Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
As a team leader, however, you are a key player in a setting that is fraught with meaning, challenge, and risk. Whether you are leading an executive management team in a Fortune 500 company or a team of frontline workers in a government agency or nonprofit organization, your interest is focused on what you can do, personally and specifically, to be more effective at leading your team and helping your organization succeed. Your purpose as a leader is to add value to your team’s effort. Unfortunately, leadership can be a frustrating and slippery topic to explore, offering little more than hints and promises of its innermost ingredients. Often, an examination of its properties can lead to dead ends, or be diverted and overpowered by sibling subjects such as charisma and character. From the outset, we must accept the fact that much of leadership may always remain elusive and nongeneralizable. How to be an effective leader isn’t some calculable math problem. Perhaps the best we can hope for is the sketch of a shadowy profile, one that must be worked at, interpreted, and adapted to each person’s unique qualities and the situation at hand. But even if there may never be an established set of commandments for successful leadership, we believe that one way to get closer to the mark is to zero in on the way team leaders are seen and assessed by their teams –in both their strengths and their failings. To this end, we asked more than 6,000 team members to provide a written response to two questions about their team leader: (1) What are the strengths of the team’s leadership? (2) What does the team leader do that keeps the team from functioning more effectively? From the responses to these two assessments of more than 600 team leaders emerged six consistent and useful leadership competencies. 1. Focus on the goal 2. Ensure a collaborative climate 3. Build confidence 4. Demonstrate sufficient technical know-how 5. Set priorities 6. Manage performance
LaFasto, F. & Larson, C. (p. 98-99, 2001). When teams work best: 6000 team members and leaders tell what it takes to succeed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
Here are our findings about four essential qualities that might change the way you lead or participate on your work teams: Great teams always have a noble cause. The great teams we studied all had a noble cause, and, more than that, they had extreme clarity about that cause. When we asked 10 people on a great team to list their raison d’être, all 10 would use the same language, i.e., “We make raving fans of our patients and their families,” or “We treat our customers like heroes.” How would your team fare with this exercise? Effective teams drive engagement. Engaged employees are those who care about the organization, are willing to give extra effort, own problems and so on. Our research shows that the number of engaged employees in your organization increases by a whopping 11% when people feel they are part of a motivating team, receive regular peer-to-peer recognition and understand how the work of their group affects the larger organization. Their performance is driven by team, not company, loyalty. Here’s one of our biggest findings, and CEOs hate it: People are more loyal to their teams than to their companies. After all, we love our countries, but aren’t we more loyal to our families? It’s our nature to band together in small teams for support and encouragement. Great leaders know this and don’t fight it. They keep teams together longer (it’s a fallacy that team productivity drops off after a few years), and they even move great teams together instead of picking off stars and moving them. Great teams simplify. We found that the best teams live by sets of simple rules and hold each member accountable for honoring those rules. We culled the various rules down into the three that were most common: Wow, No Surprises and Cheer. In short, the members of great teams commit to being world-class with every interaction with clients and with one another; they believe in open communication with no surprises; and they agree to root and cheer for one another, with a healthy dose of recognition for great work.
Gostick, Adrian and Elton, Chester (2010). Four Essential Qualities of Great Teams. Forbes http://www.forbes.com/2010/11/12/teams-essential-qualities-leadership-managing-engagement.html www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
Working cooperatively requires that team members coordinate by anticipating and predicting each other’s needs through common understandings of the environment and expectations of performance. This shared understanding or representation of team goals, individual team member tasks, and the coordination of the team to achieve common goals is frequently referred to as mental models (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1995). Mental models are what individuals use to organize or encode information such as the dynamics of the environment in which they are embedded and the response patterns needed to manage these dynamics, the purpose of the team, and the interdependencies among team members’ roles (Zaccaro et al., 2001). Two types of mental models have been frequently discussed in relation to team performance: team-related mental models and task-related mental models (e.g., Mathieu, Heffner, Goodwin, Salas, & Cannon-Bowers, 2000). Team-related mental models have to do with the team functioning and expected behaviors, whereas task-related mental models contain information regarding the materials needed for the task or manner in which the equipment is used. Shared mental models facilitate the team’s progression toward goal attainment by creating a framework that promotes common understanding and action (Zaccaro et al., 2001). With this shared understanding, teams can perform the needed teamwork skills …required for effective team performance. Conversely, without this shared understanding, the individual members may be headed toward different goals, thereby leading to ineffective feedback or assistance (e.g. Salas, Burke, & Fowlkes, in press) or the inability to anticipate each other’s actions or needs (Cannon-Bowers, Salas, & Converse, 1990, 1993). Further evidence of the importance of shared mental models has been found, indicating that teams that share similar mental models communicate more effectively, perform more team work behaviors, … are more willing to work with team members on future projects (Rentsch & Klimoski, 2001) and generally perform better (e.g. Griepentrog & Fleming, 2003; Mohammed, Klimoski, & Renstsch, 200; Stout et al., 1999), although some types of metal models are more important for certain tasks than are others (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1993). Salas, Eduardo, Sims, Dana E., & Burke, C. Shawn (2004). Is there a “Big Five” in teamwork? Small Group Research, 2005 36: 555 (p. 565) http://sgr.agepub.com/content/36/5/555 www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
It is rare to discover anything in the realm of human behavior that occurs with great consistency. Our sample was relatively small (31 interviews covering more than 75 teams), but very diverse. Therefore, it was surprising to find that in every case, without exception, when an effectively functioning team was identified, it was described by the respondent as having a clear understanding of its objective. Two insights about teams emerged early, consistently, and very emphatically from our interviews. First, high performance teams have both a clear understanding of the goal to be achieved and a belief that the goal embodies a worthwhile or important result. Second, whenever an ineffectively functioning team was identified and described, the explanation for the team’s ineffectiveness involved, in one sense or another, the goal. The goal had become unfocused; the goal had become politicized; the team had lost a sense of urgency or significance about its objective; the team’s efforts had become diluted by too many other competing goals; individual goals had taken priority over the team goals; and so on. Let’s develop the earlier and more consistent conclusion first. The principle of goal clarity emerged forcefully from our data as it has from other, similar investigations in the past. Garfield’s analysis (1986) of peak performers in both athletics and in business led him to identify “the one characteristic that appears in every peak performer I have studied: A sense of mission. Garfield defined mission as an image of a desired state of affairs that inspires action. …The more an individual or a group of people have a clear understanding of the nature of a problem that confronts them, the more effective they will be in solving that problem.
Larson, C. & LaFasto, F. (p. 27 -28, 1989). Teamwork: What must go right / what can go wrong. Newberry Park, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
To become a cohesive team, a group of leaders must learn to commit to decisions when there is less than perfect information available, and when no natural consensus develops. And because perfect information and natural consensus rarely exist, the ability to commit becomes one of the most critical behaviors of a team. But teams cannot learn to do this if they are not in the practice of engaging in productive and unguarded conflict. That’s because it is only after team members passionately and unguardedly debate with one another and speak their minds that the leader can feel confident of making a decision with the full benefit of the collective wisdom of the group. A simple example might help illustrate the costs of failing to truly commit. The CEO of a struggling pharmaceutical company decided to eliminate business and first class travel to cut costs. Everyone around the table nodded their heads in agreement, but within weeks it became apparent that only half of the room had really committed to the decision. The other merely decided not to challenge the decision, but rather to ignore it. This created its own set of destructive conflict when angry employees from different departments traveled together and found themselves heading to different parts of the airplane. Needless to say, the travel policy was on the agenda again at the next meeting, wasting important time that should have spent righting the company’s financial situation. Teams that fail to disagree and exchange unfiltered opinions are the ones that find themselves revisiting the same issues again and again. All this is ironic, because the teams that appear to an outside observer to be the most dysfunctional (the arguers) are usually the ones that can arrive at and stick with a difficult decision.
Lencioni, Patrick, M. (2012). The trouble with teamwork. (p. 38 & 39). Leader to Leader
www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
1. A good team knows why it exists. It's not enough to say, "We're the 6th grade team of teachers" -- that's simply what defines you (you teach the same grade), not why you exist. A purpose for being is a team might be: "We come together as a team to support each other, learn from each other, and identify ways that we can better meet the needs of our sixth grade students." Call it a purpose or a mission -- it doesn't really matter. What matters is that those who attend never feel like they're just obligated to attend "another meeting." The purpose is relevant, meaningful, and clear.
2. A good team creates a space for learning. There are many reasons why those of us working in schools might gather in a team -- but I believe that all of those reasons should contain opportunities for learning with and from each other. I have met very few educators who don't want to learn -- we're a curious bunch and there's so much to learn about education. So in an effective team, learning happens within a safe context. We can make mistakes, take risks, and ask every single question we want.
3. In a good team, there's healthy conflict. This is inevitable and essential if we're learning together and embarked on some kind of project together. We disagree about ideas, there's constructive dialogue and dissent, and our thinking is pushed.
4. Members of a good team trust each other. This means that when there's the inevitable conflict, it's managed. People know each other. We listen to each other. There are agreements about how we treat each other and engage with each other, and we monitor these agreements. There's also someone such as a facilitator who ensures that this is a safe space. Furthermore, in order for there to be trust, within a strong team we see equitable participation among members and shared decision-making. We don't see a replication of the inequitable patterns and structures of our larger society (such as male dominance of discourse and so on).
5. A good team has a facilitator, leader, or shared leaders. There's someone -- or a rotation of people -- who steer the ship. This ensures that there's the kind of intentionality, planning, and facilitation in the moment that's essential for a team to be high functioning.
Aguilar, Elena (2016). 5 Characteristics of an Effective School Team, Edutopia http://www.edutopia.org/blog/5-characteristics-effective-school-team-elena-aguilar www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
“Working well together” is such a fundamental ingredient in team success that it was mentioned by our interviewees as a significant characteristic of the effectively functioning teams they had experienced. From the incredibly specific and intricately coordinated safety-related activities of mountaineering teams; to the sharing of information, opinions, visions, judgments, and data of highly creative project teams; to the total interdependence, individual accountability, and interlocking responsibility of military teams, “working well together” was recognized by everyone as something important. In our interviews, “working well together” was typically characterized in one of two ways. First it was sometimes attributed to structural features of teams, such as clearly differentiated roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities, or clear lines of communication, record keeping, and documentation. Second, it was often characterized as a feeling or climate that described relationships among members of the team or between the team and its leader. It was usually a climate that fostered collaboration, and interviewees, when pushed, almost always explained this climate by referring, in one way or another, to “trust.” Trust is one of the mainstay virtues in the commerce of mankind. It is the bond that allows any kind of significant relationship to exist between people. Once broken, it is not easily – if ever – recovered. Our content analysis of the data indicated that trust is produced in a climate that includes four elements: (1) honesty – integrity, no lies, no exaggerations; (2) openness – a willingness to share, and a receptivity to information, perceptions, ideas; (3) consistency – predictable behavior and responses; and (4) respect – treating people with dignity and fairness. The problem, according to our sample of interviewees, is that trust is so fragile that if any one of the elements listed above is breached – even once – a relationship is apt to be severely compromised, even lost. In fact, our research shows a predictable pattern of diminishing confidence once a trusting relationship is violated. Larson, C. & LaFasto, F. (p. 85, 1989). Teamwork: What must go right / what can go wrong. Newberry Park, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
Purposeful collaboration To be most effective, collaborative learning should be driven by analysis of student data and focused upon the development of teachers’ knowledge, skills and understanding (Harris and Jones, 2012). As identified in the Standards, teachers should use a range of sources, including student results, to evaluate their teaching and adjust their practice to better meet student needs (Australian Professional Standards for Teachers, p.6). When teachers work together in collaborative teams to gather evidence of student learning, analyse that evidence and identify and deploy the most powerful teaching strategies to address gaps in student learning, the subsequent impact can be significant. Collaborative work should have a clear focus. This focus should be specific, measureable, simple, informed by data, easy to communicate and linked to teacher and student improvement. It should also be relevant, address an issue that teachers can do something about and be manageable. A shared vision can be supported through setting goals as a collaborative group. People are more willing to collaborate on work that has a significant personal meaning for them so creating a shared vision of the outcome is important. Goals should be specific and measurable. Words like “success” and “better” are subjective and can be interpreted differently which can make it difficult for people to understand how they can contribute effectively to those goals. Collaborative discussion should focus on actions related to the identified goal(s). The most effective professional development emphasises active learning, observation, and reflection rather than abstract discussions.
The Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership Limited (aitsl). The Essential Guide to Professional Learning: Collaboration http://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/professional-growth-resources/professional-learning-resources/theessential-guide-to-professional-learning---collaboration.pdf?sfvrsn=2 www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. —Benjamin Franklin What Is Collaboration? Collaboration occurs when a number of agencies and individuals make a commitment to work together and contribute resources to obtain a common, long-term goal. … Effective collaborations promote team building, a sense of ownership, enthusiasm, and an environment that maximizes the chance of collaborative partnerships succeeding. The components of an effective collaboration are: ■ Stakeholders with a vested interest in the collaboration ■ Trusting relationships among and between the partners ■ A shared vision and common goals for the collaboration ■ Expertise ■ Teamwork strategies ■ Open communication ■ Motivated partners ■ Means to implement and sustain the collaborative effort ■ An action plan By having these nine elements in place, the collaboration can avoid the disorder, apprehension, fragmentation, disorganization, slow pace, discouragement, and unfocused achievements that can affect many problem solving and other community policing partnerships. The process of building and sustaining collaboration is ongoing and circular in nature. The process begins with developing a shared vision and ends with developing, implementing, and assessing the action plan. However, throughout the life of the collaborative effort, the partnership will attract new expertise, decide on additional motivators, and identify and access new means and resources. Trust is the core of the relationship, with each of the other components acting as essential elements of the whole. Trust is the hub, with stakeholders, shared vision, expertise, teamwork strategies, open communication, motivated partners, means, and an action plan serving as spokes of the wheel. If any one of the pieces is weak or broken, the wheel will not roll properly and the collaboration will not progress. Thus, partners must continually reassess the collaboration and, if necessary, determine what actions should be taken to strengthen one or a number of these components. Routinely examining “what’s working” and “what’s not working” is essential to building, motivating, and sustaining a collaboration that can achieve results.
Chrislip, D. D. and Larson, C. E.. Collaborative Leadership: How Citizens and Civic Leaders Can Make a. Difference. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-. Bass, 1994. http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/html/cd_rom/inaction1/pubs/Collaborationtoolkit/Section1CollaborationFundamentals.pdf www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
Teacher collaboration and professional learning communities are frequently mentioned in articles and reports on school improvement. Schools and teachers benefit in a variety of ways when teachers work together. A small but growing body of evidence suggests a positive relationship between teacher collaboration and student achievement. Benefits for Schools and Teachers In 2006, RAND researcher Cassandra Guarino and associates analyzed federal Schools and Staffing Surveys. They found lower turnover rates among beginning teachers in schools with induction and mentoring programs that emphasized collegial support. Researcher Ken Futernick (2007), after surveying 2,000 current and former teachers in California, concluded that teachers felt greater personal satisfaction when they believed in their own efficacy, were involved in decision making, and established strong collegial relationships. School leaders who foster collaboration among novice and veteran teachers can improve teacher retention and teacher satisfaction, according to studies conducted by Susan Kardos and Susan Moore Johnson. They have found that new teachers seem more likely to stay in schools that have an “integrated professional culture” in which new teachers’ needs are recognized and all teachers share responsibility for student success. Yet this is not the norm, according to their survey of a representative sample of 486 first- and secondyear K12 teachers in California, Florida, Massachusetts and Michigan. One-half (in California and Michigan) to two-thirds (in Florida and Massachusetts) said they plan and teach alone. Fewer than half reported that teachers in their school share responsibility for all students. Even California’s state-funded mentoring program did not guarantee that new teachers got the support they wanted or needed. The researchers suggest that school leaders foster a sense of shared responsibility, engage veteran teachers in the induction of new teachers and in their own professional growth, and earmark resources to support collaborative planning, mentoring, and classroom observations.
Thomas, Carla McClure (2008). The Benefits of Teacher Collaboration; District Administration http://www.districtadministration.com/article/benefits-teacher-collaboration www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
1. Are the Conditions Right for Us to Collaborate Successfully? Although establishing a regular time and space to meet is important, other conditions are required for individuals to work effectively as a group—and the potential roadblocks are plentiful. One roadblock relates to teacher perceptions. Some teachers prefer working alone; they might feel mistrustful of other staff members, want to protect their “territory,” or resist what they perceive as interference from outsiders (DuFour & Burnette, 2002). Although collaboration can thrive in a climate of continuous, positive, and respectful critical inquiry, some teachers mistake critical for criticism and fear that others will point out their instructional shortcomings. A second roadblock relates to a lack of focus. Time for collaboration can be highjacked by personal conversations or by a mandate, project, or crisis that suddenly has appeared on the horizon. Negotiating these distractions can quickly consume meeting time. As authors DuFour and Burnette (2002) note, this lack of meeting focus can derail efforts to develop a learning community. A third roadblock is that groups generally often underestimate the task of developing collaboration skills (National Staff Development Council, 2001a). In recognition of these common problems, a good beginning step for collaborative groups is establishing standard operating procedures and written group norms. Another strategy for keeping the group focused on best practice is the use of discussion protocols. … A discussion protocol is a tool for structuring conversations that specifies how talk time will be allotted to achieve specific aims, such as answering focus questions, presenting context, formulating clarifying or probing questions, or listening to and reflecting on feedback (The Collaborative, n.d.). Although teachers might feel awkward using these tools at first, the benefits are substantial. Such tools formalize both the processes and the expectations of collaborative groups. They establish ground rules for participant interaction and can even accommodate potential distractions by allotting time for participants to voice concerns. They also help reassure participants that the investment of time will be worthwhile. Researchers Leo and Cowan (2000) and Hord (1997) identify shared vision and values focused on student learning as one of five dimensions characterizing professional learning communities. In other words, the most effectively used collaborative meeting time focuses on issues that are directly connected to the improvement priorities of the school or district. For example, if a school goal is to improve student problem-solving skills, collaboration time may be spent examining lessons and identifying problem-solving activities across various subject areas and grade levels. The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement (2010). Maximizing the Impact of Teacher Collaboration, http://www.education.com/pdf/Ref_Maximizing_Impact/ www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
Creating Effective Systems for English Learners
A common assumption found in education literature is that developing professional communities will result in increased student learning. While there is much truth to this, there is more to the story. Certain topics and ways in which teachers talk are essential to improve teaching and learning. Professional development leaders working with groups can improve the group’s capacity by improving what teachers talk about and how they talk. Collaborative groups encounter three challenges. One is a tendency, typical when groups first form, to talk not about instruction, but instead about the logistics of working together. The second challenge is to overcome the tendency to have conversations that lack inquiry, reflection, analysis, challenge, and invention. Some groups face a third challenge: letting interpersonal dynamics detract from the group’s work. Many professional development activities rightfully address these areas in order to achieve professional communities in which student learning improves. Two combined approaches to these challenges can result in sustainable change. First, leaders focus groups and set expectations that teachers will skillfully talk about student work and apply accountability data to inform their instruction. Such leaders provide professional development on, among other topics, data analysis, ways of talking, and intellectually challenging ideas related to student learning. The second approach is to develop the capacity in groups to create internal sources of excellence.
Garmston, Robert, J. (2006) What groups talk about matters – and how they talk matters, too. National Staff Development Council, V. 21, n1, Winter
www.elachieve.org
2016 Symposia Learning and Leading: Refining Our Practice
© 2016
