“What Makes a Good School Culture?” by Leah Shafer, in Usable Knowledge by Harvard Graduate School of Education

“Culture is shaped by five interwoven elements, each of which principals have the power to influence:

1. Fundamental beliefs and assumptions, or the things that people at your school consider to be true. For example: ‘All students have the potential to succeed,’ or ‘Teaching is a team sport.’

2. Shared values, or the judgments people at your school make about those belief and assumptions — whether they are right or wrong, good or bad, just or unjust. For example: ‘It’s wrong that some of our kindergarteners may not receive the same opportunity to graduate from a four-year college,’ or ‘The right thing is for our teachers to be collaborating with colleagues every step of the way.’

3. Norms, or how members believe they should act and behave, or what they think is expected of them. For example: ‘We should talk often and early to parents of young students about what it will take for their children to attend college.’ ‘We all should be present and engaged at our weekly grade-level meetings.’

4. Patterns and behaviors, or the way people actually act and behave in your school. For example: There are regularly-scheduled parent engagement nights around college; there is active participation at weekly team curriculum meetings. (But in a weak culture, these patterns and behaviors can be different than the norms.)

5. Tangible evidence, or the physical, visual, auditory, or other sensory signs that demonstrate the behaviors of the people in your school. For example: Prominently displayed posters showcasing the district’s college enrollment, or a full parking lot an hour before school begins on the mornings when curriculum teams meet.”

Why does this matter to the future of learning?

Two elements are missing from this list: mission and vision.

Your mission should be the animating principle for your culture. People who aren’t motivated by your mission will only ever be compliant with your culture.

And your vision should be the North Star. People who aren’t on board for that journey are likely to engage in behaviors that take you off course.

Mission and vision should act like tuning instruments for the five items on this list.

***

“How artificial intelligence will impact K-12 teachers,” by Jake Bryant, Christine Heitz, Saurabh Sanghvi, and Dilip Wagle, in McKinsey Quarterly

“Once we understood how teachers spend their time, we evaluated automation potential across each activity, based on an evaluation of existing technology and expert interviews. We concluded that the areas with the biggest potential for automation are preparation, administration, evaluation, and feedback. Conversely, actual instruction, engagement, coaching, and advising are more immune to automation.”

Why does this matter to the future of learning?

Maybe this will come to pass, but it may be dystopian given the way the authors conceptualize teaching as a business activity to be made more efficient.

Two key questions:

1. Who benefits in this scenario? Our guess: Tech companies.

2. Who winds up with more work? Our guess: Teachers and kids.

Shouldn’t it be the other way around?

Caveat emptor.

***

“Crisis Point,” by Stephen Burd, in New America

“Our researcher found that these [public] universities have spent nearly $32 billion of their own financial aid dollars on students who lack financial need, according to an analysis New America conducted prior. About $2 out of every $5 these public universities provided went to non-needy students—those whom the federal government deems able to afford college without financial aid.”

Why does this matter to the future of learning?

We often say that higher ed presents leading indicators for K12 independent schools. In that context, consider this additional insight from the article:

“The more public universities engage in these practices, the harder it gets for others to resist for fear of putting themselves at a competitive disadvantage. As a result, schools that provide generous amounts of non-need-based aid cannot rest easy. They have to keep ratcheting up their scholarships or discounts to try to stay ahead of their competition, creating an ever-expanding arms race. Our analysis shows this ‘merit-aid’ arms race at work.”

***

Question of the week:

***

Thank you for reading this post from Basecamp's blog, Ed:Future. Do you know someone who would find the Ed:Future blog worthwhile reading? Please let them know that they can subscribe here.