Implementation Podcast Ep 4-20240606_134746-Meeting Recording

June 6, 2024, 12:47PM

41m 11s

Laura Spence   4:00
Welcome to our 4th podcast in the series of implementation making research real.
We're joined today by jon.eaton, John Rodgers and Claire Savery.
Would you like to introduce yourself, Claire?

Claire Savory   4:14
Hi there Sir.
My name is Claire Savory and I'm the CEO of the GLA.

Laura Spence   4:19
Thank you very much, Claire.
Right.
So let's get started with the first question and we're focusing on the process recommendation of the guidance today.
So can I start with you here, John, can you begin with giving us an overview of the three key elements within the summary of recommendations with a particular nod to that third recommendation about the process?

Jon Eaton   4:37
Yeah, sure.
So just in brief, we've got three recommendations.
One is about the behaviours, so we should adopt the behaviours that drive effective implementation and I guess the he words there would be driving effective that so the behaviours are very much the engine that drive quality in implementations, not just doing it, it's doing it well.
Second one is about attending to the contextual factors that influence implementation, so keywords there I guess would be attend.
I was deliberately chosen.
We're kind of thinking it's a thing you need to give, like practical attention to and look after and care for.
Think about the systems and structures and the people who are gonna influence implementation because that recommendation.
Enables you to enact the behaviours, but can also constrain your ability to do that.
And the third recommendation, which is the focus of the podcast of course today is to use a structured but flexible implementation process.
And there's, you know, two key words that maybe seem a little bit intention.
You've got structured on the one hand and flexible on the other, and I guess we'll kind of get into what exactly that means is we talk through it.

Laura Spence   5:51
Brilliant.
Thank you, John.
That was a really useful summary there, so let's get into it now a little bit more in terms of what we mean by processing and ultimately how we can actually action this within our schools.
So the process and language of explore, prepare, deliver, and sustain is probably the most familiar and well known aspect of this new guidance report that's been transferred from the previous guidance report.
So where are there differences or new additions to this model?
And if I can direct this question to John Rodgers first please.

Rodgers, John   6:18
Yeah, absolutely.
So I think you know when you read through the the the new guidance report, it a lot of it will be familiar in terms of the process of course that for me the big change is that one has to take recommendations one and two and bear those in mind as you go through the process.
So it's about thinking, how can I manifest in in my school?
In my setting, all the behaviours that recommendation one is about.
So as I plan as I prepare, deliver sustained.
You know what implementation strategies are gonna be there that are gonna help me and my Staff exhibit those behaviors?
If you UNITING, ENGAGING and REFLECTING, and of course making sure that we're considering the contextual factors as we go through the process as well.
So for me that's kind of the biggest mindset.
Change is making sure we have those things forefront in mind, trying to enact the behaviours that drive effective implementation and attending throughout the process to the contextual factors that again I went Fluence.
Yeah, how well implementation occurs.
And don't forget that those contextual factors can be enabling or they can be constricting, sort of inhibiting as well.
So it's really important to think about that.
But as people read through it, I think there's a lot they'll recognize.
There's some wonderful new diagrams about it.
One of my favorite diagrams comes from the Explore phase, which is a similar tool to last time but takes readers school leaders through a tool for making evidence informed decisions, which is really helpful.
So it's, it's about a kind of I think Jonathan Sharples uses a kind of split screen why you're thinking about assessing the need of your setting.
What?
What's the priorities?
What?
You know what the data is telling you?
What the priorities are for your students and and holding that need alongside evidence, informed approaches, what approaches are gonna match with that need?
I like to think it almost like a jigsaw piece that you've got a clearly defined the edges of 1 in order to fit the right intervention to complete the picture, so that that's quite nice and and again I know there's quite a few different things, but another one that I really like is the inclusion during the prepare phase of.
Implementation outcomes.
So again, I think well, the diagram certainly knew and I think perhaps it was kind of maybe not as as explicit in the old guidance as it is now.
But it's really clear now that actually if we can focus on implementation outcomes and monitor and evaluate those as we go through the process, we're much more likely to see better final outcomes for our for our students.
So for example, if you know if we've got an intervention that's designed to to help students increase their reading age, for example, that's the final outcome that we're looking for.
But as we implement a particular strategy around around reading without seeing classrooms or small group interventions, whatever you know, there are things we could be looking at to to give us an idea about how well it is being implemented as we go through.
So on the diagram, it lists various outcomes like buying, adoption, fidelity, reach, acceptability, and so on.
And so for me, that again, they're really helpful ways of thinking about things, because don't forget the idea behind this country report is to try and make or help schools support schools in doing implementation.
Well and and the logic model behind the the implementation outcomes is that if if those things are going well, you're much more likely to have a better final outcome, which is what obviously what what schools are after.

Jon Eaton   10:08
Yeah.
I mean I would echo that is what John.
So I think, umm, the a lot of the strategies will be familiar from the previous garden support, but I think the difference is they're given greater coherence and they're more unified by recommendations while and two.
So whereas in the previous one you know you've got your gathering and interpreting data tool and explore and you implementation planning and prepare, they maybe felt somewhat isolated or.
You know, uh, maybe not kind of brought together under that, that kind of unifying framework of engaging right reflect and the contextual factors.
So I think there's a difference there, the kind of unity of it.
I know the difference.
I guess I'd pick out an overall one would be the the more flexibility in the process.
So we've talked about the idea that the phases overlap and are visited, so things like you mentioned the Explore tool is a good example where you're looking at people needs that begins in explore phase, but pupil needs remain relevant throughout implementation and all things.
It's really helpful to revisit and in fact in the in the sustained phase that we've got a more structured stain phase in this version and you know it says explicitly revisit the explore phase and revisit implementation plans from the prepare phase.
Think again.
Are the plans still appropriate?
Is the problem still the problem?
All the core components we've selected as core as we thought they were or you know do we need to kind of tweak them and adjust them.
Other strategies we've chosen working or do we need, do we need to kind of rethink them because things like cohorts change, right, people leave the different Staff arrive so that it's not like a static process.
So that idea flexibility and the idea that strategies begin in certain phases, but they continue beyond that is I think it's a difference in this version too.
And yeah, you're right.
There are some specific differences too, so I think the explore phase tool is the probably the most.
Significant difference, but things like the implementation planning process is much more.
Spelled out?
I think so.
It's much more.
Yeah.
You know, we've kind of broken it down literally column by column through an implementation plan and things like the SUSTAIN phase again is a more rigorous process and was almost like a decision tree in some ways.

Laura Spence   12:37
Right.
Thank you.
There are some really useful explanations there, and I think what you touched upon in the idea of this new guidance is about supporting schools to do it well.
Those are all the tools that you've been discussing there that enable schools to be as successful as possible when they're following this implementation guidance.
So I'm gonna point the question to Claire now.
Claire, why do you think schools are so fond of the explore?
Prepare.
Deliver sustained process because that's overwhelmingly what we've heard from our listeners.

Claire Savory   13:04
Thank you, Laura.
And so I've, as somebody who's been writing school development plans since I hate to say this about 1998, when the the first guidance came out in 2018, I remember thinking ohh my days, this is this is what I've been missing in all of these years of trying to bring about change in schools.
So I know from a personal perspective it's been a tool that I've been passionate about using ever since the the first iteration came about, and for me it's it's the explore phase that is has been so powerful because for me the Explore phase is where you build your your culture around change and you build trust with your colleagues around the process of change because they know that if you explore a problem really well in all the ways that you need to and you land upon what the problem is really coherently, then the solutions that you choose.
To bring and and the evidence that you use to support your decision making means that you're more likely to be successful, whereas in times I know you know you've chased after the wrong things, probably because you haven't diagnosed the problem correctly in the 1st place.
So for me is as the new CEO of our trust.
We've adopted the implementation framework as our sort of absolute core using those categories of explore, prepare, deliver, sustained to map out our trust development and this has provided a really clear road map for all stakeholders of carefully placing all our any new initiatives and ensuring that we've got sufficient capacity for change.
So this year we've got quite a few projects underway as part of our Explore.
And as I've said already, this genuinely creates a culture of sort of forward thinking and innovation where you can pull together teams of people who can enable change.
And it also helps to ensure that we have careful planning in place for how we ensure that we are really sustaining some of the change programs that are already underway, because to to easily those things can fall off as you chase after the new next best thing.
So I've really learnt that the sustained part of it is equally important to ensure that those strategies and change that you've brought about is really secure, really embedded and the all new staff are brought up to speed with this important work and they understand why and their their part of how we're sustaining it and embedding those changes because it's just too easy to rush on to the next thing and say with the new CEO, I think the the the updated guidance is just absolutely brilliant because the stuff around culture is even more explicit, umm and it's.
Really helping me to work strategically sort prioritising the key change programs that are going to make the biggest impact.
So we use this tool for all our development work.
Umm.
And I think something I've always reflected on it, because sometimes I might call it a school improvement plan or sometimes I might call it a school development plan.
And I haven't really worried too much about which word I've used to describe the plan, because it's just about bringing about change.
But my reflections are that it's really critical we need to be clear on whether it's an improvement plan or a development plan because they are different things.
So we've worked hard on thinking clearly about the definition and the difference between the two.
Umm.
So we would say that developments seeks to transform competence into mastery, whereas improvement is centered on addressing areas that are underperforming or are not at the expected standard.
And so I think that separation enables us to use the guidance more effectively.
And so we use the implementation guidance for all of our development work because it carefully takes you through the phases to get something from a a problem solving idea over here into secure embedded practice.
And when you've got to do that at scale, and I mean, our trust is is a relatively small trust of just 11 Primary schools, but when you're trying to get something rolled out at scale, you need to have a sort of careful, considered, systematic, well resourced plan that you can deliver effectively and get it to a point where it's sustained.
So I think the cycle works incredibly effectively to to guide you through.
I think what we found in the using of it, we naturally we split deliver into deliver one and deliver two.
So because what we were finding where where we were in a deliver phase of a particular project, we needed to make some adaptations and tweaks in in light of its implementation.
And so, umm, and you know, there's a balance between.
No, we need fidelity.
Got to get fidelity to the approach, but actually we got to also take account of contextual.
Challenges or or differences that might mean you need to just tweak or adapt the approach ever so slightly to so that it's still having impact.
So again the the updated guidance is really, really does speak to a more flexible way of using the cycle.
So you're not just religiously working through the different phases, you can actually be much more, umm, responsive and reflective as as as how you apply in terms of how you apply the the approach.
So yeah, is it really is fundamental to how I I work strategically as as a CEO in our trust?

Laura Spence   18:56
Thank you, Claire.
And it's so useful to hear how people are putting this into practice in their schools and their trust so that other people can draw on those experiences as well.
John, did you want to come in there?

Rodgers, John   19:05
Well, I only just say Claire, just it sounds like you were engaging in the behavior of of being reflective with you, with your Staff, perhaps even before the language of this new guns came out which which which is wonderful.

Claire Savory   19:19
Yeah, I think we, you know, you can adopt these tools and I think in is is that fine line about thinking we know we need fidelity and sort of being a slave to the fidelity which is which is important.
But I mean, you know, we've we in terms of implementing our validated phonics scheme, you know you know you've got to follow it as it is.
But actually we found that there were some context that needed to make some adaptations.
And so you can't just kind of almost stupidly go on with it as it is because then Staff lose faith with the program because they said yes.
But in my context, they were like it can't work like that.
So I think that element of flexibility is really helpful.

Rodgers, John   20:00
Yeah, absolutely.

Laura Spence   20:00
Thank you.

Rodgers, John   20:01
Sorry, Lauren.
And again, you know, just to say well done, I was supposed to.
Claire Clearing and her staff that you know, they clearly also not only being reflective and acting that behaviour, but also really keeping in mind that that contextual factor of people who enable change, so fantastic.
Right.

Laura Spence   20:21
No, of course.
I was just thinking, John, this question is directed that jon.eaton.
So I think we can absolutely hear from Claire there the passion that goes behind using the Explore, prepare, deliver sustained process and how useful that is when it's put into context in schools.
Was it always the case that this was going to remain in the second guidance report and and what conversations were had around that process?

Jon Eaton   20:42
And well before, just before we came to that, I just wanted to pick out a couple of things.
The Claire landed on that, I think are really valuable and like, make sure they get full airtime.
So you spoke around the importance of the explore phase and kind of setting up implementation.
That's a really good message to get across.
I'd argue that doing the Explore phase well and modelling a good explore process like in itself creates the conditions helps create the conditions for effective implementation.
It sort of shows everybody like this is being done really well, right?
It's an opportunity to engage, unite, reflect early on that then has a knock on effect on that kind of implementation culture going forward.
So that's just really worth picking out.
I think like really treat the explore phase as an opportunity to set the conditions for great implementation.
It's a missed opportunity not to do that.
It's, I guess what I'm saying.
And then?
You also said the the process what one of the other benefits of the process if we using that shared language and I think that's one of the things schools have been fond of.
It's created a kind of shared language around implementation that is also effectively uniting people around implementation processes.
So let's just get on the same page around what happens and when and how it's happening and just even just sort of showing that common language is a good way of uniting people around what's happening rather than having 15 different frameworks flying around.
And you know it, it is kind of hard to follow so.
So the question was there always on the cards?
Yeah, yeah, I guess it.
I guess it kind of was like we did deliberately sort of stress test it and said what happens.
We don't have.
What what happens if we don't keep the process and just have the babies and contextual factors?
And I think a lot of people would be fine with that if you're if you're a sort of sophisticated user that the implementation guidance, you've kind of internalized that, then great.
But it's it would be quite hard to know where to start.
I think you know you if you already do you good job implementation and we have this feedback from some of the users as well that some of them felt actually all I need is the behaviours and contextual factors and that's fine.
You know, if you wanna use it that way, that's great.
But I think also there is something really useful in having a set of implementation strategies kind of mapped out like a almost like a you know serving suggestion I suppose for implementation because it gives a bit of forward momentum to the process.
Just having those 44 phases inherently something about it, they inherently just keeps the wheel turning.
Let's you know what's the next phase.
What what happens next?
And even when we get to stain, you know, one of the recommendations as well revisit, explore, right.
And if you thinking about scaling up, treat it as that new implementation process.
So I think and then finally the other thing to say is that the the behaviours play out through the process, if that makes sense.
The process helps you operationalize the behaviours you know.
It's it's that you don't engage in that reflect by sitting there, thinking about engaging, inviting, reflecting you.
You do it by through your actions, like through implementation planning in a way that involves multiple people, or through having a meeting which she discuss potential barriers.
So it's the stuff you do that allows you to act out the behaviours, to operationalize the behaviours and that's, I guess the process makes that a little bit easier to do.
That makes sense.

Laura Spence   24:22
Right.
Thank you, John.
Thank you, Claire.
So reflecting on the process, I think the guidance report gives some really explicit instructions as to how to get this process right in schools, but it can still go wrong.
We can still hit the mark, but miss the point.
So how can we avoid this when we're using this guidance?
How can we make sure that we are having an impact on our pupils?
John, have you got any reflections on that?

Rodgers, John   24:46
Uh.
Probably not as as useful as John and Claire are gonna have, but I I think that, you know, I would first say it's always important during appraises, as I've said before in response to Claire, to bear in mind, you know, how are we gonna enact the behaviors and keep those contextual factors at the forefront of our minds as we go through the process?
I think just reflecting on some of the experiences of implementation that I've been involved with before where it has been done badly is where kind of like what John's just said, what where the explore phase in particular has not been done properly or thought carefully about umm, I think schools often rush things.
So taking the time to really explore to the root causes of problems to, as Claire talked about really clearly define the issue, the needs of our students.
And you know that and that just takes a lot of time of what we're school leaders.
Who?
Who's you know, come up with an idea that they want to implement and and just they're.
They're in their head.
The timeline of of getting that sorted for them, they say, Oh yeah, well, we've done that in three weeks time and then we can move on to the next thing and just like slow down because you know, these things take it's just also about carving out time to talk to the staff and and you know and engage with them and unite them and practice it and be reflective on how that's going and monitoring.
Inevitably, that just takes time.
So I think 1 cautionary message would be for school leaders in particular, just to be aware that proper implementation done well, I think takes longer than people may initially think, even if it's potentially a fairly simple strategy that the the, the trying to implement and I think other cautionary tales might be to you know, just to be aware of that and it's very specific and he's going to report, but be aware of the the flexibility that there should be within the process.
You know, I've been involved in processes before where it's just been that linear process round the phases of explore, prepare, deliver, sustained, you know, and without any thought to going back.
And and as we've heard from Claire, you know, there are times when we need to go.
Let's just take a step back.
Let's review some stuff.
Let's slightly change some stuff based on, you know, new data that's come out, new evidence from our students, new needs that emerge, you know, recognizing new staff turnover.
One thing that we've done here at Mounts Bay Academy is done.
A lot of work over the last few years on disciplinary literacy, but year on year, of course.
You know, as in all schools, you get a few new teachers that that come in and they've missed out on two years worth of CBD around vocabulary and reading fluency, reading comprehension.
So it's, it's about thinking carefully about how to how to manage that and and where to sort of rewind the circle a little bit in order to support them and clarify the core components again and so on and so forth.
So yeah, so that would be my initial reflections on things to be aware of.
Should we say in terms of not doing it well?

Laura Spence   27:59
Always useful, particularly to draw on those experiences, isn't it?
Where?
Where it's gone wrong, I think we learn as much from that as we do as as where it's been successful as well.
Claire, do you wanna come in there with any particular kind of examples you might have of where maybe the process has worked really well for you or where maybe it hasn't quite so much in any golden Nuggets there that people can take away?

Claire Savory   28:19
So I've got.
I've got a beautiful example of wearing.
It's gone really wrong.
They weren't gonna share that because I think you probably learn more if you do your reflections really well.
You can learn so much more from where you make mistakes, and so I'm just going to share where we made it.
A big old mistake and really bringing about effective change is a really messy business because you you got to be careful not to make assumptions about what everybody's bringing to the table.
And so I again, I would want to emphasize the absolute importance of getting clarity on the language that you use, because people's experiences in their previous school, if you're saying, oh, we're going to do something on, I don't know, oracy people then might have their own views and thoughts on what that is and what programs would be the best solution for that.
And so people are bringing their own different flavours and you need to unite people on the actual definition and get real precision and common understanding of what it is precisely that you mean.
Umm.
And I think the the part of the difficulty around bringing about change and implementation is that what you're saying to folks potentially is what you're currently doing isn't good enough or it could be better.
And so that for many people feels like a threat.
The and can make people panic if we think about the change curve.
There's a lot of people that will be resistant to that because it's it's going to be different and they they are uncertain about what that means for them, their workload, they're how they do things.
Umm, so it's it's not easy to predict how staff will respond.
So again, I would emphasize the importance of doing explore really well, because that's where you're building your your first followers.
You're doing some action research.
You're building that common language, understanding you're connecting people, and there's it's generating some excitement about the new thing that people are inquisitive and want to find out more.
So I think it is it is.
I can't underestimate that enough, but but back to the mess up that I did.
So I remember very enthusiastically creating a new improvement plan for our school.
So we had 21 classes across the 3-4 mentary, infinite and Junior School who were working under the leadership.
Same leadership for the first time in the school's history.
Our data across the board was showing that children were doing less well in their writing compared to reading and math.
Boom.
Right.
Let's have an improvement plan on writing, so that became the single focusing on our improvement plan or remember thinking very pleased with myself that we decluttered the plan so that we could really focus on improving writing.
So Staff were supportive and engaged.
We had more training set aside for this to go back over our approach.
We did more moderation.
We did stuff to the timetables to enable wider opportunities for writing across the curriculum and so on.
So you can imagine my disappointment when we got to the end of the year.
I need to discover that across the board, our writing outcomes remained low.
Say we had to sort of, you know, marvel at ourselves and take a dig, you know, really dig deep to look at where we've gone wrong.
And so we did a full on postmortem and of course what we discovered that although we'd focused on the right thing broadly, you know to improve writing because we hadn't analysed the barriers for children in sufficient depth, we'd missed the diagnosis of the problem. Really.
Altogether, what we'd also done was completely underestimated the impact of having seven.
They were called newly qualified teachers in those 21 classes.
So when we then undertook the thorough and careful analysis which we should have done, if we'd have been doing this is obviously before 2018, we, when we did the thorough analysis, we discovered that actually the problem wasn't broadly writing.
It was in fact it was spelling.
And then there were multiple layers within that too.
So we found out that teachers like confidence in teaching spelling, which was perhaps surprising because we also reflected that there wasn't a sort of agreed practice or approach or what we thought we were doing.
It sort of been abandoned over time due to Staff change and an absence of leadership, so our approach had been based on individual approaches and ideas from teachers and basically too many children were starting key stage 2, not securing the key stage one programme of study.
So, you know, once we now we got clarity now we can then let's do explore properly.
Now we can put in place a proper, you know, do prepare to think about where, how we move forward with our adopted idea and then get it into delivering, implement it properly.
So it's been a really useful case study for us as a trust to use across the GLA sort of highlighting the importance, as you said, John of taking sufficient time to undertake a thorough and careful evaluation of the perceived problem to enable the problem to be clearly and accurately defined.
And only then can you bark on embark on the business of school improvement through successful implementation.

Laura Spence   33:34
Thank you.
I wondering, John, if you want to come in there with some reflections.
I think hearing the example of where jon.eaton where we with the process hadn't been used versus when you know in the kind of the impact of that versus actually examples that Claire shared where they have used the process and it's been successful.

Jon Eaton   33:51
Well, I mean, I totally agree that often you learn more from reflecting on what's gone before.
And one of the things we talked about in the guidance is when things about implementation climate, this actually really useful to reflect on 111 great way into the guidance I guess is to reflect on previous implementation efforts because you probably find it will have been doing some of these things like just because these terms are new, they do capture some of the things that happened going on.
And in fact, when we've done training on the previous guidance, the often the stuff we end up talking about is the sort of human factor and the implementation being a team sport and it's nice to actually have that in the guidance explicitly in forefront.
So one way into it I think is to reflect on those how it's done previously in light of those new concepts and think actually and I think Darren said this in a previous Darren, Dr Darren Moore who who led the evidence review behind the garden support you know one potential way into it is just to reflect on a previous implementation effort and think about you know if we if there's one element we could improve, what might it be, how could we engage a little bit more here or could we unite.
And so I think yeah, you know that's that's my advice.
I really I think just kind of deliberately consciously reflect on how things have gone in light of those new concepts.

Laura Spence   35:13
I think it's really useful to be able to reflect on examples of where the implementation has worked really effectively, but where?
Perhaps other process has been implementation haven't worked quite as effectively, but as you said, learning the most from actually why and then building on that in the future.
If we finish off now, I thinking about what our key learning or our key takeaways are for our listeners today.
I think what I've absolutely gauged from listening to you all and your reflections today has been how important it is to clearly define the problem.
I think quite often you can have a hunch or something or an intuitive feeling that something isn't quite where it needs to be, but that importance of really carefully exploring.
But then diagnosing the root cause of the problem is critical, because I think it's quite easy to do that at a surface level, and they're not really pin down exactly what it is that needs to be improved.
And alongside that, the clarity of language where you're uniting people around.
Exactly what it is that you're trying to achieve, and I think that, that, that explore stage could so easily be rushed.
But taking our time to do that really carefully and to do it properly and to keep coming back to you.
But why?
But why?
But why is really, really important?
So I think that for me is is the key learning with the process is to make sure that explore isn't rushed and that plenty of time is spent to accurately define the problem into unite people around that.
So it's not just one, one voice or one person that's having that, that, that role of diagnosing the problem.
If I go to John now, how about you, John?
What would be your key learning or your takeaway to share today as we end the podcast?

Rodgers, John   36:44
Well, yeah, I absolutely agree with with what you said.
I think people schools need to, you know, to take their time, not do too many things at once, not try and implement, you know, have lots of these processes going on at the same time.
So doing fewer things, but doing them really well, I think we think John mentioned it a minute ago or maybe was Claire, but you know just recognizing that that behavior change in schools is complex because it's it's social in nature and making sure that throughout the process we are trying to enact the behaviours that drive effective implementation.
And one final reflection, just from what people have said that you know that actually talking to other schools about their successes and failures in implementation process can be really useful.
A way of you reflecting on there, but you know hearing there reflections can be actually really useful as well as another way in to start thinking about it.
Particularly schools that have gone through a process of implementing something that you're talking about.
For example, I'll meet with a network of people and different schools have been implementing tutor time reading in secondary schools and lots of different ways to do that.
Whether it's a bespoke literacy lesson or in two times and and listening to lots of schools, talk about their journey on that particular implementation and what went well, what went badly, you know, it's been really fascinating for us as a school as we implement that here.
So yeah, I think talking to each other.

Laura Spence   38:19
Yeah, absolutely.
And using those conversations to support the monitoring and the reflections, as you said to them, be able to go to that next stage or that next level, Claire.
How about you?
What would your key takeaway or your key reflection be to share as we close the podcast?

Claire Savory   38:32
Again, I think uh, just agreeing with my colleagues here around umm, sharing your learning and your mistakes because that that's that system generosity piece then where we can all you know be open and honest about that and just share and learn together.
I think you know there's a lot of talk currently about, you know, teacher workload and wellbeing and how we attract people and retain them in the profession.
So I think establishing a really strong and positive culture for your implementation is key, because it's about how people feel.
And I think if you get the explore bit really, really right that supports how you build that positive culture and build the trust in your organization.
That actually where if we're bringing about change, we know it's been really well considered, really well thought through.
There's been trials.
It's based in evidence.
It's not a knee jerk anything so I can trust that this is the right thing that's going to make the biggest difference for my children.
So I'm all in.

Laura Spence   39:32
That's a great point to finish on.
Thank you so much.
And that is absolutely key, as you said to people feel that it's done with rather than done too and then that's where we are able to unite and build that culture.
Thank you so much today everyone.
I hope our Listeners Families podcast useful.
Lots of things to take away in process and will it forward to sharing our next podcast with you soon?
Thank you very much. Goodbye.