Leadership for Deeper Learning, Class 02

[I am teaching a Leadership for Deeper Learning elective for one of our doctoral cohorts this summer and thought that I would share what is happening each week.]

We were missing a few members of the doctoral cohort in Class 01, so our second class was the first time this summer that we were all together. It was great to see everyone in the same room again!

We kicked off Class 02 by beaming in Chad Mabery as a guest speaker. Chad is the Assistant Superintendent of Instructional Services for the Laguna Beach (California) Unified School District. He shared with us LBUSD’s journey toward deeper learning, along with many of the strategies that the district is employing to change what learning and teaching looks like there. My students asked Chad some fantastic questions and we all wished that we had more time with him.

After a short discussion about my approach to this new class and our summer assignments, we engaged in a couple of quick activities. First, I described the Hegelian dialectic, just to emphasize that we should try to hold opposing thoughts in our heads and that reality is likely somewhere in the intersection of those. Second, I discussed the concept of a theory of action. Everything we do in schools is based on some theory of action: If we [do this], then [that thing will happen] because [reasons]. A theory of action is a belief statement about how things work, and often there are competing theories of action. For example, a theory of action in many schools is:

If we [create double math blocks each day], then [students’ math learning will increase] because [more math time equals more math learning].

Some competing theories of action might be:

If we [create double math blocks each day], then [students’ math learning will NOT increase] because [we are not also changing how we teach math, we are only subjecting students to even more of what they already don’t like].

If we [create double math blocks each day], then [students’ math learning will NOT increase] because [by cutting a recess, students will have even more trouble self-regulating and staying focused].

I paired up my students and asked them to articulate at least one theory of action that they thought was occurring at Dewey High, which was profiled in the chapter of In Search of Deeper Learning that they had read for this evening. They also articulated a theory of action that they thought was occurring in LBUSD and at Crosstown High in Memphis, based on their conversation with Chad and the film that they watched last week. They then articulated at least two competing theories of action, and we shared those with each other.

The rest of our time was spent unpacking our readings and other pre-activities for the evening (see below). I ask each student to publicly post on a Padlet ‘2 or 3 fantastic leadership-focused discussion questions’ before each week’s class. We use that collection of questions to inform our small group discussions. For example, some of the questions that my students posted for this week included:

“Bringing symmetry to life means that leaders who seek collaborative, inquiry-rich learning environments for students must build collaborative, inquiry-rich environments for adults” (Fine & Fullan, 2026). To what extent was this provided for the staff at Crosstown High? At Dewey High? How did they benefit? What would your leadership moves be if you were leading those schools?
One thing that I noticed across Dewey High (using physics for the portable darkroom), Crosstown High (using geography for the Twister game re: the refugees’ journey) and Hook River Middle School (using algebraic formulas to determine acreage) was that allowing choice drove the desire to want to learn the skill. So the question I have is how can this be successful in every classroom? Once again, if teachers are not taught how to facilitate and foster this style of student-led instruction too many students slip through the cracks and will not achieve mastery of the skills.
Mehta & Fine (2019): There seems to be a large fear of failure holding back our schools. Deep learning requires experimentation and uncertainty and the risk of failure (as their many examples suggest). In a system whose purpose is to educate our children, how much risk is acceptable and who gets to decide when the potential benefits outweigh the potential costs? Also taking an equity lens, how can we ensure that the risks are not disproportionally beared by historically marginalized underrepresented students?
Structural incongruities are expected in public education because the “policies, schedules, or evaluation systems are out of step with a learning-centered culture” (Fine et al., 2026) When District and School Unified Improvement Plans (DUIP and SUIP) are rooted in state testing, how can school leaders cultivate symmetry? Is it realistic to create a deeper learning environment within the confines of our current reality of public education?
Why is math so hard? In thinking about integrating content and covering standards with deeper learning practices (and as highlighted by Dewey High’s separate math classes), why is mastering math standards seemingly the most difficult subject? It leads me to think about how we ‘organize’ and silo math currently, and I wonder what a completely different K12 scope and sequence for math might look like. Does every student need to get into ‘advanced’ math classes? Why is calculus more important or rigorous than statistics, when the latter is much more likely to show up in day to day life? Does geometry have to come after algebra 1? Why? Does math need to be subsectioned into these topics at all?
Across the readings on symmetry (Fine, Rincón-Gallardo, Fullan), there is a strong emphasis on aligning leadership behavior with the learning culture being promoted in schools. However, in many systems there appears to be a gap between “rigorous” or equity-centered practice models and what actually happens in day-to-day implementation. Could this gap suggest that even well-designed models are often reduced to symbolic or performative practices (tokenism) when they move into real organizational contexts? If so, is the issue the model itself, or the conditions under which it is implemented? What would it take for a model of practice to remain intact once it enters a complex school system?
What is a theory of action that you’re working with in your current setting? Discuss what competing priorities may be hidden in a “competing theory of action” that could limit the desired outcome.

As you can imagine, our conversations are quite robust!

Our readings / viewings for Class 02 are listed below. The theme for the evening was Theories of Action. End-of-class evaluations for the second week were very positive.