This is the time of year when we move into interview mode in schools. Having just exited one of these, something the candidate said caused an aha! moment for me.

The question to the candidate had to do with a dream classroom and if given the choice, what level would he teach. His response was profound for our school, which operates as a PLC. To paraphrase: I believe that within each classroom, teachers have students with a wide variety of needs, at different levels, don’t they? As a teacher, I must be prepared to meet the needs of the children where they are, using data to guide instruction. So, I cannot say what my favorite grade would be as I will be working with students whose needs will be from all grade levels. WOW, I could not have said it better myself! But, that comment begs the question, How ARE we going to address the needs of each student, from where they are, and ensure high levels of learning for each student? For schools operating as PLCs, we have the vehicles to take our students to those levels.

In a PLC, our essential learning should be clearly outlined by professionals at each grade level/subject area. What standards have leverage, what standards have endurance, what standards provide readiness . . . these questions are answered by teachers so they have a firm footing in what each student must learn. Once indentified, teachers can go about the all-important job of teaching our students using best practices. From early identification and pre-assessment to post-assessment for a specific unit of study, we can effectively answer question 2 of a PLC: Are the students learning?

From an educator’s standpoint, I believe schools have taken some initial steps to address these questions. Look at any set of state standards or at curriculum guides and curriculum mapping tools, and there is evidence that some attempt has been made to identify what students should learn. Report cards purport to answer the question, Are students learning? However, in most schools the questions that are rarely considered on even a superficial level are questions 3 and 4 of a PLC: What are we going to do for students who don’t learn? How will we extend the learning for those who are already proficient? Effective PLCs give us an excellent process to address these two questions, which aides us in the identification of what students need.

Schools must begin building protocols for teachers and using them to look at student data. Then, educators can move past questions 1 and 2 and into what we do for children (i.e., provide directive, specified, timely interventions). It is not enough to speak to all children learning. To quote Rick DuFour, "What are you DOING for these students when they don’t learn?" If teachers, individually and collectively, subscribe to the attitude that our young interviewee had, that working with students whose needs will be very different in any grade level, and if schools operate as true professional learning communities to create the structures to support both teachers and students, how powerful the learning would be. We would truly be ensuring that all students learn at high levels.  The interview question regarding a dream classroom would be obsolete.  It would be great to mark that from our list.