RSA#2 Solution Tree: Leadership in Professional Learning Communities at Work™ Learning by Doing

By Chris Bohula

Online Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9QD6xMnshA

The remainder of the text by Martin-Kniep (2008) focuses on not the theory, design and creation of a Professional Learning Community (PLC) as the early charters cover, but move on to discuss methods of examining analyzing and assessing the outcomes of a PLC and student achievement.

In Solution Tree: Leadership in Professional Learning Communities at Work™ Learning by Doing (Solutiontree, 2009).  The idea of “tight” and “loose” are developed.  “Tight” refers attributes of a Professional Leading Community which are required and have little must be embraced by the community.  The “what” of teaching, or what we are going to teach, or what the PLC will do to improve teaching and student achievement.  Examples of these “tight” characteristics include meeting times, common assessments, PLC goals, subject matter, teacher accountability and mission of the PLC.  The principal interviewed emphasized that one of the “tightest” areas is the accountability of the teachers to use the assessment data to identify and implement interventions for students as early as possible. Whereas the “loose” refers to characteristics of teaching which refer to the art or “how” to teach a particular subject matter. These loose characteristics include how a teacher might present a concept and order of presentation. 

Both of these pieces of work emphasize the necessity for assessment.  They both agree it is very important have a common goal/objective for the students and the measure of success is determined by data collected from the assessment. Martin-Kniep (2008) additionally implies the success of the community should also be measured in not only other growth of the students but also in the community members as well.  Increased measures of interest, commitment, growth, dispositions, commitment of reflection of community members should also be evaluated when assessing the productivity and success of a PLC.

References

Martin-Kniep, G. (2008). Communities that learn, lead, and last: Building and sustaining

educational expertise (pp. 77-110). San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Solutiontree. (2009, October 9). Solution Tree: Leadership in Professional Learning Communities at Work™ Learning by Doing [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9QD6xMnshA

RSA#1 Continuous Inquiry Meets Continued Critique: The Professional Learning Community in Practice and the Resistance of (Un)Willing Participants

By Chris Bohula

Online Source: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED510036.pdf

This week’s reading focused on setting up and organization of professional learning communities concluding with a self assessment for participants of a learning community (Martin-Kniep, 2010)  Martin-Kniep (2003) first suggest a purpose for the PLC be established and provides examples.   These goals should not only include learning objectives, but also expectations and opportunities for group members (Martin-Kniep, 2003).   The text gets into quite detailed suggestions for setting up, creating and assigning roles, and assessment of the community. 

Elbousty and Bratt (2010) almost provide a case study documenting the process of a Professional Learning Community from inception through the start or the following school year. They describe their PLC group as “[The PLC] quickly burgeoned into a fairly productive group, not limiting their community to their own confines but also expanding to provide assistance to middle school teachers and other high school colleagues.” (Elbousty & Bratt, 2010)  This article documented quite extensively the results from a survey gathering the teacher’s attitudes regarding collaboration similar to that found in PLCs.  The publication concludes the with the significance of having a productive and successfully established PLC.

The first and most obvious similarity between Martin-Kniep (2003) and Elbousty & Bratt (2010) was their theoretical framework regarding the implementation and rational for having a Professional Learning Community.  At time I thought I was reading the same publication.  As it turns out I was.  Both pieces citied 7 of the same sources including works from DuFour, Talbert, McLaughlin and Eaker.  Although both sources start out very similar, differences do emerge.  Most noticeably, Elbousty and Bratt (2010) move from theory to practice.  As a student hopping to apply these theories to practice, it is quite beneficial to analyze the results from a “real life” application.  For example, Martin-Kniep (2003) state “…those in a community should always want to be in it.” That would be great, but in the real world not everyone in a community will not be a member by choice.  In the Elbousty and Bratt (2010) case study it is noted that although there was not a requirement to be member, however many participants had a certain amount of peer pressure to join the community.  Seeing the results of applying PLC principles/strategies to a real world scenario provides a perspective the text doesn’t.  Another major difference between these works was the assessments uses in each.  Although both used a questionnaire/survey, the types of questions differed.  Many survey questions in the text (Martin, 2003) begin with “I am” whereas the case study questions ask for “your feelings.” (Elbousty & Bratt, 2010) This subtle difference in wording takes a survey where an individual is asked to judge oneself to share their feelings and beliefs.  I believe this shift will greatly increase the accuracy of the assessment itself. Ultimately Elbousty & Bratt (2010) provide an example where all participants in the community didn’t demonstrate the readiness suggested by the text and still created a very successful PLC.

References

Martin-Kniep, G. (2008). Communities that learn, lead, and last: Building and sustaining

educational expertise (pp. 77-110). San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Elbousty, Y.; Bratt, K. (2010). Continuous inquiry meets continued critique: the professional learning community in practice and the resistance of (un)willing participants.  Academic Leadership. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED510036.pdf

Welcome to my blog!

Welcome to my blog!