The Use of Data Among Teachers in Professional Learning Communities

• In Event: The Culture and Politics of Professional Learning Communities

Abstract

The age of accountability has shaped the culture of teaching in significant ways. Teachers are under ever increasing pressure to improve their students’ performance on standardized test measures. While some construe this as a largely individual problem (i.e., individual teachers are responsible for improve the performance of their children), in many schools, the solutions are intended to be developed collectively. An increasing number of schools across the US are implementing professional learning communities that are oriented around the examination of student achievement data and action planning for educational improvement (Mandinach & Honey, 2008; Stoll et al., 2006). This paper addresses the question: How do educational leaders structure teacher collaboration around data use, and with what results with respect to teachers’ work?

The qualitative data for this paper were gathered as part of a case study of urban high schools across the U.S. that exhibited positive outcomes related to their implementation of data driven decision making. In each site, our research team interviewed administrators from the central office, site level administrators, and teachers across grade levels and academic disciplines. We also conducted observations of teachers working together to examine data in collaborative groups. Subsequently, qualitative data were analyzed using a conceptual framework developed for the study. Next, case reports were produced for each school site to aid in cross-site analysis. The cross site analysis allowed for an exposure of typical teacher perspectives on their work with data in PLCs, as well the responses from teachers that departed from the typical.

An analysis of the data reveals that, in the ideal scenario, teachers were provided with supportive structures and cultures in which to collaborate, but also enough autonomy to be able to make decisions and take local action on the basis of their examination of data about student learning. Structured time for collaboration was one of the supports that both districts thought was essential for data informed decision making to take place among teachers. In several schools, principals also set expectations for how meetings regarding data would be conducted. While these expectations may seem contrived or intrusive, educators indicated that these discussions helped set the tone for accountability among the staff members and ensured that meetings were purposeful. In most cases, what began as contrived meetings to discuss data evolved into spaces for more genuine collaborative activity, wherein teachers challenged each other, raised questions, and shared ideas for teaching. However, in other cases, the administrative regulation of meetings led to teachers focusing on the tasks (e.g., completing a form describing the outcome of their discussions of data), rather than having more meaningful discussions around data. These findings are discussed in light of research on teacher collaboration that discusses the tradeoffs involved with administratively organizing teacher collaboration (e.g., Hargreaves, 1994; Little & Curry, 2009; Stoll, 2009). Implications for research and policy are discussed.

Author

• Amanda L. Datnow, University of California - San Diego