Innovation does not mean dictating new policies to a school staff from the principal’s office. Google and Apple, two companies famous for their innovation, also are driven from the bottom up. Steve Jobs once said, “It doesn’t make sense to hire smart people and then tell them what to do; we hire smart people so they can tell us what to do.” This does not mean that teachers should innovate carte blanche. Quite the contrary; innovation requires a clear process of experimentation and reflection where teachers and administrators trust in each other and the process. It also requires collaboration among staff members where roles and responsibilities in the process are clearly defined.

This process of experimentation and growth has hallmarks that can be identified and learned. Action research and professional learning communities (PLCs) are two common ways that schools and teachers innovate. In both instances, staff members, either on their own or collectively, identify or develop a new practice to implement. They then implement the new practice in classrooms and collect data to determine whether the new practice has been successful in accomplishing desired goals. The practice may be tweaked or modified along the way, but ultimately it is either accepted into a teacher’s (or school’s) repertoire or rejected based upon the results. New practices may come from a variety of sources, including research literature, conferences, and colleagues, or may be novel ideas generated by staff members.

For these processes to thrive in a school, teachers and administrators must be of a common mindset when it comes to the value of innovation. This requires open lines of communication between administrators and staff members, both at the beginning of the process and throughout the experimental phases. When teachers try new practices—that may or may not prove successful—it is critical for administrators to be aware and supportive of the effort. Administrators must be willing to let teachers try new ideas, knowing that they may not reach the desired outcome. This can be daunting in this era of high-stakes accountability, but it is essential for learning and growth. Ongoing feedback for teachers can provide support during experimentation and refine new strategies.

Developing a clear process for action research or PLCs will ensure that teachers feel ownership over their experimentation and are held accountable for it. Administrators can create regular meeting times for PLCs and provide training on how effective PLCs operate. Teachers conducting action research may be given time during a faculty meeting to share results of their investigations. Administrators may lead PLCs or they may conduct action research of their own.

By participating in or modeling these practices, administrators can advocate for experimentation and learn from their own efforts. Administrators also can invite teachers to provide input into whole-school experimentation efforts (e.g., changes to the school schedule) to build community investment in larger innovations.