Supported Collaborative Teacher Inquiry

David SlavitTamara Holmlund Nelson

Washington State Universitydslavit@wsu.edu

Support for this work has been provided by a Mathematics Science Partnership grant from the US Department of Education and by the National Science Foundation Grant

ESI-0554579. The opinions expressed are solely those of the authors.

Defining the “Crisis”Large percentages of Washington students in Grade 4, 7, and 10 do not score a 3 or more on the WASL.

More than half do.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Washington State Report Card, WA OSPI, 2006

Defining the “Crisis”NAEP shows Washington is doing favorably vs. rest of U.S.It is not true that most U.S. students lack a basic knowledge of math

NAEP Trend Data Scale Score (0-500) Achievement Level (%) Grade Year WA Avg. Nat. Av g. Basic Proficient Advanced 4 1996 225 222 67 21 1 2003 238 234 81 36 5 2005 242 237 84 42 6 8 1996 276 271 67 26 4 2003 281 276 72 32 6 2005 285 278 75 36 9

Basic Partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each grade.

Proficient Solid academic performance for each grade assessed. Students reaching this level have demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter, including subject-matter knowledge, application of such knowledge to real-world situations, and analytical skills appropriate to the subject matter.

Advanced Superior performance.

The Nation’s Report Card, National Center for Education Statistics, 2005

Defining the “Crisis”TIMMS shows Washington is on par with the rest of world

Linking The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and The Third International Math and Science Study (TIMSS): Eighth-Grade Results, National Center for Education Statistics, 1998

If the public school students in Washington (and Oregon) participated in TIMSS, how would their average performance in mathematics compare to that of students in the 41 nations that took TIMSS at grade 8? Number of countries with TIMMS scores: State Higher than state Same as state Lower than state Washington 12 19 10 North Dakota 6 17 18 Vermont 8 21 12 New Mexico 27 9 5 Mississippi 34 2 5 District of Columb. 38 2 1

Defining the “Crisis”Qualities of PD that intensify the effects on teacher

instruction:1) Ongoing teacher networks or study groups rather than workshops or conferences2) Consistency with teachers’ goals, other activities, and materials and policies3) Same-subject, grade, or school group participation

Garet , M., Porter , A., Desimone , L., Birman , B., &Yoon, K.S. (2001). What makes professional developmentt effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Education Research Journal , 38(4), 915-945.

The PD math and science teachers normally receive:1) Average time span of activity is less than one week2) Median number of contact hours per PD activity is 153) Most activities had no theme or coherence, focus on content, or active learning opportunities4) Most activities had no group participation

Characteristics of Effective PD Have established norms and dispositions that allow

for trust building and risk-taking Grounded in the work teachers do in support of

student learning goals Engage teachers in inquiry and reflection Are collaborative, supported, and ongoing Are meaningfully connected to other school and

district initiatives

Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (1999), Hawley and Valli (1999), Little et al. (2003)

Defining the “Crisis”The majority of teacher PD is curriculum alignment activity, training on a specific curriculum or instructional technique, and content knowledge development

Teachers have little time to inquire about and reflect on their own instructional practice, or on their students’ work “The simple fact is that the structures for ongoing community do not exist in the American High School (Grossman et al., p. 947).”

Defining the “Crisis”Using TIMMS data, Jim Stigler and Jim Hiebert argued that there exists a “teaching gap” between the U.S. and some other nations

Could it be that there is actually a professional development gap?

Some models of PD based on collaborative teacher inquiry Communities of practice Professional learning communities (PLCs) Teacher teams (vertical teams, horizontal

teams) Coaching (of groups) Lesson study Peer observation Book study Collaborative action research

PRiSSM - Partnership for Reform in Secondary Science and MathematicsPartnership: WSUV, 22 schools in 6 districts,

ESD 112, support from ESD 114

Funding: US DOE Title IIB through Washington State OSPI

Goals: 1. Establish a vision of HQLT2. Improve student learning3. Development of PLCs4. Plan for continuous improvement

PRiSSM: Year 1 (June, 2004 – August, 2005) 45 Teacher Leaders from 6 districts

Summer academy, August, 2004

Academy focus on collaborative inquiry: protocols for LASW exploring high quality learning and teaching identifying an inquiry focus based on existing data learning to be a PLC & to facilitate a group

Cross-disciplinary, cross-grade level PLCs

Facilitation throughout year

Further information on year 1: Slavit, David & Nelson, Tamara (2006). Dialogic teacher change: Two cases of supported collaborative inquiry. Working Papers on Culture, Education and Human Development, 2(2). http://www.uam.es/otros/ptcedh/

PRiSSM: Years 2&3 (Aug, 2005 – June, 07)

45 original LTs form 35 new PLCs with 100+ colleagues

Summer academy for LTs LTs lead introductory sessions (2-8 hrs) for

colleagues in each district PLCs determine when they meet, how

often, and their inquiry focus Project facilitators continue to work with

PLCs

PRiSSMProfessional Learning Communities

Characterized by trust, sharing, participation, fellowship, reflection, and continuous learning and improvement

Teacher-initiated questions for inquiry across math/science and middle/high school

Teachers in the PLC define the scope and focus of their PD, which emerge from and in support of their collaborative inquiry

Support of teacher inquiry provided by facilitators and other PRiSSM staff (including time)

Support to engage teachers and their inquiry work in broader educational contexts (e.g., go “school-wide” with PLCs, “vision up” the teachers ideas)

PRiSSM Findings: General Teachers need dedicated time to conduct collaborative inquiry

on teaching and learning Teachers need technical support for doing inquiry work Teacher buy-in requires specific approaches and techniques;

teacher-driven inquiry is a key to buy-in Teacher collaboration can be enjoyable Collaborative teacher inquiry is mentally, physically, and

emotionally taxing Difficulties and assumptions about measuring impact on

student learning; emphasis on large-scale achievement data Teacher work does not always immediately mesh with larger

initiatives and contexts; but some schools and districts also adapt to and embrace the inquiry work of teachers

North Evergreen PLC Collaborative Inquiry Plan

High Quality Teaching & Learning Focus: Increasing our understanding ofstudents’ thinking through the quality of student questions.

Inquiry Problem/Question: What types of strategies can I use to encourage highquality questions in our classrooms?

Information Source Additional Detail

Classroom ObservationData

What classroom actions/events should we look at? How should we collectdata on this?

Video ourselves and record student questions and the types of strategiesused during those questions.

Student WorkData

What type(s) of student work should we examine together? What protocolshould we use?

Analyze student dialogue and categorize into the different levels ofquestioning according to Bloom’s Taxonomy and other such research.

Research

What do we want/need to know more about?

Journal ArticlesProfessional Development opportunities

Questions What are high quality questions and how do I identify them? What are some specific strategies to improve them?

Student Question

Question is Off Topic

Question is On Topic

Question Does Not Make Sense

Question Makes Sense

Question Has Already Been

Covered in Class

Question Expands Students’ Current

Knowledge

Makes Connections With Former

Concepts

Makes a Bridge to Future Concepts

LEVEL 1Question

LEVEL 2Question

LEVEL 3Question

LEVEL 4Question

North Evergreen Question Dichotomy

The Power of Teachers Working With Teachers (March 2005) Erica: I think it’s getting teachers together to be open enough to discuss

their practice and try to improve their teaching. I think validating how important it is by creating such great opportunities to do it rather than just saying “we really think you guys should get together and have conversations.” Like, it’s important enough to their goals that they are creating lots of opportunities for us to do that.

Sam: In a very specific way. Erica: Uh hum. Karen: Well, it just seems that teachers have taught in isolation for so long,

and just the whole professional development piece. You know, we go to workshops or we go to classes but, um, fortunately I work in a building where we do take data from our students and, even though our staff meetings I sometimes dread. But because, we work, and it is professional development and it’s based on student data and it’s real and it’s meaningful to us, it’s not somebody else’s stuff, and yeah yeah yeah, you know, it’s our own students that we work with day in and day out. And we get to see the growth. I mean, it’s exciting, that piece of it, and it’s very focused.

The Need for Support Teacher collaborative inquiry is possible without support that is

external to the teacher team. A dedicated, knowledgeable, passionate, and focused group of

teachers can unite through a common line of inquiry to address important instructional and curricular concerns.

Teachers can meet outside of the school day in support of this process.

Teachers can collectively facilitate the logistics of regular meeting times and the maintaining of quality, inquiry-focused interactions.

Teachers can provide each other with a critical lens necessary to move the inquiry forward.

But these are extremely difficult and demanding challenges to face, particularly in our current era of high-stakes teacher accountability.

Defining “Support” - Two Key Areas

1. Support for the teacher collaborative inquiry process

2. Enhancing the interface between the teacher inquiry and broader educational contexts

SCI Enhances Teachers PD: TimeFirst, support can increase the amount of time available to teachers to enact inquiry. This can be done in direct ways through the provision of specific time in the school day and year for collaborative inquiry, or it can occur with the presence of a dedicated facilitator responsible for supporting the logistics and facilitation of meeting times and schedules, freeing teachers up for responsibilities closer to the inquiry focus.

SCI Enhances Teachers PD: The Inquiry ProcessSecond, individuals who provide intellectual support can draw on resources to increase teacher awareness of existing research, suggest and oversee specific types of data collection and inquiry approaches, and provide a critical lens to the work of the teacher team designed to ensure reflection and critical analysis in the collaborative inquiry process.

SCI Enhances Teachers PD: Enhanced VisionThird, supported collaborative inquiry can influence teachers’ abilities to vision, challenge beliefs, and broaden the critical lens framing the work.

SCI Enhances Teachers PD: Teacher CommunityFourth, support can help to establish a productive set of collaborative norms and inquiry goals as well as assist in the actual logistics of the inquiry process.

SCI Enhances Teachers PD: Interface With Larger ContextsFifth, support can allow teachers to couch their inquiry in larger initiatives (School Improvement Plans, District Initiatives, Large-Scale Assessments), but also construct conduits for positioning the teachers and teacher inquiry to impact larger educational contexts.

Often Overlooked Factors

Support is needed for the support providers Teachers need support for the public-valuing of

their work Teachers can hold naïve views of “data” Supported collaborative teacher inquiry requires

enormous amounts of time

WA House Bill 2327, Senate Bill 6023

Current discussion in Washington to replace WASL with skills-based, objective test.

Educational problems will not go away until the way state and federal governments pay for education is changed.

“The real work is not about testing, it’s about teaching and it’s about funding our education system. If we do not change the focus of our funding I fear we will be in the same situation in five years.”

WA State Rep. Ross Hunter, MedinaMarch 13, 2007, The Columbian, p. A4

It is difficult to take the notion of teacher professionalism seriously when

teachers lack the time and support necessary to act professional.

ThankYou!

David Slavitdslavit@wsu.edu