The PLC concept started as a result of collaboration among a few faculty members. Several teachers began to plan assessments, ask strategic questions, and analyze student data together. In this way, the PLC developed without a strong structure and without external parameters. However, when the school principal realized that the teachers were collaborating, he decided to lend his support by scheduling a common hour during which the teachers could meet during the school day, providing resources and materials to help the teachers understand the theoretical basis for learning communities, and encouraging teachers to participate” (Elbousty, 2010, p. 1)
The principal realized the important work these educators were doing and allocated time and other resources that would enable the educators to do their best possible work. Rooney (2008) makes a key observation:
Good principals provide multiple opportunities for teacher learning because we believe that having skilled teachers correlates with strong student learning. But how often do we rely on information we recall from distant coursework, superficial mandated workshops, or district presentations? (p. 82)
With attention paid to the leadership responsibilities identified by Marzano, Waters, and McNulty (2005) the responsibility of Resources is defined as “The extent to which the principal…Provides teachers with materials and professional development necessary for the successful execution of their jobs” (p. 43). The organizational structure of our schools provides an opportunity for administrators to allocate daily time as well as professional development time toward research, collaboration, and review of instructional practices. As Liebman (2005) notes, “Altering the structure of schools translates into providing teachers with time to talk and meet, improving communication structures, and increasing interdependent teaching roles” (p. 7).
Focusing on Marzano’s definition of Resources, materials can include the element of time along with space and supplemental pay for involvement as a facilitator of a PLC.
There is also a need for the principal to be an actively engaged participant in the PLC. This requires a new approach to leadership as noted by Thompson (2004):
If principals are to become the “lead teacher and lead learner” they must move beyond traditional leadership styles to create professional learning communities where the goal is to develop people, including oneself. Developing people, each with their own mental models and beliefs about schooling and learning, cannot be accomplished in an organization that does not value the lived experiences of all stakeholders (p. 5).
With principals serving in the capacity of instructional leader rather than manager, the daily focus and interactions shift and the principal can no longer avoid quality interactions on a daily basis as he or she monitors the instructional environment for all students. As Cranston (2009) observes about evaluations:
While the participants suggested teacher evaluation might possibly provide a means to improve the collective quality of teaching, the examples of how evaluation might be used to channel the collective energy of the staff that could lead to improved student achievement school-wide generally focused on whole-school professional development initiatives (p. 15)
Administrators are evolving in unison with teachers so what you have is not isolated moments of learning but a continuous process of improvement, collaboration, and relationship development that benefits all who come in contact with the learning environment. The purpose of evaluations will continue to hold educators accountable but also focus on what strengths or weaknesses are evident building wide so that professional development can be adapted to benefit all.
It is important to expand upon Marzano’s (2005) definition of Resources, to include the concept of time and structure within the definition of necessary materials. As Servage (2008) identifies, “Administrators, teacher leaders and professional development specialists can, I believe, enhance the sustainability and long-term effectiveness of a professional learning community by providing opportunities within its structure to for teachers to hold open-ended conversations oriented to communicative learning” (p. 74). If principals desire effectual staff members and professional development, the allocation of time and other resources is incumbent upon the administrator.
In this same manner, the principal sets the expectation for collaboration and knowledge sharing. Leadership within a PLC requires the administrator to set this expectation and hold accountable the work of the PLC. As Servage (2008) states:
The professional learning community (PLC) is one model within a constellation of models and theories characterized by a number of core beliefs: (1) that staff professional development is critical to improved student learning; (2) that this professional development is most effective when it is collaborative and collegial; and (3) that this collaborative work should involve inquiry and problem solving in authentic contexts of daily teaching practices (p. 63).
However, simply setting the time aside is not enough to guarantee success in a PLC. It is also essential for the administrator to, as Mullen (2008) states, protect the vital time of the group “Protecting time allotted to study groups is essential. Prioritizing the effort of staff to focus on student learning above competing school needs communicates the resolve that teacher growth and student learning is nonnegotiable” (p. 6).
Providing necessary resources to the staff not only sets the tone of high expectation but also communicates to the staff respect for their professional lives and the desire for all to be a successful community. In this way, the responsibility of culture and resources as defined by Marzano (2005) are closely related. Mullen (2008) effectively provides a rationale for establishing the necessary time for staff to engage in professional learning: “When provided this time to collaborate, teachers can develop (or improve upon) instructional strategies, design effective lessons, focus on student achievement, expand their understanding of subject-area content and benchmarks, and address teaching problems (Hirsh, 2003)” (p. 6).Are we using our time in the best possible way? If not, what can we do? If so, what can we do better? I am reminded of a great little saying by one of my graduate school professors, "If you are satisfied with the lollipop of mediocrity, you'll always suck."
Tomorrow morning, the next installment...the importance of faculty and staff input in the decision making and leadership process.
References
Blankenship, S., & Ruona, W. (2007). Professional learning communities and communities of practice: A comparison of models, literature review. Online Submission, Retrieved October 6, 2010 from ERIC database.
Cranston, J. (2009). Holding the reins of the professional learning community: Eight themes from research on principals' perceptions of professional learning communities. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (90), 1-22. Retrieved October 6, 2010 from ERIC database.
DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Elbousty, Y., & Bratt, K. (2010). Continuous inquiry meets continued critique: The professional learning community in practice and the resistance of (un)willing participants. Online Submission, Retrieved October 7, 2010 from ERIC database.
Fullan, M. (2006). Leading professional learning. (cover story). School Administrator, 63(10), 10-14. Retrieved September 28, 2010 from Professional Development Collection database.
Knutson, K., Miranda, A., & Washell, C. (2005). The connection between school culture and leadership social interest in learning organizations. Journal of Individual Psychology, 61(1), 25-36. Retrieved October 6, 2010 from Academic Search Elite database.
Liebman, H., Maldonado, N., Lacey, C., & Thompson, S. (2005). An investigation of leadership in a professional learning community: A case study of a large, suburban, public middle school. Online Submission, Retrieved September 28, 2010 from ERIC database.
Marzano, R., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. (2005). School leadership that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Mullen, C., & Hutinger, J. (2008). The principal's role in fostering collaborative learning communities through faculty study group development. Theory Into Practice, 47(4), 276-285. doi:10.1080/00405840802329136.
Rooney, J. (2008). Taking hold of learning. Educational Leadership, 66(3), 82-83. Retrieved October 7, 2010 from Professional Development Collection database.
Servage, L. (2008). Critical and transformative practices in professional learning communities. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(1), 63-77. Retrieved October 6, 2010 from ERIC database.
Thompson, S., Gregg, L., & Niska, J. (2004). Professional learning communities, leadership, and student learning. RMLE Online: Research in Middle Level Education, 28(1), 1-15. Retrieved October 7, 2010 from ERIC database.
Williams, R., Brien, K., Sprague, C., & Sullivan, G. (2008). Professional learning communities: Developing a school-level readiness instrument. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (74), 1-17. Retrieved September 28, 2010 from ERIC database.
No comments:
Post a Comment