I. General Information
School Name: Level Up Educational Leadership Design
School District: SD#39 Vancouver
Inquiry Team Members: The 12 learners in this inquiry were 11 school leaders and one retired school leader. To safeguard psychological safety of the inquiry team members, anonymity has been maintained.
Inquiry Team Contact Email: rosa@leveluped.ca
II. Inquiry Project Information
Type of Inquiry: NOIIE Case Study
Grade Levels Addressed Through Inquiry: Primary (K-3), Intermediate (4-7)
Curricular Areas Addressed: Other: Adult Learning, Psychological Safety, Trust, Distributed Leadership
Focus Addressed: Other: Building a more cohesive culture for school improvement while decreasing burnout of school-based leaders.
In one sentence, what was your focus for the year? How can we build a more cohesive culture for school improvement, while decreasing the burn out of school-based leaders?
III. Spirals of Inquiry Details
Scanning: In the context of adult learners, the “can you name two adults” questions was posed as follows: Can you name two adults in your district who believe you will be a success in your school/who believe in you and who you can go to for help/who you can trust to receive the help you need?”.
The scan indicated that every school leader could name two horizontal connections within the association, proving to be a supportive network, but could not name two vertical connections within the district office that they felt believed in them and that they could trust to receive the help needed. In general, through this scan, the school leaders noted that there is both an efficiency aspect (timely responses) and professional safety aspect when reaching out vertically. This sets the context to why the horizontal connections are abundant, and the vertical are not.
The scan also indicates a belief that leaders need to know their people to honour their strengths and to understand what they need for areas of challenge, acknowledging that people need different things to succeed. Since everyone has the potential to burn out, we need to show compassion for each other, as well as elevate the amazing things occurring in schools.
Focus: During the Focusing Stage, there was a realization that school leaders can only do what is in our control — keeping in mind what we don’t want done onto us, to ensure we don’t do it onto our staff. Although the ideal is to have system symmetry top down, we can only control school symmetry.
Therefore, the focus became a building of common understandings about the importance of a relational and equity-centred distributed leadership approach that supports the unique differences, learning styles and leadership styles of individuals as essential to creating psychological safety.
Hunch: If our staff feel seen, heard and valued, it will reduce burnout and collectively impact each school’s big idea. “I Can” statements were created by each school leader in response and listed as follows:
I can listen like my heart has ears.
I can be more mindfully present and intentional in my interactions.
I can make sure others have turns.
I can find new ways to bring people together to connect and collaborate.
I can be more intentional in highlighting the strengths of others.
I can foster a stronger sense of trust and belonging for staff.
I can connect with and help foster connections between staff.
I can encourage diverse, expansive thinking by uplifting all voices to the table.
I can be more intentional about what I invest my energy in and ensure that I acknowledge vulnerability and process as much as product.
I can create opportunities for connection, knowledge sharing, and collective problem-solving.
I can balance courageous conversations with empathic listening to build positive and effective relationships.
New Professional Learning: These are some of our new learnings:
– Circle Forward Protocol (used at three sites)
– Seek opportunities to engage groups on staff in circle
– Shining a light on promising and powerful informal leadership within school
– Reflecting on the narrative we are sharing
– Host a Listening Campaign
– Use liberating structures to elevate voices – use LS in every staff meeting
– Establish Teams – team-building games, building trust
– Opportunities for laughter using icebreaker games during meetings with larger staff; liberating structures during staff and collaborative times to ensure equal opportunity and voice
– Ask these questions to shift from a state of despair (a limiting narrative) to one of awareness and hope:
- What is the story about how hard it is, that I hear myself most often telling?
- What are the payoffs I receive from holding on to this story?
- What is your attachment to this story costing you and your site team?
– Be clear with your staff about the why (reference Simon Sinek’s work)
– Introducing the importance of collective efficacy – what we do matters
– Build an understanding of the why
– View collective efficacy through the lens of equity and excellence
– Establish systems to allow for teachers to work collaboratively
– Be a connector: find ways to build connections amongst different staff members
– A great article: Promoting Collaborative Learning Cultures: Putting the Promise Into Action https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hEcDOAZ2fSLe4ZqjBeDzAN3BeJzR5E3p/view
– Be intentional about team building https://www.innovativeteambuilding.co.uk/free-team-building-activities/
– Recommendations re. burnout: https://edst-educ.sites.olt.ubc.ca/files/2014/07/Understanding-School-Principals-Work-and-Well-Being-BC-Final-Report-August-6-2020.pdf (Recommendations on p.56-63)\
Taking Action: Several strategies were implemented to build a more cohesive culture and reduce burnout, including the Circle Forward Protocol, promoting informal leadership, and conducting listening campaigns using liberating structures. Some integrated team-building and trust exercises, emphasized mindfulness and intentionality, and fostered equity, inclusivity, collaboration, and connection among staff. The Wonder Child approach was particularly effective in enhancing collaboration and student engagement. Baseline evidence should have been developed to include initial staff surveys and feedback on engagement and trust levels and change evidence should have come from follow-up surveys, qualitative feedback, and observed improvements in staff morale and collaboration.
Checking: This team appreciated the networking opportunity and were elated to gather together in a civilized manner over breakfast to think together, gain perspective from others, and to be honest about their practice. We were not unified in our take action approach due to the various contexts, and did not develop a baseline if enough of a difference was made, because each leader had their own focus. In fact, asking staff the scanning question we asked ourselves would have provided the baseline needed. The inquiry itself led to positive feelings and sharing amongst the team. The network of learning was appreciated and needed to de-stress in a safe environment.
Reflections/Advice: This inquiry highlighted the critical role of relational and equity-centered leadership in creating a supportive school culture, the power of informal leadership, and the importance of trust and empathy. We learned that creative and flexible approaches are essential for addressing challenges and fostering innovation. Moving forward, we plan to expand collaborative practices by enhancing professional learning, pivoting the inquiry to focus on creative leadership to strengthen connections across the learning community. For other schools with similar interests, we advise focusing on relational leadership, empowering informal leaders, prioritizing trust-building and empathic communication, embracing creativity and flexibility, and engaging in continuous learning and reflective practices to drive sustained improvement.