An interesting dichotomy exists in education.
“We are suffering from change fatigue.”
“Education is largely the same as it has been for the past century.”
Both statements are true. But how can that be?
Rethinking Student Engagement: When More Content Means Less Learning
Across decades of educational research, one finding is remarkably consistent: Student engagement is one of the strongest predictors of meaningful school outcomes. Engagement is not an instructional technique; it is a design principle. When schools align curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment around engagement, they create conditions where students are not just “doing school.” They are thinking, questioning, and growing.
Hidden Risks of Rotating Faculty Evaluation Cycles
Many schools rely on rotating evaluation cycles because evaluating every teacher every year feels impossible. Veteran teachers move to a three-year schedule, administrators focus where problems appear, and the system feels manageable.
Community Time and Advisory Success: Creating Programs with Purpose
Belonging to a community is essential to student well-being and academic success. It also influences other critical outcomes: retention, word-of-mouth marketing, and giving. Good schools carve out time in their schedule to build community intentionally, something ISM calls “Community Time.”
AI Readiness Framework Dimensions 5 & 6: Literacy & Inclusion (for Levels 3-4)
As schools reach higher levels of AI readiness, AI literacy, ethics, digital citizenship, and equitable access must be integrated into a coherent, mission-aligned approach that is sustainable, measurable, and trusted.
AI Readiness Framework Dimensions 5 & 6: Literacy & Inclusion (for Levels 1-2)
In the early stages of AI readiness, schools often feel pressure to “teach AI” and address ethics, even when adult understanding is uneven and classroom practices are still evolving. Faculty may hold different views about what students should know and what responsible AI use looks like. At the same time, equity questions quickly emerge: Who has access? Who benefits? And where might new practices unintentionally widen gaps?
Every Teacher, Every Year
You know the pressures. Administrative teams are stretched thin. Division heads carry full schedules. Completing comprehensive faculty evaluations for every teacher every year can feel unrealistic. So, a sensible proposal is made: Rotate evaluations every two or three years. Focus attention on the teachers who would most benefit.
Do not do it.
AI Readiness Framework Dimensions 3&4: Communication/Operations (for Levels 3-4)
As schools advance in AI readiness, communication challenges become more complex. Your messaging must shift from exploration to expectation. Faculty need clarity about standards and accountability, and families require transparency about data use, privacy, and instructional impact.
AI Readiness Framework Dimensions 3&4: Communication/Operations (for Levels 1-2)
For schools in the early stages of AI adoption, communication often feels reactive or inconsistent. Faculty may be experimenting quietly, students may be receiving mixed messages, and families may be forming perceptions based on headlines rather than school guidance.
How School Structure and Culture Shape Student Flourishing
Schools are often organized around curriculum efficiency, tradition, or adult convenience. Yet, these systems can unintentionally create undue stress, reduce autonomy, and hinder students’ sense of belonging. From schedules to policies to rituals, the daily structures of school profoundly influence student well-being.