 |
Asia-Pacific Forum
on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 12, Issue 1, Article 4 (Jun., 2011) |
The research-based literature on the attributes that characterize PLCs has grown over the last couple of decades and much of that literature centres on Hord’s (1997) research-based characteristics of PLCs and the work of Dufour and Eaker (1998). At the same time, PLCs have also been influenced by Senge’s (1990) notion of learning organisation and culture. Other significant contributions have been that of Kruse, Louis and Bryk (1994), Berlinger-Gastafson (2004) and Patterson and Rolheeiser (2004). The following section discusses this literature in more detail.
Supportive and shared leadership capacity
Supportive and shared leadership capacity is one of the attributes that characterises professional learning communities (Annenberg Institute for School Reform, 2003; Berlinger-Gustafson, 2004; DuFour & Eaker, 1998; Hord, 1997; Kruse, et al., 1994; Patterson & Rolhiehieser, 2004; Senge, 2000). Shared leadership capacity empowers all members of a PLC to share in support of school improvement. One of the defining characteristics of a PLC is that of power, authority and decision making as being both shared and encouraged (Hord & Sommers, 2008). Shared leadership structures are important in PLCs. Hord (1997) emphasised shared leadership structures in which participants in PLCs have the ability to question, investigate and seek solutions for school improvement.
Shared mission, vision, values and goals
PLCs work as a solid foundation consisting of collaboratively developed and widely spread mission, vision, values and goals (DuFour & Eaker, 1998). Shared mission, vision, values and goals are also considered as a collective focus on and a commitment to student learning (DuFour, et al., 2008; Hord & Sommers, 2008; Kruse, et al., 1994). When schools work as PLCs, teachers find themselves with a fundamental responsibility for their students’ achievement. To attain this shared purpose, participants are encouraged to be involved in the process of developing a clear and compelling vision that works as a guidepost in decision making about challenges they face in schools on how their collaboration must contribute to their students’ learning.
Collective learning and its application
A PLC is a place where participants find opportunities to study together and work collaboratively (Hord & Sommers, 2008). Teachers expect that all students can learn at reasonably high levels as a consequence of participants’ collaborative work. In practice, it does not happen due to different types of obstacles that students face outside the teaching institution. However, these opportunities help them to be involved in a continuous learning process and apply what they have learned to their practice. Such a collaborative process mainly emphasises the need to seek new knowledge collectively (Hord, 1997). It is an expectation through this collective learning that an individual learns more than if they were learning independently.
Teachers need appropriate environments for their professional learning (Hord, 1997, 2004). Such environments value and support, “hard work, the acceptance of challenging tasks, risk taking, and the promotion of growth” (Midgley & Wood, 1993, p. 252). Shared personal practice is one of the attributes that contributes to the development of such a setting for teachers’ professional learning and sensibly can be considered as one of the conditions that supports a professional learning community (Hord, 1997; Pickering, et al., 2007). In PLCs, members of the community discuss the situations and the specific challenges they face in their daily academic activities (Kruse, et al., 1994). They develop a set of shared norms, beliefs and values that form a basis for action (Hord, 1997, 2004; Kruse, et al., 1994). For this purpose, teachers review each other’s practice (Hord, 2004) and behavior (Hord, 1997, 2004; Kruse, et al., 1994) in their daily practice. There is a focus on a “peers helping peers” process (Hord, 2004, p. 11), not on any evaluation of teachers’ learning or teaching (Hord & Sommers, 2008). Teachers conduct this review through visiting each other’s classrooms on a regular basis to observe, write notes, discuss their observation with their visiting peers, as well as through staff meetings and specifically designed planning sessions (Hord, 1997, 2004; Patterson & Rolhiehieser, 2004).
A commitment to continuous improvement
School improvement is a part of the overall culture of all school beliefs, values and practices (Alberta Education, 2006). In essence, school improvement emphasises the role of collecting data that establishes a base for decision making, problem solving and inquiry. Two factors are considered important in school improvement. These are internal support from other members of the community (Kruse, et al., 1994; Louis & Kruse, 1995) and documenting evidence for commitment within the community (Annenberg Institute for School Reform, 2003; Morrissey, 2000). Teachers must have support from the school community if they are to take risks with any new techniques and ideas. This is also a requirement for sustaining any serious and long-lasting change effort in their teaching practice (Kruse, et al., 1994) If that is the case, then teachers feel that they are supported in their effort to learn new knowledge about their profession; new knowledge that helps them to make decisions about problems about, and inquiries into, their teaching practice.
Supportive conditions determine “when, where, and how the staff regularly come together as a unit to do the learning, decision making, problem solving, and creative work that characterise a professional learning community” (Hord, 2004, p. 10). These are basically considered as logistics of PLCs (Hord & Sommers, 2008). Kruse, Louis and Bryk (1994), Boyd (1992) and Berlinger-Gustafson (2004) worked to identify several categories that must be met in order for a PLC to be effective. The necessary conditions for physical and structural factors as mentioned by Kruse, et al. (1994) are time to meet and talk, physical proximity, independent teaching roles, communication structures, and teacher power and empowerment. The significance of the relational factors and human capacities which are considered social resources in a productive learning community is that they address teachers’ enthusiasm to acknowledge feedback and work for improvement (Boyd, 1992; Hord, 1997; Kruse, et al., 1994).
