Congenial vs Collegial Dialogue

Collaboration in our schools happens at various levels and this approach to our work is effective.  The article, Leading Deep Conversations in Collaborative Inquiry Groups, extends an invitation for us to examine the type of collaboration that exists in our schools.  Congenial conversations can easily appear to be effective; however, the authors caution about the superficial nature of this type of engagement.  Congenial collaborative groups tend to "preserve the status quo" and teachers often do not challenge each other's thinking which stifles professional growth.  Often, the focus of the collaborative group is conflict avoidance.  Collegial collaboration set in the context of an effective professional learning community can be impactful. Here, teachers understand that when practices are critically examined it is done with the purpose of improving instructional practices and for the benefit of all students. Because conversations are deep, the use of protocols to guide discussions buffers the emotions of the collaborative group. Although groups are congenial and seemly work well together, functional definitions of effective collaboration need to be challenged.  Being congenial and "just working-well together" does not lead to meaningful interactions that exact school improvement. 

The article poses some interesting points about collaboration, inquiry processes, and how to move from congenial to collegial collaboration.

Here is the link: http://www.edugains.ca/resourcesPLC/PLF/2012_Module/Handout5_Nelson2010LeadingDeepConversations.pdf

Nelson, T. H., Deuel, A., Slavit, D., & Kennedy, A. (2010). Leading deep conversations in collaborative inquiry groups. The Clearing House, 83(5), 175-179.