Educator Groups to Professional Learning Communities: A Case of Learning Team WW

• In Event: The Impact of a Statewide Professional Development Model for Formative Assessment on Teacher Learning and Practices

Abstract

Objectives or purposes
The purpose of this study is to determine the extent to which learning teams (LTs) functioned as PLCs, to identify elements critical for promoting learning about formative assessment within LTs, and document the growth of one learning team over time.

Perspective(s) or theoretical framework
There is a large difference between a group of teachers sitting in a room for a meeting and a professional learning community (Richmond & Manakore, 2011). Some things that define a PLC are having a common set of teaching and learning goals, shared responsibilities for work to be undertaken, and collaborative development of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) (Borko, 2004; Grossman et al., 2001; Lachance & Confrey, 2003; Little, 2002). PLCs that address content and practices provide an opportunity to promote teacher growth around formative assessment practices (Wyllie, Lyon, & Goe, 2009). However change in teacher knowledge and practice takes time and focused effort (Kennedy, 2005).

Data Sources & Methods
Research suggests that much can be understood about teacher learning through an analysis of talk, such as discussions in PLCs (Stoll, Bolan, McMahon, Wallace, & Thomas, 2007). We videotaped LT meetings for six different LTs throughout 2010-2011. We used a recursive coding process, employing both top-down and bottom-up procedures. We began with themes identified by survey data and the professional development materials. These predetermined categories were supplemented by emergent categories that were suggested by a close study of teacher interactions in their learning team meetings during the coding process. We then looked for patterns within and across LTs. This study presents results across LTs, but focuses on one LT for which we videoed 4 LT meetings throughout the year.

Results
Patterns across LTs suggest that many factors shaped the type of discussions that happened: the involvement and facilitation techniques of the coach, the perception of learning and changing practice, feelings of collegiality, and the impact of policies. For example, the WW LT, an interdisciplinary team led by a coach, JM, who is a principal, meets regularly, and tends to focus on the formative assessment process. JM fosters the in-facing conversations described by Coburn (2001). In contrast to out-facing conversations, those pre-occupied with satisfying external demands, in-facing conversations have a focus on improving teaching and learning. At WW LT meetings, conversations vacillate between specific problems of practice and ideals of the profession (Horn & Little, 2009). JM achieves this collaborative climate through a series of probing questions to promote deeper-level conversations and timely redirection that maintains focus on improving instruction. In contrast, the B LT’s coach often missed meetings and the conversations tended to be mostly outfacing, focusing on external pressures and frustrations, rather than on formative assessment.

Scientific or scholarly significance of the study or work
Documenting the characteristics of effective LTs and determining what factors influence the shift from a group of teachers to a PLC over time will provide information that can scaffold all LTs in promoting teacher learning about formative assessment.

Authors

• John L. Lane, Michigan State University

• Amelia Wenk Gotwals, Michigan State University

• Tara Kintz, Michigan State University