School Character and Culture First | A Conversation with Tamara Yuill Proctor

You have got a brilliant curriculum change in mind. You've seen it work somewhere else, but six months in and it's just falling flat. Today, we're asking one of the problem isn't actually the curriculum at all. Hey everyone, I'm Shane Leaning.

Welcome to Education Leaders, the chat-topping leadership podcast for school leaders just like you. As an organizational coach, I've helped thousands of leaders worldwide lead with greater confidence, make better decisions and create winning teams. And on this show, we explore the strategies that are gonna help you achieve your goals and transform your leadership practice. This episode is supported by the International Curriculum Association and the International Center for Coaching and Education.

Stay tuned to learn more. My guest today is Dr. Tamara Yuel Proctor, or Tam. She is head of educational research and professional learning at one of my all-time geekily favorite schools, United World College in Changshu, China.

And a little while back, she completed her doctorate at the University of Canterbury. Her research started with curriculum integration, but she quickly discovered that you can't get there without understanding something more fundamental first, how leadership creates the conditions for change. Let's get into it. When I was starting my research, my primary or initial primary focus had been on how to connect curriculum, curriculum integration at high school.

And as I went into that, I realized that I needed to also focus on senior leadership and middle leadership. And then that had me also pursuing what senior leadership need to do in order to create a future schooling beyond the traditional. And so it was one of those interesting outcomes of the research that in order to do the curriculum integration, I needed to look at the change that the school was doing in order to facilitate that. So that's where that came from.

It's interesting how like our passions or the things that we start investigating can come through something else. It's like you needed a key to unlock this curriculum change. And that was in looking at kind of change research, right? Yeah, the research was a case study and I was at the school in which we were doing the research.

And I soon became aware that my ability as a teacher and a head of a learning area to create change was actually directly related to the people above me and how they helped facilitate that. And the way they asked me questions and the way they wanted to support. And so that had us looking at systems, because here I was wanting to change the pedagogical approach, which then meant we needed to look at systems. And so by looking at those two things, I then realized that the way the leadership was bringing about this change was impacting these other three areas.

So let's dig into that. I think this is really, really fascinating. And I'm such a geek for this kind of stuff. So, so grateful to be having this conversation.

So you look at different components of a school as part of this research. And at the very center, like in fact, you've got a lovely diagram, which I've got in front of me, which you've kind of synthesized, is character and culture. So it might be really worthwhile. And I think it links to what you were talking about, just then, about that teacher relationship with the other people.

What do you mean by character and culture? And why is it so fundamental in your experience? The character and culture was to me the abstract components of a school. They're the people that make up the school, the students, the community in which the school is based.

It's knowing the history of the school. It's knowing what the future direction is, you know, the aspiration for the school. It's knowing where the strengths and weaknesses lie within the teaching faculty, all support staff and other staff. And it's having that very clear picture of knowing how and what people can do in order to shape that vision.

So, you know, this school in New Zealand, and they had to, as part of the ministry, do a lot of digging into their past. And one of the things that they found was that the timetable hadn't changed in 25 years. It had just been the same. And so when they were starting to look at how they wanted the teaching to change, they needed to look at, okay, well, maybe we need longer periods because, you know, if we want project-based learning or problem-based learning, maybe 40 minutes is not gonna cut it.

So, you know, they started looking at that structure. Well then, well, who's gonna teach and design these classes? So where is the capacity within our teaching staff? And so you can't work on the systems or the pedagogy, unless you've got the people there, but then also what do the students need?

Just because something might've worked somewhere else doesn't mean it works for the context of this particular school. So, you know, over time, a cohort, you know, or the school can change in relation of the makeup of all the people within it. And so then it sort of comes down to what is the knowledge we want our students to have that is meaningful for their future? Yeah, and so then the culture and character are all the people that are within that space and the culture of the school, the people in it, the capacity and capabilities of people, the willingness of the parent community.

If they're quite traditional, then there's gonna need to be some work there. So yeah, so that's what I mean by character and culture. That makes a lot of sense to me. And I really like that this is at the center of your summary, really, of your components of school.

So for people who are listening, we've got character and culture in the middle, and then you've kind of got like a circle around that with three components, which are the three that you'll mainly find yourself probably thinking about. It's called pedagogy systems and curriculum. And I almost look at it and it's a reminder to me that sometimes we just get so obsessed by those outer things, curriculum systems and pedagogy. And the connection, or you said it's like the abstract part, we kind of dance around it, or maybe just not very confident to talk about that area.

Also, we make assumptions. So you can have four or five people within the same school, and they're making an assumption about what the school is, or we've always done it this way, and therefore we should always do it that way, or maybe this isn't what our wider community wants. So you've got to be able to sort of dig into the assumptions that are embedded within the school if you're wanting to create the change. So the principal of the school had a brilliant approach to this, which was he called it creating pockets of change.

And so you go to your people and say, hey, look, if you've got an idea, bring it to us. We'll talk it through, and we'll see how we can give it a go. And not all of the ideas obviously fly, but there was this idea that just because we try it once doesn't mean we're gonna keep doing it. And that sort of iterative approach to curriculum design and teachers being able to see themselves as designers for those that were wanting to was a fantastic approach because it meant that the teachers that were really wanting to create change, they had the support of the leadership, and the leadership knew who these teachers were and then could look at, well, who else can we bring in that might be almost there, but isn't necessarily quite there, and how can we develop that teacher so that we're building the capacity of our teaching staff as well?

So that's really working with the willing to then bring some of the people that are almost there along with them. And how did that link to the character and culture being understood? Where was that work happening within this context? So this senior leadership team would meet with the different heads of learning area regularly, and they would talk about who in your learning area, where are they at, who needs support, where are people excelling in and what area, and they really tried to build a picture of the capacity of the teachers they had within the school.

And so we talk about know thy student, but we really need to know thy teacher too, and know thy support staff, and all the people that are there. So it's not the same people doing the same thing all the time, that you're building the capacities and that you're not rushing it either. So knowing that culture and character of knowing the timeframe and thinking longitudinally rather than we've got to get it now, we've got to do everything all at once, but knowing the capacity for the change that you're wanting to implement and having that long-term view as well. I love what you've described as the idea of these different teachers, these pockets of practice, these kind of like working on different areas, but at the same time, the school will have its existing character and its existing culture.

So now I'm thinking there's a tension there, isn't there? Like, you know, how do you do that balance? So there is, and there would be a weekly meeting or a fortnightly meeting with all the heads of learning area and senior leadership. And it used to be quite administrative, but when they were working into how they wanted to create this change with the school, and it was a vision that was brought along with the whole school, but there was a significant shift in those middle leadership with senior leadership meetings where they introduce leadership inquiry and took away a lot of the administrative stuff.

So they wanted to empower the middle leaders to lead learning within their departments or learning areas so that those middle leaders were looking at research, that they were taking some responsibility for the professional learning within their department, that they were inquiring into their own leadership practice. And they became quite practical in their sessions. So I distinctly remember at one point being given the New Zealand curriculum and being told, this actually is what it is. This is how we're wanting to teach it.

How is your practice aligning with it? And where do you need to shift things? We get used to doing the same thing because we've done it the same way and we overfill our curriculum because we pick up things like magpies. But they were also quite clear as well because they spoke about, well, this is the direction we're going in.

Now, if you don't like this, then you might want to consider whether this is something that you want to do and is there another option for you? And so giving people the opportunity to decide, yes, I do want to go with this or going, no, actually, I'm happy to take a step back and maybe they step down from a leadership role or maybe they move somewhere else. They were not shoved out in any way, but there was a very clear picture of, we're wanting to reimagine what our learning is. And it wasn't anything radical.

This was about trying to shift practice. It still looked like a school, but there was a variety of approaches going on. But I think it was that transparency and communication and also getting that buy-in like when they said, we're going to change the curriculum for the first time in 25 years and it might change again next year and it probably will because they would iterate on that too. So shifting the role of the middle leader to better become that conduit between the strategic plan vision and senior leadership and what was happening in the classroom and providing that support, I think that was quite critical.

I like the realism with which you described this process as well, because I've been working with an organization recently and very, very new organization. So a little bit different to this, but they've got like a community who are developing this organization together. So the balance between just getting input on everyone, but eventually them saying, actually, no, we do need to actually just define a direction and then say, it's time for you to decide whether you're on with it, but we have to move forward with something. And it can sound a bit harsh, but the reality is that's sometimes the only way to do it in the end.

Like you can work on buying structures, you can work on hopefully having rich conversations with them to understand their context, the culture that they're from, but also once that vision is established to say, this is what we've decided, are you coming with us? It's creating coherency and transparency, which was just incredibly important and empowering people too, along with it. I think that's where that dialogic leadership is really important. There's times where we need creative leadership and then there's times where we need instructional leadership and there's times where we need dialogic leadership and then you can go through all the different frameworks, but knowing when to engage with which bit at which point I think is quite important as well.

So for that character and culture, I think, knowing how you're wanting to lead the staff and at which point which to lean into, I think that's also important too. I'm interested for you to go back to there, like how did it go? What bumps in the road did you come across and was there anything interesting that just really sticks out to you in that kind of change? Yeah, humans are humans, you know?

Yeah. And change is uncomfortable and there's ambiguity in that and some people are more comfortable with ambiguity than others and with the Connected Learning Team, we were integrating science, social studies and English and we started off with six teachers and creating communities of practice for both groups of three and then as a group as well and teachers collaborating together when they're used to doing their own thing, we're worried that we're gonna get called out or that we're doing something wrong or maybe we're not as good as the other person. It's quite funny. Or we're just used to doing the way we are to do it and we're the expert in our field and what I found was it took six months and it's interesting because no matter how I've done this over the last few years, this always takes about six months for teachers to feel like they built the relationship and that relational trust to collaborate and work strongly together and so whilst you're navigating that, understanding and allowing space for the teachers to be frustrated, again, it's about knowing your teachers, allowing them to come in and go, oh, Tam, I don't think this is going to work.

I don't understand why you're doing this and then then coming back a week or two later, oh, no, it did work, it was awesome. For me, in my role, sitting in the ambiguity going, oh, fingers crossed, the research says it should and then trusting the teacher and the expertise that they have, I think the bumps in the road, again, fits into that character and culture. It's the human nature of what we are and what we're doing. Also, students, we got a lot of feedback from students and initially, we wanted to design a course where you couldn't tell what was English and what was science and what was social studies but we found that the kids had come to high school and they wanted to know what science was and they wanted to know what English was and they had this preconceived idea of what high school was all about and then we took that feedback on board and went, oh, actually, they're going to need to go to university or off to the next pathway and they need to know where these subjects connect and so we kind of shifted our approach then based on the feedback from the students so whenever we created these integrated units, we would say, well, this is the English component and you can see this here, here and here or this is the science section and so they could see how the curriculum sort of came together because we had this integration but it was one teacher in front of the students at the time because our classrooms weren't big enough to start off with.

Where now with the curriculum integration I'm doing currently, that's three teachers with the students all at once but again, found that it takes six months for the teachers to build that relationship and if you're designing a whole new course, then it's funny, you get the, oh, this is good, I'm into this and then this whole, I'm not sure and then as they move through and so with the current teacher we've got, he said, I want to be able to do this in my other classes, how do I take what I'm learning? So I think the character and culture is the bumps in the roads and I think that's where some really awesome learning comes from and it's about how we make our teachers and our students, they're taking a risk with us to feel comfortable in the newness. This episode is supported by the International Curriculum Association. The ICA have been around for 30 years now championing quality, unlocking potential and improving learning in international schools and what I really love is that right at their core is the model for improving learning.

This is a model focused on the learning experience and they have got tons of great curriculum materials, PD resources and even an accreditation pathway for schools just like yours. If you're interested, head to internationalcurriculum.com. This episode is supported by the International Center for Coaching in Education and I am actually on their current cohort.

I don't recommend anything I don't believe in and I am genuinely excited to be strengthening my coaching practice this year. The ILM Level 7 Certificate in Executive Coaching is built specifically for senior leaders in international schools. It's fully online, really practical and honestly, learning alongside other school leaders to get the context we work in as being brilliant. If coaching is something you want to develop properly, not just dabbling, head to theicce.org

or click the link in the show notes and listeners to this podcast get an exclusive 5% discount using the code SHANE5, that's SHANE5. Often leaders will be given well-intentioned advice that might say things like, to really lead a new project or to lead change, you need to give clear direction and be a pace setter and it's kind of go, go, go. So all our shoulders that need to be moving is really intense and really real. And yet it's interesting that in the change you documented but also in your changes since you've noted this six months, it's six months, six months of building relational trust and six months of allowing them space to be frustrated and to think about the feedback and I can't really do too much about that.

And also allowing people who are within the change to go through almost a cultural adaptation, like, you know, almost the classic kind of honeymoon maybe they first think there's a problem and they're happy and then the crisis where they go, no, this is change. I don't want to do this. And you've got to be humble enough and patient enough and confident enough to allow that for a time. Yeah, I think for me, one of the things I found with the research was that when it came to curriculum integration, one of the things teachers were in the research really scared of was losing the subject specific content knowledge that somehow their subject area would be watered down.

And so I think when it comes to creating change if you can have those honest discussions and find out where the fear is sitting, because that's really important because our teachers are experts in their field. And so if they're feeling uncomfortable or worried about something, trying to figure out where it is, you know, putting in place a new learning management system, then, you know, changing and having to learn a new system, you know, slows down your day and everything else. And, you know, teachers will be annoyed by that initially, but then it becomes right. But it's the same with pedagogical change or curriculum change, it's a changeful stop.

Is the fact that you need to listen and you need to have empathy, and you need to be willing to listen to diverse viewpoints and accept that maybe what you've initially created is not quite right and that it needs to be an iterative process. Like I said, we were aiming at the very start for a very transdisciplinary course, but then realized that we needed to pivot on it. But at the same time, we also, we started off with two classes, six teachers, and then the following year, we had three classes. And then the following year, we had five classes.

And then the following year, we rolled it out to a two of our year levels. And I had to kick back a little bit because we didn't have the capacity with our teachers to go all in early on, even though there was demand. So students would opt into the course, and we always had too many students for us. And then there was the pressure from the parent community.

But if we have teachers in there when they're not ready, then it's not gonna work. I also strongly believe with curriculum designs, you have to know your learning objectives. Like what is the outcome? What is the concrete outcome that these kids are gonna get at the end of the year?

And if you're holding onto that, then all the other things can kind of shift and move a little bit. I'm really glad you said that because I was thinking the balance sounds really difficult to me. And I think to a lot of people, how do you balance when you're leading a change? Being open and adaptable, adapting to the people in front of you when they raise their anxieties, but also staying mission focused and ensuring you don't adapt it away from what you were trying to do.

So am I hearing from you that your solution for that is to keep focused on the outcome? Those outcomes need to be clear and measurable. And when we have learning outcomes or curriculum outcomes, then the context or the content in which we do it can shift and change. But if we're saying that by the end of the year, students will be able to do X, then whatever methodology we decide to get there, that that's our guiding light.

Now, you might find like we've done with our futures program here is that we've sort of shifted a little bit some of the focus with realizing just what the kids were capable of. We've been working with them with developing empathy and how you do that with teenagers, that's tricky too. But yeah, having those concrete outcomes and having a framework, I think, not being inflexible, but knowing like where is the student's key evaluations of learning taking place. So I very much believe in standards-based learning.

And so it's about evaluating learning over time and giving students multiple opportunities for developing skills and demonstrating understanding of content and subject skills. And so where are students gonna get those opportunities and how are you going to evaluate it? And so those sorts of things can shift a little bit, but the goal of whatever it is should be clear. Yeah, clarity, that's so true.

Sometimes we think we've got a good outcome, but it's not clear. Sometimes not clear to our community and sometimes not even clear to ourselves. So making sure you've got that clarity. Thinking a little bit of thick skin too, like having a teacher come to you all flustered and saying, this is not going to work, I don't know what you're doing.

And being able to take that and help them unpack it and then look at what needs to change. Is there something I'm doing that needs some work or is it just the end of a week and it's been full on? For sure. Tom, this has been a brilliant exploration of change.

I wonder if you were to synthesize for listeners, so we've got lots of school leaders listening, thinking I'm about to embark on a change or actually I've got a curriculum that is fragmented and we need to bring it together. Do you have any advice based on your journeys on some of the first steps they might take? I think it's that character and culture piece. I think it's knowing you, why?

Who are the teachers? Why are you doing this for the students? How does it fit with your school and those mission and values? Understanding the capacity of your teachers too, sometimes you might think that Teacher X is the perfect, but maybe they're loaded up with like four or five different projects and there's someone else in the wings that actually could do it.

I think being very clear on what the desired outcome is and how it fits with the strategic plan and not trying to push the change. Sometimes you go to another school and you're like, oh, I really like this. And you try and bring it back. But your school is an inner city school and that school is out in the country.

They are a small school, you're a big school and it's not gonna work. It was never going to work, even though if you had adapted it and changed it. And I think, well, I'd say for school teachers, the ones not in leadership, but are wanting to play with their curriculum, I think find someone else, it doesn't have to be the same learning area, doesn't even necessarily have to be the same school that kind of wants to do the same thing you were doing and try and figure out how your curriculum can be re-imagined. I did that years ago.

I was teaching English and I worked with a science teacher and we managed to create this integrated unit. And the reason we did it was because we were told you can't integrate science and English. This was a long time ago. You did it out of protest, did you?

Yeah. So yeah, but it worked well. But I think what our leaders can do is to see our teachers and see the ones that are wanting to do the change and then ask them, what do you need? When I, in the research, was creating these connected classes, I needed them to be double periods.

That meant the timetable had to change. I needed to be able to support the two classes with the teachers who were professional learning and the school invested in me. The staffing, they removed a class off me so that I would have the time because it wasn't about the finances, it was about having the time in order to do it. So I think for leaders is thinking smart around how you can adjust the systems that are within a school in order to facilitate the pedagogical and curriculum change by knowing what it is that the teacher needs and the student needs.

So I guess if I was to put it down to three things, I would say start with relationships and would think about how can you create an environment within the school where there are pilots happening and they could be pilots happening within a single course or across. It could be something new and flashy. It could be something that's just nudging at someone along, but staying anchored to purpose I think is really important. There's one thing that Tam said that I keep coming back to.

That's that we talk about knowing thy student, but we really need to know thy teacher too. How often do we actually apply that same thinking to the adults in our buildings? Tam's framework, it puts character and culture right at the centre with pedagogy, systems, curriculum, operating around it. And I think we often start with the exciting stuff, right?

The curriculum redesign, that new approach. But if you don't understand your people first, then even the best ideas won't land. So three things to try. First, before your next big change, spend a bit of time to understand who your people are and what their capacity actually is right now.

Second, find your willing experimenters and ask them what they need. As Tam found out, sometimes it's not about the finances, it's actually about time. And third, you need to stay anchored to your purpose. Be clear on the outcomes, but flexible on how you get there.

You can find out more about Tam's work and connect with her using the links in the show notes. Education Needers is hosted by me, Shane Leaning. Thanks so much to the show editor, Pete McGill, for the production assistance by Skyler Rose Sturman and for the original music by Guillermo Silva. And thank you so, so much today for tuning in.

If we don't speak before, I'll see you here next week. If you're interested in the work of the International Center for Coaching in Education or the International curriculum association, check out the links in the show notes.