Leading Collaborative Learning Communities Training Course

Participants can assess the strengths, gaps and constraints of an existing learning community.

• Collaboration audit covering purpose, membership, routines and evidence
• Stakeholder mapping for teachers, leaders, support staff and learners
• Force-field analysis of drivers and barriers to participation
• Meeting artefact review: agendas, minutes, action logs and outputs
• Interview questions that surface informal norms and decision bottlenecks
• Baseline maturity assessment against defined community operating criteria

Participants can create a charter that gives a learning community clear direction and accountability.

• Problem statements framed around observable learner performance gaps
• SMARTER goals linked to attainment, progression or engagement measures
• Charter elements: mandate, membership, boundaries, authority and review
• RACI matrix for decisions, actions, consultation and communication
• Working agreements that establish attendance, preparation and follow-through
• Success measures balanced across learner, teacher and implementation evidence

Participants can establish conditions for candid professional dialogue and equitable team participation.

• Edmondson’s psychological safety behaviours applied to educator teams
• Norms for challenge, confidentiality, feedback and professional disagreement
• Structured turn-taking methods that prevent dominant voices controlling discussion
• Equity checks for representation, workload, access and decision influence
• Ladder of Inference used to separate evidence from assumptions
• Repair conversations following breaches of trust or agreed norms

Participants can facilitate meetings that produce decisions, actions and learning-focused follow-up.

• Meeting design using purpose, outcomes, process and participant roles
• Consent agenda separates routine updates from substantive team decisions
• Fist-to-Five checks readiness before committing collective action
• Parking-lot protocol protects agenda time without dismissing concerns
• Decision log records rationale, owner, deadline and review point
• Closing rounds confirm commitments, risks and required stakeholder communication

Participants can select, interpret and communicate learner evidence for collective improvement decisions.

• Data inventory covering assessment, attendance, behaviour and learner feedback
• Disaggregation by learner group, course, cohort and instructional setting
• Triangulation combines quantitative results, work samples and observation evidence
• Run charts distinguish normal variation from meaningful performance shifts
• Assessment moderation checks consistency of teacher judgement and grading
• Data ethics protects confidentiality, avoids labelling and challenges deficit assumptions

Participants can lead a disciplined inquiry from learner-performance concern to testable causes.

• Data-team inquiry stages from concern identification to action evaluation
• Problem framing identifies affected learners, measures and performance thresholds
• Five Whys distinguishes contributing factors from surface explanations
• Fishbone diagrams organise instructional, curriculum and attendance causes
• Root-cause hypotheses tested against available learner and classroom evidence
• Prioritisation matrix ranks causes by impact, control and evidence strength

Participants can organise lesson study cycles around a focused learner learning problem.

• Lesson study cycle: goal setting, planning, observation and reflection
• Research lessons designed around anticipated learner thinking and misconceptions
• Observation roles separate evidence collection from teacher performance judgement
• Learner work analysis identifies patterns in reasoning, errors and progress
• Post-lesson discussion follows evidence before interpretation or recommendation
• Revision decisions document changes to tasks, explanations and formative checks

Participants can run peer observation processes that lead to specific teaching improvements.

• Observation focus agreed through a pre-observation planning conversation
• Low-inference notes record visible actions, words and learner responses
• Evidence sorting distinguishes observation, interpretation and evaluation statements
• SBI feedback structure: situation, behaviour and instructional impact
• GROW questions support teacher reflection and chosen next actions
• Follow-up agreements set practice trials, support needs and review dates

Participants can coordinate team review of curriculum alignment and assessment quality.

• Backward design aligns outcomes, evidence and learning experiences
• Curriculum mapping reveals duplication, gaps and progression discontinuities
• Constructive alignment links teaching activities with assessed learning outcomes
• Assessment blueprints balance content coverage, cognitive demand and weighting
• Common formative assessments generate comparable evidence for team inquiry
• Moderation protocols improve validity, reliability and shared performance expectations

Participants can design small-scale improvement tests with clear measures and adaptation rules.

• Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles structure rapid instructional improvement testing
• Change ideas derived from root-cause hypotheses and relevant evidence
• Operational definitions make implementation measures observable and repeatable
• Driver diagrams connect aims, primary drivers, actions and measures
• Small tests specify predictions, participants, timeframe and data collection
• Study reviews compare predicted results, actual results and adaptation decisions

Participants can distribute leadership responsibilities while maintaining coherent accountability.

• Distributed leadership maps expertise, authority and decision responsibilities
• Facilitator, data lead, recorder and sponsor role descriptions
• Rotating roles builds capability without losing process continuity
• Delegation levels clarify consultation, recommendation, approval and execution authority
• Coaching routines support emerging team leaders between formal meetings
• Succession plans protect improvement work during staff turnover or absence

Participants can respond constructively to resistance, disagreement and competing professional priorities.

• Interest-based negotiation separates stated positions from underlying professional concerns
• Thomas-Kilmann conflict modes selected according to stakes and relationships
• Resistance diagnosis distinguishes capacity, clarity, trust and workload issues
• Difficult conversations prepare facts, impact statements and open questions
• Escalation paths define unresolved decisions, authority and response times
• After-action reviews capture lessons following contested change decisions

Participants can communicate learning-community purpose, progress and results to key stakeholders.

• Stakeholder communication plan matches message, audience, channel and timing
• Theory of Change links team actions with expected learner outcomes
• One-page progress reports present measures, learning and next decisions
• Data storytelling combines charts, learner evidence and operational implications
• Sponsor briefings secure resources, remove barriers and confirm accountability
• Feedback loops gather learner, family and staff perspectives on changes

Participants can create routines that retain, share and reuse effective professional knowledge.

• Knowledge capture records tested practices, conditions and implementation evidence
• Standard work documents recurring meetings, roles and review routines
• Communities of practice repositories organise tools, examples and learning notes
• Peer induction introduces new members to norms, evidence and current priorities
• Learning histories preserve decisions, adaptations and outcomes across improvement cycles
• Annual review refreshes membership, charter, measures and improvement priorities

Participants can evaluate whether collaborative practices are improving teaching and learner outcomes.

• Logic models connect inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and assumptions
• Balanced scorecards combine implementation, teacher practice and learner measures
• Fidelity checks assess whether agreed routines occurred as intended
• Contribution analysis tests plausible links between team actions and results
• Pulse surveys measure psychological safety, usefulness and participation quality
• Quarterly review cycles decide continuation, adaptation, scale or discontinuation

Participants can build, review and present a complete implementation plan for a collaborative learning community.

• Community charter defines learner problem, purpose, scope and membership
• Inquiry plan specifies evidence sources, hypotheses, measures and review dates
• Annual operating calendar schedules meetings, lesson study and PDSA cycles
• Facilitation pack includes agendas, protocols, action logs and decision records
• Stakeholder plan addresses sponsorship, communication, resistance and resource requirements
• Peer review tests feasibility, equity, evidence quality and sustainability
• Presentation defends implementation choices, measures and first-cycle actions