What have been your experiences with the PLC model? Have you worked in a school focused on the PLC concept, have you been to PLC workshops or trainings, have you helped to spearhead a PLC effort?
Based on your experiences (or lack of experience with the PLC model), what are the questions you have about the PLC concept? What do you see as its strengths? What do you see as the challenges to creating a PLC?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
My PLC experience has been great! I believe that this could be the next step to school success if it is done correctly. I have had the privilege with working with the best grade level for the past 2 years where PLC has been implemented. My building administrator strongly believes in the PLC concept and she puts a heavy emphasis on it. We have implemented several new things at my school that encourages PLC's. We have a "shared day" where each grade level has an extended planning period once a quarter. Of course, our district now has early release days that we use to meet with our PLC's. My PLC has worked towards common planning and common assessments. It has worked for us very well and I am very pleased at our accomplishments thus far. I have heard many people complaining about PLC's and I don't know how. It has really helped me as a teacher. PLC's are something that I will defiantly plan on implementing or maintaining them within my school when I am an administrator. I believe that if they are done right, then they are successfull. PLC's do take a lot of time and if you don't have a good group of peers, then I believe that it can be very stressful. PLC's are all about teamwork and collaborating.
I agree with Candace, if PLCs are implemented correctly they can be extremely valuable tools to enhance instruction. Centennial Middle School has bi-weekly PLC meetings, once a week we meet with our entire grade level, and once a week we meet in our grade level content areas. Our schedule is designed to have all of these meetings occur during the school day. Since teachers are allotted two common planning periods per day (6th grade planning: 12:50 PM-2:25 PM) teachers are still able to have one period of individual planning on PLC meeting days. Our PLC groups work together to plan common lessons, assessments, and units. During our meetings we also spend time reflecting on various units and teaching practices. Each grade level plans a theme for each quarter and creates essential questions for learning. All of the elective teachers meet with each grade level on a monthly basis for curriculum mapping, which helps all teachers make connections across the curriculum. I have attended numerous workshops on PLCs, and a group from our school traveled to Salt Lake City last year to attend a week long conference on PLCs. Within PLCs I think it is very important norms are set up in the beginning of year so every member has an equal chance to participate. Due to different personalities, if norms are not properly established in the beginning of the year certain teachers may dominate meetings while other teachers do not make an effort to participate. I think new teachers really benefit if there are strong PLCs in their schools. Common planning and reflection can really help beginning teachers. I have heard first year teachers at our school express how much PLCs have helped them improve their instruction. One of the challenges in creating PLCs is removing the stereotype many teachers have about PLCs. Some teachers believe PLCs are just another meeting they have to attend instead of having time in their classrooms. However, if PLCs are done correctly and teachers feel they are benefiting from the experience I think the negative connotation fades away. I have not heard any teachers in my school state they think PLCs are a waste of time. As a future administrator, I hope to implement many of the same guidelines we have used for setting up PLCs in my current school because I have seen the significant benefits for teachers and students.
Our school is in its third year of implementing the PLC model. Grade level teams have one hour of protected meeting time each week. We began two years ago, with the establishment of norms and moved quickly into determining Essential Skills, writing Smart Goals, and designing Common Assessments. During the first year, our administration made the decision to focus on reading only. Last year, we expanded to include math.
We have had some successes with the model as well as some difficulties. Several of our teams are flourishing and choose to meet at additional times during the week. Others are struggling to get past the feeling that this is one more meeting they have to attend.
One of the issues has been how to determine or clarify exactly what each student is expected to learn. It is not easy for a group of deeply invested teachers to come up with a list of Essential Skills (Common Essential Outcomes) in one hour. It takes time. Writing Smart Goals is no simple task either. Many of us had no experience prior to being given the assignment.
Last week, I attended an advanced PLC Training in Raleigh, Sponsored by High Five Regional Partnership and led by Rick and Becky DuFour.
Several things were cleared up for me during the training.
I understand a great deal more about the research that the concept of PLCs is based on. The potential of the model lies in building shared knowledge in schools about that research.
A strength of the model is its focus on collaboration and teaming. I’ve been fortunate to teach in a team my entire career. The sharing of resources among team members (everything from classroom materials to information on how to interpret test data) makes this an excellent strategy for improving schools.
I do see challenges with the implementation of this model as well. One obstacle is finding the time for teams to collaborate. Schools are going to have get creative. We cannot expect teams to be experts at designing the tools needed to function as an effective PLC in the beginning of the process.
In order to help build the capacity of teams, they need to be provided with exemplars of all of the important pieces of the PLC concept.
Another issue is that groups of teachers are being thrown together and told to become a team. This is easier said than done. I believe that schools are going to need some help in this area. The terms “team” and “collaboration” will need to be clarified.
PLC's are a logical solution to many of the issues that we face in schools. It only makes sense that you talk with colleagues about what is working and what is not in a classroom. It is efficient to work together so that you are not doing all of the work by yourself. The turnoff to PLC's is that administrators force them on their teachers and rather than being a relaxed, useful session it becomes a painful chore.
A group of us have been holding our PLC's since before the craze began. Our PLC's take place at the Ale House on Friday afternoons. They take place at lunches and dinners outside of school. They take place everyday in casual phone conversations as we turn to each other for help.
This upcoming Wednesday, I will be part of a team leading my school in their PLC day. We will be covering the topic of "How To Use Data."
We ar currently in our 3rd year of PLC work. As recently as last year, I attended the DuFour training courtesy of the district. My PLC meets bi-monthly to discuss goals and common assessments.
My biggest question revolves around the formalities of the PLC concept. I can easily argue that collaboration is commonsense and was happening in my building before I had attended PLC training. What are the benefits of maintaining such rigid structure and documentation expectations, which ultimately lead to more work for each department?
I absolutely view PLC's as rational and worthwhile. Collaboration stresses the notion that a group can produce more diversely innovative ideas than an isolated teacher. However, the establishment of PLC's as a mandate makes teacher buy-in a very difficult hurdle to tackle. This resistance stems from the handful of isolated teachers who may be reluctant to open themselves to the collaborative community.
I was part of PLC's at Northern for a couple of years. It was not a good experience for me. Basically we all got together and people complained a lot or we had fake conversations about what we were supposed to talk about. I think the reason it didn't work as well for us is that in career and tech everyone's course is very different. I actually PLC'ed best with the teacher next to me each year. Myself and the other marketing teacher (one year Chrissy and the Lisa), would meet over lunch or other times and talk about our classes, share ideas, talk about tests, etc. This was the best "PLC" I had. The actual PLC had many guidelines that I think inhibited what was trying to be accomplished. For example, minimum number of members, notes had to be taken and turned in, other forms due throughout the year, etc. All of those papers are probably sitting somewhere in a file, it is so sad, all the trees that die for our PLC's, what an injustice.
I noticed I ranted as I posted the last comment so let me answer the questions. I have never had to spearhead a PLC effort. I have been to PLC workshops. Some questions I have is why all of the paperwork. Can't administrators peek into a PLC and place a check mark somewhere to say we are doing it correctly? If we aren't shouldn't they step in and provide guidance? Another question I have is why no flexibility, it may work differently for different curriculum areas. Some of the strenghts are its ability to get teachers to share their methods that work. It also helps teachers align their curriculum which will hopefully lead to consitencies in testing scores.
My experience with the PLC model has not been positive. I feel this is the case because it was not implemented correctly. There were no trainings or workshops; rather, we had a meeting and were told we would be moving into “something” called a Professional Learning Community. We never worked in small grade-level groups to plan common assessments or lesson. Instead we held large “staff development” sessions. In these sessions testing, rigor, book reviews and school reform efforts were discussed.
The questions I have about the PLC model deal with nuts and bolts. Who or what decides what you can do in a PLC? Is there a right or wrong answer? Why isn’t PLC based on true professional development? Who defines professional development? I see the strength in planning as a group, using common assessments and sharing views and ideas. The challenge in PLCs deal directly with how it’s implemented. PLCs need to be researched and planned accordingly. It is necessary to know the ins and outs of the model and know to build it from the ground up correctly.
The first time I heard anything about PLCs, I was told to be at the Staff Development Center as a grade level rep. Along with several other representatives from my school, I sat there as they asked us, "What makes you qualified to take this initiative back and start it at your schools?" I had no answer, as I literally did not know what the letters even stood for at that time, and had simply been told to come. This top-down, blunt implementation was unfortunate, as I think there are many positive aspects to PLCs. However, as mentioned in class on Wednesday, anytime a "canned word" is overused, it can build resentment. "PLCs" have been in various stages of development for three years now at my school, and this is the first year I can really say that we are using the context of our PLC in a productive, beneficial way. It is serving both our students and us as teachers very well. It is letting us work smarter and more effectively, as well as sharing and lessening the burdens we struggle with as teachers. However, the PLC formed by the current third grade team is so different from the mockery of a PLC we had last year as a fourth grade team, it is almost comical. You can't force a team to be a PLC. With all of the structure in the world, we utterly failed to be a Professional Learning Community in any sense of any of the words last year, and it made me very skeptical of any reform movement that is mandated from the top-down and universally implemented.
My expeience with PLCs has been very positive. The idea is not new and I was a member of a PLC before I ever knew I was a member of a PLC. I teach US history which is one of the Big Five EOCTs in high school that a student has to pass the test in order to receive a graduation credit for the course. The US history teachers have been working together for a while. I think the PLC has made us a stronger, more cohesive unit. We have fomralized practices by setting measureable goals. We have also done a lot of work on how to meet goals such as establishing our specific learning goals, creating common formative assessments beyond Blue Diamond (the county benchmarks), creating common summative assessments, and creating a remediation program.
All of this being said, I know that some PLCs in my building have been less successful. The non-EOCT courses have not had the same focused emphasis by the administration. They struggle a great deal with goal setting, data collection, and simply their purpose as a PLC. The administration of my school has done a great job of selling the idea of and implementing the PLCs. The administration also did a great job of matching personalities within the PLCs. My principal has the advantage of having hired the entire faculty, so he was able to bring in the teachers with traits that he wanted. I know that is not normal.
As with any idea, how it is sold to the faculty is key. At my school, we have, for the most part, bought the idea and that is why it has been successful.
My experience has been similar to Kimberly's. I was choosen from my grade level to represent my school at the first PLC training a few years back. From the training, I remember just going over the concept of the PLC Model and looking at collaborative effort of data analying. Our team presented after the first training. For me, I did not take it very seriously honestly. My grade level did the things that the PLC model desired that teams do. My team collaborated with most everything and was looked upon as a model grade level in regards to collaboration. Therefore my view of PLCs was that it was what good teams do but with a catchy name. One of the issues that I am having now though, is that I feel that my district has taken a basic concept of collaboration and learning and turned it into a stressful situation. PLC meeting days have become not a group of colleages discussiong best practices, working together to generate assessments and classwork, and planning; but it has become a time of unorgainzed expectations. Most of the meetings that I attend now in regards to PLCs, are meetings that share "fluff" that my district has mandated to share with teachers and staff. It has become another time of training on topics that we receive training on EVERY year. I believe in the concept of PLCS but unfortunely for me it is like they have taken a very positive concept and made it another meeting that wastes my time.
PLCs are GREAT if the teachers and the administration of a school trust each other. I worked with PLCs down in Miami and saw the amazing results it can achieve. However, I also saw how a PLC group that cannot work together can hurt its students tremendously.
I agree with Racquel that in NC they have made PLC into something much more complex and difficult than it should be. I am constantly in PLC meetings or workshops because of my administration. Putting such strict boundaries and schedules around PLCs has really taken all the fun away from it. Now because of all the pressures from the district, when you talk about PLCs around here everyone puts a face of disgust.
It sounds like most people have had fairly positive experiences with PLCs. When true collaboration occurs among teachers, the planning, implementation and reflection process becomes much more effective than when individuals work independently. I agree with Kimberly that PLCs have a negative connotation among many teachers due to the “canned” name. When teachers hear the term “PLCs” they may feel too much money and effort is being put into this generic process. However, if schools are able to move past the title of PLCs and develop effective, collaborative groups, the students and teachers will benefit greatly.
My experiences with the PLC model are limited. I have not worked at a school focused on the PLC concept nor have I attended any PLC training.
Now, maybe we use another term like bimonthly department meetings where we share conerns or interests with fellow people in our department and share new ideas but we never use any term like PLC. Our school has five classroom buildings and each building is associated by department this year so that we can collaborate better when time permits. We actually talk alot and share ideas and check our pacing weekly if not daily sometimes. When we hold the bimonthly department meetings, we are usually half staffed (4 out of 9 social studies teachers) since some of us are on duty or coaching after school. I don't know if it was planned like this (informal meetings) but we love our nonstructured daily meetings or weekly meetings at lunch where we share information (within 25 minutes) about assessments, content, current events, and sharing remediation. I hope that they don't attach a label to this because right now I like it and I would be very disappointed if a label (PLC, ABC, EFG) was attached to it.
The question that I have would be, what are all of the other acronyms that are just like the PLC? I like discussing everything and anything associated with teaching with my collegues but would feel uncomfortable with someone coming in and attaching structure to it (rules, time for talking, content of talking). The challenges that I would see with PLCs would be getting all staff on board.
I agree with the good ideas behind PLCs (collaboration) but I do not think that setting guidelines as Cory brought up or madating the PLC experience as Tony had stated would be very productive at my school.I think that the more rules that are placed on teachers who are busy as it is, the less productive the PLC would go. Also, if the mandated PLC was implemented, then I could see myself going into the meeting with negative feelings before the meeting started because I knew that I had to be there or whatever consequence that was out there for missing the meeting would occur.
Hearing about what the PLC time has turned into at Raquel's school is very frustrating to me. I know several other people in class have echoed this experience. This was a top-down reform, yet the "top" has not bought into the collaborative, data-based concepts inherent in PLCs. Central Office doesn't seem to have any kind of collaboration going on, and consequently mandate upon mandate, training upon training are being handed down from various departments until people are spread so thin they can hardly see straight. From what Raquel described, they are not permitted to use the allotted PLC time for its intended purpose, but most likely are still expected to show the same results as if they were. From Central Office to administrators, administrators to teachers, and teachers to students, I think that everyone needs to practice what they preach a little more!
My PLC experience has not been great. My school has made me feel like I am wasting my time with the experience. I believe it could be beneficial when implemented correctly but my school does not use the ideas that are presented and try and implement the ideas that are presented in the PLCs. If nobody will try the new ideas then what is hte pint of us having the PLCs?
I would consider myself a PLC outcast. First of all, my school doesn't participate in a collaborative model. There are no designed common planning periods and no talk about making an effort in that direction. Secondly, I am not a "core" teacher. It seems that I am not a focus of the PLC. I used to teach middle school, however, so I am aware of the teaming concept. Our middle school teams are interdisciplinary and that seems to be less effective according to some of our readings. The research seems to indicate that collaborative models work. I wonder if simply the opportunity to collaborate has any benefit or does the structure need to be in play?
I find it interesting how positive the comments are about PLCs. I say this because of my experince with PLCs. I did notice something from each one that had a positive experience and they mentioned if the PLC is run correctly. My school may be doing some things very poorly for my to feel this way abot our PLCs.
Josh, again, I'm a PLC novice. But I am picking up on some patterns with these posts. I think there has to be some trust incorporated into each aspect of the system. If you don't trust the administrator, you will have a "buy-in" issue. If you don't trust your group you'll have superficial conversations. Finally, if you don't trust the concept you'll just whine a lot. So I think your right, the system has to be done correctly. The problem is that trust is not something you can mandate.
This is our school’s first year implementing PLCs at SE Raleigh HS. In the past we have used the PLC model within the social studies department to improve EOC scores. We would meet with our subject areas (US History, Civics, or World History) afterschool to formulate common assessments and strategies to share across the department. It’s a great concept when you have a group of teachers who are focused on students achieving academically and not competing with each other to see who has the best test scores. Everyone has to be an active participant to collaborate. I remember one colleague who would sit in the meeting and say nothing, but had a lot of materials in his room that he was using. This ranged from EOC booklets, supplemental resources, and videos he obtained from another school. He did not want to share his resources and this was detrimental to the PLC concept.
Aside from lack of participation, structured time to meet can also be a challenge to PLCs. It may be difficult to meet as a group within the school day if you do not have common planning. At Sanderson HS, the principal has established “late Tuesday” for PLC planning , in which the school starts late every Tuesday to allow the teachers to meet in PLC groups. This supports PLC and encourages teachers to be active participants because it is so important that the schedule has been altered to support the teacher.
I don't want to drink the Kool-Aid.
It makes me laugh each time I realize what gives my 34-year veteran peer her patience--at year 1, she knows this will be gone in 4 years.
We have been doing this PLC thing for three years in one capacity or another. In the first year it was loosely structured--we had common planning time and they didn't interfere. This was by far the most positive, affirming, and productive year. We were free to manage the sorts of informal conversations that made less experienced teachers feel supported and affirmed, experienced teachers were re-energized, and the beat-down members of our "team" were lifted up. Sharing best practices was as natural as breathing. Our intuition and feedback was valued. I cared about other people and students, more than that punk, Data.
We weren't organized as a team, but we loved being a team.
In our third year, with a PLC Coach full-time at the school to lead us through and SolutionsTree curriculum for us to follow regarding documenting everything we do, I hate PLCs.
Now I am checking off boxes and our team, which has shifted radically, is not in any way a team, although we are told we are.
This recalls the great Bill Watterson's insights in Calvin & Hobbes, as Calvin plays joyfully outside, imaginatively creating worlds for himself, and his father walks by and admires whatever he is doing saying that it "builds character." Calvin always indicates that nothing kills a good time like finding out you are "learning" or "building character" or receiving the approval of the principal for your actions being in line with the PLC mission. This brings me to the obvious point--I am a child and don't want to be told what to do. Sad, but I think it is a fact that resonates with many of my peers.
I am curious what would happen if we got to pick our own teams. Would it be like dodgeball at recess and I would always feel fat, slow and left-out?
What could we accomplish as loosely organized groups focused around broader school and instructional issues than just our content? In so many cases, good teachers could teach any subject--the content is always there sitting on paper, but the methods for delivering instruction, which can be extrapolated across nearly any content, that students respond to, is what makes a teacher. Being able to view methods in isolation might be an advantage.
How could we create more buy-in? The forms and analysis make sense, but also make me want to throw up.
Also, don't tell me I have to play well with my team, my family is the only group I was told I wasn't allowed to choose in life.
With early release days, couldn't you meet with grade level teams and departments then in a focused way, planning together, addressing content issues and changes, while meeting with your more loose support group and self-directed team in between? Would this make it less or more effective?
Surely it would be most natural to meet with people you self-select as being compatible, while still in everyone's self-interest to take advantage of their own like-subject peers to help with specific content instruction--could you get both easily with the way a schedule is structured without telling people what to do?
I wonder how PLCs would have been differently if schools were presented by the same trainers individually. Then after the training, schools were allowed to create a model that fits for them. The districts were then not allowed to use PLC meeting times to have mandated meetings. Would PLCs look differently?
I agree with Candace's comment that if a PLC is done correctly then it has great potential in helping kids that are possibly not getting the content and those that need excelleration! As Hillary demonstrated, scheduling is important and many schools have to make certain that teachers have common planning time. This shows support on the part of administration and may help with by in.
My experience with PLCs dovetails from Cory's comments since we were a pretend PLC just to check off that we had done them. Since that point, I have been to numerous traings with the DuFours both on the national and local levels. I think that training on PLCs is vital in understanding how PLCs are supposed to work and what to do when kids aren't learning the established essential questions.
One of the most important things to consider when dealing with PLC's is time managment. Time is essential when planning, creating assessments and analyzing data. Recently we received our first quarter benchmark scores. My PLC was concerned at our test scores so we wanted to get together and look at the data that was provided by the district. Of course, to do this, we needed time. We approached our principal about what we wanted to do and provided additional time for us to meet as a PLC that was built into the school day. We all took half a day and analyzed the data and starting planning and collaborating, as a team, interventions and lessons that we believed our students would benefit from. Reflecting back on that, we accomplished a lot and were able to plan several weeks’ worth of lessons. Of course, all of this would not have been possible if we did not time. I believe that administrators need to be flexible and allow for time like this if they want their teachers to successfully participate in PLC’s and engage in discussions and planning that generate best practices.
Post a Comment