- Points toward the progress we want to see in the school. Piloting an idea foreshadows the direction we are trying to go as a school (I have written about the importance of foreshadowing progress in an earlier post). Accepting the idea of a pilot course or program is far easier than making a change that purports from the start to be permanent. Pilots allow a school to test drive ambitious ideas.
- Creates opportunities to extend what is already good in the school culture or curriculum. The lion’s share of progress should allow additional space for the most strategically aligned parts of the existing culture and curriculum to flourish as unconstrained by other factors as possible.
- Encourages experimentation and mitigates the damage that may occur when a new idea falls short. If we are trying to push the boundaries of what we can make happen in a school, we are likely to take a bridge too far from time to time. A pilot course or program creates a safer space for trying something new.
- Creates opportunities for the school community to see the efficacy of the school’s direction. We need chances to demonstrate success in the specific context of our school. Just having examples from other schools is not enough. Just speaking in the abstract has an even shorter lifespan.
In upcoming posts I will flesh out the ideas in each of these bullets.
Ross,I was interviewing the Superintendent of a large local unified school district and he used the “aircraft carrier” version of your ocean liner. Sticking with the metaphorical theme, he talked about getting his people to break down to “destroyer” sized structures. I thought this was a good way to get people to envision what silo-breaking might look like, and I think aligns with the several points that you so clearly articulate. Besides, destroyers fit into Learning Ponds with greater facility than do aircraft carriers and ocean liners!
They move faster, too! Thanks for this, Grant.
Ross,I enjoy reading your thoughts.Exploring a bit: there might be some virtue to “turning slowly” when that’s synonymous with incremental change. Incremental change can be good when your system has a lot of synnergy; if the whole system looks like its failing because one subsystem is out of harmony, bringing that subsystem in line and improving performance in all subsystems would be an incremental change. Or if you’re pretty sure that what you’ve got is close to ideal, incremental change can help you dial it in.But if you think if you think that you’re far from an ideal solution, and the synnergy in your system isn’t too dynamic or unpredictable, jumps are great. And piloting sounds like a great way to test those jumps.Thanks for helping me connect that to the real world. (:–Joe
I think, depending on the situation, turning slowly can be the right approach. I think we simply need more than one gear to pace our progress. Incremental change fits well with the use of pilots as using them strategically always has the potential to lead to choosing the right next step forward. Thank you, Joe, for reading and responding!