One of my favorite times of the school year is the first week back.
There is an energy that is hard to describe. Teachers have spent countless hours preparing their classrooms. Students arrive with a mixture of excitement, curiosity, and uncertainty. School leaders are doing everything they can to make sure the year begins smoothly.
I've had the privilege of working alongside schools during this season for many years, and every August I am reminded of the incredible amount of work instructional leaders carry. Schedules are still shifting. Staffing questions are being resolved. Technology has a mind of its own. Families have questions. And just when it feels like everything is settling into place, something unexpected demands attention.
Those responsibilities matter. Strong systems create the conditions for teaching and learning to begin successfully.
But over the years, I've noticed something else.
The schools that build the strongest instructional cultures don't wait until September—or October—to begin focusing on teaching and learning. They understand that the first 30 days establish far more than routines. Those first 30 days establish the norms that communicate what matters most: how we build relationships, how we collaborate, and how we support one another in teaching and learning throughout the year.
That doesn't mean leaders ignore operational responsibilities. It means they intentionally protect time for the work that has the greatest long-term impact on students.
Whether you serve as a principal, assistant principal, curriculum specialist, or district leader, the beginning of the school year offers a unique opportunity to establish trust, demonstrate what matters most, and create systems that will support teaching and learning long after the excitement of back-to-school season has passed.
The priorities that follow are not another checklist to add to an already full plate. They are lessons I've seen make a meaningful difference in schools where instructional improvement became part of the culture—not because leaders worked harder, but because they were intentional about what they prioritized from day one.
One of the lessons that has shaped my understanding of leadership came early in my journey as a leader. There was a veteran teacher who rarely shared concerns during meetings and politely declined every offer of working with a coach. Instead of pushing, I focused on being consistently present: checking in, listening without an agenda, and following through on small promises.
Months later, that same teacher knocked on my door and said, “I think I’m ready to try working with our coach.”
In that moment, I realized leadership is not about convincing people to grow; it is about building the trust and relationships that create the conditions where growth can happen. Experiences like this have reinforced something I continue to see while partnering with schools: relationships are not separate from instructional leadership—they are what make instructional leadership possible.
That lesson has stayed with me. Genuine support isn't determined by what is shared during opening meetings or written in beginning-of-the-year communications. It is built through everyday interactions: listening before offering solutions, following through on commitments, celebrating successes, and being consistently present.
Over time, I've come to believe that sustainable instructional improvement begins with relationships.
Whether a school is implementing a new curriculum, strengthening collaborative planning, improving instructional practices, or launching a new district initiative, lasting improvement depends on trust.
Research confirms what many educators have experienced firsthand. Schools with higher levels of relational trust are better positioned to sustain improvement because people are more willing to collaborate, learn together, and work through challenges.
One lesson I've learned is that trust rarely begins during difficult conversations. More often, it is the trust built weeks—or even months—earlier that allows those conversations to be productive when they become necessary.
When relationships become the foundation, every instructional priority that follows becomes easier to sustain.
One conversation has repeated itself in schools more times than I can count.
A leader says something like, "I want to give teachers time to establish routines before I begin visiting classrooms. I'll start spending more time in classrooms in a few weeks."
I understand that instinct. It comes from a place of respect. But over the years, I've found that some of the most valuable learning happens during those very first weeks of school.
Early classroom visits are not about evaluating instruction. They are about understanding the learning environment teachers are working so hard to create and establishing that classrooms are places where leaders learn alongside educators.
I've watched the culture of a school change simply because classroom visits became a normal part of instructional leadership rather than something associated with formal observations. Teachers stopped wondering, "Why is someone in my room today?" because leaders were regularly present as learners and partners.
One of the things I’ve noticed when partnering with schools is that the tone of classroom visits changes when leaders are present before they need something from teachers. A leader who regularly walks classrooms, asks questions, and learns alongside teachers sends a very different message than a leader who only enters classrooms during formal observation cycles. I worked with a leader recently who chose to prioritize short classroom visits early in the year. These visits allowed her to notice instructional practices that she could celebrate and share with others through a staff newsletter. The highlighted teacher felt recognized for the work already happening in the classroom, while colleagues gained ideas they could easily adapt within their own lessons.
Short visits—even as brief as five to ten minutes—allow instructional leaders to notice the routines, structures, and learning experiences taking shape across the building. More importantly, they communicate that teaching and learning are at the center of everyone's work.
Every school will have different priorities.
Some leaders may be looking for evidence that foundational classroom routines are becoming established. Others may focus on student engagement, productive classroom discourse, or how newly adopted instructional resources are being implemented. Still others may be paying close attention to how students are using learning progressions, success criteria, or collaborative learning structures.
The specific questions leaders are exploring matter less than the mindset leaders bring into the classroom.
The goal is not to collect evidence for evaluation. The goal is to better understand how teaching and learning are unfolding so leaders can provide meaningful support.
Curriculum specialists may identify common questions that can shape upcoming professional learning. Building and district leaders may begin recognizing patterns that help determine where additional resources or support would be beneficial.
One of the greatest benefits of these early visits is that they establish a norm.
When leaders consistently spend time where learning happens, classrooms become places of partnership rather than places of performance.
One of the most important leadership practices in the first 30 days is also one of the easiest to overlook: taking time to understand what is happening before deciding what needs to happen next.
When a new school year begins, there is a natural urgency to respond. Leaders listen to concerns, review data from the previous year, and address challenges as they arise. That responsiveness matters.
But effective instructional leadership is also about taking time to understand before responding. When leaders gather information, identify patterns, and listen closely to what is happening in classrooms, they gain a clearer picture of how to best support teaching and learning.
The first weeks of school provide a valuable opportunity to gather baseline evidence—not as a means of evaluation, but as a way to better understand how curriculum, instructional practices, and classroom routines are coming to life.
Baseline evidence might include questions like:
The goal is not to create a list of what is working and what is not working. The goal is to understand the story the evidence is telling.
One lesson I have learned while partnering with schools is that our first impressions are rarely the full picture. A practice that appears inconsistent during a brief visit may actually be a teacher trying something new. A challenge that seems isolated may actually represent a broader need for support.
Working with a 6th grade team over the course of a school year, I noticed a decline in team engagement and initially wondered if the team needed clearer expectations and stronger accountability structures. But after listening to their feedback and reviewing survey data, I realized the real issue was a lack of clarity and communication, not commitment—and that insight completely changed my approach.
That experience reminded me that effective leadership is not about having the quickest answer; it is about being willing to learn enough to find the right answer.
When leaders gather evidence with curiosity, they are better positioned to move from individual responses to system-wide support. A common challenge across classrooms may require team learning rather than separate solutions. A successful practice may provide an opportunity to celebrate expertise and share ideas across the building.
The first 30 days are not about having every answer. They are about developing a clearer understanding of where the school is starting.
One of the greatest challenges educators face is not always a lack of support—often it is uncertainty about how to access it.
Teachers are regularly surrounded by talented colleagues, instructional coaches, curriculum specialists, and leaders who want to help. However, support is most effective when educators understand what is available, how to access it, and what that partnership will look like.
The beginning of the school year provides an opportunity to establish that clarity.
Curriculum specialists, as well as instructional coaches, play a critical role in creating systems where support is proactive rather than dependent on individual teachers asking for help. This does not mean teachers should not have ownership over their professional growth. Meaningful support depends on teacher voice, choice, and expertise.
It does mean leaders and support staff should make clear:
A teacher should not have to wonder, “Is it okay to ask for help?” or “What happens if I invite someone into my classroom?”
Support is not a response to something being wrong. Support is part of how professionals continue to learn and grow.
I have seen schools make a significant shift when curriculum specialists and coaches move from waiting for invitations to creating intentional opportunities for collaboration.
This same principle applies to leadership teams. When expectations, resources, and support structures are clear, educators can spend less energy navigating systems and more energy focusing on students.
Sustainable improvement does not happen because a new initiative is announced. It happens when educators have the time, support, and collaboration needed to make that work meaningful.
As the school year begins, calendars fill quickly.
Meetings multiply, emails accumulate, and unexpected situations demand attention. Many of these responsibilities are necessary. The challenge is making sure they do not crowd out the work that matters most.
One of the most important ways instructional leaders can support teachers is by protecting time for teaching and learning.
That means being intentional about how time is spent—not only for students, but also for teachers, coaches, curriculum specialists, and leaders themselves. Time for collaborative planning, classroom visits, coaching conversations, and professional learning should not become the first thing sacrificed when schedules become busy.
One question I have found helpful is surprisingly simple: Does this help us improve teaching and learning?
Schools are complex organizations, and not every responsibility will connect directly to instruction. But asking that question helps leaders distinguish between what feels urgent and what will have the greatest long-term impact on students.
The first 30 days establish many norms. One of the most important is how leaders choose to spend their time. When teaching and learning remain at the center of those decisions, educators receive a clear message about what matters most.
The beginning of a school year is often measured by completed checklists, successful schedules, and smooth operations.
Those things matter.
But they are only part of the story.
The first 30 days also establish something much more enduring. They shape how people work together, how decisions are made, how support is provided, and how teaching and learning will be prioritized throughout the year.
Looking back on my own leadership experiences, I have learned that the most meaningful improvements rarely began with a new initiative or a perfectly designed plan. They began with relationships, curiosity, and clarity.
None of these priorities represent a quick fix. They are leadership practices that, when sustained over time, create the conditions for meaningful and lasting improvement.
Perhaps one of the most important lessons I have learned is this: presuming positive intentions does not mean avoiding difficult conversations or overlooking areas for growth. It means taking the time to understand the conditions, experiences, and information that shape those challenges so that support and solutions address the right needs.
When leaders begin from a place of understanding, they create the clarity that allows teachers to do their best work. And when teachers have that clarity, students are the ones who ultimately benefit.
As this school year begins, consider this question:
What norms are you establishing during your first 30 days—and what message will those norms send about what matters most?
Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in Schools: A Core Resource for Improvement. Russell Sage Foundation.
Hallinger, P. (2005). Instructional Leadership and the School Principal: A Passing Fancy that Refuses to Fade Away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 221–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760500244793
Hattie, J. (2023). Visible Learning: The Sequel. Corwin.
Knight, J. (2022). The Definitive Guide to Instructional Coaching: Seven Factors for Success. Corwin.
Learning Forward. (2022). Standards for Professional Learning. Learning Forward.
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven Strong Claims about Successful School Leadership Revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077
Fullan, M., Quinn, J., Drummy, M., & Gardner, M. (2020). Education Reimagined: The Future of Learning. Corwin.