Mapping Professional Practice with Justin Baeder and Heather Bell-Williams
TAP 40 Justin Baeder and Heather Bell-Williams
===
Ross Romano: [00:00:00] Welcome everybody. You are listening once again to the Authority Podcast on the B Podcast Network. I'm pleased to welcome my guest today, Heather Bell Williams and Justin Bader. Heather is an experienced teacher, school administrator and consultant. She has over 30 years of expertise to bring to her role as a coach and consultant, and she consults with Flourishing Life and the Principal Center.
Justin Bader PhD is Director of the Principal Center where he helps leaders in K-12 organizations. Build capacity for instructional leadership. He also hosts the Principal Center Radio podcast that some of you may be familiar with. And Justin and Heather are co-authors of a book we're talking about today, mapping professional practice, how to develop instructional frameworks to support teacher growth that is published by Solution Tree.
Justin and Heather, welcome to the show.
Justin Baeder: Thanks
Heather Bell-Williams: It's great to be here.
Ross Romano: So I wanted to [00:01:00] start out, uh, with a piece. Uh, of this leadership process that you talk about it, it's not necessarily the first thing in the book, but it's something that's near and dear to my heart and I thought it was a great kickoff for our conversation. And that is the importance of, uh, the leader's role in articulating a vision for exemplary practice.
Um, right. And that that process of really setting that vision. Clarifying that vision and having everybody in that school understand what they're working toward. Um, so I really wanted to start there and talk about why is that so important and what do you have in mind when you really think about what that looks like and what an effective leader would do when they're articulating that vision.
Um, we'll start with you, Heather and Justin. You can kind of chime in and, and supplement, um, uh, you know, as we, as you wish.
Heather Bell-Williams: thing. Uh, thanks for using the word process. Um, I really believe strongly that the whole vision is. Process is, is [00:02:00] that it's a process, it's a pathway, and I believe it's super important for our school leaders to get clarity, uh, around what it is that they want, uh, their vision to be. Uh, we're all familiar with the, uh, school improvement planning or the visioning sessions that tend to make.
Staff and others roll their eyes and think, oh no, we've done this before. Not this again. But that idea of really getting clearer about the what we mean when we speak to specific practices and problems of practice. So if the vision for this school. Improvement includes, uh, doing strategy, a particular practice such as guided math or some sort of instructional practice.
Uh, we need to get clear and have a shared language that we use when we, uh, when we're talking about how we're going to improve in that particular area. And so as we think about the book, the Mapping Professional practice and that idea of instructional frameworks, [00:03:00] really. It's a tool that we've developed, uh, to help leaders when they're implementing that vision, when they want to have shared language with staff, with all the stakeholders about what it's like to engage in a particular practice.
Uh, we believe that this tool will help them be able to articulate clearly a pathway for growth to improvement.
Ross Romano: Excellent. Um, Justin, did you have anything to add on this point?
Justin Baeder: Sure. Yeah. Yeah. One of the things I think every school leader has experienced is just the, the range of different interpretations and different meanings that we can attach to a word. So even if we're crystal clear about what the vision is or what a particular focus is, you know, simply naming it is probably not enough detail.
And we can end up, if we're not careful with what we call Arlo alignment at a rhetorical level only where we're saying the same word. But we [00:04:00] mean very different things and our practice is very different. If, you know, if you look at what people are actually doing and how they're approaching their work, it often is not as aligned as our language would indicate.
So the instructional framework development process that we talk about in the book really is all about getting into the practice itself and figuring out what it looks like from the inside so that when we are talking about the same thing, you know, we're actually on the same page. We're actually. Talking about the same practice and not just something that has the same word attached to it.
Ross Romano: Right. You write about that insider's view, right? And, um, you know, and, and, and relating to this piece of articulating the vision, to me that's so much about, uh, Bringing everybody into that insider's field, right? It, it's that thing where it's not necessarily the first thing that's done because there may be work ahead of time in, um, kind of defining some of the goals and building the frameworks and working toward it.
And then you get to the point of articulating that [00:05:00] vision to the entire faculty and staff so they can kind of understand what's happening and start to get involved. But it's so all you know, everything that happens before it. If you don't, if you don't do that step, everything that happens before, it doesn't really matter.
Cuz everything that happens after is not going to work, right? Because you're going to have lack of buy-in, lack of understanding, confusion. Um, everybody's going to fill in their own narrative around why are we doing this? This must be why, or these must be the objectives, or this is what they're trying to do, right?
Because, uh, there's just that failure to say. Here's why we did it. Here's what we're trying to do, here's how you can get involved and here's how we work together. Um, so going through that process, you know, putting into action, the instructional frameworks can help teachers with a number of things. And some of the ones that are listed are locating their current level of fluency, focusing on the key dimensions of professional judgment, and then ultimately take their practice to the next level.
[00:06:00] let's kind of take that piece by piece and start with. What are instructional frameworks and how do they compare to other things that leaders are familiar with, observation, checklists, or other types of, uh, things that they might be looking for checking in on. Um, so Justin, when you define this, how does it kind of differentiate it from some other similar concepts?
Justin Baeder: Yeah, I, I think with any kind of shared expectation, there's always kind of a, kind of a boundaries question. You know, like, how much are we tackling when we're describing this process and how specific, uh, should we be? And typically, you know, we'll, we'll start with a word and then we'll get into what we mean by that word and, and kind of break that down.
Uh, for example, if you were to make an instructional framework for. Rigor. Well, rigor is a pretty, you know, pretty broad topic, and you could break that into things like the, uh, you know, the grade level expectations, the alignment to standards, the difficulty of the work, the scaffolding and support for the work.
So, so one of the first decisions [00:07:00] to make is just, which piece of that do we want to tackle and, and get specific about. So we have a, a chapter in the book on how to do that. It's a, you know, a bit of an art to decide how much to focus on. And then within what we decide to focus on, we wanna be as specific as possible so that uh, everybody really is on the same page.
And as you said, we're capturing the key dimensions of professional judgment and those are what we call the key components. And then for each of those key components, I. We articulate a level of fluency, which makes instructional frameworks end up looking quite a lot like a teacher evaluation rubric, although we have kind of a different set of, of priorities for them, they end up looking, uh, pretty much like a, a traditional rubric.
But one of the, the key differences is in how those key components are selected and kind of bounded.
Ross Romano: Excellent. And so, um, and you know, Justin mentioned flu. And we talked about locating, uh, teacher's current levels of fluency and, and Heather, so that's a specific term that you [00:08:00] use, right? Fluency as compared to performance or other terms that could be slotted in there. Um, why did you make that distinction and choose to go with the term fluency?
Heather Bell-Williams: We chatted a lot about the terms that we would, uh, name each, each level. I mean, even level was was in there a bit. Um, we, we looked at some of the other, um, Rubric, kind of traditional rubrics that have been out there. Uh, we made the decision to go with a a four stage, uh, level, but then when it came or framework, but then when it came to naming them, we did want to make sure that we, uh, chose, um, words that represented a pathway.
Uh, I mentioned earlier that idea of growth. Um, we felt like if we started with. Uh, basic, or we started with unsatisfactory. Um, it went to that evaluation place that Justin mentioned earlier. And, and while we [00:09:00] could use frameworks for evaluation, it's not really, uh, Like he said, what we had in mind when we were developing this tool, and so we felt that that word fluency, levels of fluency really gave a sense of the fluid nature of our work and how in different contexts and across different areas, teachers levels of fluency.
Could, could differ, uh, for one particular teacher. They could be fluent in an aspect of a practice, but they might only be developing, uh, in another aspect of a practice. And so, uh, We liked, um, the, the general nature of fluency and that idea of a growth pathway. You also mentioned the idea of how do these as a tool differ, uh, from some of the other, uh, tools that we might have out there.
And I think one of the key differences is that idea of. Of things that aren't necessarily observable right off the bat. Uh, were really great in [00:10:00] education at coming up with, uh, look for documents, or at least in the jurisdictions where I've been, lots of look for documents, uh, which make classroom observations and classroom visits.
Easy in the sense that you can go with your look for document and you can check things off a list. It's either there or it's not. And, and we saw that as not a particularly useful tool. Again, when it goes back to teacher growth, um, if something's there, okay, it's there, but there's not really any indicator of how that teacher could grow even more.
Uh, similarly, if it's not there, uh, what are some. Thoughts and ideas and decisions that that teacher has to make in order to, um, help that aspect of practice be present. So we see it as more of, um, again, a fluid aspect where you're looking at the decisions and the professional judgements that teachers are making, which is really, we use the analogy someplace in the book around, um, an iceberg and it's really what's beneath the [00:11:00] surface of the iceberg.
We wanna step away from those. Observables, what's it look like? What's it sound like, which is above the surface of the water, um, and head below the surface for the decisions and the professional judgements.
Ross Romano: Yeah. And it sounds as though, I mean, there's an element of identifying, right? The um, The core competencies or the, you know, when there's times when the end result, the performance, the above the surface isn't exactly where you would like it to be. That it's those root causes. Okay, well what are, you know, what's the, the underlying skill level?
The, the, you know, when we talk about with students what they know and can do, same thing with teachers, right? And that sometimes those two things aren't exactly matching up. Um, A lot of times the, you know, the fluency would kind of indicate both ends of that, but not always in saying, okay, well I know that this teacher really understands X, Y, and Z, but there's [00:12:00] something in the result that isn't showing.
Sometimes it's because the, the performance is not. Uh, is not an individual isolated thing, right? We're talking about how students are doing and how things are happening in the school. So there's a lot of other components and factors that are ultimately part of what we define as educator performance that aren't in that person's soul control.
Um, so I think that could make a lot of sense, right. When you're saying, all right, well we need to kind of really understand each individual and where they are in the process and their overall fluency and, and. If we kind of can focus on that, that's what we can grow and influence. And then it will have a positive effect on the rest of it.
But there's a lot of noise also if we're, you know, trying to chase around everything else that's happening. Um, and then that does lead back to this professional judgment piece, right? Which I think is another really interesting thing to investigate. [00:13:00] And the decision making process and the, you know, the things that don't. Aren't always, um, assumed. Or thought about in terms of how they can be learned. It's like, well, it's intuition. It's just some people have and some people don't. It's, uh, you know, you, you talk about, um, common sense in the book, right? And, and the fact of trying to kind of operationalize common sense and well actually, okay, well maybe that's not as crazy as it sounds.
Right? So what are some of these key dimensions of. Professional judgment when you talk about it here, Justin, and that you're focusing in on and saying, all right, these, these really are things that we want every educator to be able to learn.
Justin Baeder: Yeah. Well, I think it's a, it's a perspective shift from the standpoint of the observer who's concerned with, you know, as we've been talking about, what can I see, what can I document, what's visible to me to that insider's perspective that you mentioned of the, the person [00:14:00] who's doing the teaching and as a teacher or as any kind of professional who's enacting a practice.
You're doing a lot of cognitive work that's not directly visible and there are some dimensions to that cognitive work that allow you to make certain sets of decisions to focus on certain sets of, of issues and, you know, guide your actions. You know, some of which may be visible. But, you know, a lot of this is, is just, you know, pure thinking and decision making.
Um, so we wanted to, to have a way to talk about the dimensions of that thinking and judgment, even if they're not directly observable. So one, one way to think about this is trade-offs. So, uh, you know, a classic trade-off type of decision that a teacher has to make while teaching a lesson is, is about pacing.
Do I spend more time on this? Do I give students more time to practice? Do I move, move along? Cuz we have lots to get to. You know, we're teachers are constantly making decisions about pacing. And we want people to have good judgment about pacing. So if we were to make [00:15:00] a framework about pacing, uh, it would have some dimensions about, you know, mastery and, you know, whether students needed additional help.
You know, we could break that down into some, some different things, but they would be very hard to directly observe. And what we wanna end up with is a list that accurately represents. The different factors that the teacher is weighing as they make those decisions. Uh, and you can, you know, you can run this by people and say, okay, are, are these the things you're thinking about?
Do any of these feel thrown in? Like they don't really belong? Did we miss anything? And typically we wanna end up with three to five of those key components, those dimensions of professional judgment.
Ross Romano: And, and of course related, um, Two professional judgment and the factors on which we'd be kind of making those judgments, right, is the, is the shared expectations piece and, um, you know, establishing shared expectations for practice and what that should look like, uh, and what each [00:16:00] party is kind of bringing to that process.
And, and why, so why, kind of backing up from there is it so important, um, to establish those shared expectations And what's difficult about doing so, Heather?
Heather Bell-Williams: Well, when you think about the reason why it's important to establish those shared expectations, I think we can probably, as school leaders think of times, uh, in our leadership when we thought everybody was on the same page when, and then there's usually a moment in time when you realize, oh my gosh. What I think about this particular practice is not what the rest of the team thinks, or perhaps an individual, but probably your school team.
Um, I can think of a time when we were, um, working to implement a particular curriculum, a social emotional program, social emotional learning program, and we had it in our school improvement plan to [00:17:00] implement this program and. Really in a staff meeting. There was one particular staff meeting when we started to talk about it, and I, I just had this moment in time where I thought, oh my goodness, no one here is talking about the same thing.
And myself included, my ideas weren't the same as the next persons or as the next persons. And so, uh, and that, in fact, that was one of the first instructional frameworks, um, that I developed as a school leader. So, really important to get everybody on the same page. Um, It's, it's kids, uh, it's the, it's the achievement of students that's at risk, right?
When we can't, when we don't agree. It's not that we can't agree, but that, uh, when we don't agree on what we're what. What rigor is, or what guided math is like, or whatever it is, if we can't agree on that and have shared language of expectation for performance of staff, uh, we're, we're putting students achievement in jeopardy for [00:18:00] sure.
Uh, so then in terms of the levels of fluency, That's where we articulate those shared expectations. Um, we, we mentioned earlier that it looks that an instructional framework looks a lot like a rubric, and so down the left hand side you typically find your key components. Those ideas that we talked about a little bit earlier, those key dimensions where teachers are making professional judgements.
And then across, uh, to the, from left to right, each of the key components would be divided into those levels of fluency where we would articulate. What it's like to be beginning a particular practice. It was pretty easy cuz if you're just beginning, um, not a lot of content there in that, that section of the rubric.
Then as you move along to the next level of fluency developing, Uh, that might be, uh, where you're, you've worked with a particular practice for a period of time, but you're not yet sort of juggling all of those pieces smoothly. There isn't fluency. And then, uh, the [00:19:00] third is that level that we named fluent, where teachers are able to keep all of those, we use that juggling analogy again, keep all the balls in the air for particular practice.
Um, And then the fourth is exemplary. And as we, as we talk through that fourth level, we have to be clear that that's a choice that an individual teacher makes. Uh, the teacher has autonomy to decide if, if the, if the standard is fluent, uh, the teacher can, can choose to stop there and does not need to move to the next level of fluency, which is exemplary.
Ross Romano: And you know, within that emphasis on. Creating, establishing shared expectations. There's also the opportunity of course, within that, for the teacher to have expectations of leadership and of the school that then can then be met. Right, right. About the clear [00:20:00] growth pathways. Yes, of course. An important part of that is, uh, for the principal or other school leadership to.
Clarify what those pathways are so that the teachers see where they're going and they have more success in getting there. But also for the teachers to see, okay, there is a pathway laid out here. For my growth, there is emphasis and intention being put around my growth, right? So they're, I'm in an environment where this is, this matters where somebody who's thinking about this and caring about this and putting together a structure for this, um, and.
You know, of course that's going to come up quite a bit in the education world when we think about, um, you know, how many teachers don't feel like there's a plan in place for them and, and end up choosing to leave the profession or at least leaving their school to go somewhere else. But realistically, I.
This is just a problem with the way, you know, leadership and management works in the modern workforce. It's not exclusive to schools, but you know, it's [00:21:00] critical given the, the current realities. Um, but how about that piece, Justin, or, you know, what kind of effect and influence do you believe it has on the teachers?
When they can see the intentionality, uh, being put into designing those pathways that are personalized at their current level of fluency and where they're headed, um, not only, you know, so that they can attain it, but so that they maintain the belief in it.
Justin Baeder: Yeah, well, I, I think, , A huge amount of the respect that teachers feel for their, their work as professionals comes from the sense of understanding that they get from administrators. You know, if, if they feel understood that their work is respected, that their work is important, intellectual work, uh, you know, I think that goes a long way in making people feel appreciated, making people feel like they're in an environment where they get the support they need.
And I see our work as. An attempt to counteract some of the [00:22:00] reductiveness that often accompanies expectations that, you know, we, we have this tendency and we, in the book, we call it observability bias, we have this tendency to care the most about the things. That are easiest for us to see and check off as, as Heather mentioned, we, we love any kind of, uh, form that allows us to check things off cuz it's, it's just, you know, yes I see it, we can document it.
And those things tend to be extra work for teachers. They tend to be annoying, kind of micromanaging feeling requirements that the teachers really would rather not spend time on and they would rather have their thinking valued, you know, their judgment as professionals valued. So what we wanna do in our instructional frameworks is, is really tap into that and understand, you know, what are you actually thinking about when you're making, say, a pacing decision or a decision about how to plan a le a lesson that's at the right level of rigor.
What are you thinking about? And, and we can't really develop these frameworks without talking with people about their practice, and especially without talking with people who are fluent in the practice to understand, you know, what are [00:23:00] the actual dimensions of that practice, not what does it look like to me as a casual observer.
Ross Romano: And you do propose, um, you do propose that it's not a. Purely collaborative process, or at least it's not, you know, strictly collaborative from step one all the way through. Although there is a point at which there is importance to getting input and feedback from the teachers. Can you kind of talk about that evolution as the steps of the process and what are some of the initial steps before the teacher might be involved in it?
And then what it looks like as it moves into getting their input, feedback, um, you know, buy-in, co-creation and so on. Uh, Heather,
Heather Bell-Williams: Sure. Uh, we do hear a lot about co-constructing criteria, things along those lines about our work with students. And so it's important to sort of understand this process, uh, because it does include, uh, Some collaboration, as you said. However, at the very, very beginning, it's the school [00:24:00] leader who is in the unique position to be able to know.
What problem of practice or what kinds of practices we need to, uh, get shared expectations for. And so really a lot of this came from Justin's first book. Now we're talking, uh, where he talks about that idea of getting into classrooms every day, making sure that you're, we call them walkthroughs, but doing short classroom observations, classroom visits, um, You are in the, when you're doing that as a school leader, you are in the unique position to have that bird's eye view.
We talk about, uh, being able to know that the teachers in grade 11 and 12, um, English language arts, are having the same kind of struggles with perhaps rigor or high expectations for student learning as the grade nine teachers are having. And so you would be the only person or you and your admin team who would have that bird's eye view [00:25:00] and who would be able to see.
Alright. So at the very outset of the process, uh, I can see here that we, uh, need to focus on this particular aspect of our work. And then as you start to unpack that, you go to your teachers or the teacher team or, or your school staff depending on what, uh, What your focus is for your instructional framework, and as Justin mentioned earlier, start to say, you know, I'm thinking around key dimensions of this practice.
I'm thinking this, this, and this. Am I on the right path? Is there something here that doesn't make sense? Is there something that you think about when you are teaching high school English in grade 11? That isn't here listed as a key dimension. Uh, and so once you start to get to those, um, starting to articulate the key dimensions, the key components we call them in the book, you're starting to ask, um, for some advice.
You're starting to make drafts and go to teachers and come back, um, and probably want to have conversations with some [00:26:00] teachers that you perceive are fairly fluent in their practice so that you're getting. A good solid sense of the key components that fluent teachers use when they're enacting the practice.
Uh, and then as you work through the levels of fluency, articulating those in shared language, it would be a back and forth kind of process there where you could start to articulate levels of fluency, uh, be through your classroom walkthroughs, through your visits, and then start to, uh, share those with staff as you move forward.
Ross Romano: So, yeah, Heather and Heather mentioned, um, Right. That piece about getting into the classrooms frequently and the necessary benefits that provides around getting that into his view of what's going on, getting better insights into the realities. And also, you know, I would, uh, think a big part of that is trust building, at least as far as saying one, it just offers more informal and and frequent [00:27:00] touchpoints to just kind of have conversations that aren't.
Evaluative. Um, but it shows the teachers that you're taking the time to understand what's going on and that when you move into larger initiatives or you know, bigger goals and objectives, that as a leader you're doing the best that you can to kind of articulate and define and describe the process. Um, but ultimately, like that only is as good as. How they consider the source, right? And saying, okay, there's still certain parts of this that I don't totally get, but I know that my principal's been in here. I know they've been kind of doing their homework, so I k I'm going to trust that the pieces will come together as we go. Um, you know, is that part of that, Justin, what, what are some of the other things that stand out to why you, you really advocate for getting into classrooms frequently?
Making [00:28:00] that a priority?
Justin Baeder: Yeah, I think classrooms are a really rich source of evidence for leaders to, to use, to make decisions. And of course, you know, a relationship is built by our presidents and classrooms. But you know, when it comes to figuring out how to help people improve, you know, one of the things. That we see very readily when we get into classrooms is just the contrast in practice between people who are doing well in a particular area and people who are struggling.
And without being in the classroom and talking with people about their practice and getting into some of those details, it can be difficult. To help people grow. It can be difficult to kind of convey what people who are struggling should do differently. And sometimes we, we send people to observe one another, but they're not always sure what to look for or what to pay attention to.
Again, because a lot of fluent practice is invisible. It's it's thinking and judgment. So, you know, peer observations suffer from the same problem that we tend to have in our observations is that we can't see a lot of what matters. [00:29:00] So instructional frameworks can really help people pay attention to things that are happening, but happening kind of invisibly.
Uh, and, and notice. You know, if I'm going to make better decisions in my own classroom, what do I see this person attending to? What do I see them valuing and, and balancing and juggling as they enact this practice? And then that can, uh, you know, can lend itself to greater transference of, uh, you know, those, those takeaways that we hope come from, say, a peer observation.
Ross Romano: Do you each have specific, um, scenarios, examples that come to mind in which you've developed instructional frameworks and the ways in which those, you know, improved practices in those scenarios?
Heather Bell-Williams: Sure. I, I can start. Um, I've been working a lot in the last few months with new. Teachers, and this is an invaluable tool I believed for, for use with new teachers. And, and I, I [00:30:00] hesitate to say struggling teachers, a lot of new teachers are struggling, but through no fault of their own, um, they, they just lack the experience and the, and the shared language of what's important and what we're expecting.
And so working with new teachers, um, I can think of a specific situation where, uh, a school principal asked me to, uh, come and work with an individual teacher. And I spent some time in that teacher's classroom and I was able to get a fairly decent sense of what wasn't working. Uh, but it's when I went next door and looked at the same grade level classroom, different teacher, and I went, ah, There's the fluency, there's the pieces that that teacher is doing.
Um, again, I needed to look at the fluent teacher to remind myself of what that teacher was doing and the key components, the key dimensions, that, that weren't something that was [00:31:00] immediately observable. The, the outcome. Of that was observable in that, um, the particular area of struggle was much, much, uh, more fluent in the second teacher's classroom.
And so then able to go back and articulate and use that framework thinking with, with brand new teachers or teachers who are struggling, even always say, here, here's an instructional framework for you. Um, it might make them. Struggle even more or be frustrating cuz they are not sure what that process is all about.
But I always advocate for using that framework thinking, uh, when you're working with teachers and you're able to then go back after you've seen the fluent practice and go back and start to talk through some of those key dimensions and help that teacher become aware of the kinds of things that, uh, they need to be aware of.
Ross Romano: Justin, is there a a scenario or a past example that comes to mind for you where you developed an instructional [00:32:00] framework and how that helped to improve practice?
Justin Baeder: Sure. We talked about that ultimately. Led to the ground, helping some staff members who seem to vary in what we would probably call common sense that some people seem to be exercising great judgment and we wish we could clone them and yet some other people were making questionable decisions and you know, be, you know, being given kind of the same instructions, the same situation, and just getting very different results from their decisions.
And. You know, Heather and I talked about how nice it would be to be able to operationalize what we thought of as common sense, and we started to, to really think about what does good judgment in this particular scenario. Uh, this was about, uh, working with students who had behavior plans. Uh, you know, what does good judgment look like?
When you're deciding how to respond to a, a situation with a student who has a behavior plan, and as we started to get [00:33:00] more specific about that, we started to realize, okay, this is probably teachable. We, we can get clear enough in our own minds about what good judgment looks like and what some non-examples of good judgment looks like, uh, look like.
And then we can break that into components. And that was, that was how we originally came up. With this, uh, this whole process and the idea for instructional frameworks, uh, but we realized from the very start that it is about judgment. It is not about, you know, evaluation or, or what it looks like to someone else, but it is really about the thinking that the individual does to enact the practice.
Ross Romano: Justin, are there also situations in which. Which of the coach or a leader may not want to go through the entire process of developing a framework, but maybe just use pieces of it, um, to solve a particular problem. What, what if, so, you know, what would that look like? And, um, you know, are there situations in which you'd actually even advise going in that direction?
Justin Baeder: Yeah, well certainly the, the [00:34:00] process of developing a kind of publishable framework that you would be proud to show to your whole staff. You know, it, it, it is some work. It does take some revision. Takes input and conversations with a lot of people. But as Heather shared, if you're just working with one person who, who needs some guidance for what to do tomorrow, you know, a whole framework could be overwhelming.
It could be too slow to develop, so it can can be helpful to just think in terms of a developmental pathway. Um, to get somebody from not really using a practice to using it successfully. Sometimes we don't need to focus on every single key component. We can. We can identify just a couple of things that the person could, uh, could pay attention to, and, and we always struggle with this.
In education because everything is connected to everything else. You know, there's no natural limit on, you know, getting better, you know, getting better at planning and classroom management and, uh, pacing, you know, like everything is connected to, to everything else. So sometimes I think we just have to take one piece and say, here is what I want you to work on, you [00:35:00] know, with someone especially who would be easily overwhelmed because they're struggling.
Ross Romano: Yeah. Excellent. So I, I wanna transition into a little bit of a rapid round here where I have, uh, a few different questions and I'll ask each of you for your, your insights. And, um, one I wanted to start out with is an example that comes to mind, um, for each of you of a school or a district that. Used instructional frameworks for a major improvement initiative.
And of course we can't talk through the whole initiative, but if you want to talk about, you know, where did this happen, what did they do and what were some of the, the key outcomes? Heather, I'll start with you on that.
Heather Bell-Williams: Sure. Uh, a school in my home district where I worked, uh, implemented was looking to improve, uh, math outcomes and improve. By differentiating, they had a variety of levels in the classroom and they knew that they had to differentiate. So they, uh, chose to go with an instructional framework on guided math as a particular, uh, practice [00:36:00] that they believe, they submit a hypothesis if we implement instructure, our classes in this way.
We'll get increased math scores. And they did. That's the short answer. They, uh, implemented a guided math, uh, instructional framework with several key components around, uh, small groups, large groups, materials, things like that. Assessment, and saw inclusions in math scores.
Ross Romano: Justin.
Justin Baeder: I'll share a little bit of a, of a story from a high school principal that we worked with, uh, during the time we were writing the book, uh, who had. Had discovered that the work that students were being asked to do fell far below grade level. And she was obviously worried about this because, you know, how can we help students catch up if they're perpetually doing work that is, you know, multiple years below grade level?
And in that case, the, I, I think probably the be biggest outcome of that process was finding the underlying issue, finding the reason that teachers were assigning below grade level work. So it [00:37:00] wasn't that they. Didn't know how to assign grade level work. There was a reason that had a different kind of, uh, kind of, uh, gap or opportunity to it.
And in that case, the reason was that teachers were not sure how to scaffold students whose reading levels were below grade level and still give them grade level work so that that resulted, uh, you know, in, in just kind of solving the right problem. You know, if, if we do this process well, we'll, not only.
Establish better shared expectations, but we'll make sure that we're solving the right kind of underlying problems and not just, just surface problems. And that, that comes off often with, um, you know, kind of the presenting problem, not really being the underlying problem.
Ross Romano: Absolutely. So, uh, if there's, you know, a school that, that attempts to follow this process and sort of, uh, increasing their, you know, taking their teachers practice to the next level and it, the outcomes don't really follow, um, what's a reason why that may have [00:38:00] happened? Let's, is there a common cause why, uh, things might go wrong?
Heather Bell-Williams: I think that, uh, one of the. Or two of the reasons would be, uh, the scope, uh, is too big or too small. We use the analogy of Goldilocks chair, you know, uh, not too big, not too small, but just right. And that takes practice. And so, um, I might not expect right off the top that every school would be able to kind of hit that sweet spot, uh, right in the middle.
Um, so they may have taken their, if their framework's not working to get the outcomes they want, uh, I might suggest that we'd look at how they founded it. Have they made it too small or have they made it too?
Justin Baeder: Yeah,
Ross Romano: Do you have, do you each have one tip, uh, for overcoming resistance to change? Justin, we'll start with you on that one.
Justin Baeder: sure. I, I think. Often there's a good [00:39:00] reason for resistance to change and probably the most common reason that people resist change is they don't wanna stop doing something that's working for them and they're not confident that what they're being asked to switch to will work better. So I think using the instruc, at least the, the thinking process behind instructional frameworks can really help leaders understand why people wanna hold on to what.
They're holding onto and why they might be hesitant to embrace something else. You know, because if we really unpack it and understand it, then we're prob we probably have more in common than we think.
Ross Romano: Hmm. Heather, do you have a tip for that?
Heather Bell-Williams: I love the idea of, um, effort Rogers Ians of innovations, uh, the bell curve, that that talks about our readiness for change and that that's a f that's an innate trait that a lot of us bring to our work. And so I think when we apply that to instructional frameworks, it gives me a good insight into, if possible, uh, maybe not everybody.
Has to make this change all at once. And I can use what I know about [00:40:00] diffusions of innovations and people's readiness for, for change and decide who is going to go first. And I might be looking for my early adopters, uh, to, to take a leap and to go first and to pilot something. Uh, I feel like it's always a good idea to, to talk about pilot things and to then, uh, think about, uh, readiness for change around individuals.
Willingness to and ability to, to take on that pilot, cuz we know that once there's been some success and some questions have been answered by someone ahead of you on that diffusion of innovations, bell curve, uh, you'll be more able to, uh, take that risk and jump in yourself.
Ross Romano: Um, do you each have a recommendation for another book that, uh, either you think is a useful one to supplement, uh, your book and, and help leaders with some additional, you know, skills and mindsets? Or it could be on a completely different topic, um, but just something that you find valuable? Uh, [00:41:00] Heather.
Heather Bell-Williams: Um, right now I've been, this is on a completely different topic, but I've been reading a lot about the Enneagram.
Ross Romano: Hmm.
Heather Bell-Williams: that idea of there being nine types. Uh, and it's, it's, it's personality types if you want to talk about it that way. But, uh, it's a, it's a more in-depth version, uh, than I've taken part in before.
And so I've been doing a lot of reading about those nine types and how they show up as leaders. Uh, and what it's like, so what's the insider's view of, of leadership from those different types? And so I'm really appreciating that and understanding more about myself helps me, uh, become a better leader and, uh, and, and a better follower with someone else's leading.
Ross Romano: Justin.
Justin Baeder: One book that I can't stop talking about from the past several years is Natalie Wexler's book, the Knowledge Gap and, uh, just new research evidence continues to come out validating the importance of building students' background knowledge and [00:42:00] undermining a lot of our long-held beliefs about what a skill is.
Uh, so I definitely recommend checking that one out.
Ross Romano: Perfect. So as we're, uh, wrapping up our conversation, I wanted to circle back and just kind of go back to that all important. An idea of establishing shared expectations and think about what opportunities there are for leaders to reflect on, uh, their relative success with that expectation setting, right.
As they've gone, okay, I've gone through the process. I've, I believe that I've established shared expectations. I believe we all are on the same page here. Right? And now I'm a little bit further along and I want to. Think about it, ask myself some questions, reflect on was that successful? Do I need to go back and reinforce some of that?
Do we need to reset some of those expectations? Right. Um, because I think there's those guideposts that, that a leader may be able to do before, [00:43:00] before there's a failure. Uh, but something to say, all right, you know what, maybe I need to. To find a new way to articulate that. Or maybe, you know what, maybe the expectation that I had wasn't really super realistic and, um, everybody sort of went along with it, but perhaps we need to try to do it a different way.
But I wanted to ask you both about that, about your thoughts on, you know, If there is potential for that, and if so, what would, what would some of those questions be? Or what, you know, what might be some of the things to investigate, um, you know, from the school leader's perspective to say, okay, do I feel as though our shared expectations right now are clear, they're working, they're in alignment, or should we revise?
Uh, Justin, I'll, I'll start with you on this one.
Justin Baeder: Okay, thanks.
So I think one question to ask is, do I understand why we're getting the results that we're currently [00:44:00] getting? Because often we realize we have a problem when we have turnover and somebody new comes in and we thought we understood what was allowing the previous person and everybody else to meet that shared expectation.
And then when somebody new comes in and we find that we're not really able to articulate what it is that they're not doing that they need to be doing or, or what they need to be doing differently. You know, often we take for granted people's fluent practice and we're caught a little bit off guard by someone new coming in who, who is not fluent in that same way, you know?
And, and sometimes that's because the previous team had years and years of working together to get on the same page. Um, so I think just, just being mindful of how we're helping new people get up to speed with those shared expectations and, and really get their feet under them as they, uh, they come into a role.
I think that's gonna be relevant to just about every school that, uh, that's hiring anybody new.
Ross Romano: Yeah, Heather.
Heather Bell-Williams: A couple of things. If, if [00:45:00] you're, if you're reflecting and you're not sure that, that you've, um, that you've really nailed it, uh, in a great way, I might, um, we talk a little bit about, in the book about looking upstream and, and sometimes as leaders, well, All of the time because it's, it's the stuff that's urgent that's, that's right there in our faces every day when we arrive at work and in the evenings when our text is blowing up for a particular reason, we, we are looking at the downstream issues.
We are looking at what's actually happening right now. And, and sometimes, uh, we might not have had opportunity to go far enough upstream, and this is when we start to. Ask a lot of layers of why, why was this happening? Why was the problem, whatever it was that, that I started with, uh, that led me to the focus for the instructional framework.
Why is it going on? Why is this happening? And asking why at least four or five times and really trying to, [00:46:00] to visualize upstream what is causing this, what is, we call it the root cause analysis, but really getting to the base of it. Um, I take a look there. Another place that I'd look if I was struggling to know if this was really making the kind of impact that I had hoped it would make.
Would be level four. Uh, we just alluded to level four, that exemplary level, and that's the best that the profession has to offer. So somewhere out there, there is a level four for these practices. Uh, there've been lots of, you know, there's lots of research, there's lots of things that we could dive into.
And if we know what the best is that the profession has to offer, then we can start to look at what is fluent. And what is developing and what is just beginning. Uh, so if you're not sure that you're making that impact, take a look and, uh, and avail yourself of what, what the best is that we have to offer as a profession, not just in your district or in your school.
Not your local best, but [00:47:00] the best. And go from there.
Ross Romano: Great, thank you. The listeners, uh, you can find a link below for where you can purchase mapping professional practice, learn a lot more about the book. You can also read Heather's and Justin's full bios below, find their social media handles and a lot more information on each of them. Um, Heather and Justin, is there anything else you'd like our listeners to check out?
Any other websites or projects or anything that they might like to see?
Heather Bell-Williams: We're always open to, uh, to chatting with folks and, uh, love to hear about people's successes and, and some barriers if they're working through that process of instructional pro uh, instructional frameworks. So, um, make sure you reach out to us, uh, through our emails, uh, so that we can, we can, we love to chat with you about it.
Ross Romano: Excellent. So, uh, yeah, thank you both for being here. Thank you. To our listeners. Again, check out the link below for mapping professional practice. Please do also, Subscribe to the [00:48:00] Authority for more in-depth author interviews like this one and visit be podcast.network talking about all of our shows.
Heather and Justin, thanks so much for being on the authority.
Heather Bell-Williams: Thanks so much for having us. Take care.
Creators and Guests
