Building a Community of Practice for District Learning: Symmetry, Sustainability, and the Challenge of Transformation

• In Event: Creating Systemic Change for Improvement and Transformation: Affordances and Limitations of Five Efforts to Improve Instruction at Scale

Abstract

Purpose
While there are many examples in the literature of classrooms or schools that engage in widespread, equitable, deep learning (Author 2019), there are many fewer examples at the district or systems level. This paper examines the work of community of practice (COP) of the Deeper Learning Dozen, a community of 12 districts across North America—eight in the United States and four in British Columbia—that were seeking to work in a networked way towards equitable, deep learning for all students. This paper examines the affordances, limitations, and sustainability of a highly experiential community of practice as a leverage point for district-level change.

Theoretical Perspectives
Theory is functioning at two levels here: a theory of what it would entail districts to enact transformative change, and a theory of adult learning about how a COP can foster these skills, dispositions, and processes. The effort was designed around a meta-principle of symmetry (Elmore n.d, Roberts 2012, Authors 2019), in which the learning of the districts during thrice yearly convenings was intended to parallel the type of learning that districts would need to enact with local stakeholders. The designers also drew on notions of legitimate peripheral participation (Lave and Wenger 1991) and Wenger’s (1998) applied work on successful communities of practice to develop a COP that felt like an affective community, addressed participants’ felt needs, and created opportunities for mutual exchange that emphasized learning over performance (Edmondson 2018, Senge 1990, Authors 2019).

Data and Methods
This is action research; the author was one of the primary sponsors of the community of practice. This analysis draws on 9 quantitative and qualitative evaluations filled out after each convening, an overall survey that asked participants to reflect on their participation and its impact after three years, deep dive case studies of efforts in particular districts, and the many conversations the author had with district officials and COP designers over the years. To mitigate potential bias, the author has had research assistants read through the data and code for themes; more details will be presented in the fuller paper.

Results & Implications
Respondents report that the COP has been a powerful professional learning experience because of its experiential nature, norms that emphasize learning over performance, and tailoring of work to meet needs and goals of individual districts. The affective nature of the community has contributed to significant sustainability within the COP: despite ⅔ of the districts turning over superintendents, district teams have continued even despite leadership changes. At the same time, participants report that while it has accelerated and changed their thinking, they report uneven patterns of being able to replicate these kinds of changes in their districts. Respondents suggest that the COP’s emphasis on mindsets and symmetry needs to be complemented with more structural approaches to change systems if the goal is to change student outcomes; some districts were able to make these shifts but it has not been consistent across districts.

Author

• Jal David Mehta, Harvard University