July 2026 Series: Connection First (Entry 3: Practice Makes Purpose Visible)

Practice Makes Purpose Visible

Explicit Teaching, Meaningful Routines, Evidence-Based Practice, and Implementation Support

Connection First Series — Week 3 of 5 By: Janine Gacke

Estimated read time: ~7 minutes

Conditions create the environment for honest engagement, and relationships help the system carry complexity. But both still have to show up somewhere people can see. That is the work of Practice — where purpose stops being an idea and becomes something people can see, try, repeat, and refine.

There is a moment at the start of the year when the purpose feels clear in a leader's mind. They know the kind of school they want to create: students who feel safe and known, staff using the practices the team has agreed matter most. And because the purpose feels clear to them, it is easy to assume it is clear to everyone else. That assumption is where implementation often begins to drift.

A leader may believe an expectation has been taught because it was named in back-to-school professional learning, or that staff understand an evidence-based practice because it appeared in training, modeled once, in a slide deck. But knowing about a practice is not the same as being able to use it well. Implementation research reminds leaders that practices do not become durable simply because they are selected, named, or trained once; they require usable definitions, support, feedback, and fit within the system carrying them (Fixsen et al., 2005; Bryk et al., 2015). Connection First asks leaders to pause here — not to lower expectations, but to make purpose visible through practice.

Practice Is How Purpose Travels

In schools, it is easy to underestimate how much has to be explicitly taught. Students do not automatically know what respectful collaboration sounds like in a science lab or how to re-enter a classroom after a conflict. Staff do not automatically know what a new routine should look like across settings, or how to apply a practice when the real moment is messier than the training example. That does not mean people are unwilling. It means learning takes structure — modeling, guided practice, checking for understanding, and repeated opportunities to respond (Archer & Hughes, 2011; Rosenshine, 2012).

Leaders say things like, "They know this already," or "We went over this." Most have, because from a leadership seat it can feel true: the expectation was communicated, the document exists, the training happened. But then they walk the building and see three versions of the same routine, or hear a team interpret the same priority three ways. That is not a failure of people. It is information about the system. So before asking, "Why aren't people doing what we agreed to do?" Practice asks a prior question: has the practice been made clear enough to understand, teach, use, and sustain?

Purpose alone does not create consistency. A school may value belonging, but belonging becomes visible only when students are greeted by name, routines invite participation, and repair is taught instead of assumed. Practice is not a checklist that replaces purpose; it is how purpose travels. This matters most with evidence-based practices, because evidence-based does not mean self-implementing. A practice can be well-supported by research and still fail to take root if adults are not taught to use it in context, supported while they try, and given feedback that strengthens it over time (Fixsen et al., 2005; Joyce & Showers, 2002).

That is also why explicit teaching is not just for students. Adults need clear explanations, a picture of what a practice looks like and does not, time to rehearse before using it under pressure, and feedback specific enough to help and safe enough to receive (Archer & Hughes, 2011; Aguilar, 2013). This can feel uncomfortable, because adults are professionals and leaders do not want to over-script the work. But explicit teaching done well is not micromanagement — it is a form of respect. It says the work matters enough to define clearly, and that no one will be left guessing. In that sense it is connection made concrete: it lifts the hidden burden of interpretation and gives people a shared picture of what is meant — the clarity that direct, honest leadership provides (Brown, 2018).

Leadership Practice in the Moment

A leader does not need to overhaul the system to make practice visible. The work usually begins with one routine that has become too dependent on individual interpretation.

A principal notices that expectations are posted in every classroom, but students are unsure what they look like during independent work. Instead of reminding teachers to "review expectations," the principal helps the team build a short reteaching routine: teachers model it, students practice it, and the team agrees on what adults will say when they see it. A district leader hears that schools are "using data," but team conversations vary widely, so rather than assume the skill, the leader introduces a simple protocol that begins with noticing before interpretation — practiced in leadership meetings first, then carried into buildings. A coach sees that behavior-specific praise is uneven, so instead of saying "give more positive feedback," they model three examples in context, invite the teacher to try one, and follow up with a brief reflection (Aguilar, 2013; Aguilar, 2016; Joyce & Showers, 2002).

These are not complicated moves; they are small acts of implementation design. They also point to a discipline leaders often miss: when a practice is not showing up, the reflex is to add more — reminders, slides, monitoring. Sometimes the better move is subtraction: make the practice smaller, clarify the first step, name where it should show up this week, give one look-for, and revisit in a few days. Ease is not a lower standard; it is less friction, so the practice is actually usable. Without shared commitments concrete enough to revisit, teams can look aligned while quietly carrying different versions of the work (Lencioni, 2002).

System & Structure Lens

Evidence-based practices are essential, but not magic. They are carried by people managing time, relationships, competing priorities, and their own learning (Fixsen et al., 2005; Sugai & Horner, 2006). Active supervision sounds simple until the hallway is crowded, a staff member is pulled aside, and an assembly reshuffles the schedule. That is why leaders cannot stop at naming a practice; they build the system around it — teaching, modeling, feedback, coaching, reflection — with accountability paired with support, not standing in for it (Joyce & Showers, 2002).

The practical question is where the practice lives. Is it in a document, or in a routine? In one person's head, or shared across the team? Systems that hold practice well do not depend on one strong communicator or one skilled coach; they make the expected practice visible in many places — professional learning, coaching, team agendas, walkthrough look-fors, student routines, family communication — so people are not left reinterpreting what matters. That distribution is itself,  connection infrastructure: it keeps the work from resting on any single person. The companion tool, Where Does the Practice Live?, helps a team examine whether one practice is only named or actually supported across those places, and what would make it easier to teach, observe, and support.

None of this has to be complicated. The most durable systems are simple enough to repeat: a team names one practice and why it matters, defines what it looks like, practices it, observes it, and reflects on where support is needed — then repeats. That simplicity is designed, not accidental, and it is the same insight improvement and implementation science keep pointing to (Bryk et al., 2015; Fixsen et al., 2005). When leaders build that kind of system, practice does more than increase consistency; it makes learning and impact visible enough to act on (Hattie, 2009), and it builds confidence.

Reflect. Connect. Grow.

Reflect. Where might you be assuming students or staff know what has not yet been explicitly taught, modeled, or practiced?

Connect. Where does variation in practice show up across classrooms, teams, buildings, or roles — and what might that tell you about the system?

Grow. What is one meaningful practice you could make easier to understand, teach, observe, and support this month?

Looking Forward

Practice makes purpose visible, but practice alone does not sustain change. A routine may be well designed and still fade when the work becomes complex, time is tight, or the first attempts are uneven. People need the capacity to keep using the practice well: the knowledge to understand it, the skill to apply it, the time to rehearse it, the support to improve it, and the confidence to keep going.

Next week, we move into Capacity: what adults need in order to carry meaningful practice with consistency, care, and follow-through.

Conditions create the environment. Relationships hold the complexity of implementation. Practice makes purpose visible. Capacity helps people keep going.

This is why sustainable change begins beneath the strategy. A strategy may name the direction, but it is the human system underneath it — the conditions, relationships, practices, and capacity — that determines whether the work can actually take root and last.

References

Aguilar, E. (2013). The art of coaching: Effective strategies for school transformation. Jossey-Bass.

Aguilar, E. (2016). The art of coaching teams: Building resilient communities that transform schools. Jossey-Bass.

Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. Guilford Press.

Brown, B. (2018). Dare to lead: Brave work. Tough conversations. Whole hearts. Random House.

Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America's schools can get better at getting better. Harvard Education Press.

Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network.

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.). ASCD.

Lencioni, P. M. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. Jossey-Bass.

Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, 36(1), 12–19.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35(2), 245–259.