1. +
Overview: Teacher Leadership in Action: Part 2
Teacher Leadership
Megan Moscato Hoff
The American College of Education
Professional
Learning
Communities
(PLC)
Communities
of Practice
(CoP)
Critical
Friends
Group
Collaborative
Leadership
Frameworks
What are they?
2. +
Presentation Contents
3. Critical
Friends Group
(CFG)
2. Communities
of Practice
(CoP)
1. Professional
Learning
Communities
(PLC)
Which one
best fits our
leadership
initiative?
3. +
What is a PLC?
“Schools create a systematic response – processes
to monitor each student’s learning and ensure that a
student who struggles is provided additional time
and support for learning according to a schoolwide
plan.”
Data collection and analysis
Response is timely and directive
“Students are identified as soon as they experience
difficulty, allowing the school to focus on intervention
rather than mediation.”
Students are required to receive extra instruction to
help them improve their performance in school
DuFour, 2004a, p.
63
4. +
What are the characteristics of a
PLC?
Has purpose
Use of inquiry cycle
Clear expected outcomes
Has staying power
Utilizes group collective talents
Focuses on results
Centered around student learning
Ban, 2015a and Nelson, LeBard, & Waters, 2010
8. +
Presentation Contents
3. Critical
Friends Group
(CFG)
2. Communities
of Practice
(CoP)
1. Professional
Learning
Communities
(PLC)
Which one
best fits our
leadership
initiative?
9. +
What is a CoP?
“A community of practice consists of members that share
more than simply an interest; a community of practice
shares expertise, competence, learning, activities,
discussions, information, tools, stories, experiences, and a
knowledge base” (Seaman, 2008, p. 270).
“A community of practice (CoP) is defined as a group
whose members regularly participate in collaborative,
learning and knowledge-sharing activities on issues of
common interest. This community is characterized by the
mutual commitment of its members as well as
complementary knowledge and know-how. In this context,
what makes a CoP successful are the quality and depth of
the relationships emerging from the common practice
which constitutes the centre of the interest of the group”
(Bouchamma & Brie, 2014, p. 81).
10. +
What are the characteristics of a
CoP?
The Domain: shared interest
The Community: shared activities and
relationships
The Practice: shared repertoire for their
practice
Ban, 2015b
13. +
Presentation Contents
3. Critical
Friends Group
(CFG)
2. Communities
of Practice
(CoP)
1. Professional
Learning
Communities
(PLC)
Which one
best fits our
leadership
initiative?
14. +
What is a CFG?
“Critical Friends Groups are vehicles for creating
collective intentionality that reaches a shared end:
increased opportunity for the disadvantaged to create
equality of opportunity” (Law, 2005, p. 56).
CFG is a "school-wide professional community aimed
at fostering members’ capacities to undertake
instructional improvement and schoolwide reform.
Together, CFG members seek to increase student
learning and achievement through ongoing practice-
centered collegial conversations about teaching and
learning” (Curry, 2008, p. 733).
15. +
What are the characteristics of a
CFG?
Consistent and
focused
Focused on own
teaching and
own student
learning
Small,
supportive group
Principal support
Ban, 2015c
18. +
Presentation Contents
3. Critical
Friends Group
(CFG)
2. Communities
of Practice
(CoP)
1. Professional
Learning
Communities
(PLC)
Which one
best fits our
leadership
initiative?
19. +
Our Leadership Initiative
Integrating
Technology in Music
Class
• Use technology in a way
that enriches other
academic areas
• Provide technological
growth in the music
classroom
• Implemented by teacher
leaders
20. +
Would a PLC fit our leadership
initiative?
Groups are data driven and student centered
Focuses on specific problems to improve student learning
“Grade-level teachers who teach the same subject should
work together to answer these questions” (Leane, 2014,
p. 44)
A PLC would focus on student learning and teacher
collaboration while establishing a clear set of
expectations and outcomes
Examples of PLC in D62: School Leadership Team (SLT)
and grade level teams
21. +
Would a CoP fit our leadership
initiative?
Anyone with a common passion or interest can join a
CoP
Focuses on sharing knowledge and resources with other
teachers
“What can we do to improve our practice?” (Bouchamma &
Brie, 2014, p. 81)
A CoP would be used to get more teachers interested in
music/technology involved in the project
Examples of PLC in D62: No formal groups within our
district
22. +
Would a CFG fit our leadership
initiative?
Focuses on improving teaching
“CFG is believed to promote both teacher learning and
student outcomes” (Vo & Nguyen, 2010, p. 206).
Colleagues provide support and constructive critique
through observations (Vo & Nguyen, 2010)
Teachers can collaborate on topics for songs for the
students to write
Examples of PLC in D62: Small Capturing Kids’ Hearts
Groups
23. +
PLC, CoP, or CFG?
And the winner is…
Professional Learning
Community or a PLC!
24. +
Why is the rational for choosing a
PLC?
Focus on student learning and academic
achievement in the music classroom while
incorporating technology and core subjects
Encourage collaboration among various teachers to
determine what will benefit student learning and
assist students who may be struggling
Use data to shape instructional practice and set
goals for our PLC
PLCs are commonly practiced in the district and a
framework colleagues are familiar with
25. +
Our Launch: The Power of Learning
Communities
Learning Communities Animation Video
26. +
References
Ban, Eric (Lecturer). (2015a). Professional Learning Communities
(Video recorded guest lecture number 2, Course CI5393: Teacher
Leadership). Chicago, IL: American College of Education.
Ban, Eric (Lecturer). (2015b). Communities of Practice. (Video
recorded guest lecture number 3, Course CI5393: Teacher
Leadership). Chicago, IL: American College of Education.
Ban, Eric (Lecturer). (2015c). Critical Friends Group. (Video recorded
guest lecture number 4, Course CI5393: Teacher Leadership).
Chicago, IL: American College of Education.
Bouchamma, Y. & Brie, J. (2014). Communities of Practice and Ethical
Leadership. International Studies In Educational Administration
(Commonwealth Council For Educational Administration &
Management (CCEAM)), 42(2), 81-96.
27. +
References
Brodie, K. K. (2013). The Power of Professional Learning Communities.
Education As Change, 17(1), 5-18.
doi:10.1080/16823206.2013.773929
Curry, M. W. (2008). Critical Friends Groups: The Possibilities and
Limitations Embedded in Teacher Professional Communities Aimed
at Instructional Improvement and School Reform. Teachers College
Record, 110(4), 733-774.
DuFour, R. (2004a). Culture Shift Doesn't Occur Overnight – Or Without
Conflict. Journal of Staff Development, 25(4), 63-64. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.ace.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview
/211519167?accountid=31683
DuFour, R. (2004b). What is ‘Professional Learning Community’?
Educational Leadership, (8)6, 6-11.
Fahey, K. M. (2011). Still Learning about Leading: A Leadership Critical
Friends Group. Journal Of Research On Leadership Education,
6(1), 1-35.
Law, B. (2005). Creating Moral Schools: The Enabling Potential of
Critical Friends Groups. Educational Horizons, 84(1), 53-57.
28. +
References
Law, B. (2005). Creating Moral Schools: The Enabling Potential of Critical
Friends Groups. Educational Horizons, 84(1), 53-57.
Leane, B. (2014). How I learned the value of a true PLC. Phi Delta Kappan,
95(6), 44-46.
Nelson, T. H., LeBard, L., & Waters, C. (2010). How to Create a Professional
Learning Community. Science & Children, 47(9), 36-40.
Seaman, M. (2008) Birds of a Feather? Communities of Practice &
Knowledge Communities. Curriculum d Teaching Dialog, 10(1-2), p.
269-279.
Teague, G. M., & Anfara Jr., V. A. (2012). Professional Learning
Communities Create Sustainable Change Through Collaboration.
Middle School Journal, 44(2), 58-64.
Vo, L. T., & Nguyen, H. M. (2010). Critical Friends Group for EFL Teacher
Professional Development. ELT Journal, 64(2), 205-213.
Wenger, E. C., & Snyder, W. M. (2000). Communities of Practice: The
Organizational Frontier. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 139-145.
Editor's Notes
Today we are going to discuss three main collaborative leadership frameworks that are used in schools throughout the country. The three frameworks are Professional Learning Communities (PLC), Communities of Practice (CoP), and Critical Friends Group (CFG). All three promote collaboration and shared leadership within a school.
Today we are going to talk about three collaborative leadership frameworks that are commonly used in schools. Each one encourages shared leadership among group members and plays an important role in the school environment. The first one we will discuss is Professional Learning Communities.
What exactly are PLCs? According to DuFour (2004a), PLCs “create a systematic response – processes to monitor each student’s learning and ensure that a student who struggles is provided additional time and support for learning according to a schoolwide plan” (p. 63). DuFour (2004a) also stated, “students are identified as soon as they experience difficulty, allowing the school to focus on intervention rather than mediation”(p. 63). When a student is in need of remediation, the response is timely and directive in order to address the students needs immediately.
Boudett, City, & Murnane provide an excellent example of what a PLC might look like. According to Boudett et al. (as cited in Brodie, 2013), “students might be able
to solve simple, single-step problems in mathematics, but cannot go further to solve multi-step problems (learner need). If teachers choose this as their focus, they need to work out why learners struggle with multi-step problems, what in their current teaching has not helped learners to solve multi-step problems (problem of practice), and how they might shift their teaching to help learners” (p. 6).
We currently have many groups similar to PLCs within our district. Typically, a PLC is a group of teachers comprised of grade level teams, interdisciplinary teams, or department teams (Teague & Anfara, 2012).
PLCs are extremely data driven. The data is used to measure student learning and set goals for student achievement. According to Brodie (2013), ”the use of data provides a means whereby teachers can identify real learner needs, rather than working only with their own intuitions as to what learners need. Data might confirm what teachers know to be the problem, or they might suggest a problem that teachers do not know about” (p. 7).
A PLC has many characteristics that make it stand out from the other two frameworks. This type of group has a purpose, a clear set of expected outcomes, staying power, utilizes group collective talents and, centered around student learning (Ban, 2015a). The use of inquiry cycles is also commonly used in a PLC (Nelson, LeBard, & Waters, 2010). Inquiry cycles will be touched on later in this presentation.
Additional characteristics of a PLC focus on the “big ideas” of the group. The three big ideas are ensuring that students learn, building a culture of collaboration, and focusing on results. To ensure student learning, the group needs to contemplate these three questions:
What do we want students to learn?
How will we know when each studenf has learned it?
How will we respond when a student experiences difficulty in learning? (Ban, 2015a)
The culture of collaboration is built through a positive environment that creates relationships within the group (Ban, 2015a). Creating supportive and positive relationships is essential for the success of a PLC and achieved by establishing norms and structure within the group (Ban, 2015a). Focusing on results will require data collection and analysis to see what needs to be done to improve student learning (Ban, 2015a). A PLC will focus on results by setting goals based off the data collected from their students.
Some PLC activities are implementing common actions and collecting data, using the inquiry cycle, participating in deep conversations, and analyzing student thinking through collaboration. All of these are common activities for teachers within our district.
The inquiry cycle is a significant component of a PLC (Nelson, LeBard, & Waters, 2010). This cycle uses the three phases (focus, implement, and analyze) to improve student learning and keep teachers moving forward toward a goal (Nelson, LeBard, & Waters, 2010). Inquiry cycles are most often found in a PLC where it may not be as commonly used in the other two frameworks.
Here is a video to help further clarify PLCs.
The next framework we will discuss is Communities of Practice, otherwise known as CoPs.
What is a CoP? According to Seaman (2008), “a community of practice consists of members that share more than simply an interest; a community of practice shares expertise, competence, learning, activities, discussions, information, tools, stories, experiences, and a knowledge base” ( p. 270). CoPs are also “defined as a group whose members regularly participate in collaborative, learning and knowledge-sharing activities on issues of common interest. This community is characterized by the mutual commitment of its members as well as complementary knowledge and know-how. In this context, what makes a CoP successful are the quality and depth of the relationships emerging from the common practice which constitutes the centre of the interest of the group” (Bouchamma & Brie, 2014, p. 81). This type of framework centers around the common interest of the group and cultivating their practice.
So, how do CoPs typically function? According to Wenger and Snyder (2000), “a community of practice may or may not have an explicit agenda on a given week, and even if it does, it may not follow the agenda closely. Inevitably, however, people in communities of practice share their experiences and knowledge in free-flowing, creative ways that foster new approaches to problems” (p. 139).
The characteristics of a CoP are the domain, the community, and the practice. The unique components of this learning community is that a common interest is what bonds the group together. This is a very distinct trait that the other two frameworks lack. The community centers their discussions, ideas, knowledge and stories around their passion.
Another unique characteristic of a CoP is that these groups are “informal - they organize themselves, meaning they set their own agendas and establish their own leadership” (Wenger & Snyder, 2000, p. 142).
Some CoP activities are :
Problem Solving
Requests for information
Seeking experiences
Reusing assets
Coordination and Synergy
Discussing developments
Visits
Mapping knowledge and identifying gaps
All of these activities focus on improving the group’s common interest.
Here are two videos to help explain a CoP in more detail.
The last framework we will talk about is a Critical Friends Group, as known as a CFG.
What is a CFG or Critical Friends Group? Law (2005) defines a CFG as “vehicles for creating collective intentionality that reaches a shared end: increased opportunity for the disadvantaged to create equality of opportunity” (p. 56). According to Curry (2008), Critical Friends Group is a "school-wide professional community aimed at fostering members’ capacities to undertake instructional improvement and schoolwide reform. Together, CFG members seek to increase student learning and achievement through ongoing practice-centered collegial conversations about teaching and learning” ( p. 733).
A CFG focuses on improving teacher skills by providing valuable support and feedback to one another. Many times these groups are referred to as support groups among colleagues and is meant to be a group to help and encourage peers.
How would a CFG work or accomplish their goals? According to Ban (2015), CFGs could use a cycle of improvement to improve teacher skills. This cycle would include teacher reflection, action, feedback, and student achievement. Reflection and feedback are two significant aspects of CFGs that are not widely used practices in the previous frameworks. Colleagues would use this cycle to help support and assist each other to become more effective teachers.
The characteristics of a CFG are that the group is consistent and focused, focused on their own teaching and own student learning, comprised of a small, supportive group, and often times needs the support from administration (Ban, 2015c).
According Anneberg Institute for School Reform (as cited in Fahey, 2011), “the CFG model is characterized by two essential elements: (a) regular, intentional use of protocols that build the skills of collaboration and reflection as well as focus on teaching and learning and (b) skilled facilitation that supports the professional learning of the group” (p. 6).
Similar to a CoP, Critical Friends Groups focus on improving teaching skills.
Some CFG activities are:
Evaluate student work
Evaluate teacher work
Problem Solving
Discussing texts
Observing peers
Setting Goals
Building teams
The goal of these activities are to provide constructive feedback to colleagues to help them become more effective teachers.
Here is a video for more clarification of a CFG.
Now that we have discussed all three frameworks, let’s review our leadership initiative and how it fits with each framework.
The leadership initiative that our group decided on last week is integrating technology in music class. Our goals for this initiative are to use technology in a way that enriches other academic areas, provide technological growth in the music classroom, and implement the initiative without involving administration. Now that we have learned about all three frameworks, we need to pick which one would best fit our leadership initiative.
What would a PLC mean for our leadership initiative? Remember that Professional Learning Communities are data driven and student centered. These groups focus on specific problems to improve student learning. The strong emphasis on data use and student learning makes a PLC more similar to the grade level teams and School Leadership Teams in our district. All these groups display many characteristics of a PLC.
Picking a PLC for our leadership initiative would ensure that there is a strong focus on student learning and encourage teacher collaboration. Choosing a PLC will also establish a clear set of expectations and outcomes. Data relating to technology use in music would be collected to measure student achievement and ensure student learning.
Let’s look at a CoP and see if it would be a good fit for our leadership initiative. A CoP is created by a common interest or passion that brings all types of different teachers together, including colleagues from different schools. Instead of being student centered like a PLC, CoPs are centered around teachers improving their common interest or passion. Teachers within a CoP would ask “what can we do to improve our practice” to improve their teaching (Bouchamma & Brie, 2014, p. 81). Our passion would be centered around music and technology, so our group would be asking what we could do to improve these two areas.
Forming a CoP for our leadership initiative would bring together colleagues within our building that share a common interest in music and technology. This group would share knowledge, resource, experiences, and stories to help improve the use of technology in music class.
Although aspects of Communities of Practice are used on a one on one basis, there is no formal CFGs in our district at this time.
What about a Critical Friends Group? How will this impact our leadership initiative? Critical Friends Groups are created to support colleagues and improve teaching skills throughout the group. “CFG is believed to promote both teacher learning and student outcomes” (Vo & Nguyen, 2010, p. 206). Colleagues also provide support and constructive critique through observations (Vo & Nguyen, 2010). Like a CoP, a Critical Friends Group also focuses on educators and their teaching skills.
Our small groups for CKH stands out as a group that has many similar traits to a CFG.
Creating a CFG for our leadership initiative will help establish a more supportive environment among colleagues. It will also encourage teachers to observe their colleagues’ use of technology within the classroom and improve how it is used throughout the district. Choosing a CFG would also mean collaborators would evaluate teacher and student work to determine areas in need of improvement.
All three have great attributes that would benefit our initiative, but let’s discuss which one would be the best fit for our group.
Our group agreed that a PLC is an ideal fit for our leadership initiative because of its focus on student learning and improvement. These important characteristic of a PLC made this framework stand out to our team.
Another great attribute of PLCs is the collaboration among colleagues to continue to benefit student learning. Choosing this framework will bring together a team of teachers throughout the school. The team will be comprised of music teachers, technology specialists, and grade level teachers who will assist in the collaboration process. Grade level teachers will also provide suggestions regarding core subject areas being implemented within the music curriculum.
Our PLC will focus on these three questions for the leadership initiative.
What do we want students to learn?
Our initiative is to integrate technology in music class while enriching other academic areas and providing technological growth in the music classroom.
How will we know when each student has learned it?
Teachers within our PLC will collaborate ways to best collect and analyze data. This data will be used to ensure that technology is being integrated effectively into the music curriculum.
How will we respond when a student experiences difficulty in learning? (Ban, 2015)
Our PLC will analyze the data to see if there are any areas in need of problem solving. Students who continue to struggle with technology in the music classroom will receive additional help from a teacher, tech specialist, or peer who is very knowledgeable in the area. To further help students, teachers may also need to collaborate and brain storm ideas about how to integrate music, technology, and other core subjects in a more effective manner.
Learning communities are an important part of the success of a school. Collaborating and supporting each other through these groups have a significant impact on teachers and students. For our launch, please watch this video on the power of learning communities. Although this video is geared towards educators in Australia, the message is a powerful one for all educators.
