Today’s book review is on Aligning School Districts as PLCs by Mark Van Clay, Perry Soldwedel, and Thomas W. Many.
Following in the wake of my reading about PLCs and particular situations for PLCs as I prepared my ISTE presentation, Aligning School Districts offers thoughts and dangers for district or system leaders looking to build a collaborative culture rooted in data. The book fails to be as useful as Learning by Doing but can offer leadership important considerations across implementation levels.
The book is set into three sections. The first provides a case for districtwide alignment and the essential components. These essential components are anchored in strategic (top-level), tactical (building-level), and operational (teacher/staff-level) roles. These provide the lens through which the three key attributes of PLCs are then deployed and discussed in Chapters 3-5. The final chapter offers tools for assessing implementation. These rubrics might prove the most helpful and long-lasting aspect from the book.
The authors outline their purpose as “to provide leaders at all levels of a district with an instrument that is both theoretically sound and practically useful” (2). I found the book leaned towards the former, rather than the latter and could have used better examples – across district sizes and mentalities when outlining its theory. This alignment centers “intentional linkage” of the works of schools to the work of “collaborative teams” (6) and can be stymied by the different perspectives, levels of vision, and responsibilities that a district encompasses. The book struggles to present clear advice on overcoming these (a change management approach might have benefitted the construction) leaning into the ideas of better communication and unity around purpose and action. The reiteration of the 3 big ideas likewise seems to minimize the differences of what a larger organization can do for and with learning and collaboration.
Chapter two moves into the roles within a district and the bridges that unite those roles. Superintendents are the bridge between strategic (boards) and tactical (principals), while principals bridge the gap between the tactical (district office) and operational (teachers)(13). “These bridge positions can be excellent sounding boards” (ibid) is key advice when moving through any changes, whether it be curricular or PLCs. The rest of the chapter outlines the aspects of gathering a vision, rationale, and communication plan to build towards PLC integration.
The next three chapters follow a pattern outlining what each role does w/r/t that big idea, related non-negotiables, alignment considerations, and a case study. The case study tends to do both too much and too little – providing one example super in-depth rather than ensuring relevance to multiple situations. The breakdown grids ensure that the various aspects of each idea are clearly delineated – providing a high overview road map for leadership teams, a more helpful guide than a “case study.”
Chapter 3’s highlights emphasize the role of leadership around curricula support, professional development and the arrangement/accessibility of data for teachers. The authors make a valuable point noting that “when teacher teams are forced to load data into a spreadsheet for later analysis, the time lost wastes their expertise and slows the team’s planning process” (37). This data should come from summative assessments but also formative assessments – which “drive instruction” (38). When it comes to adjusting instruction based on this data, I appreciated the suggestion of the 9:1 model – nine days of instruction with day nine’s FA shaping day ten’s interventions and future regrouping.
Chapter 4 and 5 had fewer highlights. Four’s list of mistakes leaders make highlights the book’s leaning into collaboration and communication. The time of collaboration should allow a team “to collectively address the non-negotiables for a focus on learning” (61). These sessions are governed by both norms (“general guidelines that address the expected behavior of teams”) and protocols (“specific guidelines that ensure that the daily conversations among teachers are productive”(70). One example of these conversations is a lesson study – where teachers collaboratively plan and debrief a lesson centered on long-term goals. This spiraling practice of plan, teach, debrief, adjust, and reteach leads to growth across the PLC. The data aspect should ensure we are not just measuring but improving – “just as being weighed more often and more accurately does not help a person lose weight” (91).
All-in-all I found the broadness of the book less helpful than the specific resources it provided.
Aligning School Districts as PLCs by Mark Van Clay, Perry Soldwedel, and Thomas W. Many.
Rating: 2/5 Stars
Good For: Leaders wanting to avoid foreseeable pitfalls with PLC implementation.
Best nugget: The self-assessment rubrics.
Please note: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. However, I am not paid to provide reviews or use content.
Leave a Reply