Switch course ▾
Session 1. From Many Groups to a Designed System
Objective. Map the learning groups of a school or cluster, set decision rights for each level, and write a one-page charter for a network of PLCs that merges and stops work instead of adding it.
You now lead more than one team, so your results depend less on how well you run a meeting and more on how well you design the conditions for many meetings. A network of PLCs can either give every teacher a reason to look at pupils' learning or add one more layer of paperwork. This session helps you decide which, before you announce anything: what exists, who decides, what stops, and who starts first.
Key ideas
From one team to a system
- Course 12.4 (Leading a Professional Learning Community) taught how one team of 3 to 6 teachers meets and learns. A system is many such teams that share a purpose, a calendar and a way to learn from one another. Your job changes from running a meeting to designing the conditions for many meetings.
- Think in four layers: the team (3 to 6 teachers), the school (every teacher belongs to at least one team), the cluster (3 to 8 neighbouring schools) and the district. Each layer has a different job, and the upper layers exist to serve the lower ones.
- Research on networks of schools (Katz, Earl and colleagues) describes a network as a system that works at two levels at once: the network itself and each member school. A network that does not change what happens in staffrooms and classrooms has not worked.
A test for the word 'PLC'
- DuFour warned in 2004 that 'professional learning community' can become meaningless through overuse. His three big ideas are a good test at system level: Is the mission that pupils learn, not only that we teach? Is there a culture of collaboration with protected time? Is success judged by results for pupils?
- Stoll and colleagues (2006) reviewed the literature and found shared values, collective responsibility, reflective inquiry, collaboration and group as well as individual learning among the common features. Use them as questions to ask of a team, not as a certificate to give.
- A quick honesty check: if a group is called a PLC but its agenda is orders and reports, it is a renamed meeting. A system that renames everything without changing how time is used adds a new word and no new learning.
Who decides what
- Write decision rights down. A simple rule: decide at the lowest level that holds the information. The team picks its focus question within the school goal; the school steering group sets the time and the map; the cluster group agrees shared themes and the exchange calendar; the district protects hours and removes duplicate reporting.
- Keep the steering group small (4 to 6 people), include at least two classroom teachers who lead teams, and meet briefly each month. It governs conditions and removes obstacles; it does not read minutes of every team.
- Name one person who answers for the whole system and one deputy; rotate the steering group seats every year or two so the system does not belong to a single leader.
Design before launch, and subtract first
- Before announcing anything, write a one-page design brief: purpose in one sentence, which groups exist, which will merge or stop, who joins, the time slot, what evidence will tell us it works, and the first pilot teams.
- Subtract first. List every standing group and committee, and for each ask: does it work on pupils' learning? Merge those that overlap, stop those that exist only for a report. A network that adds six new groups to a full calendar will be abandoned by March.
- Start with two or three pilot teams that volunteered, learn for one term, then widen. The Learning Forward Standards for Professional Learning name Learning Communities, Leadership and Resources among their seven standards; use them as a checklist for the brief.
Four layers of a PLC system
The unit of design is the teacher's week
Every layer you design lands in the same place: a teacher's week of about 25 to 30 lessons plus marking, duties and meetings. Before adding a team, count what that teacher already attends. A teacher who sits in five committees will give a new PLC the energy left over, and it will not be much.
So design from the teacher outwards. Each teacher belongs to one team with a protected slot, a few cluster events a year, and nothing else new. Everything the upper layers want must pass through that one team and that one slot, which forces useful choices about what is worth asking of teachers.
Why systems drift towards reporting
When many teams exist, leaders need to know what is happening, and the easiest way to know is a form. Forms are cheap to ask for and expensive to fill in, and they slowly turn the meeting into the preparation of the form. DuFour's warning about the word 'PLC' becoming meaningless applies here: the label survives while the learning disappears.
Guard against this at the design stage. Decide now what the upper layers will see (a half-page per term from each team), who reads it and what they do with it. A system that decides its reporting after launch usually ends up with reporting that serves the system, not the pupils.
Examples from the classroom
Counting the committees
Scene. Dilnoza, deputy head in a Bukhara school of 52 teachers, asks every teacher to list the groups they sit in. The average is 3.1 meetings a month, and only the reading group has a pupil goal. Before starting any new team she shows the table to the steering group and proposes to merge two committees and move four routine items into a written note. The head teacher agrees because nothing is added.
Insight. Counting what exists makes subtraction possible and removes the fear that the PLC network is one more burden.
Volunteers first
Scene. In a Samarkand school, Jasur and four colleagues volunteer to try a team on Grade 6 reading. The steering group gives them the shared period on Thursdays and asks for one thing: a half-page note after one term. After eight weeks, three other teachers ask to join. The head does not announce a school-wide launch; she lets the pilot team show its notebooks at the next staff meeting.
Insight. Starting with volunteers lets the evidence persuade, so the system grows by invitation, not by order.
Writing down who decides
Scene. A cluster of four schools near Fergana argues each term about who chooses the shared theme. The cluster group writes a half-page rule: each team picks its own question within its school goal; the cluster agrees one theme a year; the district only removes duplicate forms. The argument stops, and Malika, who leads a Grade 3 team, says she finally knows what is hers to decide.
Insight. Written decision rights reduce conflict and give teams the confidence to take decisions at their own level.
Common pitfalls
- Announcing a launch before mapping what already exists, so the new network lands on top of nine old committees.
- Letting the district or the head teacher choose the focus question for every team.
- Creating a large steering group that reads all minutes and becomes a bottleneck.
- Calling the old groups PLCs without changing how their time is used.
Map the System and Write the Charter
- Open the Activity Kit: a SAMPLE map of the learning groups in a Samarkand school with 46 teachers, a decision-rights table and a charter page. In your own school or cluster use a real list of groups. (5 min)
- Alone (12 min): for each group on the sample map, write what the time is spent on and mark it Keep, Merge or Stop. Count how many of the 46 teachers belong to a group that works on a pupil-learning goal.
- Pairs (18 min): compare your marks and redraw the map with no more than 6 teams plus one steering group. Check that every teacher belongs to exactly one team with a protected slot, and list what each stopped group must give back (a report, a duty) and to whom.
- Groups of four (20 min): fill the decision-rights table for team, school, cluster and district, then argue one disputed decision (who chooses the focus question?) until the group agrees a rule and a reason.
- Part B, Charter in 20 minutes: write the one-page system charter (purpose, teams, time, steering group, decision rights, what we stop, how we will know). Swap with another group, which marks one thing unclear and one thing it would copy.
- Alone (10 min): write your leadership task from the Kit and name the person who will check it with you.
Your facilitator will guide you through this activity in the session.
Questions to discuss
- Which groups did you stop or merge, and what happened to the duty each one carried?
- Which decision was hardest to place at one level, and what rule settled it?
- What would a sceptical teacher say about your charter in the first two minutes, and what is your answer?
Reflect
- How many of the learning groups in your school could you name from memory, and how many work on a pupil-learning goal?
- Who would lose status or a duty if the map changed, and how will you speak with them first?
- Which layer of your system is weakest today: team, school, cluster or district?
Try it tomorrow
- Ask five colleagues to list every group they attend this term and count the meetings per month.
- Draw your own school's groups on one page and mark each Keep, Merge or Stop in pencil.
- Write one sentence that says which decision you will hand to teams this term.
Further reading and links
A PLC system is designed, not announced: map what exists, subtract before you add, write down who decides what, and start with volunteers.