I find one of my important jobs is getting the ‘tension’ right between schools and the district. Tension is often a word with negative connotations, but it provides a necessary balance throughout the system. People look at me questioningly when I acknowledge and even encourage healthy tension between competing interests (but we are all teammates in the bigger picture). At each hierarchical level, whether provincial government, school district, school or classroom, there needs to be autonomy to be innovative and creative to meet specific needs. But, the work must be connected because we are more than a collection of independent contractors and a sum of ideas. I described some of this in a previous post on flexibility.
When faced with a topic or issue, I regularly consider if something is primarily a school focus or a district decision. There are many issues that districts should simply stay out of, and leave to schools who are more nimble and quicker to make changes as required. Further, for new initiatives to take hold, they often come from passionate teachers, schools or communities and not from a district decree.
Schools tend to look at issues through the lens of the school first and foremost; a district takes a more global view of the school district as a whole and, as a district leader, this is the perspective I take, for example, when a school wants to start a new program. The case is often made “how it is right for the community,” and I then take into consideration the impact the new program would have on other schools and the district as a whole. Some programs that have been suggested would have done very well, but would have also moved student populations and emptied out other schools — good for the school but bad for the district. It is also very easy in a district job to think we know best and make more decisions centrally (but we would NEVER want the provincial government to do that with school districts). There are other times where the district can help transform a community by suggesting the consideration of a new program. The placement of programs like French Immersion, for example, are often crucial ones for a district to make as they look at the larger view of community interests and population trends.
As a principal, the ‘tension’ was in wanting to be encouraging of innovation, but also wanting to ensure, as a school, we were moving in a common direction. As a district leader, the ‘tension’ is more in trying to set direction for the district but giving the freedom and flexibility to schools to each have their own “signature” one that is informed but rarely prescribed by the District.
I will often talk about our commitment to inquiry, self-regulation, social-emotional learning and digital literacy. And, at each school, these ideas will take on different shapes and direction. I use this blog and other opportunities to engage, discuss and draw connections between the different approaches to the same larger goals. All our schools develop their own narrative, but they are part of a bigger story. Similarly, I feel that our district is part of a larger provincial story – one of a highly achieving system looking towards where it needs to go next.
I have often heard teachers and administrators say of their districts “I don’t know where we are going.” Hopefully, I am finding ways to be clear about where we are going, but not prescribing a single narrow path to get there. I will continue to consider whether we are getting the ‘tension’ right.
cultureofyes.ca 
Always an insightful blog! I believe Peter Senge calls this ‘creative tension’, a necessary component for a true learning organization.
Thank you – and thanks for the Senge reference. I looked it up and it does help reinforce this point. It is often very challenging to embrace this tension, but can be so necessary.
Hi Chris – well said. It really is one of balance isn’t it. Having recently taken on a new District role in a new District, it is challenging to find the sweet spot between District direction vs support for School initiative. Each District has a culture based on its past that varies from a centralized to an autonomous model of decision making. I believe neither is best but rather one where shared vision and values are developed and a reasoned level of collaboration is embedded. Together, the District and School leaders / staffs can do what’s best for each unique School community.
Brian
Yes Brian – it is very interesting where different districts define the “school” vs. “district” line. I found Coquitlam leaned to be more school-centric and West Vancouver leans to be more district-centric. Of course, that may be my own bias having had a school role in Coquitlam and now a district role in West Vancouver.
Hi Chris – I really enjoyed reading this post. It is easy (and important) to become passionate about new initiatives and pilot projects, but it is necessary to ask those “big picture” questions. Like you said, each school has its own narrative, but the tension you write about is necessary in order to ensure harmony within the district and above all, with the community. Actions we take as educators should ensure the best opportunity for students, and having those discussions (that involve tension) ensures that we get there. Asking questions that encourage respectful discourse and allow others to stretch their thinking ultimately lead to collaboration and new ideas that may not have been otherwise possible.
Carmela
Thanks Carmela – one of our challenges is to respectfully debate ideas without moving the conversation to being personal. I find we personalize issues so quickly in education and that quickly clouds the important debates.
Chris,
Your quest to empower teachers is one I think is critical to innovation. Words like “tension” as you state, don’t have to have a negative connotation but I think in order to overcome that, you have to model that which I know you do.
I think, and I think you do to, that the more prescribed the change, the less innovative and certainly the less empowering it becomes for teachers. When the “I” word is used, teachers often roll their eyes because of previous history of mandated initiatives that are filled with templates and strict guidelines.
I’m wondering if you have any stories or examples of teachers where teachers are generating and owning their own innovations? I know you do and perhaps can pull them but perhaps you can list a few examples that come to mind. Then I’ll steal them and share them wildly. 😉
Dean,
You are absolutely right – innovation is generated at the class and school level. My job is to support, share and be a champion for the thoughtful and interesting work in our schools. One of the beauties of technology is that it can more easily allow me to share and connect these ideas – and help them spread.
We have so many teachers that have taken up the invitation to think and do differently.
Here are some examples:
– secondary assessment practices – first tried at Rockridge Secondary several years ago, that most simply were about grading less and assessing more. These structures are influencing teaching throughout the district.
– Matt Trask, a secondary senior physics teacher is having students make musical instruments to learn about wavelength
– Kelly Skehill using design and software for students to apply calculus models to create new pop bottle designs
– teachers are using technology to capture assessment information during the learning process – one particular good example at PJ Elementary
– Kindergarten teacher (Sonia Southam) using iPads to engage parents and transform communication by capturing daily learning and sharing immediately via email with parents
– the creation of Gleneagles Learning Lab Open House to showcase the process of learning
– a teacher created Social Dynamics course for students with high functioning autism
– the creation of an outdoor learning program for grades 6/7 students at Bowen Island Community School (Scott Slater created) that has students blending in-class and outdoor learning experiences
In writing this list . . . . I realize I have a few good blog posts waiting to be told.