This dissertation examines how participation in professional learning communities (PLCs) influences English language arts teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. The study analyzed 3 middle school ELA teachers in a low-income, minority-majority school. Findings showed the PLC was underdeveloped and inconsistently implemented. Teachers had varying views of its purpose and overly focused on student assessment data. While the PLC provided a forum for collaboration, limitations included inadequate time, lack of collaborative inquiry skills, and incomplete work. To better develop teachers' knowledge, the PLC needs training, integrated meeting time, a student learning focus, and opportunities for professional development.

1. An Inquiry into the Influence
of Professional Learning Communities
on English Language Arts Teachers’
Pedagogical-Content Knowledge
A Dissertation Defense
by Pamela K. Pittman

2. Introduction
Teaching is an ever-evolving profession.
Teachers must
 stay abreast of recent research and trends
 continually deepen their knowledge and
 refine their skills
Teachers need high quality professional development to
 help them master content and
 strengthen their teaching skills
(Darling-Hammond et al., 2009)
Professional learning communities offer teachers
one way to collaborate and engage in professional learning.

3. Background
This case study focused on the experiences of three
middle grades English Language Arts (ELA) teachers
mandated by their school district to participate
in professional learning communities (PLCs)
as a form of professional development.
The teachers who participated in this study worked in
a rural, Title I school in a low-income community with
a student population of 235 students, including:
 80% minority
 95% free and reduced lunch
 48% reading proficiency (NCDPI, 2012)

4. Research Questions
How do ELA teachers’ experience professional learning
communities as a form of professional development?
What were the affordances and limitations
of participation in the PLC for these teachers
to further develop their pedagogical-content knowledge
(PCK)?

5. Study Participants: ELA Teachers
Name* Race Gender
Years of exp. and
educational settings
Grade
Taught
Tia Hispanic Female
7 total
(4 high school, 3 middle)
6
Maribel
African
American
Female
13 total
(5 yrs certified)
7
Batrice
African
American
Female 1 (in China) 8
*pseudonyms replace teacher names
Participants

6. Theoretical Framework
Content
Knowledge
Pedagogical
Knowledge
Pedagogical
ContentKnowledge
Shulman's pedagogical content knowledge framework.
Adapted from “Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching,”
by L. Shulman,1986, Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Copyright by the 1986 American Educational Research Association.

7. (DuFour & Eaker, 1998)
Professional Learning Communities at WorkTM model
PLCs
Three crucial
questions every
PLC must answer:
1) What do we
want students
to learn?
2) How will we
know when
they have
learned it?
3) What will we
do when they
did not learn it?

8. Teachers reflect on
current beliefs,
assumptions, &
practices
Teachers share their
reflections in their
PLC
Teachers create an
action plan for
improvement
Teachers implement
the plan of action
Teachers evaluate the
results of the plan and
begin again
PLCs at WorkTM Team Learning Component
Cycle of
Collaborative
Inquiry
(DuFour & Eaker, 1998)

9. Findings
RQ1: How do ELA teachers experience professional learning
communities as a form of professional development?
Theme 1
Under-developed, under-utilized ELA PLC
 different training
 meeting issues
 team building, not team learning
Theme 2
Inconsistent teacher perceptions about PLC’s purpose
 impact on knowledge & skills – a disconnect
 ELA PLC purpose & goals
 grade level PLC purpose & goals
Theme 3
Overemphasis on the collection of student assessment data
 classroom activities (annotation, AR, academic checks)
 use and influence of student assessment data
(STEP, leveled groups)

10. Findings
RQ2: What were the affordances and limitations of participation
in the PLC for these teachers to further develop their PCK?
Potential affordances:
 Space for content collaboration and the sharing of teacher
knowledge, instructional strategies, and resources
 A supportive environment
 Data-driven instruction
Limitations:
 Inadequate time for meeting
 Teachers’ limited experience working in PLCs
 Missed opportunities for collaborative inquiry
 Incomplete follow-through on tangible PLC products (e.g.
district –required presentations and reports)
 Ineffective data analysis

11. Conclusions
The ELA teachers in this study need:
 training in collaborative inquiry
 time and opportunities to engage in systematic, intentional
collaborative inquiry (action research)
 subject area PLCs integrated into the school day
 book study and opportunities to attend professional
conferences
 focus on student learning

12. Future Research Directions
The findings of this study prompted questions for further
study including:
 How do veteran teachers experience PLCs?
 How do other subject area teachers experience PLCs at
this school?
 What happens when teachers learn to conduct action
research in their classrooms?
 How does consistent, effective leadership impact
teacher learning in PLCs?
 How do the Common Core State Standards (NGA, 2010)
influence teacher learning in PLCs?
 What are students’ experiences in data-driven schools?
 How do teachers in higher income communities with other
demographics experience PLCs?