Pedagogical Reasoning and Action - ERIC · models are effective, but ... Pedagogical Reasoning and Action Pedagogical shifts ... in which a teacher shifts from an initial comprehension

Shannon Pella

81

Teacher Education Quarterly, Summer 2015

Pedagogical Reasoning and Action:Affordances of Practice-Based

Teacher Professional Development

By Shannon Pella

Acommonthemehasbeenconsistentlywoventhroughtheliteratureonteacherprofessionaldevelopment:thatpractice-baseddesignsandcollaborationaretwocomponents of effective teacher learning models. For example, Marrongelle,Sztajn,andSmith(2013)foundthatteacherlearningcontextsareoptimalwhentheyare“intensive,ongoing,andconnectedtopractice,focusonstudentlearn-ing,andaddresstheteachingofspecificcontent”(pp.203-204).Additionally,“byfocusingonpracticesthataredirectlyconnectedtotheworkthatteachersdointheirclassrooms,teachershavetheopportunitytodevelopknowledgeneededforteachingby investigatingaspectsof teaching itself ”(pp.206-207). In termsofcollaboration,Whitcomb,Borko,andListon(2009)suggestedthat“professionaldevelopment experiences are particularly effective when situated in a collegiallearningenvironment,whereteachersworkcollaborativelytoinquireandreflectontheirteaching”(p.208).Furthermore,accordingtoastatusreportoninternationalteacher professional development, “the content of professional development ismostusefulwhenitfocusesonconcretetasksofteaching,assessment,observation,andreflection”(Wei,Darling-Hammond,Andree,Richardson,&Orphanos,2009,p.5).Eachoftheserepresentativeexcerptsreflectsalargerbodyofresearchthathighlightscollaborationandpractice-basedcontextsascriticalaspectsofpromisingteacherprofessionaldevelopmentmodels(Darling-Hammond,1989,2002,2006;

ShannonPellaisalecturerintheTeachingCredential/M.A.programoftheSchoolofEduca-tionattheUniversityofCalifornia,[email protected]

Pedagogical Reasoning and Action

82

Desimone,2009;DuFour&Eaker,1998;McLaughlin&Talbert,2006;Wayne,Yoon,Zhu,Cronen,&Garet,2008). Inadditiontocollaborationandpractice-baseddesigns,inquirycycleshavebeenlongrecognizedascatalystsforteacherprofessionaldevelopment.Decadesofresearchhavedescribedhowteacherlearningcommunitymodels,whichincludesomeaspectofclassroom-basedinquiry,havecontributedtobuildingteachercapac-ity(Cochran-Smith&Lytle,2009Darling-Hammond,2002;Grossman,Wineburg,&Woolworth,2001;Lieberman&Miller,2008;Lieberman&Wood,2003;Stoll,Bolam,McMahon,Wallace,&Thomas,2006). Practice-basedteacherprofessionaldevelopmentmodelscantakeavarietyofforms.Somepopularmodelsincludeteacherlearninglabteams,inquirygroups,bookstudyandteacherresearchgroups,school-basedprofessionallearningcom-munities,peerobservationteams,participantsininstructionalrounds,collaborativeactionresearchgroups,andlessonstudyteams.Inthisstudy,thetermpractice-basedmeansthatteacherlearningtakesplaceinK-12classroomcontextsinrealtimewiththeteacherofrecordandhisorherstudentspresentandengaged.Practice-basedlearningopportunitiescancomprise theentireprofessionaldevelopmentmodelorbeanextensionfromaworkshop,training,class,orseminarthattakesplaceoutsidetheK-12classroom.Videotapingteachingandanalyzinglessonsthroughtechnologyhavegainedpopularityandcanbeeffectivewaystogaininsightintoteachingandlearning(Lewis,Perry,Friedkin,&Roth,2012).However,forthepurposesofthepresentstudy,thetermpractice-basedmeansthatatleastsomeoftheteacherlearningworkoccursinthecontextofanactiveK-12classroom.Thepractice-basedandcollaborativeinquiryprofessionaldevelopmentmodeldesignedforthisstudyisanadaptedformoflessonstudy.

Lesson Study

Atypicallessonstudyinvolvesteachersincyclesofcollaborativeinquirythoughtopicselection,lessondesign,observationsoflessons,analysisofdatafromobservedlessons,andapplicationofnewknowledgetoinformthenextcycle.LessonstudyisapopularformofteacherprofessionaldevelopmentinJapan.InbothJapanandtheUnitedStates,lessonstudyhasbeenshowntocontributetotheknowledgebaseandpedagogicaldevelopmentofteachers(Chokshi&Fernandez,2004;Hiebert,Gallimore,&Stigler,2002;Lewis&Hurd,2011;Lewisetal.,2012;Lewis,Perry,&Hurd,2004;Lewis,Perry,&Murata,2006;Pella,2011,2012,2015).Tosupportpurposefullearning,Japaneselessonstudygroupsestablishawell-developedsetofissuesabouttheirpractice,clearplansandapproachesforhowtoengageintheirexploration,andacommitmenttoassessingtheirlessonstudyactivitiesagainsttheirgoals (Chokshi&Fernandez,2004).School-based lessonstudy, inwhichteachersconductlessonstudyaroundasharedresearchthemechosenbythestaff,israreintheUnitedStates(Lewis&Hurd,2011).Evenmorerareisresearchon

Shannon Pella

83

lessonstudythatisfocusedonissuesinteachingandlearningwriting.Mostlessonstudyresearchtodatehasreportedfindingsfromlessonstudyprojectsfocusedonmathandscience.ThisstudysoughttocontributetotheliteraturebyfollowingfivemiddleschoolEnglishlanguageartsteachersthroughthreeyearsandninelessonstudycyclesfocusedonteachingandlearningwriting.

Purpose and Research Questions

Thepurposeofthisresearchwastouncoveranddescribeindetailwhatmakescollaborativeinquiryandpractice-baseddesignscompellingfeaturesofeffectiveprofessionaldevelopmentmodels.Inotherwords,thisstudywasconcernedwithlocating, if they existed, the specific processes and practices of practice-basedmodelsthataffordteacherlearning.Totheseends,thisstudysoughttouncoveranddescribepedagogical reasoning and action,which,accordingtoShulman(1987),arethetypesofprocessesandpracticesthatcanleadtoshiftsinunderstandingandbuildaknowledgebaseforteaching.Pedagogicalreasoningandactionareasetofprocessesofcentralimportancetothedevelopmentofpedagogicalcontentknowledge—“thatspecialamalgamofcontentandpedagogythatisuniquelytheprovinceofteachers,theirownspecialformofprofessionalunderstanding”(Shul-man,1987,p.8).Thusthepresentstudysoughttouncoveranddescribehowapractice-basedlessonstudymodelaffordedteacherstheopportunitytoengageinpedagogicalreasoningandactionandmakelastingpedagogicalshifts.Thefollowingresearchquestionswereaddressed:(a)How,ifatall,doesapractice-basedlearningmodelaffordopportunitiesforpedagogicalreasoningandaction?(b)What,ifany,pedagogicalshiftsdidteachersmakeandsustainbeyondthelessonstudy?

Conceptual Frameworks

Althoughthesubjectmatterandfociofanygivenprofessionaldevelopmentprogramwillvary,thebasicgoalforteacherprofessionaldevelopmentistoprovidelearningexperiencesthatpromotethetypesofpedagogicalshiftsthatcanadvancestudentlearning.Thustheconstructsunderinvestigationinthepresentstudyarepedagogical reasoningandaction(Shulman,1987).Byengaginginpedagogicalreasoningandaction,teacherscanshiftfrominitialunderstandingsofcontenttodevelopingpedagogicalcontentknowledge.Teachereducatorsandprofessionaldevelopment providersmay recognize that practice-based collaborative inquirymodelsareeffective,butperhapsevenmoreimportantisunderstandingwhythesemodelswork,what happensthataffordsteacherlearning,andwhatspecificpro-cesses and practicesareaffordedbypractice-baseddesigns.


84


Pedagogicalshiftsarerootedintheprocessesandpracticesofdevelopingaknowledgebaseforteaching.Inthepresentstudy,pedagogicalshiftsaredefinedaccordingtoShulman’s(1987)descriptionofpedagogicalreasoningandaction,inwhichateachershiftsfromaninitialcomprehensiontoanewcomprehension.Pedagogicalshiftsarecharacterizedbyateacher’stransformationofcontentknowl-edgeintoformsthatarepedagogicallypowerfulandadaptedtofitthestudents.Theshiftsoccurthroughtheprocessoftransformation,which,accordingtoShulman,requiressomecombinationofthefollowing:

(1)Preparationoftextmaterialsincludingtheprocessofcriticalinterpretation(2)representationoftheideasintheformofnewanalogiesormetaphors(3)instructionalselectionsfromamonganarrayofteachingmethodsandmodels(4)adaptationoftheserepresentationstothegeneralcharacteristicsofthechildrentobetaught(5)tailoringtheadaptationstothespecificyoungstersintheclassroom.(p.16)

Inhismodelofpedagogicalreasoningandaction,Shulmansuggestedthatreasoningbyteachersabouttheirteachingalsoincludesevaluatingstudentunderstandingbothduringandafterateachingandlearningevent.Thisprocessalsoincludesteacherself-evaluation,“on-linecheckingforunderstandingandmisunderstandingthatateachermustemploywhileteachinginteractively”(p.18).Furthermore,pedagogi-calreasoninginvolvesteacherself-evaluationbecause“evaluationisalsodirectedatone’sownteachingandthelessonsandmaterialsemployedinthoseactivities,[and]leadsdirectlytoreflection[whichis]theuseofparticularkindsofanalyticknowledgebroughttobearonone’swork”(p.19).Thisprocessofevaluationandreflection,inpedagogicalreasoning,canleadto“newcomprehension,”whichcanencourageteacherstodevelopanewrepertoireofactivitiesforteaching. AccordingtoShulman(1987),

thekeytodistinguishingtheknowledgebaseforteachingliesattheintersectionofcontentandpedagogy,inthecapacityoftheteachertotransformthecontentknowl-edgeheorshepossessesintoformsthatarepedagogicallypowerfulandyetadaptivetothevariationsinabilityandbackgroundpresentedbythestudents.(p.15)

Pedagogicalreasoningclearlyinvolvesobservation,reflection,ongoingformativeevaluation, and assessment as a part of a process of understanding, judgment,andactions,whichleadto“wisepedagogicaldecisions”(p.14).Theprocessofpedagogicalreasoningandaction,throughwhichteachersshiftfrominitialstatesofcomprehensiontonewcomprehension,providesacompellingandreplicableconceptualframeworkforexaminingpractice-basedteacherlearning.

Shannon Pella

85

Methods

Research Design

Thisstudyinvolvedthreeyearsandninecyclesoflessonstudy.Eachcollabora-tivecycleincludedtopicselection,lessondesign,lessonobservation,observationdebrief,andtheanalysisofstudent learningfromthelesson.Eachcycle lastedbetweenfourandsixweeks.Overathree-yearperiod,eachteacherwasobservedteachingalessonatleasttwice.Duringeachobservation,teachersinteractedwithstudentstogatherawidevarietyofdataaboutstudentlearning.Agrantpaidforteacherreleasedaystoobserveeachotherfivedaysperyear.Thetopicsparticipatingteachersselectedwerebasedontheinterestsofparticipatingteachersbyconsider-ingtheassets,interests,andlearningneedsoftheirculturally,linguistically,andeconomicallydiversestudents. Eachof the topics selectedwasgrounded in the researchon teachingandlearningwritingandliteracyinstructionmorebroadly.Table1liststhemaintopicsunderinvestigationandafocusedresearchquestionforeachtopic.Itisimportanttonotethatthereweremanyothergoals,interests,andinsightsintoteachingandlearning that arenot listed inTable1.The lesson studyaffordedopportunities

Table 1Lesson Study Topics

Lesson study cycle Topic of lesson study/focal questions

2008-2009 Cycle1 ResponsetoLiterature(R2L)Writing:Howcanwesupportstudents tointegrateevidencefromtextintoresponsestoliteratureessays? Cycle2 Howcanwesupportanalytic(close)readingoftexts(withafocus onidentifyingandexplaininghowthethemesaredevelopedacross thetext)topreparefortheR2Lessay? Cycle3 PersuasiveWriting:Howcanwesupportstudentstodeveloptheir pointofviewonatopicforpersuasivewriting?

2009-2011 Cycles4&5 Howcanwesupportstudentstoseethebiggerpictureoftheelements ofanargument?Tounderstandthedifferentchoicesanauthormay maketosupportaclaimandpresentanargument?Howwillthe analysisoftextspreparestudentstowritearguments? Cycle6 Howcanwestructurewritinggroupprotocolstomaximizethe potentialforpeerfeedbacktosupportthewritingprocess? Cycle7 Howcanwefosteraninquiryorevaluativestanceonwriting?How canwesupportstudentstomovebeyondspellingerrorsandprovide feedbackonideas,organization,wordchoices,andothertraits? Cycle8 Whatisvoiceinwriting?Howcanwesupportstudentstodiscover voiceinothers’writingaswellasexpressvoiceintheirownwriting?


86

foravarietyofancillaryinterests thatweresometimessharedandoftenvariedbetweenteachers.Forexample,someteacherswereinterestedinissuesofpacing,classroomprocedure,writer’snotebooksandportfolios,selectingtexts,settinguplearningstations,andplanningopportunitiesforavarietyoftypesofindependentandsharedreadingandwriting.Theseandotherfociwereaddressedoften,andparticipantsgainedinsightintoeachoftheirinterests,yetthesharedlearninggoalsfortheteamarelistedinTable1. Materialsforlessonplanningincludeddistrict-adoptedcurricula,books,novels,teacher-createdmaterials,andartifacts.Textsincludedarticles,speeches,editori-als,videos,music,art,andliterature.Thetextsusedwithstudentsrangedintone,complexity,texttype,andgenreaswellasintheauthors’backgrounds,ages,andpointsofview.

Participants and Settings

Fourofthefiveparticipatingteacherswerefemaleandonewasmale.EachtaughtmiddleschoolEnglish languagearts.TheywereallCaucasianandagedbetween25and40years.Acallforvolunteerswassentviae-mailtoamailinglistoflocalteacherswhohadattendedlocalaffiliateNationalWritingProjectwork-shops.Thesefiveparticipantseachvolunteeredforthelessonstudyproject.Inanefforttocastaswideanetaspossible,theselectionprocesswasprimarilybasedoninterestandadministratorsupportforreleasetime. Eachofthefiveteacher’sclassroomswasinaseparatedistrictsurroundinganurbanareainNorthernCalifornia.TaliaandRacheltaughteighthgradeinurbandistrictswithculturallyandlinguisticallydiversestudentsfromlow-incomecom-munities.LauraandElizabethtaughtseventhgradeinsuburban,affluentdistrictswith primarily English-only students. Gary taught sixth grade in a small ruralschooldistrict.MostofGary’sstudentswerebilingualnativeSpanishspeakers.Thefivesettings,someuptoanhourandahalfapart,wereauniqueadvantageinthisstudy.Thediversesettingsprovidedopportunitiesforteacherstoobserveeachotherteachinginclassroomsandcommunitiesthatvariedwidelyincommunityandstudentdemographics.Allnamesofschools,communities,places,andpeoplearepseudonyms.

Data Collection

Data for thisstudyweredrawnfroma three-year lessonstudyproject thatspannedfrom2008to2011.Astheparticipantobserver,qualitativeresearcher,andauthorofthisarticle,Icollectedawidevarietyofdatabetween2008and2011aswellasdatafromfollow-upinterviewsinspring2013. Myprimaryunitsofanalysiswere theprocessesofpedagogical reasoningandaction(Shulman,1987)thatemergedfromstudyingthenatureofparticipants’engagementsinthelessonstudymodel.Idefinedpedagogicalreasoningandaction

Shannon Pella

87

accordingtoShulman’sarticulationofthewayateachershiftsfromcomprehensiontonewcomprehensionthroughtransformationofsubjectmatterintoinstructionalsequencesandthroughengaginginongoingevaluationandreflection.IselectedthisfocusbasedonthesituativeanalyticmethodssuggestedbyLemke(1997)inhisecosocialsystemsmodel,wherehesuggestedthattheprimaryunitsofanalysisarenotthingsorpeoplebutprocessesandpractices.Lemke’sviewsonsituatedcognitiontheorypositedthatanecosocialsystemincludesnotonlyhumansintheirsituatedphysicalenvironmentbutalsothesocialpractices,meaningrelations,andallinteractionsbetweenhumansandtheirmaterialecosystems. Myfocusonparticipants’pedagogicalreasoningandactionalsoincludedawidenedlensthroughwhichIstudiedhowparticipants’processesandpracticesconnectedtothefeaturesofthelessonstudymodel.Byforegroundinganddetail-ingparticipants’engagementinaprocessofpedagogicalreasoningandaction,Isoughttodescribehowthislessonstudymodelaffordedopportunitiesforteacherstomakepedagogicalshiftsand,assuch,developtheirknowledgebaseforteachingwritingandliteracymorebroadly. Tocaptureanddescribetheseprocesses,Irecordedextensivefieldnotesfrommyobservationsofparticipants’behaviorastheyinteractedwitheachother,theirsettings,andthematerialsofthelessonstudyproject.Ialsoaudiotapedandtran-scribedallparticipants’discussionsthroughouttheplanningstages,observations,debriefingmeetings,and lessonrevisions. I triangulated thesedatawithe-mailcommunication,pre-andpostlessonstudycycle interviews,andwritten reflec-tionsfromeachparticipatingteacherattheendofeachlessonstudyyear.Ialsocollectedandanalyzedawidevarietyofdatafromallteacher-createdmaterials,thecurriculumresourcesthatwereusedinparticipants’lessondesigns,andthesamplesofstudents’workthatteachersevaluatedaftereachobservedlesson.

Data Analysis: Five Phases

Eachofthefollowingfivephasesofdataanalysisinvolvedtheprocessofdatareductionbytransformingrawdataintosummaries,reflectivememos,anddatadisplaycharts.Datadisplaychartsservedto“organizekeyideasthatallowedforconclusiondrawingandverification”(Miles&Huberman,1994,p.11).Bydecid-ingwhatthingsmeant,notingregularities,patterns,explanations,andconnections,Iincorporatedthefollowingstrategiesintomydataanalysisprocedurestoensurethequalityandinternalvalidityofthedata:(a)checkingforrepresentativeness,(b)checkingforresearcherbiases,(c)triangulatingacrossdatasourcesandmethodstoconfirmemergingfindings,(d)gettingfeedbackfromparticipantsvia“memberchecks,”and(e)examiningthe“unpatterns”inthedatabyfollowinguponsurprisesthatemergedalongthewayandinvestigatingthemeaningofoutliers(Miles&Huberman,1994). Throughtheconstantcomparativemethod,Isystematicallyinspectedthedataandconstructedandreconstructedmydevelopingtheories(Merriam,2003).Ies-


88

tablishedathresholdfortrustworthinessthroughmyprolongedengagementwiththeproject,regularmemberchecking,andtheongoingcomparisonofdata(Lincoln&Guba,1985).Eachofthefivephasesofdataanalysisisdescribedseparatelyforthepurposesofclarity,buttheyoftenoverlapped.

Phase 1: Unpacking and coding pedagogical reasoning and action.First,Iorganizedalldocumentsanddiscoursedataforeachlessonstudycycleintoninedatasets—oneforeachlessonstudycycle.Next,IunpackedtheconstructpedagogicalreasoningandactionaccordingtoShulman’smodelandcollapsedthedescriptorsintothreecodingcategories:(a)transformation,(b)instructionandevaluation,and(c)reflection.Icombedthrougheachoftheninedatasetsandcodedandcatego-rizedinstancesofpedagogicalreasoningandaction.Icreateddatadisplaychartstoorganizethedataintothreecategoriesaccordingtothefollowingdescriptors:

1. Transformation.Thisincludedpreparationand/ornegotiationofmaterials,resources,artifactsforteaching,anddesigninginstructionandadaptingtospecificstudents.Transformationcodesalsoincludedselectingstrategies,lessondesign,andadaptingandtailoringtostudentcharacteristics.

2.Instruction and evaluation.Icodedinstanceswhenparticipatingteach-erstriedoutnewapproachesinpracticeandcodedinstancesofteachers’evaluation of materials, instructional strategies, and student thinking.Furthermore,thesecodesincludedinstanceswhenteacherscheckedforstudents’understandingduringtheteachingevent.

3.Reflection.Icodedinstancesofteacherreflectiononthelesson,studentlearning,teacherself-reflection,andtheappropriationofpracticesfromthelessonstudy.Codinginstancesofreflectionincludedteachers’verbalreflectionsduringthelessonstudycycleaswellaswrittenreflections.

AfterPhase1coding,therewassubstantialevidencethatpedagogicalreasoningandactionoccurredthroughouteveryfeatureofthelessonstudy:collaborativetopicselec-tion,lessonplanning,observations,anddebrief.Infact,therewasnotasinglecycleoflessonstudyinwhichnoinstanceofpedagogicalreasoningandactionoccurred.

Phase 2: Identifying teacher pedagogical shifts.AfterPhase1,itwasclearthateachoftheninecyclesoflessonstudycontainedfeaturesofteacherpedagogicalreasoningandaction.Therefore,inPhase2,Icodedeachoftheninelessonstudycycledatasetsagainforclearinstancesofshiftsincomprehensionforeachteacher.AccordingtoShulman(1987),theprocessofpedagogicalreasoningandactionbeginswithcomprehensionofpurpose,subjectmatterstructures,andideaswithinandoutsidethediscipline.Theprocessesoftransformation,instruction,evaluation,andreflectionsupporttheshifttowarda“newcomprehensionofpurposes,subjectmatter,students,teaching,andselfthroughtheconsolidationofnewunderstandingandlearningfromexperience”(p.15).

Shannon Pella

89

OnceIwasabletolocateclearinstancesofshiftsfromcomprehensiontonewcomprehension,Iconfirmedtheshiftswithmemberchecks.Fromthesedataanalyses,Iarrivedatapreliminaryhypothesis:Pedagogicalreasoningandaction,whichinvolvedshiftingtowardnewcomprehensions,wassituatedinthecontextofthelessonstudyfeatures.Thishypothesisformedthebasisforthenextphaseofdataanalysis.

Phase 3: Situating pedagogical shifts within the lesson study.InPhase3,Itracedconnectionsfromtheprocessesofpedagogicalreasoningandaction,whichincludedtheshiftsincomprehension,tothecontextsinwhichtheseprocessesweresituated.Forexample,duringlessonplanningmeetings,therewasmuchattentiontoanalyzingandadaptingmaterialsandnegotiatingandselecting instructionalstrategies.Duringtheobservationdebriefingmeetings,therewasmuchattentiontobothevaluatingtheinstructionalstrategiesusedinthelessonandevaluatingandanalyzingstudentthinking. I used the analytic induction method, which involved selecting a tentativehypothesis and testing the hypothesis against instances of phenomena.As thephenomenaappearedtosupportthehypothesis,Itestedfurtherinstancesofphe-nomenaagainstthehypothesisuntilthehypothesiswasadequatelysupportedbydata (Merriam,2003).Myhypothesiswas that the featuresof the lessonstudyaffordedopportunities forpedagogical reasoningandaction,which include theshiftsincomprehension.Thisphaseofdataanalysisrevealedclearconnectionsbetweenlessonplanning,observations,andobservationdebriefingmeetingsandtheprocessofpedagogicalreasoningandaction.

Phase 4: Locating themes across teacher shifts.Iusedtheconstantcompara-tivemethodtodeterminethemesacrosstheinstancesofteachershifts.Icomparedthenatureoftheshiftsforeachteacherandthecontextwithinwhicheachshiftevolved.Throughthisstageofconstantcomparison,thedataacrosseachoftheparticipatingteachersrevealedthatallparticipatingteachersbroadenedandinte-gratedtheirwritingpedagogy.Theyeachshiftedawayfromanotionofwritingasanisolatedsetofskillsandtowardabroadenednotionofwritingasaprocessofcriticalthinking,whichisfurtherdetailedinthefindingssection.

Phase 5: Follow-up interviews two years later. In thefinalphaseofdataanalysis,Iconductedinterviewswitheachofthefiveteacherstoconfirmshiftsandassessthedegreetowhichpedagogicalshiftsweresustainedandgenerative.

Findings

Thefollowingresearchquestionsguidedthisstudy:(a)How,ifatall,doesapractice-basedlearningmodelaffordopportunitiesforpedagogicalreasoningandaction?(b)What,ifany,pedagogicalshiftsdidteachersmakeandsustainbeyondthelessonstudy?Eachofthesequestionsisdiscussedthefollowingsections.


90

How Did the Lesson Study Design Afford Pedagogical Reasoning and Action?

Eachofthelessonstudyfeatureshasbeenrecognizedbytheliteratureonteacherprofessionaldevelopmentasaneffectivefeatureofprofessionaldevelopmentmod-els,forexample,collaborativelessonplanning,observation,andanalysisofstudentlearning.Eachlessonstudyfeatureinvolvesanalyzingmaterials,analyzingstudentthinking,building sharedknowledge, and iterativelyapplyingnewknowledge topractice.Excerptsfrominterchangesbetweenteachersastheynegotiatedteachingandlearningwritingthroughoutthelessonstudycyclesillustratehowthelessonstudyfeaturesaffordedopportunitiesforteacherstoengageinpedagogicalreasoningandaction.Althoughtherewasmuchoverlapbetweenthefeaturesofthelessonstudy,thefollowingsectionsillustratehowthefourfeaturesofalessonstudydesign—collab-orativelessonplanning,observation,dataanalysis,andreflection—eachcontributedtonewknowledgeconstructionforparticipatingteachers.

Collaborative lesson planning.Eachlessonstudycyclebeganwithatopicselectionandcenteredonafocalquestion.Astheydesignedeachlesson,participantsgatheredalloftheresourcestheyalreadyhadonthesubject,includingpublishedcurricula,teacher-createdlessons,andbooksonthesubject.Manyoftheresourcesteachersbroughttotheplanningmeetingswerefrompreviouslyattendedprofes-sionaldevelopmentworkshopswhereparticipantshaddeemed the informationvaluableyethadnothadtheopportunitytoapplytheirlearninginpractice. Toillustratehowthecollaborativelessonplanningprocesssupportedpeda-gogicalreasoningandaction, thefollowingexamplesweredrawnfromacycleoflessonstudyfocusedonteachingvoiceinwriting.Participantswantedtosup-porttheirstudentstounderstandhowwritersuselanguagetocommunicatetheirpurposestodifferentaudiencesacrosstopicsandinvariouscontexts.Theissueofauthor’svoicebecameafocaltopic,andparticipantsnegotiatedboththemeaningandapplicationsofvoiceforwriting.Voiceisrecognizedasacriticalqualityinwriting(Elbow,1973;Fletcher,1993;Graves,1983).AccordingtoRomano(2004),“voiceisthewriter’spresenceinapieceofwriting”(p.21).Investigatingvoicewaspartofunderstandingwritingasamoreglobalandabstractendeavor—beyondthewordandsentencelevelandintotone,mood,andtheimpactofwritingonthereader.Thistopicwasparticularlychallengingforparticipants,andtheynegotiatedthemeaningandapplicationofvoiceinwriting.Oftenwhentimeranoutduringaplanningsession,aconversationcontinuedintoe-mail.Thisexchangebeganinalessonstudyplanningmeetingandcontinuedthroughe-mailforseveralweeksbeforebeingbroughtbackintothenextplanningmeeting.Thisabbreviatedinter-changeillustratedhowteachers’engagementintheanalysisofmaterialssupportedtheirearlycomprehensionofteachingandlearningvoiceforwriting:

ELIZABETH:So...voiceishowstudentsaresayingwhattheysay,acombina-tionofdiction,tone,mood,andauthors’uniquestyle,right?

Shannon Pella

91

LAURA:In thebookTheySay, ISay, itsays,“Yourvoice+ theirvoices=Aconversationof ideasthat ismeaningful.” . . .Voiceiswhat thestudentsweresayingtoo...authorsputtheirvoiceintheirworkintheformoftheiranalysisbecauseintheiranalysistheyaren’tjustrestatingtheevidence,butexplainingitthroughtheirownlens.Atthesametime,Ifeelthereisroomforvoiceevenwhenthereisnoanalysis.

RACHEL:Idothinkvoiceisboththehowauthorssaywhattheysayandwhattheyaresayingaswell.ThatissomethingI’vealwaysstruggledwith—gettingmystudentstoexpresstheirownideasandnottrytoemulatemyideasortoproducewhattheythinkIwantthemtosay.

LAURA:Ithinkyoucouldhavetwopapersthatscorehighthatdemonstrateanequallevelofinsightfulreadingandinterpretationbutonecouldexhibitvoiceandonecouldsimplybeperfunctory.

Thisexchangereflectedaprocessofpedagogicalreasoningandactionthatincludedthecriticalinterpretationoftexts,materials,andsubjectmatter(Shulman,1987).Thisprocessisalsoanintegralfeatureoflessonstudy.AccordingtoLewisetal.(2012),“thefirstpartoflessonstudyiskyouzai kenkyuu(studyofteachingmaterials),toexaminewhatiscurrentlyknownabouttheteachingandlearningofaparticulartopic”(p.370).Thecollaborativeplanningfeatureoflessonstudysupportedtheteacherstomakedecisionsaboutmaterialsforlessondesign.Thetransformationofmaterials into lessons further involvedselecting instructionalstrategiestailoredtothestudentsintheclassroom(Shulman,1987).Thefollowinginterchangeillustratedthisprocessthroughane-mailexchangeandintoalessonplanningmeeting:

ELIZABETH:Ilovetheideaofstudentsinvestigatingauthors’voicebylookingatavarietyofwaysvoiceislinkedtopurpose,audience,andcontext.IfoundalessonthroughNCTEwhichdoesthis.Mystudentsreallybenefitfromusingvisualsandmultimodalactivities....Wecouldthinkofwaystohelpkidsseehowvoiceisconnectedtodifferentcharacters,purpose,audience,andcontext.

TALIA:WhynotplanahybridofLaura’slesson...andmaybeusesomemusic,ordoaread-aloudorsomeacting...andthenthegallerywalkactivityRacheldidforpersuasivewriting....Itwassoactiveandkidswerereallyenthusiastic...wecanpostpiecesofwritingonthewallsandstudentscanreadthepieceofwriting,discusstheaudience,purpose,contextforthewriting,andthenanalyzethevoice,thewordchoices...[talkabout]theimpact...andwritetheiranswerstogether.

Thelessonplanningprocesscreatedopportunitiesforparticipatingteacherstoselecttopics,negotiatemeaning,andpreparematerialsandartifactsforinstruc-tion.Duringthesesessions,participatingteachersbuiltsharedunderstandingsofconstructssuchaswritinggroups,peerfeedback,criticalthinking,teachingvoice,andthemanywaystoapproachteachingthroughavarietyofmodalities.Asthey


92

engagedintheobservationoflessonsandtheevaluationandanalysisofstudentthinkingandlearninginaction,participatingteachersfurthershiftedintheirun-derstandingsoftheseandotherconstructsinteachingandlearningtheEnglishlanguagearts.

Observation, data analysis, and reflection.Throughout the3-year lessonstudy,teachersparticipatedinnineobservationsandobservationdebriefmeetings.Observationdebriefstypicallyinvolvedanalyzingstudentworkandvariousformsofobservationnotesandartifactsfromthelesson.Frequentlyinfollow-upmeet-ings,participantsbroughtinstudentworkfromthesameoradaptedlessonsthattheytaughtindividuallybeforeoraftereachobservation.Ineachofthemeetings,teachersevaluatedandanalyzedthestrategies,content,andfocusof the lessonandattendedtostudentthinkingandlearning.Lewisetal.(2012)describedthisas“lookingbeyondasinglecorrectanswerinordertounderstandmisconceptionsorextensionsinabstractreasoning”(p.370). AttentiontostudentthinkingisacentralfeatureofprofessionaldevelopmentfurthersupportedbyWhitcombetal.(2009),whosuggestedthat

thegrowingconsensusthatprofessionaldevelopmentshouldfocusonstudents’thinkingandlearningisnotsurprising....Professionaldevelopmentprogramsshouldhelp teachers learnhowtoelicitandinterpretstudents’ ideas,examinestudentwork,andusewhattheylearnaboutstudents’ideasandworktoinformtheirinstructionaldecisionsandactions.(p.209)

Inthefollowinginterchange,participatingteacherswereengagedinpedagogicalreasoning,whichwas characterizedby their evaluationandanalysisof studentthinkingafterobservingalessononteachingvoiceinElizabeth’sclassroom:

GARY:The whole class discussion was the best part of the lesson. [Readingfromhisobservationnotes]Whenyouasked,“Howdoyouknowthattheauthorswerepassionate,emotional,etc.?”yourkidssaidstufflike,“Tone,wordchoice,imagery, vivid details, descriptive language, specific evidence, strong verbs,sentencevariation.”

ELIZABETH:Iwassoimpressedthatmykidsdiscoveredsimilarqualitiesforvoiceastheliteraturewithoutbeingtoldwhatitwas....Iwanted[students]todiscovervoice...tofinditnaturally,organically...ontheirownwithoutbeinggivenahandouttellingthemthisiswasvoiceis.

Thisexchangeillustratedteachers’evaluationofandreflectiononthelesson.Theimmediatedebriefofeachobservationaffordedopportunitiestoevaluatestudentlearningandreflectontheconnectionsmadebetweenteachingandlearning.Attheendofthefinalyearofthelessonstudy,Elizabethexplainedhermostsignificantlearningexperiencesfromthelessonstudy:

ELIZABETH:IfeltlikeIdidn’tknowwhatit[voice]was....Ifanything,Iwastakingstudents’voicesawaybysquishingitwithalloftheacademicstuff....In

Shannon Pella

93

theend,thestudentsreallytaughtmethatIcanlearnwiththemsometimesandtheyreallyhelpedmeseethatjustbecauseIamnotcompletelysureaboutatopicdoesn’tmeanIshouldn’tteachit—sometimesifIcanputitouttothemasaques-tionforinvestigation,Icanlearnsomethingjustfromtryingitout.

ThetopicvoicewasofcompellinginteresttoElizabeth,andsheperseveredtounderstanditforlongerthanayear.Asparticipatingteachersinvestigatedtopicsofinteresttothemandtotheliteratureonteachingandlearningwriting,theymadesignificantpedagogicalshifts.ParticipantslearnedhowtochallengeandsupportEnglishlearners,howtoengagestudentsincollaboration,andhowtochallengethemtothinkcriticallyforandaboutwriting;eachisdetailedinthenextsection.

Pedagogical Shifts

Pedagogicalshifts foreach teacherwereclearly instantiated.The themethatcharacterizedallfiveteachers’shiftswasawayfromtheviewofwritingastheisolatedteachingandlearningof“rules”concerningspelling,punctuation,andthestructureofsentencesorparagraphsandtowardtheviewofwritingasanintegratedcommunica-tiveprocessthatincludedanalyzingvisualandmultimediatexts,speaking,listening,andunpackingavarietyoflanguagetypes,functions,anduses.Teachers’integratedviewsalsoinvolvedtheirunderstandingthatthinkingforandaboutwritingincludedanalyzingtextsinconnectionwithgenre,audience,purpose,andcontext—notionsthataresupportedbymuchoftheresearchonteachingandlearningwriting(Hillocks,1999,2003;Huot,2002;Johns,1997;Lattimer,2003).Participatingteachers’shiftsresultedfromtheircollaborativeinvestigationintomethodsthatengagedtheirstudentsinthinkingforandaboutwritingthroughdiscussion,collaboration,peerfeedback,andtheanalysisoftexts.Inthefollowingsections,eachteacher’spedagogicalshiftsaredescribedseparatelytoprovidedetailed,concreteexamplesandafulleraccountofeachparticipatingteacher’sexperiences.

Talia.Talia’smostsignificantpedagogicalshiftwastoengageherstudentsincollaborativewritinggroups.Inaplanningmeetingearlyinthefirstyearofthelessonstudy,Taliasharedherconcernaboutengagingherstudentsinpeercollab-orativewritinggroups:

IhavehadtheproblembeforewithmyEnglishlearners—theydon’tknowhowtocommentandtheywanttheteachertogivethecomments....Iamafraidput-tingtheminwritinggroupswouldjustbetoohardforthemtoknowwhattosaytoeachother.

ThiscommentrepresentedTalia’sreluctancetoengageherstudentsinpeerfeedbackduringthefirstmonthsofthelessonstudyproject.Weekslater,afterseeingRachel’sstudentsengageincollaborativewritinggroupswheretheyprovidedfeedbacktoeachothers’writing,Taliaemergedwithanewunderstandingofpeerfeedback:

Ididn’twantittohappenatfirst,becauseIwasafraidtheblindwouldleadthe


94

blind,but...watchingyourkidsworkinginpairs,Ithinknowitmightbeusefultonotgivethemtherestrictedscaffold,buttouseeachothertoconstructit.

ThisexcerptillustratesTalia’sshiftingunderstandingaboutengagingherstudentsincollaborativewriting.AfterobservingstudentcollaborationinRachel’sclassroom,Talia’sperspectivebegantoshift.Onefullyearlater,Taliaappropriatedmuchofwhat sheplannedandobserved inbothLauraandRachel’s classrooms.At theendofthesecondyearofthelessonstudy,Taliapresentedalessoninvolvingherstudentsinwritinggroups.Duringtheobservationdebrief,Taliareflectedonherstudents’thinkingandlearningduringthelesson:

They[students]werecommentinginboththemarginsandgivingfeedbackattheendofeachother’spieces.Itoldthemtheyshoulddothis,butweneverdiscussedwhyexactlytheyshould.ThenwereflectedonthisprocessandIasked,“Whatisthebenefitofmargincomments?”Kidswentbacktotheirwritinggroupsandanalyzedtheendnotesandmargincommentsthattheyhadgiveneachotherinordertoevaluatethedifferencebetweenthetwo.Intheend,theydecidedthatmargincommentsarebriefandeitheraskaprovocativequestionorgiveaspecificchangesuggestion....Theysaidthatendnotesaremoreofagloballookatthewholepiece....Thiswasfascinatingtome,Ineverthoughtofitbefore.

Thisseriesofrepresentativeexcerpts illustrateshowTaliaprogressivelyshiftedaway fromherearlyconcernsabouther students’ability toperform inwritinggroups.AsTaliaengaged in the lessonstudy, sheshiftedaway fromher initialconcernsaboutthe“blindleadingtheblind”towardanewcomprehensionabouthowtoengagestudentsincollaborativewritinggroups.Collaborativelyplanning,observing,andlearningtostructurewritinggroupsbytryingthemoutinpracticeaffordedopportunitiestoengageinpedagogicalreasoningandaction,whichwereessentialforTalia’spedagogicalshifts.

Gary and Laura.Thedesignandongoingmodificationofstudentcollabora-tivewritinggroupswasalsosignificantforbothGaryandLaura.Garypresentedalessontothegrouptowardtheendofthethirdyearofthelessonstudywherehisstudentscollaboratedinwritinggroupstoprovidefeedbackaboutthevoiceeachusedinhisorherwriting.Garyexpressedthathisexperienceinthelessonstudycontributedtohisnewknowledgedesigningandenactingwritinggroups.Inthefollowingexcerptfromadiscussionattheendofthelessonstudyproject,Garydiscussedtheimpactofthelessonstudyteamonhislearning:

IcanhonestlysaymystudentshaveimprovedaswritersthisyearbecauseofallIhavelearnedfromyou[thelessonstudyteam].Iwouldnothavebeendoingwrit-inggroups,Iwouldnothavebeenteachingvoice.IwouldnotseemystudentsinthewayIdo....IfeellikeIhavethiswholegroupheretohelpmeandIcansayitoutloudandtrythingsout.

Gary’spedagogicalshiftincludedanewwaytoinvolvekidsinsharing,discuss-ing,andrevisingtheirwriting.Hestretchedhis thinkingaboutwritinginways

Shannon Pella

95

hehadnotdonebeforehislessonstudyexperience.Byinvestigatingstudentcol-laborationandtheuseofvoiceinwriting,Garyemergedwithnewknowledgeforteachingandlearningwriting.Theseactivitieswereasignificantshiftawayfromhisprevioususeofwritinggroupsforrote,predeterminedfeedbackcriteria,whichoftenfocusedonpunctuation,spelling,andmechanics.ThistypeofshiftwasalsoinstantiatedforLaura,wholearnedtobalanceteacher-directedwritinginstructionwithactivitiesthatencouragedcriticalthinkingforandaboutwriting.Thefollow-ingexcerptfromawrittenreflectionattheendoflessonstudyillustratedLaura’spedagogicalshift:

InthebeginningoftheyearIstartedwithaveryformulaicapproachtowriting...thenthestudentstookonthatroleoftheevaluator.Ithinkthiswashugely,hugelypowerful.Ithinktheydon’tgetenoughchancestoreallythinkaboutwriting...andIthinkthatwasaverypowerfulthing.Thatwasahugelessonforme....Ineededtogivethemthatpower,thatchancetothinkaboutwriting....Insteadofjusttellingthem[students]whattolookfor,nowIamputtingupdifferentmodelsofsentencesandIamaskingstudents,“Whatistheauthortryingtoconvey?”—Ilikeseeingwhatstudentsextractfirstbeforewegoanyfurther.Iwillalwaysmakethistypeofcriticalthinkingapartofmywriting.

Throughoutthelessonstudycycles,Lauraincludedmoreopen-endedopportunitiesforstudentstochoosetheirownformatstoorganizetheirwritingbyanalyzingavarietyoftextstructures.ThiswasaclearshiftforLauraawayfromateacher-directedapproachtowardamoreinquiry-oriented,thinkingapproachtoteachingandlearningwriting.

Elizabeth.SimilartoGaryandLaura,Elizabethshiftedfromatightlystructuredapproachtoteachingwritingtowardamoreintegratedliteracypedagogythatincludedreading,speaking,listening,languageuse,art,music,movement,andtechnology:

Beforelessonstudy,Ifeltmostcomfortablewithresponsetoliterature,buttheessaysItaughtwerestrictlyformulatedwitharigidoutline.ThroughthelessonstudyIhavebeenexposedtoandencouragedtopresentacademicwritinginmoreaccessible,engaging,andmeaningfulways....Nowmylessonsincludegallerywalks,art,podcasts,picturebooks,music,andmeaningfulgroupwork.

ThestrategiesElizabethdescribedwerepartofherrecognitionthatwritingwasbeyondthetextandsentencelevel—thatwritingisalsoaboutthinking—andthatmanystrategiesthatsupportthinkingaremultimodalandinteractive.Anemphasisonthemultipleintelligencesandapproachestoteachingtoandfromavarietyofwaysofknowingisamongthetopicsthataregroundedinresearchonteachingandlearning(Gardener,2006).

Rachel.Rachelalsoshared the recognition thatkidsneedopportunities tomove,listentomusic,viewartandothermedia,andinteractinavarietyofways.Rachelstatedherconcernearlyinthelessonstudythatshestruggledtoprovide


96

opportunitiesthatbothchallengedandsupportedherEnglishlearners.Earlyinthelessonstudy,Rachelcommunicatedherconcernsaboutoverlyscaffoldedwritinginstruction.Rachelexpressed,“Ithinkmykidshitawallbecauseeverythingissostructuredandsometimestheirvoiceandeventheirideasgetsquashed.”Fur-thermore,Rachelexpressed,“Mykids[allofwhomareEnglishlearners]allhavecriticalthinkingskills,theyneedtocollaborateandproblemsolve,butwhentheycometomeitisthefirsttimeintheirlivesthattheyevergottodothatinschool.”Rachelsoughttobalancelanguagesupportsandthinkingchallengesthroughoutthethreeyearsofthelessonstudy,andherquesttodosowasevidentinnearlyeverylessonstudycycle.Forexample,inaninterviewattheendofthefirstyearofthelessonstudy,Racheldescribedthepedagogicalshiftsshehadmadeatthatpoint:

ThemoreItakeawayscaffolding,themoretheystruggle,butI’mOKwiththat...it’sgoingtobealotofpractice—metakingawayscaffolding,themstruggling,mecomingback,andseeingwhatthey’restrugglingwith,andsaying,let’stryitagain.BecauseIfeelifIconstantlygivethemthatscaffold,they’llneverhavetheexperi-encestheyneed,ontheirown...puttingitalltogetherontheirown.

Thisexcerpt illustrates theshiftawayfromoverlyscaffolded interventions likesentence starters, templates, and outlines. Rachel progressively designed moreopportunitiesforstudentstointeractwitheachotherandengagevariouslearningmodalities.Forexample,towardtheendofthesecondyearofthelessonstudy,Rachelpresentedalessonthatwasobservedbythelessonstudyteam.ThelessonchallengedherEnglishlearnerstothinkcriticallyaboutthewaysauthorssupportedtheirclaimswithvarioustypesofevidence.Studentsmovedaroundtheclassroominwritinggroupsandengagedinvariousstations.Eachstationhadatypeoftext:speeches,worksofart,politicalcartoons,images,musiclyrics,editorials,blogs,magazines,andmedianewssources.Ateachstation,studentsanalyzedtheauthors’claimsandchoicesofevidencetosupporttheclaims.Rachelreflectedonwhythatteachingexperiencewaspivotalforher:

IwantedthemtofeelcomfortableandfreeandopenandIwantedthemtoreallyfeellikeitisallfocusedonthem—theirideasfromexploringandinvestigat-ing.. . .Mymodelingstrategywastogetkidstogetotherkidstogivetheiropinions...soIwentaroundduringtheactivityandmodeledwaystoaskforothers’ideas....Inoticedthatmygroupwiththreegirlsandoneboy—theywere[askingeachother]“sowhatdoyouthink?”andthenreallylisteningtoeachother!Thatwasreallyawesome.

ThisexcerptillustratesRachel’sunderstandingthatherEnglishlearnersneededlanguagesupportaswellaschallengingthinking,speaking,andlisteningactivities.Rachel’spedagogicalshiftsinvolvedthegradualreleaseoftightlyscaffoldedap-proachestoteachingandlearningwritingandincreasingherrepertoireofmethodstopromotethinking,sharing,speaking,andflexibilityforherstudents.

Shannon Pella

97

Conclusion

Follow-upinterviewsinspring2013,twoyearsafterthelessonstudyprojectended,revealedthatallfiveparticipatingteachersmaintainedand/orexpandedwhattheylearnedinthelessonstudy.Additionally,duringthetwo-yearperiodafterthelessonstudy,eachparticipantpresentedideasgeneratedbythelessonstudytooutsideaudiences.Inthesummersof2012,2013,and2014,RachelandLaurapresentedweeklongsummerworkshopsthattheyalignedtotheCommonCoreStateStandards(CCSS)fortheEnglishlanguagearts.Theirworkshopsincludedmanyoftheactivi-tiestheytestedinthelessonstudy,includingstudentcollaborativewritinggroupsandmethodstoengagestudentsinmultimodalcriticalthinkingliteracyactivities.Sincethelessonstudy,Taliahasbeenactivelysharingherknowledgeforteachingwritinginculturally,economically,andlinguisticallydiverseclassroomswithotherteachersatherschoolsite.Taliaisalsoahighlyrespectedmentorteacher,asshehostsstudentteachersfromthelocaluniversityteachereducationprogram.Thisisevidencedbytestimonialsprovidedtomebybothherstudentteachersandtheuniversitysupervisorwhoplacesandobservesstudentteachersinherclassroom. Atthedateofthispublication,Elizabeth’sschoolsite,withherleadership,hasbecomeahostsiteforregularteacherprofessionaldevelopmentworkshopsaroundintegratingtheartsandtechnologyintowritingandliteracymorebroadly.Sincethelessonstudy,Garyhasbecomeaprincipalandcontinuestonotonlyvaluecollaborationbutprovideregularopportunitiesforadaptedformsoflessonstudyathisschoolsite. It is clear fromnotonly these follow-up interviewsbutalso theplethoraofwaysthattheparticipantshavesharedtheirknowledgewithotherteachersthattheirpedagogicalshiftsweresustainedandgenerative.Eachteacherexpandedhisorherintegratedapproachtoteachingwritingbyshiftingbeyondthenotionofwritingassetsofisolatedskills.Theirlessonscontinuetoincludereading,speaking,listening,andlanguagedevelopmentthroughtextanalysis,gallerywalks,music,artsandtech-nologyintegration,andstudentcollaboration.Lauraexplained,“WhenwemovedtotheCCSS,wedidnotreallyhavetochangemuch....Wewantstudentstobeabletogobeyondthetextandtoreturntothetext—whateverthetextmaybe:print,video,podcast,artwork,song—andtociteevidencetosupporttheirclaims.” EventhoughvoiceisnotmentionedintheCCSSforEnglishlanguagearts,allfiveteachersreportedtheircontinuedattentiontoteachingstudentshowtoanalyzevoiceinothers’writingandhowtoexpresstheirownvoicesinavarietyofways.The following excerpts from interviews with Elizabeth and Gary illustrate thesustainabilityofthelessonstudyprocessanditspromiseasamodelfordevelopingaknowledgebaseforteachingwriting:

ELIZABETH:Idon’tthinkthatIcanoverselltheimpactthatthelessonstudyhadonmeandmyteaching.Iamstillteachingvoice.Iconnectvoicetowordchoiceandsentencevariety—andstyle—thosethingsleadtovoice.Istillusewritinggroups—infactmywholeEnglishdepartmentusesthemnow.


98

ThefollowingexcerptfromaninterviewwithGarytwoyearsafterthelessonstudyfurtherillustratesthispoint:

GARY:Mymaintake-awayfromthelessonstudywasthatourstudentsneedop-portunitiestothinkandtowriteandtowritedeeplyaboutthingstheycareandarepassionateabout.Standardsornostandards—theyneedtofindtheirvoice,notjustthestyleoftheirwordsortheirwordchoicebuttheactualideasbehindthem.Theyneedtobeexposedtobigideas,hugeconcepts,andgrapplewithhowtoexplaintheiropinions.Thereisn’taprofessionaldevelopmentmeetingorworkshopIgotowhereIdon’tmakeaconnectionbacktoourlessonstudyandtheimportanceofteachersworkingtogether,collaborating,andthenreevaluating—together!Infact,we’vesetupourentireprofessionaldevelopmentcalendartobuildinasmuchgrade-levelcollaborationaspossible.

Theseinterviews,twoyearslater,uncoveredthatparticipatingteacherssustainedaninterestinthetopicstheyinvestigatedinthelessonstudy,forexample,studentcollaborativewritinggroups,multimodalactivitiestoencouragethinkingforandaboutwriting,andsupportingstudentstounderstandandfindtheirvoiceforwrit-ing.Furthermore,thesefindingssuggestthatpractice-basedcollaborativeinquirymodels,likelessonstudy,affordopportunitiesforteacherstoengageinpedagogi-calreasoningandaction.Theseprocessesandpracticesaffordopportunitiesforteacherstomakethetypesofpedagogicalshiftsnecessarytosupportallstudentstothriveinschool.Top-downinformationtransfermodelsontheirownhavelimiteddeliverables.Practice-basedmodels,conversely,havethepotential tomaximizeopportunitiesforteacherstoinvestigatehowtoteachand,intheprocess,makepowerfulandlastingpedagogicalshifts.

Discussion

Inthecurrentageofnewstandards,forexample,theCCSS,theNextGenerationScienceStandards,andrevisedstatestandardsforEnglishlanguagedevelopment,thereisaclearneedtodesigneffectiveteacherlearningcontexts.Moreover,ifthesenewstandardsaretohaveapositiveimpactonstudents,teachersmustlearnhowtofacilitatestudents’participationinclassroomactivitiesanddiscoursesthatreflectthepracticesofeachcontentdiscipline(Hakuta,Santos,&Fang,2013;Lee,Quinn,&Valdes,2013).Teacherswillneedrelevantandauthenticopportunitiestolearnhowtofostertheuseanddevelopmentofstudents’linguisticresourcesforlearningandfordemonstratinglearning(Bunch,2013).Additionally,adoptingtheCCSSindiverseschoolsettingsincludeslearninghowtochallengeandsupportstudentswithspecialneedsandstudentswhoidentifyacrossmultiplespecialeducationandothercategories(Constable,Grossi,Moniz,&Ryan,2013). Withorwithoutnewstandards,thechallengefacingteachereducationandprofessionaldevelopmentisconsiderable:todesigncontextsthataffordopportuni-tiestoengageinpedagogicalreasoningandaction.Attendingaclass,awebinar,

Shannon Pella

99

training,orevenaworkshopthatincludesahighlevelofactiveparticipationisvaluableforteachers.Inthesetypesoftransmissionmodels,high-leveragepeda-gogicalshiftsareadvocated.However,tomakesuchpedagogicalshifts,practice-basedmodelsofferaclearadvantage.Nomatterthefociofanyparticularteachereducationorin-serviceprofessionaldevelopmentprogram,theintendedoutcomesarethesame:toaffordopportunitiesforteacherstomakethepedagogicalshiftsnecessarytoadvancestudentlearning.Findingsfromthispresentstudysuggestthatpractice-basedteacherprofessionaldevelopmentmodelsholdgreatpromiseformakinglastingpedagogicalshiftsandforincorporatingpedagogicalreasoningandactionintothedailypracticesofteachers.

ReferencesBunch,G.C.(2013).Pedagogicallanguageknowledge:Preparingmainstreamteachersfor

Englishlearnersinthenewstandardsera.Review of Research in Education, 37,298-371.doi:10.3102/0091732X12461772

Chokshi,S.,&Fernandez,C.(2004).ChallengestoimportingJapaneselessonstudy:Con-cerns,misconceptions,andnuances.Phi Delta Kappan, 85(7),520-525.

Cochran-Smith,M.,&Lytle,S.L.(2009).Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.

Constable,S.,Grossi,B.,Moniz,A.,&Ryan,L.(2013).MeetingtheCommonCoreStateStandardsforstudentswithautism:Thechallengeforeducators.Teaching Exceptional Children, 45(3),6-13.

Darling-Hammond,L.(1989).Accountabilityforprofessionalpractice.Teachers College Record, 91(1),60-80.

Darling-Hammond,L. (2002).Learning to teach for social justice.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3),300-314.doi:10.1177/0022487105285962

Desimone,L.M.(2009).Improvingimpactstudiesofteachers’professionaldevelopment:Towardbetterconceptualizationsandmeasures.Educational Researcher, 38(3),181-199.doi:10.3102/0013189X08331140

DuFour,R.,&Eaker,R.(1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement.Alexandria,VA:AssociationforSupervisionandCurriculumDevelopment.

Elbow,P.(1973).Writing without teachers.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.Fletcher,R.(1993).What a writer needs.Portsmouth,NH:Heinemann.Gardener,H.(2006).Multiple intelligences: New horizons.NewYork:BasicBooks.Graves,D.(1983).Writing: Teachers and children at work.Portsmouth,NH:Heinemann.Grossman,P.,Wineburg,S.,&Woolworth,S.(2001).Towardatheoryofteachercommunity.

Teachers College Record, 103(6),942-1012.Hakuta,K.,Santos,M.,&Fang,Z.(2013).Challengesandopportunitiesforlanguagelearn-

inginthecontextoftheCCSSandtheNGSS.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56,451-454.doi:10.1002/JAAL.164

Hiebert,J.,Gallimore,R.,&Stigler,J.W.(2002).Aknowledgebasefortheteachingprofes-


100

sion:Whatwoulditlooklikeandhowcanwegetone?Educational Researcher 31(5),3-15.doi:10.3102/0013189X031005003

Hillocks,G.(1999).Ways of thinking, ways of teaching.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.Hillocks,G.(2003).The testing trap: How state writing assessments control learning.New

York:TeachersCollegePress.Huot,B.(2002).(Re) Articulating writing assessment for teaching and learning.Logan,

UT:UtahStatePress.Johns,A.(1997).Text, role, and context: Developing academic literacies.Cambridge,UK:

CambridgeUniversityPress.Lattimer,H.(2003).Thinking through genre: Units of study in reading and writing work-

shops.Portland,ME:Stenhouse.Lee,O.,Quinn,H.,&Valdes,G.(2013).ScienceandlanguageforEnglishlanguagelearners

inrelationtonextgenerationsciencestandardsandwithimplicationsforCommonCoreStateStandardsforEnglishlanguageartsandmathematics.Educational Researcher, 42,223-233.doi:10.3102/0013189X13480524

Lemke,J.L.(1997).Cognition,context,andlearning;Asocialsemioticperspective.InD.Kirshner&J.A.Whitson(Eds.),Situated cognition theory: Social, neurological, and semiotic perspectives(pp.37-57).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.

Lewis,C.,&Hurd,J.(2011).Lesson study step by step: How teacher learning communities improve instruction.Portsmouth,NH:Heinemann.

Lewis,C.C.,Perry,R.R.,Friedkin,S.,&Roth,J.R.(2012).Improvingteachingdoesim-proveteachers:Evidencefromlessonstudy.Journal of Teacher Education, 63,368-375.doi:10.1177/0022487112446633

Lewis,C.,Perry,R.,&Hurd,J.(2004).Adeeperlookatlessonstudy.Educational Leader-ship, 61(5),6-11.

Lewis, C., Perry, R., & Murata,A. (2006). How should research contribute to instruc-tionalimprovement?Thecaseoflessonstudy.Educational Researcher, 35(3),3-14.doi:10.3102/0013189X035003003

Lieberman,A.,&Miller,L.(2008).Teachers in professional communities: Improving teach-ing and learning.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.

Lieberman,A.,&Wood,D.R. (2003).Inside the National Writing Project: Connecting network learning and classroom teaching.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.

Lincoln,Y.,&Guba,E.(1985).Naturalistic inquiry.NewburyPark,CA:Sage.Marrongelle,K.,Sztajn,P.,&Smith,M.(2013).Scalingupprofessionaldevelopmentin

an era of common state standards. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(3), 202-211.doi:10.1177/0022487112473838

McLaughlin,M.W.,&Talbert,J.E.(2006).Building school-based teacher learning com-munities: Professional strategies to improve student achievement.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.

Merriam,S.(2003).Qualitative research and case study applications in education.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

Miles,M.B.,&Huberman,A.M.(1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook(2nded.).NewburyPark,CA:Sage.

Pella,S.(2011).Asituativeperspectiveondevelopingwritingpedagogyinateacherprofes-sionallearningcommunity.Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(1),107-125.

Pella,S.(2012).Whatshouldcountasdatafordatadriveninstruction?Towardcontextual-izeddata-inquirymodelsforteachereducationandprofessionaldevelopment.Middle

Shannon Pella

101

Grades Research Journal, 7(1),57-75.Pella,S.(2015).Learningtoteachwritingintheageofstandardizationandaccountability:

Towardanequitywritingpedagogy.Teaching/Writing: The Journal of Writing Teacher Education, 4(1).

Romano,T.(2004).Thepowerofvoice.Educational Leadership, 62(2),20-30.Shulman,L.S.(1987).Knowledgeandteaching:Foundationsofanewreform.Harvard

Educational Review, 57(1),1-22.Stoll,L.,Bolam,R.,McMahon,A.,Wallace,M.,&Thomas,S.(2006).Professionallearning

communities:Areviewoftheliterature.Journal of Educational Change, 7(4),1-38.doi:10.1007/s10833-006-0001-8

Wayne,A.J.,Yoon,K.S.,Zhu,P.,Cronen,S.,&Garet,M.S.(2008).Experimentingwithteacherprofessionaldevelopment:Motivesandmethods.Educational Researcher, 37,469-479.

Wei,R.C.,Darling-Hammond,L.,Andree,A.,Richardson,N.,&Orphanos,S. (2009).Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the U.S. and abroad.Dallas,TX:NationalStaffDevelopmentCouncil.

Whitcomb, J., Borko, H., & Liston, D. (2009). Growing talent: Promising professionaldevelopment models and practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 207–212.doi:10.1177/0022487109337280

Documents

Pedagogical Reasoning and Action - ERIC · models are effective, but ... Pedagogical Reasoning and Action Pedagogical shifts ... in which a teacher shifts from an initial comprehension