As educators, stress is an ever-present reality. But what if we could reframe stress—not as a threat—but as fuel for growth and purpose?  I was introduced to the concept of hardiness in a podcast with instructional coaches and coaching trainers, Lana Cecil and Angela Buckingham, from ESC 13 in Austin, Texas. They shared how they explored the concept from Stein and Bartone’s book, Making Stress Work for You to Achieve Your Life Goals, which defines hardiness as a set of attitudes—Commitment, Control, and Challenge—that protect us from the negative impacts of stress and help us thrive in demanding environments. Teachers today are juggling multiple expectations, pressures, and shifting demands. Developing hardiness can help them stay rooted and resilient. Instructional coaches can play a pivotal role in cultivating these attitudes in teachers.Commitment

Stein and Bartone define commitment as “the tendency to be involved with people, things, and contexts rather than being detached, alienated, or disengaged.” It reflects a deep sense of purpose and engagement. People high in commitment see life as meaningful and worthwhile. On the podcast, Angela shared a great story around asking a man, who during road construction, holds the signs to slow down or stop, and then flips the sign, “Man, that must be a boring job?” And he answers, “Oh, no, I keep people safe.”

That’s a real picture of being involved.

“Working hard for something we don’t care about is called stress. Working hard for something we love is called passion.”

Simon Sinek, “Start with Why”

I see commitment aligning with Simon Sinek’s work with “WHY.”  Instructional coaches should be providing opportunities for teachers to reflect on and state their “WHYs”. What are they committed to make happen for their students. Then, the coach can join as a partner valuing the teacher’s commitment and spotlighting the teacher’s efforts and indicators of progress toward that teacher’s goal. I describe that coaches need to know a teacher’s agenda, part of which is understanding their commitment. Only then can a coach be a true partner with the coachee.

Angela and Lana suggest these coaching questions to support commitment.

• What’s most important to you?
• How can we prioritize what’s most meaningful and let go of what is not?
• When do you feel at your best?
• What successes can we celebrate?
• What have you already figured out, and what do you want to find out?
• What might be fun to try?

Control

Stein and Bartone identify control as “the belief that one can influence the events of one’s experience. It is not the illusion of total control, but the perception that your actions make a difference. “This is about personal agency—the sense that, even in the face of stress or adversity, your efforts can influence outcomes. For teachers, this could mean believing that intentional strategies can impact student actions and learning outcomes, and that reflection can lead to improvement.

A common coaching approach for me, as I listen to a teacher describe a problem, is to get a clear picture of what the first signs of improvement might look or sound like. In the book, Switch: How to Change Things When Change is Hard, by Chip and Dan Heath, I was introduced to solution focused therapy. The solution-focused therapist looks for a solution to the problem at hand with the question, “If a miracle happened, and the problem was gone, what are the first small things you would see that would make you think the change had happened?” The therapist questions to get the picture of the change in concrete, very specific terms. They focus their patients on the first hints of the miracle, asking, “What’s the first small sign you’d see that would make you think the problem was gone” because they want to avoid answers that are overly grand and unattainable. When the picture is clear, the therapist follows with the question, “When was the last time you saw a little bit of the miracle, even just for a short time?” This question demonstrates to the client that she can solve the problem and at least in a small way already has, in some circumstances. That’s a good indication of control.

Lana and Angela’s suggested these questions supporting control.

Do you need me to just listen or offer help?

If you were giving advice to someone in your same situation, what would you say to them?

What do you think is best?

What is easy and doable?

What is our first, small step?

What do you want to say “yes” to, and what do you need to say “no” to?

Where would it be best to spend your energy?

What is in your control?

What can we let go of?

Challenge

Stein and Bartone describe challenge as “the belief that change and new experiences are normal and that they offer opportunities for growth rather than threats to security.” This mindset embraces change as a constant and stress as a chance to develop. Challenge invites us to see change and difficulty not as threats but as opportunities to grow. Teachers high in challenge are more likely to experiment with new techniques, welcome feedback, and adapt to evolving student needs with curiosity rather than fear.

Lana and Angela noted a key understanding around the mindset of challenge: “stress is enhancing not debilitating.” Coaches support teachers in developing these thoughts.” I can learn something from this. It’s not going to hijack my rational thought. It’s not going to hijack my focus. I’m going to take this focus, and I’m going to move forward with the challenge.

Angela and Lana’s suggested these questions to support challenge

What can we learn from this?

What else might be true?

What lessons from past successes can you apply to this situation?

How will you feel once we’ve reached the goal?

What could you do right now or today?

What are you willing to try?

Who can you partner with to help you with this challenge?

Hardiness doesn’t mean avoiding stress, it means learning to engage with it constructively. Coaches are in a unique position to help teachers see stress differently—as a sign they’re in the right place, doing meaningful work, and growing. Coaches can mirror hardiness for the teachers and teams they serve.

Contact Angela: angela.buckingham@esc13.txed.net

Contact Lana: lana.cecil@esc13.txed.net

Simon Senik’s advice to focus communicating the WHY of your organization before the how and what has a direct application to a staff’s understanding of “why” an investment in instructional coaching would be made. Decisions about a coaching model, the selection of coaches, the training provided to coaches, as well as the expectations for administrators, coaches, and teachers should all be connected to the program’s “WHY.”

Subscribe to the Steve Barkley Ponders Out Loud podcast on iTunes or visit BarkleyPD.com to find new episodes!

Podcast Transcript:

Steve [Intro] (00:00)

Welcome to the Steve Barkley Ponders Out Loud podcast. As instructional coaches and school leaders, you have a challenge to guide continuous teacher growth that promotes student success. This podcast looks to support you with strategies from our experienced guests and insights that I’ve gathered across many years. I’m thrilled you’re here. Thanks for listening.

Steve (00:27)

Exploring the why of instructional coaching. While assisting a high school leadership team in the midst of initiating some instructional coaching opportunities with their staff, I uncovered the need to explore if the why of their coaching plan had been communicated to their staff. Several of the teacher leaders were on a revised schedule that now created an opportunity for them to provide coaching to their colleagues or to arrange opportunities for their colleagues to coach each other. But teachers were not responding to the availability of the coaching, even though all the assurances of autonomy, and non-evalutive communication were presented. From earlier conversations with the leadership group, I could identify what they wanted to achieve with the coaching process, but I wondered if the staff knew or questioned what was the purpose. Those thoughts triggered me to connect with Simon Sinek’s work on the “why.” The golden circle concept introduced by Sinek is built on the insight that successful leaders and organizations start by communicating why – the purpose, cause, or belief that inspires them to do what they do. The why represents the core beliefs of an individual or an organization. It’s the reason that they exist, the purpose that drives every action and decision.

Steve (02:13)

The “how” refers to the processes or the methods that are used to realize the why. These are the specific actions taken to embody the core beliefs in the way they operate or the strategy strategies that they employ. The “what” encompasses the products, services, or roles that an organization or individual provides or performs. It’s the tangible outcome of the why and how. The what is the outcome of the why and the how. The what is the visible proof of the entity’s belief and methods in action. Sinek argues that most people in organizations operate from the outside in, focusing on what they do without giving much thought to why they do it. However, most inspiring leaders in organizations do the opposite. They start with why. The why attracts people who share those values. I had realized from my time in this school with the administrators that there was a desire for more students to have more learning experiences that engage them in greater autonomy, ownership, critical thinking, and problem solving. I posed these two questions to the principal: One, what do you want to make happen for your students or for some of your students that isn’t happening now? Two, how many teachers know what that picture is. The principal decided to pose the why question to his administration and teacher leaders.

Steve (04:08)

Students gaining something that they currently are not gaining is a reason for change in the teaching learning process. That’s the why. Among his leaders, there was a clear common message that they wanted students to gain joy and fun in learning, investment in learning, student ownership and engagement, connecting learning to their futures, critical thinking, being challenged. Then the team moved to the second question, how many teachers know what that picture is? Now, a substantial amount of uncertainty emerged. A realization arose that there was a need to explore the staff’s views and thinking in order to decide the next action leaders needed to take. They mapped out a plan for small group discussions with staff in order to find out. Engaging staff in ongoing reflection is a key. It’s got to be more than simply telling the staff what the why is. Here are some questions I gave the leadership team to explore in their future as they plan for the administrator and the coach’s next round of actions. First, who are the teachers that agree with the why and have ideas to implement to make it happen? Instructional coaching for this group would provide the support and encouragement to experiment with their ideas, implementing hypotheses and learning with other colleagues about ways to achieve the goal with their students.

Steve (06:02)

Secondly, are there teachers who agree with the why, but they really don’t know what they would do to achieve the goal with their students? Instructional coaching needs to provide these teachers with learning opportunities. They may want time to observe peers who are being successful in generating the desired student engagement activities. Professional development might provide possible instructional approaches. As these teachers decide on approaches to try, instructional coaching can support them with modeling, co-teaching, and reflection. Lastly, are there some staff who either disagree with the desired why or simply are not willing to invest in changing their current practice? In the short term, these unwilling staff members are not a focus of the instructional coaching activities. As school leaders focus on a bigger conceptual change, encouraging and celebrating with teachers who are gaining the process on the desired goal is key to establishing a new culture and expectations. In my work, I’ve always used the backwards planning approach to coaching. So taking a look at the desired learning outcomes we wanted to achieve, then figuring out what students needed to do in order to gain those skills those elements of knowledge, those attributes. Then, looking at what teacher actions would be taking to assist students in implementing those learning behaviors.

Steve (08:00)

And then lastly, what’s the support that we would provide teachers in order to carry out our backwards process? That’s where coaching would fit in. As I took Sinek’s thinking and overlaid it over mine, I realized that why was really about the learning outcomes. How was really about teacher actions and student learning production behaviors. And the what becomes the coaching support, professional development, and learning communities working with colleagues, all of that support of “what” to drive the “how” of teacher and student actions to achieve the “why” – student learning outcome goals. By starting with a why, a school ensures that every stakeholder understands and is aligned with the overarching goal, thereby increasing engagement, commitment, and the willingness to invest in the necessary changes. Applying Sinek’s thinking to the implementation process involves constantly linking back to the core purpose throughout the development and execution of instructional coaching. This means that decisions about coaching models, the selection of coaches, the training provided to coaches, and the methods of feedback and assessment that are made are all fundamentally connected to the why. I’d love to hear your thoughts about connecting Sinek’s work with the important why to our work with instructional coaching.

Steve (09:58)

You can always reach me at barkleypd.com. Thanks for listening.

Steve [Outro] (10:05)

Thanks for listening, folks. I’d love to hear what you’re pondering. You can find me on Twitter or LinkedIn at Steve Barkley, or send me your questions and find my videos and blogs at barkleypd.com.

As I was assisting a high school leadership team in the midst of initiating some instructional coaching opportunities with their staff, I uncovered the need to explore if the WHY of their plan had been communicated to staff. Teachers were not responding to the availability of coaching even though all the assurances of autonomy and non-evaluative communication were presented. After several conversations with the leadership group, I could identify what they wanted to achieve with the coaching process and wondered what the staff knew or wondered. Those thoughts triggered me to connect to Simon Senik’s work on WHY?

The Golden Circle concept introduced by Simon Sinek, is built on the insight that successful leaders and organizations start by communicating “WHY” — the purpose, cause, or belief that inspires them to do what they do. The “WHY” represents the core belief of the individual or organization, the reason they exist, the purpose that drives every action and decision.

The “HOW” refers to the processes or methods that are used to realize the “WHY”. These are the specific actions taken to embody the core beliefs in the way they operate or the strategies they employ. The “WHAT” encompasses the products, services, or roles that an individual or organization provides or performs. It’s the tangible outcome of the “WHY” and “HOW”, the visible proof of an entity’s belief and methods in action.

Sinek argues that most people and organizations operate from the outside in, focusing on “WHAT” they do without giving much thought to “WHY” they do it. However, the most inspiring leaders and organizations do the opposite: they start with “WHY”. This approach attracts people who share those beliefs.

I had realized from my time with the school’s administrators that there was a desire for more students to have more learning experiences that engaged them in greater autonomy, ownership, critical thinking and problem-solving.

I posed these two questions to the principal:

• What do you want to make happen for your students (or for some of your students) that isn’t happening now?
• How many teachers know what that picture is?

The principal decided to pose the WHY question to his administration and teacher leaders. Students gaining something that they currently are not gaining is a reason for change in the teaching/learning process. (WHY) There was a clear common message as leaders shared their responses: joy and fun in learning, investment in learning, student ownership and engagement, connecting learning to their futures, critical thinking, being challenged.

When the team moved to the second question, (“How many teachers know what that picture is?”)  a substantial amount of uncertainty emerged. A realization arose that there was a need to explore the staff’s views and thinking in order to decide the next actions leaders needed to take. They mapped out a plan for small group discussions with staff to find out. Engaging the staff in on-going reflection is key.  It must be more than telling staff.

Here are future questions I suggested that they need to explore as they plan administrator and instructional coaching actions.

• Who are the teachers that agree with the WHY and have ideas to implement to make it happen? [Instructional coaching for this group would provide the support and encouragement to experiment with their ideas. Implementing hypotheses and learning with other colleagues about ways to achieve the goal with students.
• Are there teachers who agree with the WHY but do not know what they would do to achieve the goal with their students? Instructional coaching needs to provide these teachers with learning opportunities. They may want time to observe peers who are being successful in generating the desired student engagement in learning. Professional development can provide possible instructional approaches. As these teachers decide on approaches to try, instructional coaching can provide support with modelling, co-teaching, and reflection.
• Are there some staff who either disagree with the desired “WHY” or simply are not willing to invest in changing their current practices. In the short term the unwilling staff are not a focus of instructional coaching. (You can find my thinking on unwilling staff in this podcast.) As school leadership focuses on a bigger conceptual change, encouraging and celebrating with the teachers who are gaining progress on the desired goal is key to establishing a new culture and expectations.

How well is the WHY of your instructional coaching communicated?

By starting with “WHY,” the school ensures that every stakeholder understands and is aligned with the overarching goal, thereby increasing engagement, commitment, and the willingness to invest in the necessary changes. Applying Sinek’s thinking to the implementation process involves consistently linking back to this core purpose throughout the development and execution phases of the instructional coaching program. This means that decisions about the coaching model, the selection of coaches, the training provided to them, and the methods of feedback and assessment are all made with the fundamental “WHY” in mind.

Simon Sinek shared the statement, “Leaders have the ability to see those around them rise” in this short video clip. It struck me as a great reflection opportunity for school leaders, instructional coaches, and teachers. Sinek identifies his own important learning about leadership with two key statements:

• Remind myself –“I don’t need to know everything and don’t need to pretend that I do.”
• Tell others – “ I don’t know, and I need help.”

Reflecting on and embracing these statements can help a leader:

Foster a Culture of Openness:

By openly acknowledging that you don’t know everything and seeking help, leaders provide an important model for their team. Team members feel comfortable admitting their own limitations and seeking assistance.

This is why I encourage instructional coaches and administrators to be among the most coached people in a building. Coaches and administrators coaching each other publicly is a powerful practice to implement. Teachers being lead learners, publicly learning as students observe, creates a similar important model. Can students observe their teachers to find out how to learn as well as observe the ‘joy of learning’?

Build Trust: Admitting when you don’t know something builds trust within your team. It demonstrates humility and honesty, which fosters strong relationships and trust between leaders and team members.

Encourage Collaborative Problem-Solving:

By acknowledging their own limitations, leaders are more likely to encourage collaboration and collective problem-solving. When leaders are open to input and assistance from others, it promotes a collaborative approach to addressing challenges and finding solutions.

In my coaching role I often take the approach of being a thinking partner with the coachee. While the coachee is considering what the possibilities are for gaining their desired outcomes, I may put an idea into the conversation for exploration. If the coachee decides to try the strategy, she/he does so with owning the plan as theirs rather than the coach’s solution to a problem.  Teachers can take the same exploration approach with students. A role that is more about supporting “learning” than “teaching” solutions.

Promote a Learning Culture:

Embracing the idea that you don’t need to know everything emphasizes the importance of continuous learning. This mindset encourages both leaders and team members to seek new knowledge, stay curious, and adapt to changing circumstances, fostering a culture of continuous improvement. When learners become teachers, sharing their new knowledge, understanding, or skills, they feel empowered and often motivated to continue learning.

“In many medical education settings, students taught by peer teachers learn at least as well as students taught by faculty. Although peer teachers are perceived as not being as knowledgeable as faculty, the cognitive and social congruencies they share with their learners support learning.” (When Learners Become Teachers: A Review of Peer Teaching in Medical Student Education)

Elementary principal, Haley Beavert, shared in a podcast a program she implemented trading required mandatory faculty meetings for optional learning opportunities. She identifies the strategy as an example of de-implementation. The program, called “Feed Your Brain,” has teachers organizing learning opportunities for professional development.

Reduce Pressure on Yourself:

Leaders who feel the need to know everything may put undue pressure on themselves. Accepting that it’s okay not to have all the answers allows you to focus on leveraging the collective knowledge and expertise of your team or students, ultimately reducing personal stress.

Educator and author, Ann Lautrette, described teachers building co-constructed classrooms in a podcast with me.

“A space where decisions about learning, planning, doing, and assessing are made in a shared way between the teacher and the student.  It’s a classroom that’s characterized by open discussions, negotiation, and two- way feedback, not just from teacher to student, but also from students to teachers. The teacher of a co-constructed classroom is passionate about student voice and choice within the planning of the learning, the doing of the learning and the assessing of the learning. These teachers see themselves as facilitators of learning rather than the source of knowledge.”

Lautrette expands co-construction beyond the classroom. “Teachers need to work together, teachers and students need to work together, leaders, teachers and students all need to work together with parents and everybody else in our community.”

Consider your opportunities to empower others with your leadership. What purposeful actions do you take?

I have written blogs and posted podcasts on building teachers’ professional growth plans and professional learning community goals around hypotheses and evidence collection.

I was initially pointed in that direction from an article by Jean Ross, in the Sloan Management review from MIT, “Why Hypotheses Beat Goals.” She suggests that instead of asking “What is Your Goal?” we ask, “What is Your Hypothesis?” She states, “Hypotheses can force individuals to articulate in advance why they believe a given course of action will succeed. A failure that exposes an incorrect hypothesis can more readily convert into organizational learning.”

Learning. That was the word that I knew should be our focus. Organizational learning; even better. My experiences illustrated that too often goals that were met or not met, didn’t produce individual or organizational learning. Ross described an example from 7-11 stores in Japan. Sales clerks were asked to form a hypothesis about what to place for sale on their shelves that would increase sales and profits. Counselors checking back asked three questions:

• What did you hypothesize?
• How did you do?
• How will you do better? (In effect, what do you think you learned)

Data was important for the clerks to learn from their process.

As I explored hypotheses in professional growth plans, I realized that the collection of evidence was critical for reflection that would lead to learning. Learning, even if the hypothesis didn’t achieve the desired outcome.

Here is a teacher’s hypothesis:

I think that students persevering and attempting to solve a problem when it appears to be “something they don’t know how to do” would result in increased math results. Providing increased experiences in solving problems collaboratively and independently should create this mindset.

Her plan:

I will create some time each week to engage in a “problem-solving event.” I’ll look to create a game-like/fun-challenging atmosphere around the activity. Students will be encouraged to find or create challenges for classmates.

The evidence she is planning to gather:

• Sample challenge problems
• I will record my observations and conscious decisions twice a month throughout the year
• Student math scores on year-end assessments
• My conclusion of insights gained from the process

I have been encouraged that the collection of evidence throughout this process creates the reflection that will promote teacher learning and growth. These experiences being shared among staff provides continuous professional learning. Too often in the past, the only evidence collected tended to be whether or not the outcome goal was achieved. That limited reflection and insights. Collecting evidence on changes the teacher implemented and how students’ learning behaviors changed promotes reflection and learning. It also sets the process for modifying the plan along the way as insights emerged.

While I have been sharing and describing the possibilities of those modifications along the way, I think a new insight is emerging for me. Iterations! Professional growth plans for individual educators as well as PLC teams should probably build in the expectation that the plan is an initial iteration. There is an expectation that learning, from success or failure experiences, leads to the next iteration that uses the initial learning to create increased success.

In the first 3 minutes of this video, Simon Sinek illustrates why innovation or progress requires failing. “If you aren’t failing, you probably not pushing very hard.” In other words, there isn’t much challenge to what you are looking to make happen.

Sinek suggests that we might replace the word failure, since some people relate it to catastrophe, with falling. When learning to ride a bike, you don’t fail but rather fall. And get back up and go again. Next iteration. In their book Empower: What Happens When Students Own Their Own Learning, Spencer and Juliani suggest replacing failure (noun) with failing (verb). Failure is permanent and failing is temporary… part of a process.

I think I am ready for the next iteration of a professional growth plan design. Up to this point, I have been sharing that as one gathers evidence while implementing the plan based on the hypothesis, there may be discoveries that lead to modification. I am now thinking that an expectation for iterations is built into the plan. As teachers shared iterations with their colleagues, they would be exchanging their insights and triggering shared learning. Teachers engaged in the process would be experiencing a learning approach that we want for students.

Working on the environment should be a continuous focus of leaders in schools and in classrooms. Simon Sinek shared this statement that reinforces our need to focus on creating an environment that supports and encourages those that we lead.

“Because we are social animals, we respond to the environment we are in. Leaders are responsible for the environment. Leaders are not responsible for the results. They are responsible to the people who are responsible for the results.”

What is the environment we want to create for our students as they return to a school building and classrooms? Teachers are not responsible for the learning that happens; students are. Teachers do need to create an environment that encourages and supports students diving into purposeful learning with high expectations and beliefs in themselves. School administrators, instructional coaches, and teacher leaders are not responsible for the teaching that occurs; the teachers are. The leaders are responsible for the environment. What actions on the part of leaders guide teachers to maintaining an ever-increasing belief in their ability to grow and impact the success of all their students?

Sinek reminds us that its consistency that builds the desired environment. Too often some major “events” are planned to message caring or appreciation but it’s the day-to-day repetition of leadership actions that embeds the desired message.

In the past year, I have had several educators join my podcast and share insights regarding the importance of creating an environment for learning and teaching and some strategies/behaviors for leaders to consistently implement. Consider listening to their podcasts to extend beyond the thoughts shared here.

Brittany Cabrera: Joyful Coaching, Bringing More Joy to Teachers and Students

“I think it really comes down to two things for coaches and leaders. Keeping things simple and connected. Those two things really go hand in hand because the more that we connect with the people that we are working with, the easier it is to keep things simple and to focus on growing that personal side and growing who we are.

When you talk to teachers, they want their leaders to know them. They want to connect just like kids want to feel that their teacher knows them. Teachers are no different because we’re all humans. It doesn’t matter if you’re short or tall, young or old, we all have the same basic needs. Teachers need their leaders to connect with them. They need to know that their leader finds them important enough to ask “How are you? How are you doing? How are you dealing with all of this? and How are you feeling?” These connecting questions are honestly quite simple, but often get overlooked. Sometimes joy and love have been given this frivolous vibe when actually they’re the most powerful things that we have. I think it’s time for leaders to realize that love and joy are actually the keys to getting us all what we want.”

Heather Lyon: Building Student Engagement 

“There are really four levels of engagement, from least engaged to most engaged: non-compliant, compliant, interested, and absorbed. In the classroom, we obviously don’t want non-compliance which is not engagement. We often accept compliance as engagement and compliance are really just doing what you’re told to do, even if you don’t really want to do it. What we should be looking for are interested students and absorbed students. We can create environments to foster interest and absorption by altering the tasks that we ask students to do and thinking about what is motivating the student extrinsically and intrinsically.
I would say that relationships matter more than anything, especially if we are talking about non-compliance, compliance, and interest levels. If I am non-compliant, I’m basically saying that I don’t care about you and I don’t care about the impact that this has on you. If we’re in compliance or interested, what we’re saying is I want to make sure that I don’t disappoint you by not doing this work.

While we do not want learning to be connected exclusively to the relationship that the learner has with the person who they’re learning from, not taking that into consideration, is a big misstep. Teachers should not be apologizing at the beginning of the year when they are taking time to establish relationships. I believe you can establish relationships through the learning process. Activities like circles, like notebooks that might be passed back and forth, build opportunities for students to create relationships with their peers and developing relationships with home and family. All those relationships have a huge impact on engagement.”

Dr. Marie-Nathalie: Partnering with Teachers: Creating the School Environment

I asked Marie-Nathalie, what do you think are the best ways for school leaders to support a staff re-engaging the in-person school community?

“Well, I’ve often said that the only power a leader really has is to create a context where people can flourish. I think that is going to be really important in the upcoming school year. Teachers work incredibly hard and most of the time they feel underappreciated by parents, students, and by the administration. Anything that a leader can do to energize teachers and to bring enthusiasm to their work and appreciation is worth it. In some ways, every meeting is an opportunity to uplift the staff. Whether it’s having teachers writing little notes in a basket to a randomly selected person or teachers sharing an effort or an experiment that they did that week and how it went. All these things that engage people into talking to one another are really important. The best leaders we know from research lead by trust and respect and by bringing the best out of their people. That’s going to be truer than ever this coming fall.

What are conversations that you want to be facilitating with staff as you plan for a new school year? What reflection might you do regarding your leadership behaviors?