TeachersTopic is a periodical feature about a subject of interest to the teaching community written by a prominent expert in the field. This month, Anne Jolly, answers questions about professional learning communities.
Q: What is a professional learning community? Haven’t school faculties always been professional communities, really? What’s different about the PLC idea we hear so much about today?
A: The term “Professional Learning Community” (“PLC”) more or less defines itself. It’s a community of professionals who engage in regular, collaborative learning. School faculties have always been communities of professionals . . . but not necessarily professional learning communities. Typically, school meetings focus on administrative issues, grade level issues, and departmental issues. Those meetings are necessary, but they are not professional learning community meetings. The focus for PLCs is on the word “learning.” Specifically, what PLCs bring to mind are communities of educators who work together on an ongoing basis to learn more about teaching and improving student learning. And keep in mind that these communities are not just groups—they are teams of interdependent adults who support one another.
Q: PLCs require teachers to make a significant commitment of time and energy. Is there research to support their effectiveness?
A: Great question! In fact, an increasing volume of research validates that PLCs are indeed effective and worth promoting. For example, in schools operating as genuine PLCs, teachers showed increased confidence, motivation, and work satisfaction. They also demonstrated a greater collective responsibility for student learning. In such schools, PLCs increased the knowledge base of the faculty and made a significant impact on their work in their classrooms.
Teachers in PLCs showed stronger beliefs that they can make a difference in students’ learning, and a greater commitment to changing their practice and trying new approaches. Students also showed enhanced motivation and improvements in performance. Not surprisingly, gains in student learning consistently occurred when a faculty engaged in ongoing collaborative study, learning, and reflection about instruction; and regularly examined the impact of teaching on student thinking and learning.
Q: In some circles, professional learning communities have developed a negative reputation. Why do you think that is? What would you say to teachers or others who don’t see the value?
A: At the surface level PLCs seem a deceptively simple idea: “Meet together and work on instruction.” How hard can that be? Well, the fact is that PLCs are hard work, especially if adequate preparations are not made in advance of kicking off this initiative. For example,
- Do the school structures and organization promote collaboration? Do teachers have built-in time for teamwork on a regular basis?
- Is the principal totally on board? Is (s)he ready and willing to provide continuing support and give high visibility to the teams’ work? And does the principal know good and effective ways of doing that?
- Does the entire administrative staff know what teams are supposed to accomplish, so that the teams will not get co-opted for other purposes?
- Do teachers know how to work collaboratively? Do they know what to do during a team meeting? Once they’re eyeball to eyeball, what next?
- Do teams have access to resources they need to increase their knowledge, skill, and teaching effectiveness?
- What ongoing incentives and supports are in place to keep the momentum rolling? For example, have any non-teaching responsibilities been lifted from teachers’ plates to make room for this new, important responsibility?
- Do teams know how to assess their progress as both team members and classroom teachers? Do they know how to assess the impact of new instructional strategies on students?
- Are mechanisms in place for sharing the work of the team’s school wide?
In some cases, people become disenchanted with PLCs because they are looking for a quick fix for this year’s test scores. PLCs represent a long-term commitment to quality. They are not a process for quickly ratcheting up test scores—although this collaborative investment in higher quality teaching will result in increased learning on the part of students.
