20,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Bildung
- Sprache: Englisch
From leading educational researcher Ron Ritchhart, a deep dive that illuminates what the foundational mindsets needed to create cultures of thinking really looks like in action.
Building on the framework presented in the best-selling Creating Cultures of Thinking, Ron Ritchhart’s new book, Cultures of Thinking in Action, takes the next step in helping readers not only understand how a culture of thinking looks and feels, but also how to create it for themselves and their learners. Arguing that no set of practices or techniques alone is sufficient to create a culture of thinking in and of itself, Ritchhart explores the underlying beliefs that motivate the creation of cultures of thinking, presenting key mindsets every educator and leader needs to embrace if they are serious about creating powerful thinkers and learners.
Much more than just an instructional guide, Cultures of Thinking in Action offers readers a reflective journey into their own teaching, leading, and parentingwhile providing the foundation and concrete strategies needed to create and develop a culture of thinking for all learners.
This book:
- Presents ten foundational mindsets of a culture of thinking
- Includes the latest research of the Cultures of Thinking Project
- Includes questions, exercises, and discussion prompts to inspire reflection by individuals and teams
- Provides case studies and best practice scenarios to exemplify each mindset
- Provides useful data collection tools to inform one’s teaching practice
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 590
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2023
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Additional Praise for
Cultures of Thinking in Action
Title Page
Copyright
Dedication
List of Figures
List of QR Codes
Acknowledgments
About the Author
Introduction
MINDSET 1: For Classrooms to Be Cultures of Thinking for Students, Schools Must Be Cultures of Thinking for Teachers
WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS:
WHY
DOES IT MATTER?
VISIONS AND REFLECTIONS:
HOW
MIGHT IT LOOK?
DATA, PRINCIPLES, AND PRACTICES:
WHAT
ACTIONS CAN WE TAKE?
Conclusion: Our Theory of Action
MINDSET 2: We Can't Directly Teach Dispositions; We Must Enculturate Them
WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS:
WHY
DOES IT MATTER?
VISIONS AND REFLECTIONS:
HOW
MIGHT IT LOOK?
DATA, PRINCIPLES, AND PRACTICES:
WHAT
ACTIONS CAN WE TAKE?
Conclusion: Our Theory of Action
Notes
MINDSET 3: To Create a New Story of Learning, We Must Change the Role of the Student and the Teacher
WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS:
WHY
DOES IT MATTER?
VISIONS AND REFLECTIONS:
HOW
MIGHT IT LOOK?
DATA, PRINCIPLES, AND PRACTICES:
WHAT
ACTIONS CAN WE TAKE?
Conclusion: Our Theory of Action
Note
MINDSET 4: Students Learn Best When They Feel Known, Valued, and Respected by Both the Adults in the School and Their Peers
WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS:
WHY
DOES IT MATTER?
VISIONS AND REFLECTIONS:
HOW
MIGHT IT LOOK?
DATA, PRINCIPLES, AND PRACTICES:
WHAT
ACTIONS CAN WE TAKE?
Conclusion: Our Theory of Action
MINDSET 5: Learning Is a Consequence of Thinking
WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS:
WHY
DOES IT MATTER?
VISIONS AND REFLECTIONS:
HOW
MIGHT IT LOOK?
DATA, PRINCIPLES, AND PRACTICES:
WHAT
ACTIONS CAN WE TAKE?
Conclusion: Our Theory of Action
Notes
MINDSET 6: Learning and Thinking Are as Much a Collective Enterprise as They Are an Individual Endeavor
WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS:
WHY
DOES IT MATTER?
VISIONS AND REFLECTIONS:
HOW
MIGHT IT LOOK?
DATA, PRINCIPLES, AND PRACTICES:
WHAT
ACTIONS CAN WE TAKE?
Conclusion: Our Theory of Action
MINDSET 7: Learning Occurs at the Point of Challenge
WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS:
WHY
DOES IT MATTER?
VISIONS AND REFLECTIONS:
HOW
MIGHT IT LOOK?
DATA, PRINCIPLES, AND PRACTICES:
WHAT
ACTIONS CAN WE TAKE?
Conclusion: Our Theory of Action
Notes
MINDSET 8: Questions Drive Thinking and Learning
WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS:
WHY
DOES IT MATTER?
VISIONS AND REFLECTIONS:
HOW
MIGHT IT LOOK?
DATA, PRINCIPLES, AND PRACTICES:
WHAT
ACTIONS CAN WE TAKE?
Conclusion: Our Theory of Action
Notes
MINDSET 9: The Opportunities We Create for Our Students Matter to Their Engagement, Empowerment, and Learning
WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS:
WHY
DOES IT MATTER?
VISIONS AND REFLECTIONS:
HOW
MIGHT IT LOOK?
DATA, PRINCIPLES, AND PRACTICES:
WHAT
ACTIONS CAN WE TAKE?
Conclusion: Our Theory of Action
Notes
MINDSET 10: We Make Thinking and Learning Visible to Demystify, Inform, and Illuminate These Processes
WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS:
WHY
DOES IT MATTER?
PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES:
HOW
MIGHT IT LOOK?
DATA, PRINCIPLES, AND PRACTICES:
WHAT
ACTIONS CAN WE TAKE?
Conclusion: Our Theory of Action
Note
Epilogue
APPENDIX A: Snapshot Observation Protocol
APPENDIX B: Thinking‐Routines–Based Learning Labs
APPENDIX C: 4 Types of Teacher Dialogue in Professional Learning Contexts
Note
APPENDIX D: Culture Messaging Ghost Walk
Note
APPENDIX E
APPENDIX F: Functioning in Groups
Note
APPENDIX G: Success Analysis Protocol: Powerful Learning Opportunities
Note
APPENDIX H: The Slice Protocol
APPENDIX I: Visibility Ghost Walk
Note
References
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 1
Table 1.1 Professional learning survey.
Chapter 3
Table 3.1 Recording template: Engaged and empowered learners.
Chapter 4
Table 4.1 Recording template: Significant learning and significant relations...
List of Illustrations
Introduction
Figure I.1 The Golden Circle.
Figure I.2 The Golden Circle as an outline for this book.
Figure I.3 8 cultural forces.
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1 Informational versus transformational learning.
Figure 1.2 Inquiry Design Cycle.
Figure 1.3 #ObserveMe.
Figure 1.4 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create.
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create.
Chapter 3
Figure 3.1 Creating a new story of learning.
Figure 3.2 What type of learner are we promoting?
Figure 3.3 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create.
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1 Relational mapping.
Figure 4.2 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create.
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1 Understanding Map.
Figure 5.2 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create.
Chapter 6
Figure 6.1 Ladder of Feedback.
Figure 6.2 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create.
Chapter 7
Figure 7.1 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create.
Chapter 8
Figure 8.1 Typology of questions.
Figure 8.2 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create.
Chapter 9
Figure 9.1 Elements of Powerful Learning Opportunities.
Figure 9.2 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create.
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1 Four practices of making thinking visible.
Figure 10.2 Looking for learning.
Figure 10.3 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create.
EPILOGUE
Figure E.1 Design Cycle for exploring culture
of
thinking
in
action mindsets...
Guide
Cover Page
Additional Praise for Cultures of Thinking in Action
Title Page
Copyright
Dedication
List of Figures
List of QR Codes
Acknowledgments
About the Author
Introduction
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Epilogue
APPENDIX A: Snapshot Observation Protocol
APPENDIX B: Thinking‐Routines–Based Learning Labs
APPENDIX C: 4 Types of Teacher Dialogue in Professional Learning Contexts
APPENDIX D: Culture Messaging Ghost Walk
APPENDIX E
APPENDIX F: Functioning in Groups
APPENDIX G: Success Analysis Protocol: Powerful Learning Opportunities
APPENDIX H: The Slice Protocol
APPENDIX I: Visibility Ghost Walk
References
Index
Wiley End User License Agreement
Pages
i
v
vi
vii
xv
xvi
xvii
xviii
xix
xx
xxi
xxiii
xxv
xxvi
xxvii
xxviii
xxix
xxx
xxxi
xxxii
xxxiii
xxxiv
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
29
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
99
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
123
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
149
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
259
261
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
Additional Praise for Cultures of Thinking in Action
“Cultures of Thinking in Action is a wonderful book. Unlike too many books for teachers, Ron Ritchhart invites, inspires, and supports educators to think, to examine the why of teaching instead of imposing on them a set of good practices.”
—Yong Zhao, Ph.D., Foundation Distinguished Professor, School of Education, University of Kansas and Professor in Educational Leadership Melbourne Graduate School of Education
“Ritchhart's newest book gets to the heart of one of society's most pernicious problems—how to meaningfully improve education—by helping teachers and administrators understand the social and cultural ‘why's' behind the procedural ‘how's' of pedagogical practice. Cultures of Thinking in Action is essential reading for anyone genuinely interested in building schools that effectively support children's learning.”
—Mary Helen Immordino‐Yang, Director, Center for Affective Neuroscience, Development, Learning and Education and Professor of Education, Psychology & Neuroscience, University of Southern California
“No one has thought more about how to teach for good thinking than Ron Ritchhart. Drawing on decades of experience and multiple bodies of research, Cultures of Thinking in Action offers wisdom, guidance, and inspiration for any teacher grappling with the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of classroom teaching.”
—Jason Baehr, Author of Deep in Thought: A Practical Guide to Intellectual Virtues, co‐founder of Intellectual Virtues Academy of Long Beach
Cultures of Thinking in Action
10 MINDSETS TO TRANSFORM OUR TEACHING AND STUDENTS' LEARNING
Ron Ritchhart
Copyright © 2023 by Jossey‐Bass Publishing. All rights reserved.
Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.
Published simultaneously in Canada.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per‐copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750‐8400, fax (978) 750‐4470, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, (201) 748‐6011, fax (201) 748‐6008, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permission.
Trademarks: Wiley and the Wiley logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the United States and other countries and may not be used without written permission. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762‐2974, outside the United States at (317) 572‐3993 or fax (317) 572‐4002.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic formats. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data is available:
ISBN 9781119901068 (Paperback)
ISBN 9781119901082 (ePDF)
ISBN 9781119901075 (ePUB)
Cover Design: Wiley
Cover Images: © naihei/Shutterstock; © Artos/Shutterstock
Author Photo by Max Woltman
To my father, who has always been my biggest supporter and who steadfastly reads all my books, not because he will necessarily use the ideas, but because he loves me.
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I.1 The Golden Circle
Figure I.2 The Golden Circle as an outline for this book
Figure I.3 8 cultural forces
Figure 1.1 Informational versus transformational learning
Figure 1.2 Inquiry Design Cycle
Figure 1.3 #ObserveMe
Figure 1.4 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create
Figure 2.1 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create
Figure 3.1 Creating a new story of learning
Figure 3.2 What type of learner are we promoting?
Figure 3.3 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create
Figure 4.1 Relational mapping
Figure 4.2 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create
Figure 5.1 Understanding Map
Figure 5.2 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create
Figure 6.1 Ladder of Feedback
Figure 6.2 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create
Figure 7.1 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create
Figure 8.1 Typology of questions
Figure 8.2 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create
Figure 9.1 Elements of Powerful Learning Opportunities
Figure 9.2 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create
Figure 10.1 Four practices of making thinking visible
Figure 10.2 Looking for learning
Figure 10.3 Amplify‐Modify‐Remove‐Create
Figure E.1 Design Cycle for exploring culture
of
thinking
in
action mindsets
LIST OF QR CODES
CoT Fellows Program Website QR Code
Making‐Meaning video QR code
QR Code for Relational Mapping video
Massachusetts Department of Education videos QR code
Conversation rubrics and self‐assessments QR code
Daily Dedication video QR code
Lieutenant General David Morrison video QR code
Barry White Jr. Handshakes video QR code
3As Routine video QR code
QR code for spreadsheets and radar graphs for in This Class data
QR code for alternative versions of understanding
QR code for The City of Reggio Video
QR code for GSCE video
QR code for accountable talk video
QR code for Fishbowl Ladder of Feedback video
QR Code for Stuck on an Escalator video
QR Code for Learning Pit video
QR Code for growth mindset lessons
QR Code for My Favorite No video
QR Code for Essential Questions video
QR Code for
Washington, D.C., Belongs to Everyone!
book
QR Code for The Truth about Snakes video
QR Code for Austin's Butterfly video
QR Code for Amazing Circus Act video
QR Code for Micro Lab video
QR Code for Cultures of Teaching Fellows website
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This book has been years in the making. Although some of the ideas explored here were present at the very beginning of the cultures of thinking project in 2005, they have since grown, developed, transformed, expanded, and taken on new resonance over the years through my ongoing work with schools and teachers around the world. In these settings, I have had numerous informal conversations in which new ideas have been sparked and my thinking spurred. Sometimes it was a question a participant asked at a workshop; other times it was an issue a teacher was having that they wanted to explore, or a coaching conversation with a school principal. These moments have consistently fueled my curiosity, deepened my understanding, sometimes challenged me, and always enriched my thinking. These conversations have encouraged me to identify and explore the mindsets foundational to the creation of a culture of thinking. Without those conversations, as incidental, ad hoc, and fleeting as they might have been, this book would not have happened. We develop our ideas through dialogue within a community, not in isolation. So, to all those who have engaged with me in conversation around the joys and challenges of building a culture of thinking, I thank you.
In taking these ideas from merely floating around in my head or in conversation to an actual framework, I am greatly indebted to the generous support of the Melville Hankins Family Foundation, which has nurtured my research for many years. Its funding supported a team of researchers at Project Zero at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. This team spent years digging into the research behind each mindset, looking at case studies, and clarifying what each mindset might mean to students and teachers. A special thanks to the team of Christine Beltran, Natasha Blitz‐Jones, Yudith Dian, Hazel Peh, Emily Piper‐Vallillo, Catherine Mcconnell, Carolyn Ho, Ursula August, liana Gutierrez, Elyse Postlewaite, Richard Mannoia, and Sean Glazebrook for their dedication in this exploration. Our team was led with great skill by Terri Turner. Terri's curiosity about the world, about children, and about learning motivated and inspired us. Her willingness to ask questions, to puzzle, and look at ideas from new perspectives encouraged our exploration. In addition, her organizational skills, good humor, and sense of community held us together as a team.
The Melville Hankins Family Foundation funding has also facilitated a multiyear collaboration with Mandela International Magnet School (MIMS) in Santa Fe, New Mexico. In this setting, we have been able to explore these mindsets as they were just taking shape in my head and through our research. Most recently the Cultures of Thinking Fellows project (more on this in Mindset 1 and the Epilogue) has provided the forum for teachers' inquiries into how these mindsets can transform teaching and learning. I want to thank our pilot group of CoT Fellows for their willingness to jump into this uncharted space. With much appreciation to Nevada Benton, Dory Daniel, Erin Gaddis, Randy Grillo, John Hise, Virginia Hofferber, Lydia Hogan, Kristine Kamrath, Janssen King, Rachel Langone, Scott Larson, Susanna Mireles‐Mankus, William Neuwirth, Ashlee Pagoda, Sairey Pickering, Matthew Rapaport, Christina Romero, Ahlum Scarola, and Terri Scullin.
For over 25 years, I have stood on the shoulders of giants at Project Zero at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, learning from my mentors David Perkins and Howard Gardner. I'm grateful for their guidance and generosity. I have also had the good fortune to work alongside inspirational colleagues Tina Blythe, Mara Krechevsky, and Ben Mardell. Their research in schools continues to inspire me. Throughout this book, I have drawn on examples from their work on the use of protocols, professional learning communities, documentation, play, and making learning visible. I know you will be as inspired by their work as I am.
A special partner in dialogue whom I wish to thank is my longtime friend, colleague, and co‐author on two other books, Mark Church. This book would not have been possible without him and is certainly much better because of his involvement. No matter where in the world either of us were, I could always count on Mark to respond to a text, phone call, or email query if I had an idea I needed to talk through. He was, and continues to be, there with good questions, useful insights, and just the right amount of push back and humor to keep me in check. Growing these ideas with such a talented thought partner has been a true blessing. As an early reader of this manuscript, he offered invaluable feedback and editorial assistance that substantively shaped my writing. Joining Mark in offering great editorial assistance and suggestions were my dear colleagues Connie Weber and Julie Landvogt. Having this incredible triad of professional educators and deep readers who were steeped in the ideas of cultures of thinking to read and respond to my writing has been crucial in making this book what it is. Thank you for letting me know when I was hitting the right notes, when things were missing, when more clarity was needed, and when I should have used effect instead of affect.
Finally, I wish to thank all the teachers who have invited me into their classrooms and shared their teaching with me. Sometimes, I have been able to be physically present; other times, I observed via video, and still on other occasions I was invited into classrooms through our correspondence or the sharing of student work. Their generosity allowed me to write the case studies in each chapter that embody each mindset. Thanks to Susan Osgood, Trevor MacKenzie, Jeff Watson, Kristen Kullberg, Thalia Ormsby, Ravi Grewal, Heather Woodcock, Mean Gretzinger, Kate Mills, Mike Medvinksy, Adam Hellebuyck, Anna Ramirez, Doug McGlathery, and Cameron Paterson.
Finally, I must thank my husband for giving me the space, and at times distance, I needed to immerse myself in writing and put my thoughts into words. I know it's not always easy living with a writer, so thank you for your patience and encouragement. I couldn't do what I do without you.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Ron Ritchhart is a world‐renowned educator, researcher, and author. For over 25 years, Ron served as a Senior Research Associate and Principal Investigator at Project Zero at the Harvard Graduate School of Education where his research focused on understanding how to develop, nurture, and sustain cultures of thinking for both students and teachers. A strong theme of learning from best practice runs throughout all of Ron's research and writing. Consequently, he spends extensive time in schools and classrooms. Ron's ability to seamlessly merge theory, research, practice, and application together in a highly accessible and engaging manner has made him a best‐selling author of numerous books, including Intellectual Character, Making Thinking Visible, Creating Cultures of Thinking, and The Power of Making Thinking Visible. After leaving Harvard in 2021, Ron has continued his classroom and school‐based research and writing to further the ideas of visible thinking and the creation of schools and classrooms as cultures of thinking.
Ron is a sought‐after speaker for his ability to connect with and engage fellow educators in powerful, big‐picture ideas, while simultaneously providing useful insights into and practical ideas for advancing the complex world of teaching and learning. This is no doubt, in part, due to Ron's diverse experience as a teacher, which includes teaching elementary school, art, secondary mathematics, undergraduates, and graduate students. Upon Ron's Harvard retirement from the Harvard Graduate School of Education, Howard Gardner commented, “Of all of us at Harvard Project Zero, you have had the most influence on what teachers around the world do in their classrooms and how to talk and think about it.”
INTRODUCTION
It's not common for an author to introduce his new book with an apology, but perhaps one is in order on this occasion—for at least some readers. Given the title, Cultures of Thinking in Action, you may have picked up this book excited to learn how to “do” cultures of thinking. Perhaps you thought, “Finally, a practical how‐to guide that spells it all out step‐by‐step!” Or maybe you were thinking, “Great, a resource book I can hand teachers to work through how to implement cultures of thinking.” To be sure, this book is meant as a resource for all those eager to cultivate a culture of thinking in their schools and classrooms. You will also find that it offers many practical ideas, tools, and resources. However, first and foremost, it is about the “why?” of our teaching. Thus, it is a book meant to spark self‐examination and collective reflection with both oneself and with colleagues. My goal is not merely to offer up a new collection of ideas, but to stir reflection that will spark transformation. Who are you as a teacher? What do you believe about teaching and learning? How do those beliefs reflect your stance toward teaching and play out in your classroom? How do these beliefs inform and propel your actions?
It is in those moments when we look critically at our practices and challenge our assumptions that we make the leap from informational learning, focused on learning about something, to transformational learning, the learning that allows us to challenge the status quo and embrace the complexity of the enterprise of teaching and learning (Mezirow 2000). For decades, policy makers, innovators, and administrators have often located professional learning in a set of practices. These folks often assume that if one changes teaching practices, revamps the curriculum, trains teachers in new instructional methods, then schools have been transformed. However, decades of failed efforts and unsustainable reforms have shown that this isn't the case. True transformation resides not at the surface level, the “what?” of teaching or even at the implementation or the “how?” No. True transformation resides in plumbing the depths of the “why?” of our teaching. What are we teaching for? What do we believe and hold true about teaching and learning?
In his writings and popular TED Talk, “How great leaders inspire action,” Simon Sinek (2009) explains the relationship between the what, the how, and the why through a diagram he calls the Golden Circle (see Figure I.1). It is common, and perhaps even intuitive, for businesses, leaders, and even teachers to start with the outside of the circle, the practical, the “what” and then perhaps spend time thinking about the “how?” After all, the “what” is so tangible. It's clear to everyone what the group does, makes, or delivers. This can be put on a spreadsheet, shelf, or test. The “what” can easily be translated into a measurable “SMARTT” (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, targeted, and time‐framed) goal or “KPI” (key performance indicator). It also is easy for leaders to manage, track, and oversee.
However, Sinek explains that truly great companies and leaders operate from the inside out. They begin with the “why?' This grounds them in a vision that directs and guides both their current and future work. It provides a sense of mission, purpose, and inspiration. As Sinek explains, Apple as a company doesn't just make computers (the what); they believe in challenging the status quo, in thinking differently by making beautifully designed products that are simple to use (the why) (Sinek 2009, #947). It is not the “what” that drives their success, extreme customer loyalty, and long lines outside their stores when new products are introduced, but the “why.”
Figure I.1 The Golden Circle.
By focusing on the “why?” I am not just transporting a popular idea from the business world to schools. There has been a long line of research on the importance of teachers' beliefs, values, and sense of purpose (Calderhead 1996; Thompson 1992). Alan Schoenfeld, professor at UC Berkeley and past president of the American Educational Research Association, conducted a multiyear line of research focused on the beliefs of teachers as central to understanding what does and does not happen in the classroom. His research focused on developing cognitive models that explain and predict teacher behavior (Schoenfeld 2010, #938). When all is going as intended in the classroom, teachers rely on their plans or experience to deliver a lesson—but things rarely go to plan. Students ask questions, make unexpected observations, get confused, have misconceptions, and so on. In these instances, teachers must make decisions. They are no longer merely implementers. Teachers make decisions based on their beliefs and values combined with their repertoire of teaching practices and knowledge of the curriculum. Although the “why?” doesn't act in isolation, it is at the core of the decision‐making process. And, of course, conflicts arise. What happens when one's beliefs don't align with one's pedagogical knowledge and skill? These can either represent moments of conflict, angst, and regression or great opportunities for growth and self‐discovery.
As part of a study of effective pedagogy conducted by the South Australian government, researchers found that teachers' beliefs and the way they understood their role as teachers were a better predictor of their teaching actions and general pedagogical repertoire than were their age, gender, or years of experience (Atkin 2019, #2155). Furthermore, teachers' epistemic awareness—that is, their awareness of how they understand the enterprise of teaching and the assumptions they are making about their teaching practice and students' learning—was found to be an important factor in promoting teacher growth and change (Atkin 2019, #1866). Teachers who were more epistemically aware tended to reflect on both their practice and their assumptions. As a result, they tended to question and probe their beliefs and embrace the complexity of teaching: transformative learning. Such occasions provided them with the opportunity for growth and self‐discovery. In contrast, teachers who were less self‐aware tended to view teaching as being more about content coverage and control. Although these teachers did reflect upon their practice, they did not question their underlying assumptions about teaching and learning. Thus, they tended to view teaching practices as either working or not working and were more likely to abandon new practices that didn't fit well into their existing repertoire or weren't immediately effective for them.
Through her years of helping schools and teachers foster inquiry learning, my good friend and colleague Kath Murdoch has witnessed the importance of teacher beliefs firsthand. She points out, “Our beliefs shape our practice. How we perceive our role as teachers has a profound influence on the language we use with students, the way we organize for learning, the design of learning tasks and what we look and listen for as we assess” (Murdoch 2022, p.47). Kath argues that while it is possible to mimic the practices of any particular approach, in her case inquiry learning, such actions tend to be just going through the motions and lack the dynamism that inspires students' learning. She says this approach “simply wallpapers over existing beliefs that are at odds with inquiry, those underlying beliefs will find all sorts of ways to manifest and even unconsciously undermine or sabotage the practice itself” (p. 47).
Others have written about the core beliefs and values people hold as representing their stance, thus connoting a physical as well as intellectual orienting. Cochran‐Smith and Lytle use stance as a deliberate metaphor in order to “carry allusions to the physical placing of the body as well as to intellectual activities and perspectives over time. In this sense the metaphor is intended to capture the ways we stand, the ways we see, and the lenses we see through” (Cochran‐Smith 1999, pp. 288–289). Mehta and Fine (2019) use the term to capture the way the teachers they studied for their book, In Search of Deeper Learning, viewed constructs key to teaching: the nature of learning, the role of failure, and the ability of their students. For instance, those effective at teaching for deeper learning viewed students as capable creators, failure as critical for learning, and the process of learning as a rich and engaging enterprise. Mehta and Fine also noted that one's stance is contextual. A teacher may engage her advanced students in deeper learning precisely because she saw them as capable creators, but then revert to traditional teaching practices with her lower track students.
My colleague Mark Church has been exploring the importance of a leader's stance in nurturing their school's progress toward a culture of thinking. In our discussions, the two of us have come to see leadership stance as being rooted in one's deeply held beliefs and values about how things work, what matters most, and the nature of the enterprise of leadership itself. A leader's stance will determine how they frame problems, see opportunities, and direct their energies. A leader's stance is what motivates and enlivens any set of practices, or conversely robs them of the oxygen needed to develop. The development of one's leadership stance, as with the stance of teachers, is an organic process, growing out of participation in multiple opportunities for conversation, practice, and reflection.
Recently, the term mindset has found a prominent place in education. The term is perhaps most familiar to educators from Carol Dweck's work on the way people view intelligence: as growing or fixed (Dweck 2006). Others have taken the term to suggest that our succeess at anything depends on how one views the enterprise: Inquiry Mindset, Innovator's Mindset, Ultimate Maker Mindset, Creator Mindset, Super Achiever Mindset, Successful Mindset, The Richest Mindset, Alpha Mindset, The Inclusive Mindset, The Ballerina Mindset (yes, these are all actual books). Despite its ubiquitiousness, I still find the term beneficial. It captures the idea that the way one views and thinks about things matters in terms of shaping our actions and directing our energies. And, as all these books suggest, our mindsets can be examined and thus changed. Furthermore, mindsets are directly tied to and grow out of our beliefs and values, and they position our stance. Thus, I have chosen to use the term mindset in this book to talk about the core ideas we as educators must seek to develop in ourselves.
Two experiences in my work with schools further drove home the importance of mindsets for me. At one school the school leaders were desperate to see some take up of these ideas (cultures of thinking and visible thinking) in the mathematics department. Every year they asked the research team to show videos and give examples of “how this can work in a mathematics classroom,” and in fact we did just that for well over a decade, but it was all for naught. Our examples were rejected out of hand. They simply didn't fit into the teachers' ideas of what teaching was about or how one learned mathematics. Therefore, our examples were worthless to them. Perhaps even less than worthless as, according to them, they reflected the wrong way to teach math: “Where was the direct instruction? The clear explanation and concrete examples? Why wasn't the teacher in the video correcting them and telling them the answer? It's all too slow. I could get twice as much work done in a class period.” Their students scored well on state tests through their current methods, so there was simply no need to change. They were focused on the “what,” the content of the state exam, and saw no need to go deeper. They were unwilling to uncover, let alone challenge their underlying assumptions about teaching, learning, schooling, the nature of mathematics, or purpose of education. To them mathematics was mastering procedures for the test.
At another school, I was confronted by an experienced history teacher after a professional learning session. He was a bit frustrated and confused by our gathering and asked a simple and straightforward question, “What exactly is it you want me to do?” He was willing to give things a go, to try some new practices, but his experience of professional learning was that you were given things to implement in your classroom. He was unused to the reflection, questioning, and examination he was being asked to do and didn't see the point. How would understanding his students' thinking help him teach history? But at least there was some hope. If I could get a few practices happening in this teacher's classroom, I might be able to leverage them for an examination of his beliefs and assumptions. And in fact, when he visited another school and saw students engaging deeply in debate about history, he did begin to question some of his assumptions about how he was teaching and what students were capable of doing.
This kind of self‐ and collective examination, reflection, interrogation, and questioning lies at the heart of developing schools and classrooms as cultures of thinking. It cannot be achieved by merely adding on a set of new practices. One must also reflect upon those practices and one's assumptions about teaching and learning. Therefore, although you will find many practical ideas throughout this book, my hope is that they will be neither your starting nor ending place. In writing and structuring this book, I have done my best to ensure this is unlikely to be the case. Our mindsets orient our stance toward teaching, propel our decision making, and motivate our actions. For this reason, the 10 core mindsets of the Cultures of Thinking Project form the conceptual basis of this book. These 10 mindsets are:
For classrooms to be cultures of thinking for students, schools must be cultures of thinking for teachers.
We can't directly teach dispositions; we must enculturate them.
To create a new story of learning, we must change the role of the student and teacher.
Students learn best when they feel known, valued, and respected by both the adults in the school and their peers.
Learning is a consequence of thinking.
Learning and thinking are as much a collective enterprise as they are an individual endeavor.
Learning occurs at the point of challenge.
Questions drive thinking and learning.
The opportunities we create for our students matter to their engagement, empowerment, and learning.
We make thinking and learning visible to demystify, inform, and illuminate these processes.
The strength of these 10 mindsets is that all are drawn from our two decades of effort helping schools and teachers grow into cultures of thinking. Furthermore, each has a strong research base drawing from the literature on cognitive, developmental, and social psychology, as well as from studies connecting to sociology, leadership, and the field of philosophy. Although I do not present an exhaustive review of all the literature connected to each of the 10 mindsets, I strive to provide an overview of key points and accessible ideas that can ground one's thinking about them and provide a foundation for action.
No doubt these 10 mindsets won't strike you as wholly new or original. The convergence between the ideas presented here and the work being done by others (for instance, work on “Deeper Learning” done by the Hewlett Foundation, the work on “Questioning” done by The Right Question Institute, or the many efforts around social and emotional learning) is a key strength that can create synergy, connection, and coherence while attesting to the general salience of the ideas to our current time as educators. Another quality that makes these ideas powerful is their relevance and broad applicability across subject domains, cultural contexts, and institutional levels. They are as germane to a secondary science teacher in Santa Fe, New Mexico, as they are to a kindergarten teacher in Kobe, Japan. Because I hope that these mindsets will become more than just words on the page, that they become part of your professional stance, each chapter is structured to promote examination, reflection, and discussion as well as action. I encourage you to engage in such reflection and examination on your own as you read. In addition, if you have the opportunity to read and reflect with colleagues, this can be extremely fertile ground for promoting even deeper learning.
Reworking Simon Sinek's Golden Circle (see Figure I.2), I have conceptualized each chapter expanding from the center:
Figure I.2 The Golden Circle as an outline for this book.
Each chapter begins with a statement of the mindset and an exploration of why it matters to us in the Worldwide Cultures of Thinking Project (Ritchhart 2022). Why should it constitute one of our core values as educators? What key ideas or concepts are embedded in or are an important aspect of this value? This is followed by an examination of what research has to say about how this mindset benefits teachers, students, and schools. This core provides us as educators with an anchoring place from which we can then survey the surrounding landscape of both what currently exists and what further actions we might want to try.
From this stance, I invite readers to look outward and consider how this mindset might orient and inform one's action. This orientation has three components: First, you are asked to envision this mindset as being realized and to capture images, stories, and metaphors that will ground your vision. Second, an examination of two case studies drawn from either my own experience or the research literature is presented to expand your view of how it might look when realized. Third, you are invited to orient the mindset with regards to your current practices by critically reflecting on your teaching and/or leadership.
Next, I turn your attention to an examination of the current state of things in your classroom and school. To accomplish this, you will need to collect some street data to inform your efforts. One might contrast street data with the satellite data often used in schools. Satellite data seeks to measure, compare, evaluate, score, and label, often in a hierarchical manner. Such data typically is removed from our lived experience and is controlled by outside entities. In contrast, street data seeks to understand the lived experience of teachers and students. It is often qualitative and experiential, though it can be quantitative. Street data resides not only in how or what one collects but in the way one draws meaning from it. As Shane Safir and Jamila Dugan explain, “Street data embodies both an ethos and a change methodology that will transform how we analyze, diagnose, and assess everything… . It offers us a new way to think about, gather, and make meaning of data” (Safir and Dugan 2021, p. 2). As educators, we make use of street data to make sure that any actions we take will fit our context and help us avoid mindless implementation or the “wallpapering over” that Kath Murdoch warns us about.
The final section of each chapter focuses on what we as educators can do in our classrooms to advance the mindset. Even though this section is focused on “the what” and aims to be practical, it will be important that one's actions not just be related to the mindset being examined but grounded in key principles. Identifying underlying principles helps one understand why an action may be useful as well as helps to identify other possible actions. With these principles identified, you are then ready to explore actions you might take. I connect these actions to the 8 cultural forces (see Figure I.3) so that readers can better understand how these actions work as culture builders. Before rushing to put these actions in place (remember this isn't your basic “how‐to” book), it will be useful to identify what current actions are already happening in your school or classroom. Being thoughtful as educators requires us to attend to the coherence of our actions. Are there things one needs to stop doing? Are there practices that need to be abandoned, rethought, cultivated, or built upon? What barriers exist to moving forward on the actions and how might those be cleared away?
Our collective examination of each chapter's mindset concludes by formulating a theory of action (City, Elmore, Fiarman, and Teitel 2009). A theory of action sets a plan in place. It identifies what one aims to do, as well as how one will know when they are successful. Consider a fire chief deciding to deploy 200 firefighters to the northern edge of a wildfire. The chief is implicitly working from a theory of action: “If we deploy 200 firefighters to spray fire retardant and dig trenches on the northern edge of the wildfire, then we will be able to contain the fire and keep it from spreading northward.” Success is not determined once the firefighters have been deployed as the chief commanded, but only after the result, containment, has been achieved. If the desired outcome is not achieved, then the situation is reviewed: Why didn't that work as expected? Perhaps the winds were too strong. Perhaps the firefighters were too tired due to long hours of work. Perhaps crews had problems with equipment or supplies. A new plan of action is then determined based upon what was learned to better achieve the desired result. So too, our theory of action around each mindset establishes what we will do and specifies the outcome by which we will measure our success.
Figure I.3 8 cultural forces.
Because some readers will dip in and out of this book and not necessarily read it chapter by chapter, I have tried to make this as easy to do as possible by keeping a common format for each chapter as previously described. This means you will notice some familiar language as I introduce various sections and try to orient the reader. I have highlighted such sections in shaded boxes to alert you that this is a common introduction you may have read before but may nonetheless find helpful to read again if you have stepped away from your reading for any length of time.
I have written this book to encourage you to work from the inside out. My hope is that you will use it to examine your assumptions and beliefs about teaching and learning as a means of setting your anchor as a teacher and to lean into your values even as you may feel yourself buffeted by change. To be sure, this journey is not for the faint of heart. As Carlina Rinaldi of Reggio Schools wrote: “Sometimes we move so quickly through our lives we lose the courage of meeting ourselves. What are you doing? Where are you going? This courage to listen, this attention to what is inside ourselves is a sort of interior listening and reflection.” So, while you may be initially disappointed that the long‐hoped‐for, how‐to‐do‐it handbook for implementing a culture of thinking isn't what you are holding (again my apologies), I hope it represents so much more: not merely the instructions for implementation but inspiring guidance for transformation.
MINDSET 1For Classrooms to Be Cultures of Thinking for Students, Schools Must Be Cultures of Thinking for Teachers
It is no coincidence that I have chosen to give this mindset top billing on our list. It is the launching pad from which all substantive efforts to create cultures of thinking in schools must proceed. On a personal level, this mindset informs the stance I take in my initial conversations with schools and school leaders interested in taking on this work precisely because it lays the foundation for any program of professional learning that we might design. To understand this mindset, we need to first understand the concepts of informational learning, transformational learning, and institutional mirroring.
When speaking with school leaders for the first time, I always strive to convey that the work of developing a culture of thinking is not about “training” teachers in one‐off workshops, but engaging them in ongoing, embedded learning over time. We must step out of the old, dominant paradigm of informational learning; that is, the learning that primarily focuses on increasing our knowledge and skill level in a merely additive way. Frequently the goal of such learning is to fix problems or weaknesses in short order by training up teachers in a set of new practices. In informational learning, the goal is to put these practices in place (often as quickly as possible) rather than seeing them as mere tools to help one achieve some greater vision and purpose. Indeed, too often the tool becomes the vision in such trainings. For instance, teachers in a workshop may learn how to implement new assessment practices without ever examining what one is trying to achieve through those practices, how they fit into the ecology of the school, are contextualized by one's teaching practices, or related to one's views of learning. However, when such underlying issues are not fully addressed, the practices being implemented will necessarily lack a strong footing. Consequently, they may be abandoned quickly if they ever take hold at all. Thus, the flurry of activity around the practices imparted in the training may not achieve any lasting change.
Working within the paradigm of informational learning, leaders often assume that more is better, creating a full plate of professional offerings to skill up teachers. Teachers may even respond positively to such efforts, speaking about a workshop as being useful, practical, giving them something they can use, focused on the nuts and bolts of teaching, and so on. Although such efforts can have their place and be of value, the problem is that informational learning rarely goes very deep and is often fleeting. Estimates are that the implementation rate for such programs is only around 10% (Knight 2007, p. 10). Furthermore, informational learning cannot produce the substantive change and rethinking of schooling we seek when we talk about creating cultures of thinking. This requires transformational learning.
Transformational learning calls on us to question the assumptions that undergird our practice through participation in constructive discourse with our colleagues (Mezirow 2000). It is about examining and revising our practice in fundamental ways as opposed to merely adding on to it. To be sure, transformation, deep learning, and substantive change are complex endeavors. Therefore, we must support educators in embracing this complexity by providing opportunities to inquire into their teaching practice within a rigorous, challenging, and nurturing community of professionals, professionals who are willing to take risks and question the status quo themselves. Such inquiry communities move beyond a soft collegiality “in which care is taken not to cause offense” and toward the tough collegiality that allows for hard questioning of our collective practice and is grounded in a willingness to explore other perspectives (Humes 2007).
To accomplish this shift from the purely informational to the transformational (see Figure 1.1), we must develop dialogic structures while providing ongoing, protected time for substantive interchange and reflection. As opposed to a discussion in which ideas and proposals are bandied about with the goal of reaching an outcome, a dialogue brings us together in joint inquiry to build understanding. “In dialogue participants explore complex, difficult issues from many points of view. Individuals suspend their assumptions freely. The result is a free exploration that brings to the surface the full depth of people's experience and thought, and yet can move them beyond their individual views” (Interlead 2019). There is a fundamental shift in the way teachers approach such dialogue as well, moving from a stance of proving and justifying one's actions to improving one's practice (Nelson, Slavit, and Deuel 2012). The first is a defensive posture one might assume when feeling threatened or confronted. The second looks at dialogue as an opportunity for growth. The more we develop this capacity in teachers, the more a school will be capable of meaningful change and reinvention (Abernathy 1999; Senge 2006).
Figure 1.1 Informational versus transformational learning.
To promote and support such dialogue, schools must create a safe and open environment of trust, respect, vulnerability, and authenticity. This will often mean that rather than imposing top‐down structures and expectations on the group, a more collaborative structure in which leaders become learners and learners become leaders emerges. Groups may be co‐facilitated through informal leadership and a co‐construction of agendas and goals, which brings in multiple voices and increases ownership. In such settings, efforts are made to de‐privatize teaching so that educators come to view teaching as a collaborative rather than purely individual act (Campbell 2018). In addition, discussion protocols are often employed to focus and slow down conversations, create equity, and facilitate participants' embrace of complexity. Protocols change the free‐flowing nature of conversations and may at first be rejected by some. However, their benefit in creating a safe environment for the examination of issues, asking of questions, and challenging of the status quo makes them invaluable tools.
A hallmark of a school culture, whether focused on thinking or focused on running the machine, is often revealed in what I call “institutional mirroring.” The idea is that in any institution, people will generally mirror the practices, behaviors, and treatment they experience in their communities when they are interacting with those they supervise or lead. The way teachers get treated as learners and as professionals by their ministries of education, state‐level education departments, district‐level administrators, and school principals will be mirrored in their classrooms. If teachers are controlled and micro‐managed, they will tend to control and micro‐manage their students. By the same token, if teachers are encouraged to innovate, collaborate, and inquire, they will tend to promote these same processes in their classrooms. Thus, we need to support teachers in the ways we want them to support their students. For teachers to be able to create a classroom culture in which students think, inquire, collaborate, discuss, take risks, and learn from mistakes, teachers need to experience such learning for themselves.
WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS: WHY DOES IT MATTER?
When we develop cultures of thinking for teachers, we create fertile ground for professional growth and change. In such cultures, teachers “feel safe to be vulnerable, to admit failings or mistakes and to trust that their colleagues are giving feedback in order for them to improve” (Schwartz 2020). When teachers are part of a culture of thinking, they are more likely to engage in rich conversations about learning, including the discussion of problems, strategies, and solutions. Learning then becomes an “ongoing, collective responsibility rather than an individual one” (Opfer and Pedder 2011). In this atmosphere, individuals can take risks and stretch themselves because there is mutual trust, support, and a shared vision (Keay, Carse, and Jess 2019; Piggot‐Irvine 2012). What is more, the learning that occurs in such spaces has a much higher rate of implementation in the classroom, 85%, versus the 10% rate for informational learning (Knight 2007).
Transformative Power of Inquiry
Inquiry‐based conversations in which teachers work toward making collective meaning of events, data, and experience through constructive dialogue with peers is a fundamental characteristic of a culture of thinking. In these spaces, teachers embrace wondering and grow comfortable with ambiguity and uncertainty. Conversations are alive with conditional language, such as: “I wonder,” “maybe,” “this might be,” “one possibility could be,” and so on. Conditional language allows one to remain open to other perspectives, invites a greater sharing of ideas, and avoids early closure and quick fixes (Langer 1997). In contrast, absolute language, such as, “we should,” “it is,” “we need to,” “we can't,” and so on, tends to constrict conversation, exclude other perspectives, and force early closure.
The presence of more inquiry‐based talk in professional learning groups is linked to teacher's transformative learning, leading to substantive changes in teaching practice (Cochran‐Smith and Lytle 2015; Nelson et al. 2012; Schon 2010). However, this kind of talk is not the norm in most schools. Nelson, Slavit, and Deuel (2012) found that teacher conversations in schools ranged from disconnected, connected, exploratory, to inquiry‐based. The connected conversation was the most prevalent. In connected talk, “The presentation of ideas tends to be authoritative or as statements of fact, and questions are usually logistical, procedural, or technical. Differing perspectives, if recognized, are seldom questioned, tested against evidence, or contrasted with other ideas. Conversational turns may be related to each other in short sequences as teachers complete a task or report results of an activity” (Nelson et al. 2012, p. 27). Helping teachers move beyond connected talk to more exploratory and inquiry conversations by using conditional language and protocols is both a mechanism and a goal of creating a culture of thinking.
This kind of professional learning, centered on collaborative meaning‐making, feels authentic rather than manufactured by outsiders and has been shown to have a positive effect on student achievement (Goddard et al. 2010; Hargreaves and O'Connor 2018; Lara‐Alecio et al. 2012). Through such collaboration, teachers are better able to reflect on their teaching practice, allowing them to assess if what they are doing works or if changes are needed (Reeves, Pun, and Chung 2017). However, it is important that this reflection focuses not only on one's actions, but also on the assumptions and beliefs underpinning those actions. Teachers who do this are more likely to employ responsive teaching techniques that help students build understanding (Atkin 2019).
When a culture of thinking exists for teachers, morale improves, and teachers report higher job satisfaction, which contributes to increased gains in student achievement. Unfortunately, this kind of meaningful, sustained collaboration among teachers is too rarely found in schools (Sarisohn 2018; Schwartz, 2016). Without time and opportunities to learn together, discussions centered around student learning simply don't occur. This inevitably leads to less teacher learning and a decline in the quality of instruction (Burgess, Rawal, and Taylor 2021; Goddard, Goddard, and Tschannen‐Moran 2007; Myers 2018).
Institutional Mirroring
In a culture of thinking, innovation, creativity, and experimentation are the norms. Risk‐taking is necessary to drive innovation and transform schools (Le Fevre 2014). As Deborah Meier has said, “Taking on risk and being more daring is a real important part of creativity.” To build a classroom culture that encourages student risk‐taking, teachers need to demonstrate their own willingness to try new things. However, teachers tend to be risk‐averse for various reasons, including the fear of being ostracized and the fear of public failure (Le Fevre 2014). Therefore, a supportive school culture that embraces teacher inquiry and innovation is important in helping teachers feel safe enough to take risks. When teachers explore and experiment with new ideas that may not always work, students observe how their teachers react and adapt. Thus, students learn the value of failure, understand that learning is a lifelong process, and accept that mistakes are a natural part of that process (Mizell 2010; Schwartz 2016).
The importance of teachers' own learning mirroring the type of instruction we want to see in classrooms has been well documented (Borko 2004; Wei, Darling‐Hammond, Andree, Richardson, and Orphanos 2009). This is particularly true when the focus is on helping students to develop new and more powerful ways of thinking (Gadge 2018). If teachers are to engage their students in any thoughtful action—inquiry, deep learning, problem solving, close looking, complex analysis, or metacognition, for example—then they need to delve into these practices themselves. They need to experience these various approaches first as learners before they can attend to them as teachers. This allows them not only to see the power of these methods, but also to understand them from the inside out, developing empathy for their students as learners. This results in the kind of authentic implementation that can influence student learning (Greenleaf et al. 2011).
