Professional Learning  ›  New Teacher  ›  Workshops  ›  Disagreeing with a Colleague
a ready-to-run workshopDisagreeing with a Colleague
New Teacher · Workshop

Disagreeing with a Colleague (Workshop)

Everything you need to lead this with your staff or PLC: a minute-by-minute run-of-show, what to say, what to hand out, and how to make it stick. Pick the length that fits your slot.

Key takeaway

New teachers often swing between two bad options when they disagree with a colleague, staying silent and resentful or pushing back clumsily and damaging the relationship, when the professional skill is a third path: voicing a different view in a way that is respectful, curious, and relationship-preserving, so disagreement strengthens the team rather than threatening the newcomer's standing.

Format
PLC / team meeting
Length
45 minutes
Group size
Any (works 4-40)
Who can run it
Any teacher-leader or mentor
You will need
Slides (5)Printed handoutA disagreement you are navigatingA timer
Aligned to
Learning Forward: Learning CommunitiesInTASC 9: Professional LearningCollegial collaboration; new-teacher induction
Share / assign

Why it works

A new teacher will, before long, find themselves disagreeing with a colleague, about a grading approach a team has settled on, a way of handling a shared student, a practice a veteran swears by, a decision made in a PLC, and how they handle that disagreement matters a great deal for both their effectiveness and their standing on the staff. The difficulty is that a newcomer feels, often acutely, that they lack the standing to disagree, that they are the inexperienced one surrounded by people who have been doing this for years, and that voicing a different view risks looking arrogant, naive, or difficult. This pressure pushes new teachers toward two bad options. The first is silence: swallowing the disagreement, going along, and quietly building resentment or compromising their own judgment, which neither serves students nor builds the new teacher's confidence and over time erodes their sense of themselves as a professional. The second is clumsy confrontation: pushing back in a way that comes across as challenging a veteran's competence, dismissing settled practice, or not knowing their place, which damages relationships the new teacher badly needs. The professional skill is a third path that most new teachers have never been taught: disagreeing in a way that is respectful, genuinely curious, and relationship-preserving, so that the disagreement is heard as a contribution rather than a threat. Several moves make this possible. Lead with curiosity and understanding before disagreement: ask about the reasoning behind the other view, which both shows respect and often reveals context the newcomer lacked, and sometimes resolves the disagreement entirely. Frame the disagreement as a question or an exploration rather than a verdict: I am wondering about, help me understand, have we considered, rather than I disagree or that is wrong. Separate the idea from the person, disagreeing with an approach without implying the colleague is incompetent, and acknowledge their experience genuinely. Pick the venue and the battles: some disagreements are worth raising and some are not, and some belong in a private conversation rather than a public meeting. Stay open to being wrong, since as a newcomer you genuinely may be missing something, and curiosity keeps that door open. And know the special care disagreement with a leader requires, which is possible and valuable but calls for extra tact and usually a private channel. Done well, professional disagreement actually builds a new teacher's standing, because colleagues come to see them as thoughtful, respectful, and willing to contribute honestly, which is far more respected than either silence or combativeness. The workshop helps new teachers disagree professionally, holding their own view while preserving the relationships and the collegial standing they need.

The research: Research and practice on professional collaboration, collegiality, and new-teacher induction.

The run-of-show

Choose your slot. The agenda, timings, and length update to match.

    The core activity: disagree professionally and keep the relationship

    The heart of the session is building the moves that let a new teacher voice a different view respectfully, so disagreement is heard as a contribution rather than a threat.

    Disagree with curiosity, not a verdictThe newcomer's fear is that disagreeing makes them look arrogant or naive. Leading with genuine curiosity about the other view, and framing your own as a question, lets you hold your position while being heard as a thoughtful contributor.

    Facilitator notes

    Stay open to being wrongAs the newcomer you genuinely may be missing context the veterans have. Leading with curiosity keeps that door open, so you either learn something that resolves the disagreement or raise your point having understood the full picture.

    Adapt it

    Participant handout

    One page for every teacher. Print it, or save it as a PDF.

    K12 Academics · Professional Learning

    Disagreeing with a Colleague: professional and relationship-preserving

    Hold your view without damaging the relationship: lead with curiosity, frame disagreement as a question, separate the idea from the person, and pick your venue and battles.

    1. A disagreement I am navigating:
    2. The curious question I will ask about their reasoning first:
    3. How I frame my view as exploration, not a verdict:
    4. How I separate the idea from the person and acknowledge their experience:
    5. The right venue for this one (and whether it is worth raising):

    Make it stick

    Disagreeing well builds standing rather than threatening it. Close by setting the follow-up:

    Common questions

    As the new teacher, do I even have the standing to disagree with experienced colleagues?
    You have more standing than you feel you do, and the way you disagree, not whether you disagree, is what determines how it lands. The feeling of having no standing is nearly universal among new teachers and it is worth taking seriously, because it is true that you lack the context and track record your veteran colleagues have, which is exactly why leading with curiosity rather than assertion is the right move. But lacking years of experience does not mean your perspective is worthless; newcomers often see things that familiarity has made invisible to others, and a thoughtful question or observation from a new teacher can be genuinely valuable. The key is that disagreeing professionally, asking about the reasoning behind a practice, framing your view as a question, acknowledging others' experience, actually earns standing rather than presuming it, because colleagues come to see you as thoughtful and respectful. So the answer is not to wait silently for years until you feel entitled to an opinion, which breeds resentment and stunts your growth, nor to assert yourself as an equal authority you are not, but to contribute your honest view in the curious, respectful way that builds the standing you are worried you lack.
    What if I stay quiet to keep the peace, isn't that safer as a newcomer?
    It feels safer, and occasionally picking not to raise a particular disagreement is a legitimate choice, but making silence your default is not actually safe; it carries real costs that compound over time. When you habitually swallow disagreements to keep the peace, three things happen. You build quiet resentment, which corrodes the very collegial relationships you were trying to protect and often leaks out eventually in worse ways. You compromise your own professional judgment, going along with approaches you think are wrong, which neither serves your students nor develops your sense of yourself as a capable professional, and over a first year that erosion of confidence matters. And you train your colleagues to see you as someone without views to contribute, which paradoxically lowers rather than raises your standing. The alternative is not loud confrontation; it is the curious, respectful third path, which lets you raise a disagreement in a way that preserves the peace you value while still contributing your honest perspective. Reserve genuine silence for the disagreements that truly are not worth raising, and for the rest, learn to voice them well rather than defaulting to a silence that only looks safe.
    How is disagreeing with a leader different from disagreeing with a peer?
    It follows the same principles, curiosity, respect, separating idea from person, but it calls for extra care in tact, timing, and especially venue, because the power difference changes how disagreement is heard and what it can cost. Disagreeing with a leader is valuable and often important, leaders need honest input and the best ones welcome it, but a newcomer publicly contradicting a principal or department head in a meeting can read as a challenge to authority regardless of how reasonably it is phrased, and can create awkwardness the leader then has to manage in front of others. So the main adjustments are to raise it privately rather than publicly wherever possible, giving the leader room to consider your view without a face-saving dynamic, to be especially careful to frame it as a question and to acknowledge their position and the constraints they may be working under, and to be thoughtful about which disagreements are worth bringing to a leader at all. You also stay particularly open to the likelihood that the leader has context you lack, since they often do. Handled with that extra tact and through the right private channel, disagreeing with a leader can actually strengthen their trust in you as someone who will tell them the truth respectfully, which is a valuable thing for a new teacher to be known for.

    Go deeper

    Build it into a bigger day

    Workshop
    New Teacher Team Collaboration
    Workshop
    Navigating School Politics
    Workshop
    New Teacher Self-Advocacy