Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Helena Public Schools
June 2014, Revised August 2015
More Students Learning More!
Professional Learning Communities
2
“Helena public schools believes in collaborative communication and is strongly committed to Professional Learning Communities (PLCs). In an effort to ensure timely communication and to facilitate effective implementation of PLC initiatives, we have designed our own online PLC work space. It is the expectation that all staff develop a working knowledge of the share site and work collaboratively to meet the needs of all students. Our main goal is simply to have more students learning more.”
Mr. Greg Upham
Assistant Superintendent
Helena Public Schools
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 4
WHAT IS A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY?
CHAPTER 2 6
WHY IMPLEMENT A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY?
CHAPTER 3 10
HOW TO CREATE A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY
CHAPTER 4 23
HOW TO DO THE WORK OF A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY
CHAPTER 5 38
RESOURCES • GETTING THE MOST OUT OF COMMON ASSESSMENTS • WORK TOGETHER: BUT ONLY IF YOU WANT TO • RIGOR/RELEVANCE FRAMEWORK • A SHIFT IN SCHOOL CULTURE: COLLECTIVE COMMITMENTS FOCUS ON CHANGE THAT BENEFITS
STUDENT LEARNING
4
CHAPTER 1: WHAT IS A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY?
What Is a PLC?
5
WHAT IS A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY?
A Professional Learning Community (PLC) “is an ongoing process in which educators work collaboratively in recurring cycles of collective inquiry and action research to achieve better results for the students they serve" (DuFour et al. 11).
The process begins with norm setting and establishing an accountability protocol and is driven by continuously reflecting on the four critical questions (CQ). Each PLC team’s work will vary depending on which one of the critical questions it is pursuing.
The Questions As They Relate to -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
The PLC Process
CQ#1 – What do we want students to learn? (essential standards)
Teamwork focused on aligning curriculum with standards (I can statements); creating a common scope and sequence
CQ#2 – How will we know if they’ve learned it? (assessment)
Teamwork focused on creating and giving common assessments (pre-, formative and summative) and analyzing the data by student
CQ#3 – What will we do if they haven’t learned it? (intervention)
Teamwork focused on bringing student work to the PLC meetings, sharing effective strategies, researching best practices and coordinating interventions
CQ#4 – What will we do if they’ve demonstrated proficiency? (enrichment)
Teamwork focused on bringing student work to the PLC meetings, sharing effective strategies, researching best practices and implementing deeper learning
(critical questions in chart modified from “PLC at Work”)
6
CHAPTER 2: WHY IMPLEMENT A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY?
Why Implementa
PLC?
7
WHY A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY?
According to Thomas Sergiovanni in his book Strengthening the Heartbeat: Leading and Learning Together in Schools, “When people gather together to…commit themselves to ideas, their relationships change ~ they have made promises to each other and are likely to feel morally obliged to keep their promises” (32).
8
WHY A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY?
The teams in a PLC engage in collective inquiry into both best practices in teaching AND best practices in learning.
“Inherent to a PLC are a persistent disquiet with the status quo and a constant search for a better way to achieve goals and accomplish the purpose of the organization. Systematic processes engage each member of the organization in an ongoing cycle of the following:”
“The goal is not simply to learn a new strategy, but instead to create conditions for perpetual learning ~ an environment in which innovation and experimentation are viewed not as tasks to be accomplished or projects to be completed but as ways of conducting day-to-day business, forever.
Members of a PLC realize that all of their efforts…must be assessed on the basis of results rather than intentions.” (DuFour et al. 13)
(graphic created by Dr. Deb Jacobsen, Hawthorne School Principal, using information from Learning by Doing)
9
ORGANIZATIONS THAT ENDORSE THE PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY MODEL
• American Federation of Teachers • Annenberg Institute for School Reform • California Teachers Association • Center for Performance-Based Assessment • Center for Teaching Quality • Council of Chief State School Officials • ETS Assessment Training • Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium • The MacKenzie Group • Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory • National Association of Elementary School Principals • National Association of Secondary School Principals • National Board of Professional Teaching Standards • National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future • National Center for Restructuring Education, Schools, and Teaching • National College for Leadership of Schools and Children’s Services • National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education • National Council of Teachers of English • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics • National Education Association • National Middle School Association • National Science Education Leadership Association • National Science Teachers Association • National Staff Development Council • North Central Association, Commission on Accreditation and School Improvement • North Central Regional Educational Laboratory • The Partnership for 21st Century Schools • Research for Action • Research for Better Teaching, Inc. • Southwest Educational Development Laboratory • The Wallace Foundation • WestEd
(“PLC at Work”)
10
CHAPTER 3: HOW TO CREATE A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY
How to Create a PLC
11
DAY ONE: HOW TO BUILD A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY
• Step 1: Complete the PLC Year 2 Introduction (about 15 minutes) o Click on the Moodle link sent to you in the PLC Year 2 Introduction email. o Log in to Moodle using one team member’s district user ID and password (the same
used for email). o If the first video does not appear, click on “Enrol Me.” Then click on “PLC Year
2 Introduction.” o After watching each video, answer the questions that follow. (Click the message
underneath the video.) The next video will then come up automatically. (There are four short videos.)
• Step 2: Select a Team Liaison o See page 16 for the position description.
• Step 3: Review/Update/Establish Team Norms
o It is essential that team norms be developed at the first team meeting. o There is a document in the PLC handbook that gives guidance for this on pages 13-
14, and there are norms examples on page 15.
• Step 4: Upload the Norms to SharePoint o Go to Sharepoint and find your team’s page.* Create a New Document.
*If you have a new team that does not yet have a team page on SharePoint, please email your norms document to your building’s BLC. They will be uploaded after the team page is created.
o Title your document with the name of your team (6th Grade ELA, for example) followed by the word “Norms.”
o State the name of your team liaison. o List all members of the team, including people who may be on another team most
of the time but who also teach that subject/grade level; these people will have access to secure documents your team will post, including assessments.
o List the agreed upon team norms.
12
o View the accountability protocol: see the bottom of page 14 of the PLC handbook, as well as the norms examples on the next page. Then add your team’s accountability protocol after the norms.
• Step 5: Review District Goals o All team members should review the district goals on page 17. School and/or
program goals should also be reviewed.
• Step 6: Begin discussing and planning team work for the first quarter o The district goals, “Four Critical Questions of a PLC” on page 18, and “Critical
Issues for Team Consideration” on pages 19-20 will help with this.
• Step 7: Review 2015-2016 Benchmarking Windows o Review the calendars for benchmark assessments on pages 21-22.
You do not have to complete a Feedback Form or a Team Planning Calendar this week!
13
EXAMPLE: TEAM NORMS A Process for Developing Norms and Examples In order to support PLC teams in developing norms, please feel free to use the following process, as well as the prompts and examples in this document. Please post your norms and accountability protocol on your team’s SharePoint page.
14
(DuFour et al. 137-‐138) Accountability Protocol – Answer the following question: What is our process for holding each other accountable in a respectful and dignified manner?
15
EXAMPLES OF MEETING NORMS Here are several examples from the June 2014 training session with Janel Keating and from OPI. Example #1
Meeting Norms:
1. Honor everyone’s time and follow the agenda. 2. Be prepared. 3. Step up, step back. 4. Soft on people, tough on ideas. 5. Put away phones and distractors to focus on the tasks. 6. Laugh often! 7. Maintain student-‐centered deliberations. 8. Filter ideas through the students’ perspective.
Example #2 (4th grade Team Norms 2012-‐13)
1. We will start and end each meeting on time. 2. We will make decisions based on consensus after listening to all ideas. 3. We will come prepared for the agreed upon task. 4. We will support each other, both professionally and emotionally. 5. We will advocate for all 4th grade students. 6. We will keep confidential our discussions and comments. 7. We will share responsibilities fairly. 8. We will keep all discussions student and/or data driven. Accountability Protocol: We agree to quickly go over the norms at the beginning of each meeting and self-‐assess. We agree to hold each other accountable by bringing concerns to the team member’s/members’ attention and asking how we can support him/her/them.
Example #3 (3rd grade Team Norms)
1. We will begin and end meetings on time. 2. We will encourage participation of each team member by providing each member an opportunity to share ideas on each topic of discussion. Each member will actively listen and respond respectfully. 3. We will keep team decided issues confidential. 4. We will agree to abide by decisions made by consensus. 5. We come prepared by bringing needed materials (i.e. binders/student work, etc.). 6. We will communicate questions and concerns directly with team members. 7. We will keep bird-‐walking to a minimum. Accountability Protocol: (If/When norms are violated) – Norms will be reviewed with the team, and the violator will be given the opportunity to own up. In cases of repeat offenses, two or more team members will approach the violator(s) to address the repeated offense and offer assistance.
16
2015-16 TEAM LIAISON POSITION DESCRIPTION
A high-performing collaborative team of teachers is the heart and soul of a school that functions as a professional learning community, and a highly effective team is facilitated by an effective team liaison. Each team will select a team liaison at the beginning of the school year, and teams can choose to rotate this position by quarter or semester.
The educators who serve in this important role are expected to coordinate the work of their teams. Each team liaison is responsible for making sure the team has completed and uploaded required forms and documents in SharePoint each week. The team liaison is the contact person for the team with the BLC/administrator.
In short, the team liaison serves as the key communications link between the team and the BLC/building administrator.
17
HELENA PUBLIC SCHOOLS DISTRICT GOALS 2015-16
The PLC goals for the 2015-16 school year build on the PLC work that was done by teams in the 2014-15 school year in order to move the process forward.
The goals are as follows:
1. Develop common units for instruction from scope, sequence, and pacing documents.
2. Identify learning targets and develop common assessments for common units of instruction.
3. Record team/unit assessment data using an item analysis form (e.g. district form, Moodle form, curriculum-specific form) and evaluate student work.
4. Complete the district TACA form to evaluate the effectiveness of the assessment by using the results from the item analysis and evaluation. Use the results to discuss and modify instruction.
18
FOUR CRITICAL QUESTIONS OF A PLC
1. What do we want students to learn? (essential standards)
2. How will we know if they’ve learned it? (assessment)
3. What will we do if they haven’t learned it? (intervention)
4. What will we do if they’ve demonstrated proficiency? (enrichment)
HPS Plan to Address the Four Critical Questions
Question One: What do we want students to learn? (essential standards)
• • • •
Question Two: How will we know if they’ve learned it? (assessment)
• • •
Question Three: What will we do if they haven’t learned it? (intervention)
• • • •
Question Four: What will we do if they’ve demonstrated proficiency? (enrichment)
• • • •
19
CRITICAL ISSUES FOR TEAM CONSIDERATION
Team Name:______________________________________________________________________________________
Team Members:____________________________________________________________________________________
Use the scale below to indicate the extent to which each of the following statements is true of your team.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Not True of Our Team Our Team Is Addressing True of Our Team
1. __ We have identified team norms and protocols to guide us in working together.
2. __ We have analyzed student achievement data and have established SMART goals that we are working interdependently to achieve.
3. __ Each member of our team is clear on the essential learning of our course in general, as well as the essential learnings of each unit.
4. __ We have aligned the essential learnings with state and district standards and the high-stakes exams required of our students.
5. __ We have identified course content and/or topics that can be eliminated so we can devote more time to essential curriculum.
6. __ We have agreed on how to best sequence the content of the course and have established pacing guides to help students achieve the intended essential learnings.
7. __ We have identified the prerequisite knowledge and skills students need in order to master the essential learnings of our course and each unit in this course.
8. __ We have identified strategies and created instruments to assess whether students have the prerequisite knowledge and skills.
20
9. __ We have developed strategies and systems to assist students in acquiring prerequisite knowledge and skills when they are lacking in those areas.
10. __We have developed frequent common formative assessments that help us to determine each student’s mastery of essential learnings.
11. __ We have established the proficiency standard we want each student to achieve on each skill and concept examined with our common assessments.
12. __ We have developed common summative assessments that help us assess the strengths and weaknesses of our program.
13. __ We have established the proficiency standard we want each student to achieve on each skill and concept examined with our summative assessments.
14. __ We have agreed on the criteria we will use in judging the quality of student work related to the essential learnings of our course, and we practice applying those criteria to ensure consistency.
15. __ We have taught students the criteria we will use in judging the quality of their work and have provided them with examples.
16. __ We evaluate our adherence to and the effectiveness of our team norms at least twice each year.
17. __ We use the results of our common assessments to assist each other in building on strengths and addressing weaknesses as part of a process of continuous improvement designed to help students achieve at higher levels.
18. __ We use the results of our common assessments to identify students who need additional time and support to master essential learnings, and we work within the systems and processes of the school to ensure they receive that support.
(modified from DuFour et al. 130-131)
21
2015-2016 BENCHMARKING WINDOW/DATA RELEASE CALENDARS
22
23
CHAPTER 4: HOW TO DO THE WORK OF A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY
How to Do the Work
of a PLC
24
SETTING THE STAGE FOR THE WORK OF A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY
1. Review the “Bookshelf” on page 25.
2. Review the district definitions on pages 26-28.
3. Review content standards on page 29.
4. Read the “BLC Position Description” on page 30 and the “Central Office” communication flow chart on page 31.
5. Review Scope, Sequence, and Pacing documents on SharePoint (examples on pages 32-33).
6. Begin/continue work on common unit planning.
7. Develop/refine common assessments.
8. Review “Item Analysis” and “Teacher Analysis of Common Assessments” (TACA) form on pages 34-36.
25
UNIT PLANNING: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR TEAMS
26
HELENA PUBLIC SCHOOLS: DEFINITIONS
Standards: State mandated expectations/statements to define what is to be learned (Montana Content Standards)
Essential Standards: Standards necessary for student success – the response to the question, “What must our students learn?” To identify essential standards, the significance of each standard should be assessed according to the following three characteristics: 1) Does it have endurance? 2) Does it have leverage? 3) Does it develop readiness for the next level of learning?
I Can Statements/Learner Targets: What we intend a student to learn
Curriculum: Program approved by local board of trustees to insure standards-based instruction
Unit: Body of instruction that is focused on specific content standards with identified learner targets
Lesson: Daily instructional plans that comprise a unit
Core Curricular Resources: Textbooks and supplementary materials designed to facilitate the delivery of curriculum
Scope and Sequence: The breadth, depth and order of the curriculum to be taught throughout the year
Pacing: Instructional time needed to teach units throughout the school year
Instructional Strategies: All approaches that a teacher may take to actively engage students in learning –drive teachers’ instruction as they work to meet specific learner targets
Fidelity: Use of core curricular resources in conjunction with scope, sequence, and pacing, as identified in the curriculum, to guide instructional practices, consistently and accurately, as they were intended to be used to best meet standards
27
Assessment
A. Benchmark: district assessment, administered two to three times per year, to measure grade-level proficiency and student growth
B. Common: the same assessment (formative/summative), given to all students in a specific course by all teachers of that course, to cover commonly taught/learned information
C. Formative: “The goal of formative assessment is to monitor student learning to provide ongoing feedback that can be used by instructors to improve their teaching and by students to improve their learning. More specifically, formative assessments:
• help students identify their strengths and weaknesses and target areas that need work
• help faculty recognize where students are struggling and address problems immediately
Formative assessments are generally low stakes, which means that they have low or no point value. Examples of formative assessments include asking students to:
• draw a concept map in class to represent their understanding of a topic
• submit one or two sentences identifying the main point of a lecture • turn in a research proposal for early feedback” (“Whys & Hows of
Assessment”)
D. Summative: “The goal of summative assessment is to evaluate student learning at the end of an instructional unit by comparing it against some standard or benchmark.
Summative assessments are often high stakes, which means that they have a high point value. Examples of summative assessments include:
• a midterm exam • a final project
28
• a paper • a senior recital
Information from summative assessments can be used formatively when students or faculty use it to guide their efforts and activities in subsequent courses” (“Whys and Hows of Assessment”).
29
MONTANA STATE STANDARDS
http://opi.mt.gov/Curriculum/CSI/AS.html
• Art • Career and Technology • English Language Arts • English Language Arts Proficiency • Health Enhancement • Library Media • Mathematics • Science • Social Studies • Technology • Traffic Education • Workplace Competencies • World Languages
HELENA PUBLIC SCHOOLS APPROVED CURRICULUM
http://www.helena.k12.mt.us/district/departme/curricul/curricul/index.dhtm
• English • Fine Arts • Health Enhancement • Library Media • Mathematics • Media Literacy • Reading • Science • Social Studies • World Languages • Writing
30
BUILDING LEARNING COORDINATOR POSITION DESCRIPTION
The position of Building Learning Coordinator (BLC) is of critical importance as the Helena School District continues to sharpen its focus on improving student learning levels by implementing professional learning community practices and concepts. The educators who fill these positions will work side-by-side with their principals and closely with teacher teams, coordinating with each team liaison. The BLC will report directly back to the building principal.
The primary function of this position is to enhance student learning in the building to which he/she is assigned. To this end, candidates for the position must have a demonstrated record of exceptional teaching skills as reflected in the learning levels of their students, as well as the recognition and respect of their peers. Simply put, each BLC must be widely viewed as an exceptional teacher and command the respect of those with whom they will work. The BLC’s professional behavior must support all aspects of the district direction.
The BLC will work with teacher teams to review student learning data, analyze student work, lead teams in reflective practice, share with individual teachers and teams proven “best practices” for enhancing student learning, and assist teams in setting and achieving learning based “SMART” goals. BLCs will ensure that teams focus on the critical questions of learning in a manner reflective of the highest quality.
BLCs will also focus on improving the effectiveness of each team. Recognizing that teams, like students, learn at different rates and in different ways, BLCs will model “differentiated teaming,” much like teachers who successfully implement “differentiated instruction” in classrooms. BLCs must understand how effective teams function and how to enhance the capacity of teams. In short, BLCs work side-by-side with their principals and are responsible for helping each team function more efficiently and effectively.
Recognizing that professional development in a school that functions as a professional learning community differs significantly from more traditional schools, the BLC will work with each team to assess the professional development needs and assist the principal in developing a Professional Development Plan for the school. The principal will then present the school’s needs and plans for professional development to the District Leadership Team.
BLCs must demonstrate leadership skills. This includes the ability to facilitate groups of adult learners, build relationships with the building staff, and manage conflict, when necessary, to move the group forward.
Excellent technology and interpersonal skills are essential for this position. BLCs must work well with others, possessing the skills to work with a variety of groups and individuals, while at the same time demonstrating results. They must be models for adult learning, constantly seeking out “best practices” in teaching and learning. Simply put, BLCs must be “students of teaching.
31
32
EXAMPLES – SCOPE, SEQUENCE, AND PACING GUIDES
8th Grade ELA Quarter 1 – 2015/16
Standards (essential in red)
Materials (instruction will flow over into Q2)
Assessment
MCCS RL.8.3 MCCS RL.8.6 MCCS RL.8.7 MCCS RI.8.1 MCCS RI.8.2 MCCS RI.8.5 MCCS RI.8.6 MCCS L.8.1 MCCS L.8.2 MCCS SL.8.2 MCCS W.8.1 ALL YEAR MCCS RL.8.10 MCCS RI.8.10 MCCS L.8.3 MCCS L.8.4 MCCS L.8.6 MCCS W.8.5 MCCS W.8.7 MCCS W.8.9 MCCS W.8.10 MCCS SL.8.1 MCCS SL.8.6
Collection 2 Texts
• "The Tell-‐Tale Heart" Anchor Text • "What is the Horror Genre?" Anchor Text • "The Monkey's Paw" story and film
Collection 2 Close Reads
• "Manmade Monsters" • Short Story by H.P. Lovecraft • "Frankenstein" Poem
Additional Literature
• "The Lottery"
Additional Multi-‐Media
• Mary Shelley video
Options for Teaching Grammar
• Grammar Notes and Tutorials from Collections • Pink Prentice Hall Grammar Book • Giggly Guide to Grammar
Optional Materials
• "The Raven"
Collection texts focused on the Civil War (SS alignment, CRA)
Performance Task: Use Collection 2 performance task for writing assessment, 8.1. Grammar Assessments: teach in context, assess as part of a writing rubric.
33
9th Grade English Quarter 1
Instructional Focus Materials & Resources
Assessments
Montana Common
Core Standards
Literary Terms (Understanding Author’s Style):
* Character (protagonist & antagonist) * Personification * Points of View: 1st person, 2nd person, 3rd person (limited & omniscient) * Theme * Tone * Imagery Grammar, Mechanics, and Usage:
* 8 Parts of Speech * Sentence Errors (Fragments /Run-ons) * Apostrophes * Daily Oral Language days 1-40 covering topics of absolute phrases, sentence length, and transitions Mode(s) of Writing:
* Process * Choice mode Timed Writes: * District Writing Assessment practice prompt (ACT) Approximate Time Spent: * 2-3 Weeks
Mandatory Print Materials: Collections Unit 2 * Anchor Text: "I Have a Dream" by MLK * Anchor Text: from "Nobody Turn Me Around" by Charles Euchner * Close Read: Eulogy for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. by Robert F. Kennedy Optional Print Materials (including but not limited to and to be determined by individual teacher): * "Cairo: My City, Our Revolution" by Ahdaf Soueif * "Reading Lolita in Tehran" by Azar Nafisi * "Persepolis 2: The Story of a Return" by Marjan Satrapi * "The Censors" by Luisa Valenzuela * "The Prisoner Who Wore Glasses" by Bessie Head (Close Reader) * See “Addendum” for novel selections Optional Online Resources: * Myhrw.com * Turnitin.com * Google Docs Additional Multi-Media: * Film versions of the stories to be used as comparison Vocabulary: * Everyday Words Lessons 16-19
Common writing prompt
- end of the unit assessment Collections Unit 2 (create/modify prompt - process essay)
CHS writing ideas and standards need to be added to fit the quarter.
District writing assessment process piece (?)
Collection 2 Assessment: Students will engage with end of section questioning based on skills learned reading the texts, not on memorization and fact recall.
Grammar Pretest: Students will complete a grammar pretest covering the necessary aspects that need to be mastered before their junior year of high school.
Grammar Assessment: All students will complete an assessment on their mastery of noun clauses, prepositional phrases, parallel structure, absolute phrases, and sentence length.
Reading Standards for Informational Text
CCSS: RI 1 CCSS: RI 2 CCSS: RI 3 CCSS: RI 4 CCSS: RI 5 CCSS: RI 6 CCSS: RI 7 CCSS: RI 9 Writing Standards:
CCSS: W 2 CCSS: W 3 CCSS: W 3d Language Standards:
CCSS: L 1a CCSS: L 4c MCCS: L 9.1 MCCS: L 9.3 MCCS: L 9.4 MCCS: L 9.5
Speaking and Listening Standards: MCCS: SL 9.1 MCCS: SL 9.2 MCCS: SL 9.3 MCCS: SL 9.6
34
EXAMPLES – ITEM ANALYSIS AND TACA
35
36
37
Works Cited
DuFour, Richard, et al. Learning by Doing: A Handbook for Professional Learning Communities
at Work. 2nd ed. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press, 2010. Print.
“PLC at Work.” Solution Tree. Solution Tree, Inc., 2015. Web. 9 Aug. 2015.
Sergiovanni, Thomas J. Strengthening the Heartbeat: Leading and Learning Together in
Schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004. Print.
“Whys & Hows of Assessment.” Carnegie Mellen University Eberly Center. N.p, n.d. Web.
5 Aug. 2015.
38
CHAPTER 5: RESOURCES
Resources
39
GETTING THE MOST OUT OF COMMON ASSESSMENTS
By Mike Mattos
Principal, Pioneer Middle School
Tustin Unified School District
Tustin, California
Published on the All Things PLC website
ioneer is one of eight schools in the nation featured in the video “The Power of Professional Learning Communities at Work: Bringing the Big Ideas to Life.” Pioneer’s standardized test scores rank first of all the middle schools in Orange County and in the top 1 percent for the state of
California. Additionally, Pioneer was named a California Distinguished School in 2003 and 2007, and is currently a state nominee for National Blue Ribbon recognition.
Like most schools that begin implementing PLC practices, the faculty at Pioneer Middle School learned about the importance of common formative assessments and decided that we would utilize this powerful tool to help us focus on learning. Unfortunately, as time progressed, our departmental teams experienced varied levels of success; some teams felt they gained significant benefits from their common assessments, while other teams were far less enthusiastic with their results.
As principal, my first thought was to question whether every team was truly using common assessments, or were they just going through the motions to appease me. After asking these questions at a faculty meeting, I was pleased to find that every team was frequently administering common assessments—in fact, every team said they also use our site assessment software, which produces powerful reports to analyze the results.
At this point, I was perplexed: If every team was giving common assessments and had access to the same types of disaggregated results, then why were our teams experiencing such varied outcomes? Upon further consideration, I realized that I was asking the wrong question; that is, it was not a question of, “Are we giving common assessments?” but “What are we doing with our common assessment data?” When we discussed this question, we found great differences from team to team, with some teams digging deeply into their common assessment data, and other teams doing almost nothing with the information.
Based upon this revelation, we discussed why we give common assessments, and determined that common assessments provide essential learning information that enabled each team to:
• Identify specifically which students did not demonstrate mastery of essential standard(s): Because we give common assessments to measure student mastery of essential standard(s), common assessments should identify students that need additional help and support. Additionally, if an assessment measures more than one essential standard, then the test results must provide more than an over-all score for each student, but also delineate specifically which standards each student did not pass.
P
40
• Identify effective instructional practices: Because our teachers have autonomy in how they teach
essential standards, it is vital that common assessment data help validate which practices were effective. This can be done best when common assessment results are displayed in such a way that allows each teacher to compare their students’ results to other teachers who teach the same course.
• Identify patterns in student mistakes: Besides using common assessment results to identify best
instructional practices, this data should also be used to determine ineffective instructional practices. When analyzing the types of mistakes that failing students make, patterns emerge that can point to weaknesses or gaps in the initial instruction.
• Measure the accuracy of the assessment: Through a careful item analysis of the assessment, a
team can determine the validity of each test question. Over time, this will build a team’s capacity to create better assessments.
• Plan and target interventions: The ultimate goal of any PLC is to ensure high levels of learning
for all students. If a team uses common assessments to identify students in need of additional help, determine effective and ineffective instructional practices, and measure the validity of the assessment, then they should have the information needed to plan and implement targeted interventions to assist the students that need help.
Once we realized that giving common assessments is not an end in itself, but instead a means to better measure our teaching and student learning, we decided that whenever a team reviews common assessment data, they would ask the following guiding questions:
• Specifically which students did not demonstrate mastery? • Which instructional practices proved to be most effective? • What patterns can we identify from the student mistakes? • How can we improve this assessment? • What interventions are needed to provide failed students additional time and support?
By asking these questions, we believe that we can get the most out of our common assessments, which in turn, allows us to give the most to our students. In the end, we learned from this experience that the power of common assessment comes not from giving them, but from what we do with them after we give them!
41
WORK TOGETHER: BUT ONLY IF YOU WANT TO
By Rick DuFour
Originally published in the journal Phi Delta Kappan, v 92 n 5 pp. 57-61 Feb. 2011
We cannot waste another quarter century inviting or encouraging educators to collaborate.
Teachers work in isolation from one another. They view their classrooms as their personal domains, have little access to the ideas or strategies of their colleagues, and prefer to be left alone rather than engage with their colleagues or principals. Their professional practice is shrouded in a veil of privacy and personal autonomy and is not a subject for collective discussion or analysis. Their schools offer no infrastructure to sup port collaboration or continuous improvement, and, in fact, the very structure of their schools serves as a powerful force for preserving the status quo. This situation will not change by merely encouraging teachers to collaborate, but will instead require embedding professional collaboration in the routine practice of the school.
Sound familiar? These were the conclusions of John Goodlad’s study of schooling published in Phi Delta Kappan in 1983. Unfortunately, these findings have been reiterated in countless studies from that date to the present. The reason for the persistence of this professional isolation — not merely of teachers, but of educators in general — is relatively simple. The structure and culture of the organizations in which they work haven’t supported, required, or even expected them to collaborate.
Attempts to promote collaboration among educators inevitably collide with this tradition of isolation. Defenders of this tradition argue that professional autonomy gives each educator the freedom to opt in or out of any collaborative process. Requiring educators to work together violates their right as professionals to work in isolation and can result only in “contrived congeniality” rather than a true collaborative culture (Hargreaves 1991). Some critics of systematic collaboration even offer a conspiracy theory, arguing that any effort to embed collaborative processes into the school day represents an administrative ploy to compel teachers to do the bidding of others and demonstrates a lack of commitment to empowering teachers. Thus proponents of volunteerism greet any attempt to ensure that educators work together with the addendum, “but only if they want to.”
I’ve searched for the dictionary that defines “professional” as one who is free to do as he or she chooses. I can’t find it. I see references to occupations in which people must engage in specialized training in order to enter the field and are expected to stay current in the practices of the field. I see references to expertise and to an expectation that members will adhere to certain standards and an ethical code of conduct. I simply cannot find any dictionary that defines a professional as someone who can do whatever he or she pleases.
PROFESSIONAL DOESN’T MEAN AUTONOMOUS
Time spent in collaboration with colleagues is considered essential to success in most professions. When professional airline pilots prepare to take off, they coordinate their work with air traffic control. If the tower
42
informs a pilot that he or she is to move to runway 24L and be fourth in line for takeoff, the pilot does not, as a professional, have the autonomy to declare, “I prefer runway 25 and I refuse to wait.” He or she is not merely expected, but is actually required to work interdependently with others to achieve the common goal of a safe takeoff. The law firm that represented our school district when I was superintendent required all of its attorneys to meet on a weekly basis to review the issues and strategies of various cases assigned to individual members. Each attorney presented the facts of the case and his or her thoughts on how to proceed. The others offered advice, suggested relevant precedents, and shared their experience and insights. Attending the meetings was not optional. One might say this law firm coerced its members to attend. The firm, however, believed that all of its clients should have the benefit of the collective expertise of the entire firm, not merely the single attorney to whom the case had been assigned.
When our school district underwent a major construction project, the professionals engaged in the project always worked as a team. Each week, architects, engineers, and the construction manager convened in a collaborative meeting to make certain they were pursuing a common objective according to their established plan. They monitored progress toward clearly defined benchmarks and observed agreed-on protocols for identifying and solving problems. The meetings were not optional, and it might be said that members were compelled to be there.
When I went for a comprehensive physical examination, a doctor who reviewed one of the tests initially recommended that I undergo an immediate angioplasty. The hospital protocol, however, demanded that his recommendation be reviewed by two specialists. Those specialists examined the data from the test, but they also sought additional information. Based on that information, the team concluded that the procedure was not necessary as long as I engaged in alternative treatments.
In each of these instances, the professional is expected to collaborate with others. In fact, collaborating effectively with others is a condition for membership in their profession. Certainly, they will spend a great deal of their time working individually and autonomously. The pilot will work in isolation during some portions of a flight. A lawyer in the courtroom must be able to respond to the immediate situation. The engineers, architects, and construction managers return to their individual realms to work at their respective tasks in the joint effort to complete their project. And the cardiologist will make decisions based on his or her individual judgment when in the operating room. In every case, however, these professionals are required to work with others on a regular basis, and a structure is created to ensure that they do so.
When schools are organized to support the collaborative culture of a professional learning community, classroom teachers continue to have tremendous latitude. Throughout most of their workday and work week they labor in their individual classrooms as they attempt to meet the needs of each student. But the school will also embed processes into the routine practice of its professionals to ensure that they collaborate in a coordinated and systematic effort to support the students they serve. Like the professionals described above, they work interdependently in the pursuit of common purposes and goals. They share their expertise with one another and make that expertise available to all of the students served by the team. They establish clear benchmarks and agreed-on measures to monitor progress. They gather and jointly examine information regarding student learning to make more informed decisions and to enhance their practice. They will not have the opportunity to opt out, because the entire structure of the school will be designed to ensure that they collaborate with their colleagues.
43
THE WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE
Professionals make decisions based on the evidence of the most promising strategy for meeting the needs of those they serve. In a profession, evidence trumps appeals to mindless precedent (“This is how I have always done it”) or personal preference (“This is how I like to do it”). So, let’s apply the standard of the “weight of the evidence” to the question, “Do schools best serve their students when educators work collaboratively or when each educator can elect to work in isolation?”
Professional organizations. Almost all of the professional organizations in education, including the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, have specifically endorsed the premise that educators should work collaboratively. In addition, advocacy organizations, such as the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (NCTAF), also call on educators to work as members of a professional learning community. NCTAF’s president wrote:
Quality teaching is not an individual accomplishment, it is the result of a collaborative culture that empowers teachers to team up to improve student learning beyond what any of them can achieve alone. . . . The idea that a single teacher, working alone, can know and do everything to meet the diverse learning needs of 30 students every day throughout the school year has rarely worked, and it certainly won’t meet the needs of learners in years to come. (Carroll 2009: 13)
Principals have been advised by their professional organizations that one of their key responsibilities and a core strategy for improving student achievement is building the capacity of staff to work as members of a collaborative professional learning community. When advocating collaboration, neither principal nor teacher professional associations have added the caveat, “but only if each person wants to.”
Research. There is abundant research linking higher levels of student achievement to educators who work in the collaborative culture of a professional learning community. A recent study of schools and districts that doubled student achievement concluded, “it should be no surprise that one result of the multiplicity of activities was a collaborative, professional school culture. . . what is commonly called a ‘professional learning community’ today” (Odden and Archibald 2009: 78). A study of the best school systems in the world found that schools in those systems focused on providing the “high-quality, collaborative, job-focused professional development” characteristic of “professional learning communities” in which teachers work together to help each other improve classroom practice (Barber and Mourshed 2009: 30). The most comprehensive study of factors affecting schooling ever conducted concluded that the most powerful strategy for helping students learn at higher levels was ensuring that teachers work collaboratively in teams to establish the essential learnings all students must acquire, to gather evidence of student learning through an ongoing assessment process, and to use the evidence of student learning to discuss, evaluate, plan, and improve their instruction (Hattie 2009).
A useful exercise for a school or district that claims its purpose and priority is to help students learn at high levels is to gather all the evidence faculty can find that supports the idea that students learn better if educators work in isolation. At the same time, gather all the evidence that students learn at higher levels when educators work as members of collaborative teams. The web site www.allthingsplc.info provides specific quotes from organizations and researchers who have concluded that a collaborative school culture raises student achievement. I’m un able to include research indicating students learn at higher levels when educators work in isolation, because I’m unaware of any.
44
If the group determines that the preponderance of evidence indicates the school will be more successful if its members work together rather than in isolation, then structures should be created to support collab-oration, and all members of the staff should be required to participate. An individual’s desire to work in isolation does not trump a professional’s obligation to apply what is considered the most effective practice in his or her field.
The fact that schools create the infrastructure to ensure educators work as members of collaborative teams does not preclude those educators from forming additional, voluntary collaborative communities. Many educators use technology to form virtual communities based on common interests. However, these voluntary communities should not substitute for school structures and cultures in which working together interdependently is the norm.
ONLY ON WHAT WE WANT
A corollary to the volunteerism argument is that if educators work in collaborative teams, each team must have the autonomy to determine the focus of its work. The issue is presented as a question of power — who will have the authority to decide what we will collaborate about. In a mature profession united in a joint effort to best meet the needs of those it serves, the more relevant questions are: Can we agree that the purpose of our collaboration is to improve our professional practice and the learning of our students? Do we recognize that we must resolve certain critical questions if we are to accomplish that purpose? Can we demonstrate the discipline to focus on the right work?
FOCUSING ON THE RIGHT WORK
Collaboration is a means to an end. Collaboration alone will not improve a school, and in a toxic school culture, providing educators with time to collaborate is likely to reinforce the negative aspects of the culture and deteriorate into complaint sessions. Team meetings that focus on the deficiencies of students, better strategies for punishing students who wear hats, or determining who will pick up the field trip forms will not improve student achievement; however, in many schools topics like these dominate the discussion. Providing educators with structures and time to support collaboration will not improve schools unless that time is focused on the right work.
What is the right work? As members of collaborative teams, educators in a PLC work collectively to develop a guaranteed and viable curriculum to ensure that students have access to the same essential knowledge and skills regardless of the teacher to whom they are assigned. The team gathers ongoing information regarding the learning of their students through a comprehensive, balanced assessment process that includes common formative assessments developed by the team. The team then jointly analyzes the evidence of student learning from the assessments and uses the information to improve the professional practice of individual members and collective effectiveness of the team. As members look at actual evidence of student proficiency in the knowledge and skills the team has deemed essential, on an assessment the team has agreed is valid, they are able to learn from one another and continually enhance their ability to meet the needs of their students.
Finally, in a professional learning community, the school creates a systematic process that ensures that students who are struggling receive additional time and support for learning. Rather than continuing with the education lottery, where what happens when a student experiences difficulty will depend almost solely on the individual teacher to whom that student is assigned, the school will create a multi-tiered, coordinated, and collective response to support that student.
45
Schools committed to higher levels of learning for both students and adults will not be content with the fact that a structure is in place to ensure that educators meet on a regular basis. They will recognize that the question, “What will we collaborate about,” is so vital that it cannot be left to the discretion of each team. Educators in these schools will collectively identify the right work and then create processes to support teams as they focus their efforts on those matters that improve student learning.
POWERFUL CONCEPTS CAN BE APPLIED BADLY
The concept of a collaborative culture of a professional learning community is powerful, but like all powerful concepts, it can be applied badly. Schools can create artificial, rather than meaningful and relevant, teams. Educators can make excuses for low student achievement rather than develop strategies to improve student learning. Teams can concentrate on matters unrelated to student learning. Getting along can be a greater priority than getting results. Administrators can micromanage the process in ways that do not build collective capacity, or they can attempt to hold teams accountable for collaborating while failing to provide the time, support, parameters, resources, and clarity that are crucial to the success of teams.
Creating a PLC is fraught with difficulty, but that doesn’t mean educators should reject the concept or allow individuals to opt out. If they are to be members of a profession, educators must work together in good faith to develop their collective capacity to implement this powerful concept effectively.
More than a quarter century has passed since Goodlad warned that overcoming the tradition of teacher isolation will require more than an invitation. We must do more than exhort people to work together. In order to establish schools in which interdependence and collaboration are the new norm, we must create the structures and cultures that embed collaboration in the routine practice of our schools, ensure that the collaborative efforts focus on the right work, and support educators as they build their capacity to work together rather than alone. K
REFERENCES
Barber, Michael, and Mona Mourshed. “Shaping the Future: How Good Education Systems Can Become Great in the Decade Ahead. Report on the International Education Roundtable.” Singapore: McKinsey & Co., July 7, 2009. www.mckinsey.com/locations/southeastasia/knowledge/ Education_Roundtable.pdf.
Carroll, Tom. "The Next Generation of Learning Teams." Phi Delta Kappan 91, no. 2 (October 2009): 8-13.
Hargreaves, Andrew. "Contrived Congeniality: The Micropolitics of Teacher Collaboration." In The Politics of Life in Schools: Power, Conflict, and Cooperation, ed. Joseph Blase: 46-72. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1991.
Hattie, John. Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. New York: Routledge, 2009.
Odden, Allen R., and Sarah Archibald. Doubling Student Performance . . . And Finding the Resources to Do It. San Francisco: Corwin Press, 2009.
46
RIGOR/RELEVANCE FRAMEWORK
Found on the website Wikispaces Classroom: http://uccs21stcenturyskills.wikispaces.com/.
47
A SHIFT IN SCHOOL CULTURE: COLLECTIVE COMMITMENTS FOCUS ON CHANGE THAT BENEFITS STUDENT LEARNING
By Robert Eaker and Janel Keating
Originally published in the Journal of Staff Development, v 29 n 3 pp. 14-17 Sum. 2008
hese are the best of times and the worst of times in education, to paraphrase Charles Dickens. Never before has there been such widespread agreement among researchers and practitioners regarding the most promising approach to significantly improve schools. Researchers, writers, and educational
organizations have all endorsed the concept of schools functioning as professional learning communities.
At the same time, the concept will have little impact on schools unless professional learning community practices become embedded into day-to-day school culture. If professional learning communities offer our best hope for school improvement, a critical question facing educators is this: How can we develop school cultures that reflect the ideals and practices of professional learning communities? We have found that collaboratively developed shared values and commitments can be a powerful tool for shaping school culture.
STRUCTURE IS NEVER ENOUGH
Michael Fullan (2005) observed that “terms travel easily … but the underlying concepts do not” (p. 67). And while the term “professional learning community” has traveled easily, actually transforming a school to function as a professional learning community requires much more than a superficial understanding of the concept and feeble attempts at reorganizing.
Schools and districts that bring the concept to life do more than adopt a new mission statement, launch a strategic plan, or fly a banner to proclaim, “We are a professional learning community!” They do more than organize their staff into teams, change their schedules, develop a new organizational chart, or engage in other attempts to tinker with the organization’s structure. They recognize that while structural changes — policies, programs, and procedures — may be necessary, those changes are never enough to transform a school into a professional learning community. They understand that it is impossible for a school or district to develop the capacity to function as a professional learning community without undergoing profound cultural shifts, and they will engage in an intentional process to impact the culture.
We see an organization’s culture in the assumptions, beliefs, expectations, and habits that constitute the norm for those working in it. Impacting an organization’s cultural aspects is far more difficult than changing the policies, programs, and practices that constitute the structure. As Phil Schlechty writes, “Structural change that is not supported by cultural change will eventually be overwhelmed by the culture, for it is in the culture that the organization finds meaning and stability” (1997, p. 136).
CULTURAL SHIFTS FOR BECOMING A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY
T
48
What does the culture of a school look like when it functions as a professional learning community? How does the culture differ from more traditional schools? While all professional learning communities do not look alike, all reflect three critical cultural shifts.
A shift in fundamental purpose from teaching to learning
Professional learning communities shift their primary purpose, their reason for being, from a focus on teaching to a focus on learning. This shift is seismic — such a change represents more than mere semantics. When schools passionately and sincerely adopt the mission of ensuring high levels of learning for all students, they are driven to pursue fundamentally different questions and work in significantly different ways.
A shift in the work of teachers
Professional learning communities acknowledge there is no hope of helping all students learn unless those within the school work collaboratively in a collective effort to achieve that fundamental purpose. There is no credible evidence that the best way to improve student learning is to have teachers work in isolation. On the other hand, there is ample evidence to support organizing teachers into high-performing, collaborative teams. A teacher’s world can change when the school shifts from a culture of isolation to a culture of collaboration.
A shift in focus
Educators in professional learning communities recognize they will not know if their collaborative efforts to help all students learn have been successful without a fixation on results. They are hungry for evidence of student learning, and they use that evidence both to respond to students who need additional time and support as well as to inform and improve their professional practice. Their focus shifts from inputs to outcomes and from intentions to results.
THE POWER OF SHARED VALUES AND COMMITMENTS
John Kotter advises that the central challenge of changing culture is “changing people’s behavior” (Kotter & Cohen, 2002, p. 2). Engaging staff in a collaborative process to develop shared values, or “collective commitments,” is one of the most powerful tools for changing behaviors that can, ultimately, transform the culture of a school or district.
As Ken Blanchard (2007) writes:
“Values provide guidelines on how you should proceed as you pursue your purpose and picture of the future. They need to be clearly described so that you know exactly what behaviors demonstrate that the value is being lived. Values need to be consistently acted on, or they are only good intentions” (p. 30). The White River School District in Buckley, Wash., has used the power of collective commitments to help its schools operate as professional learning communities. The district asks all staff members to consider, “What would it look like if we really meant it when we said we embrace learning as our fundamental purpose, or
49
we will build a collaborative culture, or we will use evidence of results to respond to student needs and improve our practice? What commitments are we prepared to make to every student who walks into our schools this fall? What commitments are we prepared to make to one another as we attempt to create a professional learning community?” People are asked to participate in a deliberate effort to identify the specific ways they will act to improve their organizations, and then commit to one another that they will act accordingly. For example, while focusing on improving reading achievement, one elementary school in the district, Mountain Meadow, made a commitment that “the children most in need will receive the most help from the most skilled staff.” In order to fulfill this commitment, collaborative teams of teachers began reviewing formative assessment results together and making timely instructional changes to meet each student’s needs. They developed plans to provide students who were experiencing difficulty additional time and support within the school day, and they began reporting student progress to parents on a weekly basis. These practices represented a seismic cultural shift from the days when students most in need received help from paraprofessionals who had minimal training and little direct guidance from a classroom teacher or when parents only received formal progress reports every nine weeks. A word of caution: Collective commitments should not be confused with developing a shared vision for a school. Vision describes an attractive future for the organization, but its focus is on the organization and the future — “someday we hope our school will be a place where … .” Collective commitments clarify how each individual can contribute to the work, and they have a much more immediate focus: “This is what I can do today to help create the school we want.” We can think of the collective commitments as a series of “if-then” statements. For example: If we are to be a school that ensures high levels of learning for all students, then we must commit to monitor each student’s learning on a timely basis using a variety of assessment strategies and create systems to ensure they receive additional time and support as soon as they experience difficulty in their learning. If we are to create a collaborative culture, then we must commit to be positive, contributing members to our collaborative teams and accept collective responsibility for the success of our colleagues and our students.
THE EXPECTATIONS-ACCEPTANCE GAP
In The Knowing-Doing Gap,
Pfeffer and Sutton (2000) explore what they regard as one of the great mysteries of organizational management — the disconnect between what we know and what we do (p. 4). Schools and districts are certainly susceptible to the knowing-doing gap, but they also often fall victim to another damaging gap — the disconnect between what leaders contend is expected and what they are ultimately willing to accept. For example, a collaborative culture will benefit student achievement only if educators focus their collaboration on the factors that directly impact student learning.
However, schools often settle for collaboration that has no impact on what happens in the classroom — who will pick up the field trip forms, how can we stop students from swearing in the hallways, who will write the parent newsletter this month. Effective leaders will avoid this tendency by clarifying the specific standards that represent high-quality work and insisting that the work meet these standards.
50
The presence of articulated collective commitments will not necessarily inspire every staff member to live by those commitments on a daily basis.
Discrepancies between what people say and what they do will continue to exist. Mutual accountability and peer pressure will not always prevail. In those instances, leaders must be willing to address the problem. The presence of collective commitments, however, allows principals and central office leaders to assume a new role in relationship to staff — the role of promoter and protector of the shared vision the staff has created and the pledges people have made to one another to make that vision a reality. When leaders must address a concern with a staff member, they can refer to the commitments (“here are the promises we have made to one another, I need you to honor them”) rather than the organizational chart (“I’m the boss”) or the policy manual (“the district policy says you must do this”). In so doing, they operate with the full weight of the group’s moral authority behind them, protectors of mutual pledges rather than keepers of the rules (DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker, in press).
SUMMARY
The increased popularity of the term “professional learning community” has not, as yet, resulted in the actual application of the concept in the majority of schools and districts throughout North America. The challenge of changing culture is the challenge of changing behavior, of persuading people to act in new ways. Engaging the faculty in a collaborative process to articulate the school’s core values or collective commitments is a powerful — and often overlooked — way to shape school culture.
Establishing explicit shared commitments is one of the most effective tools available to those seeking to implement professional learning communities in their schools and districts.
