I was having lunch with a bunch of teacher friends today and I was talking to a recently retired friend about the upcoming California League of Middle Schools/California League of High Schools (CLMS/CLHS) summer conference I am attending this weekend. Particularly, I was telling her that I was looking forward to hearing more about Professional Learning Communities from the DuFours (Richard and Rebecca, I think). I only just this moment realized, as I started writing this post, that I don’t think they’re speaking this time … it’s Ruby Payne on poverty. But that’s not the point – the conversation was about PLCs.
Several years ago the CLMS/CLHS summer conference spotlighted the DuFours and PLCs – and I attended on the recommendation of an administrator at a high school in Bakersfield that I had WASC’d as a visiting team member. They were pioneering the groups in their area and felt it was working for them, both as a way strengthen their department teams and infuse some rigor into their courses. I liked what I heard from them about examining student work, common assessments and deep discussions on effective instructional strategies. I thought this might be something we could use at my school.
The conference sessions were fabulous and terrible. I learned that PLCs that work can be a powerful way to improve student achievement. I also learned that we need a strong leader to back the development of the PLCs and to make active participation in them non-negotiable for our more reticent teachers. At the time, I didn’t think we had that administrator. Still – I thought enough of what I’d heard to hope that we could implement it at some level. I presented it to an administrative planning team and the idea was tabled because they felt that we already had too much on our plates, going from year-round to traditional, losing nearly 1,000 students and attempting to implement the International Baccalaureate MYP (Middle Years Programme) the coming year. I thought it was something we could still attempt, because it could begin with a simple restructuring of the standing department meeting agendas. Nope. I admit that I let myself be overruled. But I wander (as I tend to do … sorry).
Our conversation today evolved into my continued confusion regarding many of our teachers’ problem in seeing any connection between how they present lessons and the results they get. “I taught the hell out of that lesson. I did my job.” Ok. That’s an exaggeration. I just made that up. But I’ve seen the philosophy in action, so I know it’s real. How can a teacher be blind to the direct connection between the two? When our students don’t learn what we attempt to teach – why do we not immediately go to the student work to try to figure out why? Developing common assessments and examining student work seem to be what we SHOULD be doing here.
So what are we doing here, anyway?
Right now, many of us are doing what we perceive to be our jobs. Teaching. Only some of us are making the connection between teaching and … learning. I don’t know if I know how to convince someone who thinks it ends with the teaching. So even if the DuFours aren’t speaking at this conference … I’m going in to it with a goal. Figure out how to talk to my colleagues about teaching and learning. Try to come up with a better answer to the question.
Stuff & Nonsense 