PLC-Next

Having the right equipment can make all the difference. Attempting endeavors such as climbing a mountain, scuba diving, flying a plane, racing a car, or painting a great portrait, it is important to have the right gear. The gear we have is important to accomplishing the task.

Professional Learning Communities have their own gear too. Each member brings some unique gear to their PLC and this gear helps the entire PLC accomplish its goal.

When I refer to gear, I am actually referring to GEARR. Each team members' Gifts, Experiences, Abilities, Roles, and Relationships.

Gifts
Gifts are those naturally occuring strengths we each have. Some of us have the gift of leadership, organization, empathy, insight, communication, encouragement, consistency, etc. These gifts give each of us a unique combination of strengths that PLC can leverage to make the team stronger.

Experiences
No two team members will have exactly the same experiences. Experiences is the stuff you have been through that have helped you become the person you are today. Experience is unique to each of us. Each teacher has had experiences as a learner and as an educator. Our experiences as students, as teachers, as parents, etc. give each of us a background the we can draw upon to help the PLC better the meet the needs of our students.

Abilities
These are the skills that we are good at. Some have abilities in technology, others music or art. Some are excellent at collecting and interpreing data. Some can do magic with a spredsheet, while others can draw pictures on a chart perfectly. Other have abilities in making complex ideas simple to understand. Abilities would also include those many skills we have learned along the way in our time as educators. Every staff development session, conference, or training has provided team members wth necessary abilities to be leveraged within the PLC to meet the needs of students.

Roles
Each member of a PLC should have some type of role. Roles can included facilitation, note taking, time keeping, or any thing else the PLC needs to have done. It is through our roles that we share the leadership and the work load of the PLC.

Relationships
Often times we forget just how important the relationships outside of our grade level or department can be. Each member has a network of relationships that can be leveraged to provide insight, help, advice, knowledge, and wisdom to the work of their PLC. The relationships developed by each person can provide a myriad of useful outsiders to help the PLC accomplish its work in improving student achievement.

Every Professional Learning Community has their own GEARR. But, because every PLC has GEARR does not mean they are taking advantage of it. If you leave your gear in the truck it's not going to help you climb that mountain. PLC need to bring their GEARR with them to each and every session. The key is to surface it and then leverage it for maxmimum impact on student learning.

Note: The Professional Networked Learning Collaborative is a powerful model for maximizing GEARR because of the network effect of having many more Gifts, Experiences, Abilities, Roles, and Relationships provided through each members physical and virtual network.

For every grade level team, for every Professional Learning Community, and for every Professional Networked Learning Collaborative in the future, there is or will be a tipping point in which people stop hoarding information and ideas and begin sharing. When this threshold is reached, the Collaboration Cascade begins. (Not be confused with an Information Cascade which I posted about in Information Cascades in Professional Learning Communities)

I choose the term Collaboration Cascade to describe the point at which subject/grade level teams (PLCs or PNLCs) reach a tipping point or threshold when the collaboration of some can cause a cascade of collaboration and cooperation from those who have not been participating or who have been hoarding their information, knowledge, and insight. This is the point of the Collaboration Cascade, a “cascade” of collaboration as more members begin to move from non-participation to participation, from hoarding to sharing, from non-cooperation to cooperation. 

The tipping point or threshold at which teams reach the collaboration cascade will be different and unique for each group, governed by the unique group dynamics of that particular team, PLC, or PNLC.

The self-interest of the individual competes against the group dynamics that require members to collaborate, cooperate, share, and participate. For many members their collaboration is contingent on the collaboration of others. In other words, some members will in essence say, “You go first.” Their collaboration will require others to first demonstrate their willingness to collaborate. The question is what conditions must exist to create the tipping point or for members to reach their threshold to create a Collaboration Cascade?

I put the question, “What conditions must exist before you will step-out and share your ideas and collaborate with others? What makes you share?” to my Twitter PLN.
Here are some of the responses.

@maverickwoman I was born to share- I don't think about it- its like an internal software driving my behaviour- a natural connector

@JBrandon building off the ideas of others, and not being afraid of people telling me my ideas are too "out of the box."

@nashworld trust and familiarity period. experience & expertise pale in comparison in the PLC model.

@tjacobucci To share ideas, I have to know that they will be of value to others, that it's not the same old thing they've already tried.

How would you answer? What would create a Collaboration Cascade in your team, PLC, or PNLC?

Catalytic Questions:
1.  What role does fear play in holding back collaboration, cooperation, sharing and participation?

2.  The philosopher Epictetus said, “What concerns me is not the way things are, but rather the way people think things are.”  What role is perception playing in preventing a Collaboration Cascade?

3.  In what ways might you provide leadership or an example to influence a Collaboration Cascade?

4.  What is the underlying principle at work in reaching the tipping point for a Collaboration Cascade?

5.  In what ways could you demonstrate the benefit of the Collaboration Cascade? In what ways might you show that you are willing to, “Go first?” 

Research has proven that Professional Learning Communities are one of the most powerful educational paradigms. The Professional Learning Community takes the individual teacher and hooks them into a network of their grade level or department level peers. This network in turn makes it possible for teacher to leverage the power of those present at the table to do more for students.

I have advocated that technology and other key drivers have created an environment in which individual Professional Learning Communities can be networked with, not only other Professional Learning Communities, but useful individuals such as specialists, district personnel, researchers, etc. I call this model the Professional Networked Learning Collaborative. The essence of the PNLC is that the “who” of potential members and collaborators is increased exponentially because of individual members networking through collaborative technology platforms, the “what.” Educators working together in the ongoing purpose of increasing student learning and achievement while sharing physical space, virtual space, or both simultaneously.

The Professional Networked Learning Collaborative makes use of what network researchers call a “small world network.” Keith Sawyer, author of Group Genius, explains that small world networks consist of, “…many densely connected small groups with less strong connections.”

Brian Uzzi of Northwestern University and Jarrett Spiro of Stanford University studied the 20the century Broadway musical industry, an industry in which many teams of people created projects, and then moved on to new projects, but maintained varying levels of interconnectedness. The Broadway musical industry was a network. From their research the derive a single number, which they called “Q.” Q is a measure of how densely interconnected the entire community is.

As Keith Sawyer points out, “When Q is low, there aren’t many links among teams, and those links aren’t very strong. When Q is high, the teams are connected by more and more people who know people on the other teams. If Q is very high, then teams are connected by many members and everyone has worked with everyone else multiple times.”

The Professional Networked Learning Collaborative attempts to harness they power of Q by creating connections with many more people than the team members sitting at the table. As these connections increase and are frequently re-visited, the level of Q increases.

Connections are the key. More connections increase the surface area of the typical PLC and exposes them to many more people who can contribute in meaningful ways to the work of the PLC.

“Connections expose a team to new sources of creative material. But if the network is totally connected, there is less diversity of ideas and the web risks falling into a rut of conventional styles. Recall the research showing that brainstorming groups often fall into groupthink and become less innovative than solitary workers. The most creative web is the one in which good connections exist among the teams, but the teams still enjoy independence and autonomy.”

Professional Networked Learning Collaboratives leverage the INDIVIDUAL networks of each member. No two networks look the same; therefore the PNLC is leveraging multiple unique networks. This uniqueness helps to offset the problem of groupthink and allows the PNLC the autonomy and professional discretion that Professional Learning Communities enjoy.

Want to raise the IQ of your teacher collaboration, then create your own Professional Networked Learning Collabortive and harness the power of Q. More Q equals more IQ.

One of the biggest barriers to effective, constructive, and meaningful conversations in Professional Learning Communities is the form that most administrators require teams fill out and submit after the PLC.

Now, nearly every member of any PLC I have ever worked with knows that filling out the form is not the point of a PLC meeting. Yet, there is a great deal of angst and energy the goes into the form. Teachers naturally want to make a good impression on their administrators. Having a form filled out, with text in all the blanks check marks in all the boxes frequently takes the place of deep conversation and work.

I tell the PLCs and the administrators that it is not about the form, but about the product. If teachers spend the time to craft lessons or common assessments then they should provide these as the documentation. If teachers look at data, draw conclusions and develop plans, or build interventions—then they should submit these products.

I use a form like a cover sheet. It basically says who was there, lists the topics, and let’s me know what products are attached. I often create pre-built forms that include easy to click check boxes to save time.

It’s about the product of their work, their learning, and their conversation—it’s not about the form. 

In the book Groundswell: Winning in a world transformed by social technologies, authors Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff explain what they call the “groundswell” and how it in transforming our world. 

According to the authors, the groundswell is..
“A social trend in which people use technologies to get the things they need from each other, rather than from traditional institutions like corporations.” 

I think, that the same ideas described in the “groundswell” apply to Professional Learning Communities.

The idea of the groundswell might apply to Professional Learning Communities if, replace technology such as Web 2.0 applications (blogs, wikis, digg.com, Facebook, Ning, Twitter, YouTube, del.icio.us, Diigo, Wikipedia, etc) with…Collaboration.

Technology enables relationships. Professional Learning Communities enable relationships too. Professional Learning Communities rely on relationships to effectively collaborate together to increase student achievement. 

The authors of Groundswell describe what they call The Social Technographics Profile. This profile describes how people participate in the groundswell using technology. According to the ladder there are six levels of participants.

I have previously posted here (Technology Leadership Is Literacy Leadership) on how I believe the Social Technographic Profile is has a relationship to literacy.

Now I see a Professional Learning Community relationship.

Groundswell has two main components: technology and people.

Professional Learning Community has two main components: thoughts and people.

Based off of the Groundswell Social Technographic Profile ladder, I offer what I call the "Professional Collaborative Profile" of Professional Learning Community members.

All Professional Learning Communities have creators, critics, collectors, joiners, spectators. Sadly some have inactives as well. They question is how can you harness the individuals on each rung of the ladder to create the most collaboration among members?

In the book Groundswell, the authors describe a simple test to tell if a technology enables new relationships.
1.    Does it enable people to connect with each other in a new way?
2.    Is it effortless to sign up for?
3.    Does it shift power from institutions to people?
4.    Does the community generate enough content to sustain itself?
5.    Is it an open platform that invites partnerships?

Might these same questions apply in some sense to our Professional Learning Communities? Might these same questions relate to the rung your PLCs occupy on the Professional Collaborative Profile? 

Have you ever considered if your school and district has a hoarding culture or a sharing culture?

In a hoarding culture, teachers and schools keep their expertise, their knowledge, their ideas, and their innovations to themselves. These teachers and these schools get a sense of reward and gratification by being seen as experts, as more creative, more knowledgeable, and more effective. They crave the recognition that comes from getting results that others are not able to achieve and the influence and recognition that comes with it.

We have all seen it, those teachers who have great ideas but don’t want to share with others. Teachers with special training that keep all the knowledge to themselves to be seen as the “expert.” Teachers who are good with technology but seem to keep the “secrets” all to themselves. Principals who keep information to themselves so as to ensure staff must go to him or her for the information. Even entire schools keep their best practices and knowledge to themselves. This is what hoarders do. They set up silos and keep their knowledge inside.

Sharers know that their fellow teachers, their fellow principals, and their fellow schools can benefit and should benefit from their knowledge, ideas, creativity, and information. Sharers get a “reward” out of helping others benefit from what they know. Sharers attempt to overcome silos by sharing with others so that the entire school or school district can benefit.

Toyota has an approach to knowledge management called “Yokoten.” The Japanese word means “taking from one place to another.” Toyota’s culture is a sharing culture. They correctly understand that knowledge, ideas, and data are organizational resources. A good idea should not be wasted but should be implemented. In addition, and this is key, a good idea should not just be used in a single location, but should be exported to all parts of the organization. Their sharing culture obligates that an individual share with their peers and leaders are expected to circulate good ideas throughout the organization.

In other words, if Toyota ran your school or your district, teachers would be expected to implement good ideas and share with others. Principals would be expected to implement good ideas at their site and share with the rest of the district. Silos would not be allowed to prevent good ideas from being implemented and shared. If the idea is a resource, it is not wasted, it is used and it is shared.

Does your school and district have a hoarding culture? Or does your school and district have a sharing culture? A culture of “yokoten?”

Catalytic Questions:

1. Imagine the benefit to student learning and achievement if every great idea in your district was implemented and shared across the district. Every one. How might you encourage this level of collaboration and sharing?

2. In what ways could you begin to model a sharing culture? How might you use the principle of “yokoten?”

3. What things should you stop doing? What things are getting in the way of collaboration and should be eliminated?

4. How might your approach to collaboration change if you viewed ideas as a necessary commodity or resource for your school and district?

5. In what ways have you encouraged, rewarded, acknowledged, or expected sharing of ideas, knowledge, information, or data? 

Newtonian Physics says there are 3 laws of motion. Just as these 3 laws of motion apply to objects, they also apply to Professional Learning Communities.

 
^{http://www.flickr.com/photos/brent_nashville/ / CC BY-NC 2.0}

Law 1

Once moving at a steady speed, in a straight line, it will continue moving at a steady speed in a straight line.

In other words, objects in motion tend to stay in motion. The natural default position for most people and teams is to be "at rest." It takes energy, effort, desire and motivation to push forward and overcome inertia. But once a Professional Learning Community begins to see the results of their collaboration and learning reflected in the achievement of their students, they will continue moving with steady speed forward.

Once standing still, it will stay still.

The Professional Learning Community that doesn't collaborate, does not focus on student learning, asks no questions, is unprepared, seeks no data, is neither professional, will not learn, and is not a community. It is standing still.

 Law 2

It accelerates in the direction that you push it.

 Focus on student learning and student achievement will accelerate the professional Learning community in that direction. Once headed in that direction it will produce student-centered results. PLCs that focus on their own planning, calendars, and complaining will accelerate in that direction and will achieve non-student centered results.

If you push twice as hard, it accelerates twice as much

The more a PLC focuses on what they want students to learn, discovering what students are actually learning with data, and developing plans, strategies, and ideas to meet the needs of the students who are achieving and those who aren't; the greater the results will be. The more a PLC focuses on student achievement, the more student achievement they will achieve.

If it gets twice the mass it accelerates half as much

The non-student achievement activities teachers bring to their PLCs the slower the PLC will accelerate. The more we focus on things other than the student, the slower the PLC accelerates.

 Law 3

For every action there is an equal and opposite re-action

When PLCs learn, students learn. When students learn,  PLCs learn.

 When PLCs don't learn then...well you know the rest.

Professional Learning Communities, School Leadership Teams, and grade level teams are an excellent source of ideas. Most ideas lead to change.

To change, you must first see what is possible. Changing what teachers do, what grade levels do, what schools do, and ultimately, what education does starts with you changing your own thinking. The tragedy of September 11th provides an illustrative example.

According to Yoram (Jerry) Wind and Colin Crook, authors of The Power of Impossible Thinking, the United States was not prepared for the tragedy of September 11th because...

"Information was filtered through existing mental models related to terrorism and hijackings."

The authors suggest that our mental models could not predict the use of airplanes as weapons because it did not fit with our current mental models about airline hijacking.

"During the September 11th attacks, the information was filtered through a set of mental models that made it hard to see what was really happening until it was too late."

Contrast with the passengers of Flight 93 who instantly developed a new mental model to deal with the new reality.

"The passengers and crew of Flight 93 were presented with a picture that was similar to the hijackings earlier that day. What they suddenly developed, however, was a different mental model. They were able to quickly make sense of what was happening and to act on this new understanding. And that made all the difference" 

PLCs and School Leadership teams must be able to make sense of what is happening and to act on this new understanding. Data Driven Decision Making is based on this assumption. Data helps teams make sense of what is happening.

Mental Models control how we think and react. According to the authors, mental models, "...not only shape what we see and how we understand the world but also how we act in it. In a real sense, what we think is what we see, and what we see is what we think." 

So, I know you are asking, “Rob, what does this have to do with education and PLCs?” It has to do with education and PLCs because the world is quickly changing around us. Correction, the world has changed! The question is, do you see how it has changed? As educators, we often cling to outdated training, strategies, methods, curriculum, ideas, and beliefs, even when the educational situation has changed significantly around us.

Steven Covey, author of The Seven Habits of Highly Effective people talked about the concept of “Sharpening the Saw.”  That is, we take the time to improve our skills and abilities to make our selves “sharper” or more effective.  What if, however, those skills and abilities are no longer useful?  No matter how much time a teacher spent improving their use of Word Perfect, the ditto machine, or running a movie projector, it will not make him or her any more effective. Those mental models no longer apply.  Teachers who have not adapted to the use of Professional Learning Communities, Data Driven Instruction, or technology may instead be spending time “sharpening" mental models that no longer apply.

As the authors of The Power of Impossible Thinking put it,"Sometimes we don't need to merely 'sharpen' the saw; we need to throw it out to pick up a power tool. If we are focused only on sharpening, then we might not see the opportunity to apply new technology that can radically change the way we approach the task." 

by minicloud

This is the underlying principle of Disruptive Technology as described by Clayton Christensen in his book Disrupting Class. What you think is not useful or effective, suddenly becomes very effective and replaces the prior model, idea, strategy, curriculum, technology, etc. PLCs must become aware of this possibility and practice a level of awareness that sees, what I call "Disruptive Ideas" on the horizon.

I recommend that we who want change take the time to occasionally immerse ourselves in the world outside of education to learn fresh and innovative ideas. This approach was detailed in the book The Medici Effect. Ideas from outside education can have a positive impact on education. Ideas learned elsewhere can make you a more valuable member in your PLC or SLT. Also, we need to constantly challenge our own “mental models” and those around us. Having differing mental models and differing exposures to other ideas creates Cognitive Diversity. A Cognitive Diversity is good for Professional Learning Communities and School Leadership Teams.

As famous management guru Peter Drucker famously said,"There is nothing more wasteful than becoming highly effective at doing the wrong things." We need to be able to put down our old mental models and be wiling to pick up new ones. So put down the saw and pick up a chainsaw

In his fine book Culture Making: Recovering Our Creative Calling, author Andy Crouch explains his premise that it is not enough to condemn, critique, consume, or copy culture. The only way to change culture is to cultivate and create it.

Professional Learning Communities, School Leadership Teams, grade level teams, etc. are, in essence, mirco cultures. A micro culture is a small unit of culture within a wider general culture. In other words, the grade level or department level PLC is a micro culture within the great culture of the school site and the school district.

Thus the micro culture of the PLC is subject to problems, difficulties, obstacles, and hurdles that face all cultures. These are things that the PLC could and should be change to improve its effectiveness, thus improving student achievement. Andy Crouch explains that there is a rule that applies when we try to change culture. I call it the cultural rule.

Cultural Rule: “The only way to change culture is to create more of it.”

by tmfotki

There are 6 approaches or practices that are typically adopted to change culture. These practices are used by members within their PLCs to change the culture of the PLC for the better. However, 4 of the approaches are not necessarily the most effective way to change culture. As you will see, the first 4 approaches are lacking, while the last 2 approaches have the power to change culture for the better in our Professional Learning Communities.

1. Condemning Culture: “No matter how much we may protest--condemning the cultural goods on offer—unless we offer an alternative, the show will go on.”

Those who condemn the current practices of the PLC will do little to change it for the better. Pointing out that the PLC does not use data properly, or does not follow established PLC protocols is not going to change the culture.

To be sure, as Andy Crouch points out, “Some cultural artifacts can only be condemned.” Some practices within in a PLC rightly need to be pointed out if they are truly damaging to the students, the teachers, and the school. But it won’t change things

Condemning culture also leaves us open to being hypocrites. Be careful to condemn the culture of the PLC, because you might be contributing to it. Remember, it does nothing to improve the culture because it does not create or add anything new.

2. Critiquing Culture: “ To be sure, the best critics can change the framework in which creators are measured. But such analysis has lasting influence only when someone creates something new in the public realm.”

“Some cultural artifacts deserve to be critiqued.”

This may be the most natural approach for educators in Professional Learning Communities. It is very easy to critique, to point out what is wrong and what is not working. This is very natural for some. But it does nothing to change the culture.

Critiquing culture is passive. We are left waiting for culture to, “deliver us some new item to talk about.” When we critique we do not move the culture of the PLC forward. Critics are left waiting for others to create change.

3. Copying Culture: “…imitate it, replacing the offensive bits with more palatable ones.”

Copying culture has the advantage of finding cultural practices in other PLCs and copying those practices for the PLC to imitate. Not bad. Adopting the best practices of others is a smart and effective thing to do.

“Even the practice of copying cultural goods…has its place.”

But, copying too, is passive. We wait for culture to be created to copy. “In fast—changing cultural domains those whose posture is imitation will find themselves constantly slightly behind the times…”

When we wait for others to develop culture change in PLC practices that can be copied and adopted you eliminate the potential to create and shape the culture of your PLC to the specific needs of your team members, grade level, subject matter, school, and school district.

4. Consuming Culture: “…can very rarely consume their way into cultural change.”

“There are many cultural goods for which by far the most appropriate response is to consume.”

Just as copying culture can be effective sometimes, consuming cultural practices of other PLC can be a smart thing to do. But the same problem results.

Consuming culture is passive too. It assumes a posture of waiting. Letting someone else create the culture to be consumed and assuming that that culture is better than your own.

So if condemning, critiquing, copying, and consuming culture are not desirable means to change the culture of a PLC, what is? Cultivation and Creation.

5. Cultivation: “All culture making requires a choice, conscious or unconscious, to take our place in a cultural tradition. We cannot make culture without culture. And this means creation begins with cultivation—taking care of the good things that culture has already handed on to us.”

“One who cultivates tries to create the most fertile conditions for good things to survive and thrive. Cultivating also requires weeding—sorting out what does and does not belong, what will bear fruit and what will choke it out.”

Being a good steward of the current PLC culture will allow the team to pick out what is working, affirm each other, and then weed out what isn’t working, making room for changes to take their place.

Cultivation is not passive. It works with what exists. It is purposeful. It affirms what has come before and makes way for what can come.

To often administrators make the mistake of not taking cultivation approach to their PLCs. Not everything is broken. Acknowledge the positive aspects of the current culture before you weed out the non-desirable practices.

6. Creators: “…people who dare to think and do something that has never been thought or done before, something that makes the world more welcoming and thrilling and beautiful.”

Once non-desirable PLC practices have been weeded out, room will exist for the creator approach to change the culture with new practices, ideas, and approaches.

Approach 5 and 6 can be thought of in the spirit and mindset of a gardener and an artist.

The Artist and The Gardner

The Gardner: “The gardener looks carefully at the landscape; the existing plants, both flowers and weeds; the way the sun falls on the land.” 

“The gardener tends to what has gone before, making the most of what is beautiful and weeding out what is distracting or useless.”

The Artist: “The artist regards her subject, her canvas, her paints with care to discern what she can make with them.”

“The artist can be more daring: she starts with a blank canvas or a solid piece of stone and gradually brings something out of it that was never there before.”

The Key: “Indeed those who have cultivated and created are precisely the ones who have the legitimacy to condemn—whose denunciations, rare and carefully chosen, carry outsize weight. Cultivators and creators are the ones who are invited to critique and whose critiques are often the most telling and fruitful. Cultivators and creators can even copy without becoming mere imitators, drawing on the work of others yet extending it in new and exciting ways…”

“And when they consume, cultivators and creators do so without becoming mere consumers. They do not derive their identity from what they consume but what they create.”

To change the culture of a PLC the team must adhere to the Cultural Rule: To change culture you have to create culture. That is the only way. Allow the spirit of the gardener and the artist to allow your PLC to cultivate and create change in your PLCs culture, changes that will improve your PLC effectiveness and ultimately, your student’s performance.