Читать книгу Got Data? Now What? - Laura Lipton - Страница 9
ОглавлениеCHAPTER ONE
Developing Cultures of Collaborative Inquiry
In a rapidly changing world, the role of teaching and teachers has remained highly stable. Images from novels, old photographs, and movies portray instructors at the front and center of the classroom, delivering lessons to sometimes docile, sometimes unruly groups of students. When the backstage life of teachers is depicted, we see staffrooms filled with banter, gossip, and complaint. In these settings, social interaction with other adults is a way station offering respite from the arduous work of enlightening young minds.
Outdated expectations and structures cannot meet the learning needs of today’s students. Data bounce off these entrenched cultures of individualism, cultures that maintain isolated pockets of both excellence and mediocrity in the same organization with no mechanisms for sharing and transferring success (Newman, King, & Rigdon, 1997). A cohesive approach to school improvement requires new ways of thinking about and structuring teachers’ work. The emerging models of professional engagement rally all resources to produce greater cumulative effects on student achievement.
Some teachers still perceive working with colleagues outside the classroom as shifting away from their real work with students. However, in this changing climate, collaborative interaction is, in fact, as much a part of teachers’ work as is their time in the classroom with students.
Outdated expectations and structures cannot meet the learning needs of today’s students…. A cohesive approach to school improvement requires new ways of thinking about and structuring teachers’ work.
Shifting Values, Shifting Cultures
As work cultures evolve, the underlying values and beliefs inherent in shifting models are in transition. Table 1.1 (page 8) describes four major value shifts. Each value shift encompasses a set of related beliefs and observable behaviors that emerge from these beliefs.
From Professional Autonomy to Collaborative Practice
In cultures of high professional autonomy, the dominant values are entitlement and individualism. A strong belief in privacy translates to closed classroom doors, protection of turf, and a perspective that data reflect personal success or failure. These are cultures of my: my content—you can’t tell me what and what not to teach; my book—you can’t teach it; my unit—you can’t alter it; my materials—you can’t use them; and my students—you can’t talk about them. In these cultures, the locus of change is the individual teacher. Teachers working in schools where this value is strong operate in isolation from one another, holding on to all of their personal strengths and weaknesses inside their private domains. Professional development becomes either a private choice or an imposed remediation.
Table 1.1: Four Value Shifts
| Shifting From | Shifting To |
| Professional autonomy | Collaborative practice |
| Knowledge delivery | Knowledge construction |
| Externally mandated improvement | Internally motivated improvement |
| Quick fix | Continuous growth |
In cultures of collaborative practice, the dominant value is co-construction of a shared knowledge base. The belief that teachers learn best with others drives the use of common assessments to inform individual and collective practice. Teachers share resources and strategies, successes and failures. They engage in systematic and ongoing experimentation and analyze data to learn from and with their students and colleagues.
In these cultures, the group is the focus of change, paying attention to its interactions and the cumulative effects being produced for students. Gap analysis and ongoing data exploration drive the professional learning agendas, not individual passion, interest, or the trend du jour. Professional development is a collective resource, not a personal prerogative. Peer engagement forges powerful links between teacher learning and student growth.
From Knowledge Delivery to Knowledge Construction
In a knowledge delivery model, the classroom is the domain of the individual teacher, who controls the learning. In this authority culture, there are right and wrong answers, and students are expected to passively comply. Teachers uniformly dispense information aimed at covering the curriculum. Failure is seen as the student’s fault; an intellectual or motivational deficit. In these classrooms, isolated learners sit row by row, competing with classmates for rank and reward. Summative data are used to demonstrate success or failure. Assessment is done to students. Teachers record and report grades, and instruction moves on.
In a knowledge construction model, the purpose of education is to create self-reliant learners. In this social learning climate, knowledge is co-constructed; students are critical thinkers and collaborators in learning. Teaching choices are in response to student needs. Teaching is for understanding and application of concepts and skills. Student grouping is flexible, based on skill level and interests, within each classroom and between classes. Colleagues invest in the success of all students. In this model, teachers use formative data to determine student growth and identify gaps to address. Students are full participants in the assessment process. Assessment is a tool for learning, and instructional decisions are based on learners’ needs.
From Externally Mandated Improvement to Internally Motivated Improvement
When improvement is externally mandated, state and provincial agents develop and use data management systems to peer inside schools and publicly judge success and failure. Technical experts analyze data, identify gaps, and deliver prescriptions for groups to implement. Those in authority determine success criteria, how and when professionals should talk, and what they should talk about. This forced interaction disguises and ritualizes collegiality, as individuals sit together in the same room at the same time working on assigned tasks.
In this environment, the pressure to be accountable creates coerced responses, not thoughtful action. Teachers do not control how and when to measure learning and which data to collect and report. Assessment is something that is done to, and not by, teachers.
Assessment is something that is done to, and not by, teachers.
When improvement is internally driven, teachers are choice makers, owning both questions and answers. They are confident and skillful data users, motivated to continually increase their skillfulness, seeking multiple sources of data and methods for exploring them. Shared responsibility for student success is the organizing value.
In this environment, collegial interaction amplifies the drive to share and spread effective practice, creating new ways to work with students and one another. Collaborative teams explore data for patterns and the root causes for success and performance gaps. Teachers share ownership for taking both individual and collective responsibility for growth.
From Quick Fix to Continuous Growth
In a quick-fix culture, short-term thinking and the need for immediate success dominate the conversation. This orientation results in short-cycle planning and implementation and intervention or remedial models. Improvement is about fixing what shows, going for visible, easily measurable results that don’t require deep changes in practice. This approach to gaming the system (Hargreaves & Shirley, 2009) focuses on raising scores by targeting instruction to those students who hover at the margin of success.
In a continuous-growth culture, improving the fundamental depth and quality of teaching and learning organizes the conversation. This orientation requires complex, and often controversial, changes in instructional practice, subject identity, and school structures (Hargreaves & Shirley, 2009). Time horizons stretch beyond the school year for goals, plans, and measurements.
Teams use short-cycle assessments formatively to monitor progress and calibrate refinements in longer-term plans. These data focus and energize the collaborative conversation for continual improvement.
Defining, Developing, and Sustaining High-Performing Cultures
Significant and stable changes in student performance require not only changes in classroom practices but also changes in the working culture of teachers. All cultural change requires leaders to recognize patterns and determine which patterns of interaction are productive and which patterns are not. All groups, both large and small, develop norms around the distribution and uses of influence, authority, and power (Schein, 2004). How these norms play out in a given group forms the baseline from which any changes will emerge. Developing and sustaining high-performing cultures is an ongoing learning process that requires pattern breaking of unproductive patterns and conscious pattern making of robust and constructive ways of working together.
Organizational cultures reflect written and unwritten rules that are based on underlying assumptions and values. These values are expressed in actions and artifacts: in the language, symbols, ceremonies, rituals, and reward systems; in approaches to problem solving; and in the design of the work environment (Deal & Peterson, 1999; Schein, 2004).
Within an organization, various subsets including grade-level teams, departments, and data teams also embody and express unique group personalities based on collective values and assumptions. Culture influences four key drivers of a group’s work: (1) focus, or what captures the group’s attention; (2) commitment, or the degree to which individuals identify with the group; (3) motivation, or the willingness to invest time and energy within meetings and outside of them; and (4) productivity, or the degree of goal achievement (Deal & Peterson, 1999). These cultural elements both inform and direct the ways in which a group sees itself, treats its members, and engages with its tasks. Ingrained behavioral patterns result from deep, unconscious drivers. When these invisible elements are brought to the surface and made visible, groups can shape and strengthen both their processes and their results.
Describing the Seven Qualities of High-Performing Groups
A work culture is not static. Culture is both a noun and a verb, and is shaped by the continued shared experiences of the group and the processing of these experiences. The resulting adjustments in behaviors influence the beliefs and assumptions that ultimately become the new operating norms.
In schools, the quality of the adult culture directly affects the learning environment for students. The presence of a professional community that is centered on student learning makes a significant difference to measurable student achievement (Bolam, McMahon, Stoll, Thomas, & Wallace, 2005; Louis & Marks, 1998).
The power of this connection compels us to examine and define the interactions between adults that produce the most positive results for learners and learning. That is, what makes a group culture powerful, and what can we do to make it even more so?
The following seven actions describe high-performing groups.
1. Maintain a clear focus.
2. Embrace a spirit of inquiry.
3. Put data at the center.
4. Honor commitments to learners and learning.
5. Cultivate relational trust.
6. Seek equity.
7. Assume collective responsibility.
These qualities are lenses through which groups and individual group members can view their interactions to gain perspective on the choices that they are making and the skills they are applying as they work together.
Group development also requires personal development. When and how group members choose to participate emerges from individual and collective awareness and commitment to developing these attributes.
Maintain a Clear Focus
High-performing groups clarify desired results and define success criteria. Less-productive groups meander from topic to topic, often within overcrowded agendas. Such groups use a scattershot approach in which all items are treated with equal importance. High-performing groups agree on and protect priorities for themselves and their students, preserving precious time for focused engagement about the things that matter.
By establishing clear and measurable goals and using success criteria to determine progress, these groups can work in the present while holding longer-term visions for improvement (Jaques & Cason, 1994). These groups are willing to sustain focus for extended periods of time. For example, achieving high levels of reading comprehension for all students requires significant attention and innovation in instructional and assessment practices. The results of these changes for large cohorts of students may not appear in the short term, but they will increase over time with ongoing monitoring and adjustments informed by data-driven conversations.
High-performing groups manage and minimize the constant distractions. Agreed-on structures and signals supply digression management, particularly when time is short, energy is low, and tasks are demanding. For example, such groups have prioritized and time-coded public agendas to guide time monitoring and shorthand language, such as birdwalk alert, when the conversation wanders away from the topic at hand.
In these groups, members self-monitor, paying attention to themselves and each other, to gauge whether their contributions add to or detract from the group’s focus. There is an agreement that maintaining focus is more important than any individual’s desire to share an anecdote or elaboration.
Embrace a Spirit of Inquiry
High-performing groups ask genuine questions (Schwarz, 2002) about their own processes and practices, as well as their students’ learning. They inquire. By definition, inquiry means you do not have a preferred response or do not already know the answer. As Goldberg (1998) states, “Because questions are intrinsically related to action, they spark and direct attention, perception, energy, and effort, and so are at the heart of the evolving forms that our lives assume” (p. 3). Less-productive groups avoid ambiguity, uncertainty, and challenging questions, wrapping themselves in and drawing on the comfort of their existing knowledge base.
High-performing groups are both problem seekers and problem solvers. These groups seek external resources and data outside their own experience. Such groups consider an and/both approach, not right/wrong or either/or responses, skillfully engaging in conflict with ideas, not with one another. They inquire into data to explore who is learning and who is not, seeking patterns and root causes before pursuing solutions and planning actions.
In these groups, members are willing to suspend their own judgments and opinions as they consider other perspectives. They are willing to delay solution generation. They push past surface ideas and avoid the comfort of quick conclusions, seeking external resources to extend their own knowledge base.
Put Data at the Center
High-performing groups use data to inform and guide group and student learning. These data focus and calibrate conversations. Less-productive groups blur fact and opinion, occupying time with anecdote and argument. High-performing groups tap multiple types and multiple sources of data to move their work forward. For example, a group might examine student work products, standardized test scores, and classroom-based assessment to reveal a fuller picture of student performance in a specific skill area.
By exploring both formative and summative sources and using shared protocols and structures, these groups are able to depersonalize the data and use them as a catalyst for rich conversations about practice, learning, and progress toward desired goals. With skillful inquiry and balanced participation, they delve beneath the surface features of the data, persevering in the quest for deeper understandings.
In these groups, members are assessment literate. They keep data central to the conversation, seeking out and using multiple sources and multiple types to inform their choices and plans. They make sure the data are available to, visible to, and understood by everyone.
Less-productive groups blur fact and opinion, occupying time with anecdote and argument. High-performing groups tap multiple types and multiple sources of data to move their work forward.
Honor Commitments to Learners and Learning
High-performing groups keep learning as the focus of their conversations. They see themselves and all members as learners, and they are willing to consider the limits of their own knowledge. This essential disposition energizes the learning potential within the group and extends to high-powered learning for students. Less-productive groups stay within the boundaries of their current capabilities and are satisfied with merely meeting expectations, not exceeding them, both for themselves and for their students.
High-performing groups keep their focus on what is good for students, not just convenient for themselves. They explore the process, performance, and products of learning. They also assess and monitor their own learning, reflecting on their processes and products and setting goals for continuous improvement.
In these groups, members explore learning for all students, not just select groups. They seek to improve learning for the high performers, as well as those who may be struggling. As committed learners themselves, they understand that their students’ growth links to their own.
Cultivate Relational Trust
High-performing groups operate with high expectations and positive intentions as central assumptions. Within these groups, it is safe to display both high competence and vulnerability. In less-productive groups, members fear attack or reprisal for things they might do or say, and they are filled with doubt, having little or no faith that their colleagues will honor decisions or follow through on agreements. High-performing groups rely on the integrity and competence of their colleagues inside and outside of the meeting room. When it is safe not to know, teachers seek the counsel of their peers; they don’t feel the need to hide their shortcomings (McLaughlin & Talbert, 2001). They can count on fellow group members’ reliable and consistent application of team agreements to their own professional practice.
In these groups, members say what they’ll do and do what they said. They assume positive intentionality and believe in the goodwill of their colleagues. They understand the difference between a question and a critique. For this reason, they are willing to be vulnerable and disclose both their successes and shortcomings, knowing that this information will not be exploited or belittled. They hold high expectations for themselves and each other and have faith that those expectations will be met and even exceeded.
Seek Equity
High-performing groups leave titles, seniority, and role authority at the door. On this level playing field, they seek a diverse blend of voices and protect space for all to contribute. Less-productive groups limit participation and restrict divergent thought, sealing themselves in the protection of their own logic. They congratulate themselves for small successes and rationalize performance gaps.
High-performing groups ensure reciprocity, foster interdependence, and engage in productive collaboration. They apply structures to ensure that the data shy and the data literate have equal voice in the conversation as all strive for shared understanding. For example, such groups provide equal opportunities to join the conversations by creating smaller task groups that focus on large, shared data displays; using round-robin protocols to balance participation; and publicly charting so ideas belong to everyone.
In these groups, members operate from the assumption that everyone has something to offer. They monitor their own level of participation to be sure they are not dominating the conversation and make sure to encourage participation, especially from those who have not yet shared.
Assume Collective Responsibility
High-performing groups make and honor agreements about who they want to be as a group and what they want to produce for their students. They make data-driven choices and are willing to be answerable for those choices. This collective efficacy, or the shared belief that together the group will successfully achieve its goals, is a prime resource for sustained improvements in student learning (Goddard, Hoy, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2004). In less-productive groups, members are protective of their autonomy in the meeting room and in the classroom. They are unwilling to see others’ work as part of their own. They don’t believe that team members have the capability and willingness to make a difference.
Groups with high degrees of collective responsibility pursue challenging goals, exert concentrated effort, and persist in collective action leading to improved performance for the group and their students (Goddard, Hoy, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2000). In these groups, members believe in the power of the group to make a difference for students. They recognize that their individual choices, both in the meeting room and in their classrooms, affect everyone. Thus, they willingly invest their time and energy, setting aside personal agendas to support the group’s work and its development.
Drawing on Feedback
High-performing groups draw on internal and external sources, or feedback, to monitor and modify their performance. Feedback is information to the system. Developing groups use multiple types of feedback to modify, control, or change their products and performance. In the absence of feedback, groups stagnate. Valuing and applying the insights that emerge from well-constructed feedback is both an essential disposition and a learned skill for thoughtful group members and thoughtful groups.
Effective feedback both maintains and amplifies high performance. Maintaining feedback reinforces established parameters, such as learning standards. Amplifying feedback increases desired behaviors so that they spread throughout the system. For example, skillful groups use student performance data to determine whether and which students are meeting established standards, so they can continue to achieve these same results. They might then use the same data to determine where and how to transfer effective practices to increase success in other areas and for other students.
To assess, maintain, and amplify the seven qualities, a group requires specific feedback mechanisms. The following tables are two such instruments. Table 1.2 provides group questions to measure and maintain a group’s present feedback practices. Table 1.3 (page 16) provides self-assessment questions that stimulate deep reflection about personal choices and behaviors to amplify feedback. The essential questions in each table will help groups and group members understand who they are in light of who they want to be. (See pages 21–23 for reproducible versions of these tables.)
Table 1.2: Seven Qualities of High-Performing Groups—Scaled Group Inventory
| Quality | Questions for Groups | Scale: 1–4 (Rarely to Always) |
| Maintain a clear focus. | Are we clear about our desired results in both the short and long term? | |
| Do we have clear and shared criteria for determining success? | ||
| Do we have strategies for getting back on track if focus is lost? | ||
| Embrace a spirit of inquiry. | Do we ask questions for which we have no immediate answers? | |
| Do we search for and honor other perspectives? | ||
| Are we willing to ask questions that might cause discomfort? | ||
| Put data at the center. | Do we use data to calibrate and inform our conversations? | |
| Do we use multiple types and sources of data to add to our thinking? | ||
| Do we have methods for ensuring shared understanding? | ||
| Honor commitments to learners and learning. | Are our conversations student centered? | |
| Do we continually assess our current learning goals (for students and for ourselves as a group)? | ||
| Do we set meaningful goals for our own learning as a group? | ||
| Cultivate relational trust. | Do we clarify and communicate high expectations for ourselves as a group? | |
| Do we make it safe not to know? | ||
| Do our actions reflect our commitments? | ||
| Seek equity. | Do we use structures and protocols to ensure balanced participation? | |
| Do all group members have an equal voice? | ||
| Do we challenge our own preferences and judgments in order to consider other ideas? | ||
| Assume collective responsibility. | Do we believe that our collective action makes a greater difference for student learning than our individual efforts? | |
| Are we willing to be answerable for the choices we are making? | ||
| Do we push past good enough to continually challenge ourselves? |
Table 1.3: Seven Qualities of High-Performing Groups—Self-Assessment Inventory
| Quality | Questions for Individual Group Members | Comments |
| Maintain a clear focus. | Am I clear about our purpose? | |
| Is this comment or contribution contributing to our purpose? (Do I really need to say this?) | ||
| Should refocus the group at this point? | ||
| Embrace a spirit of inquiry. | Am asking questions to which have an answer? | |
| Am open to the influence of others’ perspectives? | ||
| What might be avoiding or leaving out? | ||
| Put data at the center. | How do these data influence my thinking and comments? | |
| What other sources might add to our thinking? | ||
| What don’t I understand at this point? | ||
| Honor commitments to learners and learning. | How do keep learning as the priority? | |
| In what ways am achieving my current goals in my classroom and with my group? | ||
| What new goals might set for my own learning? | ||
| Cultivate relational trust. | What makes me feel safe or not in this group? | |
| How am I making it safe for others? | ||
| Am following through on my commitments? | ||
| Seek equity. | Am talking too much? Too little? | |
| Do others have space to share? | ||
| Am I able to set my own preferences and judgments aside to consider others’ ideas? | ||
| Assume collective responsibility. | How am demonstrating my investment in this group? | |
| How is my participation affecting others in the group? | ||
| In what ways are the connections and linkages between my work and my colleagues’ work making a difference for students? |
For most groups, there is a tension between investing time in capacity building and completing the immediate task; many complete the immediate task at the expense of capacity building. Yet when groups only focus on their work, their skill and resource levels remain static. High-performing groups recognize that meeting the complex challenges and commitment to ongoing improvement of student learning requires equal commitment to their own growth.
Data Story: Committing to Group Growth
It is midyear at Prairie View Elementary School. The fourth-grade team has a weekly forty-five-minute work session and has been working together for two years. This year, two new teachers have joined the six-member group. The group members have targeted math as an area for improvement. While all agree that their work has been productive, they want to continue to develop as a high-performing group. Using the Scaled Group Inventory (page 21) as a basis for dialogue, the team members have established goals for their own growth as they explore math data.
Based on their conversation, they have selected two qualities: (1) maintaining a clear focus and (2) developing relational trust, as their goal arenas for the year. At this point in their development, they have agreed to focus on effectively using time (digression management) and ensuring a sense of emotional safety for all members as key growth areas.
To assess time use, they have agreed to create a rotating role of process observer. This group member, while engaging in the task at hand, will keep a record of both on- and off-task or topic time use. They will use these data comparatively from meeting to meeting to determine their increasing efficiency.
Keeping data at the center, they will also use an exit survey format at the end of each meeting. Each team member will respond to two stems to assess growth in relational trust.
1. Something that made me feel safe during this meeting is __________.
2. Something I did to make others feel safe is __________.
The team members preserve twenty minutes of processing time every other meeting to discuss their own growth.
“Look at the graph for our on- or off-task time use. On-task time is increasing, but not very rapidly.”
“Yes, I expected by this time of year we would have at least 90 percent of our time on task, but it’s only 65 percent.”
“Maybe 90 percent isn’t realistic, given that we do need some decompression conversation and to connect about stuff that happens between meetings.”
“Well, let’s say we aim for 80 percent, what can we do to meet that target?”
“How about using a visible timer, a signal when we meander off topic, or both?”
“And let’s reserve five minutes at the beginning of each meeting for some social interaction, catching up and touching base—then get down to business.”
“So, for our next meeting, let’s have a little bell in the middle of the table that anyone can access if the conversation strays away from the topic and see how that works.”
“Yes, and let’s have a coffee and conversation space at the beginning of our session—but let’s be sure to keep it to five minutes.”
“Maybe that’s where the public timer could come in, as well!”
Once the group has agreed to some action related to its time-use goal, the members explore their data on relational trust. They put the exit slips from the last two meetings on the table and sort them into categories.
“It seems that there are some consistent examples of things that increase our emotional safety, like not being interrupted or feeling like we have a space to speak, which come up in more than half of the responses; not interrupting others appears frequently as well.”
“That’s great—but what are we not seeing that would be important to be there?”
“Well, it would be important to feel like it’s OK to not understand the data or even some of the math content and to be able to say so.”
“Let’s talk about how we might ensure that degree of safety.”
This dialogue goes on for another few minutes, allowing all members to air their concerns and express their satisfactions.
Exercise Your Learning
Complete the Scaled Group Inventory (page 21) to assess how the seven qualities of high-performing groups apply to a group with whom you are presently working. Use the results to structure a data-driven dialogue and to set goals for continued learning. To focus the interaction, make a public display on which to record responses.
Consider the following options for application.
• Ask individual group members to complete the inventory and compare responses as a group.
• Subdivide the group into pairs or trios to complete the inventory.
• Complete the inventory as a full group with public recording.
Note: In each case, be sure to generate specific examples to support the scaled responses.
Complete the Self-Assessment Inventory (page 22) as a reflection of your contributions to the seven qualities of high-performing groups. Use the results to structure a dialogue and to set personal goals for continued learning. Consider the following options for application.
• Ask individual group members to complete the inventory and compare responses as a group.
• Subdivide the group into pairs or trios for interaction about their results.
• Organize a group dialogue about relationships between individual reflections and the group’s performance.
Visit go.solution-tree.com/teams to download the reproducibles and access the links in this book.
Extend Your Learning
Meredith Belbin studies team roles, responsibilities, and interpersonal styles. The Mind Tools website has a useful tool for analyzing your team’s roles based on Belbin’s strategies (www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_83.htm; Mind Tools, n.d.a).
“Group Development Tools Practitioners Can Use” (Minahan & Hutton, 2002) is a practical article that lays out a basic model about groups and their behaviors (www.ntl.org/upload/GroupDevelopmentTools.pdf).
Scaled Group Inventory
| Quality | Questions for Groups | Scale: 1–4 (Rarely to Always) |
| Maintain a clear focus. | Are we clear about our desired results in both the short and long term? | |
| Do we have clear and shared criteria for determining success? | ||
| Do we have strategies for getting back on track if focus is lost? | ||
| Embrace a spirit of inquiry. | Do we ask questions for which we have no immediate answers? | |
| Do we search for and honor other perspectives? | ||
| Are we willing to ask questions that might cause discomfort? | ||
| Put data at the center. | Do we use data to calibrate and inform our conversations? | |
| Do we use multiple types and sources of data to add to our thinking? | ||
| Do we have methods for ensuring shared understanding? | ||
| Honor commitments to learners and learning. | Are our conversations student centered? | |
| Do we continually assess our current learning goals (for students and for ourselves as a group)? | ||
| Do we set meaningful goals for our own learning as a group? | ||
| Cultivate relational trust. | Do we clarify and communicate high expectations for ourselves as a group? | |
| Do we make it safe not to know? | ||
| Do our actions reflect our commitments? | ||
| Seek equity. | Do we use structures and protocols to ensure balanced participation? | |
| Do all group members have an equal voice? | ||
| Do we challenge our own preferences and judgments in order to consider other ideas? | ||
| Assume collective responsibility. | Do we believe that our collective action makes a greater difference for student learning than our individual efforts? | |
| Are we willing to be answerable for the choices we are making? | ||
| Do we push past good enough to continually challenge ourselves? |
Self-Assessment Inventory
Maintain a Clear Focus
1. Am I clear about our purpose?____________________________
____________________________________________________
2. Is this comment or contribution contributing to our purpose? (Do I really need to say this?)
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
3. Should I refocus the group at this point?____________________________
____________________________________________________
Embrace a Spirit of Inquiry
1. Am I asking questions to which I have an answer?____________________________
____________________________________________________
2. Am I open to the influence of others’ perspectives?____________________________
____________________________________________________
3. What might I be avoiding or leaving out?____________________________
____________________________________________________
Put Data at the Center
1. How do these data influence my thinking and comments?____________________________
