In these groups, members say what they’ll do and do what they said. They assume positive intentionality and believe in the goodwill of their colleagues. They understand the difference between a question and a critique. For this reason, they are willing to be vulnerable and disclose both their successes and shortcomings, knowing that this information will not be exploited or belittled. They hold high expectations for themselves and each other and have faith that those expectations will be met and even exceeded.
Seek Equity
High-performing groups leave titles, seniority, and role authority at the door. On this level playing field, they seek a diverse blend of voices and protect space for all to contribute. Less-productive groups limit participation and restrict divergent thought, sealing themselves in the protection of their own logic. They congratulate themselves for small successes and rationalize performance gaps.
High-performing groups ensure reciprocity, foster interdependence, and engage in productive collaboration. They apply structures to ensure that the data shy and the data literate have equal voice in the conversation as all strive for shared understanding. For example, such groups provide equal opportunities to join the conversations by creating smaller task groups that focus on large, shared data displays; using round-robin protocols to balance participation; and publicly charting so ideas belong to everyone.
In these groups, members operate from the assumption that everyone has something to offer. They monitor their own level of participation to be sure they are not dominating the conversation and make sure to encourage participation, especially from those who have not yet shared.
Assume Collective Responsibility
High-performing groups make and honor agreements about who they want to be as a group and what they want to produce for their students. They make data-driven choices and are willing to be answerable for those choices. This collective efficacy, or the shared belief that together the group will successfully achieve its goals, is a prime resource for sustained improvements in student learning (Goddard, Hoy, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2004). In less-productive groups, members are protective of their autonomy in the meeting room and in the classroom. They are unwilling to see others’ work as part of their own. They don’t believe that team members have the capability and willingness to make a difference.
Groups with high degrees of collective responsibility pursue challenging goals, exert concentrated effort, and persist in collective action leading to improved performance for the group and their students (Goddard, Hoy, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2000). In these groups, members believe in the power of the group to make a difference for students. They recognize that their individual choices, both in the meeting room and in their classrooms, affect everyone. Thus, they willingly invest their time and energy, setting aside personal agendas to support the group’s work and its development.
Drawing on Feedback
High-performing groups draw on internal and external sources, or feedback, to monitor and modify their performance. Feedback is information to the system. Developing groups use multiple types of feedback to modify, control, or change their products and performance. In the absence of feedback, groups stagnate. Valuing and applying the insights that emerge from well-constructed feedback is both an essential disposition and a learned skill for thoughtful group members and thoughtful groups.
Effective feedback both maintains and amplifies high performance. Maintaining feedback reinforces established parameters, such as learning standards. Amplifying feedback increases desired behaviors so that they spread throughout the system. For example, skillful groups use student performance data to determine whether and which students are meeting established standards, so they can continue to achieve these same results. They might then use the same data to determine where and how to transfer effective practices to increase success in other areas and for other students.
To assess, maintain, and amplify the seven qualities, a group requires specific feedback mechanisms. The following tables are two such instruments. Table 1.2 provides group questions to measure and maintain a group’s present feedback practices. Table 1.3 (page 16) provides self-assessment questions that stimulate deep reflection about personal choices and behaviors to amplify feedback. The essential questions in each table will help groups and group members understand who they are in light of who they want to be. (See pages 21–23 for reproducible versions of these tables.)
Table 1.2: Seven Qualities of High-Performing Groups—Scaled Group Inventory
| Quality | Questions for Groups | Scale: 1–4 (Rarely to Always) |
| Maintain a clear focus. | Are we clear about our desired results in both the short and long term? | |
| Do we have clear and shared criteria for determining success? | ||
| Do we have strategies for getting back on track if focus is lost? | ||
| Embrace a spirit of inquiry. | Do we ask questions for which we have no immediate answers? | |
| Do we search for and honor other perspectives? | ||
| Are we willing to ask questions that might cause discomfort? | ||
| Put data at the center. | Do we use data to calibrate and inform our conversations? | |
| Do we use multiple types and sources of data to add to our thinking? | ||
| Do we have methods for ensuring shared understanding? | ||
| Honor commitments to learners and learning. | Are our conversations student centered? | |
| Do we continually assess our current learning goals (for students and for ourselves as a group)? | ||
| Do we set meaningful goals for our own learning as a group? | ||
| Cultivate relational trust. | Do we clarify and communicate high expectations for ourselves as a group? | |
| Do we make it safe not to know? | ||
| Do our actions reflect our commitments? | ||
| Seek equity. | Do we use structures and protocols to ensure balanced participation? | |
| Do all group members have an equal voice? | ||
|
|