Helping teachers learn: principal leadership for adult growth and development. (2004) Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
Drago-Severson, the author of this book, highlights twenty-five principals as they navigate the ups and downs of supporting adult learners, along with the creative strategies they practice, and the practices they employ to promote adult development. Her study answers the question: What would school leadership practices look like if they were designed to support adult development? The schools in her study come from a wide variety of contexts with different levels of financial and human resources, different grades and different types of students. She also looks at the actual practices the school leaders use to support teacher learning and what makes them effective. To accomplish her research, she conducted 75 hours of interviews and analyzed approximately 60 documents. Drago-Severson was looking mostly for school leaders that create environments that can be labeled as "transformational learning" environments. She distinguishes between "transformational learning-- learning that helps adults to develop capacities to better manage the complexities of work and life-- and informational learning-- increases in knowledge and skills that are also important and can support changes in adults' attitudes and possible their competencies." She believes that transformational learning creates learning environments for the adults that results in greater teacher retention, improved teaching and even greater student achievement.
One chapter I found helpful in my research about School Leadership and Professional Development was the chapter on "Principals as Climate Shapers." The author provides strategies for school leaders to build a positive school climate, for promoting the school mission, for rewarding teachers in new ways and for honoring teachers' strengths and contributions. Reading the stories of success from a variety of schools in creating positive learning communities for the teachers is inspiring. The book also delineates other categories of strong leadership from the principals in the study including: encouraging teamwork, providing leadership rules, collegial inquiry, and mentoring. Each of these chapters provides insight, ideas and strategies that could be useful for a school leader in developing an adult learning community at their school.
Quotes:
"Researchers maintain that effective professional development for teachers must be (a) embedded in and derived from practice, (b) continuous and ongoing rather than one-shot experiences, (c) on-site and school based, (d) focused on promoting student achievement, (e) integrated with school reform processes, (f) centered around teacher collaboration, and (g) sensitive to teachers' learning needs. p. xxii
"I think the person who benefits the most [from supporting teacher learning] is the student. If teachers are happy and enthusiastic about what they do and are willing to try new things and are open to criticism, honest criticism, so they can grow, that's what they will model for the children, and that's what learning should be about.-- Sr. Joan Magnetti" p. 37
"More than half of the principals serving in different school contexts reported that leadership roles provide transformational opportunities to teachers and themselves. In their view, people develop from the experience of being responsible for an idea's creation, development or implementation. Most of the principals believe that leadership roles also foster relationship building, help adults to acclimate to change, and ultimately enhance school climate." p. 89
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Discussion-Based Approaches to Developing Understanding: Classroom Instruction and Student Performance in Middle and High School English
Summary:
Applebee, Langer, Nystrand, and Gamoran came together to study the relationship and effects of using discussion based strategies in 64 middle and high school English classes. Basing their study in the scociocognitive view of language and literacy learning, and the foundation that many previous studies have found that high-quality discussions can greatly impact the understanding of students as readers and writers, Applebee, et al, “sought to provide evidence that an emphasis on discussion-based approaches, coupled with high academic demand, is positively related to literacy performance across a diverse set of classrooms at the middle and high school levels. (719)
Although they did not look to focus on any one specific discussion strategy, they did focus on the presence and extent of discussion activities in the classrooms. They found that the use of “authentic questions” used to explore ideas rather than test what students knew, time for open discussion between the whole class or between at least 3 participants, and building upon student’s previous comments to create continuity in the discussion all had positive effects on performance over the year (690).
Applebee, et al looked for evidence of “dialogical instruction” in terms of open discussion, authentic teacher questions, and questions with uptake. They define open discussion as a “free exchange of information among students and/or between at least 3 participants that lasts longer than 30 seconds.” They noted that the teacher may be one of the 3 participants, but that the teacher usually either stays silent or serves mainly to “keep the ball rolling.” They also note that “discussion tends to be marked by the absence of questions, from both the teacher and students, except for purposes of clarification. (700).
They looked for evidence of classrooms that supported “the development of students’ evolving envisionments” in the following activities:
1. Students were allowed room to develop their own understandings in reading and writing activities;
2. Students spent class time in purposeful conversation with peers and teachers;
3. Students were encouraged verbally or through modeling to take a position, express opinions, or explore personal reactions;
4. Students asked questions that showed comprehension;
5. Students asked questions that showed evaluation or analysis;
6. Students were allowed to shift discussions in a new direction;
7. The teacher encouraged students to use others' questions and comments to build discussion;
8. Students actually did so;
9. Students responded to other students or to the teacher with challenges, comments, opinions;
10. Students challenged the text (e.g., by bringing in alternative points of view); and
11. The teachers' questions required analysis (701).
They also looked for evidence of high academic demands by reporting on the overall amount of work expected from the students, the level of emphasis on revisions to their writing- both in content and mechanics, the hours of English homework per week, and the amount of reading and writing assignments required (703).
The overall results of this study found that:
a. “High academic demands and discussion-based approaches were significantly related to spring performance.”
b. “These approaches were effective across a range of situations.” (middle/high school, urban/suburban, academic ability, race/ethnicity)
c. “The impact of high academic demands, in particular, was greatly reduced when track level was included in the models. … lower-track students have less engagement in all aspects of effective English instruction: dialogical instruction, envisionment-building activities, extended curricular conversations, and high academic demands. … The observed maximum for average minutes of open discussion per hour in low track classes was 3.7, as opposed to 14.5 minutes in high-track classes. In these circumstances, it becomes much harder to determine how well discussion-based approaches work for lower-track students; to some extent, they have not been tried” (719).
d. “The approaches that contributed most to student performance … were those that used discussion to develop comprehensive understanding, encouraging exploration and multiple perspectives rather than focusing on correct interpretations and predetermined conclusions.”
e. “High academic demands and discussion-based approaches were significantly related to literacy performance” (722).
f. “…when students’ classroom experiences emphasize high academic demands and discussion-based approaches to the development of understanding, students internalize the knowledge and skills necessary to engage in challenging literacy tasks on their own” (723).
Analysis:
Applebee, et al’s study serves as a prime example of research that has already been conducted that supports my thinking in the benefits of discussion-based teaching strategies. Their subjects ranged from middle to high school, urban to suburban, high to low level learners, which confirms my own beliefs that best practices can and will benefit all students. They draw upon their own previous research, as well as many other researchers, to support the basis for their study, and their findings complement the findings in these other studies as well. There is a wide body of research that supports the need for more professional development in the area of discussion-based approaches to learning. This study encourages me as I continue with my own action research in this very area.
Applebee, Langer, Nystrand, and Gamoran came together to study the relationship and effects of using discussion based strategies in 64 middle and high school English classes. Basing their study in the scociocognitive view of language and literacy learning, and the foundation that many previous studies have found that high-quality discussions can greatly impact the understanding of students as readers and writers, Applebee, et al, “sought to provide evidence that an emphasis on discussion-based approaches, coupled with high academic demand, is positively related to literacy performance across a diverse set of classrooms at the middle and high school levels. (719)
Although they did not look to focus on any one specific discussion strategy, they did focus on the presence and extent of discussion activities in the classrooms. They found that the use of “authentic questions” used to explore ideas rather than test what students knew, time for open discussion between the whole class or between at least 3 participants, and building upon student’s previous comments to create continuity in the discussion all had positive effects on performance over the year (690).
Applebee, et al looked for evidence of “dialogical instruction” in terms of open discussion, authentic teacher questions, and questions with uptake. They define open discussion as a “free exchange of information among students and/or between at least 3 participants that lasts longer than 30 seconds.” They noted that the teacher may be one of the 3 participants, but that the teacher usually either stays silent or serves mainly to “keep the ball rolling.” They also note that “discussion tends to be marked by the absence of questions, from both the teacher and students, except for purposes of clarification. (700).
They looked for evidence of classrooms that supported “the development of students’ evolving envisionments” in the following activities:
1. Students were allowed room to develop their own understandings in reading and writing activities;
2. Students spent class time in purposeful conversation with peers and teachers;
3. Students were encouraged verbally or through modeling to take a position, express opinions, or explore personal reactions;
4. Students asked questions that showed comprehension;
5. Students asked questions that showed evaluation or analysis;
6. Students were allowed to shift discussions in a new direction;
7. The teacher encouraged students to use others' questions and comments to build discussion;
8. Students actually did so;
9. Students responded to other students or to the teacher with challenges, comments, opinions;
10. Students challenged the text (e.g., by bringing in alternative points of view); and
11. The teachers' questions required analysis (701).
They also looked for evidence of high academic demands by reporting on the overall amount of work expected from the students, the level of emphasis on revisions to their writing- both in content and mechanics, the hours of English homework per week, and the amount of reading and writing assignments required (703).
The overall results of this study found that:
a. “High academic demands and discussion-based approaches were significantly related to spring performance.”
b. “These approaches were effective across a range of situations.” (middle/high school, urban/suburban, academic ability, race/ethnicity)
c. “The impact of high academic demands, in particular, was greatly reduced when track level was included in the models. … lower-track students have less engagement in all aspects of effective English instruction: dialogical instruction, envisionment-building activities, extended curricular conversations, and high academic demands. … The observed maximum for average minutes of open discussion per hour in low track classes was 3.7, as opposed to 14.5 minutes in high-track classes. In these circumstances, it becomes much harder to determine how well discussion-based approaches work for lower-track students; to some extent, they have not been tried” (719).
d. “The approaches that contributed most to student performance … were those that used discussion to develop comprehensive understanding, encouraging exploration and multiple perspectives rather than focusing on correct interpretations and predetermined conclusions.”
e. “High academic demands and discussion-based approaches were significantly related to literacy performance” (722).
f. “…when students’ classroom experiences emphasize high academic demands and discussion-based approaches to the development of understanding, students internalize the knowledge and skills necessary to engage in challenging literacy tasks on their own” (723).
Analysis:
Applebee, et al’s study serves as a prime example of research that has already been conducted that supports my thinking in the benefits of discussion-based teaching strategies. Their subjects ranged from middle to high school, urban to suburban, high to low level learners, which confirms my own beliefs that best practices can and will benefit all students. They draw upon their own previous research, as well as many other researchers, to support the basis for their study, and their findings complement the findings in these other studies as well. There is a wide body of research that supports the need for more professional development in the area of discussion-based approaches to learning. This study encourages me as I continue with my own action research in this very area.
The Power of Protocols: An Educator's Guide to Better Practice
The power of protocols: an educator's guide to better practice. (2007). New York City, New York: Teachers College Press.
The first edition of The Power of Protocols, published in 1991 introduced the Tuning Protocol to teachers which was unique in that it outlined a deliberate way to "constrain participation in order to heighten it." The second edition which I read, builds on the first edition and highlights what the authors believe: that the use of protocols prize "diversity, universal participation, and wide cultivation of what we call facilitative leadership" and help to foster a democratic working environment at a school. The first chapter in the book gives educators a solid rationale for the use of protocols and how protocols help support a new kind of educational setting that is truly democratic. Protocols allow for new insight and energy for the important work that educators have to do every day and the protocols allow teachers to give and receive honest feedback and take on new perspectives. The book also explores what it means to create facilitative leadership, which is explained as the "lubricant of democracy" and can inform how meetings are run in a democratic way that promotes consensus building. The book provides practical examples of protocols to use for problem solving in schools, exploring student work and drawing advice from experts and a variety of text.
This book was really helpful for me in thinking about how to best promote adult learning and adult understanding within a democratic school environment. The first few chapters are especially helpful in terms of getting adults "on board" with using protocols and helping them feel bought into the power of protocols. Many of the protocols outlined in the book are ones we use at High Tech Middle Media Arts on a regular basis and I have seen how a protocol can shape the conversation, provide multiple perspectives and create an atmosphere where all adult opinions are valued and appreciated. The protocols from the book we have used and found very helpful include: The Final Word, the Descriptive Consultancy, and the Tuning Protocol. There are so many other protocols in the book that I would like to try and for each one, the authors provide a description, the purpose, details, the steps of the actual protocol and tips for facilitation. The chapter on improving oneself, when in the facilitation role, would be really helpful for a staff that is used to protocols but wanting to take their conversations to the next level. Finally, the book ends with "Ways to Get Started" and "Things that Make it Easier" which can be really useful for any school leaders or teachers hoping to use protocols in their work.
Quotes:
"We think that product worth producing begins with thoughtful process. Teaching is first of all a process. Leadership is, too... There is no way to solve a complex problem without listening to the perspectives on the problem of all those immersed in it." p. x
"Meanwhile, as the use of protocols continues to spread from conferences and workshops to everyday settings where colleagues meet to plan and work together and teachers and students meet to learn together, it becomes possible for all of us to imagine a new kind of educational setting-- not cellular but collaborative, not isolated but networked, not opaque but transparent and accountable." p. xiii
"The first basic idea is that we professional educators should take charge of our own learning... To say that we ought to educate ourselves, therefore, means that professional development activities for educators that are designed and conducted without benefit or inside perspectives are not worth the time and money they cost." p. 1
"In formal settings, just talking can be counterproductive... meetings called to address serious problems frequently fail because of underregulated talking. Often those leading the meetings talk too much, and often they let others talk too much. Together the talkers choke off real listening, and the kind of distributed and beyond-your-comfort zone learning that solving serious problems usually requires." p. 5
"In forcing transparency, protocols again teach us habits that we wish we already had: to take the time to think about what we want to say, to work without rushing, to speak less (or speak up more)." p. 7
"Facilitating protocols involves macro planning-- as in what protocol to use when, and how to open and close the meeting-- and also in micro planning done in the moment-- as in how to intervene when something goes wrong and when to change one's plans." p. 18
The first edition of The Power of Protocols, published in 1991 introduced the Tuning Protocol to teachers which was unique in that it outlined a deliberate way to "constrain participation in order to heighten it." The second edition which I read, builds on the first edition and highlights what the authors believe: that the use of protocols prize "diversity, universal participation, and wide cultivation of what we call facilitative leadership" and help to foster a democratic working environment at a school. The first chapter in the book gives educators a solid rationale for the use of protocols and how protocols help support a new kind of educational setting that is truly democratic. Protocols allow for new insight and energy for the important work that educators have to do every day and the protocols allow teachers to give and receive honest feedback and take on new perspectives. The book also explores what it means to create facilitative leadership, which is explained as the "lubricant of democracy" and can inform how meetings are run in a democratic way that promotes consensus building. The book provides practical examples of protocols to use for problem solving in schools, exploring student work and drawing advice from experts and a variety of text.
This book was really helpful for me in thinking about how to best promote adult learning and adult understanding within a democratic school environment. The first few chapters are especially helpful in terms of getting adults "on board" with using protocols and helping them feel bought into the power of protocols. Many of the protocols outlined in the book are ones we use at High Tech Middle Media Arts on a regular basis and I have seen how a protocol can shape the conversation, provide multiple perspectives and create an atmosphere where all adult opinions are valued and appreciated. The protocols from the book we have used and found very helpful include: The Final Word, the Descriptive Consultancy, and the Tuning Protocol. There are so many other protocols in the book that I would like to try and for each one, the authors provide a description, the purpose, details, the steps of the actual protocol and tips for facilitation. The chapter on improving oneself, when in the facilitation role, would be really helpful for a staff that is used to protocols but wanting to take their conversations to the next level. Finally, the book ends with "Ways to Get Started" and "Things that Make it Easier" which can be really useful for any school leaders or teachers hoping to use protocols in their work.
Quotes:
"We think that product worth producing begins with thoughtful process. Teaching is first of all a process. Leadership is, too... There is no way to solve a complex problem without listening to the perspectives on the problem of all those immersed in it." p. x
"Meanwhile, as the use of protocols continues to spread from conferences and workshops to everyday settings where colleagues meet to plan and work together and teachers and students meet to learn together, it becomes possible for all of us to imagine a new kind of educational setting-- not cellular but collaborative, not isolated but networked, not opaque but transparent and accountable." p. xiii
"The first basic idea is that we professional educators should take charge of our own learning... To say that we ought to educate ourselves, therefore, means that professional development activities for educators that are designed and conducted without benefit or inside perspectives are not worth the time and money they cost." p. 1
"In formal settings, just talking can be counterproductive... meetings called to address serious problems frequently fail because of underregulated talking. Often those leading the meetings talk too much, and often they let others talk too much. Together the talkers choke off real listening, and the kind of distributed and beyond-your-comfort zone learning that solving serious problems usually requires." p. 5
"In forcing transparency, protocols again teach us habits that we wish we already had: to take the time to think about what we want to say, to work without rushing, to speak less (or speak up more)." p. 7
"Facilitating protocols involves macro planning-- as in what protocol to use when, and how to open and close the meeting-- and also in micro planning done in the moment-- as in how to intervene when something goes wrong and when to change one's plans." p. 18