Aligning Spirituality, Personal Beliefs and Advocacy for Invitational Education Theory and Practice

 

A developing teacher’s spirituality and personal beliefs can serve as a powerful foundation for advocacy grounded in Invitational Education (IE) Theory and practice, as articulated by Purkey and Novak (2015). This integration optimizes the pursuit of educational goals that cultivate dignity, equity, and belonging, which are essential foundations for strengthening an inclusive society. When thoughtfully integrated, these dimensions can strengthen both professional purpose and the pursuit of inclusive educational goals.

The democratic ethos of IE Theory is rooted in the belief that people are able, valuable, and responsible, and should be treated accordingly. Many spiritual traditions similarly affirm the inherent dignity and worth of every person whereby there is a moral call to compassion and justice.  The responsibility is to serve others.

For a developing teacher, spirituality often shapes a worldview centered on meaning, interconnectedness, and service. When aligned with Invitational Theory, this worldview becomes an educational ethic. Therefore, respect becomes an intentional affirmation. Care becomes structured support and faith in human potential becomes instructional persistence. Therefore, one’s spiritual conviction can reinforce the invitational assumption that every student is capable of growth.

Invitational Education (IE) Theory rests on five core, inter-dependent elements or assumptions.  These are Intentionality, Care, Optimism, Respect, Trust (I-CORT) (Purkey, Novak, & Fretz, 2020; Anderson, 2021). When exhibiting unconditional positive regard (Rogers, 1957) and seeking to promote a growth mindset (Dweck, 2014), a teacher’s personal beliefs can further align with each IE assumption.

If a teacher believes their work is a calling or vocation, they are more likely to act with intentional purpose. Instructional decisions, classroom climate, and interactions become deliberate efforts to invite success rather than accidental occurrences.

Spiritual frameworks frequently emphasize compassion. In practice, intentional care may mean listening before correcting or designing equitable supports.  Exhibiting restorative discipline rather than punitive practices requires a caring mindset. 

The optimistic belief in human potential sustains high expectations. Teachers who view personal growth as possible for every student model resiliency and hope.  These are critical components in inclusive classrooms.

Spiritual or ethical beliefs about human dignity invite intentional exhibitions of respect.  “As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead” (James 2:26). Faith-based intentionality directly aligns with respect for student voice, culture, identity, and lived experience. This embraces students’ Funds of Identify as “assets” (Moll, Soto-Santiago, Schwartz, 2013) rather than deficits, which contributes to the teacher's Funds of Knowledge.

Trust emerges when a teacher consistently demonstrates fairness, confidentiality, and reliability.  These are traits often rooted in ethics and morality.  Arguably, intentional trust-building is built upon a foundation of spiritual integrity.

Advocacy within Invitational Education (IE) Theory and practice extends beyond individual interactions to systemic influence. For instance, a spiritually grounded teacher promoting IE tenets may be more inclined to challenge deficit-based narratives about marginalized learners, promote inclusive curriculum representation, and support policies that remove structural barriers.  IE advocacy as an extension of values-based beliefs may result in more engagement with families as valued partners. Spirituality, when outwardly-focused, rather than internalized and self-satisfying, strengthens one’s courage to advocate for students who may not have social power or franchise.

Professional growth and reflective practice should be the goal of every educational practitioner. Spiritual development often includes self-examination. This aligns closely with Invitational Theory’s emphasis on professional reflection to examine our implicit biases.  IE advocates encourage evaluating whether policies are intentionally inviting or disinviting. By assessing whether classroom environments promote belonging we recognize that if better is possible then good is not sufficient. A teacher committed to inner growth is more likely to engage in continuous professional improvement, thereby optimizing educational outcomes.

Education is a microcosm of society. Teachers intentionally creating an intentionally inviting environment strengthens an inclusive society.  The result is students experience love and belonging (Maslow, 1943). Diversity is framed as a strength. Dialogue replaces division so that democratic participation is modeled daily.

A teacher whose spirituality emphasizes community, justice, and human flourishing naturally supports these aims. By embodying Invitational Education principles, the teacher contributes not only to academic success but also to civic formation.

Let us be clear that alignment must remain ethically grounded. Personal spirituality should inform professional integrity rather than seeking to impose one’s beliefs. The pursuit of inclusivity requires honoring pluralism. IE advocacy respects the need for safeguards and ethical balance. Personal beliefs must focus on student dignity and access rather than religious persuasion.

Invitational Theory provides a universal framework that welcomes diverse belief systems while centering shared human worth. For a developing teacher, spirituality and personal beliefs can deepen commitment to Invitational Theory and practice. When thoughtfully aligned, spiritual conviction fuels intentional care. Ethical beliefs sustain optimism, respect, and trust. Therefore, IE advocacy becomes an expression of moral responsibility and professional growth becomes a reflective discipline.

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (February 28, 2026) Aligning spirituality, personal beliefs and advocacy for Invitational Education theory and practice.  [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

References:

Anderson, C. J. (2021). Developing your students' emotional intelligence and philosophical  perspective begins with I-CORT. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 27, 36-50.

Dweck, C. S. (2014, November). The power of believing that you can improve [Video]. TED Conferences. https://www.ted.com

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346

Moll, L., González, N., & Amanti, C. (2009). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classroom: Routledge

Moll L. C., Soto-Santiago S., Schwartz L. (2013). Funds of knowledge in changing communities. In Hall K., Cremin T., Comber B., Moll L. C. (Eds.), International handbook of research on children’s literacy, learning and culture (pp. 172–183). Wiley Blackwell

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2015). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2nd Ed) International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from: Fundamental of Invitational Education | IAIE

Purkey, W.W., Novak, J.M., & Fretz, J.R. (2020). Developing inviting schools: A beneficial framework for teaching. Teachers College Press.

Rogers, C. R. (1957). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21(2), 95–103. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045357

"Socrates: 'The unexamined life is not worth living.'". The Socratic Method. Retrieved 2026-2-28.

Helping a Professional Learning Community to Thrive by Healing Wounded Emotions

 

When a professional learning community (PLC) (DuFour, Eaker, & DuFour, 2005) has been emotionally bruised, the reconciliation work is as much relational as it is instructional. Healing wounded emotions (Padovani, 1987) and helping stakeholders regain their focus upon principles rather than personalities may benefit form drawing upon several frameworks.  Therefore, when intentionally combined:

• Growth mindset (Dweck, 2006) reframes the group’s struggle as a learning opportunity.
• Intentionality, Care, Optimism, Respect, and Trust (I-CORT) assumptions (Purkey, Novak, Fretz, 2020; Anderson, 2021) guide how people interact during that learning.
• Emotional healing (Padovani, 1987) restores each individual’s capacity for collaboration.
• PLC principles (DuFour, et al., 2005) can then again anchor the work beyond personalities.

 

Together these frameworks can create a powerful, coherent path forward. Let’s examine this practical synthesis.  Below we will discuss how a growth mindset and exhibiting I-CORT can be intentionally used to heal wounded emotions and re-center a PLC upon principles rather than personalities.

              Starting with emotional repair should precede cognitive repair (Padovani, 1987).  Wounded emotions quietly hijack attention, trust, and motivation. If they are not acknowledged, no framework, regardless of its assumed strength, would yield desired healing and a path forward.  By creating structured opportunities for psychological safety through listening circles, reflective protocols, or established norms for respectful dialogue, stakeholders normalize the reality that conflict and missteps are part of learning organizations, rather than moral failures. By addressing the need to first heal wounded emotions, stakeholders begin to shift the question from “Who’s wrong?” to “What happened, and what do we need to move forward?” This prepares the emotional soil for both a growth mindset and I-CORT assumptions to take root.

              Using a growth mindset (Dweck, 2006) reframes conflict as a learning opportunity.  A growth mindset reframes tension and mistakes as data, rather than defects.  This is especially important when personalities have become the focus. In practice, stakeholders replace blame-throwing language with learning language.  For instance, rather than “They’re resistant” the focus becomes “We haven’t found the conditions yet that support engagement.”

              Exhibiting a growth mindset demonstrates intellectual humility whereby PLC participants openly reflect on what they are still learning. This shift treats interpersonal breakdowns the same way the PLC intends to treat student learning gaps: Through inquiry rather than personal judgment. Therefore, conflict becomes a shared learning problem, not an individual flaw.

              By anchoring interactions in I-CORT, trust is more likely to be restored (Purkey, Novak, Fretz, 2020; Anderson, 2021). Being intentional, caring, optimistic, respectful, and trusting (I-CORT) provides behavioral clarity when emotions are tender and trust is fragile. Each I-CORT element supports healing.  To be intentional, speak with purpose, not reaction. Pause before responding. This is especially needed in emotionally charged moments.

              To exhibit care, separate the person from the behavior. Assume positive intent.  This still allows positive space to address the impact of wounding behaviors.

              Optimism needs to be shown so it can yield its capacity to spread. Exhibiting a collective belief that the team can repair, grow, and improve puts works to the faith.  Optimism should be modeled even if it doesn’t feel that way YET (Dweck, 2006)!

              Mutual respect is more generalizable when non-negotiable norms for tone, listening, and disagreement are established. Respect is not optional, even in conflict. Cultural differences, however, often come into play, thereby unintendedly inviting perceptions of disrespect.

              Rebuilding trust results through consistency, transparency, and follow-through.  It does not sustain through forced harmony. I-CORT is not about being “nice.” Rather, it is about being constructively human.

The goal of healing wounded emotions is to re-shift shared commitments through PLC principles (DuFour et al., 2023). When personalities dominate, principles have gone implicit. So, it is again necessary to make the guiding principles explicit.

• Revisit to re-establish team norms using growth mindset language and I-CORT behaviors.
• Use protocols that focus discussions, for instance, upon:
• Evidence of student learning
• Instructional impact
• Collective responsibility
• Ask principle-centered questions:
• “What does our commitment to learning require right now?”
• “How would an I-CORT response look in this situation?”

 

Over time, principles become the reference point, which mitigates personal preferences or past hurts. Integrating reflective learning as a continuous professional practice sustains the focus upon principles rather than personalities.  Healing emotional wounds is not a one-time event or a singular effort. Sustainable PLCs (Marzano and Waters, 2009) regularly reflect on both task effectiveness and relational health. Such a community uses reflection prompts based on a growth mindset:

• “What are we learning about how we work together?”
• “What’s one relational move we can improve for next time?”

 

These suggestions can keep the PLC adaptive, not reactive. Together, these practices allow a professional learning community to not just recover, but to mature.  The result is an educational community that becomes more resilient, reflective, and learning-centered.  Intentional invitations become transformational.

 

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (January 31, 2026). Helping a professional learning community to thrive by healing wounded emotions. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

References:

Anderson, C. J. (2021). Developing your students' emotional intelligence and philosophical  perspective begins with I-CORT. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 27, 36-50.

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., Many, T., & Mattos, M. (2023). Learning by doing: A handbook for professional learning communities at work (3rd ed.). Solution Tree Press.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.

Marzano, R. & Waters, T. (2009). District leadership that works. Solution Tree Press

Padovani, C. (1987). Healing wounded emotions. Paulist Press.

Purkey, W., Novak, J. M., & Fretz, R. (2020). Inviting school success: A self-concept approach to teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Exhibiting an I-CORT Mindset Invites Community

 

A goal of Invitational Education (IE) theory and practice advocacy is to exhibit a mindset that invites, rather than excludes, by always affirming the inherent worth, capability, and responsibility of every individual (Purkey & Novak, 2015). Grounded in intentionality, care, optimism, respect, and trust (I-CORT), this mindful approach fosters communities in which belonging precedes performance and empowerment replaces compliance. Through humble, servant leadership, we can all create environments that honors voices, shares power, and cultivates human potential by ensuring our policies, practices, programs and relationships with people consistently invite human flourishing.

An intentionally inviting, caring, optimistic, respectful, and trusting (I-CORT) mindset functions as the ethical posture of Invitational Education (Purkey, Novak, & Fretz, 2020; Anderson, 2021). IE advocacy begins by framing I-CORT not as a program, but as a way of being that is embedded in daily interactions and systemic practices. Therefore, it seems prudent to provide practical IE advocacy strategies.

Demonstrating how language, tone, policies, and routines can either invite or disinvite participation models intentionality. Helping stakeholders recognize how deficit thinking, gatekeeping, or compliance-only leadership undermines dignity actually provides examples of disinviting practices. Emphasizing that invitational practice actively resists marginalization affirms human worth before performance, thereby aligning I-CORT mindfulness with equity and belonging. Asking questions such as, “Who is being invited here? Who is not?”, promotes the utilization of reflective dialogue.

Empowerment occurs when people are treated as able, valuable, and responsible.  This treatment should occur long before learners prove their value, responsibility, or optimal ability. This is the intentional gateway toward developing an inviting community.

Mindfulness embedded in I-CORT assumptions transform community from a structure the people enter into toward a culture the people co-create. An I-CORT mindset creates community by shaping relational climate.  It is not solely focused on outcomes. By contrast, community members are intentionally included.

One result of an optimistically inviting community is individuals feeling more psychologically safe through exhibited, intentional care. Another is the sense that their identity and voices are honored through deliberate respect.  Self-efficacy flourishes as they are trusted to grow and contribute, which promotes the culture of high expectations within the school (Eck & Goodwin, 2010).

What characteristics should be exhibited within an intentionally inviting community?  As a valid and reliable metric, the following criteria should be considered:

·       Responsibility is shared rather than based on top-down control.

·       Accountability is mutual and grounded in care.

·       Dignity is systemically aligned throughout policies, places, programs and processes.

·       Invitations are intentional, continuous, and never assumed or withdrawn

Humility is the moral engine of servant leadership and the relational foundation of I-CORT mindfulness. So, lets further examine the role of humility in servant leadership and IE advocacy.  Humility enables listening before leading. It promotes learning from those the educational leader serves. It acknowledges limits and mistakes.  It shares power rather than guarding authority. So, from the perspective of an Invitational Education advocate, humility allows leaders to trust others’ capacity, creates space for voice and agency, resists the need to control outcomes, and emphasizes people over prestige.  Without humility, invitations become performative. With humility, by contrast, invitations become transformational.

To build an empowering community through humble invitations, educational leaders should seek to serve with people, rather than ruling over them.  The intentional educator designs systems that invite contribution rather than compliance, exhibits curiosity instead of certainty, and views leadership as stewardship of human potential.  Again, this humble, I-CORT driven approach builds communities that empowers learners’ voice and agency, sustains trust, promotes inclusion and a sense of belonging.  By exhibiting hope and optimism, it is a growth-oriented approach. An ICORT mindset, grounded in humility and servant leadership, creates communities whereby people are intentionally invited to belong, trusted to contribute, and empowered to flourish.

 

 

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (December 31, 2025). Exhibiting an I-CORT mindset invites community. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

References

Anderson, C. J. (2021). Developing your students' emotional intelligence and philosophical perspective begins with I-CORT. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 27, 36-50.

Eck, J., & Goodwin, B. (2010). Autonomy for school leaders. School Administrator, 67(1), 24-27.

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2015). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2^nd Ed) International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from: Fundamental of Invitational Education | IAIE

Purkey, W.W., Novak, J.M., & Fretz, J.R. (2020). Developing inviting schools: A beneficial framework for teaching. Teachers College Press.

Leading With Love and Appreciation in a Professional Learning Community

 

This month we will seek to provide a clear, practitioner-ready link between Purkey, Novak, & Fretz’s (2020) advocacy for an intentional caring, optimistic, respectful, and trusting (I-CORT) mindset, Chapman’s (2015) Five Love Languages, and DuFour’s (2004) Three Big Ideas of a PLC.  Ideally, this alignment of research will encourage educational leaders to lead with love in ways that strengthen collaboration, trust, and collective responsibility.

Proponents of Invitational Education theory and practice believe leaders who adopt an intentionally caring, optimistic, respectful, and trusting (I-CORT) mindset (Purkey, Novak, & Fretz, 2020; Anderson, 2021) commit to creating schools whereby every person in the system feels valued and capable. For this treatise we respectfully reframe Chapman’s Five Love Languages (2015) as professional languages of appreciation.  We will offer practical tools for enacting theory to practice. Our premise is that when educational leaders consistently speak the languages of appreciation that their staff respond to, these leaders create the relational conditions necessary for the Three Big Ideas of a PLC (DuFour, 2004) to flourish. As a review, the three are:

 ·     A focus on learning for all students

·       A collaborative culture

·       A results orientation that uses evidence to improve practice 

When educational leaders intentionally embody care, optimism, respect, and trust, the five languages of appreciation (love) become practical tools for strengthening effective relationships.  This builds the culture necessary for successful PLCs.  Let’s breakdown how each of the five languages of appreciation can directly support the Three Big Ideas for an effective professional learning community (PLC).

1. From the perspective of a professional learning community (DuFour, 2004), “Words of Affirmation” (Chapman, 2015) provide an opportunity to strengthen the PLC’s focus upon learning. Educators thrive when their expertise and effort are acknowledged. Invitational leaders who use sincere words of affirmation such specific, descriptive, professional feedback actually reinforce shared beliefs about the impact teachers have on student learning. Words of affirmation that strengthen the PLC’s focus on learning exhibits how the leader can intentionally lead with love.  This can be exemplified when the leader:  

·       Publicly affirms teams that align instruction to essential standards.

·       Celebrating teachers who modify instruction based on student evidence.

·       Offering appreciative feedback that names professional strengths rather than just effort. 

o   “Your small-group questioning increased student talk, which beautifully supports our learning goal beautifully.”   

The intentionally inviting leader’s words of affirmation impact the PLC Big Idea #1(DuFour, 2004).  Their conveyance reinforces a collective belief that all students can learn and that educators’ coordinated actions matter. Words of affirmation creates a psychological safety zone that encourages teachers to examine instructional results without fear.

2. Acts of service (Chapman, 2015) should communicate, “I am here to support you” and “We are in this together.” When leaders remove obstacles, provide resources, and work alongside teachers, they demonstrate the interdependence that is at the heart of an effective PLC. Leading with love can be exhibited by servant leaders who model a collaborative culture. Acts of service is modeled by the servant leader who:  

·       Covers a class so a PLC team can analyze student work without any interruptions. 

·       Co-plans or co-facilitates an intervention block with a team. 

·       Provides organizational help such as templates, data summaries, or materials that ease teachers' workload during busier PLC cycles.  

Whenever leaders serve their staff, the subsequent impact upon the PLC Big Ideas is normalizing reciprocity, shared vulnerability, and teamwork.  This normalization is a foundation for effective collaboration. These actions build trust, which is essential for teachers to share data honestly and to willingly innovate.

3. Quality time (Chapman, 2015) is about presence, listening, and meaningful dialogue.  These are core elements of relational leadership and necessary for high-functioning PLCs. Leading with love can be exhibited by leaders embracing quality time through intentional opportunities for collaboration and reflection.  Quality time is exhibited when educational leaders:  

·       Attend PLC meetings to listen, support, and ask catalytic questions, rather than evaluating. 

·       Schedule regular check-ins with teams to understand their needs.  

·       Protect instructional planning time so teams can do authentic collaborative inquiry. 

The subsequent impact upon the PLC Big Ideas is optimized when leaders strengthen collaboration (Big Idea #2) through signaling that collaborative work is a priority. By giving teams protected time to interpret evidence, reflect on student progress, and plan interventions, leaders promote being results oriented, which supports Big Idea #3.

4. Gifts can be symbolic, supportive, and professional withy the desire to reinforce a culture of learning and celebration.  Let’s agree that in professional settings, “receiving gifts” (Chapman, 2015) should be perceived as resources, tools, or opportunities. When leaders give in ways that align with staff needs, they reinforce shared commitments. Therefore, leading with love would be exemplified by providing instructional resources, data tools, or personalized professional learning aligned to team goals. This may be evidenced when leaders: 

·       Offer small tokens of recognition when teams reach milestones such as student growth celebrations, PLC achievement badges, or team-choice rewards.

·       Invest in teachers’ growth by funding conferences, books, or time for peer observations. 

The subsequent impact upon the PLC Big Ideas, of these celebrations recognize progress toward goals (Big Idea #3) and support of the conditions for high-quality learning for staff and students (Big Idea #1).

5. Because physical touch must be bounded and professional in schools, let’s reframe this area as “positive physical presence.” This might mean exhibiting warmth as conveyed through attentiveness, nonverbal respect, and visible support.  Leading with love can be exhibited through positive physical presence might be:  

·       Greeting colleagues warmly each morning. 

·       Being physically present in hallways, classrooms, and PLC meetings. 

·       Maintaining open, welcoming body language that communicates safety and belonging. 

The subsequent impact upon the PLC Big Ideas, as based on positive physical presence, should build psychological safety.  That is a basic need (Maslow, 1943) essential for collaborative inquiry, risk-taking, and collective responsibility. Table 1 below brings it all together.

Table 1: A Framework for Leading with Love in a Professional Learning Community

Chapman’s Love Languages	Leadership Expression	Connection to DuFour’s 3 Big Ideas
Words of Affirmation	Specific professional praise that reinforces progress	Builds shared belief in learning for all (Big Idea 1)
Acts of Service	Removing barriers; supporting teams structurally	Models interdependence and collaboration (Big Idea 2)
Quality Time	Presence, listening, protected collaboration time	Strengthens collaboration & data-driven reflection (Big Ideas 2 & 3)
Gifts	Resources, tools, opportunities that support learning goals	Reinforces results orientation & learning focus (Big Ideas 1 & 3)
Positive Physical Presence	Warmth, visibility, supportive nonverbal communication	Building trust and safety is essential for all PLC work

By learning how each staff member feels valued and then consistently communicating in those ways, the intentionally inviting leader cultivates the relational infrastructure that makes DuFour’s PLC model thrive. An I-CORT mindset becomes more normalized, thereby inviting all stakeholders to optimize their human potential.  Leaders who consistently lead with love humanize the work so that shared learning, collective responsibility, and continuous improvement become not just organizational structures, but lived experiences.

 

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (November 30, 2025). Leading with love and appreciation in a professional learning community. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

References:

Anderson, C. J. (2021). Developing your students' emotional intelligence and philosophical  perspective begins with I-CORT. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 27, 36-50.

Anderson, C.J. (January 31, 2024) In an inclusive classroom, your ICORT mindset invites optimal student engagement and success. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

Blankenship, S. S., & Ruona, W. E. A. (2007). Professional learning communities and communities of practice: A comparison of models, literature review (ERIC Document No. ED504776). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED504776.pdf

Chapman, G. D. (2015). The five love languages: The secret to love that lasts. Northfield Publishing..

DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”? Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6–11.

Dufour, R. & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2015). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2nd Ed) International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from: Fundamental of Invitational Education | IAIE

Purkey, W. W., Novak, J. M., & Fretz, J. (2020). Developing Inviting Schools: A Beneficial Framework for Teaching and Leading. Humanics

Developing a Collective and Ethical Approach to Generative AI Practices in Teacher Preparation

A detailed framework for developing a Professional Learning Community (PLC) is provided through DuFour, DuFour, and Eaker’s (2008) six key principles.  The DuFour et al. model emphasizes shared mission and vision, collective inquiry, collaborative teams, action orientation, continuous improvement, and results orientation.  By utilizing this PLC model, a teacher preparation program can design a structured training program to promote a collective, ethical, and pedagogically sound approach to Generative AI. Let’s consider the following detailed framework for this endeavor, which was intentionally aligned with DuFour et al.’s six key PLC principles.

Establishing a unified purpose around ethical and responsible AI use in education requires a shared mission, vision, and values. Suggested drafts for each were presented in the September 30 blogpost.  To implement this step of the PLC process, begin with a visioning workshop where faculty, teacher candidates, and instructional technologists articulate how AI aligns with the university’s mission and teacher education standards such as InTASC, CAEP, or AAQEP. The outcome of this workshop should be the creation of a shared statement of principles that specifies the integrity, transparency, inclusivity, and learner agency for AI utilization in teaching, learning, and assessment. It would be helpful for this workshop to anchor discussions in the professional ethics of teaching, which includes, but is not limited to, fairness, academic honesty, and equity in access.

Based on the second principle, the PLC should then seek to invite collective inquiry.  Fostering systemic curiosity, reflection, and shared understanding about AI’s educational implications invites diverse faculty to investigate key questions such as:

·       “How can Generative AI support UDL and differentiation?”

·       “What are ethical red flags in AI-assisted lesson planning?”

Teacher preparation faculty should be encouraged to incorporate action research whereby candidates test AI tools in simulated teaching tasks such as lesson plan generation and formative assessment feedback with the expectation to document outcomes and ethical considerations. During this collective inquiry, intentionally invite faculty and teacher candidates to regularly review emerging literature, policies, including the ISTE AI standards, and examine case studies of ethical dilemmas.

Building cross-disciplinary partnerships that model the collaborative spirit of the DuFour et al. (2008) PLC model transitions the institution to the third principle of implementation. Teacher preparation faculty can intentionally organize AI learning teams, comprised of teacher educators, preservice teachers, and technology specialists who co-design and critique AI-integrated teaching modules. This provides an opportunity for encouraging peer modeling and feedback. Visualize candidates presenting AI-supported lesson plans to peers for both ethical review and pedagogical critique. These present6ations should use shared digital spaces such as Microsoft Teams, Google Workspace, Canvas discussions to collaboratively document and archive guidelines and exemplars.

The fourth principle of PLC implementation should move beyond discussion toward applied, iterative practice.  This stage of the PLC is action oriented and experimental. Teacher preparation and other faculty are now implementing embedded AI-integrated microteaching activities whereby candidates practice ethically using tools like ChatGPT, Diffit, or Canva Magic Write under guided protocols. This encourages the teacher candidates and others’ “Growth mindset” (Dweck, 2009) whereby a safe space is provided to “fail forward” through formative assessment reflection cycles whereby intentional invitations encourage analysis of what worked, what ethical concerns arose, and how to revise practices. Also, respective of  Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), developing “AI Sandbox” sessions allows teacher candidates to test AI for accessibility, inclusivity, and bias detection.

The fifth PLC principle for implementation seeks continuous improvement by viewing ethical AI literacy as an evolving competency. To facilitate, the PLC can encourage reflection audits each semester to monitor how teacher candidate and other stakeholders’ competencies and attitudes toward AI have shifted.  It is crucial to integrate ongoing professional development for faculty and cooperating teachers, so mentors in the field can consistently model program expectations. Maintaining a living document, regardless if called the AI ethics playbook or AI guide, allows the PLC and institutional process and policies to evolve as technology and best practices change.

The sixth principle for effective PLC implementation is results oriented, which requires reliable measurement of the impact of PLC-based AI training on ethical and instructional outcomes. Valid data requires reliable, measurable outcomes.  For instance, consider what might be revealed by:

• Candidates demonstrating and documenting ethical AI use in lesson plans and reflection journals.
• Faculty integrating AI literacy into their course outcomes and assessment rubrics.

o   Collecting data through surveys, reflective essays, and digital artifacts designed to show how candidates apply ethical principles.

o   Using data analysis to refine coursework, policies, and collaborative structures.

Collectively, the six principles advocated by DuFour et al. (2009) should produce actual deliverables.  Therefore, the following phases for a suggested “AI in Education PLC Initiative,” Semester 1 Implementation Plan may be helpful:

Phase 1: Visioning and Principles Workshop (Weeks 1–2)

Phase 2: Inquiry & Research Teams (Weeks 3–8)

Phase 3: Application and Microteaching (Weeks 9–14)

Phase 4: Reflection, Assessment, and Policy Drafting (Weeks 15-16)

As previously provided, a structured framework and a professional development (PD) outline would help develop policies, create professional development opportunities, and highlight classroom practices that prioritize ethics, inquiry, and student empowerment. By applying DuFour et al.’s (2008) PLC framework, the teacher preparation program shifts from individual experimentation to collective ethical leadership in the use of Generative AI. Candidates graduate not just as users of AI, but as reflective practitioners who model responsible, transparent, and equity-centered digital pedagogy

 

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (October 31, 2025). Developing a collective and ethical approach to generative AI approaches in teacher preparation. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

References:

Anderson, C.J. (September 30, 2025) Educational leaders: Promote ethical utilization of AI that encourages critical thinking skills! [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/ 

Dufour, R. (2006). Learning by doing: A handbook for professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

 

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press. 

International Society for Technology in Education. (2025.). AI in education and accessibility. ISTE. https://www.iste.org

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2015). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2nd Ed) International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from: Fundamental of Invitational Education | IAIE

Purkey, W.W., Novak, J.M., & Fretz, J.R. (2020). Developing inviting schools: A beneficial framework for teaching and leading. Teachers College Press.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2023). Artificial intelligence and the future of teaching and learning: Insights and recommendations. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/