Standard 6: Communicates and collaborates with a variety of stakeholders

I began this program curious as to how to motivate adults to take part as active and engaged stakeholders in continuous improvement, and intimidated by the idea of working as a leader of adults, as I have limited experience with this and am younger than most of my colleagues. At the beginning of the EDU 6600: Communication and Collaboration course I reflected

I am curious to see how professional learning can be pursued through a social justice lens in this class this Quarter, as is mentioned in the article “Building Hope, Giving Affirmation” by Stephanie Hirsh and Shirley M. Hord. I do feel like social justice issues have been raised by our administration, and this year, we were encouraged to work in our PLCs to design units of work that would be accessible to low income students and our African American and Latino students. Unfortunately, we were given little time and no guidance/resources for how to do this, and so teachers more focused on designing collaborative units of work more than units designed to support specific populations of students within the school. 

Now, at the end of the course my interests and learning have come full circle. I worked on a plan to leverage Teacher Experts at my school in order to close the achievement gap between African American and Hispanic students and their peers (see project link here: collaboration-and-communication-project-proposal).

In EDAD 6589: Engaging Communities, I learned that involvement means doing to as opposed to engagement which means doing with. In this way, most schools involve parents and families through email, parent-teacher nights and/or curriculum nights, sports events, automatic caller systems, and mailing home school-related information. However, this is a one-way system where families and communities are the recipients of school information, but are not active contributors who have the power to shape the school culture or processes. As school leaders, we have a responsibility to not only involve families and communities, but to engage them in meaningful ways, to invite them and encourage them to be a part of the process where their voices are heard and considered and school-related decisions are made with them, not for them. (Ferlazzo, 2011)

I have come to learn that family engagement is critical for improving student achievement and is more than simply involving families. Involvement is making decisions for a group based on perceived needs, whereas engagement is making decisions with a group, based on real needs. As referenced in Washington State Leadership Standard Four, in order to consider needs of all stakeholders in our schools, we must establish a fluid feedback loop between families, students, staff and school leaders. This takes added creativity and effort when considering the needs of diverse groups, but is essential as we must recognize that as a school we are an integral part of a larger community, and by addressing the needs of our diverse student and family populations we are also enriching the school environment for our students and staff and modeling for our students how to function in a democracy made of diverse needs. I was able to put this into practice and design a theoretical Community Engagement Product (CEP).

I believe the first and foremost element in collaborating with parents regarding their student’s achievement is to make sure families feel welcomed and confident in communicating with school staff from the very beginning. This means educating families and designing family outreach and education programs that provide families with the resources to understand the culture of engagement at the school, understand school and district policies, and understand and believe that they are a true part of the process of their student’s achievement. For example, The American Dream Academy (ADA) is a university outreach program sponsored by Arizona State University that focused on building a bridge to higher education for a traditionally marginalized population of elementary and secondary school students in metropolitan Phoenix. (Pstross, et. al, 2014) It has trained parents to take a leadership role in the program as workshop facilitators and mentors and focused on teaching participant families how to be advocates and supporters of their children’s educational journey. A smaller version modeled after this program could be effective in schools to more actively engage families in their students’ education and have a positive impact on student learning. Investment in translation services and translation of important school documents for all languages spoken in our district would be key in order open lines of communication and make families feel welcomed and respected. Focus groups and listening sessions are other powerful strategies for eliciting and working to incorporate community voice. Inviting parents into the classroom to share skills, knowledge or expertise, engaging families from diverse backgrounds in community outreach, and by practicing and educating families on restorative justice disciplinary practices schools can make clear that family partnerships are key to student success.

According to Zepeda’s Adult Learning Theory, “adult learning should be built on ownership, appropriateness, structure, collaboration, internalizaton, reflection, and motivation.” (p.47) Throughout the course I learned various strategies that can be implemented within the school setting to engage staff in professional development that responds to how adults learn including: embedding professional development within the job, giving teachers choice over what professional development (PD) they need and how they would like to learn and thus giving teachers ownership and making sure PD is appropriate for the teacher’s level of knowledge and expertise, making sure  PD applies directly to the job, and engaging teachers in leadership opportunities throughout the school, including the opportunity to share their learning with others. (Zepeda, p.59) I agree that all these factors play integral roles in adult learning, however I believe that ownership and motivation, two qualities that are closely intertwined, are some of the most powerful but also the most frequently overlooked and under appreciated by politicians passing educational policy, and even by many district and school administrators. Possible strategies for engaging teachers in this process include:

  • Learning Communities (PLCs)
  • Job-embedded professional learning
  • Professional Coaching
  • Book studies, teacher study groups
  • Whole faculty study groups
  • Action Research

One piece of learning that I found particularly helpful in this EDU 6600 was the Principal Interview (Link here: principal-interview). After reflecting on the importance of leveraging teachers as key participants in their own professional development, I was dismayed and disappointed to realize that my principal and admin team did not employ many strategies to elicit teacher voice or engagement in the professional development process. Through this interview I learned that the process to decide whole staff development focus was often district driven, but that the admin team got together in the summer of each year to decide what the focus would be. Teachers are not consulted, nor a part of this process. The only teacher voice in professional development at our school seems to come from two sources:

  1. Teacher-initiated professional development: a teacher or whole staff request a particular training that the school funds.
  2. JAT (Juanita Administration Team) made up of Teacher Leaders (department chairs) in addition to the principal and three assistant principals: This team does give feedback to the Admin Team regarding professional development, but are not party to designing the development experiences.

For some reason unknown to me, the admin team does not seem to prioritize teacher voice in the planning of professional development. More so, according to my Principal, the team relies on their one-on-one conversations with teachers, classroom observations, and district focus to determine the direction of professional development for the year, and yes, the focus is different year to year.

Very importantly, leaders should promote teachers sharing expertise the wide range of experiences that teachers bring with them. This can be done in many ways, such as asking teachers who are exceptional in one area or another to lead break-out sessions on their areas of expertise during LEAP days (professional development days). (See link: cstp-fillingleadershipvac) In addition to this, school administrators and leaders need to frame the evaluation process as an opportunity for the principal or evaluator to ask questions, for the teacher to be reflective on his/her practice, and for administrator and teacher to engage in talk about growth opportunities and how the evaluator can help facilitate this growth (provide necessary resources, for example). If the administrator makes professional development and continued growth a priority in this evaluation disucussion, then possibly the evaluation system can be a vehicle for growth, instead of a high-stakes farce.

“If schoolwide changes about attitudes and expectations are a desired outcome, then settings that convene the entire staff for hard conversations and facilitated dialogue may be necessary first steps.” (Hirsh & Hord) The article “Building Hope, Giving Affirmation” discusses the need to support a schoolwide learning process where teachers work in teams (PLCs) to set professional learning goals, are then supported by receiving training in required/desired areas to help them build knowledge and skills that can change pedagogy or deepen content knowledge, and then bring these new ideas and skills back to their PLCs to being cycles of inquiry and data analysis to further work towards the goal. I agree this is an ideal situation, one that I would very much like to participate in. (See link here: building-hope-giving-affirmation-hirsch-and-hord)

However, in my experience, although there are regular, notable successes in collaboration and team learning, implementation of this process has often been imperfect and frustrating for a variety of reasons. My main concern coming from my professional experiences, is that there rarely, if ever, is time given to having the hard and meaningful conversations that have to happen to cause real change in individual attitudes and philosophies regarding best practice, students’ needs, assessment, and collaboration. As Hirsh & Hord mention, “while we can start with changing behaviors, if we don’t modify beliefs about our children’s needs and what is truly required to provide them social justice, we will make changes at the superficial level and will not initiate nor sustain true and lasting change (Guerra & Nelson, 2009).” 

At my school over the last two years, school administrators have been pushing us to think about our practice through a social justice lens. Last year we began talking about race, culture, and our diversifying school. We began to discuss bias and how we can or should address the needs of a multicultural student body. However, this conversation never progressed past the first two whole staff trainings. We never got to a point where strategies or training was offered to help staff develop their abilities to address needs of diverse students, or to teach multicultural education. Thus, although it was an important conversation to have, I question what change it had on actual teacher practice.

I have learned this year that collaborating with staff in a continuous learning loop is the essential foundation for a school culture open to and focused on continuous improvement. This means that principals and administrators need to re-imagine their roles and give up some leadership power to staff. In doing so, principals can empower their staff and motivate them to continue improving and learning for the betterment of students.  Zapeda mentions seven Pathways to Instructional Improvement: Increased knowledge of subject matter, increased knowledge of instruction, increased ability to observe students, stronger collegial networks, stronger connections of daily practice to long term goals, stronger motivation and sense of efficacy, and improved quality of available lesson plans. I believe that as a teacher leader, the most significant challenge when working to increase collaboration at my school would be “staff’s lack of goals and lack of understanding the connectivity required between goals and practice.” (p. 229) This is significant because the teachers I work with are mostly highly experienced, effective practitioners who keep students’ well-being at the center of all they do. I strongly believe that if teachers can connect the impact of their efforts to student impact, they will be willing to invest the time and effort, and building of trust and collaboration, that is necessary to accomplish the goal. Unfortunately, most of the collaboration we do now is mandated, top-down. Most teachers I work with do not see the goal and cannot connect the work we are mandated to do with student impact or improvement. There is thus no buy-in.  As a teacher leader or administrator, I would work to get creative to give teachers more time to collaborate. I would then set a clear expectation that increased collaboration, in order to benefit student well-being and performance is the goal. I would provide opportunities for teachers to discuss their values and build a common vision and purpose, and to build trust amongst themselves. Then I would give teachers choices in how they collaborated and with whom. I would give them options such as book studies, lesson studies, PD leadership opportunities, coaching opportunities, PCCs, etc. and teachers would have to choose at least 1 way that they would participate in one of the collaborative communities. Hopefully by giving teachers choice, staff would be able to find personal and professional meaning in the work that directly linked back to their daily work with students.

Ferlazzo, L. (2011).  Involvment or Engagement?  Educational Leadership, 68(8), 10-14.

Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: maximizing impact on learning. London: Routledge.

Hirsh, S., & Hord, S. M. (2010). Building Hope, Giving Affirmation. JSD,31(4), 10-17. Retrieved from http://www.nsdc.org.

Pstross, M., Rodriguez, A., Knopf, R. C., & Paris, C. M. (2014). Empowering Latino Parents to Transform the Education of Their Children. Education and Urban Society,48(7), 650-671. doi:10.1177/0013124514541464

Zepeda, S. (2008). Professional Development: What Works. New York: Eye on Education.

Advertisements

EDU 6600 Communication and Collaboration: Models for Collaboration

Please summarize one or two of the models of collaboration you have learned about so far that you think best align with either- 1- what you would like to see in your school, 2- what you do see in your school AND 3- what are some challenges to creating this type of collaborative model in your school? What might be a good “next step?” How has your thinking changed regarding your school’s current practice for collaboration and it’s alignment to “best practice?” Due November 7th.

My school has slowly been working to establish a more collaborative work environment. The staff does share a common vision of teaching and learning. Our principal is clear that at the heart of everything we do, we need to keep what is good for kids in mind. I think that overall our school culture would be described as a positive, collegial one where staff genuinely enjoy each other and even spend time together outside of the school day.

However, the laissez faire attitude that exists within the school has created an environment that disregards collaboration as a critical component to both professional development and improving student achievement. Currently, collaboration efforts are often mandated from “above,” either at the district level or from admin. There is little teacher buy in with current attempts to enforce participation in PLCs, attempts to create interdisciplinary teams, and classroom learning walks. I believe this comes from a lack of leader vision and shared staff vision and goals. My principal mentioned during my interview with him that he and the admin team have set a goal to be more direct with staff and they have primarily been focused on building relationships in the past and have sometimes avoided hard conversations and in my opinion, strong leadership on the need and importance of collaboration.

According to Zapeda, Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) are “a group of individuals who share a similar vision of educational values and beliefs. As a result of this shared vision, a community of learners can work toward common goals that enhance professional and personal development.” (p.83) We are currently using some sad form of PLCs at my school, and most are formed according to department or content area. Different PLCs are functioning at various levels of efficiency. A few are actively collecting and analyzing data to reflect on practice and collaborate to improve together. However, for the most part, including my own PLC, teachers work together in loosely organized and ill-defined groups that may informally share strategies and activities, but rarely, if ever, analyze data in order to improve practice and deepen our practice. For the most part, PLCs are seen as a top-down initiative with little buy-in; another hoop to jump through.

A type of learning that could include PLCs but also encompasses other types of learning is Collaborative Teacher Development. This type of professional development is not truly being implemented at my school right now, but it is a style of PD that I believe in as it encompasses teacher voice, choice and thus teacher buy-in, which I consider to be fundamental aspects of successful professional development experiences. Collaborative Teacher Development is any learning that teachers do collaboratively with others and can be structured tightly, with protocols, or in an informal way, depending on the needs of the teachers and the model being used. It can include teacher study groups and book studies. The idea behind these types of professional development is that teachers are at the center of choosing the topics of study and growth, and teachers are recognized as valuable resources to contribute to the development and growth of the whole. Teachers identify, investigate, implement, and reflect upon areas of growth that are meaningful and applicable to their practice and students, and dialogue and collaborate with other staff who share similar values and visions in order to improve their practice and school.

As I’ve learned about various models of professional learning, including the few mentioned here, I can’t help but reflect on both the positive direction we’ve been moving in, but also the great areas for growth that still exist. I believe at my school there is a belief that we are “good enough” as we are now. Teachers are bogged down with other responsibilities and thus it will take decisive vision and leadership to prioritize teacher professional development and lead us down the path of collaboration and teacher empowerment. Next steps would be for our administrators to:

  1. Make teacher professional development a priority and communicate this vision and goal to teachers, or even better, develop it WITH teachers.
  2. Create time and space to discuss values and vision. Link this to professional development.
  3. Create opportunities for teachers to choose their area for development and method for growth, whether it be in a PLC, a book study group, a coaching opportunity, attending a training or workshop and then sharing learning with staff as an in-house expert, learning walks, etc.
  4. Get creative and create time for teachers to collaborate and work together (more than our one hour Wednesday LEAP, which is irregular and often taken up with other responsibilities/commitments).
  5. Follow through-administrators need to commit to emphasizing and dedicating time and resources to the same focus for a few years in order to truly change school culture. In the three years I’ve been at my school, passing attempts at PLCs/data teams, book studies, learning walks, and interdisciplinary teams have been attempted. None have had much development or follow through however.
  6. Intentionally work to empower teachers: Give teachers more voice. What development do they need? How can they share their learning, in a meaningful way, with all staff? How can more than just Team Leaders take a leadership role? Send out leadership surveys asking teachers in what areas they feel like they could lead or share expertise. What types of areas would they like to collaborate with others? Then admin needs to work to set up these opportunities for staff to both lead and participate. Respond to teachers concerns. Let them know you listen to and value their opinion. Keep shared vision and non-negotiable values at the center.

 

 

 

EDU 6600 Communication and Collaboration: Reflection on Theories of Adult Learning

Adults and children learn in similar ways, but with marketed differences that need to be noted when planning and facilitating adult professional development. Both children and adults learn best when presented with creative opportunities, choice, structure, are given ownership of their learning, are motivated to learn, and are given opportunities to self-reflect on learning.

However, children often need more structure than adults, and adults thrive with self-directed learning and when learning is directly and immediately applicable to their life. Also, adult learning often, if not usually, involves collaborating with colleagues. Adults are more intrinsically motivated and self-directed, having learned sufficient skills to allow them to problem solve, cope with frustration, manage their time and prioritize tasks, and search for additional resources when necessary,  while children are still learning essential educational skills needed to become independent. However it is essential that adult professional development be in context and directly applicable to the learner’s daily work. It is also very important to have follow up on professional development, either through PLCs, further trainings, learning coaches, etc., as much adult learning is informal and incidental, and practitioners benefit from the reflective process, either individually or collaboratively.

According to Zepeda’s Adult Learning Theory, “adult learning should be built on ownership, appropriateness, structure, collaboration, internalization, reflection, and motivation.” (p.47) I agree that all these factors play integral roles in adult learning, however I believe that ownership and motivation, two qualities that are closely intertwined, are some of the most powerful but also the most frequently overlooked and under appreciated by politicians passing educational policy, and even by many district and school administrators.

Teacher leaders and administrators should be a facilitator of information and learning, not necessarily the source. This means their ideal role is listening to teachers or staff regarding what kind of training or resources they need, then going out and finding those resources, coming back to staff or teachers and continuing the cycle.

According to Zepeda, collaborative evaluation processes give teachers a sense of ownership in the learning and evaluation process, produce learning through participation in the evaluation process, enforce skills in self-reflection and skills in program evaluation, and improve communication among staff at different levels throughout the school. The benefits of engaging staff and stakeholders in the evaluative process of a staff development program seem to be many, yet this requires cultivating trust amongst staff and administrators.

Some new strategies for involving teachers in professional learning discussion and program evaluations that have been suggested in our group discussions  are:

  • listening sessions
  • sticky note brainstorms and then a follow up discussion
  • giving credit to others who have helped or have been a part of projects, teams, or initiatives, instead of taking the credit for ourselves

I have learned from my own professional development journey, and from watching those journeys of colleagues, that as teachers are used to being autonomous educational experts, it is essential that they own their own professional evolution. This means teachers will change at their own pace, when they are ready, and when they have compelling enough evidence to motivate them to invest the substantial amount of energy that is required to change pedagogy or practice. The old saying “you can lead a horse to water but you can’t force him to drink” is appropriate here. If governments or districts or administrators try to force teachers to change without first getting teachers’ buy in, change will not take hold, and the culture of the school will be compromised in the process. We see this happen with regularity, whether talking about No Child Left Behind, state standardized testing, professional evaluation systems, data teams or PCCs/PLCs, or adoption of new curriculums. As Hilty states “given a reinforcing school culture and a self-confident principal willing to experiment and to share some power, the raw potential for teachers to become a serious force in local school policy would appear to be enormous.” (p.87) Unless teachers are entrusted with the power to lead within the school and have their voices heard in the decision making process, whether those voices are in agreement or dissension, unless you empower teachers, it is hard to get teacher buy in and thus motivation.

Hilty, E. B. (2011). Teacher leadership: The “new” foundations of teacher education: A reader. New York: P. Lang.
Zepeda, S. J. (2008). Professional development: What works. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

Pre-Assessment: EDU 6600 Communication and Collaboration

My current experiences with professional learning practices thus far have been generally positive, but individualized more than collaborative. 

When I started in this district 3 years ago, it was my first experience with PLCs. My current knowledge of PLCs is limited, although I know that the general cycle of group inquiry begins with a collective question or goal, data collection and tracking, reflection as a group on that data, decisions made together to react to what the data tells us (sharing of best practices, trying new strategies to see who has the better results, etc.), collecting data again and continuing this cycle. I have worked in a PLC ever since joining my current school, but I have never felt like we follow this cycle as we set common goals and discuss how we are addressing these goals, but we have never compared data nor reacted to data to adjust our teaching, which I feel are actually the critical steps. There actually seems to be a true aversion to data collection with my colleagues, and I have felt jeered at recently when attempting to suggest we use data collection to improve our practice. 

Due to diverse attitudes towards data collection and collaboration in my PLC, I have chosen a more individualized and personal route of professional learning, pursuing workshops and trainings multiple times a year, organizing trainings to share with colleagues, pursuing my Masters in Teacher Leadership and working to apply this learning directly to my classroom, and pursuing my National Board Certification, which is an inherently reflective process. 

I became a teacher to help level the playing field, close the gap, play my role in making the world a more just place. However, I have not always felt like I am directly achieving this. I am curious to see how professional learning can be pursued through a social justice lens in this class this Quarter, as is mentioned in the article Building Hope, Giving Affirmation by Stephanie Hirsh and Shirley M. Hord. I do feel like social justice issues have been raised by our administration, and this year, we were encouraged to work in our PLCs to design units of work that would be accessible to low income students and our African American and Latino students. Unfortunately, we were given little time and no guidance/resources for how to do this, and so teachers more focused on designing collaborative units of work more than units designed to support specific populations of students within the school.