*******************************************************************************************************************
You
can find My Coaches Couch, the podcast (with
different content) in your favorite podcast app or at MyCoachesCouch.podbean.com.
*******************************************************************************************************************
Last
week’s post offers
a protocol for diving into assessment data and determining possible root
causes. Now, it’s time to think about making a plan to address those causes.
Assessment
data has the potential to guide purposeful instruction and intervention. But
data doesn’t make decisions. People do. As instructional coaches, we can
support the work of moving from data to decision to action.
After
teachers have spent time understanding what the data is telling them, digging
beneath the surface, and narrowing the focus, there’s an important question to
answer: What are we going to do about it?
It
can be tempting to answer that question quickly. Someone suggests a familiar
strategy, another person remembers a resource that worked last year, and before
long, the team has a plan. But just like getting to root causes, taking our
time to get to solutions pays off. Because there are no quick fixes. When we
move from data to decision, I try to slow down everyone’s thinking so we can
make a plan that matters. Here are a few ideas to help teachers generate
possibilities, consider them carefully, and choose a productive path forward.
Generate
Possibilities
The
first suggestion works best with a larger group – at least 6 people – and is a
great one for the full faculty, especially if you’ve just spent a meeting or a
PD day looking at data. When you’re ready for action, try a Snowball fight. 😊
The
snowball fight stays on-topic but lightens the mood. And it generates lots of
possible solutions. Here’s how it works:
Give
everyone a full sheet of paper and ask them to write down one possible response
to something the team has noticed in the data. What might we try? What change
in instruction, intervention, grouping, practice, or support could address the
need we’ve identified? They should write this potential answer (just one) in
large print on their sheet of paper. If they have another idea they really want
to suggest, they can grab another sheet of paper. One per page.
Once
everyone has completed this task, we go to a large open space, paper in hand,
and line up in two groups facing each other. Then I ask everyone to wad their
paper up into a ball—and we have a snowball fight! After throwing your
“snowball,” pick up one that has been lobbed your way, unwad it, read it, wad
it, and throw it again. Call a truce to the blizzard when you start getting
repeat snowballs. The snowball fight will get the thinking going, giving everyone
the chance to consider multiple possible solutions.
Have
everyone gather snowballs and bring them to the table. Teachers then call them
out and we generate a list that includes all of the ideas (there will likely be
repeats on the snowballs, shortening our list). If you want to skip the
snowball fight, you can go straight to brainstorming and get your list that
way. The next step is to see which ideas rise to the surface.
Narrow
the List
After
all the ideas are on the table, it’s time to narrow the list. Affinity mapping
and dot voting are two of my favorite ways to do that.
Affinity
Mapping
To
begin narrowing options, each participant picks their favorite ideas that have surfaced
from previous protocols and writes them down, one per post-it note. Everyone
sticks their post-its on a wall and works to group similar ideas together and
then label each group. You could talk this through or use the Affinity Mapping protocol for a silent version
of this activity (groups should be 8 or smaller). In the silent version, you
give the instructions, and then the “no talking” rule begins. Participants move
the sticky notes around, forming groups that they think go together. If someone
disagrees, they can move a note to another location. Once the notes settle,
with no more movement, the “no talking” rule is revoked. Teachers then decide
on a label for each group, write it on a sticky note, and use it as the
heading. Those headings are action ideas you take to the next step.
Dot
Voting
Another
approach if you’ve got a long list and a lot of teachers (whole faculty or a team)
is dot voting. I give everyone 3-4 small stickers (I use the
blank garage-sale price tag kind); the longer the list, the more stickers you
should give each teacher). Teachers place their dots next to the solutions they
think are most worth exploring. They can load up their favorite with all their
stickers or spread the wealth among ideas. The goal isn’t to choose a winner.
It’s to identify the ideas that deserve a closer look.
Look
Closely
Once
you have a short list, you’re getting closer to action, but you’re not there
yet! Instead of asking, “Which one are we going to do?”, create space for
teachers to consider these most-promising options. One way to do this is with a
fishbowl interview. With this protocol, you “interview” a volunteer
teacher about a potential solution while everyone else silently listens in,
taking notes about interesting ideas that are shared. Your questions can
uncover what needs to be considered before making a decision. You might ask:
* What intrigues you about this possibility?
* What might this look like in actual classroom
practice?
* What makes you think this could address the
need we identified?
* What questions or concerns do you have?
* What would teachers need in order to try this
successfully?
* What might get in the way?
* What are your hunches about this option?
If
you’re in a large group, you can follow this initial fishbowl by asking groups
of 3 to discuss the remaining possible solutions, with one interviewer, one
interviewee, and one note-taker. The note-taker from each interview trio then
shares out to the whole group.
Choose
an Action
Now
that the narrowed list of solutions has been thoroughly considered, it’s time
to make a choice about what course of action to take. Open dialogue should
precede decision-making. Be sure to talk about any necessary funding (and whether
you could get it) and the time that might be required. This part of the process
is especially important because an idea can sound wonderful in the abstract but
become more complicated when we start considering what it would actually
require:
* Does it fit the need we identified?
* Do teachers have the time and resources to
implement it?
* Is professional learning needed?
* Is there a cost involved?
More
broadly, is this something teachers can realistically translate into
instruction that benefits students?
Those
questions aren’t meant to shoot down ideas. They help the team choose with its
eyes open.
Once
you’ve reached a decision about which solution to move forward with (or if
you’re having trouble deciding between two), it could be helpful to have a
second fishbowl interview, especially one that might offer a different point of
view. The final call can be made with dot voting, gradients
of agreement, or a consensus
discussion,
Make
Commitments
Making
a decision is an important step, but it only matters if teachers consider their
own roles and commit to moving forward. Ask participants to write about the
difference they believe they can make and what they will do, individually. Then
share. Identify what happens next. What will teachers try? What support will
they need? What evidence will the team pay attention to? Before wrapping up the
meeting, set a date to reconvene and report back.
Protocols
in Action
Of
course, you won’t need to use all of these protocols with all groups, but
you’ll probably use more than one to help you get to the best options for
instruction and intervention. Pick and choose those protocols that best fit
your context. A grade-level team might need only a quick round of possibilities
and a short consensus conversation. A faculty making a larger instructional
decision may benefit from several opportunities to generate, investigate,
narrow, and discuss ideas. The purpose is to offer just enough structure to
help teachers do their best thinking. Which of these protocols could help the
group turn data into meaningful action?
Yes,
these data analysis processes take time – but you’ll be sticking with the
solution for weeks and impacting many students. Time you invest up front in
determining the best solutions reduces time wasted in
unfruitful change. Choosing the best solutions from the start is more efficient
and effective than chasing changes without results.
When
the chosen path has been conscientiously selected, everyone feels more-confident
about it. And, since teachers have invested
in the process, they’ll be more-invested in the solution.
This
week, you might want to take a look at: