Michael Fullan is a hero of mine. He was very helpful to the education non-profit I led in Houston when it launched in the early 1990’s. Fullan, a professor emeritus, is a former dean of the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto and the global director of leadership for New Pedagogies for Deep Learning. He’s written many books on schools, learning, and change.
Recently, Fullan wrote an article for EducationWeek online. Fullan writes,
“In order to go from our current state of academic obsession to a combination of well-being and learning, research and practice have shown that it takes a while to get to specificity with complex matters. There are two absolutely core concepts, working in tandems, that are imperative: relationships and pedagogy (the nature and practice of learning). Included in these findings – and this is absolutely crucial – is that both these concepts must be context specific (what I call ‘contextual literacy’). Their use is grounded in the personal and cultural knowledge of the groups in question – always.”
“One of the mysteries of change is that it is difficult to establish and keep relationships and pedagogy working together. Yet, if you have one without the other, you do not progress. Teachers can be great at caring, including diverse groups of students, but if the pedagogy is not grounded in the culture of the students in question, overall learning will fail. Or teachers’ pedagogical knowledge may be great, but they fail to understand the cultures and lives of their students. The challenge of our times is addressing mental health and well-being while trying to meet curriculum expectations, i.e., crowded curriculum and difficult learning conditions laced with anxiety and stress. Understanding and addressing both relationships and pedagogy is the challenge of the century for schools.”
“Simplexity requires us to identify the smallest number of key actions that can get us on the road to redemption – hit the ground running. Action is urgent because society with increasing alacrity is heading into what appears to be an abyss – the interaction between social degradation and climate collapse. With the knowledge that deliberate system transformation is rare, and crisis is upon us, people may be prepared to do ‘something’ if it has promise and provides early momentum. Here is a summary of breakthrough change that seems possible to me:
Recognize that systems are extremely difficult to change even when large numbers want change.
Focus on relationships and pedagogy grounded in cultural context or you won’t have a chance.
Worry that the focus [referenced above] will wane if not constantly attended to.
Integrate academics and deep learning. Don’t slip back into academic obsession – the helping hand strikes again.
Beware of a more subtle academic priority problem. You may improve relationships, and pedagogy to improve literacy and numeracy, and be ‘successful’ in that results increase but fail to address the deeper well-being goals or even academic goals related to the learning crucial for coping and thriving in a complex society. In such a case, you would have achieved ‘improvement’ but not transformation. In effect, you would have produced a better version of the status quo – getting better at an old game. Fit for schooling not necessarily for life. The old grammar of school can be subtle.
Build connections to the outside: community, civic agencies, technology, business, policy, world issues like climate, poverty, discrimination, and financial quality. The universe is a system, too, and you are implicated. If you haven’t developed your relationships and pedagogy, you won’t make a good partner in these endeavors.”
Reread Fullan’s six imperatives above – the difficulty of system change, focusing on relationships and pedagogy within a cultural context, constantly attending to the focus, integrating academics with deep learning, focus on learning that matters to cope and thrive within a complex society, and building connections to the outside.
Now tell me if you think traditional schools can do any of this.
I’m not hopeful and haven’t been hopeful for some years now.
The traditional school system is a bureaucracy, and bureaucracies don’t like change.
The traditional school system was not built to focus on relationships. It was built to sort and select based on academic potential/success.
The traditional school system can’t focus on much over a long period of time. Politics always seems to get in the way.
Traditional schools don’t know how to do deep learning, and the school day definitely is not set up to prioritize deep learning, especially on the secondary level.
Traditional schools don’t play well with others in the community sand pile. In the end, school leaders want things done their way. They are basically intolerant of community input that may differ from the school’s strategic intent.
Of course there are always examples of schools and districts that do a vast majority of Fullan’s imperatives well.
But not enough, especially when it comes to schools and districts that serve black, brown, and poor kids and families.
We need a new system of learning that can deliver on Fullan’s imperatives. I think he has the right list. He is just depending on the wrong system to deliver.
Til tomorrow. SVB
A Better Path to Learning 
Leave a comment