 21st century learning. The process guides schools to engage in strategic moves that can ultimately lead to a new type of education needed for the 21st century. From vision to mission and from mission to action, Jay and Greg lay out a systematic process of redesigning schools with abundant evidence, proven strategies, and practical tools. To be sure, this is not the first book I have seen that claims to provide practical guidance to education redesign. I have seen plenty of “blueprints” in education, and not all are equal; they can be good or bad. What makes me think this is a good blueprint is much more than the extensive practical strategies and actions. It is the sound research base behind the suggested strategies and actions and the ambitious goals these strategies and actions can help achieve. But most important, it is the bridge Jay and Greg build between distant, abstract, and grand ambitions and present, immediate, and small steps. They make the daunting task of

Foreword

designing a brand-new education achievable. It gives me, and all who desire a better education, confidence. A blueprint can run the danger of being overly prescriptive and imposing a uniform view. As we know too well, educational institutions differ a great deal, as do people’s views of what constitutes 21st century education—outcomes, processes, institutional structures, students’ experiences, and pedagogy. For example, while I agree with Jay and Greg, I do think education should push even further in the areas of student autonomy and personalization as well as turning schools into global campuses. Still, Jay and Greg deal with these issues masterfully. While they have their version of a curriculum blueprint, assessment framework, and pedagogical approach for the 21st century, they do not impose them. I treat them as examples rather than as prescriptions. The process they suggest is about helping each school develop its own vision and mission. It is about schools working out strategies and actions of their own. Education is in the futures business in that it is responsible for preparing students to live successfully in the future; however success is defined. But it should not be about preparing them to cope with the future or simply wait for the arrival of the future. It should be preparing them to proactively create their future. To train future-creators, we need future-oriented educational institutions, which are drastically different from institutions of the past and present. To create future-oriented educational institutions, we need to have a process, a plan, and a set of tools. This book offers such a blueprint and an excellent one at that.

xix

Introduction

any researchers and authors, both within the field of education and beyond, have made the case for educational change to prepare today’s students for the challenges and opportunities they will encounter tomorrow. Indeed, the press for 21st century schools has flourished for years under various names. We will not rehash the arguments, nor try to make the case. Rather, we begin with the simple premise that education needs to undertake major reform to meet the needs of our students, our countries, and our planet in the years to come. If you do not agree with this basic premise, we doubt this book is for you. However, if you agree that the world is changing and that educational institutions are obligated to acknowledge and address the future, read on. The term 21st century learning has itself become something of a cliché; and, as with many clichés, people sometimes dismiss it as “been there, done that,” thereby losing some of its original potential as an agent of change. We use the term modern learning interchangeably with 21st century learning (and more commonly, 21st century skills) to highlight the fact that we are not simply writing about implementing a trend; rather, we are outlining ways in which education and learning can remain relevant, vital, and connected with the future. Leading Modern Learning, Second Edition examines a central question: How might we determine and enact necessary educational changes in a systemic and lasting way? Our contribution focuses on process. We offer a thoroughly reviewed and revised blueprint of practical and proven approaches to redesign your educational environment, whether a district, school, or single department. We’ve used all these methods in a variety of contexts. While you may have heard of them and even used some, we contend that these approaches are unlikely 1

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

to lead to substantial change on their own. Although each can add value, their transformative power must be realized collectively.

About This Second Edition For this second edition, we move beyond a simple reprinting and toward a refreshing of the ideas and processes. We do this for the simple reason that we continue to learn more about these models and frameworks as we continue to work with schools. As such, we have refined our approaches and tools, developed new experiences and insights, and most of all, we have had the privilege to work with some outstanding organizations and individuals who have contributed to the clarity of this work from the practitionersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perspective. Many elements remain the same, but we chose these because they have proven to be logical and effective. We removed some elements to focus the work and keep from overloading this edition, and we added new elements and much new content. We also added a new feature, Notes From the Field. These sections allow us to highlight key observations from our first-hand work with schools. This includes potential missteps, misunderstandings, and time wasters we have derived from our ongoing work with schools. We include Notes From the Field sections when appropriate to share insight we have gained in our work with teachers, schools, and districts.

About This Book We wrote this book with district and school leaders in mind, but it is also a valuable resource for educational policymakers, such as board of education members or school trustees. More specifically, educators in the following roles will benefit from this book: district administrators (superintendents and assistant superintendents; directors of curriculum, assessment, and professional learning; subject-area supervisors); school-based administrators (principals and assistant principals), and teacher leaders (grade and department chairs and instructional coaches). Educators are in the learning business, not just for our students but also for ourselves. As such, we designed this book to be a learning resource. We seek to engage all those who have a vested interest in a big-picture view of the shifts and structures necessary to move toward a conception of modern learning. Leadership

I nt roduct ion

and interested participants at all levels—be they at a district of several schools, an individual school, or even specific departments and teams of teacher leaders—are the audience we want to support in their journeys. We organized this book into seven chapters framed by specific guiding questions. The first two chapters take us from vision to mission to action and introduce two frameworks that we employ throughout the book: Input-OutputImpact (I-O-I)® and backward design. The next four chapters look at four critical components of any comprehensive educational system: (1) curriculum, (2) assessment, (3) instruction, and (4) reporting. The final chapter reflects on all of these in the context of theories of action for and principles of change leadership. There is a logic to this arrangement, and you should consider the book as describing a series of linked steps. Although you may want to concentrate on certain chapters that most directly align with your interests, the premise we outline in the first few chapters is central to the alignment of all the components we discuss in subsequent chapters. In fact, one of the goals of this book is to encourage a systemic approach to school change and improvement. We recommend that district and school teams read this book together so that the work of different team members is better linked and mutually supporting. A guiding question frames the beginning of each chapter to focus readers’ attention and stimulate thinking and discussion. Following is a brief overview of each chapter.

Chapter 1: Creating a Futures-Oriented Vision and Mission How do we develop a powerful and informed view of the future to drive our vision for modern learning? Although we cannot predict the future, we can examine the various trends and drivers of change that lead to a future-focused vision of modern learning. In this chapter, we introduce some of the major forecasts and thinking about the future and examine the implications for teaching and learning. Our goal is to help educators and institutions to develop an informed view (a vision) of the future. This, in turn, will drive a clear articulation of necessary learning goals and produce a mission that exists at the heart of your concept of modern learning.

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

Chapter 2: From Mission to Action How do we collaboratively plan backward from the mission to purposeful actions? An educational mission declares an educational institution’s values and specifies what it purports to achieve in terms of students’ accomplishments. We must act on these intentions purposefully. The inability to translate great intentions into purposeful actions unravels many powerful visions and missions. We will explore the Input-Output-Impact and backward design frameworks as ways to help us distinguish means from ends and always keep the end in mind. In this chapter, we present a three-stage backward design process with a corresponding template to guide your strategic actions.

Chapter 3: Curriculum for Modern Learning What are the building blocks for a curriculum that anchors modern learning, and how do we develop them? A key element in achieving your mission is the development of a curriculum blueprint. The curriculum we propose emphasizes the development of conceptual understandings and the capabilities to transfer learning, which are key outcomes of modern learning. Our blueprint illustrates how to integrate transdisciplinary 21st century skills with disciplinary content, because both are key outcomes of modern learning.

Chapter 4: An Assessment System for Modern Learning How can we assess progress toward both disciplinary and transdisciplinary outcomes? Too often, 21st century skills fall through the cracks of conventional testing of academic content. Indeed, one of the most frequently missing elements of a school’s reform effort is a rich and comprehensive assessment system that captures evidence of modern learning, not simply content acquisition. We show a process for joining one or more transdisciplinary outcomes together (what we call grafting) to ensure that everything we proclaim to value is appropriately assessed.

Chapter 5: Instruction for Modern Learning How do we align instruction practices, resources, and tools with our goals for modern learning?

I nt roduct ion

Teaching is a means to an end. Clarity influences the nature and practice of the learning experiences necessary to reach the end goals from your mission. In this chapter, we explore the value of an established set of learning principles to guide the selection of teaching strategies and learning resources, and we describe the acquisition, meaning making, transfer (A-M-T) framework.

Chapter 6: A Reporting System for Modern Learning How do we communicate student achievement and growth within the context of modern learning? Traditional grading practices and report cards are inadequate for reporting on modern learning. We explore an alternative grading system and a digital LearningBoard® (https://learningboard.co) platform that better communicates student growth and achievement of our mission for modern learning.

Chapter 7: Change Leadership for Modern Learning How might we lead adaptive change across the complex environment of learning organizations? As with many things in the modern world, the demands and processes of leadership in schools have changed and will continue to do so. We cannot lead transformational change in the same way as we may have led more linear, technical change in the past. In this chapter, we explore several principles for change leadership, an essential element of acting on the processes and frameworks outlined in this book. In addition, we include three resource-rich appendices: (1) “Sources for FuturesOriented Thinking Tools and Processes,” (2) “Sample Sources and Performance Indicators for 21st Century Skills,” and (3) “Sample Map of Cornerstone Performance Tasks and Transfer Goals.” In this book, we seek to support meaningful reform through practical methods, and we are confident that the strategies and tools we outline are replicable and scalable in varied school settings and contexts. We believe that you and your colleagues can apply these steps in multiple contexts, both large and small. Individually, each is an achievable implementation step for your 21st century vision. Collectively, they will make your vision come to life.

CHAPTER 1

How do we develop a powerful and informed view of the future to drive our vision for modern learning?

clear, compelling, and shared vision of what a disDo not confine your trict or school would like to achieve for its students in children to your the future should anchor any plan for revitalizing schools. own learning, since However, the word vision has widely differing interprethey were born tations. Educators use it to characterize everything from a simple, isolated idea to an almost mystical inspiration in another time. for a whole new reality. Our conception of a vision lies —Chinese Proverb somewhere in between. We are not talking about vision as merely a statement but rather as a guiding process. We develop a vision to sharpen our focus on the future and garner the commitment necessary for broad and meaningful change. But aren’t all visions directed toward the future? In a word, no. As we noted in the introduction, we believe that an impediment to deep and lasting reform of education systems stems from educators’ inability to envision a compelling future of a truly modern learning environment. Too often, school visions and the strategies educators develop to meet them are concerned with fixing the present as opposed to embracing the future. If our aspirations do not spring from the 7

Creating a Futures-Oriented Vision and Mission

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

understandings gained through an informed inquiry into the future, our students are likely to be constrained to an education rooted in the past.

To that end, this chapter focuses on how you or your core leadership group can develop a knowledge base and a future-focused orientation, engage in a community-based inquiry into the future, and consolidate that inquiry into an informed vision. From there, you will learn how communication plays a key role in these processes and begin to understand how you move from vision to mission. We wrap up by examining how you will come to define the operational outcomes you seek.

Developing a Knowledge Base and a Future-Focused Orientation A knowledge base—one based on shared knowledge, understandings, and insights into the future our students will inhabit—is the necessary starting point for informing your school’s or district’s view of the future. It allows an education community to engage in a positive and knowledgeable dialogue about the future and the concomitant educational preparation for it. We cannot rest on existing perceptions, simple generalizations, preconceptions, or our own past experiences with education. A solid knowledge base, one built on expected trends and drivers of change in the future, will help the community gain the understanding and develop the foresight to drive the change it seeks. Here, we are in luck. Volumes have been written about the future and, in particular, about the future of teaching and learning. Popular books abound on the subject, both in mainstream publishing and within the field of education. Indeed, education experts have added much to this discourse since the release of the first edition of this book. Several organizations engage in futures-oriented research, and their work adds great value to our understanding of how the future may evolve and emerge. (See appendix A, page 187.) One such organization is

A truly futures-oriented vision gets us to the future more directly. If real change is going to happen within our schools, we believe that we need to leapfrog the present and get right to the future. Consider how China leapfrogged from a primitive telecommunications infrastructure straight to mobile phones (The Economist, 2016). If China had plodded along the path of constructing traditional telephone landlines, this transformation would have taken decades. It is time for schools to consider meaningful leaps rather than tentatively tiptoeing forward.

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission

KnowledgeWorks, which is best known for developing seminal documents such as the Map of Future Forces Affecting Education (2006), 2020 Forecast: Creating the Future of Learning (2008), Forecast 4.0â&#x20AC;&#x201D;The Future of Learning: Education in the Era of Partners in Code (2015), and Forecast 5.0â&#x20AC;&#x201D;The Future of Learning: Navigating the Future of Learning (2018). 1. Automating choices (such as the rise of artificial intelligence and personalized learning opportunities) 2. Civic superpowers (such as redefining civic engagement) 3. Accelerating brains (such as technology and changing cognitive abilities) 4. Toxic narratives (such as effects of negative environments on wellbeing) 5. Remaking geographies (such as volatility in times of rapid globalization and migration) The report explores the various ways in which these drivers interact with three key players: (1) educators and students, (2) educational systems and structures for teaching and learning, and (3) various societal factors. It suggests possibilities for what modern learning could look like and poses a set of what if? provocations; for example: What effects might artificial intelligence and automated systems have on learning and life? How might technology-enabled civic engagement reshape educational governance and decision making? How might educational accountability expand to support a broader perspective on learner development and well-being?

Building a deep knowledge base offers you a rich opportunity to engage different elements of your educational community in a futures-focused dialogue. Involvement of various school constituents is key, and having a plan to engage members of your community appropriately and inclusively is an important part of building a shared and informed understanding of the forces that will shape the future and your educational responses to them. You cannot predict the future, but you can engage with it to better understand what might emerge to affect your students and their schooling.

KnowledgeWorks (2018) explores five drivers of change.

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

Through deep, rich, and collaborative engagement, we can inform the hearts and minds of our communities with an eye to the future. This knowledge base is the foundation of your why? for school transformation, and you should not assume that all involved stakeholders will understand it. Without a foundation to help articulate the Why change? question and outline the drivers of change most pertinent to students’ lives, you may end up with a less powerful premise than you will need to move the work forward. In the next section, we outline a simple process for engaging your community in this important collaborative learning.

Notes From the Field In our work with schools and districts, we note that there is often an impatience to get on with it. In the rush to identify things to implement, educators often don’t take the time to learn and to derive focus and meaning from that learning. If we asked a teacher why he or she didn’t just give all students the big ideas and understandings of the course on day one and save everyone a lot of time, that teacher would likely say something like this: “Learners need to arrive at understandings. They will never really learn if they don’t make meaning first.” That statement is correct. So, why would adult learners be any different? Consider this cautionary note: it is important to develop a knowledge base before continuing to the next step of actually generating a vision for modern learning. Without a knowledge base, we cannot develop an informed view of the future and take appropriate actions in response to it. In the absence of solid information, community input is likely to be all over the map and impossible to forge into a unifying vision. You are likely

In addition to reading and discussing futures publications such as the KnowledgeWorks reports, you might enlist a speaker for a professional development day or an evening meeting for parents. Or, you could initiate a study group or book club with teachers. Viewing a series of thought-provoking, futuresoriented TED Talks is also a stimulating way to engage staff and parents in the process. Additionally, be sure to involve students, as they are generally keen to talk about their future.

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission

Engaging in a Community-Based Inquiry Into the Future A key part of our change leadership strategy involves engaging the school community in a collaborative exploration of potential futures based on a solid knowledge base. The goal of this exploration is to answer the questions: Why change? and Change to what? Visions constructed without this common rationale and foundation are often aspirational statements with little clarity, open to multiple interpretations, and full of “motherhood” statements. We believe that a vision and mission should be well-founded in a knowledge base and drive school strategy and actions. The perspectives and interpretations from various stakeholders across the broader community enrich the collective visioning that emerges. It is our experience that leaders or leadership groups should implement a structure for fruitful engagement with the research and thought surrounding the future to maximize the effort of such an inquiry. We find it helpful to distribute the exploratory work by establishing subgroups that can delve deeply into specific areas of drivers of future change. These subgroups should include representation from various stakeholder groups and undertake the focused work that the whole community cannot. Groups of fifteen to twenty provide enough variety of perspective to engage in important discussions and collaborative learning. Groups of this size also help to parcel out various source material to ensure engagement with a wide range of research and thought. We have also worked with larger groups using this process, but logistics and facilitation can become overly complicated.

to end up with a wide variety of personal perceptions (some informed, some not), assertions based on false assumptions and misunderstandings, and contradictory points of view that are not drawn from evidence or research. Assumption and personal preference without real knowledge or understanding will result in an unstable foundation incapable of supporting the vision of modern learning you seek.

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

One practical technique for engaging groups in considering trends and drivers of change and imagining future possibilities is through the use of polarities and magic squares. We explore these in the next two sections.

Polarities Polarities present a continuum displaying two endpoints reflecting different trends suggesting possible scenarios. For example, forces influencing 21st century schooling could push education to become more standardized on the one hand or highly personalized on the other. Other influences, like technology in conjunction with standardization, could cause learning to derive from a single source (such as all teachers in a school using the same standardized online curriculum) or from multiple sources (such as those teachers using a variety of open source courseware, online tutorials, mentors, internships, and independent projects). See figure 1.1 for two examples of polarities.

Standardized

Will future learning be delivered through efficient mass modes or experienced in more personalized ways? Personalized

Single Sourced

Will schools continue to serve as the primary sources of learning, or will students access learning resources from many suppliers? Multisourced

Figure 1.1: Two polarities.

We also recommend providing a small set of informative starter resources to help the subgroups get started; however, it is also important to allow these groups to move beyond these starters if they so desire. Provocative TED Talks and materials from various think-tank organizations (such as KnowledgeWorks) are good places to begin. Your initial goal is to open eyes and challenge assumptions while helping people to understand that tomorrow will not look like yesterday (or even today). Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s important not to limit groups to a precooked set of resources, such as a limited number of advocacy materials that support one perspective or potential approach, for which you have already drawn your conclusions. At the same time, you donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t want to overwhelm people by having them start their research from scratch.

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission

Magic Squares To see how the polarities and their accompanying questions in table 1.1 relate to one another and suggest potential futures, you can use a four-quadrant chart (sometimes called a magic square but more properly known as a Cartesian plane). By plotting two sets of polarities with accompanying questions, groups can workshop a variety of potential future scenarios. We have found these charts stimulate thinking and prompt rich conversations about the possible futures each quadrant suggests. Using the polarities we referenced in figure 1.1—standardized versus personalized and single sourced versus multisourced—we’ve created a sample magic square in figure 1.2 (page 15). Using this chart, we now have four potential futures to explore with many shades between them. Quadrant A represents a potential future where education is standardized and has diversified the sources and suppliers of learning; quadrant D represents a potential future where learning is highly personalized, but the sources and suppliers of learning are not as diverse; and so on. After graphing the polarities, compare the potential futures and have the group pick those it most prefers from each chart by discussing the following questions: Where are we currently? What would each potential future look like? What are the benefits and drawbacks of each? Where do we want to be? Figure 1.3 (page 15) represents the questions and challenges associated with the potential future that each quadrant of figure 1.2 suggests. In a typical group workshop, mix four to twelve sets of polarities to create two to six four-quadrant charts. The ensuing discussion then results in the articulation of preferred futures from all the potential ones.

By inquiring into various factors and trends, you can develop polarities that can help your community teams explore the numerous ways in which the future of education could unfold. Identifying these polarities is an important part of moving from developing a knowledge base to envisioning and designing a preferred future. Table 1.1 (page 14) presents potential polarities and accompanying questions.

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

Table 1.1: Polarities and Sample Questions

Polarities

Sample Questions Will learning focus on local or national contexts or adopt a global perspective?

Public sector versus corporate sector

Is the public school model going to remain the same, or will the private sector become more involved and influential?

Career readiness versus college readiness

Should students be prepared for work or for institutions of higher education?

Career oriented versus citizenship oriented

Is learning geared toward college and career orientation or toward citizenship and satisfying, productive lives?

Specialized versus generalized

Should students gain deep knowledge in a few specialized areas or learn across a broader spectrum?

Short-term accountability versus long-term goals

Should we focus on short-term accountability measures or on long-term goals that may be more difficult to assess?

Disciplinary knowledge versus transdisciplinary skills

Do we educate for acquisition of knowledge and skills within traditional disciplines, or do we develop transdisciplinary 21st century skills?

Employees versus employers

Do we want to develop students destined to be employees or employers?

Individual versus collaborative

Is success, in our context, an individual or collaborative endeavor?

Face to face versus distance

In the future, will students learn through face-to-face interactions or through online or distance-learning opportunities?

Diploma versus accumulated evidence of proficiency

Will student learning be authenticated through common graduation requirements (such as Carnegie Units) or through more personalized evidence of performance and accomplishment (such as digital portfolios and badges)?

Stability versus innovation

Are we a district, school, or department that values stability and structure, or do we value innovation and risk?

Connected versus independent

Are we a district, school, or department that sees itself as part of a connected network or as an independent entity?

Local versus global

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission

Multisourced Will schools dictate the primary sources of learning, or will students access resources from many suppliers?

Standardized Personalized

Single Sourced

D Will learning be delivered through efficient mass modes or in more personalized ways?

Figure 1.2: Magic square chart.

Quadrant

Characteristics

• Districts and schools can order state-adopted textbooks or resources from approved vendors. • There is some choice within a box-set environment. • School and class schedules are set. • Students are grouped by age.

Standardized and Multisourced

Questions and Challenges • The approved resources may not support all teaching and learning approaches (such as inquiry). • There is minimal flexibility for schools and teachers regarding scheduling and grouping. • Would standardized testing increase?

Figure 1.3: Questions and challenges by quadrant

continued

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

Questions and Challenges

Characteristics

• Learning resources would come from a wide variety of sources. • Students source much of their own learning. • Students assemble their own content (such as creating a musical playlist of learning using iTunes). • Teachers facilitate the process at an individual student level. • Students meet in flexible groups. • Learning experiences take place anywhere and anytime (not necessarily in a brick-and-mortar schoolhouse).

• Who decides what quality is? • What are the criteria for success? • There is potential for an incoherent program (for example, important skills can fall through the cracks). • How do we manage so many options? • How much autonomy and flexibility should we allow? • Are all students mature enough to handle having this freedom? • How can we ensure accountability? • How would a student progress through the system (for instance, it could be a competency-based program)?

• This future offers a guaranteed curriculum to all students. • There is centralized control over curriculum and learning resources. • Prescriptive syllabi ensure uniformity. • Inexperienced teachers can follow a script. • Rigid pacing guides keep everyone on track.

• Centralized structures can be bureaucratic. • A one-size-fits-all system discourages innovation and responsiveness to change. • How would we meet different learning needs, styles, and interests? • Rigid pacing guides encourage a coverage approach to teaching. • There is minimal flexibility for schools and teachers. • Standardized testing encourages excessive test prep.

Personalized and Multisourced

C Standardized and Single Sourced

Quadrant

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission

D Personalized and Single Sourced

• How would we keep centralized materials up to date? • This future lends itself to a competency-based program. • A sophisticated database is necessary to manage the various pathways that students elect to take.

Once the group graphs and discusses various potential futures, you can consolidate and summarize the work as follows. • Collect and collate the descriptions of all the different future points the quadrants describe. Together, they form a rich description of preferred futures from varied perspectives. • Schedule time for the group to reflect on its work and package it for communication to others. Generally, it is best to transfer the completed charts into a digital format, such as a simple set of PowerPoint slides, and collate the descriptions of preferred futures to bring them together in a single document. When you synthesize the descriptions of multiple preferred futures (each in the context of different mixtures of polarities), the result is a powerful vision for the future your community desires.

Next Steps Once you have tasked the research and inquiry appropriately across representative groups, you must consolidate their resulting insights and deductions. You can accomplish this work of summarizing and agreeing on the core, essential elements of the research in two ways. One option is to set up an online system (such as a website where groups can post their results) that offers an efficient alternative to trying to coordinate schedules to bring groups together physically. Even a simple Google Doc (https://google.com/docs/about) can suffice for this purpose.

• There is centralized control of all learning sources. • There is a guaranteed and coordinated course curriculum. • Students select from a predetermined menu of sources and experiences. • Time frames and schedules can vary. • There is freedom within a structure.

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

Alternately, you can use facilitated workshops to structure each group’s dialogue and discussion to arrive at its members' shared understandings about the future.

Consolidating a Community-Based and Informed View of the Future Once the important work of engaging in a community-based, future-focused inquiry is complete, you must further consolidate the responses into shared and concise understandings about the future and the implications for learning and education. You will have created the raw material for this consolidation from some of the previous knowledge-building and generative tasks, such as working with the magic squares described in the previous section. It is best to do this as a two- to three-hour workshop so that your core leadership group can consider all the learning and insights from the subgroups. Figure 1.4 offers a protocol for facilitating a consolidation workshop. Process Phase

Planning Questions

Reassemble small groups so that each group has representation from the various focus groups listed above. For all research, each group should have access to the learning consolidation tables in the knowledge base.

• How might we share what we’ve learned?

Each group briefly reviews the sources it consulted and summarizes the insights and implications for schools gathered from its research. (Thirty minutes)

• What did we discover through our inquiry? • What big ideas come to the surface as a result of this research?

Regardless of the format, generative dialogue and community exploration can be an important part of opening your thinking to new possibilities and opportunities for an educational future. Community engagement in this collaborative inquiry will yield shared understandings and commitments that will be necessary to support and sustain the effort, especially during the challenges of planning and implementing the processes that will follow.

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission

Process Phase

Each group will record its set of insights and understandings on a piece of poster paper for display. (One hour)

The larger group will then undertake a gallery walk to identify the most relevant and key insights resulting from the preceding process. (See page 30 on operationally defining outcomes.) One method for achieving this is to give each individual five sticky dots. Ask each member to endorse five insights or understandings with the caveat that he or she cannot endorse any from his or her group. (Fifteen minutes) The facilitator will gather and group the insights or understandings with the greatest number of nominations during a break. It is likely that there will be overlap (so you can group similar insights or understandings) and that a small number will rise to the top.

Planning Questions • What common themes about the future and change do we notice? • What larger insights and understandings come to the surface? • What commonalities do we see in what we’ve learned across the different focus groups? • What five or six statements do we believe best characterizes the future? • Which insights or understandings represent important ideas about the future? • Why is it important? • Which insights or understandings should we focus on to best prepare our students for their futures?

• What distinct insights or understandings emerge? • What commonalities or patterns do we observe?

Record each insight or understanding (or a small group of common ones) on separate pieces of poster paper. (Fifteen minutes)

Figure 1.4: Protocol for a consolidation workshop.

continued

Each group records a brief set of insights and understandings that represents the key findings that the research supports and the group agreed on. These insights and understandings should be few (five or six maximum) and represent the group’s highlevel learnings.

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

Process Phase Redistribute individual poster paper to smaller groups formed at the beginning of the workshop.

Have each group record these statements on its piece of poster paper and post around the room. (Forty-five minutes) Carry out another gallery walk. If desired, repeat the endorsement process to help sort and prioritize the responses to the insights and understandings. (Fifteen minutes)

After the workshop, a very small group of people will trim and tune this content into a succinct set of statements and responses (see figure 1.5). Quickly distribute this set to all members of the workshop for a quick sign off.

Planning Questions • If these insights and understandings represent key elements of the future, what is our response to them? • What does this mean in order to prepare our students for their futures? • What are the implications for modern learning?

• Which of the responses seem most important and relevant to address our insights and understandings about the future? • Which of the responses help to articulate what should happen as opposed to what currently happens? • Do these statements accurately reflect the key ideas and insights that we have learned? • Can I stand behind this list as the core element of a vision of modern learning at my schools or district? • Could I communicate this to others?

The results of this process, when massaged and streamlined, will represent not only a core definition of modern learning in your context but a community agreement that addresses both the Why change? question and the essence of a Change to what? vision. A simple technique for achieving clarity and consolidation involves the use of an if–then prompt: “If this is true, then the implications for learning are . . .” We’ve paraphrased this approach in figure 1.5. In other words, if our collective research and understanding that A, B, and C are true about the future for our students, then our focus should be on X, Y, and Z. Note that these

Groups collaborate to identify a response to their insights and understandings. Using a simple “This means that . . .” sentence stem often helps to focus these statements.

L E A R N I NG

continued

• Our students must acquire skills and dispositions beyond the traditional subject-based content and procedural knowledge schools have traditionally delivered. • Retention and recall are not key skills or indicators of learning for the future. • Our students will need to demonstrate more than good grades to impress future employers, investors, partners, and further learning institutions. • Our students will need more experience in transferring and extending their learning through messy and complex real-world learning and tasks.

Figure 1.5: Sample output of developing an informed view of the future.

• The workforce and some post-secondary environments highlight the need for skills and dispositions beyond those normally taught or assessed in school. • Much of the content schools have traditionally transmitted to students that is relevant to a task or challenge is readily available through the internet on demand. • The future will be solutions or design focused, often spanning existing disciplines or known problems.

Educational Implications Then . . .

• Our students need to be prepared to learn continuously and reinvent themselves throughout their lives. • Our students must be able to activate the skills and dispositions of modern learning throughout their lives. • It is no longer enough to attempt to teach our students an existing set of finite and existing knowledge. • Schools need to shift from preparing students solely for college or lifelong careers to providing them with the skills and dispositions to navigate fluid and ambiguous work and life environments.

Critical Skills

• Our students will have many different jobs in the future, many of which do not yet exist. • Job markets and opportunities will shift rapidly with increasing effect of robotics, outsourcing, and the rising influence of artificial intelligence. • There will be fewer numbers of traditional, full-time jobs in the future. • Preparing for smaller, agile innovations will foster more opportunities than preparing for traditional, life-long corporate careers. • People will be living and working far beyond current norms.

The Future Workforce

Core Insight or Understanding About the Future If . . .

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission 21

• Our students need to understand the interrelated nature of the world, its systems, and its people. • The fluidity within which our students can move between and among cultures will be more important. • Identifying patterns and anticipating change will be an important part of a skillset for the future. • Students need to explore and understand the implication of issues, change, and solutions within and across systems.

• Balance and wellbeing will be increasingly important for healthy and successful lives. • Students must learn to rapidly adapt and utilize new technologies. • Students must become critical and savvy consumers and creators of information, data, and ideas.

MODE R N

• Technology and media are likely to create more polarization and disparity. • Digital crime, identity theft, and media manipulation will become more prevalent than traditional threats. • Accelerating technical advances will have far-reaching effects on relationships, communities, and life balance.

L E A DI NG

Technology

• The world will become increasingly interdependent. • The future will become increasingly characterized by VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity). • The tight connection between systems and people across the planet means that things will shift more rapidly and unintended consequences will be more pronounced. • The mobility of populations will increase.

Globalization and Change

22 L E A R N I NG

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission

statements are not one to one. Multiple If observations can combine into a single Then statement.

Clarity and brevity are key elements of this stage. You do not need reams of documents to capture the essence of what you have learned and understood through this inquiry process. What you do need is a solid and succinct basis for shared understanding. One practical and valuable output from this process is to generate a Portrait of a Graduate, “a collective vision that articulates the community’s aspirations for all students” (Battelle for Kids, n.d.). The following are two examples from a public-school district and an independent school, respectively. The first is from the Catalina Foothills school district in Tucson, Arizona (Catalina Foothills School District, n.d.): The Catalina Foothills School District (CFSD) is committed to building knowledge and skills that prepare students for college and career pathways. In addition to mastering essential academic content, CFSD is also focused on building a set of proficiencies that we believe students must learn in order to apply and transfer knowledge to problems or situations in the classroom and beyond the PreK–12 educational setting.

The site goes on to name specific deep learning proficiencies that include: citizenship, creativity and innovation, critical thinking and problem solving, communication, collaboration, and systems thinking (Catalina Foothills School District, n.d.). The second such Portrait of a Graduate is from the Alexandria Country Day School in Alexandria, Virginia (Alexandria Country Day School, n.d.):

Because these are not assumptions (they are based in research and current thinking about the future), your leadership group should properly support and reference (cite) the insights and understandings derived from the inquiry process. One of the goals of this process is to emerge with a clear set of shared understandings and parameters for deciding on your highest learning needs and goals. This is the basis on which all future work will proceed. We very deliberately differentiate this visioning and goal-setting phase from deciding on the details of how we might achieve these goals. Too often, we have seen schools and districts rush to develop action plans for implementation before they have truly and clearly established the goals and principles (the vision) for such a selection. The result is often a set of potentially disruptive and disjointed programmatic implementations ungrounded in and unaccountable to clear articulations of the whys and whats.

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

We seek to ensure that at the conclusion of their eighth grade year ACDS graduates are: Independent Learners: The ACDS Graduate actively engages in the acquisition of academic, athletic, and artistic skills. He or she seeks opportunities to learn and exhibits the abilities, knowledge, confidence, and creativity to complete a given task independently. . . .

Community Minded: The ACDS Graduate demonstrates an awareness of his or her impact on the community, values diversity, and has the skills to understand, cooperate, and empathize with others. The ACDS Graduate exhibits moral courage and takes an active role in the betterment of the greater community. . . . Balanced: The ACDS Graduate demonstrates a healthy understanding of the work/life balance, attends to his or her physical and mental health, and is willing to take prudent risks in pursuit of his or her goals.

Having a portrait like these enables you to communicate something more concrete that illustrates the type of student you want to collectively create. It is accessible and compelling to the broader community while establishing a focal point for directing ensuing decisions and actions. If you’d like to learn more, EdLeader21 is a leading organization promoting the cultivation of 21st century skills and the new basics of modern education (Kay & Greenhill, 2013). The organization hosts an excellent website that offers many examples of graduate profiles along with a detailed protocol that districts and schools can use to engage stakeholders in developing their own Portrait of a Graduate (https://portraitofagraduate.org).

Communicating Futures Research With Key Stakeholders You need to clearly communicate the understandings and implications of your futures research, along with the resulting Portrait of a Graduate, to the parents, students, community connections, and educators within the broader community. A variety of communication channels exist, including print and online newsletters, articles in local papers, district and school-based websites, social media like Facebook and Twitter, and informational videos posted on YouTube. We also recommend offering in-person sessions, such as information meetings, workshops, and informal coffees where people can actively explore and

Effective Communicators: The ACDS Graduate effectively exchanges ideas, experiences, and knowledge confidently and appropriately in person and using a variety of media. . . .

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission

Notes From the Field The process of transforming a learning community toward meaningful modern learning is a long one, comparable to a relay race. It is not a race, per se, but it is a long and complex process that needs proper staging. To build the proper conditions for success at the next stage, effective change leaders must recognize that various stages of the race require various participants to be involved. The validity of this process is earned through the trust that it is both representative of the community and focused on what is best for our students (not the adults or the organization). Accordingly, community involvement and voice are essential. The word we must echo through everything.

Moving From Vision to Mission When you have a vision, the next question to ask is: “How do we concretize our vision for modern learning into an actionable mission?” By acting on the ideas presented in this chapter, you have collaboratively developed an informed, futures-oriented vision for your educational organization. You may also have imagined or created other components, such as a Portrait of a Graduate, to support communication and understanding. In this next stage, you move to transform your vision into a clearly articulated and actionable mission to guide the work at any level—district, school, or department. A vision is aspirational; it is a projection of what a district, school, or department wants to become. Think of the mission as the organization’s core business; that is,

discuss. You cannot simply tell people that your leadership group’s interpretations are true; you need to help them to arrive at similar conclusions and understand your responses to those conclusions. The importance of building a collective understanding is crucial to gaining the support necessary for the acceptance of subsequent work and the challenges of change. Failure to plan and execute an effective communication plan can hinder subsequent efforts that arise from your desire to do better for your students.

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

what it is committed to achieving for its clients—the students it serves. An educational mission should thus serve to operationalize your vision in terms of the main outcomes of student learning based on the school’s vision of its desired future.

• The XYZ School District believes that all students can learn and strives to help all learners reach their full potential. • We will fully prepare our graduates for college or a career. • In the ABC School’s social studies department, we nurture future citizens to be ready to succeed in a rapidly changing world. Mission statements such as these are ambiguous and trite. They lack the specificity necessary to guide actions. They leave us asking: “What does it mean for students to reach their full potential?” “What does it mean to be fully prepared for college or a career?” “What exactly would we expect a future citizen to do?” “What learning outcomes will make it more likely that students will be able to succeed in a rapidly changing world?” Another common characteristic of poorly constructed mission statements is a focus on what the educational institution or program will provide for its students rather than on student accomplishments. The following are examples. • The QRS School District is committed to providing a warm and nurturing environment in partnership with parents to support all our learners. • The TYG International School offers the rigorous International Baccalaureate Program along with a wide range of electives to prepare students for future success. • All faculty in the mathematics department at NOP Prep have advanced degrees and many years of teaching experience. Such descriptions may sound appealing, but notice that being warm, nurturing, and rigorous are descriptions of means, not ends. They state what the district, school, or department will offer rather than specifying the long-term learning outcomes for students. Indeed, we find that organizations often confuse the environment, program, teachers’ credentials, and facilities—all means for achieving a goal—with the goal itself.

Unfortunately, schools do not always properly craft their mission statements. Some missions reflect a mixture of vague catchphrases and jargon. Consider the following examples.

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission

• They are long-term in nature; for example, they specify exit outcomes to be developed over time in school. • They are performance based and involve transfer; for example, they specify what learners will be able to do with their learning when confronted with new situations. • They call for autonomous performance; for example, they establish independent performance by the learner without coaching or prompting as the goal. • They reflect the most important outcomes of schooling for a modern era; for example, they need to represent the learning priorities identified in the portrait of the graduate or other such statements. Some mission-related educational outcomes fall within traditional subject areas (disciplinary), while others cut across disciplines (transdisciplinary). In general, we expect to find disciplinary outcomes rooted in the mission statements of subject-based departments (for example, in mathematics or visual art), while district- and school-level missions typically identify transdisciplinary outcomes, such as 21st century skills and dispositions. Here are a few examples of such mission statements for a district or school as well some as for discipline areas. The mission of GHI School is to develop learners who are independently able to: Function as self-directed learners Apply critical thinking and ethical judgment when analyzing

issues and taking actions Effectively communicate ideas for a variety of purposes and

audiences using varied media

So, how do you move from a vision of what you believe is most important for your students to achieve to an articulation of a mission that truly guides your actions? Our recommendation is straightforward: an educational mission statement should expressly state the desired outcomes in terms of student learning. More specifically, we contend that the outcomes for a modern education should have several distinguishing characteristics.

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

The mission of the mathematics department is to develop learners who are independently able to: Effectively use strategies and sound mathematical reasoning

to tackle never-seen-before problems involving real-world and theoretical challenges

statistical claims and evidence

The mission of the history department is to develop learners who are independently able to: Use knowledge of patterns in history to better understand the

present and prepare for the future Critically appraise historical claims and analyze contemporary

issues Participate as an active and civil citizen in a democratic society

Table 1.2 shows examples of both types of mission-based outcomes. Table 1.2: Two Types of Mission-Based Outcomes

Disciplinary Outcomes

Transdisciplinary Outcomes

Effective writer

Critical thinker

Mathematical reasoner

Effective collaborator

Creative artist

Self-directed learner

Although we advocate framing the mission of a district, school, or department (or program) in terms of student learning outcomes, there is often a need to define and describe these outcomes, especially those that are transdisciplinary in nature. West Windsor-Plainsboro Township District, a public school district located in northern New Jersey, engaged in a unique and effective process for

Develop and critique arguments based on mathematical or

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission

clarifying its four transdisciplinary outcomes by declaring the following characteristics in its district’s mission: (1) self-directed learner, (2) responsible and involved student and citizen, (3) creative and practical problem solver, (4) and effective team member (M. Wise, personal communication, 2012).

Following the ninety-minute meeting, a designee typed up the lists and proposed edits for a committee representing various roles (administrators and teachers of various grades and subjects) to synthesize. Later in the summer, a school administrator emailed the draft lists of indicators for the four transdisciplinary outcomes to the staff with an invitation to review the document, propose any final edits, and return their comments by a designated date in August. When the faculty returned for the start of the school year, the committee distributed the final set of staff-generated performance indicators at a meeting, along with the directions for next steps. Next came the innovative step of the process—each homeroom teacher in the secondary schools engaged his or her students in the same exercise that the faculty undertook! Over four days during the homeroom periods, teachers led their students through the process of considering how a person would demonstrate each of the four transdisciplinary outcomes through their actions and behaviors. Students worked in small groups to brainstorm indicators. They then shared, discussed, and synthesized these. (Teachers did not show students the faculty lists of indicators since one of the goals was to have students think deeply about each outcome and not just repeat indicators from the adults’ lists.) Finally, the committee created a composite list that reflected a synthesis of the ideas and language of both teachers and students. Figure 1.6 (page 30) lists an example of these results based on the transdisciplinary outcome of a self-directed learner.

The distric started with an end-of-the-school-year faculty meeting (to plan for the upcoming year) in which teachers were seated in heterogeneous groups of mixed subjects and grade levels (five to six people per group) and asked to brainstorm performance indicators for one of the four transdisciplinary outcomes. Each group recorded its initial list on chart paper and posted the large sheets on the walls of the meeting room. Then, the entire staff participated in a gallery walk to view the lists of other groups and used sticky notes to propose edits to the draft lists. Predictably, the gallery walk generated rich professional conversations among the faculty members.

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

Self-Directed Learner

As I continue to become a resourceful, self-directed learner, I will: • Ask a variety of questions to clarify my understanding • Know when and how to seek help and assistance • Find and use information from a variety of sources • Evaluate information for reliability, accuracy, and credibility • Demonstrate a willingness to take risks to learn • Use reasoning strategies, knowledge, and common sense to solve problems • Apply prior knowledge to new situations As I continue to become a reflective, self-directed learner, I will: • Be thoughtful, open-minded, and curious • Assess my work in order to identify areas of strength and weakness • Assess the strengths and weaknesses of how I learn in order to make appropriate adjustments • Generate and employ strategies to improve weaknesses • Respond to new information by reflecting on the experience and reconsidering my opinion and sources of information • Listen to and respect the contributions of others

Figure 1.6: Faculty- and student-generated lists of performance indicators.

The benefits of this process should be evident—all school community members, students, and staff have a clear and agreed-on set of valued outcomes and associated indicators. Even if students are not involved, the process of operationally defining outcomes and identifying performance indicators still brings a mission to life. The resulting lists of indicators serve as targets for teaching and learning, parameters for teachers’ assessments, and guides for students’ self-assessment of their growth in these important capacities. We explore this idea in greater detail in chapters 3 and 4.

As I continue to become a responsible, self-directed learner, I will: • Arrive prepared for class • Plan and budget time to meet deadlines • Follow through on commitments • Attend to and follow directions • Manage my behavior so that I remain focused • Organize time and materials • Persevere in challenging situations • Take ownership of work and actions • Strive to do my best work in all situations • Strive for accuracy • Undertake independent study

Creat i ng a Fut u res-O r iented Vision a nd M ission

Notes From the Field

When writing a mission statement, we suggest avoiding flowery and inert language that evidence cannot observe or support. It is nice to say that your organization wants to “empower all students,” but what does that mean, and how will you know it has achieved success? We encourage the districts and schools we work with to focus on goal clarity within the mission and the supporting frameworks they will use to design and assess whether that learning is taking place. Two questions that we often ask learning communities to help them avoid the pitfalls of an obscure or vague mission statement are: 1. “What does your mission statement look like?” 2. “How will you know that it is being achieved?” When a district or school can answer these two questions with specificity, we know it has something it can act on and to which it can hold itself accountable.

Conclusion In this chapter, we explored ways of engaging a school community in developing an informed view of the future and considering the implications for the modern learning that will prepare students for the opportunities and challenges they will encounter in their lives. We discussed ways of moving from a vision of a graduate to an actionable educational mission designed to achieve both disciplinary and transdisciplinary learning outcomes. We offered practical processes for agreeing on operational definitions and observable indicators of the outcomes we seek.

Mission statements often derive from a collaborative writing session that focuses on how they read and whether they sound powerful. But missions are not mottos; they are the organization’s reason for being, and they clarify how it will set out to achieve those goals.

L E A DI NG

MODE R N

L E A R N I NG

A compelling vision and mission for modern learning are necessary, but not sufficient. The sobering reality is that most districts and schools are not currently structured to achieve the modern learning outcomes that we have discussed. Existing systems need alignment with these outcomes so our staff and students can achieve them. In the next chapter, we explore two systemic frameworks for working backward from these stated outcomes to design the actions necessary to achieve them.

L E A D I N G

Modern

Learning A Blueprint for S

Vision-Driven Schools D

L E A D I N G

—Emmanuel Bonin, Deputy Head of School and Chief Academic Officer, Shanghai American School

Learning

Understand the necessity and value of updating education for the 21st century classroom

•

Explore systems thinking and frameworks for backward design to develop action plans and guide reform

•

Develop a blueprint for learning to establish a vision and mission, and use it to enhance curricula, refine instruction, design more effective assessments, and improve reporting

•

Read an all-new chapter on change management and strategic planning for district and school leadership

•

Gain insights from the new Notes From the Field feature, which highlights how to avoid potential missteps and misunderstandings that inhibit progress

A joint publication

SolutionTree.com

Visit go.SolutionTree.com/leadership to download the free reproducibles in this book.

McTIGHE | CURTIS

•

Vision-Driven SECOND EDITION

Readers will:

A Blueprint for SCHOOLS SECOND EDITION