Showing posts with label PLC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PLC. Show all posts

3.13.2011

PLC Readiness Survey

In my PLC class, we are simulating PLC's and worked together to create a PLC readiness survey to give to the other teachers in our school who are not taking the class. We started out by all writing our own questions on issues we thought needed to be addressed. Our instructor compiled them and tried to cluster them together. We went through and voted on the ones we liked the most. Every group has the same first 11 questions. Then each group added 3-5 of their own depending on who they were giving their surveys to: elementary, middle, or high. My group was the high school group.

I wanted to share this survey in case it was something that other schools who want to implement the PLC model might find useful or at least a stepping stone to the PLC mindset.

We based the first questions on the Likert scale and then threw in some open ended questions.
  1. I feel comfortable with my peers observing my class
  2. The faculty works well together to explore skills and strategies to improve student learning.
  3. I am committed to continuously seeking out opportunities to improve my teaching.
  4. Our school has a supportive environment for students.
  5. Our school has a supportive environment for staff.
  6. Our district has a culture of trust and commitment.
  7. Instructors have a voice and ownership in our school.
  8. I value collaborative planning and sharing among faculty.
  9. I am willing to collaborate with my peers.
  10. I use the results of assessments to guide student learning.
  11. Our school would see improved student achievement data as a result of implementing a system of teacher collaboration and data analysis.
  12. I am willing to talk to faculty members about my teaching methods and my ideas.
  13. Staff members work together to search for solutions to address diverse student needs.
  14. What concerns you most about peer observation? (Open-ended)
  15. How can we use assessment data toward more positive outcomes? (Open-ended)
  16. What disadvantages do you see with collaborative planning periods? (Open-ended)

3.09.2011

SBG + PLC = I Finally Get It

This one article assigned in our PLC class has finally cemented how SBG should work FOR ME.

*from Revisiting Professional Learning Communities at Work pg 190-193
Dufour, Dufour, & Eaker, 2008

Diana, Se, Marie, and Amy, the second-grade team at Westlawn Elementary, began their collaborative process for improving  math proficiency for their students by engaging in collective inquiry regarding the current results and practices in second-grade math. Their math achievement data from the previous year's summative district assessment indicated 78% of second graders met or exceeded the district's proficiency target in math. They agree to establish a team SMART goal to improve upon last year's results by at least 10% on that same summative district assessment. The goal was strategic in that it was aligned with the school's goal to increase the percentage of students meeting or exceeding proficiency in math as measured on local, county, state, and national indicators. The team goal was measurable because it asked for a 10% increase over the previous year. The team believed the goal was attainable because improved results (higher levels of student learning) were required to achieve the goal. It was time-bound because the goal was to be accomplished within the course of the school year.

Prior to developing strategies to achieve their goal, Diana, Se, Marie, and Amy had a candid conversation about how they had approached the math curriculum in the previous year. They acknowledged they had followed the same 4-step pattern for each unit:
  • Step 1. Administer the pre-assessment from the textbook.
  • Step 2. Teach the unit.
  • Step 3. Administer the post-assessment from the textbook.
  • Step 4. Move on to the next unit, repeating steps 1 through 3.
They recognized they would only improve student performance in math across second grade by seeking out and implementing new and better practices. They committed to each other to use the team learning process of a PLC to guide their teamwork throughout that year.

What Did They Do?
1. They clarified the 8 to 10 most essential student learning outcomes (skills, concepts, dispositions) in math for each semester by doing the following:
  • Talking with the third-grade team to determine the skills and concepts most essential to student success in math for entering third graders
  • Analyzing and clarifying their state and division second-grade math standards
  • Consulting with school and division math specialists to clarify multiple interpretations of the same standards
  • Analyzing the district assessment, and identifying where their students had struggled in the previous year.
  • Developing a math curriculum map and common pacing guide they all agreed to follow
2. They created a series of common formative assessments aligned to the essential math outcomes by doing the following:

  • Studying the language and format of the district's summative assessment of second-grade math
  • Selecting appropriate items aligned to the essential math skills from math textbooks, individual teacher assessments, and state and national websites providing released math items
  • Creating new items deemed by the members of the team to be valid ways of assessing the essential skills
  • Including at least five items per skill on each common assessment to provide students an adequate opportunity to demonstrate their proficient
  • Increasing the number and frequency of assessments so that only two or three skills were considered on each assessment
3. They established a proficiency target of 80% for each skill on each assessment. For example, if they used five terms to assess a particular skill, students needed to solve four of the five problems correctly to be deemed proficient.

4. They collectively analyzed the results from each common formative assessment, identifying, skill by skill, the individual students throughout second grade whose scores exceeded, met, or fell below the team's proficiency target.

Through this collaborative analysis of common formative assessment data, the team was quickly able to do the following:
  • Identify individual students who were experiencing difficulty on any skill.
  • Identify individual students who were already highly proficient
  • Create flexible groups of students across the grade level for the intervention/enrichment period each day based on skill-by-skill proficiency.
  • Establish a protected block of time each day for the team, resource specialists, and instructional assistants to provide students with coordinated and precise intervention and enrichment based on students' personal needs.
  • Identify the teachers whose students were experiencing the greatest success on each skill.
  • Assign students who were struggling with a particular skill to work with the teachers experiencing the best results in that skill on the common assessments during their intervention/enrichment period.
  • Explore and discuss the strategies being used in individual classrooms
The team also engaged students in the process of monitoring their own learning by requiring each student to maintain simple bar graphs indicating his or her proficiency on each essential math skill. Items on the assessment were arranged by skill, and each item was assigned its own box on the graph. After every common assessment, students would color in the box for each item they answered correctly. As individual students discovered they had not not met the proficiency target on a particular math skill or concept, they knew to report to the corresponding small-group tutorial during the intervention/enrichment period to receive additional support for their learning.

At the completion of this skill-driven cycle, the team administered another form of the common assessment to students who had experienced difficulty on any of the essential skills. At that point, new student learning groups were formed. Students who demonstrated proficiency were moved to enrichment groups, while students who continued to struggle were moved to smaller, more intensive group interventions.

This intervention/enrichment process ensured that any student in second grade who was having difficulty understanding a skill would receive intensive, small-group instruction from the most effective teacher on the team for that particular skill. The process allowed the team to continue with new direct instruction during the regular math period each day, so the difficulties of a few did not adversely impact the opportunity for all students to learn new material. Meanwhile, the team continued to build shared knowledge of the best way to help young students acquire math  skills through  a collective study of the research on the topic. At the same tine, however, members were conducting their own action research on effective math instruction and learning from one another.

2.21.2011

PLC: Readings

Week One:

Theory Into Practice, pg 281-290
Professional Learning Communities: Teachers, Knowledge, and Knowing
Diane R. Wood

Canadian Journal of Education 32, (2009) pg 149-171
Who is the "Professional" in a Professional Learning Community? An Exploration of Teacher Professionalism in Collaborative Professional Development Settings
Laura Servage

Professional Learning Communities and Communities of Practice: A Comparison of Models, Literature Review
Selena S. Blankenship and Wendy E.A. Ruona

Week 2:


The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, Winter 2010 pg 10-17
Professional Learning Communities: Overcoming the Roadblocks
Nan Lujan and Barbara Day


California Schools, Spring 2010, pg 4-9
Professional Learning Communities Allow a Transformational Culture to Take Root
Kristi Garrett

Reframing Organizations pg 240-269
Ch 12 Organizational Culture and Symbols
Lee G. Bolman and Terrence E. Deal

Week 3:

Academic Leadership Volume 8, Issue 2 Spring 2010 pg 1-7

Continuous Inquiry Meets Continued Critique: The Professional Learning Community In Practice And The Resistance Of (Un)willing Participants
Youness Elbousty, Kirstin Bratt


Teachers College Record, Volume 112, Number 1, January 2010, pg 182-224
Learning From Success as Leverage for a Professional Learning Community: Exploring an Alternative Perspective of School Improvement Process
Chen Schechter

Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, v83 n5 p175-17
Leading Deep Conversations in Collaborative Inquiry Groups
Tamara Holmlund Nelson; Angie Deuel; David Slavit; Anne Kennedy


Wikipedia
Professional learning community

2.17.2011

PLC: Week Two

A mission statement is why we're here and a vision statement says where we'd like to be. It's our driving force. We should own it. It should be simple, realistic, and straightforward.

Organizational culture: 'how we do things here'.

We need leaders to craft space for teachers.

We need self-observation as well as pure observations.

We need infrastructure for PLC type of learning.

Results on one test don't tell you everything you need to know, but it does tell you something.

What are you taking away from collaboration? Do you want collaboration? Are you comfortable with observations?

Are we really willing to commit to everyday, continuous improvement?

PLC: Week One

PLC: We plan and implement common assessments, review data, and analyze individual student learning. Every student matters. We come together to decide what should be taught, how it should be taught, and how to achieve mastery.

PLCs can't exist without an organizational structure.

PLCs ask, what can we do about students who are not learning? How can we work together to find solutions?

All assessments give us more pieces of the puzzle of student learning. Everything is informative.

PLCs are:
  • a form of job embedded professional development
  • a formal title of what some schools already do through mentoring/collaboration
  • collegial professional learning. We need people to work and talk with. We want to find out what other people are doing.
  •  interactive learning as opposed to the "sit and get"
  •  learning by doing
  •  a variety of contact: face to face or online
  • results oriented; want to know the 'what' as opposed to the 'how'

PLC: The Start of Something New

Thanks to our school improvement grant, 20 teachers from my school have the opportunity to take a graduate level course for free. We are partnering with a local university and hoping that it will smoothly transition into a cohort where we can earn our master's degree in teacher leadership. So far, this is our pilot class and the instructor comes to us on Monday night from 3:15 to 5:45. The class is called Professional Learning Communities and Curriculum and the university developed it specifically for our school. If it  goes well, they plan to implement it into their regular program.

Our first class was January 24th. I plan to post some notes that I'm keeping from each session. We've also been given some readings and if you are interested in what those are, please comment and I'll try to post titles/authors.

The 20 of us have been broken down into smaller groups to try to simulate a real PLC type setting. Our first assignment has been working together to develop a PLC readiness survey that we will give to other teachers in our school who are not taking the class. To me, it seems pointless because regardless of whether we are ready or not, we're doing it.

We've started meeting on Wednesday mornings from 7:15 to 8:00 based on content area. We started the first week by discussing norms. The meetings are not mandatory this year and we are being paid for each meeting that we attend.  So norms were kind of hard to decide since technically, we don't have to show up.  Next year we are going to eight periods so that we can have built in collaboration time which will then be mandatory.

But anyway, I think it's going to be super hard to have PLCs when we don't have any common classes. I am the only algebra and geometry teacher. Every teacher is the only teacher. How are we supposed to collaborate? How do we create common assessments? Yes, we can implement strategies and games and lesson formats, but somehow I think we are missing the point. We are the first small school in Illinois to try this and we are supposed to be setting the example for other small schools. We are pioneers and the terrain is tough!

Yesterday was our monthly in-service and we talked about exciting things such as exit exams for every course, student portfolios that show mastery of every required standard (basically a sbg report card!), aligning curriculum K-12, and implementing grade level vocabulary standards.

I think we are doing everything I want to do but I get frustrated because there is no manual on how to do this.

I can't wait to get started!