Part II Conversations Designed to Build Knowledge Coherence From the Inside Out

Urban Luck Design, urbanluckdesign.com

As a way of thinking through complex ideas, we often sketch out our thoughts. When Bill first proposed this book, Diane said, “Sketch it out, so I can see all the parts.” When Bill did, Diane could immediately see what he was talking about, and a book was born. The idea of telling a leadership story focused on conversations that begin with open-ended conversations for reflection and move toward more-directed conversations seemed like an invaluable resource. Initially, we thought each conversation would stand alone; we could not have been more wrong. As we wrote, we saw relationships among all of them and came to appreciate the power of these left-arc conversations. We realized that even directive conversations require that all be active participants. Indeed, when directive conversations do not result in reflection and the desired change, they are not successful. The real difference between the left and right arcs is that on the left side of the Dashboard the professional is responsible for creating both the agenda and the criteria for success; on the right side, the external data or information drives the conversation and sets both the agenda and the criteria for success. Yet in the end, each person is responsible for making the directed changes.

Years ago, without realizing it, our thinking shifted away from needing to be the wise sages who knew it all to wanting to find ways to support others in thinking about practice. Both of us loved being principals and particularly enjoyed the intellectual partnership we formed with our staff. When we listened and paid attention, our learning accelerated. We found teachers to have a wealth of information if we only asked for their expertise.

These conversations on the left arc support our belief that setting reflective processes in action supports deeper, more contemplative thought about teaching and learning. Every one of the conversations outlined on the Professional Conversation Arc requires attention to the cycle of reflective practice. What changes as one moves across the arc is the focus, which shifts the intention and the outcome of the conversation. All too often, leaders think that the ability to reflect on practice is developmental. We do not believe this is the case, as we believe it is more often related to habits of communication learned as we grow up and grow into a profession. We have observed brand-new teachers capable of deep reflection and seasoned-veteran teachers who are quick to seek answers and initially can be resistant to slowing down to allow time to think. No matter where a conversation falls on the Dashboard, the facilitator always puts the responsibility back on the other to respond, grow, and learn from the experiences, moving the conversation back toward the left arc. It is only when someone can’t or won’t that we consider other options, which we address toward the end of the book.

Our experience has demonstrated that slowing down and taking quality time to reflect on practices actually speeds up learning later. When groups take the time to find knowledge coherence, they are able to communicate more clearly, learn from each other more quickly, and come to appreciate that internal resources and practices are equally important to outside expertise. In the end, these conversations build collective efficacy, and success becomes the synthesis in the process of co-creation.

In the end, these conversations build collective efficacy, and success becomes the synthesis in the process of co-creation.

To begin our exploration of the Nine Professional Conversations, we start with the most open-ended reflective conversations. These two conversations ask the professionals to reflect on their own practices and to draw from this learning to learn from practice and from each other. When these kinds of conversations involve a group, they open up the access to learning in ways that are profound. When professionals learn from their own and peers’ knowledge, it brings a coherence and accelerates learning. Bryk and Schnieder (2002) have found that relational trust has a significant effect on learning. They found that teacher-to-teacher collaboration was the most significant. Think about it: If teachers trust each other, they more readily share supplies and resources. Most importantly, they share ideas to help kids learn.

The framed reflections are two conversations that are more focused. The first one focuses on setting goals and evaluating the efficacy of those goals, and the second one demonstrates how paying attention to how and what people communicate can open up insights that expand interpersonal understandings. While the SCARF model has been used as a diagnostic tool, we find it more useful as a self-reflection tool.