Schools do not run only on vision statements and instructional frameworks, but on calendars, inboxes, shared drives, slide decks, and dashboards. Schools operate on a thousand small digital decisions that either reduce friction or create it.
As such, a school leader’s digital habits have a direct impact on the entire school, sometimes for the worse.
Most of these habits are not malicious. Many come from good intentions and limited time, but intention does not cancel impact. In schools, attention is precious, so when our digital communication creates extra steps, people spend more energy decoding the message than acting on it. When leaders add avoidable friction, we shift the burden onto the people who already have the least time to spare.
These are not “gotchas,” but patterns which help to shape culture. The way we communicate digitally becomes a daily lesson in what we value: clarity, care, quality–or the lack of it–all of it shows up as you.
Here are six digital pet peeves I keep running into at schools, what each quietly reveals, and what you can do instead.
1. Reply-all as a performance of unity
The reply-all storm is the classic. Someone sends a birthday email, a holiday greeting, or a quick shout-out, then the chain begins. “Happy birthday!” “So true!” “Agreed!” “Thank you!” The content is kind, the intention is fine. But suddenly we have 30 messages that accomplish nothing except proving that we are all, in fact, checking our email.
I am not against appreciation; I am against forced audience participation.
Sometimes reply-all is not communication, but a performance. People feel socially compelled to respond because it feels rude not to, so for anyone managing a high-volume inbox, it becomes a productivity tax.
Do this instead: If your reply does not change anyone’s work, it probably does not need to go to everyone, so send it directly to the person. Or if your platform allows it, react instead of replying. If the message is truly for the whole staff, one person can compile appreciation and send a single follow-up. Culture does not require clutter.
2. Using AI to inflate a simple message
This one is newer, and it may become the biggest one if we are not careful–using AI to turn a simple message into a long email that the reader has to wade through.
I had a colleague show me an email she was about to send with a simple message: she was sick and would miss a deadline. That was all the recipient needed. Instead, the email became three paragraphs that repeated the same point in different ways, with extra personal details that did not help the reader take action. I had to take time to read it, she had to take time to generate it, and none of that improved communication.
AI can be useful, but the standard should be simple–it should reduce cognitive load, not increase it, and help communication become clearer, shorter, and more actionable.
Do this instead: If the message is a status update, keep it to three sentences: what happened, what you need, and what happens next. Use AI to tighten and clarify, not to sound more elaborate.
3. Dead links and “I sent it” culture
Dead links turn simple tasks into scavenger hunts. “Here’s the resource.” The link does not work. “Here’s the folder.” No permission. “See the attachment.” The attachment is missing, or the file is named Final_FINAL_v7 and no one can tell what is current.
This is not really a technical issue. It is a respect issue.
When a leader sends information that is not usable, the message becomes: “I pushed this out, now you figure it out.” Over time, staff stop trusting communications, and stop clicking.
Do this instead: Test links before you send any, and check permissions using a non-owner view if possible. Use file names that humans can recognize later, ideally with a date and topic. And add one small leadership move that goes a long way: “If you cannot access this, reply and I will fix it.”
4. QR codes in PDFs that assume you are holding paper
This one is so common that I still cannot believe we do it. Someone creates a flyer for an event. “Register here!” They include a QR code. Great idea if the flyer is printed and taped to a wall.
But what happens in real life? The PDF is emailed or posted on a site, and someone opens it on their phone. They see the QR code, but they cannot scan it because it is on the same device they are using to read it. If they do not have a second device, they are stuck.
QR codes are usually meant to make registration or information more accessible, however, in a digital setting, the opposite can happen.
Do this instead: If you include a QR code in a digital document, include a clickable link underneath it or add a short URL that can be copied. Design for the most realistic scenario: a busy teacher reading it on a phone in a hallway between periods. If it cannot be opened in ten seconds, it is not ready.
5. Sloppy outputs: grammar, slides, and basic accessibility
We live in a world where tools can catch basic grammar issues instantly and templates exist for decent slide design. And yet, we still circulate staff-wide messages with obvious errors and preset decks that are hard to read. Tiny fonts. Low contrast. Walls of text.
This is not about being fancy, but about quality control.
When grammar is unchecked, it distracts from the message and signals haste. Slide quality does the same. Consequently, if the communication is sloppy, people assume the planning and thinking behind it is sloppy, too.
This is also where basic accessibility shows up. If the font is tiny, the contrast is weak, and the document is a scanned image that cannot be searched or selected, it creates barriers. Some staff will struggle quietly while others will disengage. Either way, the message does not land the way it should.
Do this instead: If a message is going to the whole staff, take two minutes to proofread. If it is a deck for a real meeting, make it readable. One idea per slide, large font, high contrast, and less text. Aim for materials that are usable on a phone, searchable, and readable without squinting.
6. Data dumps with no story and no action
I love data. I also hate data dumps.
There is nothing worse than receiving a spreadsheet or dashboard with “FYI” and no explanation–no context, no interpretation, no action, just numbers floating in space. If there is no decision to make, no next step to take, and no owner to follow up, then the data becomes noise wearing a serious outfit.
Data only becomes helpful when it answers a question and drives an action. Without that, we are not using data, we are distributing anxiety.
Do this instead: Every data share should answer three questions:
- So what? What does this data mean and what matters most here.
- Now what? What are we going to do differently by knowing it.
- Who owns it by when? What is the follow-through here and who is responsible.
Staff can handle hard truths. What they cannot handle is being handed numbers with no direction and then being judged for not magically improving them.
A closing thought about digital leadership
I am not writing this from a place of perfection as I have sent messages too fast, shared the wrong link, and have built a deck late at night and hoped nobody noticed. That is all part of leadership life. The point is not to shame anyone but to notice what our habits communicate and what these cost other people.
Digital choices are rarely neutral, and send signals about our standards and our care. These reveal whether we are thinking about the people on the receiving end, especially the ones who have the least time and the most daily demands. That is why I keep returning to the same line: It shows up as you.
If people have to decode you, they cannot act on your requests. So lead with the ask/task, make links usable, design for phone-first access, proofread anything that represents the school, make slides readable, do not send data without a next step, and use AI to clarify, not inflate.
Our digital habits should make it easier to do the work, not harder. When we reduce friction in small ways, we protect time for what actually matters: better instruction, stronger relationships, and better support for students. That is not tech. That is leadership.
