Who has the answers? Who has the questions?

In a typical classroom in the not so distant past, teachers asked all the questions and looked for good answers from the students.  As much as we tried to call on every student equally and fairly, the best answers were almost always provided by the students that felt school was easy.  Whether the question was a simple question with one answer, or the question was open-ended and thought-provoking, good answers usually came from the highest-achieving students.

In a classroom that values questions, good ones can be provided by any student!  A question isn't right or wrong.  A question asks everyone to think.  Asking students to ask questions doesn't require kids to search their data banks for a singular answer and it doesn't require them to formulate a response to an open-ended question.  It simply requires curiosity and wonder!

When we ask kids for questions instead of answers, we level the playing field for participation by all students and we raise the level of thinking required!

Suspicious dissatisfaction

In a culture of continuous improvement, it is everyone's responsibility to ask questions about current practices in order to facilitate progress.  Some improvement needs are evident and clear by all involved parties.  When this is the case, the need to make changes is met with minimal resistance.  Any stakeholder can ask, "How can we do this better?" and the improvement process begins!

Other times, the need for improvement is much less evident.  There may not actually be any evidence at all!  Occasionally, someone merely suspects the need for improvement.  The suspicion may come from previous experience or feedback from stakeholders.  The suspicion may come from new learning or from a gut feeling that things can be done more effectively.  Sometimes the suspicion simply comes from someone who loves to ask why things are done a certain way.  (This one is me quite often!)

Unfortunately, suspicion can be a bad word.  Those that are innocent until proven guilty are suspects.  Elvis sang Suspicious Minds.  (Although I prefer the Fine Young Cannibals version and the Dwight Yoakum version!)  The idea of suspicion has generated more books and TV shows than any word other than love!

When a need for improvement is suspected, rather than known, the improvement process is usually met with some level of resistance and the one who suspected the need for improvement is oftentimes suspected of foul play.  More suspicion!

Regardless, suspicion is how experts and visionaries make things move from good to great.  They value excellence and celebrate success, yet they hold a certain amount of dissatisfaction for the status quo.  They ask, "Why?"  

Dissatisfaction is another bad word.  Too many folks see it as a sign of poor performance rather than an attitude of continuous improvement.  Several years ago, I worked for a superintendent who told the district to, "Be dissatisfied."  He passionately professed his belief that an attitude of dissatisfaction leads to continuous improvement.  I walked away feeling empowered to question everything!  Lots of folks walked away feeling like their good just wasn't good enough.

In order to truly make things better and better and better, be dissatisfied and question your suspicions.  Indeed, improvements will follow!  Healthy dissatisfaction with the status quo and a suspicious mind will drive you to ask good questions and create a culture of continuous improvement!

Between Stimulus and Response

I was thinking about Viktor Frankl's words,

"Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom."

While I am sure this may be perfectly obvious to most people, especially anyone who has heard Dr. Stephen Covey talk about this topic, the idea of the space between stimulus and response is the essence of being proactive rather than reactive.  When there is no space created, we simply react.  The more space created, the greater likelihood of a thoughtful response.

Does this idea jive with another oft-heard quip? "Trust your gut feeling."  Can you create a space between stimulus and response and trust your gut feeling at the same time?  It seems that an immediate reaction to something might be your gut reaction, but it also might not be a chosen response.  Oppositely, creating the space after a challenging stimulus is presented gives you time to respond after giving your actions time and thought.  Perhaps this is when you occasionally go against your gut instincts.

What about those questions you occasionally ponder that linger for months and months.  The response you want probably wrestles with your gut feelings until you are sick to your stomach!  What you really want, what you think you want, what your gut is telling you to do, and the sheer inability to make a decision just might be too much space between stimulus and response.

Is it possible that too much time can be created between stimulus and response?  I think so!  While I wholeheartedly believe that space must be created to choose your best response to any given stimulus, too much space will eventually cloud the entire decision.  This leads to indecision...and perhaps indigestion!

Another good quote to end this thinking, brought to you by the Canadian Rock and Roll trio, Rush.

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice..."

Passionately engaged learning!

I love seeing people passionately engaged.  It doesn't really matter what it is either.  Watching someone intensely study, work, practice, investigate, rehearse, repeat, or try to do something successfully for the very first time is intriguing!

Both of my boys play soccer.  They love soccer!  Every now and then, I catch one of them alone in the yard, working on a new juggling move.  They try it over and over and over again until they get it right.  Then they try it over and over and over again until they get it right pretty much every time.  There have been a few occasions where I watched them from a fairly close distance and they didn't even notice I was there.

This type of passionate engagement is magic!  It is where the brain grows and the deep learning occurs.  I have seen this same type of intensity in classrooms many times.  Amazing lesson design in an amazing learning environment makes it happen!  It is not easy.  It doesn't happen all the time.  But when it does, it is the kind of lesson that the teacher will always remember.

I have a few of my own teaching memories of these magical learning activities.  Building bridges, the Bike Accident Trial, and hiking in the dark come to mind rather quickly.  I loved these more than the kids.  I loved them because the kids learned from them and THEY loved them.

These are the lessons worth repeating!  These are the types of lessons we want more of!

Same Question, Different Reaction

I was recently asked, "What would the people you work with say about you in your role as principal?"

The first thing that popped into my head, "They would say that I like to ask questions!"  Indeed, I do like to ask questions.  I like to hear about the rationale behind ideas.  I like to hear about the barriers that may be in the way.  I ask question to learn more about what is going on.

The challenge with some questions is that they mean different things to different people.  The easiest example is the question, "Why?"  For some people, this little three-letter word automatically flips the defensiveness switch.  If you are asking why, you must not trust me and my decisions and you think my words are not OK.

Within a solid relationship, this one usually does not cause a defensive reaction.  But it can.  For example, two strong, thoughtful, and energetic teachers I worked with for several years approached me with a question about team teaching.  They were very excited!  These two had been on the campus leadership team and had led several successful initiatives.  They were seen as true campus leaders and I felt like they knew I respected their work and their thoughts immensely.  They were very comfortable engaging in professional discourse and they had enjoyably indulged my why a thousand times!

They asked if their whole team could try a new arrangement for teaching and learning.  Just the thought of taking a risk and trying something different was awesome!  I loved the fact that they wanted to explore ways to improve what was happening for their students!  I listened to them explain the logistics for few minutes, then asked them about their rationale, "Why will this arrangement be better for your students?"

I had asked these two teachers the "Why" question many times in the past and they typically loved answering it because they confidently knew their business!  They didn't mind answering why!  These teachers, the ones that I felt like I had a great relationship with, had previously shown no problem with my why.

This time however, their faces changed a little, and they approached their response with a bit of hesitancy. As usual, they had some really good answers to the question, but they did not have their typical level of confidence, so their reaction to the question wasn't the same as usual.  No bright smiles this time. Rather than excitedly telling me about their plans, they hemmed and hawed a little bit.  They didn't like my why.  I am sure the fact that I had had not immediately approved caused a great deal of the difference in their reaction.

Knowing these two, they would have made it successful regardless of my question.  They usually did!  However this time, I left them with two outstanding questions to think about.

1. How will you ensure that you build relationships with every single child just as well as you usually do in a self-contained classroom?
2. How will you ensure that your lesson planning remains fully collaborative like it is now?

It didn't take too long for this group to approach me again with the same request, "Can we team teach?"

This time, I didn't even need to ask, "Why?"  I could tell that they had really thought out the the answers to that question.  When they presented their rationale, their reactions were quite the opposite of the first request.  They were excited and confident.  They had already thought through the why.  They had really done the thinking and talking to make sure that their plan would have the very best chance to work well!  Bright smiles and brilliant ideas abound!

My why didn't bother them this time!

In hindsight, knowing the talent and passion for doing great things of these two teachers and the entire team, I should have responded to their question with an immediate and emphatic, "Yes!"  Then I should have engaged in some other good questions to hear more about it.  Also looking back, I can say that they made their team better by working hard to build relationships and by using their collaborative strengths to plan for incredible instruction!

Did you paint the outhouse?

I have read a bunch of Tweets recently about the power of 1% improvements.  I have also read several articles and blogs about using consistent, incremental improvements to make things extraordinarily better over time.

Likewise, there comes a place in the timelines of a  process to simply overhaul the entire thing.  If something is ineffective and needs more than a tweak, 1% adjustments won't get it done!

As you evaluate your systems and processes, don't simply tweak when the system needs an overhaul.  And don't reinvent the whole thing if a little bit of polish will make a noticeable improvement.

Most importantly, never ever describe a few minor changes as a completely "New and Improved" process.  Likewise, never ever tell folks that there are only a few minor differences when the entire process is newly unfamiliar.  Both cause eyes to roll.

Like my favorite ag teacher once asked me when I tried to describe an exciting change, "Did you slap a new coat of paint on the outhouse or did you install indoor plumbing?"

No Conflict? No Innovation. Know Conflict? Know Innovation!

Karen Valencic said, "Without conflict, there is no innovation."  Indeed, we tend to make our greatest innovations when we are left with no choice but to do something different.  If the "different thing" works, it is an innovative success!  If the "different thing" does not work, do we still call it innovative???  I think we should.

What about those who operate on the edge and do new and different things on a regular basis?  What about the trendsetters?  Where is their conflict?

I believe it comes from their passion and their relentless pursuit to improve.  Even when a lesson goes well, these are the folks who push to do better.  They may find a new app that will increase student engagement and focus student dialogue on the learning target.  They may create a new project for students based on a neighborhood problem.  They may ask the questions that nobody else asks.   They are the ones who constantly challenge the TTWWADI mentality.  They might even cause a few folks to shake their heads in disbelief.

These teachers first moved their desks out of rows and into small groups so that kids could collaborate.  It is almost a challenge to find desks in rows in 2015.  These are the same ones who first tried teaching kids to read in small groups with appropriately leveled texts.  Twenty years ago, these teachers were trendsetters.  Today, guided reading is the norm.  These trendsetters wrote grant proposals to buy iPads for their classrooms way back in 2010 so their students could access relevant and timely information globally, rather than from outdated encyclopedias.  These days, educators are fully aware that technology needs to be in the hands of students!

Teachers who make things happen find their own conflict.  Unlike folks who cringe at the thought of conflict and change, these passionate educators smile at the challenge of doing things differently!  They relish the thought of doing something better!  They innovate!