Implementing Change Through PLCs IMPLEMENTAL CHANGE THROUGH PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITIES

IMPLEMENTING CHANGE THROUGH PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITIES by Michael Phan UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX SCHOOL OF ADVANCED STUDIES

2011 by Michael Phan ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Implementing Change Through PLCs Introduction This essay contains a discussion of implementing change through professional learning communities (PLCs or PLC). I will write the proposal from the perspective of an instructional leader at a public high school tasked with creating a PLC and pay special attention to the

following points: (a) Defining and justifying PLCs; (b) explaining the logistics and infrastructure of PLC creation; (c) describing professional development activities crucial to the building of a PLC; and (d) a rough timeline for action. Background: What are PLCs and Why Do They Matter? According to Fogarty and Pete (2006), a PLC is a construct that allows teaching professionals to improve their skills, invigorate their spirits, obtain helpful feedback from trusted peers, learn more, and learn how to keep learning. A PLC is a way to use the proven dynamics of support and feedback from peers, overseen by a trusted leader (such as a principal), to make teachers better at their jobs and more inclined to remain in their profession rather than burning out (Caffarella & Zinn, 1999). PLCs also raise organizational morale and generate a collaborative culture (Borko, 2004). As such, PLCs ought to be supported and funded at all levels, from the individual school all the way up to the national education budget. Research has demonstrated that such investments pay off by improving teacher performance and retention, and student improvement (Butler, Lauscher, Jarvis-Selinger, & Beckingham 2004). Logistics and Infrastructure of PLC Creation In many ways, the heart of any PLC is the set of professional activities in which teachers indulge. However, before a PLC can begin to take advantage of these value-added activities, it is important to lay a proper infrastructure and take care of logistical and planning matters. Without this kind of foundation, even a PLC with sound pedagogical design will falter.

Implementing Change Through PLCs According to Abdal-Haqq (1996), the greatest challenge to implementing effective professional development is lack of time (p. 1). The main reason that lack of time becomes a

problem is that there is disconnect between the logistical requirements of the PLC and the actual schedule of teachers. For this reason, as soon as a PLC enters design stage, it is necessary for administrators and other managerial personnel to accommodate the PLC time commitment within teachers schedules. The PLC must be treated as a mandatory activity that is going to take time out of a teachers working hours, not as a wishy-washy sort of volunteer activity that the teacher herself is responsible for finding the time to attend. Although there are many other infrastructural components of PLC success, I would pay the most attention to ensuring that the PLCs time requirements are fully budgeted into teacher schedules. Key Professional Development Activities for the PLC Developing professional development activities for the PLC ought to be done with four goals in mind: (a) Creating time and infrastructural opportunity for development; (b) choosing activities that are proven to be pedagogically effective in improving teachers skills and motivation; (c) measuring change; (d) defining success; and (e) making necessary adjustments to put the PLC back on track if it is not achieving the desired results in the desired timeframe. This general model has been offered by Dufour, Dufour, and Eaker (2008) as a means for creating highly effective and responsive PLCs. In terms of (b), there is no one fixed set of development activities that is appropriate for all communities. However, there is consensus on how to identify and enact development activities that are customized to the needs of teachers. Bransford (2000), for example, has argued that PLC development activities ought to be learner-centered, knowledge-centered, assessment-

Implementing Change Through PLCs centered, and community-centered (p. 188). There are many different interpretations of how

these four Bransford foci can be best captured in a PLC. For example, Beyerbach, Weber, Swift, and Gooding (1996) emphasized that the knowledge focus of PLC design ought to have a practical component, so that members of the community understand the practical applications of what they are being taught (pp. 101-102). For teachers, this practical component can be satisfied by understanding why, in the context of real-world problem solving, it is necessary for them to develop a new skill or refine an existing one. Another recent emphasis in coaching design for community-centered learning is the utilization of collaborative software, particularly blogs and wikis, which have the potential to span each of Bransfords (2000) focus areas for coaching design. Higdon and Topaz (2009) stated that blogs and wikis had an important role in creating a more centered learning environment, specifically by creating a shared virtual space to which all participants had to keep returning. My focus would not be on the electronic component of the PLC, although I would certainly create and support blogs, web sites, and other helpful repositories to supplement and extend the PLC experience. Instead, I see the core professional development activity of the PLC as being teacher (a) observation and (b) critique of other teachers in practice. This activity yields the most bang for the buck in a public education setting, which does not have the luxury of waiting years for results (see Knight 2005 and Killion 2007 for evidence that practical observation- and critique-oriented PLCs exercise rapid and significant impact on teacher skills and morale). As such, the PLC would have two main components in terms of development activity. The first would be observation. Teachers in the PLC would have time off to attend classes taught

Implementing Change Through PLCs by other members of the PLC. The second component would be critique. In an environment facilitated by the professor and selected educational consultants who can guide the teachers in articulating and framing their critiques helpfully and positively, teachers would then give each

other feedback on how to improve, reinforce what they like, and suggest alterations to what they do not like. This feedback can serve as homework for teachers in either altering their practices or keeping their practices the same, but with more awareness of why these practices work. All teachers would be responsible for providing feedback and also being subject to feedback. I would structure the PLC so that it met only twice a month. Making teachers give each other constant feedback would be stressful and also a means of generating inaccurate data, as teachers would eventually feel under pressure to make comments just for the sake of seeming involved in the PLC. The reality is that, although it is possible to create elaborate PLC plans that are built around pedagogical interventions, group learning, and the like, teachers are tired and under stress, and cannot make a major time or mental commitment to a second tier of learning. It is therefore necessary to structure a PLC as an institution that, for a relatively low commitment in terms of time, offers big returns by addressing the most important components of teacher performance. My PLC would be goal-oriented; it would not exist for the purpose of idealized and unrealistic forms of group learning, but rather to diagnose and treat pedagogical approaches in the classroom and to provide motivation for teachers to do well. A second outcome of the PLC would be to generate an espirit de corps in a school that is sorely lacking one. It would be unwise to turn the PLC into yet another motivation-sucker by turning it into an abstract and timeconsuming exercise with no clear goals in sight.

Implementing Change Through PLCs Timeline for Action

The PLCs timeline for action is open-ended, because, once the PLC is up and running, it will be meeting continuously. However, this section will discuss the timeline for all steps leading up to the actual first meeting of the PLC. Table 1 PLC Timetable for Action Timeframe -12 months to -9 months before go live date Actions Create fact-finding committee to deal with logistical matters relating to restructuring of teacher schedules. Identify consultants to facilitate PLC. Determine if principal needs -9 months to -6 months before go live date additional training in terms of PLC leadership. Begin to circulate the idea of the PLC among teachers so as to acclimate them to the idea in advance. Settle on school-approved methodologies for giving and receiving feedback in the PLC. Determine how participation in the PLC will fit alongside other development activities and also teacher -6 months to 0 months before go live date evaluation. Run a dummy PLC. Send teachers to other PLCs to observe critique in action. Identify teachers who will champion the PLC to other teachers. Create written collateral to serve as a guide to the PLC. Decide on what metrics will

Implementing Change Through PLCs be used to assess the success of the PLC (e.g.,

improvement in student test scores, increase in teacher retention rates, etc.). Create flowchart plan for adjusting the PLC when, after a fixed period of time, it is not being observed to have the requisite level of success. Conclusion Change in public school is unavoidable, given the complexities that exist and challenges that continue to pervade our schools. This research supports the premise that school leaders understanding of their staff and the leaders humanistic ability to lead their staff through change is imperative. Huffman and Hipp (2003) stated: A community of continuous learners professional learnersis a key element of school capacity, a way of working, and the most powerful professional development and change strategy available for improving our educational system (p. vii). If we believe that it is important to create communities of learners both in our teachers and students it is important to determine the most effective role principals should play in creating these communities.

References

Implementing Change Through PLCs Abdal-Haqq, I. (1996). Making time for teacher professional development. ERIC Digest, 199610-00, 1-7. Beyerbach, B.A., Swever, S., Swift, J.N., and Gooding, C.T. (1996). A school/business/ university partnership for professional development. The School Community Journal, 6(1), 101-112. Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15. Bransford, J. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. Butler, D.L., Lauscher, H.N., Jarvis-Selinger, S., & Beckingham, B. (2004). Collaboration and self-regulation in teachers professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(5), 435-455. Caffarella, R.S. and Zinn, L.F. (1999). Professional development for faculty: a conceptual framework of barriers and supports. Innovative Higher Education, 23(4), 241-254. DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work. San Francisco, CA: Solution Tree. Fogarty, R. & Pete, B. (2006). From staff room to classroom: A guide for planning and coaching professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Higdon, J. & Topaz, C. (2009). Blogs and wikis as instructional tools: A social software adaptation of just-in-time teaching. College Teaching, 57(2), 105-110. Huffman, J., & Hipp, K.(2003). Reculturing schools as professional learning communities. Lanham, MA: Scarecrow Education.

Implementing Change Through PLCs

Killion, J. (2007). Assessing impact: Evaluating staff development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Knight, J. (2005). A primer on instructional coaches. Principal Leadership, 5(9), 16-21.