RSA2 - What Research Tells Us: Common Characteristics of Professional Learning that Leads to Student Achievement.

Full Text

http://web.b.ebscohost.com.cucproxy.cuchicago.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=30b9220a-80d0-4392-85d6-4e690109791e%40sessionmgr113&vid=9&hid=108

     The topic of this week’s module looked at which methods of professional development have the most impact on student learning. The article “Teaching Teachers: Professional Development to Improve Student Achievement” (Hill & Cohen, 2005) cited three main ways that teachers can significantly improve student learning through professional development. They include focusing on how students learn a particular subject matter, instructional practices that are specifically related to the subject matter and how students understand it, and strengthening teachers’ knowledge of specific subject matter content.

     While Hill and Cohen find three clear ways to help teacher development, it must be noted that the article is from 2005, nearly 10 years ago. A second, more recent article, "What Research Tells Us: Common Characteristics of Professional Learning that Leads to Student Achievement" (Blank, 2013) also explored the relationship between professional development and student achievement. Blank identified 16 significant studies, of more than 400 hundred published professional development studies ( (Blank, 2013, p. 52), that scientifically proved that student learning had achieved gains because of professional development. The article came to some significant, data driven solutions, which suggest that the type of professional development given, does have impact on student learning.

     Both articles come to two very similar conclusions on teacher development.  The first is that professional development must focus on a way for teachers to directly apply what they learn to their teaching.  According to Hill and Cohen (2005),  “Research shows that professional development leads to better instructions and improved student learning when it connects to the curriculum materials that teachers use. (p. 2) The second conclusion is “that the more time teachers spend on professional development, the more significantly they change their practices”. (Hill & Cohen, 2005, p. 2) Blank agrees by saying that teachers need both “More time for professional learning” (p. 52) and “Longer duration of professional learning” (p. 52).

     Both articles agree that in order to move student learning, teachers need professional development that is focused on the content that they teach, and that they need more of that type of professional development than they are currently receiving.

Works Cited

Blank, R. (2013, Feb). What Research Tells Us: Common Characteristics of Professional Learning that Leads to Student Achievement. Journal of Staff Development, 34(1), 50-53.

Hill, H., & Cohen, D. (2005). Teaching Teachers: Professional Development to Improve Student Achievement. Research Points, 3(1), 1-4.

RSA1 - In Praise of Isolation: Who says PLCs are a better way?

In Praise of Isolation: Who says PLCs are a better way?
http://web.b.ebscohost.com.cucproxy.cuchicago.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=aa0fd124-1030-4e14-b4c1-fc46be4d8e41%40sessionmgr115&vid=5&hid=123

                For years, teachers have been working in isolation from each other. In his article “Work together: But only if you want to”, Rick DuFour addresses the problem of teacher that view the classroom as their personal domains and have little access to the ideas or strategies of their colleagues. (DuFour, 2011) He attacks the idea that teachers can consider themselves professional if they refuse to collaborate in a coordinated and systematic effort to support the students they serve. (DuFour, 2011) Dufour’s solution to creating a professional environment amongst teachers is to implement Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) within schools. (DuFour, 2004) Given the validity of the arguments presented in DuFour’s article, I found myself questioning what arguments one would give towards not implementing a PLC within a school.

                My research led me to find the article “In praise of isolation: Who says PLCs are a better way?” by James O’Keeffe. In his article, O’Keeffe argues against the implementation of PLCs by stating that meaningful collaboration cannot be coerced and efficiently managed by administrators or experts, and that teacher isolation is a safeguard against bad ideology. (O'Keeffe, 2012) O’Keeffe would have you believe that the true aim of a PLC is to give building or district administration a way to indoctrinate teachers to conform to their bidding. He goes as far in his argument to not conform to these bidding's as to state that “Global answers to ideological questions are destructive”, and that “Contrived collaboration, imposed and managed through hierarchy, is meaningless and paradoxical.” (O'Keeffe, 2012) He insists that school administration is simply looking to apply the newest fads to solve the problem of improving student scores. He argues that to protect teachers from being forced to apply the newest trends in education teachers should work autonomously in their classroom and do what they believe is in the best interest of their students. He states, “Teacher autonomy is a critical safeguard against bad ideology.” (O'Keeffe, 2012)

                What I find ironic with O’Keeffe’s article is that he opens the article, in which he opposes PLCs, by giving an account of his teaching practices. In this account he speaks of how he meets with teachers to discuss student learning, create a viable curriculum, create common assessments, analyze student data, and create needed interventions. In fact, as I read the opening of his article, it appeared as if he were about to argue for the use of PLCs, as he was practicing all things good that they intend. Instead, he argues for not using them, as he believes they do not work when forced by administration. It’s as if he is taking the stance that these strategies work for him because he was not forced to, and if you force someone else to use these strategies, you will be hurting the teachers independent thought. What he fails to argue is the fact that not only do these strategies work for him, there is abundant research linking higher levels of student achievement to educators who work in the collaborative culture of a professional learning community. (DuFour, 2011) He also fails to acknowledge that in a PLC, teachers still spend much of their time working autonomously, and continue to have tremendous latitude in their individual practice. (DuFour, 2011)

                O’Keeffe insists that PLCs are a fad being forced upon teachers by administrators looking to wield their power of control. He likens using them to being forced to conform to the bidding's of others and give up all independent thought of your own. What he fails to mention in his article is that PLCs are not just a fad being forced by administrators, but rather, that almost all professional organizations in education, including the National Education Association, have specifically endorsed the premise that educators should work collaboratively. (DuFour, 2011) The fact that O’Keeffe doesn’t want to be forced to participate in a PLC, yet does so in practice, lends more credibility to the overriding argument in DuFour’s article that schools cannot just encourage teachers to collaborate, but instead must require professional collaboration in the routine practice of the school. (DuFour, 2011)

References

DuFour, R. (2004). What is a "Professional Learning Community"? Educational Leadership, 6-11.

DuFour, R. (2011, February). Work Together: But Only if You Want to. Phi Delta Kappan, 92, 57-61.

O'Keeffe, J. (2012, April). In Praise of Isolation: Who Says PLCs Are a Better Way? Phi Delta Kappan, 93, 56-58.

 

1st Post

Welcome to my education blog.