special education

Collaborative inquiry

Ontario Focused intervention Partnership

The Teaching-Learning Critical Pathway (TLCP) is a promising model used to organize actions for teaching and student learning. The basic idea of the pathway is that when classroom practice is examined collaboratively.

it leads to increased student achievement for all. The Ontario approach is based on collaborative inquiry that involves new ways of working together (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2007b).

In Ontario, the critical learning instructional path was adapted and used with over 800 low-performing schools to provide targeted, nonpu- nitive, and transparent support called the Ontario Focused Intervention Partnership (OFIP). The results were dramatic, with fewer than 100 schools designated as poor performing after three years of use.

The process involves four key steps (see Figure 3.3):

Assess:

A group of teachers, usually a grade team, gathers evidence of current student achievement to identify areas of need. They iden- tify curriculum standards related to that need and review current instructional practices. Together, they design a common assessment that will be administered at the conclusion of the six-week learning cycle.

Plan:

The team develops a six-week learning block based on the standards and selects high-yield instructional strategies. If needed, they engage in professional learning targeted to the identified needs.

Collaborative inquiry: Four Key steps

Act:

The team implements the learning design in their classrooms. Teachers select students to watch as “markers” and will share their progress with the grade team. Teachers monitor both the appropriateness of the instruction and the progress of students. They provide scaffolding and adjustments as needed over the six weeks. They administer the common assessment as a culminat- ing task and collect samples of student work.

Reflect:

In the final stage, the team conducts a teacher moderation cycle using the collected samples of work. Teachers collaboratively assess student work for the “marker” students and identify next steps needed in the student learning. These strategies can usu- ally be applied to groups of students. Next, the team engages in reflection to determine the effectiveness of the learning design and the high-yield strategies chosen and the next steps needed to deepen learning. Ways to support students who were not yet successful are identified, and the data on the learning design and student learning feed into the next six-week cycle.

The power of this model has been to focus transparently on a clear target in a way that motivates and builds capacity across the school. The provincial support included training in the processes and facilitation and fostered a sense of partnership to achieve a common goal of increased student achievement. Teachers, superintendents, and teacher-leaders describe the process as highly challenging but also as the best professional experience they have had. This version of collaborative inquiry merges the best features of lesson study and examination of student work. It ensures that both the learning and teaching are thoughtfully designed and assessed and moves the conversation from simply analyzing data to robust discussion of ways to shift instruction to improve student learning.

This deep collaborative work requires new ways of working together, trust, shared leadership, sustained focus, and a commitment to collaborative inquiry. It works because reflection and collaborative examination of practice become part of the culture of the school and district. While the intervention was first piloted with underperforming schools, word spread quickly that it was having a strong impact on student learning. Other schools began asking for the capacity building in facilitation skills, and it has now become a widespread practice across the 4,000 schools in Ontario, thus increasing coherence at both the school and district levels.

improvement science

Anthony Bryk, president of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, proposes using improvement science to accelerate learning and address problems of practice because “we need smarter systems, organiza- tions capable of learning and improving, that see learning and change as what it means to be vital, to be alive” (Bryk, Gomez, Grunow, & Le Mahieu, 2014). Bryk et al. (2014) set out “six principles of improvement.” The authors describe improvement science as explicitly designed to accelerate learning-by-doing, utilizing a user-centered and problem-centered approach to improving teach- ing and learning. The overall goal is to develop the necessary know-how for a reform idea to spread faster and more effectively. A key component of their approach is a structure called networked improvement communities (NICs).

NICs are intentionally designed social organizations, each with a distinct problem-solving focus. These structured networks have norms of practice, roles, and responsibilities. NICs are scientific communities because they are focused on a well-specified common aim guided by a deep understanding of the problem, the system that produces it, and a shared working theory to improve it; disciplined by the methods of improvement research to develop, test, and refine interventions; organized to accelerate interventions into the field; and designed to effectively integrate them into varied educational contexts.

These communities use a 90-day cycle (Park & Takahashi, 2013), which includes three phases:

• Scan: The team reviews pertinent current and academic knowledge on the topic, then narrows to a specific issue and identifies a prod- uct or framework to be tested for 30 days.

• Focus: The participants use rapid, small-scale testing to assess the prototype or framework over 30 days.

• Summarize: The team refines its innovation and summarizes its work in a 90-day cycle report including what the cycle has produced.

At the conclusion of the cycle, a decision is made on how to use or share the findings. This improvement approach is a powerful way to bring precision to collaborative work as it incorporates rigor in the examination of the issue and requires an outcome based on authentic application and reflection.

Networks

Networks are proliferating in a variety of formats and attract both individuals and groups. Results can be dramatic or mediocre, depending on the design elements. Interest in collaborating across districts is evolving rapidly. Currently, we are working with 10 (mostly large) school districts in California, serving more than one million students. The districts have cre- ated vertical leadership teams representing levels within the district and are engaged in multiyear collaborative learning focused on rethinking, lead- ership, and increased coherence. In another project, we are working with three districts in California over a three-year period. Across the country, we are working with a cohort of 28 school districts in Connecticut on leader- ship to maximize coherence. This effort is supported by five professional organizations that are bringing vertical teams together to engage in cycles of learning and engagement in a multiyear experience. These are just three of many examples of districts that are seeing the value of deep collaborative work that engages new ideas and applies them in context. We next share two examples that are intentionally organized to shift practice in organiza- tions across and within districts.

system Transformation Collaborative

Three school districts in Northern California—Pittsburg Unified, San Lorenzo Unified, and Napa Valley Unified—are engaged in a three-year collaborative with us, focused on sustainable system improvement and enhanced cross-school and cross-district collaboration.

The three district leadership teams attend joint learning sessions quar- terly to increase their skills as change leaders, develop clarity about system goals and strategy, and enhance collaborative cultures. Between sessions, they apply the new learning in their roles and return to share evidence of impact. This is an example of using the group to change the group as the peer connections across districts both raise the bar and stimulate new thinking about common issues.

School leadership teams composed of principals and three to eight teachers attend quarterly sessions to deepen instructional coherence and improve student learning. They engage in within-school and cross-school examination of cases and simulations during the sessions and design 60-day learning cycles to apply the new ideas in their schools.

to subsequent sessions to share evidence of impact on other staff and stu- dent learning. The collaborative learning cycle is a key lever for inquiry into practices that work in the local context.

After 18 months, participants describe the impact in three areas: they are developing a common language and knowledge base across the districts, the design is building both vertical and lateral capacity, and they articulate and act with greater clarity of focus and strategy. Patrick Sweeney, superinten- dent of Napa, stated recently, “We are getting traction now.” Teachers and principals talk about the way the new skills and knowledge are helping them navigate the implementation of the CCSS and new assessments by provid- ing a focus on quality learning for both the adults and the students. Learning fairs are held each year for schools and districts to reflect on the achieve- ments and insights gleaned from the work and to collate evidence of impact. This system transformation collaborative is building coherence and impact because it increases clarity of goals and strategy; provides sus- tained learning experiences with cycles of application and reflection; increases both vertical and lateral capacity building; and fosters relentless focus on student learning.

Ontario Networked learning Community

Across the province of Ontario, examples of networked learning communi- ties for teachers and school leaders are on the rise. Groups form with a spe- cific purpose, establish norms, and use protocols to keep focused. Using a collaborative inquiry model, they access research, examine questions, serve as critical friends, and focus on ways to use best practice as well as to learn new practices. A question format promotes thoughtful reflection and encourages team members to dig deeply into the why of the inquiry.

A recent report on effective learning teams and networks with school leaders (Leskiw-Janvary, Oakes, & Waler, 2013) identified six key factors that increased the impact of these networks

• Collaborative inquiry: Collective learning and understanding encourages innovation and meaning while practices are analyzed, leading to purposeful, effective action.

• Leadership: All members share flexible, emergent leadership by asking effective, timely questions to create the compelling distur- bances that generate new ideas and questions.

• Relationships:Allmemberstakeriskswithinatrustingenvironment and operate in interdependent ways.

• Instructional focus: A continuous process with evidence of new, quality thinking and intentional changes in practice is embedded. Groups are established based on explicit needs, and meaningful, relevant, appropriate data are strategically collected.

• Reflection: Ongoing focused reflection leads to integration of learn- ing and deeper understanding. Theories of action are refined based on new learning that results in a change in practice

• Accountability :As aresult of collective learning, changes in teacher instructional practice lead to improved student outcomes.

School leaders in the networks point out that they always begin with the needs of the school. Trust and relationships are key, and they note that the variety of experience levels in the network means they learn with one another and on behalf of one another. They see this as building capacity that is leading to sustainability across the district and the province.

Harnessing the Power of Personal learning Networks 2.0

A new form of collaborative interaction is spreading through social net- working, online communities, and collaboration platforms. Early use has been somewhat random, with varied levels of engagement and impact, but our lean start-up philosophy suggests that future iterations will be increas- ingly more powerful if we harness the power of virtual connections and connect it to focused purpose.

Two forces are combining to propel the use of virtual networks: time and global reach. Educators feel universally overwhelmed with demands on their time, and virtual connections allow them freedom to connect any- time, anywhere to share learning designs, strategies, and collaboration across grades, departments, or schools. Second, virtual tools allow users to connect with leaders and teachers from anywhere who may be working on common interests or give new perspectives to the work.

Formats for connection are expanding rapidly from e-mail and Twitter to blogs, social bookmarking, groups, forums, and collaborative plat- forms. One downside for users is finding a way to keep track of the deluge of information and to avoid the distraction of interesting but not necessar- ily relevant information.We highlight one attempt at a state level to utilize the power of tech- nology and virtual networks to address core issues.

The New Hampshire Network strategy

New Hampshire wanted a system that would fundamentally change how they support districts with a goal of moving from a compliance-oriented culture to one of greater support that better serves the needs of students. Their strategy is founded on a belief in the power of networks to promote change and deepen adult learning, and that success will be defined by moving students to true college and career readiness. This requires the building of capacity of educators as they note the following:

The strategy’s focus is to build and support relationships by connecting educators and districts across our state to one another, to high quality information resources and professional learning supports, as well as to promote greater alignment between and among statewide initiatives.

The strategy comprises two features: professional learning networks based on district needs and state goals, and the New Hampshire Network Platform, which is a virtual space for educators to collaborate and learn.

The design began by understanding district needs, which ranged from implementation of CCSS to use of data by school-based teams. The identified needs were used to establish learning objectives for the professional learning networks. Launched in November 2012, over 1,800 educators participated in workshops, conferences, and webinars in the first seven months.

As they continue to refine the strategy, they plan to capture broader evidence of impact, but comments from participants are positive.

We are engaging many more people now. . . . We are casting a broader net, which is probably the largest change, in terms of dis- trict growth. Instead of picking the five or ten all star teachers we have a lot of people who are aware and encourage others of information and to avoid the distraction of interesting but not necessar- ily relevant information.

We highlight one attempt at a state level to utilize the power of tech- nology and virtual networks to address core issues.

The New Hampshire Network strategy

New Hampshire wanted a system that would fundamentally change how they support districts with a goal of moving from a compliance-oriented culture to one of greater support that better serves the needs of students. Their strategy is founded on a belief in the power of networks to promote change and deepen adult learning, and that success will be defined by moving students to true college and career readiness. This requires the building of capacity of educators as they note the following:

The strategy’s focus is to build and support relationships by connecting educators and districts across our state to one another, to high quality information resources and professional learning supports, as well as to promote greater alignment .

The strategy comprises two features: professional learning networks based on district needs and state goals, and the New Hampshire Network Platform, which is a virtual space for educators to collaborate and learn.

The design began by understanding district needs, which ranged from implementation of CCSS to use of data by school-based teams. The identified needs were used to establish learning objectives for the professional learning networks. Launched in November 2012, over 1,800 educators participated in workshops, conferences, and webinars in the first seven months.

As they continue to refine the strategy, they plan to capture broader evidence of impact, but comments from participants are positive.

“Coming together with other cohorts and with fidelity and in a collaborative fashion so people own it has not been the practice,” but the network strategy helps propel us in that direction. “More and more we are looking at community and looking forward.” (New Hampshire Department of Education, 2013, p. 26) (refer- ring to the Keen School District [SAU29], p. 26)

The change strategy incorporated a prototyping for the first six months and then revisions based on early data. Four lessons emerged:

Lesson One: This is complex work. Shifting from compliance to capac- ity support is challenging. They noted a tension between balancing the requirements of being a regulatory body and what is needed to support transformation in and meet current expectations of users for support.

Lesson Two: Clear communication is key. Designers needed to be clearer about goals and connections as well as integrating the components of the strategy into a stronger whole.

Lesson Three: Formalize the structure. While participants reported a good experience, feedback revealed areas for refinement and greater time- liness in providing options.

Lesson Four: Changing behaviors takes time. Technology was not the driver of collaboration or problem solving—that requires a shift in chang- ing perceptions and actions from within the New Hampshire Department of Education as well as in districts, which means shifting from a focus on the initiative to cultivating relationships.

New Hampshire’s end game is to grow a marketplace where high- quality professional learning supports are offered and to shift the relationships from compliance to support. We see promise in this effort as it has avoided the simple allure of technology as a panacea and has focused on building relationships and two-way communication. Their design incorporates rapid prototyping informed by feedback cycles from the field; combining virtual connection with focused, meaningful purpose and protocols to maximize involvement and depth of learning; and recognizing that coherence will only emerge from an integrated effort. We look forward to seeing the results of this combination.

assess

plan

reflect

act