EDU 6600 final reflection

When I began this course I did not see the title, “Communication and Collaboration,” as reflecting the emphasis placed on professional development. I was surprised by how much of the course was about professional development, and not necessarily in a positive way. My previous experience with professional development has generally been negative, especially when such activities were organized by the school district. My initial reflection and most of my initial discussion group posts were about my dissatisfaction with my experiences in professional development.

“I have taught at two different schools and I have seen two different models, neither of which has been particularly effective, of delivering professional learning. I have experienced an overabundance of professional learning with no common theme, and I have experienced too little professional learning.”

As I progressed through the course and developed an understanding of adult learning, I began to see why my previous experiences had not worked: I had never been in charge of my own learning. Dalellew and Martinez (1988), as cited in Zepeda (2013) state that adult learning is more self-directed, but I did not direct any of my own professional development until recently. My districts have required trainings for a variety of reasons: to introduce new programs, to reinforce old programs, or to satisfy the union contract. I may have found some of the sessions interesting, but those were rarely followed up on with practical classroom applications; the needs of the classroom have always been so great that I rarely found time to follow up myself.

The examination of different learning models brought attention to my limited and poor experience with professional learning. Honestly, one area where I wish I would have done more with was my experience as an academic coach early in my career. I spent two years sitting in an office because I did not know any better. Had I known the benefit of coaching, and had I been coached on how to coach, I could have taken advantage of this valuable opportunity to learn. My problems were not unique; Johnson and Donaldson (2016) reported a study that found that second-stage teachers in these leadership roles had challenges that discouraged teacher leadership. What was missing in my experience was leadership at my school; I had two principals during my coaching tenure, one of whom was transferred midway through his first year, the other who was coasting toward retirement. I did not know how I fit into the school’s plan, and according to J. C. Maxwell (2008), “one way to add significance to the lives of the people you lead is to show them the big picture and let them know how they contribute to it” (p. 86-87).

Another aspect of my professional learning has been through professional learning communities, both in California and Washington state. Neither has been an ideal situation, but then I never viewed them as vehicles for professional learning. In California we were prescribed by administration to accomplish certain tasks (take minutes, discuss data, etc.) and in Washington the groups were more for planning curriculum than looking at data. Some of my PLCs were more collaborative than others, and those I found more beneficial to me as a teacher, regardless of the tasks we accomplished. What I strive for is the collaboration cited by Angelle (2016) when she writes that “to ensure success for these teacher leaders, the school culture must value their work, the school principal must support their work, and their teacher colleagues must be willing to work alongside them as they strive for a more effective school” (p. 107).

By looking at my own practice through the lens of professional development, I now see where collaboration and communication come in. My previous experiences lacked those components, and when I reflect on my more positive professional learning, collaboration and communication are the highlights. My best training sessions have been Advanced Placement summer institutes, and those have been highly collaborative. In the Seattle Pacific teacher leadership program, I have collaborated and communicated with my cohort and have found it highly rewarding.

As I move forward into larger roles of teacher leadership in my career, I will keep those two aspects of professional learning foremost in my mind. I must be willing to collaborate with my colleagues and keep open all lines of communication. I must keep the door open, literally and figuratively. That will do the most to bring up myself as a teacher and my colleagues as well.

References

Angelle, P. S. (2016). Teachers as leaders: Collaborative leadership for learning communities. In E. Blair (Ed.). Teacher leadership: The “new” foundations of teacher education (p. 101-108). New York: Peter Lang.

Johnson, S. M., & Donaldson, M. L. (2016). Overcoming the obstacles to leadership. In E. Blair (Ed.). Teacher leadership: The “new” foundations of teacher education (pp. 157-162). New York: Peter Lang.

Maxwell, J. C. (2008). Mentoring 101: What every leader needs to know. Nashville, TN; Thomas Nelson.

Zepeda, S. J. (2013). Professional development: What works. New York: Routledge.

PLC's vs. lesson study

My school uses the learning community model as its primary mode of collaboration among teachers of same subjects. Specifically called professional learning communities after the Dufour model, the groups meet weekly or biweekly to discuss curriculum and student data and collaborate on future lesson planning. The groups do share the school’s vision of learning, and they “work toward common goals that enhance professional and personal development” (Zepeda, 2013, p. 83). Each group has a PLC leader that coordinates the groups, but the responsibilities attached to the title generally include administrative tasks such as setting the agenda, writing minutes, and sharing feedback from the school administration. Where my school occasionally differs from the model is in the role of the principal. Zepeda (2013) cites Marks & Printy (2003) as saying that a principal should be more of a facilitator than an inspector in a learning community. Administrators at my school, however, are often seen as looking to hold teachers accountable for doing the work rather than facilitating the work being done.

One model that I could see being implemented at my school is the lesson study process. It already contains elements of the learning community format (Zepeda, 2013). Both study curriculum and develop goals. Both involve planning lessons. Both demand reflection. The major difference is that lesson study conducts research, and there are certain groups at my school that would be advanced enough to engage in that component. The transition from a standard learning community to a lesson study group would not be difficult, but it would require commitment from the teachers involved and the administration. More time would be needed for the study and planning elements, but as our district has a teachers contract that encourages teachers to collaborate outside of the contract in exchange for hourly pay, this would be a strong incentive. The administration has already supported learning communities that have engaged in observation of other teachers, so having teachers conduct research through observing other teachers would not be hard to get approved.

Teachers tend to be strong lifelong learners, and the ability to work with colleagues on research into their own practice would be hard to pass up, especially if there’s extra pay involved. The obstructions are strong, however. Zepeda (2013) cites several. The argument that “this is the way I have always done it” (p. 228) gets in the way, but as teachers we ask our students every day to think differently; why can’t teachers change, too? The lack of time is another impediment, but again that extra pay component, if worked into the proposal, would provide the incentive. A team that is already effective would overcome the challenge of not having specific goals, as their effectiveness is already tied to having those goals. The challenges cited by Zepeda (pp. 228-229) would all be easily handled in my building, I believe.

The next step toward implementing lesson study would be for an established learning community to put forth a proposal to the administration. The proposal would have to be clear as to its goals, and it would have to align to the objectives already laid out for learning communities. The trust already established by administration with certain groups would come into play, and assuming the group carries out the objectives of the lesson study, effectiveness could lead to implementation by other groups.

I worked with professional learning communities at my previous school before moving to Washington state, and I never felt that they were fully implemented or effective. We had vocal support from administration, but added responsibilities reduced our effectiveness. Too often the focus was on data, and not on the reflection required to adequately use that data to influence instruction. At my current school, my experience is that PLCs are used more for planning units rather than looking at individual lessons. There is a movement toward more specific objectives, but as I no longer part of a content-specific PLC, I have not seen how that has been implemented. I feel lesson study would be more effective for certain, established groups of veteran teachers, and I look forward to suggesting the idea.

EDU 6600 Initial Reflection

In my teaching career professional learning has rarely been organized around a common theme applicable to all teachers in my building. I have taught at two different schools and I have seen two different models, neither of which has been particularly effective, of delivering professional learning. I have experienced an overabundance of professional learning with no common theme, and I have experienced too little professional learning.

At my first school in southern California, the district was compelled by outside forces to provide a wide variety of professional learning, but I never saw an organized effort to make it effective. An agreement with the teachers union required the district to offer paid professional development days before and after school, and these often served as fillers, such as teaching vocabulary, learning a new behavior protocol, or checking for understanding. As the school year progressed, these skills were emphasized less and less, generally in favor of professional learning being forced from the county and the state in response to low student performance. At the same time, professional learning communities were required to assess students, analyze data, make adjustments, and prepare instruction - all with little extra time to do so, and often with demands to incorporate the latest training into our practice. Teachers attended professional learning for the money and had little incentive to change their practice.

At my current school, professional development for the most part has been left to the teachers’ discretion. The district has begun an effort to provide leaders of professional learning communities with training, and some departments have improved their practice as a result, but this has been sporadic among all departments and sections.

Presently, the professional learning communities I am involved with do not have research-based components that would facilitate the development of a plan for incorporating social justice learning in our school, as determined by Hirsh and Hord (2010). An advantage we do have is that questions of social justice are being raised schoolwide, and many teachers are starting to seek knowledge in how to address these questions. Staff and administration have demonstrated a sincere effort to learn more about our students and their particular needs. Most of this work at present happens outside of our professional learning communities, although a recent discussion in my Advanced Placement professional learning community focused on strategies to increase involvement in the AP program by traditionally underserved students. The discussion is in its early stages, but for now, with a group that has no common curriculum, social justice issues are what we do share and what we can address.