Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for January, 2026

This is Post #500. Writing that sentence feels both surreal and deeply satisfying. More than anything, these posts have taught me that leadership and life are sustained by one simple word: yes.

That yes began more than fifteen years ago, uncertain and small. When I pressed “publish” on my very first entry, I had no sense of where it might lead. Would anyone read it? Would I have anything worth saying after a handful of posts? Would the blog simply fade out, like so many others? And yet, here we are. 499 posts later.

The Early Yes

At the beginning, the simple act of writing was an experiment. By the time I reached 150 posts, I reflected that

Blogging has helped me become very comfortable with who I am … it has forced me to be specific about ideas, pushed me to share publicly, and given me a regular vehicle to reflect and refine my thinking. Blogging is different; it is the difference between telling and engaging, and I look forward to engaging in the next 150.

That shift, from telling to engaging, was one of my first and most important yesses.

At 150, I was already sharing advice for others who wanted to start: be clear about what you will and won’t write about … write for yourself, not for what others may want … think in blog posts … be a storyteller. Our schools are full of amazing stories waiting to be told. It was a reminder that blogging isn’t about volume; it’s about voice.

The Hard but Important Yes

Here’s what I didn’t know at the beginning: how difficult it would be to keep saying yes.

At 400, I wrote:

When I started blogging, I never really thought about how it would end. And I don’t think I fully knew that it was actually hard to write regularly. Anyone who tells you blogging is easy is lying! But most important things are not easy.

There were weeks when the words wouldn’t come. Stretches when I questioned whether I had anything new to say. Moments when the pressure of other responsibilities made the blog feel like one more obligation rather than an opportunity. Even at the 10-year mark, when I joked with George Couros that we might be “two of the last bloggers out there,” I wondered if persistence was just stubbornness by another name.

But then someone would stop me at a conference to share how a post resonated with them. Or an email would arrive from a teacher I had never met, describing how an idea sparked something in their practice. Or a comment would appear on the blog itself: thoughtful, challenging, extending the thinking beyond what I had offered. And the yes would return, renewed not by my own certainty but by the community that had quietly formed around these posts.

The persistence of yes, I have learned, is not a solo endeavor. It is sustained by every reader who takes the time to engage, whether directly on the blog, through social media, or in those wonderful in-person moments when someone says, “I read your blog.” Those four words matter more than you might know.

The Yes Behind the Yes

What I haven’t said yet is that I never wrote alone.

Before there was a blog, there was a newspaper column. And before every column went to print, it went to my dad. He was my first editor, catching errors, questioning word choices, and making everything a little bit better. When I started the blog in 2010, I had just officially become a superintendent. My dad was proud of that. He saw me settle into the role, saw the blog take shape, saw the first few years of posts. He passed away in August 2014, and I think of him often when I write. Some habits, once formed by people we love, thankfully stay with us.

When I started this blog in 2010, newspapers were still flourishing. I had grown up reading them, writing for them, learning from the columnists who made sense of the world in 800 words at a time. Over these 500 posts, I have watched that world shrink. Papers have closed. Bureaus have emptied. The people who made a living thinking in public, holding institutions accountable, telling the stories of communities, have largely moved on or been moved out. I miss newspapers, but more than that, I miss the people who wrote for them. Blogging is not the same thing, but in some small way it feels like an attempt to keep that spirit alive: a place to think publicly, to wrestle with ideas, to believe that writing for an audience, however small, still matters.

Since my dad, others have quietly taken up the work of editing. Tricia Buckley, and before her Sharon Pierce and Deb Podurgiel, have read every single post before it was published. Every one. They catch what I miss, sharpen what I muddle, and make this space better than I could make it alone. To write for 500 posts is one thing. To have colleagues willing to read 500 drafts is something else entirely.

I am also grateful to Jay Goldman, editor of School Administrator Magazine. Over the years, Jay and the magazine have repurposed a number of my posts and accepted other pieces of writing. What begins as a post for this small corner of the internet sometimes finds its way to a broader audience. That reach, and the connections it creates, has mattered more than I expected.

And then there are the bloggers who showed me what this could be. In the early days, I had a blogroll that was inspiring. I would read Dean Shareski, or Will Richardson, or David Warlick and be excited. The world of web 2.0 was booming and each post I read was opening me up to new ideas and a new world I was trying to understand. George Couros has been both friend and model for what it means to tell the story of education with optimism and persistence. More recently, I have found kinship with a small community of BC superintendent bloggers. Jordan Tinney and Kevin Godden have since retired, but for a time we kept each other going. Now it’s mostly Dave Eberwein and me. I also appreciate how Cari Wilson and Sandra-Lynn Shortall in West Vancouver blog regularly and keep the blog community humming.

The Yes in Ideas

Looking back across 499 posts, I am struck by something unexpected: the topics have changed dramatically, but the underlying themes have remained remarkably consistent.

Yes to innovation with curiosity: From early posts on social media in classrooms and mobile devices to today’s reflections on generative AI, the tools change but the thread remains: lean into change with curiosity, not fear.

Yes to mentorship that outlives us: I arrived in Mrs. Caffrey’s Grade 2 class unable to read and without confidence. I had her for Grade 2, Grade 3, and Grade 4, and left at the end of those three years a completely different student. I have written about her many times over the years because she represents something I believe deeply: a single teacher can change a life trajectory. From World Teachers’ Day tributes to stories of colleagues who shaped my early career, I have come to see mentorship as how yes persists beyond any single person, passed forward voice to voice, generation to generation. And now, at 52, I find myself on the other side of that exchange, trying to be for others what so many were for me.

Yes to well-being as core, not extra: Posts on physical literacy, wellness, and school sports remind me that joy, movement, and balance are not optional. They are essentials for students and leaders alike.

Yes to family and wonder as part of leadership: Interwoven among leadership reflections are personal stories: concerts with my wife, milestones with my kids, anecdotes from sports and community. Leadership is human work. Yes is sustained when it includes wonder, humour, and gratitude.

The Yes that Learns

Over the years, I have admitted when I was wrong. I have revised posts, shifted my stance, and acknowledged that what once seemed certain might now be more complicated. The persistence of yes doesn’t mean refusing to change. It is about holding fast to values while letting strategies evolve. It is about being willing to write in pencil, not ink.

The Yes Forward

So what does yes look like after 500 posts?

It looks like continuing to model thoughtful, transparent use of AI in schools, choosing curiosity over compliance, and reminding ourselves that technology should expand opportunity, not shrink relationships.

It looks like protecting public education as a place of hope, belonging, and possibility, even when the winds of politics blow cold.

It looks like saying yes to wonder, to the small joys that keep cynicism at bay.

It looks like believing, still, that education can and must be better tomorrow than it was yesterday.

After 500 posts, here is my promise: I will keep saying yes to relationships before technology, to students before systems, to hope before cynicism. Because public education still deserves our most persistent yes.

The Power of People

As I’ve been rereading old posts in preparation for this one, I keep being struck by the same thing: the people. Name after name, story after story. I am reminded of how many good people we have in West Vancouver, and more broadly across education. People who care deeply, who show up for one another, who make this work meaningful. I am lucky to be part of this community.

The Invitation

So here, at Post #500, I leave you with the same question that has guided me since the beginning:

What, in your corner of education, still deserves a persistent yes?

For me, the answer is unchanged: a stubborn belief in public education as a place of hope, possibility, and human connection.

When I pressed “publish” on that first post, I didn’t know if anyone would read it. 499 posts later, I still don’t know exactly where this is going. But I know the question is still worth asking, and the yes is still worth emphatically saying. This is not just persistence. This is the persistence of yes.

The image at the top of this post was generated through AI.  Various AI tools were used as feedback helpers (for our students this post would be a Yellow assignment – see link to explanation chart) as I edited and refined my thinking.

Read Full Post »

I have been thinking a lot about assistance lately. Who gets it, who does not, and why we suddenly get moralistic about it the moment the assistance comes from AI.

The spark for this post is Nick Potkalitsky’s Substack essay, “In Praise of Assistance.” It is one of those pieces that does not just add to the AI and writing conversation. It reframes it (Thanks to Adam Garry for pointing me towards it).

Nick starts from the now familiar worry about “cognitive offloading,” students delegating the thinking to a tool, and he agrees the concern is real. But then he names what often sits underneath the concern: not just pedagogy, but ideology.

He argues that the cognitive offloading critique rests on “a historical fiction: the autonomous learner.” Because if we are honest, most of us did not learn to write (or think, or revise) alone.

My own invisible advantage

In high school, I had a huge advantage: my dad was an English teacher, and he read every essay before I submitted it. Not just English essays. All of them, across every subject.

He did not write my essays. But he did what good teachers do. He asked questions I had not thought to ask. He pointed out where my logic sagged. He helped me tighten sentences. He coached me toward clarity.

That continued through university. And years later, when I became a newspaper columnist, he was still my first reader. Every column went to him before it went to my editor. He would call with suggestions, and I would decide what to keep and what to let go.

At the time, nobody called this cheating. We called it support. Nick puts it simply: “Students have always learned through assistance. From peers, from teachers, from resources…” 

We rarely worry students are “offloading” onto classmates in a discussion. We celebrate it. But when AI enters the picture, suddenly assistance becomes suspect.

That is the tension.

The question is not “help or no help”

When we talk about AI and writing, the debate often collapses into a binary: real writing (alone, unaided) versus fake writing (assisted, scaffolded).

But that binary does not match how writing actually works. It does not match how learning has actually  ever worked.

The better question is the one Nick keeps pointing us toward: what kind of assistance builds thinking, rather than replacing it?

That is where his essay becomes more than a defense of AI. It is a critique of an unspoken standard that has been unevenly distributed for a long time. The idea that “authentic struggle” is the price of admission to learning.

Nick names the class based reality bluntly: affluent students often have “small seminars, writing conferences, office hours, peer review sessions” while others are in systems where meaningful feedback barely exists. And then comes the sentence: “The outcome depends on whether we recognize assistance for what it is: not a threat to learning, but its precondition.”

What I have been writing toward

In October, I wrote “Modeling AI for Authentic Writing.”  If AI is here (it is), then our job is to model the kind of use that keeps the writer in control. In that post, I tried to move the conversation from “Don’t use AI” to “Show your decisions.”

Because the heart of authentic writing is not whether you had help. It is whether your thinking is present. What did you accept? What did you reject? Why? What did you learn in the revision?

I wrote then: “None of this replaces judgment. I accept or reject every change.”

For years, Tricia Buckley, and before her Sharon Pierce and Deb Podurgiel, have played a similar role here on this blog, reading every post before publication and offering feedback. The byline is still mine because the ideas, voice, and final choices are mine.

That is the point.

Assistance is not the enemy of learning. Abdication is.

What I want to add

There is a system design question underneath that I keep circling back to.

If we accept that all learning has always been assisted, what changes about how we run schools?

A few weeks ago I wrote about the tutoring revolution and found myself wrestling with a similar tension. For years, success in certain courses quietly required something extra: a tutor. Parents traded recommendations, students admitted they needed help, and the whole system ran on an unspoken understanding that school alone was not enough. At least not for everyone.

AI is changing that. But here is the part that worries me: the digital divide is no longer just about device access. It is about knowing how to use the tool well. A student with strong digital literacy might turn ChatGPT into a Socratic tutor. Another might never get past using it as a homework completion machine.

Nick writes about elite students who have always had access to “assistance made flesh.” The risk now is that we create a new version of the same divide. Some students learn to collaborate with AI in ways that deepen their thinking. Others use it to bypass thinking altogether. And if we are not intentional, digital confidence becomes the new proxy for privilege.

The question is not whether students will have AI assistance. They already do. The question is whether we will teach them to use it in ways that build capacity or let the gap widen on its own.

A Culture of Yes stance

A Culture of Yes does not mean saying yes to every tool or every shortcut.

It means saying yes to the conditions that help more people learn well.

So here is where I am landing, at least today.

Writing has always been assisted. The myth of the autonomous writer has always favoured students with the most support. AI can absolutely be used to bypass thinking. But it can also be used to invite thinking, especially where feedback is scarce.

Our job is to design and model practices where assistance makes thinking visible and growth possible.

Nick’s essay refuses the easy frame. It asks us to stop policing help and start building learning communities where help is normal, explicit, teachable, and more equitably available.

That feels like the kind of “yes” worth defending.

The image at the top of this post was generated through AI.  Various AI tools were used as feedback helpers (for our students this post would be a Yellow assignment – see link to explanation chart) as I edited and refined my thinking.

Read Full Post »

This marks the 11th year of my One Word tradition. Eleven years. When I started this practice back in 2016, I was 42 years old and hungry. Literally, that was my word. Hungry. I wanted to compete, to stay curious, to keep pushing. And here I am, a decade later, still hungry but now asking different questions about what that means.

Before I get to 2026, let me say this about 2025 and “Thrive.” It delivered. In a year where it would have been easy to retreat into cynicism or exhaustion, I chose to flourish instead. I wrote more than I have in years, and it never felt like a chore. I ran every single day. I spent my summer coaching basketball with young athletes who remind me why I do this work. I leaned into AI not as a threat but as an invitation to rethink learning. I found great satisfaction in work and with those I work with.   Thrive was about sustaining momentum and finding joy in that momentum. It worked.

So what comes next?

This word is not about doing more. It is about feeling more, without losing momentum.

My word for 2026 is Alive.

Why Alive?

I turn 53 this year. Regular readers know I feel my age more than ever (I keep bringing it up), and I mean that in both the best and most humbling ways. There are strands of grey in my hair that were not there five years ago. My recovery from long runs takes longer than it used to. I notice things now that I never noticed before: the way my knees feel on cold mornings, the reading glasses I now keep in three different places, the names that take an extra second (or sometimes minute) to retrieve.

And yet.

I am not checking out. My body may be changing, but my commitment to showing up has not. My run streak will cross 2,000 days in 2026. I will keep coaching. I will keep writing. I will keep appearing in classrooms and  conference rooms with intention and energy, even when generating that energy requires more deliberate effort than it used to.

A friend of mine, Anthony, texted me recently. He is not in education; he is a successful entrepreneur. His message was simple: “Call me.” He does that sometimes. When I did, he started right in. “You know what makes us different? No matter what happens today, we show up tomorrow and attack the day. We don’t get stuck in what happened. We just keep moving forward.”

That is what Alive means to me. Not ignoring the hard stuff. Not pretending the grey hair and the sore knees do not exist. But choosing, every single day, to show up and engage anyway.

Alive is my answer to a world that feels increasingly numb. In a time filled with cynics and critics, with doom-scrolling and disengagement, I am choosing to stay fully present. To feel things. To remain curious when it would be easier to become jaded. To stay optimistic when pessimism seems more sophisticated.

Being alive means more than existing. It means showing up with your whole self, not some protected, half version. It means being willing to be changed by what you encounter.

Building on a Decade of Words

When I look back at my words over the past decade, I see a story. Each word was right for its moment, and together they form something larger than any single year.

The early years were about drive: Hungry (2016), Hope (2017), Relevance (2018), Delight (2019).

The middle years were about resilience: Hustle (2020), Optimism (2021), Focus (2022), Coached (2023).

The recent years have been about integration: Accelerate (2024), Thrive (2025).

And now, 2026: Alive.

Alive feels like a synthesis of all of it. You cannot be truly alive without hunger and hope. You cannot be alive without relevance and delight. You cannot be alive without focus and the willingness to be coached. Being alive requires both acceleration and the wisdom to know what thriving actually looks like.

Alive in a Changing World

We are living through one of the most significant shifts in how humans learn and work. AI is not coming; it is here. And I want to be fully alive to what that means, not as a passive observer but as an active participant shaping how we integrate these tools in our schools.

But here is what I keep coming back to:

The more powerful the technology becomes, the more important the human elements are.

Connection. Curiosity. Creativity. Compassion. These are not things AI can replicate. They are the things that make us alive.

In 2026, I want to be alive to both realities. I want to keep exploring what AI can do for learning while never losing sight of what only humans can do for each other. I want to be in classrooms watching teachers and students navigate this new landscape together. I want to ask good questions and resist easy answers. I want to model what it looks like to embrace change without abandoning what matters most.

Alive in Body and Relationship

For me, being alive has always been connected to physical movement. My run streak is not about athletic achievement. It is about presence. Every morning when I lace up my shoes and step outside, I am choosing to be alive to that day. Rain or shine, tired or energized, home or traveling. The streak is a daily declaration: I am here. I am engaged.

In 2026, I will keep running. I will keep coaching basketball. I will keep prioritizing the habits that have carried me this far: 10,000 steps, daily movement, attention to what I put in my body (OK – this last one needs to be better).

But being alive is also about the people around me. My family. My colleagues. The educators I work alongside. Relationships require the same consistency as run streaks. You show up. You do the work. You stay curious about the people next to you, even when you think you know them completely.

Alive and Hopeful

I know the world can feel heavy right now. There is no shortage of reasons to disengage, to protect yourself, to lower your expectations. Cynicism is easy. Hope is harder.

But I keep choosing hope. Not naive hope that ignores reality, but stubborn hope that insists on possibility anyway. Hope that believes education can be better. Hope that trusts young people to rise to challenges we cannot yet imagine. Hope that sees AI as a tool for human flourishing rather than replacement.

Being alive means staying open to wonder. It means maintaining the curiosity that has driven my career and my writing. It means refusing to let age or experience calcify into certainty. The older I get, the more I realize how much I do not know. And that feels like a gift, not a limitation.

All In

So yes, I may be greyer. I may be slower in some ways. But I am all in on 2026.

All in on learning.
All in on family.
All in on health.
All in on this beautiful, complicated, rapidly changing world.

Alive is not a passive state. It is a choice, made daily, sometimes hourly. It is the choice to engage rather than withdraw. To feel rather than numb. To hope rather than despair. To keep saying yes.

That is the Culture of Yes I have been writing about for 16 years now. And it turns out, it has always been about being fully, stubbornly, joyfully alive.

What word will guide your 2026?

And want a second opinion on picking a word,  here is what Daniel Pink said this week about the power of the one word process.  


Previous One Word Posts:

2016: Hungry

2017: Hope

2018: Relevance

2019: Delight

2020: Hustle

2021: Optimism

2022: Focus

2023: Coached

2024: Accelerate

2025: Thrive

The image at the top of this post was generated through AI.  Various AI tools were used as feedback helpers (for our students this post would be a Yellow assignment – see link to explanation chart) as I edited and refined my thinking.

Read Full Post »