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/

Educational Leaders: Promote Ethical Utilization of AI That Encourages Critical Thinking Skills!

To promote ethical utilization of Generative AI that encourages critical thinking skills, educational leaders should take a proactive, strategic, and values-driven approach. Having a structured framework and a professional development (PD) outline would help in this regard to develop policies, create professional development opportunities, and highlight classroom practices that prioritize ethics, inquiry, and student empowerment. This month we will examine the question: How might educational leaders promote best policies, practices, and PD programs for generative AI implementation in schools?

Integrating AI into pedagogy with purpose requires learning to use  generative AI to model Socratic questioning, hypothesis generation, and multiple perspectives. The school culture needs to encourage utilization of AI as a “thinking partner" rather than a content generator. For example, leaders should expect lessons that plan for students to use AI to brainstorm arguments, critically evaluate the generated output, then revise them using further evidence. Therefore, encourage grade 6-12 lessons that plan for students’ interrogation of AI outputs by identifying for bias, assessing credibility, and comparing to human sources. 

Fostering AI literacy and critical digital skills requires providing explicit training for both teachers and students on how generative AI’s basic mechanisms include limitations and potential biases. Explicitly train AI consumers how to ask effective prompts and critically analyze results. The process needs to include teaching how to integrate media and data literacy to equip students with tools needed to verify and challenge AI-generated content.

Modeling ethical decision-making requires educational leaders to exemplify ethical AI use during administrative and instructional decision-making processes. Willingly share real-life case studies of ethical dilemmas in AI such as plagiarism, misinformation, or surveillance to inspire relevant classroom discussion. Empower students to develop codes of conduct for their own AI use.

Creating a culture of inquiry and reflection requires the promotion of project-based learning whereby students use AI in creative, responsible ways.  Think how vibrant a class could be if students were empowered to design AI tools that addressed a community problem.  Opportunities abound and our options are only limited by our imaginations and willingness to innovate.  Begin by embedding reflective practices.  Journaling about AI use and decision-making or peer discussions on how AI influenced their thinking or learning process begins developing this culture of inquiry and reflection.

Supporting ongoing professional development requires leaders offering sustained, scaffolded PD for teachers.  Scaffolded support begins with pedagogically sound uses of generative AI. Teachers need to become familiar with AI tools and platforms aligned with learning goals. Evaluating student work when AI may be involved in the generation of assessments suggests the need for discussions and professional development.  These needs and more invite creation of learning communities for educators to share best AI-practices and concerns.

Monitoring, evaluating, and adapting AI policies, practices, and processes, requires regularly assessing the impact of AI tools upon student learning and critical thinking development. Educational leaders need to be ready to adjust policies and practices based on quickly evolving insights, technologies, or challenges.  This invites the involvement of students to give feedback on how AI is impacting their learning and thinking processes.

As advocated by Invitational Education theory and practice (Purkey & Novak, 2015), educational leaders should exhibit I-CORT: an intentional, caring, optimistic, respectful and trustworthy mindset (Purkey, Novak, & Fretz, 2020; Anderson, 2021) to invite optimal realization of the principle, “AI should amplify human thinking, not replace it (Hoffman, 2025).” By inviting AI implementation as an opportunity to enhance human reasoning, rather than replacing it, educational leaders can ensure that generative AI becomes a tool for empowerment rather than dependency.  As noted above a policy framework and a PD outline should help educational leaders implement generative AI ethically while fostering critical thinking skills in students.

To begin, educational leaders should draft a policy framework for ethical and critical AI use in schools.  This framework typically would entail a vision statement, guiding principles, and acceptable compared to unacceptable utilization scenarios.  The following are examples for each and invite further collaboration before implementing.

A Draft Vision Statement: "We believe generative AI should be used as a tool to empower learners, encourage critical thinking, and promote ethical decision-making. AI will be implemented in ways that support creativity, inquiry, and responsible digital citizenship."

Draft Guiding Principles:

·         Advance Human-Centered Learning: AI supports, but does not replace, human judgment, inquiry, and originality.

·         Promote Ethical Responsibility: All AI use must respect privacy, equity, fairness, and integrity.

·         Exhibit Transparency & Consent: Stakeholders, including students, parents, educators will be informed of how AI is used in learning and data handling.

·         Develop AI Literacy for All: Students and staff will receive age-appropriate training on AI’s strengths, limitations, and ethical implications.

·         Optimize Critical Engagement: Students will be encouraged to challenge, verify, and contextualize AI-generated information.

Draft Acceptable Use Guidelines

Stakeholder	Example of Acceptable Use	Example of Unacceptable Use
Students	Using AI to brainstorm essay topics, then researching and writing the essay independently.	Submitting AI-generated text as original work without attribution.
Teachers	Using AI to generate example problems or differentiated materials.	Using AI to assess student work without human review.
Administrators	Leveraging AI for data analysis to inform instruction.	Using AI tools to monitor students without transparency or consent.

 

Effective educational leaders understand that a goal without a plan is just a wish.  Therefore, the following steps could be useful.  By its very nature, any implementation strategy is a starting point.

·         Plan your pilot programs: Launch AI use in select classrooms with diverse student populations.

·         Create a student AI use agreement: All students sign a Responsible AI Use Agreement.

·         Identify a review committee: Form an AI Oversight Committee that includes educators, students, parents, and information technologists to monitor AI use and guide adjustments.

Monitor, evaluate, and seek feedback throughout the pilot program.  Subsequently annual surveys for students and staff on AI’s impact on learning and engagement will sustain this practice. By reviewing incidents of misuse and addressing them through restorative, educational interventions, a growth mindset is instilled and high expectations maintained. Annual policy updates based on new research, technologies, and school needs help to make better possible.

Likewise, a clear goal and an action plan is needed for effective professional development (PD) when we desire to empower educators toward ethical AI integration.  Consider the worth of the following PD Goal:

·         To equip educators with the tools, mindset, and strategies to integrate generative AI in ways that enhance student inquiry and critical thinking while upholding ethical standards.

If seen as worthwhile, the following structure for 5 PD sessions may serve as a draft action plan for K-12 teachers, curriculum designers, instructional coaches. Note the importance of ensuring your PD sessions’ desired outcomes are observable and thereby measurable:

During session 1: Understanding Generative AI. The measurable objective could be, “Given Interactive demo of generative AI tools, participants will learn how AI tools like ChatGPT, DALL·E, and others work by categorizing the capabilities and limitations of generative AI.”

The debrief would include the participants discussing “What AI can and can’t do.”

During session 2: Ethical Considerations & Student Integrity. The measurable objective could be, “Given case study analysis eliciting, "What would you do?" participants will discuss ethical risks including plagiarism, bias, and surveillance identify (x) strategies for fostering academic integrity.”

The summary activity would include the participants drafting classroom AI use norms with colleagues.

During session 3: Designing AI-Enhanced Critical Thinking Tasks. The measurable objective could be, “Given sample lesson plans, participants will practice prompting AI for effective classroom use and embed AI into a lesson such as to enhance rather than replace student thinking.”

The summary activity could include the participant groups workshopping to rewrite one lesson plan to include AI as a tool for inquiry followed by cross peer-group feedback sessions.

During session 4: Assessing AI-Influenced Work. The measurable objective could be, “Given opportunities to review student work samples, participants will detect and assess AI-assisted student work and promote student reflective practices around AI use.

The summary activity could include the participants developing a (grade-level) reflection rubric based on the prompt: “How did you use AI, and how did it help or hinder your thinking?”

During session 5: Ongoing Learning & Leadership. The measurable objective could be, “Given a planned session, participants will exhibit skills of an AI leader or mentor in the school by collaboratively creating a grade or department AI use plan.

The summary activity could include the participants beginning an implementation plan for developing a collaborative AI integration guide or forming a professional learning community (PLC) for continued support.

The effective, intentionally inviting educational leader’s desire to establish clear ethical guidelines requires development of AI-use policies rooted in transparency, privacy, bias mitigation, and accountability. For this purpose, it is crucial to involve students, educators, and community stakeholders in crafting these guidelines to ensure broad support and awareness. The suggestions and guidelines provided above are provided as an opportunity to make it explicit that AI should support learning, not replace original thinking.

 

To cite:

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/

 

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.

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/

Empowering New Teachers and Candidates: You Are Intentionally Invited.

 

New teachers and teacher candidates are essential for sustaining a school’s or institutional culture. The International Alliance of Invitational Education (IAIE) needs to recruit new teacher candidates to sustain and further promote its advocacy for an intentional, caring, optimistic, respectful, and trustworthy (I-CORT) school culture (Purkey & Novak, 2015; Anderson, 2020).  IAIE’s core mission is to foster positive and inclusive school cultures grounded in I-CORT principles. As current educators retire or move on, new teacher candidates are essential to carry the mission forward. Without intentional recruitment and empowerment of these individuals, the movement risks losing momentum and coherence over time.

Embedding I-CORT into every early teaching professional’s identity is a win/win focus point.  New teachers are at a formative stage in their professional journey. Introducing I-CORT values during their preparation helps to shape their foundational beliefs about teaching and learning, encourages them to see schools as places that should affirm every student’s worth, and promotes consistent practice aligned with invitational education principles. Therefore, when these values are integrated early, they become a natural part of a teacher’s pedagogical approach.

New teachers need to be part of creating a sustainable and scalable positive school culture.  A positive school culture isn’t maintained by a few individuals.  Rather, it requires a collective and systemic effort. Recruiting teacher candidates committed to I-CORT principles invites a critical mass of educators who consistently model caring and respect, work collaboratively with colleagues and students, and challenge negative or exclusionary practices. It is important that exhibited consistency is embraced as essential for sustainable cultural change at the school and district levels.

Innovation and fresh perspectives presented by new teacher candidates “makes better possible.”  New teacher candidates often bring energy, openness to learning, and new ideas. Their enthusiasm reinforces optimism within the school environment, can help adapt I-CORT values to modern educational challenges, and stimulate innovation in how I-CORT is practiced and promoted.

To advance this vision, it is essential to widen the reach and influence of the IAIE.  Recruiting new teachers can expand IAIE’s network and influence. As these educators implement I-CORT principles in diverse settings, they can act as ambassadors for invitational education, spread awareness to other educators, parents, and communities, and help the movement grow beyond its existing boundaries.

By addressing current educational challenges, the IAIE will continue helping today’s schools face complex social, emotional, and academic challenges. Teachers grounded in I-CORT values are more likely to advocate for building inclusive classrooms, fostering student engagement and trust, and promoting well-being and resilience.  Thus, the initiative to recruit and develop new I-CART-minded educators is vital to meeting the evolving needs of students and school communities.

Thus, recruiting new teacher candidates is essential for the IAIE to maintain and expand its vision of invitational education. These individuals are not just future educators, they are future leaders, culture builders, and advocates for schools that prioritize care, respect, and optimism. By empowering new teachers, IAIE secures both the present vitality and future relevance of the I-CORT philosophy.

The IAIE provides forward-thinking individuals, an affordable path to learning, implementing and helping us to improve Invitational Education theory and practice. Joining helps us work together to make your organization and the world a more welcoming place!

Advocates of Invitational Education are dedicated to encouraging the next generation to become involved with Invitational Education theory and practice. Joining us empowers you to make your schools and your future workplaces more productive, enjoyable and inviting! Collaborating with an intentional, caring, optimistic, respectful, and trustworthy (I-CORT) mindset can make the world a better place!

To get started, access the following IAIE membership link.

Additionally, your organization will constantly evolve, ideally seeking to improve. In this endeavor, the IAIE provides resources. You are invited to help bring Invitational Education to your school or professional organization. Conscientious educators and professionals can help promote Invitational Education in the interaction between the 5Ps: people, places, policies, programs, and processes of any school setting or institution for everyone's benefit. The IAIE wants to help you create a welcoming environment where all individuals flourish and bring their best ideas and most creative work into play. Making the world a better place is no small task.  However, together, we can make better possible! 
An institutional membership will help your organization create a blueprint for continued success and will qualify your institution to apply for IAIE awards. 

• An Institutional Member is $175.   It includes up to 5 memberships for people in your institution.

Please, join us.  Together we will be blessed by the opportunity to trudge a path that still needs to be cleared in many ways.  Becoming more familiar with IE theory and practices will empower your utilization of all the resources within your growing pedagogical toolbox.  

To Cite:

Anderson, C.J. (August 31, 2025). Empowering new teachers and candidates: You are intentionally invited. [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.

 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