Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Professional Learning Communities - Coggle Diagram

- - - - The project defines school-based development as occurring when: ‘the school and the school leaders and all staff members take part in a development process in the school. The purpose is to develop the school’s joint knowledge, attitudes and skills when it comes to learning, teaching and collaboration’ (Directorate of Education 2012, 5). Ref. 3
    - - We propose that organizational capacity and learning can act as the conceptual framework "bridge" to align teacher leadership for learning practices within varying levels of distributed school leadership implementation that are centrally focused on instructional leadership implementation that are centrally focused on instructional leadership and improvement. (Spillane & Louis, 2002, p. 95). Ref. 4.
      - Organizational learning capacity requires individual and group-level leadership for learning activities are "fundamentally focused on improving the core technology of schools, that is, "instruction." Ref. 4
    - - Spillane et al, 2001
        
        Distributed leadership models emphasize individual's inherent leadership potential, their contextualized leadership activity, and their relationship exchanges as socially constructed leadership activity across the collective organization. Ref. 4.
      - Ho & Ng, 2017
        
        We applied a definition of distributed leadership that describes how teacher leaders and principals interact and engage in leadership activity "among a network of individuals ... within a specific social and cultural context ... [as a] collectively performed activity system". Ref. 4
      - Wieczorek & Lear, 2018
        
        While collaborative or shared leadership practices are not conceptual or theoretical equivalents to distributed leadership, they contain essential elements of a distributed leadership system, such as collective leadership roles of all staff, a shared sense of purpose, contexts of leadership, sharing of power, and collaborative culture (Marks & Printy, 2003; Hallinger 2003/2011). Ref. 4
      - King & Bourhard, 2011
        
        Their model outlines the reciprocal interactions among several elements of principal, teacher, and teacher leader behavior within distributed forms of leadership to improve teaching and learning “in ways that advance the collective work in their schools . . . exercised in an organized, collective enterprise” (King & Bouchard, 2011, p. 654-655). These elements include teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions; professional community; technical resources; and program coherence. In their model, teachers’ growth requires increasing their knowledge of the essential functions of teaching: curriculum, planning, assessment, content knowledge, professionalism, high expectations for learners, and reflection. They framed professional community as a collaborative process where all stakeholders are accountable for goal setting and engaging in mutually shared problem-solving strategies. Linked closely is coherence and technical resources, described as the extent to which a school’s goals are clear, reachable, and supported by capital, human, technology, and instructional resources. Ref. 4
    - - York-Barr and Duke 2004
        
        The process "by which teachers, individually or collectively, influence their colleagues, principals, and other members of school communities to improve teaching and learning practices with the aim of increased student learning and achievement. Ref. 4
    - - Leadership for learning emphasizes not only the role of the principal, but the collective leadership capacity of all individuals to affects school-wide instructional improvement. Ref. 4
- - - - Collaboration is more than collegial relationships; it refers to teachers creating new knowledge or programs that will improve their expertise and that have tangible products. Teachers both share expertise and call on one another to develop skills.... Collaboration can increase teachers' mutual support and collective responsibility for effective instruction. Ref. 2
      - Focus on student learning motivates all of the elements of a school-wide professional community. Teachers investigate how their instruction promotes student intellectual growth, thus affective opportunities for students to learn. Ref. 2
      - Reflective dialogue promotes awareness of one's teaching beliefs and practices. When teachers reflect on practice, it can lead to deeper understanding of how instruction can improve or inhibit student learning and engagement. Ref. 2
      - Making practice public aims to open classrooms, normally private domains, to colleagues' advice and support. Teachers can share roles of mentor, advisor, or specialist. Ref. 2
      - Shared norms & values signal the collective responsibility of educators related to assumptions about students, learning, teaching and teachers' roles, and human relationships in schools and society. Ref. 2
- - - - The culture of a school is one of PLC’s critical organizational characteristics (Williams et al., 2008) and it may be invisible, conscious or unconscious (Teasley, 2017), positive or negative (Glossary of Education Reform, 2013). School culture describes the character of the school and functions of the organization (Van Houtte, 2005), and it consists of the norms, values and social interaction in the organization. Ref. 5
      - Creating a positive school culture is critical in implementing PLC, because school culture influences readiness for change and effective schools establish professionally collaborative cultures (Fullan, 2001), which has a positive effect on student learning (Stoll, 2006). Ref. 5
    - - Stoll (2006) argues that the nature and quality of leadership has a significant \influence on the nature of the school culture....Morrissey (2000) found that if principals do not identify a shared focus, they are not able to guide their staff in developing and articulating a collective vision for their students or their school. Ref. 5
      - The success of distributed leadership depends on the growth state of the organization, its readiness to change, its culture and developmental needs, the pattern of distribution and its purpose (Harris, 2008). Distributed leadership requires strong and supportive formal leadership in defining the autonomy and authority of informal leaders; in securing PD resources; in modelling the vision and focus; and in creating trust environments (Harris, 2011). Ref. 5
    - - The core purpose of PLC is to enhance teachers’ effectiveness as professionals (Stoll et al., 2006) and to improve student learning (DuFour, 2004.; The focus must be on changing and improving instructional practice (Hipp et al., 2008; Vescio et al., 2008). Ref. 5
      - Several studies have supported the idea that participation in a learning community leads to changes in teaching practice (Little 2012; Vescio et al., 2008) and teachers, who are offered rich learning opportunities, teach in more ambitious and effective ways (Little, 2012). It has been argued that collaboration outside classrooms is important for school improvement, teachers’ professional development, and student learning (DuFour, 2004; Sleegers et al., 2013). Ref, 5
  - - - PD in PLCs represents a fundamental shift away from the traditional model of professional development (Vescio et al., 2008), and teachers identify and value collegiality as crucial for their own professional growth (Richmond & Mankore, 2011). This embedded PD can take diverse forms: co-teaching; lesson reflection; mentoring and tutoring practices; participation in instructional teams and networks; and involvement in development or improvement processes, such as designing and implementing curriculum or schools’ annual plans (Ilomäki, Lakkala, Toom, & Muukkonen, 2017; Lakkala & Ilomäki, 2015). Ref. 5
    - - Muñoz & Branham (2016, p. 40) found a clear connection between “proper implementation of PLCs and the use of quality and timely data that allowed regular monitoring of student learning by transforming academic data into actionable information”. Ref. 5
      - Hargreaves (2007) argues that by concentrating first on learning, before achievement and testing, PLCs reach better learning results. To improve the quality of learning, PLCs ground their actions on diverse inside and outside evidence, on multiple sources of data and new cultures of evidence-informed inquiry (Hargreaves, 2007). Key issues in the use of data are the selection of relevant data, how it informs decision making (Williams, 2008) and how the data are processed by the school community. Ref. 5
    - - grounds a powerful social resource for supporting the collaboration, reflective dialogue, and deprivatization characteristics of a professional community (Bryk et al., 1999). Hargreaves (2007, p. 187) describes trust as the backbone of a strong and sustaining PLC: “colleagues value each other personally and professionally, are committed to their students, are willing to discuss and disagree about evidence and data that can inform them about how to improve their practices in ways that benefit their students, and are willing to challenge one another’s practice in doing so”. Ref. 5
      - Tschannen-Moran (2004) argue that creating trust among teachers may be more significant in stimulating changes in practice than does having a trusting relationship with the principal. Ref. 5
- - - - Some models focus on the participatory element of teacher leadership practice which enhance teacher leaders' roles to improve school culture and elevate teachers' professionalism. Ref. 4
    - - 5-category framework of teacher leaders' activities: articulates clear views of a better world; models trust and sincerity, confronts structural barriers, builds networks of support, and nurtures a culture of success, with 18 sub-characteristics and behaviors. Ref. 4
    - - Five general themes that scholars have used to define teacher leadership: teacher leaders should exercise influence within and beyond classroom walls, teacher leaders should support professional learning in their schools, teacher leaders should be involved in decision making, teacher leaders should focus on student learning, and teacher leaders should work towards whole school and organizational change. Ref. 4
    - - The Teacher Leader Model Standards domains include fostering collaborative culture to support educator development and student learning, accessing and using research to improve practice, promoting professional learning for continuous improvement, facilitating improvements in instruction and student learning, promoting the use of assessments for school and district improvement, improving outreach and collaboration with families and community, and advocating for student learning and the profession. Ref. 4
    - - Instead of searching for a definition, structure, place, or system to fit teacher leaders into existing organizational practices, we assert that teacher leaders should be the next generation of systemic instructional leaders. We propose that teacher leadership for learning can potentially serve as a conceptual bridge between hierarchical instructional leadership configurations which depend primarily on principal activity, and distributed leadership cultures which enable teacher leaders to build organizational capacity for instructional improvement. Ref. 4
- - - - Teacher Leadership for Learning
        
        Social networks
        
        The enactment of distributed instructional leadership networks is characterized by opportunities for teachers to participate in reflections of their instructional activities in a safe and collaborative culture. (Blase & Blase, 2000; Kenjarski, 2015). Ref. 4
        
        Teacher leaders' and principal's leadership actions are socially situated and have aimed to develop favorable conditions for instructional practice reflection and reform, such as foster deep level social and professional exchanges, share and establish a community around a set of values and norms, and allow instructional teacher leaders to create professional sub-cultures focused on adult learning. (Blase & Blase, 2000; Daly et al, 2010; Ghamrawi 2013; Taylor et al 2018). Ref 4
        
        A central purpose of teacher leaders’ activity is to develop relationships, encourage cooperation, and foster a professional culture of collaboration within existing hierarchical structures and leadership systems (Adams, 2013; Devo, Tuytens, & Hulpia, 2014; Ghamrawi, 2010). These interactions are intended to establish cultural and professional connections within the organization. Ref. 4
        
        Education leadership functions within a dynamic school culture, with actors determining elements of practice in the networked communities of which they invested time to develop professional connections and establish relationships with other actors (Daly et al., 2010). Among cross-contextual necessities, time must be established as a resource for educators to establish leadership mindsets, identities, and relationships to grow in their leadership activities that are bounded by complex social and professional contexts (Blase & Blase, 1999; Leithwood et al., 2007). Ref. 4
        
        Communication
        
        Engaging in dialogue and opening lines of communications is essential to increasing teacher instructional leadership capacity in schools (Blase & Blase, 1999, Brezicha, Bergmark, and Mitra, 2015; Holloway et al, 2018). Ref. 4
        
        Teacher leaders communicate to coordinate instructional and PD activity (Leithwood et al, 2007), identify and address problems (Angelle & Schmid, 2007; Scribner...2007), and discuss instructional knowledge and practices with colleagues (Margolis & Deuel, 2009, Supovitz, 2018). Ref. 4
        
        Teaceher leaders' instructional leadership communications include talking with teachers regarding professional reflection and growth through listening, sharing experiences using demonstration, modeling, and giving praise, which facilitate positive cultures (Blase & Blase, 2000; Daly et al, 2010; Weiner & Woulfin, 2018) Ref. 4
        
        Improved communications are one of the main purposes for teacher leaders' work, which can empower more teachers to participate and share in leadership to improve student learning outcomes (Fairman & MacKenzie, 2015; Klar, 2012a,b, 2013; Portin et al, 2013). Open and constructive communication develops professional trust among members of the organizational network which is essential for teacher leadership to take hold and influence instruction and professional practice. Ref. 4
        
        Trust
        
        Trust and teacher leadership
        
        Levels of professional trust are related to leadership behaviors that afford increased interaction time for meetings, professional development, and the establishment of transparent decision-making processes (Adams, 2013; Cosner, 2009). Ref. 4
        
        Teachers practicing as connected educators experiment with new strategies tapping internal collective expertise available within networked social and professional structures (i.e., professional learning communities, or PLC’s) have identified trusting relations as essential to their work (Daly et al., 2010; Moolenaar, Daly, & Sleegers, 2011). Ref. 4
        
        Faculty trust and collective trust have been found to be indicators in the sustainability of quality teaching and learning among both principals’ and teacher leaders’ instructional leadership (Adams, 2013; Harris, 2008; King & Bouchard, 2011; Louis & Lee, 2016). Ref.4
        
        Teacher leaders are crucial developers of mutual, intrapersonal and organizational trust which serve as goals foundations for teacher leaders’ work within a professional community focused on instructional improvement and capacity building. Ref. 4
        
        Trust among educators is essential for positive educator behaviors to permeate in the relationships necessary to maintain a positive school culture (Adams, 2013; Fairman & MacKenzie, 2015; McKenzie & Locke, 2014). Ref. 4
        
        Collective trust and
        professional community
        
        Why collective
        trust matters
        
        Teacher leaders’ loyalty, commitment to children, and desire to improve a school’s culture and a sense of purpose is a strong motivation to develop professional trust (Copland, 2003; Ghamrawi, 2010; Holloway et al., 2018; Kenjarski, 2015; Naicker, 2013) Trust is the social fabric that facilitates any aspect of individual or organizational change, including instructional improvement and capacity building. Ref. 4
        
        Principal
        related
        
        The role of the principal within social and organizational networks permits instructional leadership modeling to foster the treatment of educators with fairness and respect, reciprocated as collective trust expressed across the instructional improvement climate of the school (Adams, 2013; Burt, 2000; Ghamrawi, 2010; Handford & Leithwood, 2013). The focus of the social interactions underpinning collective trust is suggested to be with principals’ capacity-building work (Cosner, 2009), with a need for deeper exploration of teacher leaders and teachers influence on trust-building practices in specific school contexts and high-stakes policy environments (Handford & Leithwood, 2013; Louis & Lee, 2016; Supovitz, 2018). Ref. 4
        
        There is a belief that the bonds among principals, teacher leaders, and teachers will influence their individual and collective relationships with students, and elevate the school community (Angelle & Schmid, 2007). Ref. 4
      - Organizational Capacity
        
        Principals' instructional leaderhip
        
        the literature shows that teacher leaders have the most significant influence on school norms, culture, and instructional processes when combined with a skillful implementation of effective principal leadership (Harris, 2008; King & Bouchard, 2011; Taylor et al., 2018). If teacher leaders are not situated structurally, symbolically, or socially as instructional leaders (Brezicha et al., 2015; Ghamrawi, 2010; Klar, 2013; Scribner & Bradley-Levine, 2010; Scribner et al., 2007; Weiner & Woulfin, 2018), then teacher leaders may be limited in their abilities to influence the instructional capacity as instructional leaders in their own right. Ref. 4
        
        Teacher leaders’ and principals’ efforts within distributed configurations are related to co-constructed or mutually coproduced instructional leadership practices as mutual actors in social contexts (Brezicha, Bergmark, & Mitra, 2015; Spillane & Kim, 2012). Ref. 4
        
        The principal instructional leader may exercise professional influence to support teacher leaders’ and teachers’ professional network activity, which may, in turn, increase their instructional capacity as principals (Daly et al., 2010; Moolenaar, Daly, & Sleegers, 2011). Ref. 4
        
        There is a core belief shared among principals and teacher leaders that collaborative, shared, and distributed instructional leadership can improve teachers’ growth, and subsequently, student learning and achievement (Fairman & MacKenzie, 2012, 2015; Klar et al., 2016; Klein et al., 2018; Leithwood & Mascall, 2008; Nguyen & Cheung, 2018; Supovitz, 2018). Ref. 4
        
        Teacher leaders’ intellectual resources, skills, and dispositions need to be supported by the principal instructional leader (Spillane, Halverson, & Diamond, 2001; McKenzie and Locke, 2014; Mangin 2009; Leithwood & Mascall, 2008; Lee, Hallinger, & Walker, 2012). Ref. 4
        
        Supports for instructional teacher leadership many include “emotional, financial, material, or symbolic support” and may originate from various places in the organization in a socially networked environment (Mangin, 2007, p.352).
        
        Principals should provide support for instructional teacher leadership activities between teachers and teacher leaders such as listening, sharing experiences, and modeling which generates a sense of common purpose championed by the school leader (Blase & Blase, 2000; Ghamrawi, 2010; Kenjarski, 2015; Klein et al., 2018; Mangin, 2007; McKenzie & Locke, 2014). Ref.4
        
        Principal instructional leaders are central to facilitating and enabling efficient and meaningful interactions that support instructional teacher leader practice in social networks (Blase & Blase, 2000; Daly et al., 2010; Moolenaar & Sleegers, 2015). Ref. 4
        
        Teacher leaders' decision-making
        and diplomatic skills
        
        Practices exhibited by effective instructional teacher leaders include instructional coaching, engaging in reflective conversations, curriculum, and the study of teaching and learning (Blase & Blase, 2000; Fairman & McKenzie, 2015; Kenjarski. 2015; Supovitz, 2018; Weiner & Woulfin, 2018). Ref. 4
        
        Effective discourse among educators extends instructional teacher leadership activity to broaden and strengthen teachers’ participation in peer coaching, collegial study groups, community liaison representation, policy advocacy, and professional identity development (Blase & Blase, 2000; Ghamrawi & Al-Jammal, 2013; Margolis & Deuel, 2009). Ref. 4
        
        Little research currently exists on effective leadership strategies in support of teachers’ skills contributing to building capacity for school instructional leadership (Blase & Blase, 1999; Brezicha, Bergmark, & Mitra, 2015; Leithwood & Mascall, 2008; Supovitz, 2018). One way that principals can empower teacher leaders and teachers is through participatory activities such as problem-solving and decision-making. Ref. 4
        
        Distributed instructional leadership capacity
        
        Principals and teacher leaders have constructed distributed leadership network configurations to build teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions for improved student outcomes (Gronn, 2002; Harris, 2008; Leithwood et al. 2007; McKenzie & Locke, 2014; King & Bouchard, 2011) Ref.4
        
        Despite the promise of distributed leadership, the constructions of teacher leadership behavior remain “… legitimized by particular institutional, organizational, and sociocultural rules” (Scribner & Bradley-Levine, 2010, p. 515; Taylor et al., 2018; Weiner & Woulfin, 2018). The diffusing of instructional teacher practice though socially constructed organizational systems requires teacher leaders and teachers to be able to step outside of networks governed by traditional or conventional social categorizations (Brezicha, Bergmark & Mitra, 2015; Cosner, 2009; Spillane et al., 1999). Ref. 4
        
        The complex social systems in diverse school cultures present challenges that principal instructional leaders need assistance with in order to support instructional teacher leaders (McKenzie & Locke, 2014). An effective instructional principal leader situates oneself as a central facilitator among multiple types of distributed configurations and contexts to develop and sustain organizational and institutional environments conducive of distributed instructional leadership (Scribner & Bradley-Levine, 2010). Ref. 4
        
        Diplomacy and participative decision making
        
        Teacher leaders’ practice of instructional leadership requires reductions in teacher leaders’ scheduled instructional loads and to include them in professional dialog about vision building and instructional experimentation (Ghamrawi, 2013; Kenjarski, 2015). Ref. 4
        
        Teacher leadership practices may involve brokering relations among staff, being representatives regarding external school governance, and maintaining relations with external stakeholders (Scribner et al., 2007; Spillane & Kim, 2012). Ref. 4
        
        A multitude of teacher experiences lend to their potential to engage in the practice of teacher leadership including the teaching of adults, dealing with conflict, and aligning philosophical perspectives with collective school vision (Angelle & Schmid, 2007; Brezicha, Bergmark, & Mitra, 2015; McKenzie & Locke, 2014). Ref. 4
        
        Teacher leaders, indeed, all teachers should be involved in collective decision making as a means to accomplish organizational goals (Devos, Tuytens, & Hulpia, 2014; Leithwood & Mascall, 2008; Spillane & Kim, 2012). Ref. 4
        
        Teacher leaders aspire to contribute to the decision making processes in their school, but express frustration within highly collaborative environments designed to improve instruction due to lack of influence in decision making and competing purposes or agendas that limit their roles (Angelle & Schmid, 2007; Holloway et al., 2018; Margolis & Huggins, 2012; McKenzie & Locke, 2014; Weiner & Woulfin, 2018). Ref. 4
        
        Teacher leaders’ roles have not developed to the point where they are empowered to make decisions on an organizational level, which is indicative of our overall findings regarding the research on teacher leaders’ instructional leadership activity. Ref.4