Julie H. Rucker
|
 |
School Staff Development:
Becoming a Professional Learning Community
Julie H. Rucker
In partial fulfillment of requirements for
EDUL 6017
The University of Georgia
Spring 2006
This paper addresses my understanding of professional development, how it has evolved within my school system over the past eight years, what characteristics are necessary for having a professional learning community, the insights I have gained through this study, and questions I still need answered for the future.
Learning about Professional Development
In the summer of 1999, I attended the Bread Loaf School of English and became a member of the Bread Loaf Teacher Network (BLTN), a network of teachers all over the country who are connected via the Internet on a member-only network, Breadnet. When I began reading the text by Roberts and Pruitt (2003), I made numerous connections between what happens online in BLTN and what happens in a professional learning community. We have “reflective dialogue” (Roberts & Pruitt, 2003, p. 8) via Bread Net where we discuss our teaching practices. I share the information about BLTN because as I read the text, I found myself comparing what I was reading time and again to the many professional development experiences I have had as a result of being a member of this online teacher network. I also contrasted much of what I read online and in the text with what happens in my school.
One of the end of chapter activities suggested talking with teachers in my school about their idea of a “learning community.” Of the four colleagues with whom I talked, all said that “teacher collaboration” was teachers working together and sharing ideas. But when they were asked to share ways they thought our school should change or obstacles that would prevent change, many of their responses indicated there is little collaboration in our school and a lack of vision.
My School's Professional Development Program
When I first came to my current school, professional development consisted of outside speakers who came in for two days to train us on how to teach on the block schedule. Our school had just moved to block scheduling the year prior to my being hired. This was a refresher, I suppose, for most of the teachers. Then we progressed to common staff development coordinated by our RESA, which took place on one day in October. Then Intech, the professional development workshop that taught teachers how to incorporate technology into their classrooms, changed the face of professional development, at least in my school by calling for redelivery teams to train and then teach the faculty at their schools.
All of our professional development has more or less followed the top-down approach; administrators decided what we needed, and we were told to take it. Our faculty members were told four years ago that we would be a Learning Focused School , no teacher input allowed. Then I found myself on a team being trained to redeliver LFS to the rest of the teachers in my department. The same thing happened when my school went to the Inclusion model to mainstream most of our special education students: go to five days of training and then come back and train others. While in these cases the teachers were learners and leaders, both part of a learning community, there was no evidence of shared leadership in the decision making process that lead to these professional developments. To this day there is no “facilitative leadership” (Roberts & Pruitt, 2003, p. 26) in my school, as evidenced by my colleagues lack of knowledge of a vision for our school.
Fortunately, our Needs Improvement status for the second year has required my administration to begin moving toward creating a learning community out of necessity, though I think we still have much progress we need to make before I am willing to label my school as a learning community. We have a Leadership Facilitator this year, a retired school superintendent who now works for the Georgia Department of Education. She comes on our campus at least once, sometimes twice a month. She has required our administration to begin thinking “out of the box,” as she likes to say. One of her first requirements was that we create a leadership team consisting of teachers from all subject areas. We meet with her for 90 minutes each time she visits. We discuss issues related to moving our school out of Needs Improvement status. We have discussed data collected from students' test scores, a mentoring program, and most recently, a pyramid of interventions. What is discussed and coordinated through the collaboration of the leadership team is then taken back to our faculty for further dissemination and implementation. For instance, our mentoring program focuses on the subgroup that consistently scores the lowest on our high-stakes tests: our black males. Teachers and community members are “adopting” black males who are identified as being at-risk of failing the graduation test, and they are meeting with them bi-weekly to have “test-talks,” or discussions about why the standardized tests we take are important; to have talks about their progress in classes; and to just show that they care about the student.
Through the efforts of administration and the leadership team, we are building trust, listening to each other about certain issues, sharing our own positions and feelings about those issues, giving information from the perspective of other teachers in our departments, and asking questions (p. 41). We are collaborating. But we still have some obstacles to overcome. If asked, many faculty members would probably say making AYP is our school vision. Unfortunately, that is the message being sent by our administration to the faculty, and it is not a vision—it is a reaction to a troubling position. Right now our principal is more interested in “jumping through all the hoops” to please our Leadership Facilitator and the Department of Education than he is in helping the faculty find a positive vision for the future, where we want to be in five to ten years as a school. Our principal is also seen as a person who delegates much of the school improvement responsibilities to an assistant principal, so the principal is not seen as the one actively collaborating with teachers.
The other recent development in our school's professional development program was not teacher initiated at first, but is moving in that direction. After attending a leadership conference at the beginning of the school year, our assistant principal in charge of school improvement decided that each individual department needed to participate as a professional learning community and have one activity each semester. The first semester, she requested all of our activities be the same but did give us the freedom to choose our own activity during the second semester. Again, I see this as a positive step toward our faculty having ownership in our professional development, but many are reluctant to change when it comes down as a mandate.
Three Critical Insights
First, I will always believe that teachers, as well as administrators, should continue to be learners. Roberts & Pruitt (2003) discuss learning in relation to the constructivist leadership theory where all teachers are considered learners and leaders, and the principal is the “head learner” (p. 26). They should also be granted more autonomy to decide what it is they need to learn to improve student learning. While the administration is aware of mandates passed down from state and federal agencies, it is the classroom teacher who is the expert in the classroom, and the teacher should have the opportunities for collaboration concerning instructional strategies or learning problems within the school.
Next, I also find that it is extremely important for the principal, the school leader, to collaborate with the faculty in creating a vision for the school. While it is a shared vision, the principal has to take the lead in refining the vision and communicating it with the school community (p. 30). In order for the staff to be ready to collaborate on a vision statement, leadership among the teachers is crucial and necessary, but most importantly, learning communities among the faculty must be initiated and nurtured.
The third critical insight I gained through this study was that there is already a tool used by teachers in many schools that can facilitate an organized collaborative environment—our school computer network. Many teachers in my school use email, but it would not be a stretch to plan collaborative activities to be completed by teachers and posted online. The guide for establishing electronic collaboration among teachers published by the Northeast and Islands Regional Educational Laboratory at Brown University succinctly describes for administrator and teachers the benefits of electronic collaboration and how to go about creating an environment for that to happen within a school. Much of the information provided in this document replicates what is happening in Bread Net, as I mentioned earlier, and it can happen within any school with the right support. Many teachers would like to become part of a learning community, but they may feel it infringes upon their time to prepare for student instruction. An online collaboration among teachers can cut down on meeting time and allow teachers to contribute at times that are more conducive to their personal schedules. More often, asynchronous online collaboration is easier for teachers, though periodic synchronous opportunities can be beneficial as well.
Questions for Further Consideration
What is the best method of promoting teacher learning within a school? Often there are teachers who are reluctant to do anything more than arrive on time and leave on time. They are reluctant to attend faculty meetings, and they constantly complain about having to attend staff development. Many say, “I just want to do my job and go home.” How does an administrator turn a teacher with that attitude into a learner? How does an administrator convince those teachers that collaboration is beneficial to the school community without making those teachers obstinately retreat further into their classrooms? My first step would be to go to the faculty with a kernel of a vision for the school and request their help in solidifying it. I would also openly share my own learning experiences with faculty members to show them that I take seriously being the “head learner.” While it is a selfish position for teachers to take when they say “what's in it for me,” I do not castigate them for it; instead, I show them what is in it for them by providing evidence (data) from other schools who have become collaborative learning communities.
Next, I wonder what effort it would take to continue the learning community. What steps must be in place for initiating new teachers to the school each year? How does the school bring someone new into the learning community without disturbing the dynamics of the community? There is a bonding that happens among teachers, even if they are not part of a professional learning community. Though I do not have data to support my hypothesis, I do feel safe saying that those teachers in a school that is a learning community create a bond. As an administrator, I would see the need for a mentoring program that would initiate new teachers into the community in a way they would be welcomed and appreciated for their own unique contributions.
Finally, how do I get teachers to open the doors of their classrooms to adults? Last year I began teaching with a co-teacher, and at the same time, and adult tutor for a program in our school was also assigned that same class. I had two outside adults coming into my classroom. I had to give up the power I had as the only adult in the classroom and share responsibilities with the others. I had to not be afraid of what other adults would think of my planning, teaching, and disciplining. I had to learn to communicate what I wanted to happen in my classroom with those adults, and as a result, my administration often brings other adult visitors into my classroom. But being placed in this position at first is not easy. I think to promote a collaborative environment, all teachers must be willing to open their doors to other faculty members and administrators without fear of critique or retribution.
Creating professional learning communities within schools unwilling to let go of traditional ideas about leadership (i.e., the top-down model), is impossible. Schools who want to be successful in the changing face of 21 st century public education must look to the teacher as the expert first. Schools that are successful will have a faculty accountable to itself first through collaboration in a professional learning community.
References
Koufmann-Frederick, A., Lillie, M., Patteson-Gordon, L., Watt, D. L., & Carter, R. (1999). Electronic collaboration: A practical guide for educators . Providence , RI : LAB at Brown University . Retrieved April 13, 2006, from Brown University Web site: http://www.alliance.brown.edu/?pubs/?collab/?elec-collab.
Roberts, S.M., & Pruitt, E.Z. (2003). Schools as professional learning communities:
Collaborative activities and strategies for professional development . Thousand Oaks , CA : Corwin Press.