A REQUIEM FOR SCHOOL INNOVATION? After Decades of Fleeting School Reform Initiatives, Are We Still Waiting for Superman?…
This post, originally published in October 2019, was updated, revised, and republished on November 11, 2025.
...We might conclude that urban school districts are doomed to failure, that no amount of money and creativity can overcome their substantial governance limitations. Or instead we might...brace ourselves, and accept that there are no pain-free shortcuts...
— Williams, Connor, 2015. Review: In Dale Russakoff's "The Prize," an Urgent Education Catastrophe Overflowing with Culprits and Caveats
[Culture change] is absolutely doable, but is undeniably difficult.
— Michael Fullan and Rick DuFour, Cultures Built To Last: Systemic PLCs at Work
For decades, waves of school reform, new technologies, and “disruptive” ideas have crashed into K-12 systems, yet day-to-day classroom life often looks stubbornly familiar. Is the case for school innovation teetering on hopelessness? This essay explores why stasis is so persistent — drawing on Larry Cuban, Willard Waller, NAEP data, and the mixed legacy of charter and philanthropic reforms. It argues that there are no silver-bullet programs to “fix” schools, but there are roadmaps for the only path to real change: governance and process focused change approaches, like Michael Fullan’s “learning organization” model.
Only by putting the focus on building high-functioning professional cultures will we build agile and innovative schools — where collaborative inquiry, shared purpose, and adaptive governance make meaningful innovation possible.
Islands of Stasis in Seas of Change
In today's K-12 school systems, IT innovations may have penetrated into operational, informational, and communications infrastructures, but classrooms and instructional practices in other respects still look much like they did fifty years ago...
Given the fate of so many fleeting reform initiatives over many decades, to speak figuratively of a REQUIEM is perhaps fitting.
It is intriguing that teaching methods and school structures — despite being the object of so much hand wringing and public scrutiny — have remained so static, including in an era of ever accelerating change.
This evident stasis and resistance to change are not the whole story, however.
The good news is that decades-old approaches that don’t focus on finding the “right” instructional fixes but lean into broader, fundamental system change — with an emphasis on professionalizing teaching and creating school cultures that drive collaborative, inquiry-driven, and data-informed practice.
Promising Roadmaps for School Change
These new road maps for school change are not rooted in prescriptive academic theories. Nor do they superimpose private sector models of innovation and success, nor do they naively rely on solving all problems with new funding streams or by scapegoating teachers or teacher tenure systems or other “root causes” of K12 stasis.
Instead, by reverse engineering exemplary (if rare) large-scale reform initiatives, they offer road maps for improving the larger systems themselves.
They focus strategically on what is actually driving high-functioning school organizations — which it turns out is not on any specific instructional method or learning gizmo — but critical organizational norms, networks, and belief systems that shape professional culture and the larger, more fully inclusive school culture.
The challenge and goal?…
To foster professional cultures and schoolwide cultures that develop a willingness to embrace constructive change and channel this impulse into more disciplined, iterative (and energizing) norms and processes that foster collaborative and data-informed practice, professional resiliency, structured experimentation and innovation, and iterative organizational learning and capacity building.
In other words, the goal is to foster dynamic school cultures and communities where collective engagement and inquiry make identifying, adopting, scaling, sustaining, and improving upon meaningful innovations — in both teaching and learning, and governance — second nature.
“... the right response to human complexity is to increase our leadership agility, to be able to get into the work, to learn, to seek out feedback from the people this is actually impacting, and then to take that feedback on board to create a new iteration of the change we’re trying to lead.”
An Invitation To Other Education Innovators
These new road maps for school innovation not only take into account critical features of adaptive change within the educational organization, they also give external partners urgent insights into the unique challenges of working with large school systems.
Schools with more agile, collaborative, and deliberative professional cultures that are open to change but also focused on concrete outcomes will be primed and professionally equipped to embrace and get more out of strategic and sustained collaborations and co-design efforts with valuable external partners, such as advocacy, service, and specialty nonprofits, and EdTech leaders, for example.
These collaborative engagements and partnerships will give both those on the inside of school culture and those on the outside of it fresh and fuller perspectives and insights into how to navigate key challenges and increase opportunities for addressing learning gaps, updating learning objectives (to keep pace with social changes and evolving technical domains and vocational roles), and to get more out of harnessing technology.
Before looking further into these new road maps, we need to first truly appreciate the nature of the challenges hindering successful large-scale K-12 innovation.
This "requiem" for school reform provides a brief, but we hope enlightening, overview of the stasis that often plagues K-12 education and points to effective roadmaps for deep change.
Stasis — Not The Whole Story, But Real
Decades of academic interest in and public calls for pedagogical and instructional reform and innovation have had some effect on teacher attitudes and curriculum content and design, but America's K-12 classrooms often operate on patterns that would look familiar to a visitor from decades past. The problem isn’t a lack of ideas — it’s a kind of cultural stasis, a still point that keeps schools orbiting around the same old routines. Sure, you’re likely to see Chromebooks and other personal electronic devices appearing on students' desks alongside binders and spiral notebooks, but the routine practices and the social culture of the classroom have changed far less than the world outside.
In Greek, stasis means ‘a standing still’—a pause that can preserve balance or paralyze movement. In schools, it too often becomes the latter.
However, other connotations of the word stasis can also help us dig deeper…
In Classical Greece, for example, the word stásis took on distinct cultural implications. The paralysis at hand was understood to come not simply from passive immobility, but from social and cultural fragmentation and factionalism — from what, in organizational terms, would imply a distinct lack of a collective and effectively deliberative professional culture — a lack of koinōnía (a lack of community, collaboration, and partnership toward shared goals).
Immune to Today’s Infomation Revolution and Age of “Disruption”…
This pedagogical stasis has also weathered today’s revolution in information access and collaboration agility. Moreover, the disruptive business models baked into business school curricula and championed by influential technology entrepreneur-philanthropists — sometimes even in the K12 sector itself — have left the K12 status quo largely unfazed.
Back to the Future
Larry Cuban, Ph.D., a professor Emeritus at Stanford University, former teacher of teachers, former school teacher, and former school district superintendent, described the K-12 rabbit hole this way in his book How Teachers Taught, a classic, sweeping historical survey of innovation (or the lack thereof) in a century of so called US education progress:
I have been in many classrooms in the last decade. When I watched teachers in secondary schools a flash of recognition jumped out of my memory and swept over me. What I saw was almost exactly what I remembered of the junior and senior high school classrooms that I sat in as a student and as a teacher in the mid 1950s. This acute sense of recall about how teachers were teaching occurred in many different schools.
— Larry Cuban, How Teachers Taught: Constancy and Change in American Classrooms, 1890 - 1980
While this lack of change made a strong impression, Cuban also saw some fundamental shifts taking place over the course of the 20th century... away from a rigid adherence to teacher-centered classroom practices, for example, to progressively more student-centered approaches.
In the larger analysis though, Cuban sees stasis as the most remarkable trait.
This realization is paradoxical given the fervor, resources, and pontificating devoted to school reform during many decades of the 20th century.
For Cuban, these decades of "reform" are marked by a bewildering disconnect between theory and public discourse on the one hand, and actual changes (or lack thereof) in teaching practices at the classroom level:
Since the late 1950s, reforms in curriculum (e.g. new math), governance (e.g. community control), instruction (e.g. team teaching) have tried to alter teacher behavior in the classroom. There should be a page in the Guinness Book of World Records on failed classroom reforms, for few ever seem to have been incorporated into teachers' repertoires.
— Larry Cuban, How Teachers Taught…
Cuban's vantage point is slightly dated, but it offers a vast historical survey of classroom practices over multiple decades.
What really stood out to Cuban is the underlying paradox — the insular resistance to change amidst relentless change pressures:
Classrooms are calm refuges from change, deep below the ocean's surface, while above the tempests of school reform, of alarms over perceived school failures that would threaten everything from GDP to National Security, the parade of new theories, and of academic conferences rife with reformist jargon, all rage in fury on the sea's surface...
— Larry Cuban, How Teachers Taught…
Cuban’s "calm refuges..." notwithstanding, the effort of resisting change can also lead to turmoil, acrimony, and division within school communities or within professional culture in K12 settings.
For example, it’s just as often the case that change is “resisted” because it is imposed by decision making largely or entirely external to the teaching corps. This can lead to lackluster adoption or engagement, which in turn is often viewed by organizational leaders or reform advocates as a sign that even stronger top-down governance and directives are needed to “correct course.” As such, leadership that fails to emphasize the development of a healthy, resilient, and collaborative professional culture creates conditions that encourage further top-down governance creating a downward spiral and self-fulfilling prophecy.
Student-centered approaches, then, infrequently penetrated classrooms because of the unwillingness or incapacity of school officials to convert a policy decision or formal approval of an instructional change into a process that would gain teacher support for classroom adoption. The explanation contains within it the adage implementors are fond of using: It was a terrific idea; it is a shame it wasn't ever tried. The explanation also suggests that the very adoption of the innovation without subsequent organizational effort may have even strengthened the stability of existing practices by spreading the illusion of classroom change.
— Larry Cuban, How Teachers Taught…
As more change efforts wither on the vine so to speak, teachers don’t grow thirstier for change, they in fact are likely to grow more skeptical of subsequent change efforts.
As a result, teachers’ so called resistance to change collides with an increasingly top-down approach to achieving the needed change, or to prescribing and imposing this change, as the case may be. One education watcher, penning a review of Dale Russakoff’s book that serves as a cautionary tale for school reform efforts, described the New Jersey school reform dynamics depicted in the book as a lose-lose scenario:
This is a story where more or less everyone in Newark loses. There is no easy solution to the city’s deep and persistent troubles. So in addition to the many culprits, “The Prize” is also — appropriately — packed with caveats: Sure, Newark’s school district is a dysfunctional embarrassment, but changing it dramatically ignites huge pushback. But slow progress is leaving kids stuck. But fast progress bothers lots of community stakeholders. But community stakeholders want schools to get better quickly. But they don’t like those leading the effort. And so on.
— Connor Williams, “Review: Dale Russakoff's The Prize — An Urgent Education Catastrophe Overflowing with Culprits and Caveats” (2015) (Emphasis added.)
The “Flattening” of the Teaching Profession
Another factor contributing to stasis in schools is the socialization dynamic that shapes K12 professional culture.
It has been pointed out, for example, that K12 education is one of the fields in which the lack of robust and consistent high-quality professonal training and narrow and highly regulated credentialing criteria also limit the professional capacity of new educators.
In addition, this lack of rich and robust approaches to the teaching craft means the practices of new educators often remain significantly shaped and influenced by, if not also directly informed by purely idiosyncratic experiences — the teacher’s own years of experiences in classrooms while growing up. In other words, K12 education not only needs a stronger training and recruitment model, but the professional formation process needs to also include a significant unlearning component.
The highly unusual ways in which education itself shapes the teaching profession was first brought to the fore almost a century ago, in Willard Waller’s The Sociology of Teaching. Reflecting on Waller's book and on the impact on K12 professional culture, Larry Cuban notes that teaching is the one profession where the future worker has already been… exposed daily for 12 years (about 13,000 hours) to the habits, methods, and attitudes of the profession!
“Teachers intuitively absorbed lessons of how to teach as they watched. Within this explanation, the familiar assertion is heard that teachers teach as they were taught.”
Cuban emphasizes that this cycle of professional indoctrination has no parallel in other professions and is likely a formidable source of stasis in teaching practices.
Cuban recalls the longtime teacher union leader, Albert Shanker, marveling at the way this socialization process flattened out the profession:
Ten thousand new teachers each year enter the New York City school system as a result of retirement, death, job turnover, and attrition. These new teachers come from all over the country. They represent all religions, races, political persuasions, and educational institutions. But the amazing thing is that, after three weeks in the classroom you can't tell them from the teachers they replaced.
— Albert Shanker, cited by Larry Cuban
As it turns out, Waller's bleak vision of schools and his pessimism about the difficulty of changing schools and teachers were prophetic. The sustained school reform movement that began with the 1983 report by the National Commission on Excellence in Education, Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform, failed to appreciate until the late 1990s one of Waller's key insights: "The reformation of the schools must begin with the teachers, and no program that does not include the personal rehabilitation of teachers can ever overcome the passive resistance of the old order."
This doesn’t mean that schools can’t navigate these constraints, but it underlines why schools will struggle to perform and evolve in the absence of a deftly led cohesive, collective, and deliberative professional culture.
Nor should we fall prey to the myth that absent such contraints — through charter school or privatization schemes — schools can suddenly and consistently overcome the challenges of the education project. Evidence shows this is not the case. In every scenario, what does work are not replicable structures or solutions, but a well-tuned professional and organizational culture with norms, policies, and structures that drive capacity building and cooperative and collaborative learning — both professional learning and student learning.
Why Schools Need a High-Functioning “Learning Culture”
Waller understood acutely what few policymakers have grasped about the fundamental nature of schools: They are highly institutionalized "small societies," run by employees with a strong feeling of vulnerability to pressures, both from within and without...
Waller believed that schools are typically run on autocratic principles and often develop a garrison mentality. The result, he argued, is that the school is "a despotism in a state of perilous equilibrium." "The school is continually threatened," he goes on to say, "because it is autocratic, and it has to be autocratic because it is threatened." Those who fail to recon with these consequences, he suggested, will fail in efforts to reform schools.
Just as all these features of professional culture perpetuate stasis, transforming school culture by fostering what Michael Fullan calls “learning organizations” is foundational to the success of other change efforts. Learning cultures
Unfortunately, reform and change efforts often focus on more concrete policies and solutions which then become entangled in larger “culture wars” as stasis proves more and more entrenched amid the growing list of failed or short-lived initiatives.
These “initiatives” come and go in revolving door fashion: from charter schools and school vouchers, to back-to-phonics, to new math, to self-esteem, mindfullness, and open mindset…
The focus on specific approaches, methods, and solutions hides another implicit school change mindset — the assumption that the effect of specific solutions can be reliably measured and then “replicated” — both questionable assumptions at best.
Opposed to this find-a-solution-and-fix-the-problem approach, and the assumption that any “proven” approach can be imported or prescribed and deliver results successfully across diverse school settings and cultures, Michael Fullan in work such as such as Leading in a Culture of Change, The Six Secrets of Change, Professional Capital (co-authored with Andy Hargreaves) suggests that the foundation for deeper change and agility requires governance practices that promote strong “learning organizations” and “learning cultures” in schools and school districts. Here are just some of the features of this kind of “learning organization:”
Core Features of a Learning Organization in Education (Fullan’s Frameworks)
Collective Capacity Building
Focus on developing groups, teams, learning communities, and shared expertise (not just on how individual teachers perform) — breaking down professional silos and cultivating mutual / horizontal accountability, peer learning, and collaborative professionalism
Leaders model and support ongoing learning and competency building, including robust investments in strategically focused professional development
Continuous Inquiry and Reflection
Schools operate as communities of inquiry
Teachers and leaders routinely analyze evidence, reflect on practice, and adjust approaches
Teachers learn through their work (as in action research, comparing learning outcomes…)
The district or system learns from its own experiences and feedback loops drive iterative, adaptive improvement
Collaborative Cultures and Networks
Emphasis on teamwork, trust, and open dialogue
Networks within and across schools facilitate knowledge sharing and innovation diffusion
“Lateral capacity building” replaces isolated or top-down reform
Coherence Making
Leaders help the organization arrive at shared goals and priorities that connect effort around measurable, high-impact initiatives that form a shared narrative instead of fragmented efforts
Coherence is built through collective learning, deliberation, and organizational agreements based on purposeful goals and alignment — not compliance.
Can Private Sector Insights & Technology Turn the Tide?
Under skies darkened by smoke, gunfire and flying arrows, 210 men of the U.S. Army’s 7th Cavalry Unit led by Lt. Colonel George Custer confronted thousands of fierce Sioux and Cheyenne warriors on June 25, 1876, near the Little Big Horn River in present-day Montana. In less than an hour, the Indians had massacred Custer and every one of his men. The ferocious Battle of the Little Big Horn has been ennobled as “Custer’s Last Stand” – but in truth, Custer and his men never stood a fighting chance.
— McDermont, Annette. History Stories What Really Happened at Custer's Last Stand
The first decades of the 21st century saw a new brand of reform efforts rooted in an ethos of disruptive business approaches, technology, and deep-pocket philanthropy.
Highly successful tech entrepreneurs stepped in to “fix” what academic researchers and legislators had failed to “fix” for decades. This private sector ethos was transforming business and technology, so why not schools too?
The Mark Zuckerberg Reform Initiative
On September 24th 2010, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and Newark Mayor Corey Booker abruptly unveiled on the Oprah Winfrey Show a $100 million initiative to reform the Newark New Jersey school system.
Fast forward to 2015...The quixotic Zuckerberg-Booker initiative is retrospectively characterized as "The Great American Disaster" by The Atlantic Monthly.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Initiative
However, Zuckerberg was only one of the entrepreneur-social-engineering-philanthropists trumpeting a disruptive revitalization of America's schools. Another school fix initiative was spearheaded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, but it too struggled to get traction:
A seven-year, nearly $1 billion education initiative centered on improving teaching quality in low-income schools — and bankrolled in part by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation — largely failed to help students, according to a new report from the nonprofit policy think tank RAND. RAND was selected at the outset of the initiative by the Gates Foundation to evaluate whether the project improved outcomes for students. "Overall...the initiative did not achieve its goals for student achievement or graduation, particularly for LIM [low-income minority] students," the report's summary said. By 2015, six years into the initiative, "student achievement, access to effective teaching, and dropout rates were not dramatically better," than in schools that didn't participate in the program, according to the RAND study.
— Jeremy Burke, "A $1 Billion Gates Foundation-Backed Education Initiative..." Business Insider (2018). (Emphasis added.)
While the old reforms were about pedagogy and school governance, these more recent reforms were about disruption driven by transformative technologies that offered educators tools unlike those available to educators in prior decades, such as the the internet and the personal computer:
Teachers, administrators, researchers, reformers, government leaders, parents, and others have long extolled the benefits that computer-based learning could have in schools. Educational video games...could make learning fun and motivating... Computers offer a way to customize instruction and allow students to learn in the way they are best wired to process information, in the style that conforms to them, and at a pace that matches their own. Computer-based learning on a large scale is also less expensive than the current labor intensive system and could solve the financial dilemmas facing public schools. For all these reasons and more, taxpayers, philanthropists, and corporations have spent more than $60 billion to equip schools with computers in just the last two decades. And yet the machines have made hardly any impact. As Stanford professor Larry Cuban has documented, computers have merely sustained how schools already operate.
— C.M. Christensen and M.B. Horn, "How Do We Transform Our Schools?" Education Next, Vol. 8, Issue 3 (2008). (Emphasis added.)
What About Charter Schools?
Overall, multiple decades of charter school experimentation have led to results that are basically as varied and predictable as those of conventional public schools, some performing well, others not, many in line with their traditional counterparts.
In essence, neither technology, nor charter schools, nor charter schools infused with technology have provided solutions at scale.
In its 2003 report for the California Legislative Analyst's Office, Charter School Operations and Performance: New Evidence From California, the Rand corporation found that using broad API measures [California Department of Education Academic Performance Index scores], there was no statistically significant differences in student achievement between conventional public schools and charter schools. When measuring individual student score data adjusted for demographic factors, the report concluded:
...the elementary school reading score for comparable students in conventional public schools and charter schools is virtually identical, but each of the other scores is lower for charter schools (these differences are statistically significant).
— Ron Zimmer, Charter School Operations and Performance: New Evidence From California. RAND Education (2003).
When All Else Fails... Bring in the Scapegoats?
While Fullan’s model of a “learning organization” is built in response to organizational complexity, some reform advocates simply blame “root causes” — common root causes blamed for hindering innovation in schools include:
ineffective principals
incompetent or “lazy” teachers
lax disciplinary action, not suspending students
bureaucracy
teacher tenure
teacher unions
lack of funding
wasteful spending
“woke” teachers
If “fixing” schools came down to one issue, there might be more reason for optimism. But scapegoating creates smoke screens and distractions, while reform advocates who truly confront and engage K12 organizatiaonal complexity identify a strong professional culture as the true driver of effective change and outline the governance principles that foster a thriving professional culture. Unfortunately, these practices don’t fit the mold of “replicable” solutions as “effective” instructional methods will vary in reality from one setting to another, based on local variability, making the health of the school culture the primary object of the reform focus and governance strategy.
The Not So Great News About K12 Learning
If only there were a superman to swoop in and save us, or a simple fix. The reality is that the needed fix can’t be neatly packaged or boiled down into a sound bite or replicable or packaged approach. As such, it seems hard for the K12 sector to find a clear pathway to school innovation that improves learning outcomes. There is some reason for alarm too: in many places, especially the deeply rural or highly urban, kids are falling through the cracks in large numbers. Meanwhile, as we write this, the White House is not seeking a robust and sustained approach to improving professional culture and is rather focused on entirely eliminating the U.S. Department of Education.
2024 NAEP Data Show That…
45 % of U.S. 12th graders scored below the “Basic” level in math — the highest proportion ever
32 % of U.S. 12th graders scored below “Basic” in reading — the largest percentage in the history of the assessment
About 40 % of U.S. 4th graders performed below “Basic” in reading
“Reading scores on the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress fell two points, on average, for both 4th and 8th graders, sustaining a steady decline in the subject that predates COVID-era disruptions.
The drop from the historic low scores of 2022 comes despite an unprecendented infusion of federal funding that flowed into schools, fueling tutoring and other interventions aimed at addressing learning loss.”
Is There Good News?...
1. There are many school districts doing a solid job of educating students with improving levels of student achievement, and in some measure the alarming data is about persistant learning gaps and inequities. The other side of the learning inequity coin is that there are many schools are promoting many students who are achieving high levels of proficiency.
2. The other good news is that reformers like Fullan — those who understand organizational complexity and actually work on the frontlines of school reform and change-oriented governance practices — have stores of insight for K12 leaders to draw from.
“If you’re the state chief in a place like that [struggling to boost scores], the question in front of you is how to use the tools you have to systematize a long-term approach to change. I don’t see any evidence — and Massachusetts has proven so for decades — that you can’t systematize improvement over multiple years.””
Remembering That “Culture Eats Structure for Lunch…”
What we most need now is a more unified, sustained, and concerted approach — an approach where the primary is focus on improving K12 professional culture.
All other “solutions” must emerge from and be supported by a high-functioning professional culture — a culture that integrates purpose-driven values, collective learning, inquiry, and deliberation, and collaborative focus on core attitudes, structures, and practices impacting learning outcomes. In Fullan’s “learning organization” principles an ample blueprint is ready and waiting.
While these broad principles can be applied widely, it’s important to note that focusing on school culture will inform distinct journeys and diverse responses to learning challenges — each journey influenced by and aligning to local school district and local school community variables (existing competencies, attitudes, values, beliefs, structures, norms).
This is important to note, in particular because it means that the the “responses” and “structures” and “solutions” that emerge and evolve will always be largely germane to their respective settings, and NOT having intrinsic value as responses that can simply be airdropped into other school sites under an oversimplified notion of top-down implementation, prescription, or replication.
Enlarging the Circle of Commitment and Support
In his book The Sociology of Teaching, Willard Waller observes that schools were buffeted by so many social, economic, legislative, and research-driven policy and reform pressures that a bunker or “garrison” mentality evolved. It’s a reminder of how much K12 schools have evolved in relatively insular conditions, because schools were not made to be the whipping posts for social dysfunction, fads, and factions.
Schools don’t need new solutions, they need help taking on the hard work of evolving and innovating organizationally, despite complex factors, structures, mandates and myriad, complex social forces.
When we remove the focus from divisive, lightening rod (and false) “root causes,” like teacher tenure, “lazy” teachers, or “lazy” students (etc.), and maintain a constructive focus on incrementally building collective engagement for purpose-driven change and evidence-based action and experimentation, then schools will have a framework of values and priorities that help them involve and learn from a wider circle of stakeholders, partners, and perspectives.
External partners with a constructive contribution can help these systems embrace the mindset and support structures they need to build professional cultures that are affirming in embracing change, and that are democratic in their shared commitments to evidence-based and participatory consensus-building and co-governance, rather than pitting one interest against another — overcoming paralysis and stasis with the help of strong, purpose-driven partnerships.
Final Thoughts
The genius of these governance frameworks, in light of so many failed initiatives in the past, is their focus on the transformation of school culture first and foremost, in order to build dynamic school cultures that can embrace innovation.
They discourage fragmentation, patiently work to turn siloed or divided interest groups into broad, collaborative constituencies in pursuit of shared goals, and unite overlapping levels of larger school systems around core (and measurable) educational outcomes: learning and student achievement, work readiness, and student health, character, and well being.
Instead of forming bulwarks against the external storms raging around them, or adopting willy-nilly new solutions and simply “hoping” for better results, these transformed school cultures cultivate learning organizations with strong professional practices that value and derive value from engaged and lasting collaborations between school professionals, students, and school families, and (over time) between other education innovators on the outside — with B2B education and technology leaders, with political leaders, with nonprofit partners and community advocates.
Sound like an exciting approach for leading educational change and partnering with schools?...
EdPro Communications looks forward to helping interested education sector B2B enterprises and education sector nonprofit advocates maintain an informative edge with additional posts and reports on the landscape for school change and innovation... Stay tuned!