One of the concepts I still struggle with as a leader is around teacher Autonomy and Consistency. The struggle comes in that to be consistent with other teachers, I have to give up some of my autonomy since I have to do things similar to the way that they do. But, to give up my autonomy, it limits my ability to customize the learning experience for my learners. 

John Hattie describes how, interestingly enough, there is more variability within a school from classroom to classroom than from school to school. We know that when students have consistent experiences from one teacher to the next it helps to reduce their anxiety as it gives them a sense of the familiar and they know the expectations in the classroom. This could be something as simple as how classes begin when students enter. As an example, let's say that an English class starts with 10 minutes of silent reading designed to encourage and support this reading. By contrast, a math class may take the same 10 minutes and decide that students can complete some basic math problems to help enhance foundational skills. Meanwhile when they enter a science class, the teacher wants to get going right away with whole group engagement. Here, to achieve a consistency of the way that class starts, the science teacher would need to shift their strategy to have that 10 minute block. This may not work well for that teacher who may feel that those 10 minutes are vital to engaging and setting the tone for their lesson. If it is decided that school-wide that all classes will start their 10 minutes with a silent settling in period, the science teacher loses their autonomy to begin the class differently. 

This looks at a consistency of routine, but what about a consistency of expectations. As an example, Teacher A greets students at the door to set a positive example for the day. Teacher B uses the same time to put handouts on their desks for when they come in. Teacher A lets students listen to music while they work, Teacher B does not. Teacher A expects students to raise their hand before speaking, whereas Teacher B has students just call out if they are needed. I suspect, that most educators have opinions on what the expectations for their classroom is, but I also suspect that it varies, much like the personalities of our teachers varies.

It can be argued that by choosing to comply with school-wide expectations that have been set and agreed on by staff, you are using your autonomy to opt-in to that system in order to create consistency. We each give up a little bit of our autonomy since we respect and understand how our efforts can affect the whole. By giving up of autonomy for consistency, we are still making that choice. This would still be somewhat true for expectations that are top-down, but would certainly make for less autonomy since teachers may not have had a say in it.

The major part of my struggle though is when we mean academic consistency. This becomes even more murky since if you have to keep pace with another teacher because of curriculum delivery timelines it limits your ability to stop and reteach if needed. If you have a set lesson plan that everyone will teach, then how can you customize it to your learners if consistency trumps autonomy? If you have to be in lockstep with another class, then how can you account for and respond to the learner variability between these classes? 

The curriculum sets some of the consistency since we all teach the same outcomes in our jurisdiction. The way in which we teach them though can be as different as educators and classes are different. Some students will respond better to different approaches, as such, autonomy is needed to adapt and adjust. We also need to be consistent in that we use data to support our claims about the evidence of learning, but that data can be obtained in a variety of ways that is not limited to creating common assessment tools. To be clear, I am not necessarily opposed to common assessment tools, but I do think we need to give some consideration to ensuring that students have multiple avenues to demonstrate their learning which need to be taken into account when we develop these common tools.

So perhaps the answer lies in having a consistent tool box for everyone where there is still a lot of voice and choice that allows us to adapt to our learners, but in broad strokes we are still drawing from the same types of approaches and instruments so that things are not wildly different from classroom to classroom. Cycles of collaborative inquiry where we come together as a group to determine which practices work best for which students, co-construct some formal assessment items so they can take learner variability into account and ensure that the educators have a voice in it. This can be a powerful means to navigate the Autonomy and Consistency struggle though will require some work and training to build it into the fabric of your school.

Going back to John Hattie’s findings, a school being a diverse place with diverse teachers and students will produce a lot of different approaches. From class to class these can look noticeably different, but on the macro level from school to school they likely still fall into the same range of practices. It is up to leaders to ensure that their staff has access and the skill to use the identified set of tools and strategies so they can select the best strategy that matches their class.

Striking the balance between Autonomy and Consistency is incredibly difficult, but it is necessary for educators to be able to navigate this balance if we are to ensure success for all our students.