National School Reform Faculty

CFG Meetings by Phone
Date: March 6-8, 2006
Listserv: Coaches

Monday, March 6, 2006 4:52 PM
I have a few questions about CFGs by telephone.

I direct a leadership training institute and we have used CFG protocols in our training and at our yearly retreats. A couple of the participants and alumni have taken the coaches training. Others are familiar with the protocols. The alumni group consist of principals and heads of schools spread across the country. They would like more contact than the yearly retreats.

Would it be feasible to facilitate CFG meetings bi-monthly by telephone? Is face to face contact necessary? Does anyone have experience with facilitating CFG meetings by conference call?
Thanks for the feedback.
Fran, NJ

Monday, March 6, 2006 4:55 PM
I would say if all parties agree, by phone is okay; but I think that nothing takes the place of face-to-face. Is teleconferencing an option?
Ernestine, NM

Monday, March 6, 2006 5:09 PM
I have worked with some folks from Teach For America in Houston, TX who have tried to do CFG via phone. Zoe Stemm-Calderon from the Houston office might be able to give you some pointers/feedback.
Tim, TX

Monday, March 6, 2006 8:23 PM
You might try a synchronous web meeting using Elluminate or other similar program. You can hear and speak to each other, write on a whiteboard, bring in other applications/documents, text message, etc. I had considered using it for CFG's myself, but opted for in-person since we are close enough.
Elissa, NY

Monday, March 6, 2006 9:00 PM
We have recently had several conference calls in the last few months with different groups and have found that we have had varying degrees of success. Some of my learning in this as both a facilitator and a participant at times is these. I hope they might be helpful.

* Even more so than with an in-person CFG, the size of the group seems important to keep fairly small to allow for the richest dialogue and not just a series of monologues.
* It might be helpful for folks/facilitator to create some semblance of how it is when you are together...e.g. how you are seated in a circle (folks write names down accordingly), being very present as if sitting in a circle together, etc.
* Consider the technology and the noise associated with it. It can be a little challenging if folks are not in quiet areas.
* Keep equity in mind and perhaps do more check-ins on the process since it is challenging to pick up on clues via the phone. The pace or structure might be stifling, so it could be valuable to find that out early on so adjustments could be made.
* Save time for the debrief, since the conversation may take longer than usual and people tend to peel away at a different rate than they would face to face.

I'm sure there are many others, but if everyone has that connection and desire to converse, it should be a fantastic opportunity to keep moving together at a distance. Best of luck
Scott, CO

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 6:39 AM
I agree with every Scott. I have many concerns and carry reservations about the purpose of a telephone CFG. The more diverse the group the more challenging the CFG via telephone might be. If you are going to go deep and deal with some deep seeded beliefs and challenges that cross differences, I wonder if a telephone CFG will work. How does a telephone participant in a CFG read my body language? How do I read other participant's body language? I can be very expressive and at times demonstrative and passionate. I would venture that a telephone CFG will be superficial at best. Perhaps a telephone CFG would work after you have spent some time face to face. Peace,
Camilla, NJ

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 10:31 AM
Thank you for your thoughtful responses.
Fran, NJ

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 7:13 AM
Hi,
I agree with Scott’s ideas about attention to structure and I share Camilla’s concerns about depth across differences. I’m wondering if you might consider triads that would communicate between face to face full group opportunities. I know the Annenberg Principals used triads successfully to bridge distances and stretches of time when they could not be together in the past.
Debbie, PA