laboration, which all have a tremendously
positive impact on teaching and learning.
When leadership of a school is distributed
among members of an instructional leader-
ship team, the school taps into the team’s
collective wisdom and energy. In addition,
the school benefits from having a group
with a “balcony-level” view of the school – a
group that can learn from successful grades
or departments and spread those practices
school-wide, and that brings multiple per-
spectives to issues that cut across grades and
departments.
Furthermore, a school that establishes
an instructional leadership team tends to
experience an increase in trust between
administrators and teachers because they
unite around a purpose – meeting all stu-
dents’ learning needs. The trust, cohesion
and focus that instructional leadership
teams bring about are hugely important in-
gredients in school improvement. Instruc-
tional leadership teams also foster stability
in reform efforts because such teams build
a broad base of support that can sustain
reform, even when there is turnover in the
principal’s office.
Grade or department teams also bolster
schools. A properly functioning team collab-
orates to determine what students will learn,
how students’ improvement will be moni-
tored, and how academic struggles will be
addressed (DuFour, 2004). Grade or depart-
ment teams continually revisit these issues to
assess, adjust and establish new approaches
and goals. These teams tackle the details that
are particular to a grade or department in
ways that an instructional leadership team
cannot. In addition, grade or department
teams allow educators to learn from and
support one another and hold each other ac-
countable. They strengthen instruction and
the esprit de corps in schools, especially in
low-income communities, where teachers
are often inexperienced and isolated.
Instructional leadership teams and
grade or department teams are most effec-
tive when they encourage open, respectful,
thoughtful dialogue among members, as
well as risk-taking. Creating such an envi-
ronment allows team members to push each
other and discover innovative ways of reach-
ing their instr uctional goals. One of those
Teachers improve their
culturally responsive
instruction more quickly
when they work with a grade
or department team than
when they rely on just their
own reflection.
goals should be to provide instruction that
resonates with students’ experiences.
Culturally responsive teaching
Understanding students’ cultures and
home lives allows educators to situate in-
struction within students’ frames of refer-
ence, which facilitates learning. Experts
on culturally responsive teaching, such as
Zaretta Hammond (2015), clarify that “cul-
ture” does not refer to relatively superficial
items such as food, dress, and music but in-
stead to “deep culture” – for example, how
kinship is defined, notions of fairness, and
concept of a higher power. Research shows
that culturally responsive instruction pro-
motes student involvement, while instruc-
tion that ignores students’ identities brings
about resistance in the classroom (Olneck
1995).
Teachers come to understand their stu-
dents better when they implement assets-
based instruction. Such instruction capi-
talizes on the skills and experiences that
students bring into the classroom, and
recognizes their ability to make informed
choices, which gives students some owner-
ship of their educational growth.
Teachers can think of students’ assets as
existing in what Pat Thomson (2002) calls
the “virtual school bag” – strengths that
students carry around with them but that
need to be “unpacked” to be seen and under-
stood. The unpacking is achieved by creating
classrooms where students feel their voices
are heard and by getting to know students
through having lunch with them or corre-
sponding with them in journals, for example.
Through these activities, teachers learn
about students’ experiences at home, in
sports, in clubs and so on, and plan lessons
that build from the knowledge that students
have gained from those activities. Getting
to know students deeply is the first step in
developing what Hammond calls learning
partnerships.
In these partnerships, teachers and stu-
dents are allies who trust each other and
take on specific learning challenges to-
gether. Because students trust their teacher,
the students are less likely to withdraw and
more likely to rise to the challenge. As stu-
dents succeed, they become more indepen-
dent and expand their intellectual capacity
(Hammond, 2015). That increased capac-
ity fosters intellectual insights, which leads
to greater academic performance, which
leads to greater self-confidence, and a virtu-
ous cycle is created. This increased student
agency is key in the Common Core era,
when much more is being asked of students
than in the past.
Teachers improve their culturally respon-
sive instruction more quickly when they
November | December 2017
35