If you read my first two posts, you gleaned the importance I place on critical and creative thinking for both adults and children in our classrooms. I am as dedicated to the art as well as the science of learning and teaching. Here’s why.

• Stuck in the matrix. When practitioners mindlessly implement teacher-proof curriculum year after year, they are like deer mesmerized by headlights when curricular changes occur. For example, as a new principal, I was not prepared when teachers struggled after a direct-instruction, highly scripted curriculum was no longer adopted by the district. They had become so adjusted to not having to think, and had been steeped in implementing the expected lesson at the expected time for the expected duration. The new curriculum required more thinking, planning, and design work. They were startled.
• Democratic education. Teachers who lack choice and voice in their work produce passive students who depend on teacher-led instruction. When we silence teachers and expect them to act like assembly-line robots, we create a culture of compliance and add more people who are taking the blue pill, simply existing and not actively engaged in the community. Both teacher and student agency go hand – in – hand.
• Teacher persona. The proficient teacher is a researcher, advocate, artist, creator, designer, coach, entertainer, motivator and so much more. She is a leader who is able to adapt to student needs, instructional goals and the changing demands of the profession. She is authentic and adds value to creating an environment conducive to learning. She is not an enslaved implant.
• The wisdom is in the room. Collective efficacy is highly evident in great schools. Teams have relational trust and work together to achieve the best for students. They do not rely on a single voice or the formal leaders; they feel safe and empowered enough to share their knowledge and skills.

I learned a lot when I served as a 6 – 12 lead literacy coach in an urban school district. Instructional rounds were essential to my professional growth. We visited classrooms with eyes and ears open for evidence of the transfer of learning. Our team had immersed teachers in communities of practice around key literacy research and practices. We wanted to understand how this work looked in the classroom and its impact on student learning.

Yes, our work employed a scientific approach. Over several years, we studied how to engage students in the district literacy model, which included a literate environment, metacognition, rich and rigorous conversations about texts, rigorous reading and writing tasks, the gradual release of responsibility, classroom libraries, and strategy, behavior, and skill work in whole and small groups. We were intentional about teachers and students owning specific practices at scale.

However, beholding the artistry in this work was the most rewarding part of these rounds for me. The thinking demand was high. Teachers and students collaborated to explore and create new ideas together. Thinking was generative, divergent, and interdisciplinary in nature. Curiosity, questioning, and self-directed learning were alive and well.

Imagination does not have to be suppressed in order to improve outcomes for students. Our most talented teachers won’t stay in schools where oppression rather than creativity thrives.