leadership focus: doing the right things, right no€¦ · leadership focus: doing the right...

Leadership Focus: Doing the Right Things, Right Now

By Douglas B. Reeves

Dr. Reeves welcomes your questions and comments. If you would like a complete copy of today’s slides or other research articles discussed in today’s presentation, please e-mail [email protected] or call (303)504-9312, ext. 512.

Today will be a success if . . . __________________________________________________________ The big ideas: Moral Imperative Implementation The Essentials: Focus, Monitoring, and Efficacy Change Leadership Evidence Sustainability

1. The Moral Imperative

Essential Goals Present Reality Moral Imperative

Student achievement

Faculty morale

Administrative stress

Community support

Recruiting and developing the best new teachers and administrators

Other key results:

Dr. Reeves is the founder of The Leadership and Learning Center. In partnership with Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, the Center serves school systems around the world. Dr. Reeves is the author of 30 books and many articles. He received the highest honor from the National Staff Development Council for his lifetime contributions to the field of professional development. He was named the Brock International Laureate for his contributions to education, received the Distinguished Service Award from the National Association of Secondary School Principals, and the Parents’ Choice Award for his writing for children and parents. He can be reached at [email protected] or (978) 740 3001, ext. 11.

© 2011 by The Leadership and Learning Center All rights reserved. Copy only with permission. 1.303.504.9312

Leadership Focus

2. Implementation

The impact of implementation on student achievement. How do you measure implementation? Create an implementation rubric. Identify an instructional strategy that is important to you right now: Describe an “acceptable” or “proficient” level of performance for this strategy: Describe performance that is “progressing” but not quite proficient yet: Describe performance that is “not meeting standards” – it hurts students and colleagues: Describe performance that is “exemplary” – FAR better than “proficient” – this would challenge even the most veteran and expert colleague to improve:


Leadership Focus

3. Focus

Factor analysis as a “constellation” – finding patterns in millions of stars. The constellation of professional practices with the greatest impact on achievement:

Focus (six or fewer strategic priorities)

Monitoring (specific observation of adults, not just testing of students)

Efficacy (certainty that teaching and leadership have disproportionate impact on

student results) Assess your school, department, or district in each of these three areas and identify at least one possible way to improve:

Assessment of Present Practices Possible Improvements Focus

Monitoring

Efficacy

Tools for Focus:

Implementation Audit The “Not to Do” List

Dramatically Higher Impact on Student Results

Efficacy

Monitoring

Focus


Leadership Focus

4. Why is Change So Difficult?

What are the reasons that essential changes have not been made? 1. 2. 3. 4.

What are the consistent themes that are associated with unsuccessful change? When has change been successful? What are the consistent themes that are associated with successful change?


Leadership Focus

5. Standards of Evidence in Education

Level 1 – Personal belief and opinion Level 2 – Personal experience Level 3 – Experience, beliefs, and opinions shared by others Level 4 – Objective observation Level 5 – Preponderance of the evidence

Common Claim in My School

Evidence to Support That Claim

Evidence Level (1-5)

What does the best available evidence say about student achievement?

90 90 90 and 100 100 100 schools Relative impact of demographics and achievement High leverage activities – nonfiction writing, formative assessment, collaborative scoring Short-term wins – improved grading practices Building faculty morale – improved discipline and saving time

6. Applying the Evidence to Personal and Professional Responsibilities

Return to page1 and review your moral imperatives – the present gap between what you and your students need and today’s reality. Now identify two or three action steps that are appropriate for your personal and professional responsibilities based on the evidence, discussion, and your best thinking today. If you would like to receive some personal support and follow up on these action steps, share them with me at [email protected].

Action Step Person Responsible Commitment Date


Leadership Focus

To download today’s presentation along with other free research articles, podcasts, and other resources, go to www.LeadandLearn.com.

Examples of recent articles include:

“Getting Ready for the Common Core,” American School Board Journal, March, 2011

“The Shanghai Surprise, ” American School Board Journal, February, 2011

“Fact or Fiction,” American School Board Journal, January, 2011

“Sound Grading Policies,” American School Board Journal, December, 2010

“The Write Way, “American School Board Journal, November, 2010

“Fixer or Multiplier?” American School Board Journal, September, 2010

“What does the public really want,” American School Board Journal, August, 2010

“Focusing on Leadership Essentials,” American School Board Journal, July, 2010

“Getting accountability right: Principles and policies for a new era,” The AdvancED Source, Spring, 2010

“Earning credits, saving money,” American School Board Journal, June, 2010

Commentary/Common standards: From what to how, Education Week, May 12, 2010

“Paying for performance,” American School Board Journal, May, 2010

“Sizing up your leaders,” American School Board Journal, April 2010

“Dealing with stress and anxiety,” American School Board Journal, March 2010

“Resilience through adversity,” American School Board Journal, February, 2010

“The board’s role in innovation,” American School Board Journal, January, 2010

“I knew he was a special boy-friend,” explained my mother, “because he gave me an ex-

travagant gift for my high school grad-uation.” What was the hopelessly ro-mantic present for this 1940 graduate? The ballpoint pen, recently invented by Ladislas Biro in L935. lt was a tech-nological marvel, relieving students of the tedious burden of refilling the ink. Still researching, writing, and teach-ing in her 87th year, my mother was impressed more by the romance than the technology of the pen. Even as the new technology became widely used, not a single school system employed a “Director of Ballpoint Pens” because it was clear that its technology was the servant, not the master, of education.

This article posits that technology is the ballpoint pen of the 21st century and that focus, not technological manipu-lation, is the most important skill in the decades ahead. Technology can ease our burdens, allow us to make mis-takes and make progress quickly and efficiently, and sometimes, though not always, improve teaching and learning. Educational leaders and policymakers must, however, distinguish between romance and utility. Breathless enthu-siasm for 21st century technology can be as seductive as a beautiful writing instrument, but at the end of the day, our excitement must be tempered by the realization that the latest gadget is just the latest incarnation of a ballpoint pen. This reconsideration of the role of technology in education has important implications for teachers, school ad-ministrators, and policymakers.

Focus in the Classroom

Watch a student (let’s call him James, a young man who lives in my home) “do homework” on a computer and you are more likely to watch a mix of si-multaneous conversations through in-stant messages, text messages on a cell phone, downloads of music and videos, receipt and sending of Facebook up-dates, and a review of multiple tweets. These students are only modeling the frenetic behavior of their multi-tasking parents who also ignore the evidence, and purchase the lie of the virtues of multi-tasking. ln fact, these students and their parents are “switch-tasking”, losing efficiency and time, each time their attention is diverted. Thus the 20-minute homework assignment remains unfinished after two hours “working” on the computer. lf the student (yes, James, l’m speaking directly to you) wanted to have more time with friends, then the better strategy would be focus-ing on homework for 20 minutes and then giving his friends 100 minutes of his undivided attention.

Perhaps one of the most important 21st century skills that teachers can impart is that of focus-devoted concentration to a task. Gallagher (2009) explodes the myth of multi-tasking and docu-ments in meticulous detail the benefits of focus. She also concludes that focus has a price:

“When you focus, you’re spending lim-ited cognitive currency that should be wisely invested, because the stakes are high…Your attentional system selects a certain chunk of what’s there, which

gets valuable cerebral real estate and, therefore, the chance to affect your be-havior…And the rest is consigned to the shadows or oblivion.” (p. 28)

For students who are (and I choose my terms wisely) addicted to multiple stimuli, focus entails loss – the loss of immediate response to friends, the loss of uninterrupted connection to a so-cial circle, and the loss of responsibil-ity for completing the challenging task at hand. Thus teachers who choose to embrace the 21st century skill of focus have an enormous hurdle to overcome: helping students understand that the benefits of focus are worth the costs. Fortunately, the Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance (Ericcson et al., 2006) offers abundant evidence that these teachers are right. ln every discipline and every culture, success is the result of sustained, effec-tive, and focused practice. ln synthesiz-ing the research, Colvin (2008) wisely concludes that it is not mysterious tal-ent that leads to success, but deliber-ate practice and effective coaching by teachers who keep us focused on the right task at the right level.

Focus in the Board Room

My fervent sermons to teenagers and teachers are incomplete and hypocriti-cal if I fail to consider the damage done to focus by leaders and policymakers who are profligate in their embrace of technology. These leaders might extol the virtues of focus during the next ex-ecutive meeting, just as soon as they finish responding to their e-mail on their device not so subtly concealed

Focus: The Forgotten 21st Century Skillby Douglas B. Reeves

under the conference table. ln fact, in-stitutional fragmentation is a big part of the problem, with data warehouses substituting for data analysis, and tech-nology initiatives , replacing learning initiatives. White (2009) and Reeves (in press) establish that proliferating initiatives are inversely related to gains in student achievement. When lead-ers have more initiatives than they can monitor, they doom their colleagues to the Law of lnitiative Fatigue, in which each successive effort receives lower levels of time, resources, attention, and emotional energy.

lf the focus of an educational system is student learning, as most mission state-ments claim, then leaders must com-pare the reality of their employment of technology with their stated inten-tion. lf they would not be impressed by a cabinet full of ballpoint pens, why would they consider a roomful of computers a success story? While they would intuitively understand the need to integrate ballpoint pens into every class, the application of technology remains idiosyncratic, embraced by some and rejected by others.

Finally, leaders must consider what their organizational chart says about their priorities. ln the 1950s, when a school system had one computer that was primarily used for payroll, it per-haps made sense for the technology officer to report to the business office or to the superintendent. But in this century, when technology must serve instructional needs, why is it so rare to find an organization chart in which the technology office is subordinate to instructional leadership? When the divergence between technology and instruction starts in the boardroom, it is not difficult to understand why the dichotomy persists in the classroom.

Luddites and Learning

Ned Ludd and his colleagues took their distaste for modern technology

to an extreme precisely 200 years ago, smashing textile machinery in the hopes of preserving the past. De-spite my temptation to smash a few cell phones, the clarion call of this ar-ticle is not for Luddites but for learn-ing. Our students do not learn through superficial exposure to technology any more than they acquire writing skills through close proximity to ballpoint pens. Technology will change, but the need for focus will not, and it remains as important in this century as it was in the Lyceum.

Our failure to focus has a price. Why do pilots ignore safety warnings and poli-cies that require a focus on safety and thus jeopardize the lives of their pas-sengers? Why do train conductors send text messages while at the controls of a speeding train, ignoring the stopped car in front of them? Focus saves lives and a lack of focus is deadly. School leaders know intellectually the power of focus, but every year there is a pro-liferation of new initiatives without an organizational discipline of removing unnecessary and conflicting initiatives. ln the hours before writing this para-graph, I heard a superintendent claim to be focused exclusively on six priori-ties. Within minutes of that claim, how-ever, I was treated to his proposed new “scorecard” that included more than 100 initiatives, many of which were la-bels without meaningful explanations. His staff development catalog included more than 300 separate courses, some of which were more than a decade old and few of which were linked clearly to the six priorities.

The enthusiasm for 21st century skills is understandable, if a bit overstated. Lists of skills, like lists of academic standards, are impotent if they result in fragmentation rather than focus. lt is intellectually inconsistent to advocate “critical thinking” while cramming more and more content into a limited

number of minutes in the school day. While we can improve the speed and storage capacity of computers, we can-not improve the speed and capacity of students by stacking three-ring binders filled with new expectations to the sky. ln order for our students to reach their potential and meet the demands of this and future centuries, they must learn in an environment that offers the op-portunity for deliberation and focus. That will only happen if teachers and educational leaders are willing to do the same.

Colvin, G. (2008). Talent is overrated: Whot really separates world-class per-formers from everybody else. New York: Portfolio.

Ericcson, K. A., Charness, Feltovich, P J. & Hoffman, R. R. (eds) (2006). The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise ond Expert Performonce. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Gallagher, W (2009). Ropt: Attention and the Focused ly’e. New York: The Penguin Group.

Reeves, D. B. (in press). High lmpoct Learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Devel-opment.

White, S. l2AO9l. Leodership Maps. Englewood, CO: Lead+Learn Press.

Dr. Douglas B. Reeves is the founder of The Leadership and Learning Cen-tre. He has worked with education, business, non-profit, ond government organizations throughout the world. The author of more thon 20 books and many articles on leadership and orga-nizational effectiveness, he has twice been named to the Harvard Univer-sity Distinguished Authors Series. His monthly column on change leadership appears in Educational Leadership, the ASCD journal.

lt is intellectually inconsistent to advocate “critical thinking” while cramming

more and more content into a limited number of minutes in the school day.

A few strategies have a disproportionately large impact oneducation. Here are six questions you should ask about thework that is ongoing in your school district

American School Board Journal � www.asbj.com � July 2010 39

isn’t an argument that poverty and othersocioeconomic factors are unimportant.Instead, it’s a declaration that the deci-sions you make about critical instruction-al matters, such as feedback, can have agreater impact on student achievementthan socioeconomic factors.

Moreover, wise leaders focus thegreater part of their attention on factorsthat are within their control—the dailystrategies of educators and administra-tors. The first big question for leaders is,“How good is our feedback?”

The purpose of feedback is toimprove performance. It must be accu-rate, timely, and effective. Ask yourselfif your present feedback systems areleading to improved performance bystudents, teachers, and leaders. If not,why persist in using the same feedbacksystems in the future?

Efficacy

When teachers and leaders have a bone-deep conviction that their personal pro-fessional practices influence studentresults, then they have efficacy. By con-trast, when they attribute the causes ofachievement to factors they cannot con-trol, they lack it.

When teachers believe they are theprimary causes of student achievement,student gains are three to five timeshigher than when they assume that the

M oney and time are theresources in greatest demand in short-est supply for school leaders. Despitethe potential of short-term federalgrants, almost all state and local edu-cation budgets are being ravaged byreductions in revenue. Moreover, theagendas of board meetings and the calendars of system-level leaders areovertaxed by a series of never-endingdemands.

Now, more than ever, leaders mustfocus on the essentials, the core strate-gies that have the greatest impact on stu-dent learning and educational equity.Abundant evidence suggests that a fewstrategies have a disproportionatelylarge impact on education. The “big six”are feedback, efficacy, time, nonfictionwriting, formative assessment, andexpectations.

Feedback

The most recent evidence on the powerof feedback comes from a meta-analysisof more than 800 meta-analyses. That isa “study of study of studies,” includingmore than 83 million students, conduct-ed by researcher John Hattie and pub-lished in the book, Visible Learning.

When students receive feedback thatis accurate, specific, and timely, theimpact on achievement is so great that itis more significant than the socioeco-nomic status of children. This certainly

causes are factors beyond their control.The second question you should ask is,“How do our teachers know that theyinfluence student results?”

Time

It’s a fact that, in almost all districts,some students have fallen behind inreading and other essential skills bymiddle and high school. The third ques-tion is, “If we know that a student istwo or three grades behind where heshould be, how will his schedule be dif-ferent from classmates who are ongrade level?”

Consider this: If a quarterback need-ed to improve passing skills, a basketballplayer needed to work on free throwshooting, or a musician had a difficulttime playing a particularly challengingpiece, we would not hesitate to pre-scribe “more practice” as the remedy.Why should changing a student’s sched-ule to provide “more practice” for read-ing, writing, and math be more difficult?

Nonfiction writing

There are no “silver bullets” in educa-tion, but few activities have a greaterand more consistent positive impact onevery other discipline than nonfictionwriting. The overwhelming evidence isthat more nonfiction writing—descrip-tion, persuasion, and analysis—helpsstudents at every level improve think-ing, reasoning, and analytical skills.

Surprisingly, nonfiction writingdemands are infrequent at every level.One of the most frequent complaintsfrom postsecondary programs is inade-quate writing skills. The fourth questionis, “How is nonfiction writing integratedinto our curriculum outside of the regu-

Focusing on the Essentials

Douglas B. Reeves�LEADERSHIP

Continued on pg. 41

Reprinted with permission from American School Board Journal, July 2010 © 2010 National School Boards Association. All rights reserved.

American School Board Journal � www.asbj.com � July 2010 41

lar Language Arts class?”

Formative assessment

The media and governmental authori-ties focus on end-of-year test scores,but research is clear that formativeassessment—that is, assessments dur-ing the school year that are used to“inform” teaching and learning—have agreater impact on improving achieve-ment than any other form of test.

It’s important to remember thatassessment is not “formative” merelybecause of the label, but because teach-ers and school leaders use the informa-tion in a way that leads to better teach-ing and learning. The fifth question is,“What are teachers and principals doingdifferently today as a result of the mostrecent formative assessment data?”

Expectations

The Pygmalion Effect is named for thecharacter in the George Bernard Shawplay on which the Broadway musical“My Fair Lady” was based. When ElizaDoolittle was treated as a person wor-thy of respect, she was no longer aflower girl, but a lady. Similarly, 40years of research on the subject demon-strates that, when teachers and admin-istrators expect more, they get more;when they expect less, they get less.

The sixth critical question is, “Whatis the evidence in publicly available stu-dent work samples that our expecta-tions for students meet or exceedgrade-level standards?”

In the year ahead, school boardmembers and system leaders willdevote many hours—and millions ofdollars—to matters of policy and prac-tice. Before launching into your nextagenda item, ask if what you are aboutto devote this time, energy, and moneyto is as important as the “big six” of edu-cational impact. �

Douglas B. Reeves ([email protected]) is an author and founder ofThe Leadership and Learning Center, whichprovides professional development services.

Reprinted with permission from American School Board Journal, July 2010 © 2010 National School Boards Association. All rights reserved.

Making decisions based on data is a popular trend,

but make sure the facts are real and not simply

strongly held opinions masquerading as reality

40 American School Board Journal ■ www.asbj.com ■ January 2011

Level 1: ‘I believe it’

Education policy discussions are rifewith Level 1 claims. Silicon Valleyentrepreneur James Barksdale wasfond of saying, “Everybody’s entitledto their own opinion; they’re just notentitled to their own facts.” Often, pol-icymakers must listen to sincerelyheld beliefs about the virtues of cor-poral punishment or claims that chil-dren will learn to read and write bycoloring, but we need not confuserespectful listening with acknowl-edgement of a fact.

T he subject of this column is“decision-based data-making.” This isnot a misprint.

Educational leaders and policy-makers pride themselves on “data-based decision-making,” but discern-ing school board members must eval-uate carefully which came first—thedata or the decision. With that, I’d likefor us to consider different levels ofclaims that you likely will encounterand provide some of the most recentand best sources of educationalresearch.

Level 2: ‘It worked for my studentsand my children’

Memoirs sometimes masquerade asresearch. With heartrending detail, awriter or speaker will recall thedetails of their experiences with theirstudents or families. “It worked forme!” they enthuse, or more frequently,“I tried it in my classroom and it didn’twork.” In both cases, the impliedclaim is that personal experience canbe generalized to all students and allschools.

Level 3: ‘My colleagues have similarexperiences’

School improvement washes upon theshoals of the determined opposition ofthe vocal few. When the “I” becomes“we” in discussions of reform ideas,then leaders become preoccupiedwith the need for popularity ratherthan effectiveness. They succumb tothe idea that “buy in” is the prerequi-site for change, failing to acknowledgethat effective change requires thatpeople sacrifice time and energy—andpre-existing beliefs.

Wise leaders do not conduct anendless search for “buy in,” butacknowledge the truth—change is dif-ficult and always involves opposition.They say, “I understand and respectthat you do not agree with me and thatyou do not like my proposal forimproved student achievement. ButI’ve got great news: I’m not asking youto like it—I’m just asking that you doit, give it a try, and together let’s eval-uate the impact on achievement. If itdoesn’t work, we’ll stop. If it works,we’ll continue. But I’m not going tofail to give a promising new idea achance just because you’ve had some

Fact or Fiction

Douglas B. Reeves■LEADERSHIP

Copyright, January 2011, National School Boards Association. All rightsreserved. You may make up to 50 copies for individual or noncommercialuse. Any other use requires express written permission. Permission touse NSBA materials does not imply endorsement of any product or service.

American School Board Journal ■ www.asbj.com ■ January 2011 41

bad experiences in the past.”

Level 4: Systematic examination ofauthentic cases

Fortunately, board members do nothave to settle for claims at levels 1, 2,or 3. Leaders can and must demand ahigher standard. Researchers such asHeather Zavadsky (Bringing School

Reform to Scale, 2009) and KarinChenoweth (It’s Being Done, 2007)provide compelling cases of sustainedschool improvement.

Case studies are not necessarily iso-lated anecdotes, as Ben Levin’s splendidHow to Change 5,000 Schools (2008)makes clear. Case studies aren’t randomsamples and not necessarily generaliz-able to other schools, but systematicexamination of effective schools allowsresearchers, leaders, and policymakersto consider in detail the specific actionsof teachers and leaders who are associ-ated with improved achievement.

Level 5: Looking for ‘preponderanceof evidence’

Imagine you are on a jury. There isconflicting testimony by persuasivewitnesses on both sides. Experts, sto-ries, and statistical tables seem to sup-port both sides. What do you do?

In a criminal case, you must find evi-dence “beyond a reasonable doubt” toreturn a verdict in favor of the prose-cution. In a civil case—the closest anal-ogy to the decision standards faced byeducation policymakers—you mustconsider the “preponderance of the evi-dence.” The evidence is not perfect,

and neither side has a monopoly on thetruth. But at the end of the day, you findthat one side has made a sufficient casefor public policy.

You know that exceptions test therule—just because my grandmothersmoked like a chimney and lived intoher 90s, you nevertheless ban smokingin schools. Just because you receivedcorporal punishment and turned outjust fine, you decide to consider theevidence and ban the beating of chil-dren in the schools you govern.Fortunately, some excellent examplesof educational research meet thismost demanding standard.

Ken Leithwood and his colleagues(Learning from Leadership, 2010)used a rigorous methodology to linkspecific leadership practices to stu-dent achievement. Andy Hargreavesand his colleagues (The Fourth Way,

2009) bring together decades ofresearch and on-site observations toidentify specific teaching and leader-ship variables that are most effective.Robert Marzano (The Art and Science

of Teaching, 2007) synthesizes thework of many other researchers in ameta-analysis—a technique thatbrought together the work of morethan 1,000 studies. And in a stunningtour de force in research, John Hattie(Visible Learning, 2009) published ameta-analysis of more than 800 meta-analyses, providing clear guidance forleaders and policymakers about themost—and least—effective education-al practices.

Evidence-based decisions

When we focus on Level 5 research,we induce a degree of humility in anyresearcher. My work is nothing morethan a pebble on the mountain ofresearch. Beliefs and anecdotes, nomatter how compelling, cannot com-pete with evidence.

The problem, of course, is thatheartfelt beliefs and tear-jerking anec-dotes can trump the best evidenceduring the public comment period of aboard meeting. In “Queen for a Day,” areality television show that aired inthe 1950s, the audience membersdetermined the winner—the womanwith the saddest story—by the volumeof their applause. But in the 21st cen-tury, board members are often calledupon to select not the most popularbut the most effective winner of thedebate.

You can make this difficult choicewhen you first identify the five levelsof claims that you will encounter, andlimit your decisions to those based onthe best evidence. ■

Douglas B. Reeves (dreeves@leadand learn.com) is an author and founder ofThe Leadership and Learning Center,which provides professional developmentservices, research, and solutions for edu-cators and school leaders who serve stu-dents from prekindergarten through col-lege. He is the author of Finding YourLeadership Focus (Teachers CollegePress, 2010) and The Learning Leader(ASCD, 2006).

Copyright, January 2011, National School Boards Association. All rightsreserved. You may make up to 50 copies for individual or noncommercialuse. Any other use requires express written permission. Permission touse NSBA materials does not imply endorsement of any product or service.

FEEDBACK FOR FACILITATOR

WORKSHOP TITLE:_______________________________________________________________________

LOCATION & DATE: _______________________________________________________________________

FACILITATOR: ___________________________________________________________________________

Your feedback is very important. It fosters continuous improvement for me and for this work. Feel free to make additional comments on the back of this page.

What was the most helpful thing you learned as a result of this session?

What would have helped you learn more effectively/efficiently?

What questions do you still have about the discussion?

What else would you like the presenter to know about this session?

Please visit our web site at www.LeadandLearn.com for more information about: -The Leadership and Learning Center -Center workshops, institutes, and conferences -Scheduling staff development for my school district, conference, or convention -Catalog of books and videos -Performance assessments linked to my state’s standards -Additional resources and downloads

SCHOOL DISTRICT: ______________________________________________________________________

NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________

TELEPHONE: _______________________________________ E-MAIL: _____________________________

SCHOOL WEBSITE: ______________________________________________________________________

SCHOOL NAME/ORGANIZATION: ___________________________________________________________

JOB TITLE: ______________________________________________________________________________

ADDRESS: ______________________________________________________________________________

CITY, STATE, ZIP: ________________________________________________________________________

FAX #: __________________________________________________________________________________

The Leadership and Learning Center · 866.399.6019 ext. 512

Burning Questions, Challenges, and Success Stories…

__________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________

leadership focus: doing the right things, right no€¦ · leadership focus: doing the right...

Documents