Stop Assuming Fidelity: Start Practicing Mutual Accountability

“Mutual accountability means we give each other permission to tell the truth in service of the work.” - Jim Knight

Over the past several years of facilitating work with principals and their Guiding Coalitions (teacher leadership teams), I have been intentional about collecting feedback and studying which strategies actually move the needle during school improvement efforts. Across academic and behavioral systems, school-wide structures, and campus culture work, a few consistent truths continue to surface—truths that capture the attention of both teachers and administrators and bind them together in meaningful change.

One of the most powerful of these truths is mutual accountability.

What Mutual Accountability Is, and What It Is Not

In any meaningful change effort, whether small or significant, both teachers and administrators must change. Too often, teachers experience improvement initiatives as something being done to them rather than with them. When administrators appear to remain unchanged, directing the work without engaging in it, trust erodes, culture suffers, and progress stalls.

This dynamic often leads to what many refer to as “buy-in.” When we talk about buy-in, what we really mean is convincing teachers to take on additional work, often without clarity about what is being removed from their plates to allow focus on the highest-leverage actions. This approach is unsustainable and rarely leads to lasting improvement.

Mutual accountability shifts the work from buy-in to commitment.

Trust and Safety: The Prerequisite for Accountability

Before any real change effort begins, we intentionally establish trust and psychological safety. Why? Because teachers and administrators must know that what is said here stays here, and what is learned here leaves here.

We do this through explicit protocols designed to build shared expectations and clarity around trust, safety, and professional norms. Occasionally, participants will share in feedback surveys that this step feels unnecessary or excessive. It isn’t. As a facilitator, it is my responsibility to ensure a common understanding of what is, and is not, acceptable within the work. When trust and safety are firmly established, teams are far more willing to engage honestly, take risks, and move forward together.

From Top-Down Direction to Shared Ownership

Once trust is established, we move into focused learning around the foundations of Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) and, when requested, Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS). These sessions are intentionally interactive, incorporating partner and group dialogue alongside modeling exercises that help teams visualize the systems they currently have, and the ones they do not.

By engaging teachers and administrators side by side, the work naturally moves away from top-down directives toward shared ownership. Principals still lead, but the leadership is grounded in collaboration. Most importantly, teams leave these sessions with tangible systems, clearly defined next steps, assigned responsibilities, and follow-up dates already on the calendar.

This is where mutual accountability begins to take shape.

Where Mutual Accountability Comes to Life

Mutual accountability typically emerges most clearly during system design or near the end of a learning cycle. One recent example comes from work with middle school teams focused on PLC execution.

In many PLCs, teachers conclude meetings by outlining what they will do next, how they will teach an essential standard in Tier 1 or intervene and extend learning in Tier 2. On the surface, this is solid practice.

The shift happens when administrators publicly name their next steps as well.

When teachers articulate their plans, the administrator must also specify:

• When they will observe Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruction

• How they will provide individual and/or team feedback

• When follow-up will occur at the next PLC meeting

  
  

When this expectation is introduced, teachers’ reactions are often immediate, and positive. Not because they distrust their administrators, but because they recognize that consistent follow-up ensures everyone does the work well. Teachers want accountability. They want clarity. And they want support when others fall short.

Mutual accountability means spelling out what teachers will do, what administrators will do, and how progress will be checked, together.

The Cost of Assuming Fidelity

Out of the dozens of administrators I have worked with, very few consistently engage in this level of follow-through. More often, administrators assume systems are being implemented with fidelity simply because they were discussed in PLCs.

They aren’t.

In one school visit earlier this year, a principal wanted to review Tier 2 interventions that had been planned since September. During classroom observations, only two out of twelve classrooms were implementing interventions as designed. The principal was understandably frustrated, but we didn’t panic.

Instead, we used the moment to rebuild shared understanding with the Guiding Coalition around what intervention and enrichment should look like, and more importantly, what the principal would do differently moving forward: observe intentionally, provide timely feedback, and hold follow-up conversations with individuals and teams.

That is mutual accountability in action.

A Final Word to Administrators

If you are an administrator and this level of accountability makes you nervous, don’t be. Your strongest teachers want this. They want their colleagues supported, challenged, and held to high expectations because they care deeply about student outcomes.

When accountability is paired with trust and delivered without fear or shame, it becomes one of the most powerful levers for sustained improvement. In truth, this isn’t extra work, it’s the work.

Steenport Leadership Coaching is already beginning to plan facilitation and systems-building support for the summer of 2026. If this resonates with you, we’d love to listen, learn about your needs, and co-design a multi-session experience that builds clarity, commitment, and results. Our student accountability, climate, and culture data continue to show the impact of this work.

Mutual accountability works—when everyone is truly in it together.