2 asap

esyim

WatkinsQualDissertation.pdf

Home >Social Science homework help >Sociology homework help >2 asap

Professional Learning Community Implementation and Teacher Perceptions of

Participation Influences on Professional Growth

Submitted by

Tracy M. Watkins

A Dissertation Proposal Presented in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctorate of Education

Grand Canyon University

Phoenix, Arizona

September 21, 2016

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,

a note will indicate the deletion.

Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346

ProQuest

Published by ProQuest LLC ( ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

ProQuest Number:

10170194

2016

GRAND CANYON UNIVERSITY

Professional Learning Community Implementation and Teacher Perceptions of

Participation Influences on Professional Growth

I verify that my dissertation represents original research, is not falsified or plagiarized,

and that I have accurately reported, cited, and referenced all sources within this

manuscript in strict compliance with APA and Grand Canyon University (GCU)

guidelines. I also verify my dissertation complies with the approval(s) granted for this

research investigation by GCU Institutional Review Board (IRB).

August 12, 2016

Tracy Watkins Date

Abstract

This qualitative case study explored how professional learning community models in one

K-8 school were designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning and how

educators perceived participation in professional learning communities (PLC) influenced

their professional growth and development. The theoretical framework of the

transformational learning theory, social cognitive theory and the foundations of PLCs,

established the platform for this study. The research questions specified a focus on teacher

perceptions of the professional learning community model being implemented, addressed

how professional learning communities were structured and implemented to focus on data-

based decisions and described how participation in professional learning communities

influences professional growth and instructional effectiveness. The sample consisted of at

least 30 teachers and 2 administrators in five schools located in a southwestern school

district in the United States. Data collection instruments included questionnaires,

interviews, and archival data. Data coding procedures determined specific patterns that

emerged in the analysis. The results provided that the greatest influence on teacher

professional growth were: purposeful meetings, shared responsibility, commitments to

common practice and common assessments with ongoing progress monitoring. The

implications of this study suggest that school organizations provide an opportunity for

purposeful collaboration during the work day. Most importantly, focused conversations

must address student data, sharing instructional strategies and committing to common

practice and assessment for ongoing student improvement and teacher development.

Key words: Professional learning communities, professional development, data-

driven decisions

Dedication

This dissertation is dedicated to my mom, Lillian Rollo. My mom has been my

leading cheerleader my entire life, and it is because of her that I have accomplished this

ambitious goal. I am encouraged daily by reflecting on her sacrifice to raise such strong

children on her own. She has endured many things in her life, but her positive disposition

is one that I strive for daily. I am thankful for the struggle, life experiences, and

celebrations. I am honored every day to be the daughter of the strongest woman I will

ever know.

vii

Acknowledgments

I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude towards those who

encouraged, inspired and pressed me to accomplish this ambitious, academic milestone.

I would like to begin by thanking the chair of my committee, Dr. Cristie

McClendon. Dr. McClendon was always available to answer questions, probe my

thinking and her continued support during my frustration was much appreciated. I was

fortunate to have her knowledge and dedication to pursue my passion of exploring

professional learning communities.

I would like to thank the teachers and administrators that participated in this

study. I know that you sacrificed time to participate and time is a precious commodity in

education, so thank you. All of you have inspired me by what I have learned in this

process to become a more conscientious leader.

I would also like to acknowledge all the students and teachers that I have been so

honored to serve as a teacher, principal and director over the last 19 years. I will continue

to be a passionate educator because of you! I will never forget what it is like to walk in

your shoes and I will always remember why I chose to be an educator because of your

continuous dedication.

Most importantly, I would like to express my heartfelt love and appreciation for

the best support system, my family. Thank you to my wonderful husband, Marlo. Thank

you for your unconditional love, support and encouragement during my times of

frustration, defeat and celebration. To my children, thank you for your love and support

during my educational journey. I could not have made it through without your continued

inspiration!

viii

Table of Contents

List of Tables ................................................................................................................... xiii

List of Figures .................................................................................................................. xiv

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study ....................................................................................1

Introduction ....................................................................................................................1

Background of the Study ...............................................................................................2

Problem Statement .........................................................................................................4

Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................6

Research Questions ........................................................................................................8

Advancing Scientific Knowledge ................................................................................10

Significance of the Study .............................................................................................15

Rationale for Methodology ..........................................................................................18

Nature of the Research Design for the Study ...............................................................20

Definition of Terms......................................................................................................25

Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations ....................................................................26

Assumptions. .......................................................................................................26

Limitations. .........................................................................................................27

Delimitations. ......................................................................................................28

Summary and Organization of the Remainder of the Study ........................................28

Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................30

Introduction to the Chapter ..........................................................................................30

Background to the Problem .........................................................................................32

Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................34

Transformational learning theory ........................................................................35

Social cognitive theory........................................................................................36

Professional learning communities. ....................................................................37

Review of the Literature ..............................................................................................39

Qualitative PLC research. ...................................................................................40

PLC’s focus on teaching and learning ................................................................43

Professional development. ..................................................................................56

Teacher perceptions of PLCs. .............................................................................62

Transformational learning. ..................................................................................64

Social cognitive theory........................................................................................70

Methodology and Instrumentation ...............................................................................76

Questionnaires. ....................................................................................................82

Interviews. ...........................................................................................................83

Archival data. ......................................................................................................83

Summary ......................................................................................................................84

Chapter 3: Methodology ....................................................................................................88

Introduction ..................................................................................................................88

Statement of the Problem .............................................................................................89

Phenomenon and Research Questions .........................................................................90

Research Methodology ................................................................................................91

Research Design...........................................................................................................94

Population and Sample Selection.................................................................................97

Sources of Data ............................................................................................................98

Questionnaires .....................................................................................................99

Interviews. .........................................................................................................100

Archival data. ....................................................................................................101

Validity ......................................................................................................................102

Reliability ...................................................................................................................102

Data Collection and Management ..............................................................................103

Data Analysis Procedures ..........................................................................................106

Ethical Considerations ...............................................................................................108

Limitations and Delimitations ....................................................................................110

Summary ....................................................................................................................111

Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Results ..............................................................................114

Introduction ................................................................................................................114

Descriptive Data.........................................................................................................115

Questionnaire descriptive statistics. ..................................................................117

Interviews. .........................................................................................................124

Archival data. ....................................................................................................126

Data Analysis Procedures ..........................................................................................129

Preparing raw data for analysis. ........................................................................129

Thematic analysis ..............................................................................................131

Results ........................................................................................................................133

Definition of PLC..............................................................................................134

Research Question 1..........................................................................................136

Theme 1. Collaborative teams. .........................................................................138

Theme 2. Data-driven decisions focused on student success............................140

Theme 3. Shared responsibility, commitment, and buy-in to a common

practice. ....................................................................................................142

Summary of Research Question 1. ....................................................................147

Research Question 2..........................................................................................149

Summary of Research Question 2. ....................................................................159

Research Question 3..........................................................................................160

Summary for RQ3. ............................................................................................169

Summary ....................................................................................................................170

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations ............................................174

Introduction ................................................................................................................174

Summary of the Study ...............................................................................................176

Summary of Findings and Conclusion .......................................................................179

Research Question 1..........................................................................................181

Research Question 2..........................................................................................184

Research Question 3..........................................................................................187

Implications................................................................................................................190

Theoretical implications. ...................................................................................191

Practical implications ........................................................................................195

Future implications ...........................................................................................197

Recommendations ......................................................................................................198

Recommendations for future research ..............................................................199

Recommendations for future practice. ..............................................................199

References ........................................................................................................................202

Appendix A. IRB Approval Letter...................................................................................210

Appendix B. Letter of Consent ........................................................................................211

Appendix C. Permission Letters to Use the Instruments Copy of Instruments ...............212

Appendix D. Copy of Instruments ...................................................................................213

xii

Appendix E. Interview Protocol/ Participant Consent .....................................................217

Appendix F. Recruitment Letter ......................................................................................220

Appendix G. Questionnaire Results Part 1 ......................................................................221

Appendix H. Questionnaire Results Part 2 ......................................................................224

Appendix I. Sample of Transcribed Interviews ...............................................................228

Appendix J. Interview Analysis .......................................................................................238

Appendix K. Questionnaire Part 2 Example of Coding Process .....................................247

xiii

List of Tables

Table 1. Questionnaire Participant of Years Taught at Current School ........................ 116

Table 2. Questionnaire Participant of Years Teaching Current Subject or Grade Level 117

Table 3. Rating Average for Questionnaire Part 1 ......................................................... 118

Table 4. Participant Definitions of PLCs ....................................................................... 120

Table 5. Participant Perceptions of PLCs Usefulness .................................................... 122

Table 6. Questionnaire Item 40 Responses .................................................................... 123

Table 7. Questionnaire Item 41 Responses .................................................................... 124

Table 8. Archival Data Supporting School Improvement ............................................. 128

Table 9. Key: Identified Codes for Items 38-41 ............................................................ 132

Table 10. Research Question 1 Emergent Codes and Themes ....................................... 137

Table 11. Advantages and Barriers Related to Shared Commitment ............................ 144

Table 12. Research Question 1 Themes .......................................................................... 146

Table 13. Research Question 2 Emergent Codes and Themes ...................................... 150

Table 14. Research Question 2 Themes ......................................................................... 157

Table 15. Research Question 3 Emergent Codes and Themes ...................................... 160

Table 16. Research Question 3 Themes ......................................................................... 168

xiv

List of Figures

Figure 1. Teacher perceptions of school PLC model ...................................................... 119

Figure 2. Interview participant demographic data. ......................................................... 125

Figure 3. Interview minutes and transcribed pages. ....................................................... 126

Figure 4. Percent of students passing statewide (English language arts and math)

assessment in 2006-07 compared to 2009-10. ................................................. 127

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study

Introduction

Recent reforms in education and calls for increased accountability have caused

administrators and teachers to implement a variety of programs and strategies designed to

improve student achievement. One concern among stakeholders is that teachers can no

longer work in isolation if the staff is collectively responsible for the learning of all

students. Therefore, measures have been introduced in school systems designed to

increase teacher collaboration. One of these structures is the Professional Learning

Community (PLC), which Darling-Hammond and Richardson (2009) touted as the new

paradigm of professional development. A PLC is a small team of teachers committed to

meeting regularly and working collaboratively on shared goals in order to improve

achievement for each individual student they serve (Dufour, Dufour & Eaker, 2008).

Valentin (2014) contributed that the success of PLC models depends on the nature

of teacher participation and collaborative efforts. Hence, the accomplishment of the

teams depends on the teachers, who need to use their collaborative time to engage one

another in critical dialogue. Chong and Kong (2012) added that successful teaching

requires that PLCs as a training tool need to be intensive, ongoing, and connected to

practice. Yet, how teachers use their time in PLCs and how teachers perceive this

collaboration influences their growth as instructors is not well studied.

Valentin (2014) also noted that most studies on PLC models have been on how

collaboration impacts student achievement. Few studies have been conducted to explore

teacher perspectives on PLC implementation and models. Furthermore, C. Stewart (2014)

recommended that further empirical research regarding PLC’s as a school reform model

should be addressed to gain additional insight into the success and sustainability of

PLC’s. Thus, this research effort pursued K-8 teacher perspectives on how PLCs models

are implemented with a focus on teaching and learning and how teachers perceived

participation in PLCs influenced their professional growth and development.

This chapter provides the background of the study and establishes the problem

determined in prior research. Further, the information presented in this chapter highlights

the purpose of this endeavor and defines the research questions this researcher sought to

answer. In an effort to provide substantial knowledge to advance the work of PLCs, this

chapter identified how the information will advance the scientific knowledge and provide

significance as well as determine the most effective methodology to seek trustworthy

results. The research design will be explained in more detail along with defining the

common terms used throughout the study. Finally, the assumptions, limitations and

delimitations are clarified and explained in more detail that may challenge the process.

Background of the Study

Reforms in education, including the No Child Left Behind Act, referred to as

NCLB (2001), Race to the Top (2011) and most recently, the implementation of the

Common Core Standards have required teachers to learn and develop new instructional

and collaborative skills. In order to provide more time and opportunities for teachers to

develop these needed skills, many schools have implemented collaborative models such

as PLCs. Supporters of PLCs indicated that team members should collaborate as a unit to

examine student achievement data in order to discuss, design and implement instruction

to improve teaching and learning (Bitterman, 2010). However, Thessin (2015) found that

obstacles to the successful implementation of the PLCs was a lack of training,

administrator support and clarity of PLC components. Schools that implement PLCs must

offer teachers time, training, and guidance in order to collaborate and plan instruction

designed to improve student learning. Additionally, a crucial consideration must be that

the implementation plans include the professional development framework of a school

based PLC, a school culture that supports the collaborative efforts, and a readiness by

school leaders to engage and communicate the expectations (Thessin, 2015).

Further, there is a wealth of information that supports the idea that PLCs “provide

a framework and process for ongoing learning and professional growth” (Stegall, 2011, p.

9). According to Chong and Kong (2012), teaming and collaboration models require that

teachers have time to meet regularly to promote their instructional expertise. More

significantly, this type of job-embedded teacher development is a direct result of

sustained learning.

Schmoker (2006) maintained that in PLCs, teachers work with experts in

education and one another to learn about and discuss instructional techniques that will

improve the teacher’s skills, but also improve student learning. During this time, team

members tap into each other’s existing capabilities and potential (Schmoker, 2006) to

further develop a common repertoire of instructional skills. These collaborative

experiences provide teachers needed opportunities to develop a refined craft and instill

good teaching practices into authentic settings, hence change manifests into ongoing

student achievement. Further, these critical conversations that teachers engage in often

bring about creative conflict that leads to improved instruction. Disagreement and

disequilibrium that comes with the critical questioning, debates and discourse about best

practices, although difficult, can extend the professional growth of teachers (Owen,

2014). Prior studies have been conducted on the relationship between the implementation

of PLCs and student achievement (Scott, 2012) and the impact that collaborative

frameworks such as PLCs have on teacher self-efficacy (Romeo, 2012; Stegall, 2011).

Valentin (2014) highlighted the important role that teachers play in the success of

PLCs, but also noted that limited research exists on teacher perspectives of how this

collaborative structure actually works in terms of improving the instructional skills and

development of teachers. In a study of teacher perspectives related to science PLCs,

Bitterman (2010) found that in order for teachers to be aware of the latest research on

instruction and learning, they needed a structured framework for the PLC process to

benefit. That framework allocates time for teachers to plan and develop as professionals.

They also needed a growth mindset and focus on inquiry to best support this way of

developing. Like Valentin, Bitterman (2010 recommended more study on the topic of

how teachers describe they implement PLC structures to not only improve student

learning, but to also adopt that “inquiry” mindset as they grow professionally as

educators. C. Stewart (2014) also suggested additional empirical research regarding PLCs

as a school reform model and how to sustain their effectiveness be addressed.

Therefore, a gap existed related to PLC models and how they extend the growth

and development of teachers. These collaborative experiences provide teachers

opportunities and are an essential component of school improvement efforts if explicit

training is provided to teachers on how they will learn to engage in this process (Thessin,

2015). This study explained the influence of collaborative teaming models for teacher

development within professional learning communities in K-8 schools with a focus on

teaching and learning, and how educators perceived participation in PLCs influenced

their professional growth and development.

Problem Statement

It was not known how professional learning community models in one K-8 school

were designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how

educators perceived participation in professional learning communities influenced their

professional growth and development. Prior research focused on the relationship between

the implementation of PLCs and student achievement, but Valentin (2014) noted that

limited research exists on teacher perspectives of how this collaborative structure actually

works. Furthermore, Bitterman (2010) found teachers needed a structured framework for

the PLC process and also needed a growth mindset and a focus on inquiry. Bitterman

(2010) recommended more study on the topic of how teachers describe they implement

PLC structures to improve teaching, learning and also how they adopt that “inquiry”

mindset. C. Stewart (2014) suggested further empirical research regarding PLCs as a

school reform model and how to sustain their effectiveness. Therefore, a gap existed

relative to PLC models and how they extend the growth and development of teachers.

This study was conducted to address the gap of how teachers perceive PLCs, how the

structure fosters an inquiry and growth mindset and how teachers perceived factors and

conditions that created sustainable PLCs.

With respect to collaborative teaming structures, there are three conditions that

support teacher change or improvement these include: embedded professional

development, a focus on learning outcomes, and organized time provided by the school to

collaborate (Chong & Kong, 2012). However, these three conditions pose significant

challenges and obstacles for many schools as teachers struggle to find time to meet for

collaboration; administrators often offer inadequate guidance and expectations for the

PLC framework, and teachers lack training on data-based decision making. Therefore, the

most important group affected are students, who stand to benefit from teachers who know

how to use data to improve learning. Similarily, teachers are also affected as they need

time to move from the traditional structure of working in isolation to working as a group

to grow as instructors and educators (Thessin, 2015; Valentin, 2014). Hence, PLC

structures, when implemented correctly, offer teachers opportunities to engage one

another in insightful, critical, and reflective dialog, engaging in a solution for sustained

improvement (Hord, 1997).

Therefore, there are important details that were explored in this case study to

determine how collaborative teaming models are perceived by educators to advance

professional growth including: addressing poor student performance, acknowledging that

not all teachers have the skills to address particular student needs, and addressing the

discourse of new content and teaching strategies (Van Lare & Brazer, 2013). The

contributions and the results of this study added to the extensive knowledge by

determining how professional learning community models in one K-8 school are

designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators

perceived participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional

growth and development. Teachers needed to be willing and able to effectively

collaborate in PLCs to improve instruction and learning. The results of this study

provided information regarding the perceptions of teachers and the ways they collaborate,

which could be replicated by other leaders in similar settings. In addition, the impact on

teacher development within effective professional learning communities promotes a more

authentic way that will ensure sustainable change in education, with the end goal being,

improved student achievement.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to investigate how professional

learning community models in one K-8 school are designed and implemented with a

focus on teaching and learning, and how educators perceived participation in professional

learning communities influenced their professional growth and development. PLCs are

designed to respond to the instructional needs of teachers for direct student achievement

(Stegall, 2011). Further, the recommendation of the work presented in PLCs have

impacted teacher learning that support state and national expectations.

The target population for this study is comprised of public school educators that

have been involved in the building, sustaining and implementing of the PLC process in a

K-8 school in the southwest. The facilitation of PLCs in schools demand an intentional

definition of learning and a framework that support leaders in thinking about what counts

as learning within collaborative groups and how organizational leverages that engage

instructional learning (Van Lare & Brazer, 2013). Therefore, the involvement of a variety

of educators that include: administrators, primary, intermediate and middle school

teachers were included to explore the perception of those involved in collaborative

teaming. This qualitative study required a rigorous in-depth analysis of transcribed data

(Saldana, 2013); therefore, the interviewed public school educators was limited to 16,

with questionnaires being collected from at least 30 participants and archival data being

used to support the outcome of increased student achievement supporting the results of

this study.

It was essential that a qualitative approach be employed to support this study.

School environments offer current experiences in terms of reality, which ultimately will

lead the observer to witness the dynamics of a PLC in a natural setting (Baxter & Jack,

2008; Yin, 2014). Case studies often connect to workplace issues (teacher development)

and usually connect with something happening in an organization or institution

(employing PLCs); therefore, qualitative was the most prominent way to answer the

research questions provided by the researcher. In addition, this case study sought to offer

an explanation of the phenomenon on how professional learning community models in

one K-8 school are designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and

how educators perceived participation in professional learning communities influenced

their professional growth and development.

Research Questions

The goal of this case study was to investigate how professional learning

community models in one K-8 school are designed and implemented with a focus on

teaching and learning, and how educators perceived participation in professional learning

communities influenced their professional growth and development. The research

questions were developed using the rigorous, previous literature, which elicited

researcher recommendations for additional study. This case study provided a solution to

the identified problem, how PLC models in one K-8 school are designed and

implemented with a focus on teaching and learning and how educators perceived

participation influenced teacher development. The questions that guided this research and

have assisted with designing the interview questions and questionnaire (Appendix D) are

as follows:

R1: What are teacher perceptions of the professional learning community model

being implemented in one K-8 school district located in the southwest region

of the United States?

R2: How are professional learning communities in one K-8 school district in the

southwest region of the United States structured and implemented to show a

primary focus on databased decisions to improve teaching and learning?

R3: How do K-8 educators explain and describe how participation in professional

learning communities influences their professional growth and instructional

effectiveness in the southwest region of the United States?

The purpose of Research Question 1 was created to determine how teachers

perceive the PLC implementation within the K-8 school district and if there is

consistency of the model. Further, this question determined to what degree does the

districts PLC model impact teaching and learning. This question was answered by using

the interview protocol and questionnaire completed by participants.

The second question lead the researcher to further determine how teaching and

learning are the focus of the district’s PLC model and if this was true, what data based

decisions are being made and more importantly what data supports that the PLC

implementation is effective. This question was answered with the interview protocol,

questionnaire and archived data; which included school improvement plans aligned with

current and past data provided by each school site as well as PLC team minutes.

The purpose of the third question was to provide this researcher with perceptions

derived by participating in PLCs. This question captured the essence of professional

growth and instructional effectiveness as explained by the participants that have

perceived influential change. This question was answered by using the interview protocol

and questionnaire completed by the participants.

Bitterman (2010) conducted a study on teacher perspectives and the impact of

PLCs on student learning in science, yet the results did not include K-8 teacher

perspectives on professional growth and development. This researcher obtained

permission from Bitterman to use, modify or add to instruments from that study to further

the knowledge (see Appendix C) of PLCs. All teachers from the participating schools that

contributed to PLCs were recruited to complete Bitterman’s questionnaire in order to

provide specific recommendations to the problem that was being addressed. Additionally,

the researcher conducted interviews in order to capture, in detail how teachers perceived

the PLC structure being implemented aligns with the three guiding questions and

Dufour’s (2006) six PLC characteristics:

1. Shared purpose, clear direction, collective commitments and timeline goals all aligned to student learning

2. Collaborative culture focused on teacher development 3. Inquiry best practices and current reality 4. Action oriented with an emphasis on learning by doing 5. A commitment to continued improvement by assessing student learning 6. A results oriented approach.

Finally, the archival documents used in this study were meant to explore the

impact, which specifically related to structuring and implementing PLCs with a focus on

improved teaching and learning, focused on student results. The archival school

achievement data showed the progress and sustainment of growth in one school district

over the course of the PLC implementation. The selected school district had been

highlighted as a recognized PLC model in the southwest which validated the contributing

success. The questionnaire results were provided to explain the perception of teachers as

well as provide a more in-depth understanding of the implemented structure of PLCs that

support improved teaching and learning. Furthermore, the interviews captured the

educators’ description of how participation in PLCs influenced their professional growth

and instructional effectiveness.

Advancing Scientific Knowledge

Dufour, Dufour and, Eaker (2008) noted that the most effective professional

development experiences are those that include opportunities for teachers to collaborate

and learn “on-the-job,” through observing others and applying what is learned in

workshops and other training experiences. Professional learning communities offer a

structured format to facilitate these embedded learning opportunities for teachers. Hord

(1997), identified characteristics of PLCs that facilitate improvements in teaching and

learning. These include: a collective creativity amongst stakeholders and reflective

dialogue that includes current reality and best practice that facilitates decisions about

teaching and learning within the culture of the school. Teacher learning that impacts

instruction and student learning may not always be focused on one content area or one

grade level, but on the skills necessary that support explicit instructional strategies and

work in all learning environments. Severage (2008) found that PLCs are viable forums

for teacher collaboration, however, PLCs do not always operate as they should.

A major barrier to school reform efforts is the fact that most teachers are

accustomed to working alone in their classrooms (Schmoker, 2005; Voelkel, 2011), but,

this practice of isolation no longer meets student-learning needs. Increased calls for

accountability and higher test scores, coupled with the need to produce graduates who

can compete in a global market, have left administrators seeking ways to improve

schools, teaching, and learning. Principals “have attempted to redistribute resources,

reorganize instructional staff, redesign curricula, restructure the school day, and provide

interventions to under-performing students in the hopes of improving student

achievement” (Voelkel, 2011, p.4 ). One reform initiative that many administrators have

implemented is professional learning communities.

Working with others in a professional learning community requires a different or

new set of skills and attitudes for teachers who are used to working in isolation and with

a great deal of autonomy. While the benefits of PLCs are strong, there are often

inconsistencies between the way they “should” operate and how they operate in reality.

Additionally, they are not always sustainable over the long term, leaving many

administrators and teachers wondering why some are successful and others are not

(DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker, 2008). Voelkel (2011) recommended more studies be

conducted to determine the reasons behind implementation of PLCs and how to foster

their sustainability.

Bitterman (2010) conducted a study to determine teacher perspectives of PLCs in

middle school science classrooms. Bitterman used a modified survey initially used by

Bolam, McMahon, Stoll, and Thomas (2005). Additionally, interviews were conducted

with teachers from three middle schools. Four themes emerged as results. These included

identification of learning trends, organizational support for the learning community, an

inquiry mindset for teachers and the need for time to plan and more professional

development on the topic. Bitterman recommended more research be conducted to

determine how professional learning communities are sustained, how they offer

professional development for teachers, and how they are implemented to make a

difference in curriculum design, lesson delivery and student learning outcomes. Finally,

Valentin (2014) recommended more study on teacher perspectives of the PLC process.

This current case study addressed these gaps that remained significant to how

professional learning community models in K-8 schools can be implemented in one K-8

school and how they are designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and

learning. Most importantly, this study sought to determine how educators’ perceived

participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional growth

and development. Furthermore, this PLC study addressed the nature of collaborative

learning, which can significantly impact a positive working relationship amongst school

level colleagues facing challenging reform requirements (Piercy, 2010; Doherty, Walsh,

Jacobs & Neuman-Sheldon, 2010).

The researcher used a questionnaire, interviews and archival documents to collect

data. The questionnaire results explained the perception of teachers as well as provided

an in-depth understanding of the implemented structure of PLCs that support improved

teaching and learning in the district. Furthermore, the interviews took into account the

educators’ description of how participation in PLCs influenced their professional growth

and instructional effectiveness. Finally, archival documents were reviewed to show the

progress and sustainment of growth in one school district over the course of the PLC

implementation process.

Transformative learning theory and the social cognitive theory were ideal

conceptual frameworks for this qualitative research design as well as a focus on teacher

development (Chong & Kong, 2012). This research utilized the framework for

professional learning communities, social cognitive theory and the transformational

learning theory to guide the research study. Additionally, the work of researchers and

theories that have common frameworks significant to PLCs, the concept of PLCs

provided supportive evidence related to the social cognitive theory.

Bandura’s social cognitive theory was referenced to gain more understanding on

the perception of effectiveness (efficacy) and capability to produce result driven

instruction. Bandura (1986) explained that the conditions for learning are a result of

social cognition, which addresses the relationships between environmental and individual

behavior; one is contingent upon the other. Further, Bandura implied that learning

through observation is an occurrence of the impact of the environmental factors relative

to indivdiual behavior. Chong and Kong’s (2012) lesson study also provided evidence for

successful collaboration that supports teacher efficacy and described processes that

specifically improved content knowledge. The authors summarized the process for

sustaining effective instructional strategies. This current study extended those results by

elaborating on the perception of educators on teacher development, reinforced by

organization and structure.

Transformational learning occurs in response to critically examining a current

belief or practice and developing a different perspective as a result of discourse, self-

reflection and analysis (Mezirow, 1997). Transformational learning is crucial for

sustained opportunities to grow professionally and naturally, supported this study as well.

Ideally, this type of learning begins with honest dialogue and critical self-reflection.

Mezirow determined that there are four processes of learning, which include: elaborate

on a current point of view, establish new points of view by encountering the differences

of others, and by critically reflecting on biases set by one’s own belief. Likewise,

intentional conversations and actions that identify instructional strengths and weaknesses

are shared through formative experiences in PLCs.

Teachers that engage with colleagues, in the PLC format, clearly participate in

transformational learning as they begin to examine their practice critically and develop

different perspectives that deepen their understanding (McComish & Parsons, 2013).

PLCs offer teachers the structured time to meet and focus solely on use of data to

improve teaching and learning. Thus, as teachers collaborate and observe the work of

their colleagues, they should or have the opportunity to engage in reflection and

transform their instructional practices. Those “aha” moments come through watching

others work and identifying practices that one can implement in their own classroom

teaching. These in-depth observations cannot occur in the traditional, isolated format of

schools.

Mezirow (2003) indicated that the art of transformational learning is an attitude

adjustment based on new knowledge and the application being transformed into

autonomous practice. The transformative learning theory supported in Servage (2008)

finding’s showed a “significant personal and professional growth” (p.69) in the

concluding efforts. The author identified that the transformative learning theory supports

the following: “enhance our understanding of learning by collaborating and shifts the

emphasis to a communicative framework more appropriate for exploring any

transformative potential” (p.69). Teachers can see the successes of others in a

collaborative format and the collective whole of the group can be leveraged to implement

effective teaching and learning strategies that results in improved performance for both

teachers and students. If this is so, the results of this study substantially contribute to the

transformational learning theory, social cognitive theory and the foundations of PLCs as

perceived and applied to adult learning and organizations and structures within

collaborative teams focused on result driven instruction.

Significance of the Study

The importance of this study occurred as the researcher explored how

professional learning community models in one K-8 school are designed and

implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators perceived

participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional growth.

Many studies have been conducted on the relationship between the implementation of

PLCs and student achievement (Scott, 2012) and the impact that collaborative

frameworks such as PLCs have on teacher self-efficacy (Romeo, 2012; Stegall, 2011),

yet the specifics of perception were not explored.

Scott (2012) conducted a study wherein results revealed that participants believed

that a PLC can provide opportunities for authentic collaboration, but before student

learning can improve, teachers must first improve. This study provided an opportunity to

also seek how an organized structure captures the most effective PLC model. Stegall

(2011) and Romeo’s (2010) research studies showed that teacher efficacy was

substantially higher when they were members of a collaborative team in an environment

built on trust. In addition, the researchers indicated that PLCs were valuable in the school

reform movement. The efforts and results of the experts have provided that more in-depth

studies are required to glean perception of educators on how PLC structures support

teacher and student learning.

The recent works which investigated PLCs and the viable nature of collaboration

remains significant in the efforts of educators as well as the embedded opportunities for

professional development to meet the ongoing needs of a range of teachers (Fieldman &

Fataar, 2014). More specifically, the results of Scott (2012) concluded the importance of

PLC structures that are intentionally designed to support teacher collaboration; providing

instructional tools and time promoted lifelong learning and the ability to increase student

achievement beyond average acceptance.

Romeo’s (2011) findings on relationships between teacher self-efficacy and

established PLCs are limited, although the author aligns the findings to the structure of

the study the contributing efforts on relationships is crucial. Romeo (2011) highlighted

the importance of trusting relationships to create collaboration within school frameworks

as a common theme amongst many participants. Further, it can also be concluded that the

importance of establishing opportunities for teachers to develop, initiate change, assume

more responsibility and lead beyond the classroom serves as a catalyst for sustaining

teacher development. Therefore, the efforts of this study outlined the importance of

establishing a specific structure for a functioning PLC. Finally, in a 2010 study conducted

by Bitterman (2010), the author provided evidence that supported themes captured in a

PLC, which included constant collaboration centralized on effective instruction that

impacts student learning. The research also provided that schools must not only focus on

improved teaching strategies but improved learning opportunities that are meaningful to

teachers.

This study contributed to existing studies by providing more specific details on

the influences of collaborative teaming models for teacher development within

professional learning communities and teacher perceptions of participation. Further, it

remained crucial to determine, how PLCs are structured and implemented to focus on

data based decision making that support improved teaching and learning. The investment

of time, funding and resources associated with the implementation of PLCs are

substantial (Doherty, Jacobs, Neuman-Sheldon, & Walsh, 2010). Therefore, the potential

of this study was meant to increase organizing and structuring a PLC working

environment that is perceived as meaningful and supportive to teachers and educational

professionals, yet data driven.

Therefore, the value of this study was to teachers, local community and society so

that one could determine methods to encourage sustained and consistent professional

growth for all teachers over time through the structure and implementation of a PLC

(Stegall, 2011). The resulting outcomes translated to improved student learning, which in

turn, contributed to positive outcomes in the local community and society in general, as

students become more apt to leave school career ready (Dufour 2009). The

determinations inclusive of establishing a high functioning PLC are a direct contribution

of how organizations are structured and supported, and the most important component of

this particular forum is often the teacher. Hence, districts and schools must acknowledge

and support the development of those who are significantly influential of student success

(Marzano, 2003).

Rationale for Methodology

The qualitative methodology provides tools to study complex phenomena within

context (Baxter & Jack, 2008). Punch (2014) stated “qualitative research is empirical

research where the data are not in the form of numbers” (p.3), and the opposite is true of

quantitative research, which is empirical research where the data examined is that of

numbers (Punch, 2014). Further, qualitative research is descriptive, rather than predictive

and provides an in depth understanding of the phenomenon being studied. This researcher

sought to do just that by capturing an in-depth understanding which was crafted by

netting the words and phrases of educators immersed in the work of PLCs and sharing

their story. This occurred by exploring the detailed responses of each research question

and the descriptive account of the profound concepts explored in the work produced in

this case study.

Baxter and Jack (2008) found that observing the action in an authentic setting

allows the desired phenomenon to transpire in a natural context and a deeper

understanding for the researcher’s conclusion may be formed. In this case, PLCs were

being conducted on site within school organizations. The dedicated work and outcomes

of the PLCs are embedded into the classroom teaching and are contributing to teacher

development in a continuous fashion.

Yin (2014) indicated that qualitative studies are most commonly used to

understand complex phenomena, allowing the focus to be on a real world occurrence by

studying organizational processes and perspective. This researcher entered the natural

setting by meeting participants in his/her school environment in the midst of an authentic

working environment; the school or classroom. The wealth of information provided in

this narrative format captured the magnitude and the significance of perceptions that a

quantitative analysis would not support or accurately, respond to the described

phenomenon.

Further, exploring a contemporary phenomenon required the investment of this

researcher to seek perceptions of participants in his/her daily work, and was essentially,

the outcome of this case study. Yin (2014) indicated that a case study is most commonly

used to understand complex phenomena, allowing the focus to be on a real world

occurrence by studying organizational processes and perspective. In contrast, a

quantitative approach uses statistical comparisons and numbers to infer results. A

quantitative study would not adequately represent the perception of individuals as

accurately as a qualitative format (Yin, 2014).

For the purposes of this study, a qualitative method was the best method due to

the fact that the gap being addressed is that the researcher wants to give the teachers a

voice regarding their perspectives of how participations in PLCs influences their

professional growth. According to Yin (2014), allowing a real world focus on

organizational processes and perspectives are most often the work of a case study.

A qualitative method was the best method to address the research questions as

they focus on the meaning teachers ascribe to their experiences regarding collaboration,

how they use this particular structure to improve their craft and student learning, and how

working with colleagues improves their professional skills. The intent of this case study

explored perspectives, according to Baxter and Jack (2008), a qualitative format is the

authentic design to capture action in an authentic setting. This data needed to be

measured with words as opposed to numbers (Yin, 2014). Additionally, the researcher

did not seek to establish a correlation or causation between two or more variables.

Therefore, a quantitative method was not appropriate (Golfshani, 2011).

Nature of the Research Design for the Study

A case study design was used for this research study. Yin (2014) stated, “a case

study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon (the case) in

depth and within a real world context” (p.16). With regard to this study, the phenomenon

explored was how professional learning community models in one K-8 school are

designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators

perceived participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional

growth. A case study provided an approach to research that explored a phenomenon

within a context using an array of data sources (Baxter & Jack, 2008; Nobel & Smith,

2015). In alignment with this description, multiple sources of data were used for this case

study to explore the phenomenon of collaboration as a form of teacher growth and

development.

The rationale for design was the most prominent to support the research questions

and support the findings. Other qualitative designs were considered for this study, but

were discarded. The qualitative approach described as a phenomenology is further

explained by Randies (2012) who determined that the goal of this design is to explore a

common lived experience that a group of individuals have in common. Phenomenology is

a study of the common lived experience of a group of individuals, such as experiencing

the adoption or infertility process. This study did not really seek to identify the

experience as not all teachers due to collaboration practices or reflective practices will

have that experience in common. Therefore, this design was discarded. Using a

phenomenology does not include the use of various forms of instruments to confirm the

trustworthiness of a study (Randies, 2012).

Ethnographic studies cultures of people within the living environment and

attempts to make sense of culture being observed. This methodology required the

researcher to become situated in the environment to observe the interactions, actions and

surroundings of the group (Broussard, 2006). The length of time to study a culture of

people is considerable to gather the appropriate findings. An ethnography study may

include a specific religious practice or ethnic neighborhood; the results are derived by

intense observations. This research conversely pursued to determine perception based on

authentic responses of the participants in the work setting, therefore this methodology

does not align with the desired solution.

Another qualitative methodology is grounded theory. Grounded theory is

comprised of the following: coding of ample and diverse information, continuous

comparison of data, and organization into categories and formulating a theory of non-

measureable findings. (Mateos-Moreno & Alcaraz-Iborra, 2013). An example of

grounded theory might include a derived theory based solely on the literature to support a

type of personality that elicits effective management in the work place. The data

collection in this study did not involve formulating a theory as a viable method of

answering the research questions. Further, the purpose of this case study was to

determine how professional learning community models in one K-8 school are designed

and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators perceived

participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional growth.

The importance of capturing the different perspectives was crucial to determine the

solution and further advance the knowledge of PLCs. Therefore, this researcher

considered a case study as the most effective mode of explaining the results.

This researcher determined that a qualitative case study was the best design to

address the problem: how professional learning community models in one K-8 school are

designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators’

perceived participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional

growth. More importantly, the intent of this study was to seek the authenticity of

perception. In this case, it was significant to explore the details within a context of a

school environment that promotes an in-depth explanation of the design and

implementation of PLCs that lead to teacher development.

This explanatory case study contributed to the three conditions leading to a strong

case study design: the exploration of conditions over time, and an in-depth inquiry of the

case and contextual conditions (Yin, 2012; 2014). The most common is the inclusive of

conditions over time or beginning and ending within a timeframe, which specifically

relates to the condition of events that have created the current state. In this case, the

evolving work of PLCs within the school organization over a 4 to 6-week timeframe was

used in this study. Next, in-depth inquiry is delved by multiple situations leading to the

learning that continues to transpire, in this case the evidence collected in the results of the

questionnaires and interviews were rationalized. Finally, the contextual conditions, which

encompass data surrounding the case, in this situation the contextual conditions which

were the outcomes of the implemented PLCs relative to data provided by the district in

archival form were considered.

Finally, the sample, comprised of K-8 school teachers who participated regularly

in PLC’s were chosen. This single case (one school district) will help the researcher

determine how this collaborative structure is implemented within one setting (Yin, 2012).

The single case is critical as the researcher sought to determine how the school had

implemented PLC structures that had sustained over time and if, or how the collaborative

structure contributed to the reflective actions of teachers. It was imperative that the

results of this study consider teachers who had a similar experience within a PLC

framework. To determine the significance of transformation, required a thorough

investigation aligned to qualitative characteristics that maintain importance. Additionally,

the recommendations of previous researchers, presented findings in limited formats that

suggested using additional methods to further a more complex investigation of the

phenomenon embedded into the PLC concept (Chong & Kong, 2012) be selected.

The target population for this study consisted of all K-8 teachers in schools who

participate in PLCs. The sample was comprised of no fewer than 30 teachers who gave

consent to participate in this study. The sample selected included no more than 16 public

educator, interview participants: four administrators, four primary teachers (K-2), four

intermediate (3-6), and four middle-school teachers (7-8) in five southwest K-8 public

schools. The selected interviewees that particpated in the PLC model transcribed in the

district’s protocol of particpation to include but not limited to K-8 teachers that teach

various subjects or grade. School or district administrators selected had opportunties to

oversee and support the PLC models within the organizational framework. The 3-5

schools selected in the study had similar characteristics including student demographics

and had established ongoing PLCs.

To collect the data, the researcher used semi-structured interviews, archival data,

and a questionnaire to elicit participant responses. An interview is described as a mode of

verbal information derived from case study participants, which is usually conversational

in nature and guided by the researcher’s intent for specific findings (Yin, 2014). Further,

the interview data that was collected by the selected, purposeful sample was used to

explain how professional learning communities in one K-8 school district structured and

implemented to show a primary focus on databased decisions to improve teaching and

learning. Additionally, this information was used to further explain how educators

explain and describe how participation in professional learning communities influenced

their professional growth and instructional effectiveness. Interviews were meant to be no

less than 45 minutes and included an open-ended format to glean in-depth

understandings.

Questionnaires were provided to the 3-5 schools selected in the study. The

participants had an opportunity to respond openly to the questions. The data collected in

the questionnaires was used to glean teacher perceptions of the professional learning

community model being implemented in one K-8 school district located in the southwest.

The data collected was used to explain how professional learning communities in one K-

8 school district structured and implemented to show a primary focus on databased

decisions to improve teaching and learning. The archival data were used and provided by

the selected district to assist with explaining how professional learning communities in

one K-8 school district are structured and implemented to show a primary focus on

databased decisions to improve teaching and learning.

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of the study, the following key terms are defined to ensure a

common understanding was provided throughout this case study:

Common Core Standards. Builds on the existing state standards deemed as the

best grade specific goals. The build on the best of existing state standards, the Common

Core State Standards consistent learning goals to help prepare students for college,

career, and life (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2015).

Collaborative inquiry. Defined within a professional learning community adheres

to collaborating on the same dilemma (Owen, 2014).

Collaboration. A process designed for working together, interdependently, to

analyze and strengthen professional practice for student improvement and teacher

improvement (Chong & Kong, 2012).

Collective inquiry. Building a shared knowledge base is created by shared

knowledge, which is a result of a question answered by the group. PLCs engage in

collective inquiry into efficient practices by examining both external and internal

evidence. (Dufour, Dufour & Earker, 2008).

Educational reform. The outcome of social and political forums requesting

school improvement to increase learning for all students regardless of race, ethnicity or

social economic status (Madsen, Schroeder, & Irby, 2014).

NCLB. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001; the intent is to improve achievement

among low-achieving students in high-poverty schools supported in school improvement

efforts aligned with federal education policy and funding (Forte, 2010).

PLC or Professional Learning Community. Refers to a small team of teachers

committed to meeting regularly; working collaboratively on shared goals in order to

improve achievement for each individual student they serve, thus the significance is

determining common themes amongst diverse teams of teachers within K-8 schools

(Dufour et al., 2008; Hord, 1997).

Race to the Top (RTTT). Funding efforts to support “great teachers and leaders.”

Funding is achieved through grant applications that design comprehensive and coherent

approaches to address data infrastructure, teachers, struggling schools, and

standards/assessments (Doherty, Walsh, Jacobs, & Neuman-Sheldon, 2010).

Social cognitive theory. Addresses the relationships between environmental and

individual behavior, one is contingent upon the other (Bandura, 1986).

Teaming. “A team that aligns and develops its capacity (willingness or ability) as

a team to create the desired results” (Lick, 2006).

Transformational learning theory. Learning which occurs in response to

critically examining a current belief or practice and developing a different perspective as

a result of discourse, self-reflection and analysis (Mezirow, 1997).

Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations

Assumptions. The following assumptions may have been present in this study

and were fully, considered by the researcher.

1. It was assumed that the selected school district employees had training and were aware of the components of effective PLCs and how they function

within a collaborative setting. Therefore, the teachers should have been aware

that a PLC may include a level of trust, a willingness of teachers to engage in

conflict in open discussion, a commitment to purpose, ability to hold one

another accountable and a focus on collective results (Piercy, 2010).

2. It was also assumed that teachers would respond honestly and openly to all questions on the instruments being considered in this study. As educators that

are interested in student learning, selected teachers should have a vested

interest in providing honest information regarding the status of school and

districtwide PLC implementation so as to offer beneficial information to

others in a like field of interest.

Limitations. The limitations of such a study could be misguided by previously

embedded philosophies on professional learning communities and the identified non-

characteristics of those believed by the participants that are included in the study. For

instance, “teachers collaborate to analyze their practice and discuss new strategies and

tactics, testing them in the classroom and reporting the results to each other” must be a

shared belief within the team (Croft, Coggshall, Dolan, Powers & Killion, 2010, p. 7).

The idea of collaboration with intention is viewed as rich conversation and a significant

learning opportunity if embraced in a transparent fashion. In addition, participants were

asked to self-report data, which may limit the accuracy and applicability of the findings

as teachers will have different perceptions of PLCs.

Teacher participants may be hesitant to disclose honest perceptions related to

collaborative efforts as “school leaders must foster an organizational culture of

continuous learning and teamwork through venues such as professional learning

communities and professional norms, including, for example, an open door policy for

observing each other’s classroom” (Croft et al., 2010, p. 8). Therefore, revealing the

ongoing function may be difficult for some. This study may also have posed time

constraints on the part of the teachers willing to participate. In order to avoid this, data

collection took place at a time and place convenient for the teachers. Also, the

implementation of PLCs will be different at the various school sites, which may limit the

reliability or commonality of findings. Similarly, teacher experiences or philosophies on

professional learning communities may influence their perceptions regarding how these

collaborative structures work and their value. Therefore, the interview and questionnaires

used to collect the data may have been perceived as biased due to the perceptions of

participants used in this study, this was also considered.

Delimitations. The study was delimited to one school district; therefore, the

results of the study may not be applicable to other settings, or other districts. Due to time

and available resources, the researcher made the decision to use a sample of teachers who

were readily available, who also participate in PLCs on a regular basis.

Summary and Organization of the Remainder of the Study

The current study will present five chapters. This chapter provides the background

information to support the magnitude of research to support implementing PLCs. Further,

Stegall (2011) delivered an in-depth analysis of how PLCs are designed to respond to the

instructional needs of teachers for direct student achievement. The purpose of this chapter

was to glean the importance of the contributions of professional learning communities

and the power of collaboration relative to teacher learning and student achievement

relative to educational reform.

The research was based on the efforts of scholars and authors, including Bandura

(1986), Mezirow (1997; 2003), Hord (1997), Dufour (2009), Dufour et al. (2008) and

many more. The clarifying evidence built an understanding of the significance of the

structure and organization of PLCs in collaborative teams. The results from this study

explained how professional learning community models in one K-8 school are designed

and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators perceived

participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional growth

and development.

Chapter 2 offers a literature review of current studies associated with professional

learning communities and identified themes, related to the research questions that guided

this study. Chapter 3 outlines the methodology, research design, and procedures that were

required to conclude this case study. Chapter 4 will detail how the data was analyzed and

will provide a written summary of the case study results. Chapter 5 will infer the

collected data to conclude with processes used to implement effective teaming as well as

recommendations for further research.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Introduction to the Chapter

There is a significant amount of research supporting that professional learning

communities (PLC) offer teachers learning and training opportunities aligned with recent

reforms in education (Scott, 2012). With these increased accountability mandates,

educators have initiated a variety of programs and strategies designed to improve student

achievement. One example is the implementation of PLCs within school organizations. A

PLC is a small team of teachers committed to meeting regularly and working

collaboratively on shared goals in order to improve achievement for each individual

student they serve (Dufour et al., 2008). With this embedded approach to professional

development that structured PLCs can offer are supportive of best practices focused on

student achievement. Furthermore, this forum of teacher and student success is

paramount in ongoing collaboration.

Valentin (2014) noted that most studies on PLC models have primarily focused on

how collaboration impacts student achievement but noted that limited research exists on

teacher perspectives of how this collaborative structure actually works. In the supportive

work of Bitterman (2010, the researcher found that teachers needed a structured

framework for the PLC process to be effective. The author also indicated that a growth

mindset and a focus on inquiry were essential characteristics of high achieving PLCs.

Bitterman recommended more study on the topic of how teachers describe the

implementation of PLC structures to improve teaching, learning, and also how they adopt

that “inquiry” mindset to further understand the process. C. Stewart (2014) suggested

further empirical research regarding PLCs as a school reform model and how to sustain

their effectiveness would be a benefit to the vast knowledge of PLC organizations.

Therefore, a gap exists with respect to PLC models and how they extend the growth and

development of teachers.

To gather pertinent information to support this case study, this researcher

reviewed the Expanded Academic Database, using the terminology frequent in PLC

studies: “professional learning communities,” “collaboration,” “teacher learning,”

“transformational learning,” and “social cognitive theory.” This gave the researcher the

opportunity to gather peer-reviewed sources from recognized, academic venues which

resulted in the significance of PLCs and provided results of prior studies which are

included in this literature review. The conclusion of previous studies established the

defined gap in research and enabled a supportive endeavor offered in the current study.

Further, the results generated research to provide a foundational understanding of adult

learning and specifically the grounded work in transformational learning. The cited work

examines two of the scientific theories that support the conceptual framework as

described in transformational learning and the social cognitive theory.

The purpose of this study was to explore how professional learning community

models in one K-8 school are designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and

learning, and how educators perceived participation in professional learning communities

influenced their professional growth and development. Furthermore, this study was

conducted to address the gap on how teachers perceive PLCs, how the structure fostered

an inquiry and growth mindset, and how teachers perceived factors and conditions that

create sustainable PLCs.

The outline of Chapter 1 highlighted that reforms in education, including NCLB

(2001), Race to the Top (Doherty, Walsh, Jacobs & Neuman-Sheldon, 2010) and more

currently, the implementation of the Common Core Standards (Common Core State

Standards Initiative, 2015) have required teachers to learn and develop new instructional

and collaborative skills to engage in high-level learning (Stegall, 2009, & Valentin, 2010)

producing gains in student achievement. In order to offer more time and occasions for

teachers to develop these necessary skills, many schools have applied collaborative

models such as PLCs to support reform expectations (Owen, 2014).

The following review will first provide a historical background of PLCs and the

theories significantly, influencing the success of PLCs. Second, this review will offer the

concepts that support the framework of the organization and structure of PLCs and

outline the necessary components of PLCs to improve teacher development will be

explored. Following this examination, the theories that support adult learning will be

discussed and supported in detail. Finally, literature relating to the phenomenon will be

explored as a supportive venue that contributed to this study.

Background to the Problem

Hord (1997) described that during the 1980s, the term “professional community

of learners” evolved as the act of teachers and leaders continuously seeking new learning.

The goal of this action was to enhance effectiveness that resulted in student improvement.

This has also been touted as “communities of continuous inquiry and improvement.” The

author listed five attributes of effective professional learning communities: supportive

and shared leadership, collective creativity, shared values and vision, supportive

conditions, and shared personal practice. Professional learning communities redress

teachers’ isolation, create shared teacher responsibility for all students, and expose

teachers to instructional strategies or knowledge they did not have access to previously.

“Such communities can be venues for JEPD (job embedded professional development) as

well as other forms of reform based professional development” (Hord, 1997, p.7).

Schools that implement PLCs must offer teachers time, training, and guidance in order to

collaborate and plan instruction designed to improve student-learning outcomes.

Therefore, school leaders must provide clear expectations and structures in order to allow

teachers to accomplish the goals of a PLC.

Additionally, there is significant information that supports the idea that PLCs

“provide a framework and process for ongoing learning and professional growth”

(Stegall, 2011, p. 9), for example, Chong and Kong (2012) noted that teaming and

collaboration models require that teachers have time to meet regularly to promote

instructional awareness and job-embedded teacher development, which results in

sustained learning (Owen, 2014). Likewise, Schmoker (2006) noted that in PLCs,

teachers work with experts in education and one another to learn about and discuss

instructional techniques that will improve the teachers’ skills, but more importantly,

impact student learning. During this time, it is important that team members tap into each

other’s existing capabilities and potential (Schmoker, 2006). Many times, the kind of

disagreement and disequilibrium that comes with critical questioning and debates about

best practices in this discourse extends the professional growth of teachers (Owen, 2014).

Several studies have been conducted on the relationship between the

implementation of PLCs and student achievement (Scott, 2012) and the impact that

collaborative frameworks such as PLCs have on teacher self-efficacy (Romeo, 2012;

Stegall, 2011); for instance, Valentin (2014) highlighted the importance of teachers to the

success of PLCs, but also noted that limited research exists on teacher perspectives of

how this collaboration structure actually works in terms of improving the instructional

skills and development of teachers. However, a study was conducted on teacher

perspectives of science PLCs, Bitterman (2010), the author found that teachers needed to

be aware of the latest research on instruction and learning, there needed to be support

structures in place for PLCs to function, and teachers needed time to plan and develop as

professionals. The author indicated the importance of a growth mindset and a focus on

inquiry throughout the collaborative dialogue as a significant element to the success.

Like Valentin (2014), Bitterman (2010) recommended more study on the topic of

how teachers describe they implement PLC structures to not only improve student

learning, but to also adopt that “inquiry” mindset as they grow professionally as

educators. Like many, C. Stewart (2014) recommended further empirical research

regarding PLCs as a school reform model and how to sustain their effectiveness as an

opportunity to invest more effort to understand the process. Yet, despite keen efforts to

determine the success of PLCs, it had not yet been determined how professional learning

community models in one K-8 school were designed and implemented with a focus on

teaching and learning, and how educators perceived participation in professional learning

communities influenced their professional growth and development.

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of this section provides the foundation for PLCs and

teacher development. This current research study was supported by the transformational

learning theory, social cognitive theory, and the foundations of professional learning

communities. In Bitterman’s 2014 research, the author described that a conceptual

framework for professional learning communities captured ideas to better support an

investigated phenomenon on collaborative learning. Also, Servage (2008), stated that if

“properly implemented, the professional learning community represents “transformation”

from factory modeled schools” (p.64).

This section of the study is intended to explore the characteristics of PLCs and

how professional learning community models in one K-8 school are designed and

implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators’ perceived

participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional growth

and development. Each of these concepts were key to further understand professional

development, student learning and organizational support.

Transformational learning theory. Mezirow (1997) contended that

transformative learning is the act of automaticity of thinking and eventually occurs

naturally. In terms of adult learning, the author further explained that livelihood and the

actions of being are sometimes a direct result of how we are expected to behave. Yet, the

idea of transforming beliefs is contingent on transformative learning and changes are

clearly effected by a personal “frame of reference.” A frame of reference is grounded in

past experiences, associations, new information, conditioned responses, and values. Ideas

of others may often be rejected based on the preconceptions one may hold as truth which

can challenge a sustained change. Servage (2008) describes that transformation within

schools as a fundamental shift relies heavily on the concepts grounded in PLCs. Thus,

PLCs if implemented correctly, have a profound way of transforming new truths that

better define effective classroom instruction.

The determining factors relevant in transforming a frame of reference is through

“critical reflection on the assumptions” based on interpretation, beliefs, and habits of

mind. “Self-reflection can lead to significant personal transformations” (Mezirow, 1997,

p.7). More importantly, the established belief of one’s own ideas are at times so strong

that shared or contribution of ideas by others are often rejected based on preconceptions

held as truth by the participant. The author clarified that there are four processes of

learning that need to be addressed if new learning is to occur: elaborated on a current

point of view, established in a new point of view by encountering the differences of

others, experience driven, and by critically reflecting on biases established by one’s own

belief.

According to authors, McComish and Parsons (2013), transformational learning

about teaching occurs when teachers begin to examine their practice critically and

develop different perspectives that deepen one’s understanding. Furthermore, McCormish

and Parson referenced the work of Mezirow (2000) in their study by indicating that the

art of transformational learning is an attitude adjustment based on new knowledge and

the application being transformed into practice. If this is true, then PLCs are modalities of

learning that do not rest on pedagogical skills but rather rely on critical reflection that

enables learners to transform beliefs into sustained instruction that become the norm of

effective teaching (Servage, 2008). This study occurred in a setting that encouraged

teachers to be learners of one another; a direct result of transformation not reformation in

terms of evolving and discovering new knowledge that supported transitioning to more

effective strategies and sustained learning.

Social cognitive theory. Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory addresses the

relationships involving personal, behavioral, and social/environmental factors influencing

individual behavior. The theory implies that capabilities inclusive of processing are

vicarious, symbolic, and self-regulatory, all of which play a significant role on

acquisition of learning. More specifically, the author maintains that vicariously,

individuals acquire skills, behaviors, and cognition by simply, observing others.

Symbolic processes are often used to alter environments that pose obstacles in

life. Further, this includes reacting to situations by problem solving, communicating to

enhance learning, and seeking new ways of addressing situations. Finally, self- regulation

involves assessing goals and identifying strategies to support achieving the end goal. As

the task unfolds, individual learning opportunities are achieved throughout the process by

deciding if the strategy requires adjustment and if so why. Hence, as tasks are completed,

individual reflection is significant in determining if the progress is correctly justified and

if successful, self-efficacy is heightened.

Bandura and Wood (1989) contended that belief in one’s own abilities can be

strengthened and instilled by the following ways: mastery of experience, modeling, social

persuasion, and physiological state of mind. The perceptions of self-efficacy are an

essential component in shaping the outcomes of instilled beliefs. Further, as adults learn

and observe positive progress, their desire to learn more becomes enhanced.

Bandura and Wood (1989) described that the social cognitive theory is essentially

relevant in organizational structure. Thus, the development of peoples’ cognitive, social,

and behavioral competence through mastery modeling and the belief in ability is

paramount in motivation through goal setting. In this case, the theory was further

elaborated by a learning environment grounded in discourse and the application of

change through embedded opportunities to learn noted in PLC frameworks. Additionally,

the social cognitive theory supports that often an opportunity for learning is contingent on

supportive environments and shared resposibilities, both components are essential in

PLCs. Although, most behaviors are learned intently and are reliant on self-efficacy, this

idea is present in terms of a person’s belief in his or her own success in both present and

future situations that encompass teaching and learning.

Professional learning communities. According to Dufour (2009), the learning

from one another is not always centralized in a content area or one grade level but more

importantly, on the skills necessary to support all learning environments that promote

student achievement. This foundation is upheld in the structure of functional PLCs.

Dufour et al. (2008) contended that there are three ideas that drive professional learning

communities; first, members work together to determine what students must learn. Then,

teachers commit to progress monitoring the learning on a timely basis. Then, teachers

provide support to those students who are struggling, and extend or enrich the learning of

those who have mastered the objective. Second, the term isolation is noted as

unproductive and calls for collaborative efforts that build on interdependency and

collective responsibility of all learning for all students within the school organization.

Teachers must work together to problem solve and seek the expertise within the

school team for further development. Finally, there must be evidence based monitoring to

ensure that students are learning and to determine if what is being done to support the

problem is valid. Hence, this supports the data recommendation to intervene or extend the

concepts of individual learning environments and ensure academic success, in order to

gain further insight on influencing teacher development.

Significantly, “professional learning communities have been up held as powerful

structures for teachers’ continuing professional development” (Servage, 2008, p. 74);

however, how professional learning community models in one K-8 school are designed

and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators perceive

participation in professional learning communities influences their professional growth

and development required further exploration. If this was true, then important details

needed to be explored to determine how collaborative teaming models were perceived by

educators to advance professional growth including: addressing poor student

performance, acknowledging that not all teachers have the skills to address particular

student needs, and addressing the discourse of new content and teaching strategies (Van

Lare & Brazer, 2013). This is characterized in the social cognitive theory that supports

the relationships that involve personal, behavioral, and social/environmental factors that

influence behavior.

It is important to address that teachers must be willing and be able to effectively

collaborate in PLCs to transform instruction that improves student achievement and

personal development. The results of this study extended the theories that support the

perceptions of teachers as they participate in collaboration. Further, the influence on

teacher development within effective professional learning communities continue to play

a significant role in transformational learning and sustained improvement.

Review of the Literature

The intent of PLCs is anchored in collective commitments and a focus on learning

(Dufour et al., 2008). Banks and Knuth (2013) argued that public schools repeatedly

grapple with restructuring in response to change and new trends, however one reform

movement that potentially may be regarded as a true paradigm shift is captured in the

concept “professional learning communities.” The advantages of these collaborative

organizations are the forums of learning opportunities that are offered equally among

team members. Thessin (2015) confirmed that the implementation of PLCs is often a

route secured to meet reform expectations, yet the author discussed that many districts or

schools do not consider the appropriate supports and components required for PLCs to

produce instructional effectiveness.

Additionally, Banks and Kurth (2013) explained that PLCs are based on two

assumptions. First, is that the knowledge and skills required in educational practice are

initiated in the day to day experiences and interactions, therefore profound

understandings are advanced through critical reflection with others who share the same

experiences. Secondly, an active, ongoing, and structured professional discussion

increases professional learning and abilities that improve student outcomes. However, the

supportive conditions necessary for PLCs to function properly are heavily, reliant on

logistical conditions, capacities, and relationships developed among colleagues to ensure

productivity (Hord, 2007; Gray, Mitchel & Tarter, 2014).

Qualitative PLC research. It is significant to address that prior qualitative

studies have been produced that supported this researcher’s intent to conduct more

exploration on how professional learning community models in one K-8 school are

designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators

perceived participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional

growth and development.

One similar example is Bitterman’s (2010) study, which examined how three

middle schools engaged in professional learning communities to further develop

effectively as science teachers. The findings included an analysis of implementation

efforts to support teacher development in a middle school setting, specifically content

focused. Professional development was discussed as a major component of success.

Further, the collected data determined that professional development aligned to the team

and continuous support in embedded effective teaching practices was significant in the

results. The researcher determined that teachers benefit the most from continuous

dialogue on data and instruction to meet the ongoing needs of students. The researcher

also suggested that an elementary study on PLCs be conducted to extend the knowledge

on collaborative efforts within professional learning communities.

The following work summarized in C. Stewart’s 2014 study, found that learning

within a professional learning community is most effective for transforming teaching and

learning. The author noted that participants are ideally invested in the work they do day

to day and most importantly, contributions of a PLC are best when all members have

taken part in the organizational framework. It was also eminent that cohesion be present

if honest feedback and improvement are the authentic focus of the team. Thus, the

importance of student needs based on data are essentially the driving force of production.

The author concluded with the following: “active learning working with content to create

lasting change; allows teachers to focus on specific needs” (p.31). The work produced by

C. Stewart (2014) offered leverage needed to further the work in qualitative form, ideally

the work of a PLC is most certainly, centralized on school improvement. If teacher

perception on individual development is a critical component, then it is evident that the

best framework to support this endeavor is one that embraces an ongoing dialogue which

engages teachers in effective instruction to further the work that must be done.

Another example is found in a study produced by Valentin in 2014; it was

designed as a qualitative study to investigate teachers’ perspective on math instruction,

student learning, and achievement in a vertical alignment process. The researcher sought

to interview teachers to better understand teacher perspective. Like most, collaboration

was found to be an effective way to connect teachers to district goals. The extent of

collaborative efforts was determined to help teachers better understand the curriculum

and support student learning. Significantly, the vertical alignment teams or teams that

connected each grade level to one another were meant to lead each individual school’s

math team to address specific content and instructional delivery methods. The

participants grappled with topics in each grade level to decrease repetition and provide

transitions with ease for students. The researcher concluded that most participants

appeared to have established lasting connections and appreciated knowing who would be

teaching his/her student the following year, which is maintained in a supportive culture of

trust discussed in PLC settings.

In an additional case study produced by K. Stewart (2012) sought to determine if

PLCs do in fact, sustain student achievement. The researcher concluded through

interviews and observations that simply relying on organizational factors would not

guarantee success. The findings for sustaining student achievement included the

following: “sustainable education leadership, student-centered learning, shared values

and vision, collective inquiry into best practices, action oriented and a focus on results”

(p.157). The researcher determined that the results of this study do support the reform

efforts on improving teaching and learning within lower socioeconomic school districts.

Significantly, the recommendation for further study included an investigation on the

direct relationship of an implemented PLC model and student achievement. It was noted

that all participants in this study elaborated on the positive effect that collaboration has on

student success, which is also an alignment to this current study.

Chong and Kong (2012) also offered a qualitative approach on a lesson study that

identified the conditions most effective in collaborative settings supportive of teacher

efficacy. The findings suggested that sustainable change is captured in self-beliefs.

Therefore, embedded professional development opportunities and time are necessary

components to support sustained change. This study utilized the social cognitive theory to

better illustrate psychological constructs related to teacher motivation. The concluding

efforts maintain that school PLCs provide influential forces linked to self-efficacy and

effective instruction.

Additionally, Lick (2006) included an analysis also using qualitative information

to promote defining factors of “learning” teams which are similar to PLCs. The author

determined that the potential of learning teams in collaborative structures is vast in terms

of, effectively achieving common goals. However, the development of learning teams

must be intentional. Notably, an organization with these teams in place is more likely to

generate change and new learning, lending itself to school improvement. Therefore, PLCs

show great promise if the implementation process is well thought out.

Finally, Owens (2014) contributed a qualitative case study to address the

experiences of teachers in one Australian state. This researcher determined that there is

ample support and funding for individuals to attend external conferences then bring back

that learning to share with their school or team. Yet, how this is delivered is not always

the same. For example, when educators are asked to share the material of what was

learned at a conference or training, what may be applicable to the educator may not be

what the objective of the training was. There were identified indicators that characterized

that not all PLCs operate in the same phase of development, however the author

determined that as teachers survey various sources of data, co-assess student work, and

debate its quality as well as learn from each other, innovation is ongoing. In this case, the

one that benefits the most is the student. The researcher also determined that leadership

support is crucial in the development of teacher effectiveness; therefore, it is imperative

to explore the structure and organization of PLCs that are most prominent to teacher

development.

PLC’s focus on teaching and learning. The following literature supported the

current research effort on the significance of how PLC models are implemented with a

focus on teaching and learning. Further, it was intended to provide a foundation on

further information relative to how teachers perceive participation in PLCs influences

their professional growth and development through collaboration and professional

development. Thus, the importance of determining teacher perception of the development

and the structures that are supportive of that learning are crucial indicators to schools and

districts seeking PLC models to sustain continuous school improvement.

Attributes of professional learning communities. Thessin (2015) suggested that

planning a full implementation of the PLC framework must begin with an assessment of

the school’s readiness to participate in the work required of high functioning PLCs. The

author elaborated that supporting schools is not a “one size fits all” approach. First,

schools and districts must identify the purpose of their work and identify school goals.

Therefore, identifying the mission and vision is critical to this review.

Recognizably, the impact of a mission statement informs staff and students of the

purpose of their journey. More importantly, the vision of an organization inspires action

by building on past success and offering a glimpse of the future (Gruenert & Whitaker,

2015). “If a mission clarifies our purpose in the school (why we are we here); a school’s

vision is an idea of what it hopes to eventually become” (p.30). The mission of

professional learning communities, according to Bitterman (2010), is a focused approach

on continuous improvement of learning through student assessment. Further, the vision

from this perspective is founded in collaboration sought to deepen understandings of

teaching and learning that supports school wide improvement.

Particularly, Hord (1997) described that during the 1980s, the term “professional

community of learners” evolved as the act of teachers and leaders continuously seeking

new learning. The goal of this action is to enhance effectiveness that results in student

improvement. This has also been touted as “communities of continuous inquiry and

improvement.” The author listed five attributes of effective professional learning

communities: supportive and shared leadership, collective creativity, shared values and

vision, supportive conditions, and shared personal practice. Professional learning

communities redress teachers’ isolation, create shared teacher responsibility for all

students, and expose teachers to instructional strategies or knowledge they did not have

access to previously. Such communities can be venues for JEPD (job embedded

professional development) as well as other forms of reform based professional

development. (Hord, 1997, p.7).

DuFour et al. (2008) extended this idea by describing in detail a set of six

characteristics that illustrate the process of professional learning communities, which

include: shared mission, vision, values and goals, collaborative culture, collective

inquiry, action oriented and a commitment to continuous improvement. Each recognized

characteristic is focused on student achievement. This is a compelling commitment to

embrace high levels of learning for what educators within the school or district believe all

students should be or become. More importantly, established clarity is best supported

when setting expectations that all stakeholders embrace in order to create a learning

environment that supports the purpose, way in which it will be achieved, and buy in for

all staff and learning goals. In terms of a collaborative culture, this is derived with a focus

on learning and by members working in collaboration with one another. The team

members work “interdependently” and hold each other mutually accountable for the

learning of all students.

Collaboration, in terms of a PLC, means extending the conversation beyond the

table and applying the analysis of student data into the instructional practice to impact a

more profound result. Hord (1997) added that participants in intentional conversations

apply new ideas to problems and are then able to create new learning conditions for

students. Banks and Kurth (2013) determined that effective teaming occurs when

dynamics are inclusive of a shared goal of meeting, focusing on the needs of students to

increase collective professional knowledge and skills to support teaching. Further, the

opportunity to meet and establish the following norms; establishing priorities of time,

space, and roles ensued during PLC efforts.

Defining collective inquiry into the best practice and current reality is a level of

engagement within a PLC framework that includes best teaching practices, clarifying

current practices, and a transparent assessment of their students’ current levels of learning

(Dufour et al., 2008). Thus, collective inquiry supports that shared knowledge transforms

new possibilities to support teaching and learning (Bitterman, 2010). Additionally, action

orientation or the concepts of learning by doing is turning the hope of change into a plan

of reality. Educators understand that the power of knowledge is met with action.

Furthermore, learning by doing creates a catalyst for change.

A PLC recognizes that until all members do something different, there is no

indication that a different result will occur (Dufour et al., 2008). Therefore, a

commitment to continuous improvement results when PLCs are in search of a better way

to achieve the goals and purpose. The requirements of an ambitious outlook include data

driven planning based on student learning that requires developing strategies to build on

the strengths and weaknesses present in the data. Finally, implementing those strategies

into the teaching and learning environment for student success. The team analyzes the

impact of the effectiveness of the applied strategies to determine if continuous

improvement is occurring. Therefore, the goal is not reliant on learning a new strategy

but creating the environment for permanent and lasting results (Dufour, 2009).

A focus on this process significantly impacts professional learning communities

and contributes to effective teaching and student achievement. Stegall (2011) added that

the caviate of successful PLC’s is that a supportive and shared leadership are present in a

manner that is believed and accepted by staff, the school. The author noted that various

collaborative PLC teams that work together must begin by developing a shared core

vision and set of value. Hence, collective commitments clarify how individual roles of all

members contribute to the goal (Eaker & Keating, 2008). PLCs must also include

collective values and common language, which significantly contributes to effective

teaching and learning aligned to high levels of student achievement for all students.

Gray, Mitchell, and Turner (2014) contributed that trust, collective efficacy, and

enabling school structures elicit keen characteristics of the environment that promotes the

success of PLCs. The authors further argued that trust is the most important component

of functioning PLCs. Colleagues must maintain transparency of student results and

identify instructional weaknesses to gain improvement. The most substantial concepts

embraced in authentic PLCs is also identified as a challenge: “PLC concept is convincing

educators to shift from a focus on teaching to focus on learning- to move beyond the

question, (was it taught?) and to the far more relevant question, (was it learned?)”

(Dufour et al., 2008, p.19).

Van Lare and Brazer (2013) found that schools and districts that establish

enforcement of specific protocols can be a means of improving the fidelity of

implementation, however “applying routines is problematized because learning suggests

inquiry rather than compliance” (p. 391). Further, the research of PLCs suggested that

exploring gaps between theories and student results and recreating the delivery of content

through new strategies implies that autonomy and decision-making creates conditions for

innovation that promotes the authenticity of PLCs (Van Lare & Brazer, 2013). Linder,

Post, and Calabrese (2012) contributed that teachers participating in PLCs are

appreciative of the supports administration can provide to secure time and space for

meeting, materials, and expertise that all contribute to classroom efforts.

In summary, the success of PLCs is based on the structure of the community, the

goals, and the collaboration that exists regularly throughout the school year or day

(Bitterman, 2010). The ideas presented in this work indicated that a connectivity among

teachers to invest in the mission and vision of a PLC framework must be present if

sustained change is to occur. If the concepts are tangible and embedded in the

philosophical understandings, then the ability to extend that knowledge into action is

possible with commitment.

Common practices for PLCs and teacher development. In the study conducted

by Thessin (2015), the author highlighted a comparison among high-functioning PLCs

and struggling PLCs. This included the presence or absence of the following conditions,

which played significant roles towards the effectiveness of the organizations, which

included: “the provision of school based professional development on PLCs; existing

school practices; and a school culture focused on collaboration and the readiness of

school leaders and the communication of expectations by school leaders for PLC work”

(p.18). Further, the identifying that high functioning PLCs are often more productive and

adhere to the characteristics supported in a PLC framework. Thus, the results are ongoing

improvement of instructional effectiveness and teacher development.

Setting up a PLC requires that a safe space that encourages teachers to participate

in developing conceptual capacity and skills to justify effective approaches in their

classroom pedagogy be present in each collaborative exchange (Feldman & Fataar,

2014). Additionally, Eaker and Keating (2008) found that professional learning

communities must be embedded into the day-to-day routines of a school culture. The

structure is not enough to transform a school into a professional learning community. The

term “professional learning community” travels easy but the requirements are more than

organizing staff into teams, changing schedules, developing a new organizational chart,

or organizational structure. Hence, the heart of practicing as a PLC is engaging in an

intentional process that impacts the culture of the organization (Van Lare & Brazer,

2012). More than ever, this requires a shift in fundamental purpose from teaching to

learning, ensuring that the mission elicits the high levels of achievement for ALL

students.

In PLCs, teachers are significantly driven to ask hard questions and address the

needs of students in changed ways. Ultimately, without fixating on results, a guarantee of

student results is not applicable. Teachers must use student learning to drive the change

that prompts sustained improvement. Scott (2012) added that directional clarity must

overplay good intentions if a PLC is to succeed. Communities of practice are significant

in terms of promoting change, encouraging teacher leadership, and ultimately ensuring

student success. A practicing PLC participates in solution driven dialogue that

encourages and expects pedagogical change (Fieldman & Fataar, 2014).

Furthermore, Croft, Coggshall, Dolan, Powers, and Killion (2010) elicited that

teachers benefit from multiple opportunities to learn in a collaborative setting. Colleagues

must rely on each other’s expertise to dissect the current instructional delivery and extend

focus on individual needs. In the contributions by Gray, Mitchell, and Tarter (2014) the

authors demonstrated the importance of collective efficacy as being a significant

component of collaboration. Collective efficacy implies that the individuals in the group

believe in each other’s abilities so that opportunity to produce results is heightened. The

authors also maintained that the more efficacious the group of teachers are, the more

likely they will sustain the purpose of PLCs.

Likewise, a focus on learning prompts the importance of transparency among

teachers that fosters a learning forum that is purposeful. PLC participants must focus and

engage in discussions with colleagues from their team around crucial questions (Dufour

et al., 2008). Collegial trust is an essential component of transparent forums that elicit

honest feedback and difficult conversations. Gray, Mitchell, and Tarter (2014)

determined that although colleagues believing they can rely on each other is important, it

is equally important that the faculty also have the confidence that the leader or

administrator maintains their best interest in decision making efforts. Fieldman and

Fataar (2014) outlined that most significant PLC structures are focused on opportunities

for teachers to learn. A PLC plays a unique role in encouraging teachers to reflect

continually on current practice and the impact of that on student learning. Therefore,

optimal learning is achieved when deliberate and supportive conversations are centralized

on critical reflection and an inquiry mindset prevails in terms of a pedagogical shift.

Relative to student success, Marzano (2003) found that the most significant factor

that affects student learning is the teacher. The author clarified that effective teachers are

useful to various learners in a variety of settings. If the teacher is ineffective, the students

under that teacher’s direction will achieve inadequate progress. In a study produced by

the author, the results elicited that effective teachers produced 53 percentage points in

student achievement over one year, whereas the ineffective teacher production is merely

14 percentage points in that same year. Significantly, the author maintained that if

teacher’s master three factors which include: instructional strategies, classroom

management, and classroom curriculum design, then the teacher would see at least an

average academic growth score. Furthermore, the author discussed that although each are

identified separately, they are not isolated factors in terms of student success or

application. This is evidenced by the crucial importance of teacher development and

sustained growth.

Finally, Stegall (2011) contributed that long lasting reform and transitioning to a

PLC is not about a memorized mission statement by all stakeholders but more

importantly, it is about the ownership of the day to day work that is contingent on student

achievement and changed practices. The art of teaching is a culmination of balancing all

the factors to employ great classroom success and achievement. Conley (2011) also

found that the ability of a teacher to develop cognitive strategies is essential in the 21st

century classroom. Further, the kind of community required to change teachers’ beliefs

about student support opportunities is a direct result of relationships amongst staff that

not only encourage deep collaboration but the teaching craft needed in meeting the needs

of all students. Dufour (2009) added that the quality of teaching remains paramount in

student learning, and the PLC concept is ultimately the best strategy for creating the

systems that ensure good teaching in the classroom.

Collaborative teaming models that support teacher development. According to

the contributed efforts of researchers, there is a cross-over in skills used by both general

and special educators. Thus, this shared expertise is essentially the framework and

mission of collaborative teaming (Banks & Kurth, 2013). This idea significantly involves

the work of many to support the learning goals of all students. In the work outlined by the

authors, the role of specialist educators is profound in a collaborative team setting. The

requirement of all participants is not to just go beyond supporting the students’ learning

but to be mutually accountable for the professional learning of all team members. The

idea of this shared responsibility ensures that the competencies of experts are shared with

other members.

Collaborative learning structures involve teachers meeting on a regular basis to

develop shared responsibility for students’ success. It is important that this time include a

cycle that begins with examining student needs and identifying the teaching strategies

and approaches to best support the student, along with following up on student results

(Chong & Kong, 2012). Piercy (2010) also contends that there are six conditions for

necessary change to occur: mutual goals, equality among participants, shared

responsibility for participation and decision making, shared responsibility for outcomes,

sharing of resources, and voluntary. Further, the author determined that if collaboration is

expected, then shared understandings must be developed.

Collaboration can be an essential part of creating a team of transparent learners

that entrust one another with success and obstacles. Contributing authors, Silva and

Contreras (2011) noted in a school wide study that included a collaborative coaching and

learning model, found that 96% of the participants supported that an improved teaching

practice is aligned to collaborative teaching. The model fostered an in-depth opportunity

to work as an accountable professional learning community focused on student learning.

Additionally, in the work of Linder, Post, and Calabrese (2012), the authors determined

that collaboration within PLCs that support teacher development is inclusive of

opportunities that select a topic and produce knowledgeable facilitation that further

professional development. This is because most opportunities presented in a collaborative

team provide an openness for teachers to exchange instructional strategies and monitor

the success of students within the implementation process. Significantly, the presence and

support of colleagues venturing the same approach and the accountability to one another

can contribute to profound and more importantly, positive change.

More recently, with mandated requirements such as those presented in NCLB, the

notion that lower achieving students in economically challenged areas are a crucial

component of providing equality for all students, however the efforts of this reform

initiative are still unclear, however, it is relevant that school improvement has become a

focus for improved education (Forte, 2010). Madsen, Schroeder and Irby (2014) indicated

that increasing expectations of schools have encouraged organizational development

required to bring about change.

In an example included in the Race to the Top (RTT) report (Doherty et al., 2010)

discussed that the success of any plan is dependent on communicating the expectations

for the process to occur. If this is true, then the embedded use of a collaborative

organizations will assist with identifying unbiased evidence supported by student learning

and articulating a process for determining further action as an essential recommendation

for sustained improvement (Doherty, Walsh, Jacobson, & Neuman-Sheldon, 2010).

Notably, in the study by Croft, Coggshall, Dolan, Powers, and Killion (2010), the

authors stated that collaboration is the art of analysis. The authors determined that many

collaborative opportunities for teachers to extend learning should include: action

research, case discussions, coaching, critical friends group, data teams, lesson study,

mentoring, professional learning communities, study groups, and examination of student

work, concluding that teachers learn from multiple collaborative opportunities. These

occasions are sought when time, space, structure, and support are provided by the

individual school or district. It is suggested that with the elimination of excessive

paperwork and non-instructional teacher duties, along with aligning teacher schedules

and the clarification of goals and outcomes, collaboration will be met with more success.

Owen (2014) contended that examination from various sources of data about

student learning requires debate to implement innovative practices (teacher development)

to support their teams and more importantly, student learning. Specific examples of

change are highlighted throughout the study focused on influential efforts of

collaborative teams being the guiding source of both teacher development and student

learning. Additionally, Jao (2015) found that endeavors for improving “on-the job”

collaborative opportunities are comprehensive of professional learning communities, co-

teaching, and peer coaching. The study revealed that working together enabled teacher

experience and reflection on lesson delivery to authentically extend teaching knowledge

and improvement. The teachers reported that collaboration is an investment of time and

resources. However, opportunities to share ideas is reassuring when teaching like

subjects, as well as discussing, trading, and sharing resources.

Leading and expecting collaboration can be challenging, but the results offset the

obstacles. Dufour (2009) concluded that positive peer pressure during collaboration

fosters improvements. This occurs when educators are open to seeking new practices

rather than preventing the team from achieving set goals as a result of poor student

performance from individuals or groups. Yet, it is not realistic to believe that all members

will be inspired to do what they say or that positive peer pressure will always work.

Therefore, there are instances that leaders must address in order to resolve these

problems. The collective commitments held up by the group afford the leader a platform

to address discrepancies by providing the evidence that supports the commitment.

However, in C. Stewart’s (2014) work, the author maintained that motivation is

impacted by the ownership of goals. Resistance to constructive criticism is moderated if

groups attend the principles of group learning which include: equality (teachers have

added value in the outline of professional development), choice (teachers chose how and

what they will learn), voice (respect is given to teacher’s voice), reflection (reflection is

significant in learning), praxis (learning is authentic and applied to practice), and

reciprocity (all participants offer and receive feedback).

Teacher development is often achieved if the group commits to working together

for a semester or longer for professional improvement to occur. More importantly, the

process of development that include dialogue about student work and identifying the gaps

that should be addressed in the learning environment. C. Stewart (2014) contended that

teams should consider the learning objective and address an in-depth understanding of

how students learn, active learning that includes ongoing review of student work, and

observing others teach as well as being observed with feedback, coherence of

expectations within the group, duration or a commitment of time, and collective

participation. Teacher practice was most impacted when teaching the same content or

grade level as other members.

The contributions of Lick (2006) are practical learning team design processes that

include the following: build group synergy, foster co-mentoring, utilize educational

resources, integrate knowledge and create potential solutions, apply possible outcomes,

recheck group synergy and co-mentoring. More specifically, the author maintains that

building group synergy “is the foundation for being self-directed, setting and focusing on

challenging new goals, having collaboration and reflection, and dialoguing and thinking

insightfully together about complex issues” (Lick, 2006, p.93). The author defended that

supporting co-mentoring in the group offers support and encouragement to everyone else,

which in turn provides a safe environment to expand the thinking and application of new

learning. Hence, using learning resources to promote and enhance understandings affords

an increased awareness and potential for more creative solutions to problems. The results

indicated that staff are encouraged to use all relevant resources as the group integrates

into one or more possible solutions for desired outcomes.

Lafifi and Touli (2010) studied collaboration among teachers and determined that

participation has a positive effect on cognitive abilities of learners and on teacher’s skills

that support in-depth discussion. Valentin (2014) additionally concluded that teachers

participating in collaboration felt less alone and more connected to goals. Further, this

study highlighted the significance of vertical alignment and empowered teachers to have

better understandings of connecting grade level expectations, strategies used, and

becoming familiar with student backgrounds. However, ongoing examination of student

results with an agreed upon measure and outcome is always the driving force of

professional learning communities in collaborative teams. Banks and Kurth (2013)

endorsed that collaborative efforts of PLCs is the most effective process that moves from

isolation to improved learning for all students. All members must maintain inquiry,

continuous learning, and efforts to seek more profound instructional practices to sustain

improvement.

Professional development. Educational funding efforts identify a “need” to

strengthen schools as aligned to the concepts in Race to the Top (RTT) that awarded a

significant amount of educational funding to states by competition (Doherty, Walsh,

Jacobs & Neuman-Sheldon, 2010; Jones & Dexter, 2014). Doherty et al. (2010) specified

that one important component that states must consider is teacher quality; “having made

human capital one pillar, the Department has made clear that it believes all states have

considerable work to do on improving teacher quality” (p.9). Further, the report found

that a successful system should provide educators the tools to be successful. This

included supports for development, rewarding accomplishments and ensuring that

accountability of results is maintained. Additionally, as with all reform proposals the goal

is that students achieve at their highest potential.

Considerations of effective professional development remain unclear and depend

on the content of which the development is focused on. For example, Jones and Dexter

(2014) discussed how teachers learn and the facilitation of learning that is most valuable

to them. The authors determined that recommendations of training classes would be

better suited if teachers were provided more choice. The informal learning defined in the

study included observations of one another, email, and conversations with several

different educators, and appeared to compliment the formal professional development.

However, time is an obstacle faced by teachers and educators. Yet, ongoing, reflective

dialogue is an essential component of authentic professional development that is

meaningful and transforms practice to expertise.

Stegall (2011) provided that the intent of professional development is to improve

the quality of classroom instruction. In an effort to maintain a competitive role, educators

are continuously seeking improved ways to impact student achievement. The challenge

noted by the author is improved school wide instruction. Most often, improvement is

focused on isolated teacher change versus a more profound, school wide change. Patton,

Parker, and Pratt (2013) argued that by investing and putting teachers at the forefront of

change, professional capital is met with teachers making complex decisions in a

collective setting, being transparent, and open to feedback which in turn provides

teachers and schools the ability to reach full potential. Further, it can be assumed that

professional capital is one of the most prominent resources, schools can and should invest

in. The idea of sustained change is achieved when shifts in thinking are transformed into

practice which leads to student achievement.

Servage (2008) found that PLCs have been a powerful structure for continued

teacher development. Therefore, this embedded professional development model is a

framework that many PLCs employ as an opportunity to advance teacher knowledge and

encourage teacher change (Chong & Kong, 2012). The dynamics of collaborative efforts

by teachers and the purpose of professional learning communities has eliminated teacher

solation that was once common amongst teacher instruction (Servage, 2008). The authors

continued that the core beliefs outlined by Dufour et al. (2008) included: professional

development which is critical to student improvement, professional development which is

most effective when it is collaborative and collegial, and collaborative work should

involve inquiry and problem solving in authentic settings supportive of classroom

practices. Significantly, the work of Patton et al. (2013) defined that professional learning

environments are not just places to construct new knowledge with colleagues, but require

building trusting relationships that promote a vulnerability to address what isn’t working.

In addition, the authors contend that “a collaborative culture of empowerment and student

learning transforms teaching” (Patton et al., 2013, p.442). The idea of empowerment is

certainly regarded as important in order to maintain reform expectations.

Chong and Kong (2012) stated that “for teacher professional development to be

successful, training programs need to be intensive, ongoing, and connected to practices,

focused on specific subject content, and need to foster strong working relationships

among teachers” (p. 263). Further it is noted in this study, that teachers expressed that

professional development was more conducive when a limited number of clearly defined

goals were the main focus. Hence, the occasion to learn beyond the surface was likely

achieved. This includes deepening teachers’ content knowledge and addressing effective

instructional practices. This also requires an intent opportunity focused on reflective

dialogue on the instructional practice as an independent occurrence of the teacher in the

classroom. The findings of this study suggested that for professional development to be

successful, it required that working conditions and attending to teacher self-beliefs be

fostered to observe sustainable change. In addition, embedding professional development

in the classroom where the new learning is to take place is an example of contextual

conditions that schools can employ to promote change.

Job embedded and not job embedded professional development were further

defined most accurately in the work of Croft, Coggshall, Dolan, Powers, and Killion

(2010). The authors defined that job-embedded professional development takes place in

the classroom with “current students, in real time, and is centered on issues of actual

practice.” It may take place in the school before or after instruction, “away from students

and focused on issues of actual practice” (p.3). Examples include a mentor or

instructional coach that may observe, interact, or plan with the teacher. This opportunity

allows for dialogue to include clarifications prior and after the lesson delivery.

Furthermore, it may also include the teacher applying a new strategy based on an article

from a professional journal, blog, or journals about the experience. More significantly,

the authors discussed in detail the dynamics of teams of teachers engaging in interactive

and result driven work. The teams could include departmental, cross departments, grade

level, or cross grade level teams seeking discourse. The closer the work is with current

students the more job embedded the approach is.

Non job-embedded professional development takes place outside the school,

removed from instructions, away from students, and is focused on likely practices in the

classroom. Examples of this include no application of a read journal article as the teacher

may not find it of any value. Additionally, a mentor and teacher could review a case

study together, identifying similarities and differences between the schools, however it

does not provide specific feedback on the observed action nor is it applicable to current

reality.

Facilitation of effective professional development is a balancing act that requires

challenging the learners with new information, while also providing an opportunity to

make meaning for themselves (Patton, Parker, & Pruitt, 2013). Additionally, the authors

contended that the requirements must also acknowledge teachers’ prior knowledge and

experience in context, hearing their voices, and identifying their strengths, as well as

addressing deficiencies in a non-judgmental way. Therefore, the strategies identified in

this study promoted effective professional development and are identified as: social and

active learning opportunities, monitoring discussion, and interjecting in opportune times,

thoughtful and critical questioning to prompt reflection, and guiding and redirecting.

Each strategy is more explicitly defined in the following:

First, social and active learning opportunities occurred as a result of interacting

with one another outside of formal settings. This included collaboration at various times

throughout the year in unrelated venues. Many times, reflective opportunities extended

knowledge and provided solutions to difficult problems in a collective sense that teachers

applied immediately. This study also explored structured professional development times

that included monitoring discussion and interjecting in opportune times. Ideally, this

referred to the facilitator’s input, which supports the art of knowing when to be silent and

turn over the reins for further exploring by the learners is a concept that requires a great

deal of intuition. Teachers appreciate being heard and many times are experts themselves.

Facilitators must maintain an appropriate level of support and pressure all at the same

time to ensure that the learning opportunities are self-directed.

Purposeful questioning with the appropriate amount of wait time prompts the

reflection needed to glean problem-based solutions. This strategy is an effective way to

encourage critical thinking and reflection that extends teacher knowledge in a non-

threatening way. Thus, the demonstration of questioning not only assists with teacher

knowledge but models exemplary classroom practice. Teachers are exposed to what

students experience when purposeful questioning is embedded into instruction.

Facilitation of discussion is essential to assist teachers with their thinking and refocusing

efforts. This is met by “revisiting professional development goals, emphasizing essential

information and refocusing their efforts” (Patton et al., 2013, p.451). Guiding and

fostering independence creates an environment of autonomy (Patton et al., 2013).

Professional development is a holistic approach that must include formal

professional development activities that bring teachers together to set the stage for further

collaboration throughout a specific time period. However, an informal collaboration most

certainly provides the ongoing support for the originated professional development to

manifest into implementation and reflection. Finally, independent activities can

contribute to informal collaboration or provide foundations for extending the learning in

authentic work environments (Jones & Dexter, 2014). Silva and Contreras (2011) found

that often times one time workshops, study groups and traditional faculty trainings fail to

produce the collaboration and innovative practices required to impact change. Jao (2015)

discussed that overcoming barriers to reform can be achieved through quality

professional development. The author specifically stated that one-shot sessions are often

“fragmented and disconnected from classroom practice” (p.4).

Jones and Dexter (2014) maintained that focusing solely on formal professional

development activities limits the leverage of teachers’ expertise and experience to build

on knowledge that will benefit the organization as a whole. Stegall (2011) added that

when PLCs are rooted correctly, the opportunity to seamlessly shift from focusing on

teaching to focusing on learning prevails. Finally, it is important to consider that

extensive knowledge is required to support all learners, manage behavior, and master

content to deliver high quality instruction. Hence, to meet the needs of curriculum

changes and educational evolvement, a teacher must not only master the art of teaching

but maintain a willingness to change as evidenced by research and data. Jao (2015)

concluded that professional development must be grounded in teachers’ work, feelings

and experiences. The efforts focused on teaching and learning will certainly outweigh

training a specific skill or isolated skill, if transformation is sustained and school

improvement is the goal.

Teacher perceptions of PLCs. Peppers (2015) conducted an ethnographic study

of teacher perceptions of PLCs in a suburban high school, the teachers noted that PLCs

offer an opportunity to not just collaborate on academic topics, but create positive

relationships amongst colleagues that share the same experience. Many teachers

maintained that time was a factor that hindered the work of PLCs. Additionally, the

interviewed participants determined that the support of campus leadership was an

essential component of productive PLCs. In addition, the author concluded that the

results of this study extended that PLCs “do influence the schools’ learning environment”

(Peppers, 2015, p.29). The themes that emerged in this analysis of sustainable PLCs

included a profound characteristic of empowerment amongst teachers. The empowerment

of teachers encompassed owning the learning that is provided in the PLC framework.

Similarly, McConnell, Parker, Eberhardt, Koehler, and Lundeberg, (2013)

conducted a phenomenological perspective and comparative case study to compare the

experiences of teacher participants in a virtual PLC group to members of the other groups

(face to face). The results of this study emerged themes that included positive teacher

perceptions. These experiences provided a positive perspective overall. Many participants

included that sharing articles or information found by others assisted with the current and

agreed upon focus. Group members also reported that opportunities to contribute a new

perspective on evidence was essential in making instructional plans to support all

learners. In addition, it was conveyed that “hearing practical solutions others have tried”

(Parker et al., 2013, p. 272) was incredibly useful and authentic. Also, many reported that

having accountability to do a particular task or read an agreed upon article assisted with

ongoing learning. Similarly, a “focus on professional discourse” (Parker et al., 2013,

p.272) was discussed.

Likewise, in the study of Peppers (2015) the perception of developing

professional friendships beyond the classroom and with colleagues in other schools was a

substantially, positive factor in participating in PLCs. In both virtual and face to face

focus groups, accountability to one another was viewed as a valuable aspect of

participating in PLCs. Teachers discussed the importance of having regular, scheduled

meetings that incorporated agreed upon tasks to complete prior to the meeting. It was

shared that being mindful of other members ensured that teachers did their part in

contributing articles, student work or personal teaching dilemmas that posed thoughtful

reflection and a solution generated dialogue.

The studies of Peppers (2015) and McConnell et al., (2013) revealed the

importance of sustained PLCs. More importantly, these studies asked participants to

share the experience. Each study focused on the perception of teachers that included

collegial relationships and the significance. There are opportunities presented in PLCS

that ensure an accountability to one another naturally enhance learning. The expectation

that is presented allows one to reflect deeply about instruction and student learning to

determine best practices can be a profound realization. More importantly, the details in

the analysis of each study infers a commitment to ongoing learning and school

improvement.

Transformational learning. Mezirow (1997) vied that transformative learning is

the act of automaticity in thinking. “Transformative learning is learning that transforms

problematic frames of reference – sets of fixed assumptions and exceptions (habits of

mind, meaning perspectives, mindsets) to make them more open and reflective”

(Mezirow, 2003, p.58). In terms of adult learning, the author further explained that

livelihood and the actions of being are sometimes a direct result of how we are expected

to behave. Additionally, this is dependent on ideal conditions for quality of knowledge

and the sociopolitical conditions that either facilitate or stifle the learning process.

Significantly, the idea of transforming beliefs is contingent on transformative learning

and change, affected by an individual’s frame of reference. Mezirow (2003) maintained

that frame of reference is composed of two dimensions: habits of mind and point of view.

Habits of mind are more ethnocentric and often are durable grounded in broad, abstract

habitual ways of thinking or feeling based on assumptions influenced by a set of codes.

“These codes are often cultural, social, educational, economic, political, or

psychological” (Mezirow, 2003, p.6).

In contrast, points of view are seemingly more flexible in terms of the influence

of feelings, beliefs, judgments, and attitudes. Points of view are often more accessible to

feedback and awareness. For example, in a 2008 study conducted by Servage, the author

discussed the transforming or reformation of professional learning communities in school

settings. The author determined that professional learning communities cause individuals

to embrace a new of way of thinking. Transformative learning theory in this case can

serve as a catalyst; however, in doing so, a safe and conducive learning environment must

be present. It is not without consideration that PLCs must also address those members

who hold tight to established beliefs. The author concluded that using collaborative time

to engage in critical dialogue may be the missing element in school reform.

The application of a frame of reference is grounded in several factors including:

past experience, associations, conception information, conditioned responses, and values.

The established belief of one’s own ideas are often so strong that shared or contributed

ideas by others are often rejected based on preconceptions held as truth. The determining

factors relevant to transforming a frame of reference is through “critical reflection on the

assumptions” based on interpretation, beliefs, and habits of mind. Mezirow (1997) also

described that self-reflection can inspire real transformation and significantly impact the

application of new learning.

Malkki (2010) extended self-reflection in terms of defining how the frame of

reference can be interpreted as reflection. The author stated that meaning perspective as

well as meaning perspective and emotion are digested differently. The author defended

that there are two interpretations relevant to reflection. First, meaning perspective is the

frame of meaning taking place. This is referred to as critically thinking about assumptions

and applying that independent thinking, feelings, and action to concrete meaning.

Furthermore, the extensive emotions required to critically self-reflect and impose

reflective judgement occurs differently in individuals. Often learners are strongly rooted

in beliefs, and unpleasant emotions often interfere with the stability of thought. Thus, it

remains critical that learning to participate fully is extended through discourse.

According to Kumi-Yeboah and James (2012), making meaning in terms of

perspective is vital to learning. This operates as a perceptual filter that basis organization

of past experiences on the new setting. Furthermore, reinforcement or extending

boundaries will subsequently occur. Transformed meaning is developed into new

meaning with moments to reflect on standards and princples. As adults partake in the

learning process, determination of how this new learning fits into existing configurations

occurs. As a 21st century educator, the transformation of practice is essential to maintain

new and innovative practices that encourage self-reflective thinking.

Adult learners must view learning as autonomous and become open to critical

self-examination of assumptions. Autonomy refers to the understanding, skills, and

disposition necessary to become critically reflective of one’s own assumptions and to

engage effectively in discourse to validate one’s beliefs through the experiences of others

who share universal values (Mezirow, 1997). The way facilitation of such learning occurs

involves discourse. Effective discourse is dependent on ensuring that participants have

adequate information. That they are provided equal access to assume roles in discourse

and assumptions are critically examined. Learners must maintain an inquiry mindset and

be willing to listen and seek common ground. Finally, adult learners must have a

willingness to make the best judgment to further guide the action (Mezirow, 2003).

Transformation for educators includes all aspects of discourse that can add to

established beliefs. Significantly, to evaluate arguments, educators must contest, secure,

describe, and assess evidence that is supportive or not supportive of the argument. This is

met with valuing the effort of others and seeking commonality to conduct further action.

Ideally, transformative learning fosters critical reflection on self-livelihood and

application through practice, resulting in automaticity of thought and action.

Transformation is about becoming more complex in thinking to deal with levels of

demand and uncertainties (Poutiatine & Conners, 2012).

In a recent study, Sammut (2014), explored the transformative learning theory in a

coaching-coachee relationship. Participant coaches discussed the opportunity to foster the

learning process, this included elements of critical reflection and dialogue. The reflection

focused on intentional and powerful questions that promoted coachee participants to

think and examine in a more profound way. The transformation is not prompted by the

coach but is supported in a clarifying way to the coachee. Significantly, the author

defined 10 strategies that foster transformation which include: “creating a safe

environment, acceptance, presence, no-judgment, asking through provoking questions,

deep inquiry for critical reflection, challenging false beliefs and assumptions,

accountability, active listening and modeling behavior” (p. 48). The study included that

experience drives the transformation.

In an effort to understand Mezirow’s disorienting dilemma, Sammut (2014) noted

that when adult learners experience an event that is not productive, revisiting and revising

is a natural occurrence in the learning experience. Reflection is often a questioning

mechanism that lends itself to critical examination. Critical reflection includes content,

process, and premise. Content is what we already perceive or think, process upholds the

elements of how “we perform the functions we are perceiving” and the premise is the

awareness of why it occurs. The coaching process employs strategies that support and

facilitate the reflective cycle.

For transformative learning to occur the components of self-reflection,

recognizing frames of reference, and allowing for discourse are critical elements that

must be explored in learning forums (McComish & Parsons, 2013). There are four

processes of learning: elaborate on a current point of view, establish new points of view

by encountering the differences of others, experience driven, and by critically reflecting

on biases set by one’s own belief (Mezirow, 1997). Transformational learning involves

the critical examination of assumptions in a group or individual setting. Further, the term

“critical reflection” requires understanding the nature of reasonableness and justification

(Meizrow, 2003). Additionally, critical reasoning is supportive of evidence as it relates to

significance, suitability, and consequences explored during the learning process.

Generally, transformative learning does not occur easily. The process of providing

solutions to challenging episodes is only a framework to develop a growing

understanding (Kumi-Yeboah & James, 2012). For example, the study conducted by

Poutiatine and Conners (2012) described the process of transformational in the

perspective of a learner as a process of vital change that begins with formational work.

Participants in the study contributed that profound changes of who they are or who they

are becoming is a “result of deep engagement with their own identity and integrity” (p.

70). This can be further understood in the disorientation process. The dilemmas are

presented to the learners in authenticity; the learner can either ignore the consciousness

presented or explore the process to further emerge as an improved learner.

Adult learning requires that learners realize capabilities by developing skills,

insights and dispositions essential for improved practice (Meizrow, 2003). Therefore,

fostering organizational environments that support discourse and reflection must establish

norms for acceptance, justifying responses, supporting the learning of one another, and

providing an equal forum of responsibility and respect for the contributions of all

stakeholders (McComish & Parsons, 2013). The foundation and establishment of

authentic relationships are the essential content of establishing trusting environments that

promote the necessary basis to support adult learning and transformational learning.

“Authentic relationships allow individuals to have questioning discussions, share

information openly, and achieve mutual and consensual understanding” (Sammut, 2014,

p.51).

Designing programs that have profound effect on how participants maintain and

transform beliefs and mindsets is multifaceted and comes with difficult challenges. Often

times, individuals are content with the way things are and maintain that this is how things

have always been. Yet, the most powerful learning forum is built on extending and

challenging those beliefs to achieve a more effective practice and transformed

practitioner (Poutiatine & Conners, 2012). Significantly, the work of Patton et al. (2013)

contributed that professional learning environments are not just a place to construct new

knowledge with colleagues, but require building trusting relationships. Further, the

authors contend that “a collaborative culture of empowerment and student learning

transforms teaching” (p.442). The idea of empowerment is certainly regarded as

important to maintain reform expectations. The importance of sustained change is

significant in school improvement, therefore the theory present in transformational

learning and the structure and organization of a PLC were ideal and considered in the

results of this study.

Social cognitive theory. Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory addresses the

relationships that involve personal, behavioral, and social/environmental factors

influencing individual behavior. The theory suggested that capabilities inclusive of

processing are vicarious, symbolic, and self-regulatory, all of which play a significant

role in the learning process. More specifically, the author maintained that vicariously,

individuals acquire skills, behaviors, and cognition by observing others. Bandura and

Wood (1989) described that observational learning is directed by four processes:

attentional, representational, behavioral production, and motivation.

Attentional process is self-selected based on the observation of the modeling.

Individuals are influenced by extracted activities. Representational process is reliant on

determining the rules and concepts that are symbolically transferred into memory.

Behavioral production process is comparing the concepts matched with the process.

Thus, people are guided by patterns of behavior aligned and compared to a conceptual

model. Motivational processes are determined by success and failure of others similar to

the individual. Self-evaluation and personal standards are factors that regulate and

determine if the behavior is successful or not (Bandura, 2001). Yet, to explain this

process more, it is significant to acknowledge that not all learning is applied by the

individual immediately or sometimes ever. The importance of an individual establishing

“goals rooted in a value system and sense of personal identity, invest activities with

meaning and purpose” (Bandura, 2001, p.8) are viewed as essential components that

impact motivation and foster the application of learning.

Chong and Kong (2012) conducted a study on conditions of effective

collaborative learning structures to support teacher self-efficacy. The direct relationship

between teacher self-efficacy and a teacher’s ability to influence student outcomes is

significant to consider. This study highlighted that teacher efficacy beliefs play an

important role in teacher instructional change. The results of this study included

collaborative efforts which added to individual schema by engaging in idea exchanges to

increase effective instruction. The authors concluded that professional learning

recommendations must include attention to self-beliefs.

Embedding professional development into the classroom and protecting time to

do so are essential elements of teacher-development. Self-efficacy is significant in the

social cognitive theory and heavily relies on the ability to feel successful in terms of

applying new learning. Although, self-efficacy is effective by positive encouragement;

and it is mostly influenced by the outcomes (Bandura, 1986; Schnuk, 2012). Some of the

influential factors included are progress towards a goal and learning environments that

are conducive to creativity. Satisfactory performance will naturally heightened self-

efficacy, whereas a failed attempt will lower it.

However, it is not uncommon for emotion to play a fundamental role in self-

efficacy. Stress and negative thinking about individual ability will lower self-efficacy.

When individuals are less stressed they experience self-efficacy in an elevated state.

Schnuk (2012) extended by elaborating on the factors that play a unique role in one’s

perceived abilities for performing or learning. The author coined these as enactive and

vicarious learning opportunities. Schnuk (2012) maintained that enactive learning is

actualized by doing what is observed. Thus, by observing the behavior of others and

learning from consequences a behavior will either be repeated or diminished by the

learner.

People are motivated to learn and repeat behaviors that they believe are followed

by positive results. Typically, a behavior that would lead to punishment will not be tried

or tested by others. The author continued that this type of learning is grounded in

consequences, thus behaviors that are validated in success are maintained while failed

actions are discarded. However, vicarious learning is not performing while the learning is

taking place; this would be described as reading what and how to construct or perform

something safely. Like that of enactive learning, much learning is achieved through

perceived consequences.

Schnuk (2012) also described that human learning is intrinsically complex in

nature. The author defined examples of student learning that included learning by

observing an explanation and vicariously modeling the skills or strategies in the

demonstration. The concepts are then practiced at an alternate time. Through practice and

specific feedback, students learn the skills more efficiently and skillfully with careful

direction and coaching. Symbolic processes are often used to alter environments that pose

obstacles in life. This process would include reacting to situations by problem solving

and communicating to enrich learning opportunities and seek new ways of addressing

situations.

Additionally, in the study conducted by Romeo (2010), the researcher sought to

determine the relationship between self-efficacy and contributions of a PLC. The

evidence supported that efforts of self-efficacy and self-belief play a significant role in

student success aligned to teacher instruction. More importantly, teachers that had access

to PLCs were more likely to feel less stressed, more supported, and “have a positive

impact on the learning environment” (Romeo, 2010, p.99). This study aligns to self-

regulation, which involves assessing goals and determining strategies to support

achieving the end goal. As the task unfolds, individual learning opportunities are

achieved throughout the process by deciding if the strategy requires adjustment. Hence,

as tasks are completed, personal reflection is significant in determining if the progress is

justified and meets the goal.

If successful, self-efficacy is heightened. Further, the perceptions of self-efficacy

are an essential component in shaping the outcomes of an individual. As adults learn and

observe progress, their desire to learn more is enhanced. Similar to student learning, adult

learning is subsequently the learning that transforms ineffective habits. These are directly

resulted in the social cognitive theory, grounded in self-efficacy, and rooted in

consequences. The learner must be encouraged by success to maintain the new learning

application. Much like students, teachers are exposed to explanation and theory to

elaborate on the repertoire of teaching. The learning is later demonstrated in the

classroom for improved student results, if the results are successful then the new strategy

will likely continue.

It is important to consider that learning and performing are not always

simultaneous. This means that the learned skill or task may or may not be applied in

authentic circumstances immediately following the learning (Schnuk, 2012). The learning

may be stalled for various reasons: “motivation, interest, incentives, perceived need,

physical conditions, social pressure, and competing activities” (p. 105). This situation

may be difficult for the facilitation of learning in terms of measuring if the strategy is

effective or not.

Like students, assessment of learning is an essential component of gauging the

performance of teachers alike. In this case, the social cognitive theory will be further

explored in a supportive culture and the application of change through embedded

opportunities to apply new learning in the classroom will unfold. The opportunity is

reliant on self-efficacy in terms of a person’s belief in his or her success in a current or

future situation that involves teaching and learning, however it is crucial to remember

that it is not isolated factor.

Ng and Lucianetti (2015) added that self-efficacy also determines the intensity of

persuasion with idea generation. Further, the authors also contend that “individuals that

experience increased anxiety and fear” are less likely to experience growth and positive

performance. Emotional barriers are contingent on growth by opportunities presented to

exert an opinion or idea without fear of being ridiculed or punished. Therefore, the

learning organizational framework must be built on trust and respect.

Gray, Mitchell, and Tarter (2014) determined that the components presented in a

PLC increase self-efficacy. The results contributed to the characteristics of an effective

teacher, thus the establishment of trust to engage in collaboration is imperative if

individual growth and self-satisfaction are the end result. Organizational trust refers to

employees that expect positive results and believe that regardless of the risk, the

employee trusts that the organization will follow through (Ng & Lucianetti, 2015).

Further, the core of organizational trust is built on the ability of employees to engage in

vulnerability, aiding in the development of self-efficacy. Additionally, innovative

thinking and creativity can and will only be captured in an environment that is safe and

psychologically sound for risk taking. The author maintained that perceived respect plays

a crucial role in promoting the perception of self. Respect generates innovation and

assists with overcoming emotional barriers that can hinder positive beliefs about one’s

own ability to create, implement, and maintain innovative ideas. Therefore, the alignment

with Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory further established how a social

environment and acceptance will often contribute to effective behavior in a specific

setting.

Therefore, there are significant details in prior studies on social cognitive studies

and the importance of a trusting environment that PLCs should offer. It is crucial to

determine the nature of a framework relative to a successful organization. Further, in the

study conducted by Samimi-Duncan, Duncan, and Lancaster (2010) on the experience of

pre-service teachers in a paired practicum reveal the importance of collaboration in

teaching environments. The results of this study support the social cognitive theory and

experiences of collaboration within an environment built on trust. The effective and

positive teaching experiences were more likely a contribution of a less stressful

environment; provided by time to collaborate and work together, the participants were

more successful overall.

Similarly, Bandura and Wood (1989) described that the social cognitive theory is

essentially relevant to organizational structure, it is directly the result of explicit

guidelines that are provided to assist with improving individual competencies, self-

regulatory abilities, and efficacy that will ultimately thrive in organizational structures.

Thus, the development of people’s cognitive, social, and behavioral proficiency through

mastery modeling and the belief in one’s own ability is paramount in personal

motivation. The authors contended that efficay can be strengthened and instilled by four

principal ways: mastery of experience, modeling, social persuasion, and physiological.

Banks and Kurth (2013) reported that PLCs are based on two assumptions. First,

the knowledge and skills required in educational practice are initiated in the day to day

experiences and interactions, therefore profound understandings are advanced through

critical reflection with others who share the same experiences. Secondly, active, ongoing

and structured professional discussion increases professional learning and abilities that

improve student outcomes. As with the social cognitive theory, the ability to apply high

expectations of effective instructional delivery will certainly play a crucial part in the

sustainment of teacher development. More importantly, the supportive conditions

necessary for PLCs to function properly are reliant on logistical conditions, capacities

and relationships developed among colleagues to ensure productivity (Hord, 2007; Gray

et al., 2014). A safe and respectful environment will inspire individuals to take risks and

step outside the bounds of comfort in the classroom. Further, the relationship between the

social cognitive theory and the framework of a PLC significantly added to understanding

the results of this researcher’s, current study.

Methodology and Instrumentation

The review conducted, considered prior qualitative studies that supported this

researcher’s intent. More importantly, to explore how professional learning community

models in one K-8 school are designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and

learning, and how educators perceived participation in professional learning communities

influenced their professional growth and development, the following were referenced.

Bitterman’s (2010) study examined how three middle schools engaged in professional

learning communities to further develop effectively as science teachers. The findings

included an analysis of implementation efforts to support teacher development in a

middle school setting; however, it was specifically content focused. Professional

development was discussed as a major component of success. Further, the collected data

determined that professional development aligned to the team, and continuous support in

embedded effective teaching practices was significant in developing teacher repertoire.

The researcher determined that teachers benefit the most from continuous dialogue

focused on data and instruction to meet the ongoing needs of students. The researcher

suggested that an elementary study on PLC’s be conducted to further the knowledge on

collaborative efforts within professional learning communities.

C. Stewart (2014) also found that learning within a professional learning

community is most effective in transforming teaching and learning. Because participants

are ideally invested in the work they do day to day, the buy in is of greater value. Further,

the contributions of a PLC are best when all members have taken part in the

organizational framework. Cohesion must be present if honest feedback and

improvement is essentially the goal. Thus, the importance of needs based on student data

are the driving force in these endeavors. The author concluded with the following: “active

learning working with content to create lasting change; allows teachers to focus on

specific needs” (p.31). The work produced by C. Stewart offers leverage needed to

extend the work in qualitative form; ideally the work of a PLC is centralized on school

improvement. Teacher perception on individual development is critical in order to

examine the best framework that embraces an ongoing dialogue to further engage

teachers in effective instruction.

Valentin (2014) also designed a qualitative study to investigate teachers’

perspective on math instruction, student learning, and achievement in a vertical

alignment. The researcher sought to interview teachers to better understand teacher

perspective. Collaboration was found to be an effective way to connect teachers to district

goals. The extent of collaborative efforts was found to help teachers better understand the

curriculum and support student learning. The vertical alignment teams were meant to lead

each individual school’s math team on specific content and instruction delivery.

Participants grappled with topics in each grade level to decrease repetition and provide

transitions with ease for students. The researcher concluded that most participants

appeared to have established lasting connections and gratitude knowing who would be

teaching his/her students the following year, which is supportive of an established culture

of trust.

An additional case study is found in the work of K. Stewart (2012), the author

sought to determine if PLC’s sustain student achievement. The researcher determined

through interviews and observations that simply relying on organizational factors would

not guarantee success. The findings for sustaining student achievement included the

following: “sustainable education leadership, student-centered learning, shared values

and vision, collective inquiry into best practices, action oriented and a focus on results”

(p.157). The researcher determined that the results support the reform efforts for

improving teaching and learning for lower socioeconomic school districts. Significantly,

the recommendation for further study included an investigation on the direct relationship

of an implemented PLC model and student achievement. All participants in this study

elaborated on the positive effect that collaboration has on student success, which was

ideally aligned to the current study.

Chong and Kong (2012) offered a qualitative approach on lesson study that

identified the conditions most effective in collaborative settings supportive of teacher

efficacy. The findings suggested that sustainable change is captured in self-beliefs.

Therefore, embedded professional development opportunities and time are necessary

components to support sustained change. The study utilized social cognitive theory to

better illustrate psychological constructs related to teacher motivation. The concluding

efforts support that school PLCs provide influential forces linked to self-efficacy and

effective instruction. Additionally, Lick (2006) included an analysis also using qualitative

information to further glean defining factors of learning teams which are often PLCs. The

author determined that the potential of learning teams in collaborative structures is vast in

terms of effectively achieving common goals. However, the development of learning

teams must be intentional. An organization with these teams in place is more likely to

generate change and new learning lending itself to school improvement. PLCs show great

promise if the implementation process is well thought out.

Finally, Owen (2014) contributed a case study approach to address the

experiences of teachers in one Australian state. This researcher determined that there is

ample support and funding to individuals to attend external conferences then bring back

that learning to share with their school or team. However, the delivered learning from a

colleague may or may not be the profound objective of the training. There were identified

indicators that characterized that not all PLCs operate in the same phase of development,

however the author determined that as teachers survey various sources of data, co-assess

student work, and debate its quality, as well as learn from each other, innovation is

ongoing. In this case, the one that benefits the most is the student. The research further

determined that leadership support is crucial in the development of teacher effectiveness,

therefore it is imperative to explore the structure and organization of PLCs that are most

prominent to teacher development.

In this case, the qualitative methodology provided tools to study complex

phenomena within context (Baxter & Jack, 2008). Punch (2014) stated “Qualitative

research is empirical research where the data are not in the form of numbers” (p.3); and

the opposite is true of quantitative research, which is empirical research where the data

examined is that of numbers (Punch, 2014). Therefore, qualitative research is descriptive,

rather than predictive. This researcher sought to capture the words and phrases to respond

to each of the research questions. Baxter and Jack (2008) found that observing the action

in an authentic setting allows the desired phenomenon to transpire in a natural context

and a deeper understanding for the researcher’s conclusion may be formed. In this case,

PLCs were being conducted on site and the dedicated work is embedded into classroom

teaching as well as contributing to teacher development.

Yin (2014) indicated that qualitative studies are most commonly used to

understand complex phenomena, allowing the focus to be on a real world occurrence by

studying organizational processes and perspective. This researcher entered the natural

setting by meeting participants in the midst of an authentic working environment; the

school or classroom. The wealth of information provided in this narrative format captured

the magnitude and the significance of perception that a quantitative analysis would not

support or adequately, respond to the described phenomenon.

Exploring a contemporary phenomenon required the investment of this researcher

to seek perceptions of participants in the workplace. Yin (2014) determined that a case

study is most commonly used to understand complex phenomena, allowing the focus to

be on a real world occurrence by studying organizational processes and perspective. In

contrast, a quantitative approach uses statistical comparisons and numbers to infer results.

Therefore, a quantitative study would not have adequately represented the perception of

individuals as accurately as a qualitative format did (Yin, 2014).

The instrumentation used in this study was carefully considered and based on the

outcomes and experiences of prior qualitative studies. For instance, Owen (2014) used

school documents, interviews and focus groups to conduct a case study to capture the

PLC experiences of teachers in one Australian state. The results showed that not all PLCs

operated in the same phase of development; however, the author determined that as

teachers survey various sources of data, co-assess student work, and debate its quality, as

well as learn from each other, innovation is an ongoing process. This was an important

consideration in this current study, as it is often perceived that PLCs are not always

defined in the same way. Therefore, this researcher sought to explore this and use

interview data as well as archival data that included: school improvement plans and PLC

notes from organized meetings to further this understanding.

Next, Chong and Kong (2012) conducted a on PLCs four sources which included

written reflections, discussion sessions, observation notes, and group interviews. The

findings suggested that sustainable change is captured in self-beliefs. The research also

concluded that embedded professional development opportunities and time are necessary

components to support sustained change. Similarly, this researcher intended to capture

the words and phrases and elaborate on a story that elicited the perception of educators to

sustain improvement and development, therefore an interview and open-ended responses

were the selected instruments to share the story.

An additional case study explored by K. Stewart (2012) sought to determine if

PLC’s sustain student achievement. The researcher used a qualitative method with

interviews, the Learning Team Collaboration survey and observations. The findings for

sustaining student achievement included the following: “sustainable education leadership,

student-centered learning, shared values and vision, collective inquiry into best practices,

action oriented and a focus on results” (p.157). This instrumentation was significant to

the current study. Therefore, to determine the influence of student achievement as it

related to PLCs and teacher development, collecting interview data and two-part

questionnaire were selected.

Valentin (2014) designed a mixed methods study to investigate teachers’

perspective on math instruction, student learning, and achievement in a vertical

alignment. The researcher sought to interview teachers to better understand teacher

perspective. This current case study sought to explore perspectives on PLCs. Finally,

Bitterman’s (2010) multiple method study examined how three middle schools engaged

in professional learning communities to further develop effectively as science teachers.

The researcher used a teacher survey and interview data to elaborate on the concluding

themes. In this current case study, the researcher determined that using a similar

instrumentation would be justified to truly and accurately report the findings in a

qualitative form. Therefore, a similar two part questionnaire with open-ended responses

and a similar interview format were used in this study. Sources of data for this study

included semi-structured interviews (see Appendix D), a two-part questionnaire (see

Appendix D), and archival documents received from each school site were used to

answer the identified research questions.

Questionnaires. Bitterman’s (2010) questionnaire is aligned with the concepts of

DuFour’s recommendations of a PLC framework. Bitterman asked participants to report

how they felt about the implementation process of PLCs as a framework for supporting

school success. The questionnaire was used in this study as an initial data collection

instrument. Teachers were asked to describe the status of the PLCs at their school site.

Teachers were asked to define a PLC and how they would change their working

definition, what those main facilitators are, and the barriers and successes they have

experienced with the teaming structure. Questionnaires were provided to the schools

selected in the study. The participants had an opportunity to respond openly to the

questions. The data collected in the questionnaires was used to gather teacher perceptions

of the professional learning community model being implemented in one K-8 school

district located in the southwest.

Interviews. The researcher used Bitterman’s (2010) interview, with permission,

to glean in depth perspectives of teacher understandings and to find out how PLCs

facilitate professional growth and development. Bitterman (2010) stated that “questions

were constructed out of the characteristics that make up an effective professional learning

community… to capture an accurate and complete understanding of teacher

perceptions…” (p.47). Participants responded to the same questions during the interview

and the protocol established (Yin, 2014). Each participant’s interview was recorded,

transcribed and reviewed by the participant for accuracy.

The interview data was used to explain how professional learning communities in

one K-8 school district structured and implemented to show a primary focus on data-

based decisions to improve teaching and learning. Additionally, this information was

used to further explain how educators explain and describe how participation in

professional learning communities influenced their professional growth and instructional

effectiveness. Interviews were approximately 25-60 minutes and were delivered in an

open-ended format to glean in-depth understandings of the phenomenon. The interview

guide was composed of 10 questions that asked teachers to describe how collaborative

teams were implemented at the school site, how they view PLC’s as contributing to

collaborative teams and the most effective ways that teachers feel these PLCs contribute

to teaching and learning. A full copy of the interview guide is located in Appendix D of

this dissertation.

Archival data. Next, archival school district data was analyzed to determine how

the PLC structures aligned to Dufour’s six characteristics of PLCs. The archival data used

was provided by the school sites. This information included PLC meeting minutes from

the 3-5 school sites, each site’s continuous improvement plan, data from allthingsplc.com

as well as the Arizona Department of Education student achievement data which assisted

with explaining how professional learning communities in one K-8 school district are

structured and implemented to show a primary focus on data-based decisions to improve

teaching and learning.

The data collected was used to explain how professional learning communities in

one K-8 school district are structured and implemented and how the perceived

participation in professional learning communities influenced teacher professional growth

and development The researcher used all three sources in the triangulation analysis to

determine “trustworthiness, consistency, confirmability and applicability” (Golafshani,

2003; Noble & Smith, 2015) of this case study.

Summary

The concepts that are significant in professional learning communities (PLCs)

support the transformational learning theory and social cognitive theory, evidenced in the

alignment of reflective dialogue resulting in the way one thinks about delivering high

quality instruction and more importantly sustaining that way of thinking. As a 21st

century educator, transformation is essential when maintaining innovative practices that

encourage student thinking and teacher development. Adult learners must view learning

as autonomous and maintain reflective thinking continuously. “Autonomy refers to the

understanding, skills, and disposition necessary to become critically reflective of one’s

own assumptions and to engage effectively in discourse to validate one’s beliefs through

the experiences of others who share universal values” (Mezirow, 1997).

Additionally, the main themes included in this chapter are: identifying

components and attributes of PLCs. Hord (1997) described that during the 1980s,

the term “professional community of learners” evolved as the act of teachers and

leaders continuously seeking new learning. The author listed five attributes of

effective professional learning communities: supportive and shared leadership,

collective creativity, shared values and vision, supportive conditions, shared

personal practice. Professional learning communities redress teachers’ isolation,

create shared teacher responsibility for all students, and expose teachers to

instructional strategies or knowledge they did not have access to previously. Such

communities can be venues for JEPD (job embedded professional development)

as well as other forms of reform based professional development. (p.7)

Common practices are needed to support professional development and continuous

teacher development. Croft et al. (2010) highlighted that teachers benefit from multiple

opportunities to learn. The author noted that colleagues must rely on each other’s

expertise to dissect the current instructional delivery and further focus on individual

needs. Therefore, a focus on learning prompts the importance of transparency among

teachers that innately fostesr a learning forum which is meaningful to members. PLC

participants must focus and engage in discussions with colleagues from their team around

crucial questions (Dufour et al., 2008). More importantly, collaborative learning

structures involve teachers meeting on a regular basis to develop shared responsibility for

students’ success which includes following a cycle that begins with examining student

needs and identifying the teaching strategies and approaches to best support the student

(Chong & Kong, 2012).

Piercy (2010) contended that there are six conditions for necessary change to

occur: mutual goals, equality among participants, shared responsibility for participation

and decision making, shared responsibility for outcomes, sharing of resources, and

voluntary. Further, the author determined that if collaboration is expected, then shared

understandings must be developed. Collaboration can be an essential part of creating a

team of comfortable with transparency.

Stegall (2011) provided that the intent of professional development is to improve

the quality of classroom instruction. In an effort to maintain this competitive role,

educators are continuously seeking improved ways to impact student achievement.

Additionally, job embedded professional development was determined as the most

effective mode as is defined most accurately by Croft et al. (2010). The authors suggested

that job- embedded professional development is seen as most valuable when it takes

place in the classroom with a teacher’s students, data and current practice to take true

effect. This potentially occurs in the school before or after instruction, “away from

students and focused on issues of actual practice” (Croft et al., p.3). Examples included as

an embedded approach can sometimes include a mentor or instructional coach that

observes, interacts, or plans with the teacher. This type of approach fosters supportive

dialogue that elicits clarifications prior and after the lesson delivery. Furthermore, this

could also involve the teacher applying a new strategy based on an article from a

professional journal, blog, or attempting to journal about the experience throughout.

More significantly, the authors discussed in detail the dynamics of teams of teachers

engaging in interactive and result driven work. The closer the work is with current

students the more job embedded the approach is.

The studies of Peppers (2015) and McConnell et al. (2013) provided the key to

sustained PLCs which are the participants and the perceptions of teachers. Each study

revealed that the perception of teachers noted positive collegial relationships.

Additionally, opportunities were presented in PLCs that ensured an accountability to one

another. The expectation in these collaborative times presented an occasion to reflect

deeply about instruction and student learning to determine best practices. More

importantly the results in the analysis of each study infer a commitment to ongoing

learning and school improvement.

There is a wealth of literature and empirical studies supportive of PLCs and the

impact of such organizational structures which include teaching and learning, common

practices, collaboration and professional development. However, it still remained limited

in the area of teacher perceptions in K-8 schools. C. Stewart (2014) endorsed further

empirical research regarding PLCs as a school reform model and how to sustain their

effectiveness. Therefore, a gap exists was determined relative to PLC models and how

they extend the growth and development of teachers in K-8 schools. This study explored

how professional learning community models in one K-8 school were designed and

implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators perceived

participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional growth

and development. Chapter 3 will outline the methodology, research design, and

procedures required in this case study.

Chapter 3: Methodology

Introduction

According to Darling-Hammond and Richardson (2009), a new paradigm in

professional development for teachers includes job-embedded professional learning

communities. Most teachers are now collectively responsible for student outcomes;

therefore, traditional methods of working in isolation are no longer acceptable. As a

result, measures have been introduced in school systems designed to increase teacher

collaboration (Forte, 2010). This measure is often the implementation of a professional

learning community or referred to more frequently as a PLC. A PLC is described as a

small team of teachers committed to meeting regularly and working collaboratively on

shared goals in order to improve achievement for each individual student they serve.

According to Scott (2012), this collaborative opportunity could significantly impact

student success and teacher development in a positive way.

Based on the literature review, there is sufficient evidence to support the

promising efforts of a PLC (Romeo, 2012; Stegall, 2011). However, minimal research

existed to provide educators with information on how PLCs models are implemented

with a focus on teaching and learning and how teachers perceived participation in PLCs

influenced their professional growth and development (Valentin, 2014). Therefore,

further investigation was needed to determine what teachers do to engage in the growth

and develop an inquiry mindset needed to sustain both the PLC and professional learning.

This chapter will discuss the specific problem and research questions along with

the phenomenon being addressed in this study. Then the methodology, research design,

and population as well as the sample selection will be further explained. This chapter also

examines sources of data, validity and reliability of the data that will be collected. Next,

this chapter will also disclose how the data was collected and managed during the process

of this case study. The chapter will also address ethical considerations that were applied

to each participant as well as the limitations and delimitations of the study. Finally, the

chapter will present a concluding summary that focuses on the relevance of each point in

the chapter.

Statement of the Problem

The problem addressed in this study is that it was not known how professional

learning community models in one K-8 school were designed and implemented with a

focus on teaching and learning and how educators perceived participation in professional

learning communities’ influenced their professional growth and development. According

to Chong and Kong (2012), teachers must have time to collaborate, must have access to

embedded professional development and should use those two structures to focus on

improving teaching and learning. However, many teachers struggle to find time to

collaborate and balance their other job duties. Additionally, administrators often offer

inadequate guidance and expectations for collaboration, which impacts the quality of

collaboration. When PLCs function effectively and correctly, teachers have opportuntiies

to engage in meaningful dialog (Hord, 1997).

Teachers need both a growth mindset and structured framework for the PLC

process to work (Bitterman, 2010). However, more research was needed regarding how

teachers described the implementation PLC structures that improve teaching, learning

and also how they adopt that “inquiry” mindset (Bitterman, 2010; Valentin, 2014). This

study explored how the PLC structures in one K-8 school were implemented, if and how

they aligned to the intended mission of PLCs, and how teachers perceived this framework

allowed them to grow as professional instructors.

Phenomenon and Research Questions

This study explored how professional learning community models in one K-8

school are designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how

educators perceived participation in professional learning communities influenced their

professional growth and development. The research questions resulted in this cases study

are from the literature and researcher recommendations for further study. The questions

that guided this research are as follows:

R1: What are teacher perceptions of the professional learning community model

being implemented in one K-8 school district located in the southwest region

of the United States?

R2: How are professional learning communities in one K-8 school district in the

southwest region of the United States structured and implemented to show a

primary focus on data-based decisions to improve teaching and learning?

R3: How do K-8 educators explain and describe how participation in professional

learning communities influences their professional growth and instructional

effectiveness in the southwest region of the United States?

Bitterman (2010) provided a study of teacher perspectives on the impact of PLCs

on student learning in science, yet the results did not include K-8 teacher perspectives on

professional growth and development. This researcher obtained permission from

Bitterman to use, modify or add to the instruments from that study to further the

knowledge of PLCs. All teachers from the selected school sites, participating in PLCs

were recruited to complete Bitterman’s questionnaire in order to provide specific

recommendations to the problem being addressed. Additionally, the researcher conducted

interviews in order to capture in detail how teachers’ perceived how the PLC structure

being implemented aligns with three guiding questions and Dufour’s (2006) six PLC

characteristics:

1. Shared purpose, clear direction, collective commitments and timeline goals all aligned to student learning

2. Collaborative culture focused on teacher development

3. Inquiry into best practices and current reality

4. Action oriented with an emphasis on learning by doing

5. A commitment to continued improvement by assessing student learning

6. A results oriented approach.

Finally, archival documents were reviewed to explore the impact, which

specifically related to structuring and implementing PLCs with a focus on improved

teaching and learning, focused on student results. The archival school data showed the

progress and sustainment of growth in one school district over the course of the PLC

implementation process. The selected school district has been highlighted as a recognized

PLC model in the southwest (allthingsplc.com). The questionnaire was expected to

explain the perception of teachers as well as provide a more in-depth understanding of the

implemented structure of PLCs that support improved teaching and learning.

Furthermore, the interviews conducted captured the educators’ description of how

participation in PLCs influenced their professional growth and instructional effectiveness.

The archival data used was specifically selected to explore how PLCs are a characteristic

of improved teaching and learning that promoted high levels of student achievement.

Research Methodology

The qualitative methodology provides tools to study complex phenomena within

context (Baxter & Jack, 2008) and address the intent of what this researcher addressed.

Lavrakas and Roller (2015) shared that qualitative research is conducted to better

understand human condition about a research issue that quantitative data does not

address. Further, the uniqueness of qualitative data include gathering a story and sharing

perspectives rather than numerical explanations. This provided the researcher with a

descriptive account of what was being studied and captured in contextual situations.

Additionally, Punch (2014) stated “Qualitative research is empirical research where the

data are not in the form of numbers” (p.3); and the opposite is true of quantitative

research.

The essence of qualitative research hinges on gathering plausibility, rather than

truth from participants. Lavarkas and Roller (2015) described that research methodology

focused on qualitative format interprets meaning from multiple sources that include

variables such as the impact of the participant-researcher relationship. In this study, the

researcher sought to capture the words and phrases to respond to the research questions

and better explore the perception of teachers and sharing their story.

Baxter and Jack (2008) found that observing the action in an authentic setting

allows the desired phenomenon to transpire in a natural context and a deeper

understanding for the researcher’s conclusion may be formed. For example, Bitterman’s

(2010) study examined how three middle schools engaged in professional learning

communities to further develop effectively as science teachers. This research was an

analysis of implementation efforts to support teacher development in a middle school

setting, specifically content focused which delved into the importance of professional

development. The collected data determined that professional development aligned to the

team and continuous support with embedded effective teaching practices was significant,

and this was according to teachers who participated in the study. However, this

researcher also determined that a limitation that should be addressed was an elementary

study on PLCs. C. Stewart (2014) also contributed a qualitative effort that supported

transforming teaching and learning in a professional learning community, a methodology

aligned to exploring contextual situations in determining plausible results (Lavrakas &

Roller, 2015). The research by C. Stewart (2014) offered leverage needed to further the

effort in a qualitative format, ideally the work of a PLC that is centralized on school

improvement. Significantly, teacher perception on perceived professional development is

critical in order to describe and address the best framework that supports ongoing

dialogue immersed in effective instruction and student achievement.

Owens (2014) also developed a qualitative case study to describe the experiences

of teachers in one Australian state. This researcher discussed the efforts of external

conferences adding value to all staff, even those who did not attend a particular

conference. This case study described the ineffectiveness of such attempts in comparison

to embedded PLCs, where all are involved in the learning. There were identified

indicators that characterized that not all PLCs operate in the same phase of development,

however the author determined that as teachers survey various sources of data, co-assess

student work, and debate its quality as well as learn from each other, innovation is

ongoing. In this case, and the case of this researcher a qualitative format is justified to

further the work of PLCs.

In this case, PLCs were being conducted on site and the dedicated work was

embedded into classroom teaching as well as contributing to teacher development. If Yin

(2014) indicated that qualitative format is most often justified when research data is being

collected in a real world context, then a narrative format was a plausible approach. In

contrast, quantitative research focuses on data that are numeric in form and use of

statistical tests to describe or measure the relationship between variables (Golafshani,

2003). Therefore, a quantitative method was not selected for this study as the researcher

does not desire to measure variables related to implementation of PLCs, but rather sought

to explain how professional learning community models in one K-8 school are designed

and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators perceived

participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional growth

and development.

Research Design

Several factors were considered in the selection of a case study design for this

research design. First, the overarching research question focused on teacher perceptions

of the professional learning community model being implemented in one K-8 school

district located in the southwest region of the United States. Since case studies are

appropriate when the researcher wants to explore a current phenomenon in a natural

setting, using multiple sources of evidence, this design was well suited for the current

research (Baxter & Jack, 2008; Nobel & Smith, 2015; Yin, 2014). Further, to glean

detailed understanding of the question, a qualitative methodology was used to analyze the

experiences of participants in a more flexible research design (Lavrakas and Roller

(2015).

Case studies are often pertinent when the research questions seek to describe or

explain. Therefore, they would include “what,” “how” or “why” questions. Case studies

are also used to elucidate a specific situation through first-hand observation in a natural

setting, rather than secondary data. (Lavarakas & Roller, 2015; Yin, 2014). A qualitative

case study design was used for this study as the researcher wanted to explore three

separate entities (schools) at a specific time (Yin, 2014). The PLC structure was explored

in the context of three separate schools, with a definitive start and end.

However, other qualitative designs were considered for this study, but were

discarded. For example, the phenomenological approach is designed to explore a

common lived experience that a group of individuals have in common (Randies, 2012).

Since the teachers at this school do not have one specific experience in common,

phenomenology was discarded. Next, ethnographies are studies of cultures in an attempt

to make sense of the culture being observed. This methodology requires the researcher to

become situated in the environment to observe the interactions, actions and surroundings

of the group (Broussard, 2006). The researcher did not desire to study one specific

culture, so this design was also discarded. Also considered was grounded theory, which

are studies conducted with the goal of deriving a theory based on data collected (Mateos-

Moreno & Alcaraz-Iborra, 2013). The data collection in this study did not involve

formulating a theory as a viable method of answering the research questions. Therefore,

grounded theory was not selected.

As appropriate for a case study, multiple sources of data were gathered in the

process (Yin, 2014). The researcher worked with the target school district to identify at

least three schools willing to participate. The sample selected inlcuded at 30

questionnaire participants and no more than 16 teacher, interview participants: four

administrators, four primary teachers (K-2), four intermediate teachers (3-6), and four

middle-school teachers (7-8); in three K-8 public schools that had implemented PLC

structures. The selected teachers and staff had particpated in the PLC model transcribed

in the district’s protocol of particpation to include but not limited to: K-8 teachers that

teach various subjects or grade.

To collect the data, the researcher used Bitterman’s (2010) questionnaire (see

Appendix D) designed to gather teacher perspectives of PLCs, along with a modified

version of Bitterman’s (2010) interview guide designed to explore perspectives on

teacher perceptions of how PLCs facilitate teacher growth and development. The results

were used to support the answer to the guiding questions:

R1: What are teacher perceptions of the professional learning community model

being implemented in one K-8 school district located in the southwest region

of the United States?

R2: How are professional learning communities in one K-8 school district in the

southwest region of the United States structured and implemented to show a

primary focus on databased decisions to improve teaching and learning?

R3: How do K-8 educators explain and describe how participation in professional

learning communities influences their professional growth and instructional

effectiveness in the southwest region of the United States?

The purpose of Research Question 1 was to analyze educators’ perceptions of the

PLC implementation within the K-8 school district and if there was consistency and to

what degree does the districts PLC model impact teaching and learning. This question

was answered using the interview data and questionnaires completed by participants. The

second question allowed the researcher to further determine how teaching and learning

are the focus of the district’s PLC model, and if this is true, what data based decisions

were being made and more importantly what data supports drive the PLC’s effectiveness.

This question was addressed with the interview data, questionnaire and archived data,

which encompassed the school improvement plans, aligned with current and past data

provided by each school site as well as achievement data obtained from the

allthingsplc.com website.

The third question provided this researcher with perceptions resulted from

participating in PLCs. Further, the significance of this question captured the heart of

professional growth and instructional effectiveness as explained by the participants. This

question was answered by using the interview protocol and questionnaire completed by

the participants. All of which assisted with explaining how professional learning

communities in one K-8 school district are structured and implemented to show a primary

focus on data based decisions to improve teaching and learning.

Population and Sample Selection

The population for this study included all teachers, administrators and staff

members working in schools with active professional learning communities in the United

States. The setting for this study was one K-8 school district located in a southwestern

region of the United States. Thus, the study population consisted of all teachers,

administrators and staff in five targeted schools within this district who participated in

PLCs. The target district selected had implemented the PLC framework and was

recognized by “All Things PLC” (2015), a website supported by Solution Tree indicative

of ongoing research that identifies districts that have incorporated the working

foundations of PLCs.

A convenience sampling strategy was used to recruit no more than 14 public

educators, interview participants that included 12 teachers and 2 administrators within the

district and at least 30 questionnaire participants. A convenience sample was used by the

researcher due to participants being willing to take part in a study and were relatively

easy to access (Gravetter & Forzano, 2013). Marshal, Cardon, Podner and Fontenot

(2013) conducted a study of qualitative sample sizes and found that the concept of

saturation should ideally determine the sample size, but noted most multiple case studies

contained between two and eight cases. The sample size for this dissertation adheres to

these recommendations, with three cases, and at least 16 target participants.

The researcher obtained site authorization from the southwestern K-8 public

school district and worked with the target school district to identify at least three schools

willing to participate (see Appendix B). Once principals of schools had been identified

and gave consent for their campuses to participate in the study, the researcher sought to

schedule a meeting with each principal to explain the purpose of the study, the

requirements for participation and to recruit interested participants. Interview participants

signed hard copies of the informed consent forms (see Appendix E) during the initial

meeting and returned it to the researcher in person, prior to the start of the interview.

Participants’ anonymity remained protected, as codes for each school and each

participant were assigned rather than using real names. Additionally, all participants were

able to withdraw from the study at any time with no penalty. Participation requirements

included completing a questionnaire (consent was given upon the completion of the

online questionnaire) and potentially participating in a semi-structured interview, for a

total of approximately one hour of time. This case study offered an explanation of how

professional learning community models in one K-8 school were designed and

implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how educators perceived

participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional growth

and development.

Sources of Data

Sources of data for the study included semi-structured interviews (see Appendix

D), an open-ended, two-part questionnaire (see Appendix D), and archival documents to

address the problem relating to how PLC models in one K-8 school are designed and

implemented with a focus on teaching and learning and how educators perceived

participation influenced teacher development.

The questions that guided the research assisted with designing the interview

questions and questionnaire resulting in the following: Research Question 1: What are

teacher perceptions of the professional learning community model being implemented in

one K-8 school district located in the southwest? This question was answered using the

interview and questionnaire data. Research Question 2 stated: How are professional

learning communities in one K-8 school district structured and implemented to show a

primary focus on databased decisions to improve teaching and learning? This question

was answered with the interview data, questionnaire data and archived data which

included school improvement plans aligned with current and past data, PLC meeting

notes and student achievement data from allthingsplc.com (2015).

The third research question was: How do educators explain and describe how

participation in professional learning communities influences their professional growth

and instructional effectiveness? This question was also answered using the interview and

questionnaire responses.

Questionnaires. Bitterman’s (2010) questionnaire is aligned with the concepts of

DuFour’s recommendations of a PLC framework. Bitterman asked participants to report

how they felt about the implementation process of PLCs as a framework for supporting

school success. The questionnaire was used in this study as an initial data collection

instrument. Teachers were asked to describe the status of the PLCs at their school site.

Teachers were asked to define a PLC and how they might change their working

definition, what the main facilitators are and the barriers and successes they have

experienced with the teaming structure.

100

Questionnaires were provided to the 3-5 schools selected in the study. The

participants had an opportunity to respond openly to a portion of the questions in word

form. The data collected in the questionnaires was used to gather teacher perceptions of

the professional learning community model being implemented in one K-8 school district

located in the southwest.

Interviews. The researcher used Bitterman’s (2010) interview, with permission,

to collect in depth perspectives of teacher understandings and to find out how PLCs

facilitate professional growth and development. An interview is described as a mode of

verbal information derived from case study participants, which is usually conversational

in nature and guided by the researcher’s intent for specific findings (Yin, 2014). Further,

Bitterman (2010) stated, “questions were constructed out of the characteristics that make

up an effective professional learning community… to capture an accurate and complete

understanding of teacher perceptions…” (p.47). Participants respond to the same

questions during the interview and a protocol was established (Yin, 2014). Each

participant’s interview was recorded, transcribed and reviewed by the participant for

accuracy. Interview responses were used to explain the perceived understandings of

participating in a professional learning community and the influences on teacher

professional growth and development.

Further, the interview data was used to explain how professional learning

communities in one K-8 school district structured and implemented to show a primary

focus on data-based decisions to improve teaching and learning. Additionally, this

information was used to explain how educators explain and describe how participation in

professional learning communities influenced their professional growth and instructional

101

effectiveness. Interviews were set to be approximately 45-60 minutes and were an open-

ended format to develop understandings of the phenomenon being studied.

The interview guide had 10 questions that asked teachers to describe how

collaborative teams are implemented at his/her school site, how they view PLC’s as

contributing to collaborative teams and the most effective ways that teachers feel PLCs

contribute to teaching and learning. A full copy of the interview guide is located in

Appendix D of this dissertation.

Archival data. Next, archival school district data was analyzed to determine how

the PLC structures align to Dufour’s six characteristics of PLCs. The archival data was

mostly provided by the district, school sites. This information included: PLC meeting

minutes from the 3-5 school sites, each school’s improvement plan, data from

allthingsplc.com (2015), as well as the Arizona Department of Education student

achievement data which assisted with explaining how professional learning communities

in one K-8 school district are structured and implemented to show a primary focus on

data-based decisions to improve teaching and learning.

The data collected were used to explain how professional learning communities in

one K-8 school district are structured and implemented and the perceived participation in

professional learning communities influenced teacher professional growth and

development. The researcher used the questionnaires, semi-structured interviews and

archival data in the triangulation analysis to determine “trustworthiness, consistency,

confirmability and applicability” (Golafshani, 2003; Noble & Smith, 2015) of this case

study.

102

Validity

Validity in a qualitative study refers to how the results of the study are

transferable from the sample to the population and the rigor with which the study was

conducted with regard to the instruments used. Further, validity processes include:

collection of multiple sources of data, triangulation, member checking, quasi-statistic,

review of data analysis by others, expert panel review of developed instruments and/or

practicing interviews and observations.

According to Guion (2002), validity in a qualitative study is determined when the

results of the study are true and certain. In addition, the definition of “true” is accurately

reporting the situation and “certain” meaning that there are no doubts that the work is

supported by evidence. The researcher described the sample in clear and thorough terms

to ensure comparison with other samples. Additionally, validity in qualitative studies

entails the use of multiple sources of data. For the purposes of this study, the researcher

provided three sources of data which included the electronic questionnaire collected from

at least 30 participants, interviews of at least 16 educators along with the archival data

sources to provide a convergence of different sources. Noble and Smith (2015) stated that

qualitative research validity is reliant on “trustworthiness” of findings, based on the view

of the participants. Therefore, the researcher used member checking to ensure the

transcripts accurately represented each participant’s thoughts. Finally, the researcher

convened an expert panel to review the interview questions for clarity and to ensure the

participants would understand what was being asked.

Reliability

Reliability refers to the quality and consistency of data collected in a study.

Detailed data, collected through a clearly described and documented plan, enhances the

103

reliability of the study’s findings (Saldana, 2013; Yin, 2014). For this study, the

researcher used a detailed data collection process, documented in this chapter to include

multiple sources of evidence: individual interviews, an electronic questionnaire, and

archival data (Saldana, 2013; Yin, 2014). Through the use of this clearly documented

method, other researchers could follow the sequence of this data collection process.

Additionally, the same interview guide and questionnaire was used with all participants,

to ensure that similar data was collected.

Yin (2014) suggested that the use of a detailed interview with an interview

protocol ensures that each participant is provided the same opportunity to respond to the

same question. The researcher adhered to this suggestion. In addition, the researcher

included archival data consisting of PLC meeting notes, continuous improvement plans,

achievement data from allthingsplc.com and Arizona Department of Education

achievement data that formulated conclusions and answered the research questions in

explicit detail. Thus, data triangulation involved the consideration of these different

sources (Guion, 2002) in determining the results. Interviews from various stakeholders

provided an array of understandings from several perspectives. Golafshani (2003)

included that data triangulation was an important methodological consideration which is

was used to control bias and established valid understandings in this research conclusion.

These measures were used and considered to produce a reliable study.

Data Collection and Management

Data collection began once IRB permission was received from Grand Canyon

University (see Appendix A). The researcher obtained site authorization from one

southwestern K-8 public school district. The researcher worked with district personnel to

identify at least five schools willing to participate (see Appendix B).

104

Lavrakas and Roller (2015) found that collecting qualitative data relies on the

researcher-as-instrument as wells at the participant-researcher relationship. If this was

true, then it would be significant for this researcher to maintain a level of respect and

responsibility to each participant throughout participation. According to Yin (2014)

preparing to collect data for a case study requires the researcher to adhere to the

following: “ask good questions, listen, be adaptive, have a firm grasp of the issue being

studied, and know how to avoid bias and bring high ethical standards to the research.” (p.

70).

To ensure that this case study produced reliability and truth value, the researcher

used a sample size of at least 16 interview participants and 30 questionnaire participants.

The sample selected included no more than: four administrators, four primary teachers

(K-2), four intermediate teachers (3-6), and four middle-school teachers (7-8) in three to

five southwest K-8 public schools that had implemented PLC structures ensuring that

familiarity of concepts that are present in the organizational framework were accessible.

Next, at least 30 particpants completed the questionaire in the selected school

sites. Once principals had personally consented to having their campuses participate in

the study, the researcher scheduled a meeting at each school site to share the purpose of

the study, requirements for participation and to recruit volunteers for the questionnaire

and interview. According to Yin (2014), the importance of using a structured

questionnaire was to provide relevant information that could be referred to over and over

again.

Once individuals had voiced interest to participate in the interview, the researcher

had them sign an informed consent form prior to the start of the interview (see Appendix

E). This opportunity included the researcher personally meeting with each individual at

105

the school site and explained the purpose of the study, provided the consent form as well

as provided participant’s the right to withdraw from the study throughout the four to six

weeks. This delivered an opportunity to gain trust, openness and produce a non-

threatening environment to collect the data more accurately (Yin, 2014).

The questionnaire was electronically accessible to at least 60 teachers using

SurveyMonkey. Each participant’s school email address was used as the point of

contact. The participants were asked to return the questionnaire within five days of

receiving the item. It was the researcher’s intent to collect at least thirty completed

questionnaires to assemble reliability and a non-biased result in determining the answer

to the problem. The questionnaires were then retrieved using the data collection source

provided by SurveyMonkey.

For the interview portion, the researcher intitially sought out two, eduator

volunteers not within the chosen district to practice the interview prior to the start of the

study. This is suggested as an addition of conducting a “pilot study” or practice session

(Yin, 2014). Further, the researcher established clarity of potential questions or obstacles

before the onset of the interview portion and ulitmately reserved time. The researcher

requested at least eight educators from each school to particpate in the interview portion.

The interviews were scheduled with at least a two week notice to the participants

or what was more convenient to the participant. Each school site was asked to provide a

private area to ensure privacy to the both the researcher and participant. The interviews

were recorded, transcribed and emailed to each participant for review and confirmation.

The researcher intended to interview each participant for forty-five to sixty minutes.

Finally, the archival data included collected PLC meeting notes from each school

site provided by the principals or designated staff member. The meeting notes were

106

collected for a minimum of four weeks. School improvement plans were provided to the

researcher from the principal or school web site. The achievement data of each school

site was retrieved from the Arizona Department of Education and the PLC website as

provided as public knowledge (Arizona Department of Education, 2015; All Things PLC,

2015).

The selected coding process consisted of axial coding that focused on the four

dimensions of context, strategy, processes, and consequences. The triangulation of the

data consisted of reviewing all elements of the research and creating an array to organize

the narrative data in cells, organized by question (Insites, 2007 & Yin, 2012). The

research data was collected within four to six weeks and continues to be stored on this

researcher’s secured laptop. The collected data will be kept secured for a period of three

years after which it will be destroyed.

Data Analysis Procedures

In this qualitative case study, the researcher addressed the three defined research

questions by asking selected participants to reflect and elaborate on their perception of

participation in a professional learning community. More specifically, the questions were

intended to glean perceived influences on teacher professional growth and development.

The first research question was: What are teacher perceptions of the professional learning

community model being implemented in one K-8 school district located in the southwest?

This question was answered by using the interview items and questionnaire items.

Research Question 2 stated, how are professional learning communities in one K-

8 school district structured and implemented to show a primary focus on data-based

decisions to improve teaching and learning? This question provided an answer with the

interview items, questionnaire items and archived data that included school improvement

107

plans aligned with current and past data, meeting notes and achievement data. The third

research question was: How do educators explain and describe how participation in

professional learning communities influences their professional growth and instructional

effectiveness? This question was answered by using the interview items and

questionnaire items.

The results of the questionnaire were transferred into an excel document to

prepare for analysis. After each interview, the recordings were transcribed with a draft

transcript and provided to the participant to review for accuracy (Yin, 2014); this is often

referred to as member checking and is considered a means of triangulation. The archival

documents that were collected and prepared for analysis were organized into a Word

document. Pseudonyms were also signed to participants along with a coding system such

as I-Sally, Q-Sally, to ensure the anonymity of participants, but to also connect each

person to their different sources of data.

Hatch’s (2002) strategy was used to analyze the data. This process consisted of

several steps. First, the researcher read the data several times to get a sense of what was

included and identify the parts that would be the “analyzable parts” (Hatch, 2002, p. 163).

Then, domains or categories were developed based on identified relationships within the

“analyzable parts” (Hatch, 2002, p. 163). Then, codes were assigned to these groups,

followed by reading the data again to ensure the code names were accurate and to keep

notes of the relationships in the data. Then, the researcher confirmed code names and

sought specific examples in the data that supported these names and completed the data

analysis using the code names. Then, the researcher identified themes across codes or

domains and created an outline of those relationships, within and across domains (codes).

108

Finally, the researcher selected excerpts from the data that supported or provided

examples of the codes in the outline.

The coding process was instrumental in the analysis to report the concepts that

were profound in the collected data. Further, the data was triangulated to strengthen the

trustworthiness of this case study and to provide an account of the perception of the

participants (Noble, 2015; Yin, 2014). Data triangulation included the use of different

sources or groups to determine insight on perceptions. The task ideally reveals the similar

concepts among the various data or groups (Guion, 2002). Noble (2015) recommended

that building a trustworthy account for credible findings in a qualitative study includes

the following strategies: account for personal biases that may be influential of the

findings, ensure that interpretations of data are consistent and transparent, include rich

descriptions of participant’s accounts to support findings and establish a case seeking out

similarities and differences across accounts to ensure a difference in perspective.

Finally, the author determined that data triangulation supports a more

comprehensive set of findings. Thus, the researcher considered this and identified

patterns and themes across all three sources of data in order to triangulate findings. This

process of coding the data, along with triangulation addressed the research questions,

which focused on how teachers perceived collaboration. The results of this case study

concluded with a thick, rich description of the phenomenon, as is appropriate for a case

study (Yin, 2014).

Ethical Considerations

Grand Canyon University selected an IRB that approved the project for this study

(see Appendix A). IRB aligns goals to the Belmont report which include the protection of

human subjects, to develop and maintain ethical research, to ensure that researchers are

109

qualified and to ultimately add value to current research (GCU, 2014). This researcher

ensured that personal bias were not included in the findings. According to Yin (2014),

“avoiding bias is but one facet of a broader set of values that falls under the rubric of

research ethics” (p.76). The inclusion of the following were also recommended by the

author to produce credible research: “having responsibility to scholarship, such as neither

plagiarizing nor falsifying information, as well as being honest, avoiding deception, and

accepting responsibility for ones’ own work” (Yin, 2014, p, 76). Further, particpants

were provided the following protection by giving informed consent, avoiding the use of

any deception, protecting confidentiality so that they are not unwillingly put into any

undesirable position and equitable selection (Yin, 2014).

In accordance with The Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI

Program, 2014), the defining factors of informed consent “is largely derived from the

principle of autonomy.” The participants were informed of the process throughout the

study and had the opportunity to accept or decline participation without fear of negative

consequences. A written consent and a signature was also collected at each interview.

The district, school, and participants were informed of the following:

1. The purpose of the research

2. The participant’s rights, including the freedom to discontinue participation at any time

3. How the subject's privacy and anonymity will be protected

4. Whether there is compensation for participating

5. Who the contact persons are if a subject has questions or concerns about the research (CITI Program, 2014).

Participants were specifically informed of the following:

 Anonymity: Anonymity will occur by the researcher ensuring that names of participants are not included in any production of the written work.

110

 Privacy: Additional precautions shall be taken by securing a private room for the interview and an anonymous survey.

Strategies to prevent coercion included that the bias opinions of participants and the

researcher were not included in the conclusion of this case study. Potential conflicts of

interest were prevented by interviewing a sample of staff from different school sites at

various grade levels.

Finally, the data collected will be kept for 3 years, after which time it will be

destroyed. The information shall be stored in a locked filing cabinet and on a removable

drive. The interview data and questionnaires do not include the names of the participants

and the collected information is anonymous. The potential concerning factors that were

included were natural events that could have prevented participants from consistently

participating, specific school factors preventing participation during common release time

and the extent to which the school staff willingly participated.

Limitations and Delimitations

The implications of such a study could potentially be misguided by previously

embedded philosophies on PLCs and the non-characteristics of PLCs by the participants

that participated in the study. For instance, “teachers collaborate to analyze their practice

and discuss new strategies and tactics, testing them in the classroom and reporting the

results to each other” must be a shared belief within the team (Croft, Coggshall, Dolan,

Powers and Killion, 2010, p. 7). This idea of collaboration with intention, is a rich

conversation and learning opportunity if embraced in an open mindset, but may not have

been present for all participants.

Additionally, some participants in very limited cases, were hesitant to disclose an

honest perception related to collaborative efforts; “school leaders must foster an

111

organizational culture of continuous learning and teamwork through venues such as

professional learning communities and professional norms, including, for example, an

open door policy for observing each other’s classroom” (Croft, Coggshall, Dolan, Powers

& Killion, 2010, p. 8). Next, a time commitment “to align and develop capacity to create

the results its members desire to achieve” (Lick, 2006, p. 92), is a significant limitation of

this case study, in this case participants were asked to contribute planning time to

participate in this study.

Summary

This chapter presents the specifics of a qualitative case study. The literature

review offers substantial evidence to support that there are characteristics relative to

teacher development that are profound in professional learning communities. Therefore, a

more descriptive approach on how professional learning community models in one K-8

school are designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning, and how

educators perceived participation in professional learning communities influenced their

professional growth and development was vital.

The chapter begins by recognizing that recent reforms in education and calls for

increased accountability have triggered administrators and teachers to implement a range

of programs and strategies designed to improve student achievement. One point among

many stakeholders is that teachers can no longer work in isolation if the staff is

collectively responsible for the learning of all students. Therefore, measures have been

introduced in school systems designed to increase teacher collaboration. One of these

valid structures is a PLC, which Darling-Hammond and Richardson (2009) publicized as

the new standard of professional development. Gray, Mitchell and Turner (2014)

112

contributed that trust, collective efficacy enable school structures to elicit keen

characteristics to an environment that promotes the success of PLCs.

A unique opportunity to develop a deep understanding of the phenomenon

presented in the organizational framework of PLCs was present in this case study.

Furthermore, to gain understanding of the questions the researcher determined that a

qualitative format analyzing the experiences of participants in an authentic manner was

justified.

The research questions that guided this study were:

R1: What are teacher perceptions of the professional learning community model

being implemented in one K-8 school district located in the southwest region

of the United States?

R2: How are professional learning communities in one K-8 school district in the

southwest region of the United States structured and implemented to show a

primary focus on databased decisions to improve teaching and learning?

R3: How do K-8 educators explain and describe how participation in professional

learning communities influences their professional growth and instructional

effectiveness in the southwest region of the United States?

Yin (2014) stated “a case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a

contemporary phenomenon (the case) in depth and within a real world context” (p.16). A

case study is an approach to research that explores a phenomenon within a context using

an array of data sources (Baxter & Jack, 2008; Nobel & Smith, 2015). Further, the

recommendations of previous research presented findings in limited format that

suggested the extension of using additional methods to provide a more thorough

113

investigation of the phenomenon embedded into the PLC concept be applied (Chong &

Kong, 2012).

Following the data analysis, the researcher will report the findings of this study in

explanatory format in the upcoming chapter, Chapter 4. In this chapter, the researcher

will share the interview transcripts outlining similar responses. The questionnaire

responses are presented in an organized format along with the integration of the archival

data. The discussion is focused on the perceptions of teachers relative to professional

growth and the organizational structures within a professional learning community that

are most prominent to support teaching and learning.

114

Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Results

Introduction

This case study explored how professional learning community models in one K-

8 school were designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning and how

educators perceived participation in professional learning communities (PLC) influenced

their professional growth and development. A qualitative methodology was used for this

study, as the researcher investigated a multifaceted phenomenon in the context of a

school setting (Baxter & Jack, 2008). Qualitative research was conducted to better

understand human condition about a research issue that quantitative data does not address

(Lavrakas & Roller, 2015) and in this case, an opportunity to gather a story and share

perspectives, rather than numerical representation was provided.

The study population consisted of teachers, administrators, and staff in five

schools within this district, who also participated in PLCs. Three research questions

guided the research and purpose for data collection. The first research question focused

on teacher perceptions of the professional learning community model being implemented

in one K-8 school district located in the southwest region of the United States. The

second question addressed how professional learning communities in the district were

structured and implemented to show a primary focus on data-based decisions to improve

teaching and learning. The third question asked educators to explain and describe how

participation in professional learning communities influenced their professional growth

and instructional effectiveness.

The researcher used multiple sources of evidence, including semi-structured

interviews, an electronic questionnaire, and archival data. The archival data provided by

building administration and consisted of a continuous improvement plan, PLC meeting

115

notes and current student achievement data. The researcher also sought archival

achievement from the AZ MERIT data located on the Arizona Department of Education

website as well as noted information on this school district provided by Allthingsplc.com.

This chapter supports the questions and responses for each research question and

the relatable responses being explored in the case study. Furthermore, this chapter

outlines the purpose of the study and the designated research methodology, provides a

summary of the qualitative questions and data analysis used to conclude findings. The

researcher collected, coded, and thematically analyzed the survey, questionnaire and

interview data. The results of the study included in this chapter include a description of

the process, a summary of the data, the results of the study and a summary of the

findings.

Descriptive Data

The focus of the study was on teacher perceptions of the professional learning

community model being implemented in one K-8 school district located in the southwest

region of the United States. Three different sources of data were gathered, which

included individual interviews, a two-part questionnaire and artifacts from three schools.

Fourteen participants completed semi-structured interviews. This source totaled 63

transcribed, single-spaced pages (see Appendix I). Forty-one participants from the five

schools completed Part 1 of the questionnaire, and 31 participants completed both Part

1and Part 2 of the questionnaire (see Appendix H). Three individual school continuous

improvement plans along with PLC meeting minutes from one grade level were provided

by three of the selected schools used as archival data in this study.

All participants who completed the questionnaire were afforded an opportunity to

skip questions if they chose to do so. Ten participants chose not to complete Part 2 or

116

indicate personal information. Therefore, demographic data from 31 participants was

included in the descriptive data.

Teachers identified their job role, number of years in their current school and

number of years in the current subject area or grade level. Two participants identified

their job role as instructional support specialist (ISS) were referred as teachers for data

purposes. All participants specified that they assumed the role of a teacher, but not all

participants indicated the grade level. Fifteen participants indicated that they had been at

the school site for 1-4 years, 12 participants indicated that they had been part of the

school site for 5-10 years, and four particpants indicated that they had been at the school

site for more than 10 years. Table 1 demonstrates the demographic information

summarizing that portion for the questionnaire participants.

Fifteen participants indicated that theyhad been teaching the content or grade

level for 1-4 years, 11 participants indicated that they had been in the same content area

or grade level for 5-10 years, and five participants responded that they had been in the

same content area or grade level from more than 10 years. Table 2 represents how

questionnaire participants responded when asked how long they had been teaching the

current subject or grade level.

Table 1

Questionnaire Participant of Years Taught at Current School

1-4 years 5-10 years 10+ years

15 12 4

117

Table 2

Questionnaire Participant of Years Teaching Current Subject or Grade Level

1-4 years 5-10 years 10+ years

15 11 5

Questionnaire descriptive statistics. After AQR and IRB approval, the

questionnaire was sent to building principals to forward to staff along with an explanation

of the purpose of the study and participation guidelines. The questionnaire consisted of

two parts. Part 1 included 36 Likert scale questions on a 5-point scale, asking participants

to respond with strongly agree to strongly disagree. Part 2 was designed to generate

written responses in an open-ended format.

The researcher prepared the questionnaire data in two parts Items 1-36 were

Likert scaled items and items 37-41, open-ended responses. The original rating scale

noted that strongly agree was worth a scaled score of 1; however, the researcher chose to

reformate the formula in Excel with strongly agree valued at a scaled score of 5. Table 3

represents the first part of this process.

A copy of the full set of questionnaire responses and mean scores is located in

Appendix G. For ease of reporting, the highest and lowest scores are presented in this

section. All mean scores of 4.5 or higher and 3.5 or lower are represented in Table 3. The

highest scoring items included statements where teachers felt they took collective

responsibility for student learning, created environments where students felt comfortable

learning, teachers routinely learned from one another, teacher routinely collect data to

evaluate student learning, have high expectations for student learning and take

responsibility for their own learning as educators. The lowest scoring items indicated that

teachers felt they did not have enough time dedicated to classroom observations, did not

118

receive enough training on how to work and learn in teams, felt they did not have enough

dedicated time to be mentored in a new role, and did not feel they routinely engaged in

team teaching.

Table 3

Rating Average for Questionnaire Part 1

Item Strongly

Agree

Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Rating

Average

Response

Count

1. Take collective

responsibility for pupil

learning.

23 18 0 0 0 4.56 41

3. Create conditions

for pupils to feel

confident to learn.

29 10 1 1 0 4.63 41

4. Learn together with

colleagues.

21 19 0 1 0 4.46 41

8. Routinely collect,

analyze and use data

and evidence to

inform my practice.

24 13 4 0 0 4.49 41

9. Have high

expectation of

students.

32 9 0 0 0 4.78 41

26. Take responsibility

for my own

professional learning.

20 21 0 0 0 4.49 41

11. Have time

dedicated to classroom

observations.

6 20 5 9 1 3.51 41

21. Receive training on

how to work and learn

in teams.

5 16 9 11 0 3.37 41

28. Have dedicated

time to be mentored in

a new role.

4 12 15 8 2 3.20 41

29. Engage in team

teaching.

1 14 13 12 1 3.05 41

Next, the researcher determined responses indicating the percentage of

participants agreeing with the item statements; this conversion to percentile demonstrates

the response count in relation to the participants in this portion of the study. The response

counts for items 1-36, with the exception of items 2, 30, 31 and 36, which received 41

responses, is included in Appendix G.

119

Part 2 of the questionnaire was given to participants in an open-ended format.

Item 37 asked participants to identify the PLC they are currently part of, and item 38

asked participants to define PLCs. Three items asked the participant to elaborate on

perceptions; these are identified as items 39-41. Item 39 asked the participants to describe

how useful PLC’s are to his/her school and students, item 40 asked what the main

facilitators are in order to sustain a PLC, and item 41 asked respondents to identify

challenges of sustaining a PLC. Finally, item 42 asked participants about themselves that

provided specific information on position, number of years at the school site and number

of years teaching the specific grade level or content.

Figure 1 outlines results of item 37, or the percentage of teachers who reported

their school was in the developmental stages of establishing PLCs, starting the journey of

establishing PLCs, or working to re-establish what had once been a PLC. 37 teachers

responded to this question. Over half (59.5%) of the teachers reported their school was in

the initial stages of developing PLCs, about 11% noted their school was on the journey to

establishing PLCs, and about 30% of the teachers noted their school was working to re-

establish PLCs.

Figure 1. Teacher perceptions of school PLC model

120

Item 38 asked teachers to define PLCs. The teachers were presented with

Bitterman’s (2010) definition of a PLC, “Usually a school attempting to develop a

professional learning community is set up so that teachers work in collaborative teams to

develop, plan, and implement lessons that are innovative and promote student learning"

(p.98). Teachers were asked whether they would change the definition or to provide

additional thoughts as to their own definitions of a PLC. The responses indicated a

support of the PLC concept. Table 5 summarizes the working definition of a PLC from

the educators’ perspectives.

Table 4

Participant Definitions of PLCs

Participant Summaries

 Seven participants indicated they agreed with the definition as written.

 Three participants stated they did not understand what the question was asking.

 “Working together as a team to be collectively accountable for student learning.”

 “Our teachers work together as a team to best meet the needs of our students.”

 “A team of teachers that works together on daily basis that is continually changing to better meant the needs of our students.”

 “I believe a PLC is a community of professionals working together to achieve a common goal. In our school our goal is to see every student succeed. We work together every day to achieve our

goals.”

 “Too much to do, not enough time.”

 “Professionally committed to ongoing improvement.”

 “I think a PLC is a group of people that come together to work towards making sure that all students are successful.”

 “A PLC is a community of professionals who work together to achieve a common goal.

 “Teams working together, teachers having a say in what happens in the school, taking time to listen to new ideas.”

 “We had a lot of changes in our leadership in recent years. We are working to reestablish what we had as a PLC before the change.”

 “Working to rebuild a PLC that has been lost over time. “

 “Working together as a team to be collectively accountable for student learning.”

Item 39 of the questionnaire asked teachers how useful the idea of a PLC is. Respondents

shared information that allowed the researcher to better comprehend the perception of the

121

teachers and identify the usefulness of a PLC structure. Of the total responses, all but

three teachers indicated they felt the facilitation of PLCs were useful or extremely useful;

two indicated neutral perspectives, with comments related to they work only if the staff

understands the philosophy, and that they “take time” to develop. Only one teacher felt

PLCs were not useful. Table 5 shows those responses

122

Table 5

Participant Perceptions of PLCs Usefulness

Sample Responses:

How useful is the idea of a professional learning community for your school and pupils?

 “It has had a profound impact.”

 “I think PLC is very useful because we keep our students in mind with everything we do.”

 “Not as useful since not everyone knows the philosophy of PLC.”

 “Essential, less work with more hands/minds.”

 “I think it is very useful and find it successful on my grade level because we have time to share ideas and discuss what is best for our students on a weekly basis.”

 “I think it is useful, but it is usually focused on elements besides first best instruction, which means are students do worse than if that time was devoted to refining how we present

information and concepts to our students.”

 “Extremely useful. We have 2 days per week that is set aside to work alongside our grade level team.”

 “Very useful.”

 “It is useful as long as you have a team that is strong in their professional knowledge.”

 “It is extremely useful. I can't imagine teaching without a PLC. The knowledge I have gained from PLC meetings with my grade level team, my school teams, and teams from other schools is

irreplaceable.”

 “A PLC is very useful for the students at my school. Our students provide a challenging and varied range of what they bring to the table. It makes it so much easier when teachers work

together to create lessons, but also to group students based on their needs for intervention. Trying

to do all of this on my own would be overwhelming and daunting. Being able to share the

workload and ideas makes it easier to address the needs of every student.”

 “I think we try to be a good PLC school and we hear all the time that "you're already doing what a PLC is" but I don't really think the teachers understand all that is involved. Just by making it

mandatory to meet during our preps does not make us a PLC. I'm convinced, especially in the K-

2 sections of our school, the kids have no idea what it means to be a PLC.”

 “It is extremely useful because there is always, and should always be, room for improvement.”

 “I would not be half the teacher I am today if I did not work in a PLC. Because teachers are given time to communicate in a group about plans and strategies, I was able to learn best

practices than I did from student teaching.”

 “I would say it is highly useful. It is data-driven and a community working towards a common goal. As a single member in a professional learning community I don't feel alone and as if all of

the weight is on my shoulders. It gives a sense of security and support.”

 “I feel that a plc is very beneficial to a school and its students when implemented properly. When all voices are heard and time to meet and grow is respected.”

 “It is essential for the all-around success of our school.”

 “It does not seem to be useful. We are driven more by decisions made by individuals rather than community discussion. We talk about how we are implementing the ideas of others rather than if

these ideas are actually working for students.”

 “When I was a part of a very cohesive PLC it was great. We were more of a community than coworkers.”

 “Very useful, the students become ours instead of mine! It brings everyone on the same page.”

123

Table 6 outlines the responses to Item 40. This item asked participants to identify

the main facilitators of becoming a PLC and sustaining a PLC. Participants provided

insightful information that further supported the phenomenon of a sustainable PLC. Most

of the comments centered on terms reflecting the need for buy-in, working as a team,

focusing on data to inform instruction, and time for collaboration.

Table 6

Questionnaire Item 40 Responses

40. What do you see as the main facilitators to becoming a professional learning community and

sustaining a professional learning community?

 “Professional Development, Staff buy-in, Time given by admin.”

 “Consistency in our curriculum so we can become experts on what to teach.”

 “Working/planning as a team, genuine relationships. Discussing student data, what is working what’s not. How can we change things that aren't working so that they are best for the student.”

 “It needs to be focused on things teachers actually think are valuable to teaching their students and there needs to be time to do it without just adding it as one more thing for teachers to fit in

along with everything else.

 “Working together as a team, talking about student progress on a regular basis, and planning together as a team to better accommodate all our student.”

 “Team time. We must have dedicated time to meet with our PLC teams to ensure that we can analyze data and answer the 4 key questions.”

 “The main facilitators are a collective and positive teacher buy-in as well a constant yet changing meaningful purpose.”

 “I think the biggest factor is "buy in.” Everyone has to be part of the process in order for it to work effectively. In sustaining a PLC I think there should be ongoing training for new staff and

even "refresher" courses for everyone.”

 “The whole staff needs to have the buy in that it really works and team leaders and admin need to work collectively to make sure everyone understands what it at stake and how to get the most

out of a PLC”

 “Effective collaboration, working norms, high expectations, vision, assessment, and commitment.”

 “The main facilitators would be the Administrators but every member of the school is a stakeholder therefore collaboration is key to maintaining momentum toward our goals.”

 “I think that the teachers and the school community need to buy into the idea. For some people it is a shift in how they have always done things and it can be hard for some to collaborate with

others. A strong team of people that want to collaborate and share makes it sustainable”

 “Collaboration, time for collaboration and less focus on the numbers and more focus on the wellbeing of students and teachers.”

 “Conversations that center on methods for sustaining and improving student learning.”

Table 7 corresponds with the responses to item 41. This item asked participants to

discuss the challenges of becoming a PLC and sustaining a PLC. Participants provided

124

the information that noted the challenges perceived by teachers participating in PLCs

adding to the sustainability factor. Most barriers were identified with comments such as

lack of time, teacher turnover, learning curve for new teachers, and consistent

participation and agreement among team members.

Table 7

Questionnaire Item 41 Responses

41. What do you see as a challenge to becoming a professional learning community and sustaining

a professional learning community?

 New teachers-might not have the training/experience of plc.” “Finding the time to do it and doing it with fidelity.”

 “Making sure everyone can agree and be on the same page the majority of the time.”

 “There needs to be time to do it without just adding it as one more thing for teachers to fit in along with everything else. It is frustrating to sit in a PLC meeting when you know you will then have to

spend extra hours after school to prepare for giving your students first best instruction.”

 “People that are unwilling to adjust their old habits and create new ones that will work better for their co-workers and students.” “Not all members value the time spent together for collaboration.”

“Time to reestablish all those norms.”

 “We focus too much on finding out where the students are at rather than focus on producing better lessons.” “One person making decisions and teachers not having a voice in decisions that involve

them and the students. ”A lot of change. Changes in leadership and staffing.”

 “The 'Hogs and Logs'. When one person takes over the entire over meeting and doesn't allow others to share can ruin a PLC. On the flip side to that, those that sit like a log and don't contribute at all.

This type of negative attitude can really affect a team.”

 “The complete curriculum change we experienced this year had both negative and positive impacts. When teachers are overwhelmed with too many changes at once, they sometimes function alone

instead of pulling together to work as a team. Gradually as we surface from so much change, we

started collaborating and finding a way to work together again.”

 “A big challenge is not everyone participating in the process. It slows down the progress and hampers the workload. A challenge to sustaining the PLC is not ensuring everyone is following the

PLC process. Trainings and refresher courses could help with that.”

 “Teacher morale is a challenge due to, changing curriculums or no curriculum, implementation of a given practice without follow through and reliability. Teachers are expected to do A LOT with

limited resources and incentive which also affects teacher "buy in" on sustaining a PLC.”

 “Sometimes teachers are told to do specific activities during the time they have to meet and I think there needs to be more input from teachers on how the community should work and what

expectations should be. For example, if teachers have very different students in their classrooms is it

truly best for the students to expect all teachers to be doing the exact same thing.”

Interviews. Scheduled interviews were conducted after AQR and IRB approvals

were granted to the researcher. The interviews began on February 26, 2016 and

concluded on March 24, 2016. Each interview took place at a time that was convenient

for each of the participants. Interview participant locations were identified in this study as

125

follows: school site (S1-S5) or district site and school position (teacher, administrator or

ISS (instructional support specialist)). Participants ranged in experience, grade level and

location. This sample included 13 females and one male, 10 classroom teachers (all

female), two instructional support specialists (noted as teachers on special assignment:

one assigned to S1, one district support coach also assigned as a part time teacher, both

female) and two administrators (one principal from S5 (male) and one assistant principal

from S3 (female). Figure 2 shows the demographic data of interview participants.

Figure 2. Interview participant demographic data

The interviews were conducted in a semi-structured format and included 10

questions. Each participant’s interview varied in length, from 21 minutes to 60 minutes.

The transcribed data (see Appendix I) varied per interview ranging from 3 to 8 pages,

totaling 63 pages. The transcribed data produced during the interview portion of this case

study included 63 pages; a sample of transcription is available in Appendix I.

K-8 Teacher Administrator Instructional

Coach/Teacher on special assignment

S1 4 1

S2 2

S3` 3 1

S4 1

S5 1

District 1

1 2

11 1 1 0

0.5 1

1.5 2

2.5 3

3.5 4

4.5

Interview Participant Demographic Data

S1 S2 S3` S4 S5 District

126

Participants 1, 4, 5, 6, 11 and 12 interviewed for 30 minutes, producing 3-6 pages

each. Participants 2, 3, 7, 10, 13 and 14 interviewed for more than 30 minutes and

produced 4-8 pages each. Participants 8 and 9 each interviewed for less than 30 minutes

and produced 3-4 pages each. Below in Figure 3, the information represents the number

of minutes and the number of transcribed pages that resulted in the interview process of

this case study. Interview participants were provided an opportunity to skip questions if

they chose to do so and had the opportunity to withdraw at any point during the study, it

is noted that none of the participants chose to skip questions or withdraw from the study.

Figure 3. Interview minutes and transcribed pages.

Archival data. The researcher chose to use the achievement data as an artifact to

determine the impact on student achievement specified in RQ2. This information was

obtained from allthingsplc.com (2016) that indicated increases in student learning during

two years of the PLC implementation process for the identified school district. All scores

increased during the timeframe under investigation. The researcher took into

consideration that the data were not current; however, the state assessment currently in

3 0

6 0

3 0

3 8

2 8

2 1

3 5

3 0

3 0 3 3

4 0

4 5

5 3

6 6 4 3 4 3 4 4

P 1 P 2 P 3 P 4 P 5 P 6 P 7 P 8 P 9 P 10 P 11 P 12 P 13 P 14

Interview Minutes and Transcribed Pages

Interview Minutes Transcribed Pages

127

place is not at a measureable point due to the recent changes in the format of the

assessment. Figure 4 outlines the achievement data used for this case study.

Figure 4. Percent of students passing statewide (English language arts and math)

assessment in 2006-07 compared to 2009-10.

(allthingsplc.com, 2016)

Three of the five schools provided the researcher with each site’s continuous

improvement plan and PLC meeting minutes for one grade level over a period of four

weeks. School plans and PLC minutes are outlined in Table 8. Table 8 recognizes three

school sites identified as: S1, S2 and S3. Each continuous improvement plan outlined

goals, strategies and action steps towards student achievement. The PLC minutes that

were collected over a 4-week period, included a site selected team to submit the meeting

minutes for this case study: S1 represents a 4th grade team, S2 represents a 4th grade team

and S3 represents a 2nd grade team.

55%

40% 54%

40% 52%

35%

54% 46% 51% 45%

56% 45% 45%

38%

72%

45%

63% 61% 62% 58% 59% 66% 65%

58% 57% 58% 59% 55%

20%

40%

60%

80%

2nd Grade Math

2nd Grade

ELA

3rd Grade Math

3rd Grade

ELA

4th Grade Math

4th Grade

ELA

5th Grade Math

5th Grade

ELA

6th Grade Math

6th Grade

ELA

7th Grade Math

7th Grade

ELA

8th Grade Math

8th Grade

ELA

Comparative Chart of Percentage of Students Passing ELA and Math State Assessment

in 2006-07 and 2009-10

2006-07 2009-10

128

Table 8

Archival Data Supporting School Improvement

Participating

School Site

School Continuous Improvement

Plan PLC Meeting Notes/ Minutes

School

Site 1 Goal: Increase Student

Achievement

Strategy: Strengthen Instruction

for all students

Action Step: Professional

development

Action Step: Data driven decision

making

Action Step: Plan development,

implementation, and evaluation

Discussion agenda: Subject specific noting

specific items to work on and discuss, leadership

information, data discussion regarding common

assessment

School

Site 2

Goal: Increase Student

Achievement

Strategy: Strengthen Instruction

for all students

Action Step: Support specialists

(instructional coaches)

Action Step: Collective inquiry

(teams meet to engage in

conversations about practice and

strategies)

Action Step: Data driven decision

making

Discussion agenda: Team building, leadership

information, current data, looking ahead, and

common assessment schedule.

Our goal: 80% mastery

How will we know when our students are

learning?

How will we respond when our students don’t

learn?

How will we respond if they already know it?

School

Site 3

Goal: Increase Student

Achievement

Strategy: Strengthen Instruction

for all students

Action Step: Professional

Learning Communities (PLC)

Action Step: Embedded

professional development

Action Step: Data based decision

making

Discussion agenda: Norms, team purpose

statement, school mission, SMART goal.

Guiding questions in analysis:

What strategies are working?

What are students struggling with?

Next steps?

In summary, the participants involved in this case study met the study’s criteria

relative to having experienced a PLC and currently participating in a PLC at their school

site. Questionnaire participant information included the number of years assigned at the

current school placement and number of years teaching the assigned grade level or

subject area. During the semi-structured interview the participants disclosed current

129

position (noted as a teacher or administrator) at the school site. Participants varied in

school position, number of years taught to the number of years in their current placement.

The data sources used provided sufficient information for determining the results of the

identified research questions. The following section outlines the analysis procedures that

support the results.

Data Analysis Procedures

The research questions below guided the analysis for this study:

R1: What are teacher perceptions of the professional learning community model

being implemented in one K-8 school district located in the southwest region

of the United States?

R2: How are professional learning communities in one K-8 school district in the

southwest region of the United States structured and implemented to show a

primary focus on databased decisions to improve teaching and learning?

R3: How do K-8 educators explain and describe how participation in professional

learning communities influences their professional growth and instructional

effectiveness in the southwest region of the United States?

Preparing raw data for analysis. The qualitative data included for this study,

consisted of a two-part questionnaire that was uploaded into an Excel document. Also,

transcribed interviews were produced using a voice-to-text software and edited by the

researcher for accuracy. This section describes how raw data were prepared for analysis.

Questionnaire. Preparation for data analysis launched with Part 1 of the

questionnaire (see Appendix G). The researcher downloaded items 1-36 (see Appendix

G) identified as Likert scaled items from SurveyMonkey in the form of scaled score

responses, rating averages, and response counts for each item. The delivered original

130

rating scale noted that strongly agree was worth a scaled score of 1; therefore, the

researcher chose to reformat the formula in Excel with strongly agree worth a scaled

score of 5 (see Table 3). The researcher tallied items by response count and rating scale.

Table 4 was created to indicate the percentage of participants that agreed/strongly agreed

with each of the items or participants in the opposition with disagree/strongly disagree.

For Part 2 of the questionnaire, the researcher combined all participant responses to these

open-ended items in one Word document for review and analysis. The researcher noted

that not all questionnaire participants completed both parts of the instrument, however

there was little to no impact on the overall results.

Interviews. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed by a voice

recognition, computer software and edited by the researcher. Then, the participating

interviewee was sent the transcribed information via email to verify accuracy, also known

as member checking. Each interviewee had the opportunity to agree, disagree or add to

the data. Once the participant confirmed the accuracy, the researcher uploaded that data

into an Excel spread sheet. Next, the interview data were organized by relating each

interview question by determining appropriate information that would support the results

of each research questions. Then, this document was used to complete the coding process

and assisted with identifying themes relatable to each of the guiding questions. The

researcher selected excerpts from the data that supported the codes in the process (see

Appendix K).

Artifacts. The use of artifacts contributed to builidng a trustworthy study as three

of the five schools. Each school selected one grade level to submit PLC meeting notes,

two sites chose a 4th grade team and one site chose a 2nd grade team. The researcher was

also afforded an opportunity to observe a leadership PLC meeting at S3; this was not a

131

scheduled observation, yet the school leaders welcomed the researcher’s attendance. This

observation provided the researcher a glimpse of the working community in action.

Additionally, the outlined findings used as artifacts for this study are noted in table 8

organized to identify the key points of each CIP and PLC notes. Next, the researcher

chose the allthingsplc.com website to address the data during the implementation phase

of PLC during this district’s initiative which began during the 2006-2007 school year and

concluded during the 2009-10 school year. Figure 5 outlined the data that was applied in

this study, used specifically to address RQ2.

Thematic analysis. The researcher used Hatch’s (2002) recommendations to

analyze this qualitative data. This process consisted of several steps. First, the researcher

read the data several times to get a sense of what is included and identified the parts that

would be considered (Hatch, 2002, p. 163). Then, domains or categories were developed

based on identified relationships within the data considered to be “analyzable” (Hatch,

2002, p. 163). Then, codes were assigned to these groups, followed by reading the data

again to ensure the code names were accurately recorded and noting the relationships in

the data. Then, the researcher confirmed code names and identified specific examples in

the data that supported these names, completing the analysis using code names. Next,

themes across the codes or domains assisted with creating an outline of those

relationships, within and across domains (codes). Finally, the researcher selected excerpts

from the data that supported the codes in the outline. This process assisted with defining

the themes that emerged in this data. This specific coding and thematic analysis process

was applied to both the open-ended questions (see Appendix K) and the interview portion

(see Appendix J) of this case study. Table 9 details the developed codes in the analysis of

questionnaire items 38, 39, 40 and 41.

132

Table 9

Key: Identified Codes for Items 38-41

Yellow Green Lt. Blue Purple

Item 38

Working

together

Ongoing Student success

Item 39

Consistency if

understanding is

present

Sharing

responsibility

Useful

Item 40 Staff buy in Data focused Time Collaboration

Item 41

Ongoing

training

Staff buy-in Time

Next, each research question was aligned with the specific data associated with

answering the question. Specific data was selected as it was significant in this study to

conclude with results that determined each questions answer. Data triangulation included

the use of various sources or groups to determine perception. The task revealed the

similar concepts among the various data or groups (Guion, 2002), in this case the 39-41

participants for questionnaire part 1, 31 participants that completed questionnaire part 1

and part 2, the 14 interviewed participants and the alignment of the artifacts used in this

case study were all considerable data sources.

The researcher referred to Noble (2015) for building a trustworthy account for

credible findings in this qualitative study as simultaneously applying Hatch’s (2002)

recommendations. The author included that the researcher must account for personal

biases that may be influential in the findings, ensure that interpretations of data are

consistent and transparent, include a rich description of the participant’s accounts to

support findings and establish a case seeking out similarities and differences to ensure all

133

perspectives are valued. The researcher addressed each as a potential limitation.

Therefore, differences in perspective were determined in the sampling the researcher

chose to follow and valued in the concluding results.

Finally, Noble (2015) determined that data triangulation supports a more

comprehensive set of findings in qualitative methods. In this case, the researcher

identified codes or descriptors, patterns and themes across all three sources of data in

order to triangulate findings. This process of coding the data, along with triangulation

addressed each research question that significantly focused on how teachers perceive

collaboration as it related to the foundations of PLCs. In the following paragraphs, the

researcher represented each data source as it influences each research question. The

results of this thorough analysis are presented by research question in the following

section.

Results

The researcher organized study results by research question to address and

explain the phenomenon as well as address the gaps in literature noted in the literature

review. The following research questions guided data collection:

R1: What are teacher perceptions of the professional learning community model

being implemented in one K-8 school district located in the southwest region

of the United States?

R2: How are professional learning communities in one K-8 school district in the

southwest region of the United States structured and implemented to show a

primary focus on databased decisions to improve teaching and learning?

134

R3: How do K-8 educators explain and describe how participation in professional

learning communities influences their professional growth and instructional

effectiveness in the southwest region of the United States?

First, the results of questionnaire part 1 were organized and evaluated according

to mean score (see Table 3). Each item identified the perception of the current practice

implemented within the school and how teachers related to each item. After this, the

researcher read and re-read each response to the open-ended portion of the questionnaire,

noted as part 2 (see Appendix H) as well as the interview data (see Appendix I). Each

question guided the significance of codes extracted from each items response. Next, the

questionnaire items from part 2, including items 38, 39, 40 and 41 were used to determine

contributions to the thematic analysis (see Appendix K). Each participant is identified as

QP followed by an identifying number to ensure anonymity. The collected responses are

accounts of each participant’s perception. The researcher highlighted codes in the

information that would be significant in the analysis.

Definition of PLC. To support the understanding of how a K-8 school district is

structured and implemented to show a primary focus on data based decisions to improve

teaching and learning participants were asked to clarify or define a PLC. The participants

indicated that the working definition of a PLC should include the following: ongoing,

working together, and meeting the needs of students. These characteristics or phrases

were extracted from the open-ended responses and used to explain participants

understanding of the purpose of a PLC collaboration.

To further understand how participation in professional learning communities

influenced their professional growth and instructional effectiveness participants indicated

that PLCs are useful as long as teachers understand the purpose as defined by some of the

135

participants in the following questionnaire, participant phrases included: “is an ongoing

professional learning community,” “working together as a team to be collectively

accountable for student learning,” “consistently changing as professional learning

community” and “work together as a team to best meet the needs of our students”.

To describe how PLCs were structured and implemented to show a focus on

databased decisions that improve teaching and learning, the respondents contributed that

staff buy in, data focus and time were important facilitators of PLCs. Additionally the

opposite must be considered; therefore, participants added that structured and

implemented PLCs aligned to databased decisions to improve teaching and learning,

often experience challenges including: time, training as well as participant attitudes that

play a crucial role which influencing professional growth.

Following this, the interview data was organized in a similar way; codes were

excerpted from each participant’s response (see Appendix K), and additionally the

researcher extracted sample phrases from the transcription to elaborate the theme

specifically aligned to reoccurring codes. Next, triangulation of all three sources

supported the analysis. Data triangulation was comprised of three different sources to

determine a clear understanding of the perceptions of the participants. Building the case

study results, the researcher first referred to Hatch (2002) recommendations of reading

and re-reading to identify specific patterns, considered analyzable pieces. The task

revealed comparable concepts among the various data to produce codes and according to

Guion (2002), building trustworthy results are indicated by comparable concepts,

revealing themes.

The researcher additionally referenced Noble (2015), who suggested that

constructing a trustworthy account for sound findings in a qualitative study must include

136

the following: account for personal biases that may be influential of the findings, ensure

that interpretations of data are consistent and transparent, include rich descriptions of

participant’s accounts to support findings and establish a case seeking out similarities and

differences across accounts to ensure a difference in perspective. In this case, the

researcher’s triangulated process of all sources included: questionnaire part 1,

questionnaire part 2, the interviews and artifacts compiling relatable results and assisted

with further explaining the phenomenon and responding to the guiding questions. In the

following, the researcher represents each source as it pertains to the explanation of the

answer for each research question.

Research Question 1. The first research question focused on teacher perceptions

of the professional learning community model being implemented in one K-8 school

district located in the southwest region of the United States. The intent of this question

was to analyze educators’ perceptions of the PLC implementation within the K-8 school

district and to determine consistencies of the districts PLC model and the influence on

teaching and learning. Data collected to answer this question came from Interview

Questions 1, 2, 5 and 9, open-ended items on the Questionnaire Part 2: 38, 39, 40 and 41

and questionnaire items part 1: 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 28, 29, 31, 35, and 36. Four themes

emerged from the interviews: collaborative teams, data-driven decisions focused on

student success, shared responsibility, and commitment/buy-in to a common practice.

Table 10 outlines the themes developed in the coding process evidenced throughout the

data analysis.

137

Table 10

Research Question 1 Emergent Codes and Themes

Theme Codes Notes on Emerging Codes

Theme 1:

Collaborative Teams Working together, Collaboration,

Team

The term “team” was referenced by

40 participants in the questionnaire;

14 interview participants used similar

terms or phrases.

Theme 2: Data-driven

decisions focused on

student success

Student success, data, student data,

progress monitoring, school goals,

achievement

39 teachers agreed with the item that

showed they based teaching approach

on good evidence. The interview

transcript referenced this several

more times by the majority of

participants. All three school

improvement plans elicited that

increasing student improvement was

a goal.

Theme 3: shared

responsibility Sharing ideas, shared responsibility,

useful collaboration

Questionnaire items produced

evidence that teachers agreed with

statements focused on collective

responsibility. Similar and like

phrases appeared throughout

interview data.

Theme 4:

Commitment/Buy-in to

common practice

Staff buy in, consistency among staff,

common goals, common practice

Questionnaire items showed pros and

barriers to shared commitment, buy

in and values. Terms and phrases

repeated in interviews.

Questionnaire Part 1. Items: 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 28, 29, 31, 35, and 36

generated responses for RQ 1 (see Appendix G). These items identified the school

district’s model being implemented according to teacher participants. The following items

determined that 90%-92% participants completing the questionnaire part 1, strongly

agreed/agreed with statements indicating they each shared a common core of educational

values, were members of at least one professional team, had opportunities to take on

leadership roles, had some protected time for joint planning and development, and

actively contributed to the school as a professional learning community. In contrast, 24%-

31% of participants disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that they received

138

training on how to work and learn in teams, had dedicated time to be mentored in a new

role, and engaged in team teaching.

Questionnaire Part 2. Questionnaire items 38, 39, 40 and 41 generated data also

used to support RQ 1 (see Appendix L). The findings for those items provided that when

teachers were asked how they would change the definition of a PLC, the codes associated

with the answer to this question included: ongoing, working together, and student

success. Next, when teachers were asked to discuss how useful the idea of a PLC was for

their school, codes associated with this question included useful, collaboration, and

consistency. Then, when teachers described the main facilitators for a PLC codes such as

buy in, time, collaboration, and data focused emerged. Finally, when teachers described

some challenges associated with PLCs these included: time, teacher training and

participant attitudes.

Interviews. Interview questions 1, 2, 5 and 9 also produced data to answer RQ1

(see Appendix K). Themes associated with these interview responses included:

collaborative teams, data-driven decisions focused on student success, shared

responsibility, and commitment and buy-in to a common practice.

Theme 1. Collaborative teams. One primary theme that emerged from the data

indicated that 40 questionnaire participants, felt the “team” concept was critical to a

functioning PLC. Questionnaire items indicated that teachers worked in teams. Item 4

indicated a high mean score of 4.46, which determined that teachers felt they learned

together as a group. Other items indicated that most of the participants were members of

a PLC, but also indicated that little team teaching took place.

In defining PLCs, phrases were evident that supported the concept of team, those

included: ongoing and working together. Responses from teachers’ opened-ended

139

questionnaire items included phrases such as: “Working/planning as a team,” “Working

together as a team, talking about student progress on a regular basis, and planning

together as a team to better accommodate all our students,” “Team collaboration,”

“Building trust and supportive teams,” and “teamwork, sharing ideas, and knowledge.”

Interview responses also supported the team theme. All 14 interview participants

indicated the need for teaming. Grade level teams are composed of members that teach

the same grade, each team meets at least weekly between 45-120 minutes. Leadership

teams, which included grade level lead teachers, specialists and administration meet less

often. Most often this team meets biweekly to monthly.

The first evidence of support was determined by comments regarding time for

collaboration. Open-ended questionnaire items reflected this:

 Team time. We must have dedicated time to meet with our PLC teams to ensure that we can analyze data and answer the 4 key questions.

 Dedicated time to plan, collaborate, share ideas/lessons, look at data

 We are given an amount of time but I honestly feel that it’s never enough in order to become a truly successful professional learning community. There is so much

involved but not enough time for collaboration, searching for resources, and

group learning.

Interview Participant 1 described planning time:

We have an hour on Thursday mornings, then half an hour on Tuesday

afternoons. So we really do break it up with planning our units, planning what we

can do to teach those and looking at data. So I think weekly is a good thing. I say

weekly because I think anything longer than that you would feel lost… like you

know you’re going to meet with your team and that they are there if you have any

questions on anything. I think it gives everyone common goals and you have that

goal, you have a mission, you have a purpose for meeting whether its data driven,

140

sharing instructional strategies or quarterly planning, everyone is on the same

page.

Interview Participant 14 discussed the fact that contributing to the team and planning

time is important:

A PLC really helps when you come to contribute to your collaborative teams and

it makes people more willing to contribute and then follow through. Grade level

meetings weekly is necessary and there was a period of time that we actually met

twice a week with our teams probably and I actually really liked that only because

there’s a lot to do with your grade level PLCs and often times, even this year I

feel like sometimes were not getting to things.

Interview Participant 9 elaborated on grade level time, by stating:

Well we meet as a grade level team several times a month, two times a week and

then the leadership team meets as well. I really enjoy working on the team and

within a PLC because everyone brings what they have to the table for whatever

standard we are working. We’re really there to support each other.

Interview Participant 11 highlighted the need for a leadership component of the PLC

team:

We currently have our leadership team for all grade level leads to come together

and collaborate. We have grade level teams that collaborate. We have what we

call our problem-solving team, which includes resource, our school site

interventionists and administration that collaborate using data.

Theme 2. Data-driven decisions focused on student success. A second theme

related to RQ 1 indicated a focus on data-driven decisions. Questionnaire responses

specified teacher support for databased decisions. Thirty-nine teachers agreed with the

141

item that showed they based teaching approach to change on good evidence, 41 teachers

agreed that they set learning targets for individual students. A high mean score of 4.49,

represented that almost all participants routinely collect, analyze and use data and

evidence to inform practice, and regularly monitored the learning and progress of

individual students. Teacher responses to open-ended questionnaires also evidenced data-

based decisions:

 Working/planning as a team.

 Discussing student data, what is working what’s not working.

 How can we change things that aren't working so that they are best for the students.

 Working together as a team, talking about student progress on a regular basis

 Planning together as a team to better accommodate all our students

 Dedicated time to plan, collaborate, share ideas/lessons, look at data

 Conversations that center on student learning and methods for sustaining and improving student learning

Archival data were used to determine if schools focused on data to make

decisions in efforts to improve teaching and learning. All three schools had increasing

student achievement as a goal, with action steps dedicated to data-driven decision

making. Discussion agendas referenced data discussion regarding common assessment,

current data, looking ahead, common assessment schedule, SMART goals and a

discussion on what strategies are working and what students are struggling with.

Finally, interview responses showed evidence that teachers supported databased

decisions as part of the PLC. Eight of the fourteen interviewed participants mentioned the

importance of databased decisions. This included the analysis of student data both

formally and informally to inform instructionally practices: adjust, reteach or enrich

instruction. With regard to data, the following responses are noted.

142

Interview Participant 1 stated:

This year we’ve done a really good job as a team looking at our students,

collecting data and going over our data after we’ve given a common assessment

or unit assessment. Really looking at what can we do to reteach and meet those

kids that didn’t get it or how can we help the kids that did.

Interview Participant 3 added:

Being open and willing to talk about data together as a team and then being

willing to share ideas about those things to help each other. During your PLC,

everything should be about instruction or assessment or planning interventions.

Interview Participant 7 stated that: “So when I look and I think about the grade level PLC

and that collaborative team, their whole focus is on student achievement.” Additionally,

Interview Participant 14 responded:

I think that it’s really good for our team, I think it helps guide our instruction, it

helps us to be able to ask questions to each other about our students and we’re

kind of all on the same page.

Theme 3. Shared responsibility, commitment, and buy-in to a common practice.

The third theme that emerged from the data focused on teacher’s responses provided that

PLCs require buy-in, commitment, shared values and shared responsibilities.

Questionnaire items produced evidence that teachers agreed with statements focused on

collective responsibility and shared values. A high mean score of 4.56 determined they

felt they take collective responsibility for pupil learning. A high mean score of 4.46

indicated that they learned together with colleagues. Forty-one participants related to

actively sought ideas from colleagues. While the majority represented that most shared a

common core of educational values, determined that they shared experiences and success,

143

experiment and are innovated about new curriculum. Additionally, a high score of 4.39

indicated that a shared responsibility for student learning was present, while a score of

4.27 indicated that they actively contributed to the school as a professional learning

community. Open-ended questionnaire items showed pros and barriers related to shared

commitment, values and buy-in. These items are presented in Table 11.

144

Table 11

Advantages and Barriers Related to Shared Commitment

Sample Questionnaire Responses Related to Shared Commitment

Advantages

 Consistency in our curriculum so we can become experts on what to teach

 It needs to be focused on things teachers actually think are valuable to teaching their students Having all members on board

 The main facilitators are a collective and positive teacher buy-in as well a constant yet changing meaningful purpose.as

 Effective collaboration, high expectations, vision, assessment, and commitment

 The main facilitators would be the Administrators, but every member of the school is a stakeholder therefore collaboration is key to maintaining momentum toward our goals.

 I think that the teachers and the school community need to buy into the idea. For some people it is a shift in how they have always done things and it can be hard for some to collaborate with others. A

strong team of people that want to collaborate and share makes it sustainable.

 The main facilitators are working norms and time to meet.

 Trust, honesty, collaboration

 Building genuine relationships and having support from administration

 Teamwork, sharing ideas, and knowledge.

Barriers

 Making sure everyone can agree and be on the same page the majority of the time.

 The different attitudes and personalities/beliefs of all people

 A big challenge is not everyone participating in the process. It slows down the progress and hampers the workload. A challenge to sustaining the PLC is not ensuring everyone is following the

PLC process. Trainings and refresher courses could help with that.

 Some teachers are set in their ways and do not feel that a collaborative unit works best. Some teachers give it their all, and some just "show up" to work.

 Employee turnover

 Being open to new ideas and sharing the workload.

 Some challenges could be that professionals could not agree on what is best for the students. Another challenge could be if a teacher does not come prepared to a meeting or follow what the

group agreed upon.

 Not having enough time to develop true bonds and relationship

Additionally, evidence from interview responses showed teacher perspectives on

shared responsibilities, which included sharing instructional strategies, data and

responsibility to all students within the grade level. Interview participant 3 responded to

shared responsibility by stating: “In the beginning its rocky road because you have to get

145

used to owning all the kids as your own and not just owning your class.” Interview

participant 4 described collective responsibility to all students, sharing instructional

strategies and data discussion by reflecting on her first year as a teacher:

My first year teaching my team lead was phenomenal and it kind of just resonated

with me from the PLC conference, when they said a teacher who is a first year

teacher who is in a PLC can get or leave their first year with the knowledge of a

three year teacher without a PLC. It just stuck because I mean my first year

teaching it was like- what did I decide to do, but my team lead and being able to

work in a team and share ideas and share data and be transparent with each other

made it feel like I wasn’t alone and you have other people to support you and your

students.

Interview Participant 7 identified the relationship between shared vision, collective

responsibility and a focus on data:

When I look and think about the grade level PLC and that collaborative team,

their whole focus is on student achievement. Our common goals are making sure

that we remain committed to our vision and mission and then that were making

sure student achievement is always backed with what we’re doing. It all goes back

to data.

Interview Participant 8 related a responsibility to all students by stating:

A lot of what we do here is we end up sharing kids a lot with different types of

programs that we’re doing with either interventions or walk to read or walk to

math, so suddenly they really are our kids. I think we’re in a different time, I think

we need every single piece of everybody to do the job.

146

This interview participant also noted that the transition into the model is a process by

adding, “You know it didn’t happen overnight but it developed. I think people had some

trust and also just some experience.” Table 12 identifies the theme name, description, like

responses and sample quotes by individual participant’s response relating to RQ1.

Table 12

Research Question 1 Themes

Theme Theme

Description

Number of

Interview

Participants

with Like

Responses

Sample Quotations

Collaborative

teams

Grade level

teams, these

teams are

composed of

members that

teach the

same grade,

Leadership

teams which

include grade

level lead

teachers,

specialists

and

administration

14/14

 We have grade level bands that meet once a week during a common time

 The leadership teams meets additionally which includes grade level leaders, additional leadership

which includes our specialists, resources and the

speech teacher

 We have our grade level meetings and those are our PLCs and then we also have staff meetings,

leadership meetings, those are one’s that I’m part

of we also do have some committee meetings as

well

 We currently have our leadership team for all grade level leads that come together to

collaborate

 Every grade level meets every week, all MAP (music, art, PE) meet together so those

collaborative teams are in place, it’s nice to meet

once a week

 We have collaborative teams within grade levels so that the entire grade level is at the team, we

meet once to twice a week as the team

Data Driven

Decisions

Teachers

analyze

student data

both formally

and

informally to

inform

instructionally

practices:

adjust, reteach

or enrich

instruction

8/14  ..focused on student achievement

 Openly look at data and really search to see what was working and what wasn’t working and then

going back and applying those practices to your

classroom

 PLC’s within grade levels were really focused on data and seeing not only what was going on in

your room but what was going on in other

teacher’s classrooms

 We look at data to determine our instruction.. and to see if students are learning

147

Theme Theme

Description

Number of

Interview

Participants

with Like

Responses

Sample Quotations

Shared

responsibility

Sharing

instructional

strategies,

data and

responsibility

to ALL

students

within the

grade level

10/14  When you’re sharing ideas and other people are sharing ideas that ultimately we’re all going to be

accountable to one another again helps out

 Contribute and follow through

 When you work together and call them our kids not just my kids the power that’s in that is really

beneficial

 It’s not just shared responsibility amongst the grade level but a shared responsibility amongst

the entire staff for every student

 Learning how to compromise and setting aside personal feelings

Commitments

to common

practice

Commitments

to common

practice and

accountability

to one another

to follow

through

12/14  It helps guide our instruction and we’re all on the same page

 Being there to support each other and it’s not like someone’s better than us, it’s like we’re all on an

even playing field, just trying to help each other be

successful

 Maintain efficient time and honoring all members

 It sets a structure and guidelines of what we should be doing at our meetings and in our

classrooms

Summary of Research Question 1. The first question focused on teacher

perceptions of the PLC model being implemented in one K-8 school district located in the

southwest region of the United States is as follows. The researcher identified three

themes responding to this question. These included collaborative teams, data-driven

decisions focused on student success, and a shared responsibility, commitment and buy-

in to a common practice.

The team concept was evidenced by the fact that many teachers noted common

planning time is provided during the school day to participate in collaborative

conversations that are focused on data related to instructional planning. A shared

responsibility to ensure that all members are accountable to each other and to all the

148

students within the grade level or school consistently emerged with 10/14 interview

participants referring to this as an important factor. Then, 12/14 interview participants

noted that commitments to common practice and supporting each other was also

significant factor in place. The results showed that teacher perceptions of the PLC model

being implemented included teams that are composed of grade level members. More than

90% of questionnaire respondents indicated that shared educational values, having

protected time to plan with one another and participating in an opportunity to contribute

to a learning team are all components of the processes being implemented.

Teachers described the characteristics that facilitate a PLC to include staff buy in,

time, collaboration, and data. Next, factors that were identified as challenges to PLCs

included: providing time, training, member attitudes or openness. Teacher’s described

these challenges by indicating, “New teachers might not have the training/experience of a

PLC,” “district changes from year to year,” Makings sure everyone can agree and be on

the same page the majority of the time’, “when one person takes over the entire meeting

and doesn’t allow others to share can ruin a PLC,” “teachers are expected to do a lot with

limited resources and incentives which also affects teacher buy in and sustaining a PLC.”

Outliers. One interesting finding in the data associated with this question emerged

a difference between where teachers described the stage of PLCs in their schools and

their comments on PLCs, which indicated a more advanced implementation phase. More

than half (59.5%) of the teachers thought their school was in the initial stages of

developing PLCs, about 11% noted their school was on the journey to establishing PLCs,

and about 30% of the teachers noted their school was working to re-establish what had

once been a PLC (see Figure 1). However, when asked about the definition of PLCs, or to

add to the definition, the vast majority of teachers could readily identify the attributes of

149

PLCs and agreed with the definition. Most teachers collectively used terms like: working

together and a community of professionals achieving a common goal as well as student

success in defining a PLC. Additionally, 82% of teachers felt PLCs are useful for schools

and students. Participant phrases included: “organized collaboration,” “a team can

experience and explore more opportunities together than an individual does alone,” “It

makes it so much easier when teacher work together to create lesson, but also to group

students based on their needs for intervention” and “It is data driven and a community

working towards a common goal. As a single member in a PLC I don’t feel alone and as

if all the weight is on my shoulders, it gives me a sense of security and support.”

Research Question 2. The second research focused on how professional learning

communities in the K-8 school district were structured and implemented to show a

primary focus on databased decisions to improve teaching and learning. Questionnaire

Qtems 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 24, 27, 33, 38 and 39 addressed this question. Interview

questions 3, 6 and 7 also provided support. In determining a clear clarification the

archived data, which is comprised of the continuous improvement plans, PLC meeting

notes and achievement data by three of the five school sites involved in this case study

will be explored as the fourth data source for this question. The researcher identified

three themes responding to this question. These included that teaching and learning are

dependent on common instructional goals and assessments goals, progress monitoring,

and teacher support. Table 13 outlines the themes developed in the coding process that

were evidenced throughout the data analysis.

150

Table 13

Research Question 2 Emergent Codes and Themes

Theme Codes Notes on Emergent Codes

Theme 1: Teaching and learning

are dependent on common

instructional goals and

assessments goals.

Data focus, student success,

common goals, assessments,

progress monitoring

Inteview participants identified

consistently that grade level

teams analyze assessments to

determine goals. Terms and

phrases appeared throughout

questionnaire, interview and in

school plans.

Theme 2: Progress Monitoring Data focus, intervention,

progress monitoring

37 questionnaire participants

indicated they regularly monitor

student learning. Interview

participants echoed this with

similar phrases, terms and ideas.

Theme 3: Teacher Support Share responsibility, “our” kids,

learning from each other,

support

37 responses indicated that

teachers learn from one another.

Interview phrases, terms and

ideas also referenced this idea of

support throughout.

Questionnaire Part 1. Results from the Likert-scale items related to RQ2 showed

95%-100% of participants strongly agreed or agreed with the following statements

indicating they take collective responsibility for pupil learning, create conditions for

pupils to feel confident to learn, have high expectation of students, and share

responsibility for student learning. Additionally, 82%-90% of the teachers strongly

agreed or agreed that they ensure students receive constructive feedback about their

work, routinely collect, analyze and use data and evidence to inform practice, regularly

monitor the learning and progress of individual students, routinely share information with

parents and community and give priority to learning more about student learning. Only

4% of the participants stated that they disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement:

set learning targets for individual students.

Questionnaire Part 2. The findings in the open-ended questionnaire items

included comments from participants, which showed a focus on teaching, learning and

data. Some examples are below:

151

 We have time to share ideas and discuss what is best for our students on a weekly basis.

 It is data-driven and a community working towards a common goal. As a single member in a professional learning community I don't feel alone and as if all of the

weight is on my shoulders. It gives a sense of security and support.

 Consistency in our curriculum so we can become experts on what to teach.

 Discussing student data, what is working, what’s not. How can we change things that aren't working so that they are best for the students.

 Talking about student progress on a regular basis, and planning together as a team to better accommodate all our students.

 Dedicated time to look at data.

Interviews. Responses collected from the aligned interview items identified as 3,

6 and 7 addressed RQ2 (see Appendix K). The researcher determined three themes

responding to this question. These included that teaching and learning are dependent on

common instructional goals and assessments goals, progress monitoring, and teacher

support.

Theme 1. Common instructional goals and assessments goal. The first theme

that emerged from RQ2 was common instructional and assessment goals. This referred to

the fact that 13 interview participants identified that grade level teams either design or are

provided common assessments, and that grade levels analyze a variety of assessment to

determine quarterly SMART goals, specifically noted by 6 of the interview participants.

31 questionnaire respondents indicated that they use common instructional goals or

factors that determine learning targets.

More specifically, 37 questionnaire respondents and a mean score of 4.34

indicated that they regularly monitor student learning. The vast majority of the

questionnaire participants and a high mean score of 4.56 indicated that they take

collective responsibility for pupil learning. While another high score of 4.63 determined

152

that the majority of participants create conditions for pupils to feel confident to learn,

while all 41 participants indicated that teachers have high expectation of students, and a

score of 4.39 defined that most share responsibility for student learning. Additionally,

over 90% of the teachers and mean scores ranging from 4.20-4.49 reported they ensure

students receive constructive feedback about their work, routinely collect, analyze and

use data and evidence to inform practice, and regularly monitor the learning and progress

of individual students. Some comments from open-ended questionnaires reflected

common instructional goals:

 Working together as a team, talking about student progress on a regular basis planning together as a team to better accommodate all our students.

 Dedicated time to plan, collaborate, share ideas/lessons, and look at data.

Interview Participant 1 discussed how the PLC team reviewed data and created goals:

This year we’ve done a really good job as a team looking at our students,

collecting data and going over our data after we have given a common

assessment. We are all assessing the same way, we may use different instructional

strategies, but were all going to be assessing the same way, then if one student or

one class did really well, we may ask what did you do? We have academic goals

like our SMART goals, making sure we have whatever percentage it is moving.

Students are constantly being progress monitored every week so we get to see

how they’re doing so if they’re making those improvements, then going back

again and looking at that data.

Participant 2 highlighted the importance of common goals:

The PLC helps with keeping meetings organized with the focus on student

achievement and definitely going through the questions that PLC asks us to go

153

through to make sure we meet our goals. SMART goals are created for each grade

level team, every time we have our district benchmark, that is something we track

very carefully, especially through progress monitoring, that is the key piece right

there.

Participant 6 determined that common goals are established by, “We have quarterly

assessments, and we give them at the end of the quarter. We focus on different ones each

quarter but the big ones are all year.” Participant 14 added that during their grade level

PLC:

We set goals throughout the semester and we change our goals two or three times

once they’ve met the goal or if they’re not meeting the goals than we look at it

and see what we need to do differently.

Theme 2. Progress monitoring. The second theme that emerged from RQ2 was

progress monitoring, which includes constant monitoring of individual students to ensure

benchmarks or standards covered on common assessment are being met. Thirty-seven

questionnaire participants indicated with mean scores ranging from 4.20-4.49, that they

ensure students receive constructive feedback about their work, routinely collect, analyze

and use data and evidence to inform practice, and regularly monitor the learning and

progress of individual students. A vast majority of participants, which included 39

questionnaire participants and a mean score of 4.63, indicated that the majority of

participants create conditions for pupils to feel confident to learn. While all 41

questionnaire participants and a mean score of 4.78 specified that they have high

expectation of students.

Participant 14 described the focus on common assessments and progress

monitoring by sharing:

154

We meet weekly as a team and we talk about our common assessments that we

had and then we talk about where the kids are and what can we do to get them to

the next place. We share students, so we have intervention after lunch for about

40 minutes and all the kids that need skill one go to one teacher and all the kids

that need skill two go to a different teacher and then within our own classroom

were working on a skill that the majority of our students need. We change our

goals two or three times, once they’ve met the goal then we up it or if they’re not

meeting the goal, then we look at it and see what we need to do differently. We

take a look at each individual teacher’s data and then we say how many of those

kids do you think you can try your best to move and we all go around and discuss

our kids and say the number we can move by a certain point.

Participant 13 highlighted the connection between SMART goals, common assessments

and progress monitoring to ensure that standards are met:

When we meet as a team we set what we call SMART goals all based on data,

ideally we want our kids meeting at around 80% or higher…we’re looking at the

data, so you can tell are the kids getting it and if they are what are our next steps

and how can we push them further. If the student isn’t getting it, what do I need to

do or where is the breakdown or what gap is missing?

Theme 3. Teacher support. The third theme associated with RQ2 focused on

teacher support. This is evidenced with 37 questionnaire participants and mean scores

ranging from 4.46 to 4.33 that determined participants learn from each other and have

dedicated time for joint planning and development. 31 questionnaire participants and a

mean score of 3.88 reflected that most learn about their own learning during PLC

collaboration, while 38 participants responded that they have opportunities for

155

professional development. This evidence provides that teachers sharing instructional

strategies in various forums lends to better instruction. It also reflected that being

transparent with data allows teachers to participate in supportive structures. The

following excerpts are indicative of teacher support.

For example, Interview: participant 3 responded that: “I think it helps people to not feel

alone in a situation, either because we’ve all been in that spot where you’re like I did

everything I thought that I should be doing and it just didn’t work.” Interview Participant

7 referenced teacher support evidenced in the following:

We only know so much so collaboration allows ideas and strategies to be shared

out and if I’m struggling in an area and we’re having collaboration time and

somebody has this great idea and it’s worked with their students, maybe it’s a

strategy I can try and apply or vice versa. Maybe my colleague is really struggling

and so I can share my ideas too.

Interview Participant 11 supported this by stating:

A true PLC team who is very transparent with each other and aren’t afraid to

make mistakes or admit where they’re not as strong in seeking help for that, you

know finding the people who are strong in the areas where you’re weak and

asking for help.

Interview Participant 13 also supported this idea by stating:

I think things come up in discussion that I would’ve never considered on my own

and then I think it’s great because then that helps me become a better teacher

because I think, “oh I need to make sure that next time I’m thinking of that.” The

discussion part I feel like is really an important piece of the collaboration I just

get so much of out of it then I would on my own.

156

Interview Participant 14 identified that being supported is significant with the following

response:

I think our PLC time really helps me, just like working with my team and anytime

I have questions I feel comfortable going to anyone on my team and saying I

don’t get this. I’m not teaching it right or something and the kids aren’t getting it,

can you help me.

Table 14 specifies the theme name, description, like responses and sample quotes by

individual participant’s response relating to RQ2.

157

Table 14

Research Question 2 Themes

Theme Theme

Description

Number of

interview

participants

with like

responses:

Sample Quotations

Common

assessments

and

common

goals

Grade level

teams either

design or are

provided

common

assessments

which

include

AIMS web

or Galileo

quarterly

assessments

13/14

6/14

identified

SMART

goals

 We give common assessments. We enter our student data.

 When we can sit down together and plan, everybody is on the same page.

 What are we doing to improve student learning, what are we doing right and what do we need to look at for

tier support.

 SMART goals are created for each grade level.

 SMART goals are established but small goals are created to check and recheck to get us ready for AZ

Merit.

 SMART goals are based off student data

 We are focused on student achievement, what are we doing to close the gap. Common goals are making

sure we are committed to the vision and mission.

Progress

Monitoring

Constant

monitoring

based on

individual

student to

ensure

benchmark

is being met.

8/14  Looking at our data and then if it’s not working and our kids aren’t getting it, what are we going to do

 Progress monitoring, that is the key piece right there

 We do create quick checks and we talk about those

 Tracking everything and then at the end of the quarter we will see if what we changed is working

Teacher

support

Sharing

instructional

strategies

and being

transparent

with data

allows

teachers

supportive

structures.

13/14  Being willing to talk about data together and share ideas about those things to help each other.

 Going back and reviewing our kids constantly

 Not feeling alone because we’ve all been in that spot

 We ask how did you teach it or what strategies did you use

 A big part has to with trust, supporting you because a lot of what we do here, we end up sharing kids

 .. identifying strengths and weaknesses.. seeing what you need to work on

Archival data. The researcher also included evidence of goals, common

assessments and progress monitoring in the archival data. Table 8 represented the

158

archival data, which represents three of the five school’s CIP (continuous improvement

plan) as well as one grade level team from each of the three schools’ PLC meeting notes

over a four week period. The information provided the researcher the identifying factors

that support student achievement, this included a CIP that focused on increasing student

achievement as a school-wide initiative, strengthening instruction for all students,

professional development and data driven decision making. Further, PLC minutes for

grade levels provided data focused topics that either identified goals or common

assessments that teams used to further student achievement.

Additionally, the overall student achievement performance at the start of the PLC

initiative that began in 2006-2007 transitioning to 2009-10 into the PLC model was also

included. This demonstrated achievement gains when PLCs were employed as part of the

professional development model in the current school district. The average percentage of

students passing English language arts (ELA) in 2006-07 was 41.5%, and in 2009-10 that

increased to 57.2% of students passing the ELA state assessment. In math, the average

percent of students passing was 52.2%, and by 2009-10, 63% of students passed the math

state assessment as noted previously in figure 5.

The final archival item considered for RQ 2 analysis was the 2014 schoolwide

data as measured by Arizona’s state assessment, AZ MERIT data as a source was

previously noted in chapter three. However, the Arizona Department of Education

implemented this as a new assessment: AZ MERIT (Arizona’s Measurement of

Educational Readiness to Inform Teaching) in November 2014 (http://www.azed.gov,

2016), the datum was considered but was not relevant to the findings in this study due to

the inconsistency of the assessment.

159

Summary of Research Question 2. The second research question focused on

how professional learning communities this district focused on data based decisions to

improve teaching and learning. The researcher identified three themes responding to this

question. These included that teaching and learning are dependent on common

instructional goals and assessments, progress monitoring, and teacher support. All of the

questionnaire participants indicated that school sites take collective responsibility for

student learning, have high expectations and share responsibility for student learning.

The interview data revealed that 13/14 interview participants recognized that

grade level teams either created or are provided common assessments to improve student

learning by ensuring grade level members are teaching student objectives during the same

time. The data also showed that teams support one another on next instructional steps

observed through data analysis. The majority or 13/14 of the interviewed participants also

identified that sharing instructional strategies as well as being transparent promote

supportive team structures.

More than 90% of the questionnaire part 1 participating teachers responded that

creating conditions for students to feel confident to learn, providing constructive

feedback to students, using data to inform practice, regularly monitoring student progress

and giving priority to student learning are all important factors of decisions that improve

teaching and learning. Further, three out of five continuous improvement plans and

teacher PLC notes indicated that a focus on strengthening instruction for all students and

data driven decision making aligns to the processes substantial in the success of PLCs.

This is simply the ideal way of creating common goals. It is also evident that throughout

the PLC implementation process for this selected district during 2006-2010, this school

district gained a 14.7 percentage increase in math and a 10 percentage increase in ELA.

160

Research Question 3. The third question focused on how K-8 educators

explained and describe participation in professional learning communities influences

their professional growth and instructional effectiveness. This question provided the

researcher with participant perceptions resulting in participating in PLCs. More

significantly, this question netted the core of professional growth and instructional

effectiveness as explained in the participant’s point of view. Questionnaire items 1, 2, 4,

6, 10, 11, 13, 18, 19, 20, 23, 25, 26, 30, 31, 32 and 34, 39, 40 and 41 provided data to

answer this research question. Additionally, interview questions 4, 8 and 10 aligned to

RQ3. Five themes emerged from data related to RQ3, which showed evidence of teacher

growth and development. These included a common planning time, purposeful

collaboration, teacher buy-in, communicating expectations and support. Table 15 outlines

the themes developed in the coding process that were evidenced throughout the data

analysis.

Table 15

Research Question 3 Emergent Codes and Themes

Theme Codes Notes on Emergent Codes

Theme 1: Common Planning

Time

Providing time, allotted time,

grade level planning

All schools commit to common

planning time indicated in

questionnaire and interview

responses. “Time” appeared

consistently in analysis.

Theme 2: Purposeful

Collaboration

Efficieny of time, common

goals, student focus, data talk

Collaboration terms and phrases

was identified throughout the

data.

Theme 3: Teacher buy-in Ownership, teacher buy-in,

empowerment, attitude

Opportunity to grow and learn

appeared in similar terms and

phrases. “Buy-in” consistently

appeared.

Theme 4: Communicating

expectations

Ongoing training, expecations,

leader support, facilitation

expectations

Ongoing training was captured

throughout the interview

transcripts and questionnaire

analysis that referenced

expectations.

Theme 5: Communicating

Expectations and support

Constant communications,

teacher support, constant,

sharing workload

The terms or phrases that

referenced communication and

support were consistent.

161

Questionnaire Part 1. Several questionnaire items identified the perception of

professional growth and instructional effectiveness by participating in a PLC as

determined by the participant’s responses. Eighty-five percent or more of teachers

strongly agreed or agreed that they learned together with colleagues, sought out and used

research relevant and practical information to inform work, learned from one another,

took responsibility for professional learning, had protected time for joint planning and

had professional development opportunities.

Questionnaire Part 2. Questionnaire items 39, 40 and 41 generated supportive

data used to support RQ 3 (see Appendix L). When teachers were asked to discuss how

useful the idea of a PLC was for their school, codes associated with this question

included useful, collaboration, and consistency. Then, when teachers described the main

facilitators for a PLC codes such as buy in, time, collaboration and data focused were

identified. Finally, when teachers described some challenges associated with PLCs they

included time, teacher training, and participant attitudes.

Interview responses. Themes from interview responses included common

planning time, purposeful collaboration, teacher buy-in, communicating expectations, and

teacher support. Participants provided information to give the researcher insight on

influences of professional growth and instructional effectiveness. Finally, teachers

shared.

Theme 1. Common planning time. The first theme that emerged for RQ2

included the benefits of a common planning time. 24 of the questionnaire participants and

indicated that PLCs are useful, by supporting schools commitment to common planning

time. The first evidence of support was determined by the usefulness of PLCs. Open-

ended questionnaire items indicated this in the following:

162

 Essential, less work with more hands/minds

 I think it is very useful and find it successful on my grade level because we have time to share ideas and discuss what is best for our students on a weekly

basis.

 We have two days per week that is set aside to work alongside our grade level team.

 It is extremely useful, I can’t imagine teaching without a PLC. The knowledge I have gained from PLC meetings with my grade level team, my school teams,

and teams from other schools is irreplaceable.

 A team can experience and explore more opportunities together than an individual does alone

 It makes it so much easier when teachers work together to create lessons, but also to group students based on their needs for intervention.

 It is extremely useful because there is always, and should always be room for improvement.

 I would not be half the teacher I am today, if I did not work in a PLC. Because teachers are given time to communicate in a group about plans and strategies,

I was able to learn best practices.

The next evidence of support was determined by questionnaire, participant

comments regarding common planning time as provided by the participating schools.

Open-ended questionnaire items reflected this include:

 Team time. We must have dedicated time to meet with our PLC teams to ensure that we can analyze data and answer the 4 key questions.

 Dedicated time to plan, collaborate, share ideas/lessons, look at data

 We are given an amount of time but I honestly feel that it’s never enough in order to become a truly successful professional learning community. There is so much

involved but not enough time for collaboration, searching for resources, and

group learning.

Further, 37 of the questionnaire participants and a mean score of 4.33 indicated that

participants had protected time for joint planning. 8 open-ended questionnaire

participants noted that having time is an essential characteristic of effective PLCs, while

7 questionnaire open-ended participants noted that having enough time to do it all was

163

challenging. Additionally, interview participants shared that common planning time

provided them with the opportunity to learn and grow as educators.

For instance, interview participant 1 expressed the following: “I think giving time

is a huge part, so giving time to meet.” Interview participant 5 evidenced this by

responding: “Definitely giving the time to meet and our principal has been very helpful in

giving us time.” Interview participant 6 reflected on common planning time by sharing:

I know the district kind of forced us into it, they were like this is what we’re

doing, which got people upset. Then, you know they started giving us time to plan

together and time to actually look at our student data, instead of finding time on

our own. The spin on it was, this is going to benefit everyone.

Interview participant 7 evidenced the importance of a common planning time by

responding:

What I think makes our teams really successful is scheduling, making sure not

only do they have common prep but that they are teaching the same things at the

same time so there is more of an alignment and a better way to build discussions

and strategies.

Interview participant 9 defined that time may be a challenge of PLCs, but the way in

which you use your time is important. This is referenced by the participant affirming the

following:

People always you know, need more time but I think it’s not as much time but

creative use of time and best use of your resources and really smart players that

have a lot of content and although it’s great to be a leader but know that you don’t

know certain things and then find the people that do.

Interview participant 10 noted that common planning time was essential by stating:

164

If we had to do it on our own time, so many people have different commitments.

So it’s nice to have that time within the day and a lot of times we don’t

necessarily get to the planning until the end because we’re looking at goals. We’re

looking at data and discussing whether or not we want to give small group time or

individual time. We don’t talk about business, the agendas are very much this is

what we’re doing.

Theme 2. Teacher buy-in and collegial support. Thirty-eight questionnaire

participants and a mean score of 4.27 indicated that they actively contribute to the school

as a PLC. The open ended responses reflected the following that encompass the idea of

teacher buy in and collegial support with the following:

 Staff buy in.

 It needs to be focused on things that teachers actually think are valuable to teaching their students.

 Having all members on board.

 The main facilitators are collective and positive teacher buy in.

 I think the biggest factor is buy in, everyone needs to be part of the process in order for it to work effectively.

 The whole staff needs to have buy in.

 Every member of the school is a stakeholder.

 The school community need to buy into the idea.

 Building trust and supportive teams.

Additionally, 13 of the 14 interview participants, highlighted the fact that buy-in was

important in the professional growth process of a PLC. Teacher buy-in included allowing

teachers a voice in decision making and empowering teachers to try new ideas. Collegial

support involved teachers engaging in constant conversations that support their own

development and also student achievement.

165

Interview participant 1 related to this by discussing the purpose of empowering teachers

by stating:

Everything gets discussed, there are emails about it, and so it’s very transparent.

We trust them (administration) to make decisions so they trust us (teachers) to

make decisions we need to make, so I think just giving everybody that and that’s

how you get buy in to make it successful. Because if you’re not feeling like your

voice is heard you’re not going to speak and that’s one less idea and one less

change that could be made.

Interview participant 3 stated that collegial support is imperative by sharing: “Constantly

having conversations with teachers about instructional practices, what is working and

what isn’t working.” Interview participant 4 shared that building leadership capacity can

begin by:

I think really just seeing what is already going on and what’s already working and

see who is already leading and what is functioning well, then work on the things

that aren’t working well and leave those other things alone for a while. If you

have other ideas may be revisit it later but when you start a new PLC, change is

hard and so be very cautious and purposeful.

Interview participant 8 also responded that having leadership support was vital by stating:

We would have leadership team members who were always there, which I think

people unfortunately felt like it was someone to spy on them, but really it was just

like a liaison that helped but I think having a team leader that is well trained on

how to facilitate conversations helps the team.

Interview participant 13 mentioned the importance of buy-in:

166

…you know almost everybody has to buy in to the ideas and the philosophy of

PLCs if you have a team. Sometimes it’s hard making sure that staff really know

what the benefits of this are so trying to build that guy in because if you don’t

have that then the rest of your professional development isn’t going to go

anywhere.

Theme 3. Communicating expectations. Communicating expectations of the PLC

process was also evidenced. The questionnaire participants’ open ended responses

determined this by the following:

 In sustaining a PLC, I think there should be ongoing training for new staff and even a refresher course for everyone.

 Make sure everyone understands what is at stake and how to get the most out of a PLC.

 For some people, it’s a shift in how they have always done things and it can be hard for some to collaborate with others.

 A big challenge is not everyone participating in the process.

All 14 interviewees referred to the importance of establishing common norms and

expectations for PLC team members.

Interview participant 1 stated the source of communication is essential by stating:

We have a leadership team, which we need a leadership team because they report

directly to the district, but then it also goes down to the specialists and what can

they do to plan those professional developments and then bringing it back to

extended leadership which includes the grade level leaders, and then those grade

level leaders get back to their team to discuss and debrief.

Interview participant 2 highlighted the significance of communication by sharing:

167

The communication of why we chose to be educators and what should we look at

as a final product, which is obviously our kids. Definitely keeping that in mind,

with everything that you do, it’s not about what you teach, it’s about what the

results are in relation to what you teach.

Interview participant 3 determined that being transparent and communicating the purpose

is valuable by stating:

I think that it always helps whenever there is change to begin by explaining to

teachers the research behind it and the rationale of why we do this and how it

helps students and how it helps us as educators.

Interview participant 5 shared the significance of establishing norms by stating:

Having set guidelines of this is what’s expected during our meeting, because that

time does go by so fast and if you’re sitting there dwelling on something, you’re

not really focused or getting the work done.

Interview participant 7 added:

I think they have to be able to build team norms; you can’t just go in and go we

are going to use the norms from here, but really what are our team norms so that

we can get to the collective commitments on our own because you have all these

little teams contributing to a big team, really our school is one big PLC.

Table 16 identifies the theme name, description, like responses and sample quotes by

individual participant’s response relating to RQ3.

168

Table 16

Research Question 3 Themes

Theme name Theme

Description

Number of

interview

participants

with like

responses:

Sample Quotations

Providing

Common

Planning Time

for

Collaboration

Teams are

provided

common

planning

time at least

weekly. The

district offers

a half day

each week

for

professional

development.

Paid time is

offered after

school

quarterly to

teachers to

collaborate

10/14  It’s giving people time, but then again explaining the purpose and why we do this, it’s ultimately

helping our kids.

 Being provided the time to look at data and plan.

 Scheduling common time and block time so that teachers are teaching the same thing at the same

time to ensure alignment happens during

collaboration.

 Giving the time to meet and setting mandatory meeting days.

 Sharing purposeful ideas that are focused on the topic helps to develop skills because it’s

supported with data.

 Working together to share ideas to support not only you but your students.

Teacher

Buy-in and

collegial

support

Allowing

teachers a

voice in

decision

making and

empowering

teachers to

try new ideas

9/14  We (teachers) trust them (administrators) to make decisions they need to make and they trust

us to make the decisions we need to make..

 Creating buy in from staff by explaining the purpose and why we do this.

 Having leaders willing to listen to new ideas.

 Establishing little teams (grade levels) that contribute to the big team (school level).

 Sharing kids and holding each other accountable for success.

 Constantly having conversations about what is working and what isn’t working

 Understanding that not everyone is the same, but in turn you grow from that.

Communicating

Expectations

Training

leads and

establishing

norms,

commitments

and

expectations

that are

revisited

regularly

14/14  Making sure that transparency in communication exists between leaders and teachers.

 Communicate whey we chose to be educators.

 Define expectations and commitments.

 Establishing norms and guidelines focused on what needs to get done.

 Understanding what a PLC is (not a personal meeting but a professional meeting)

 Understand the structure to have all members participate

169

Summary for RQ3. The third question focused on the foundation of a PLC

contributing to teacher growth and instructional effectiveness. Questionnaire participants

indicated that 90% or more agree that learning together with colleagues, learning from

each other, having protected time for joint planning or development and having

opportunities for professional development contributed to influencing professional

growth and instructional effectiveness. Further, an astounding 100% of the questionnaire

participants agreed or strongly agreed that taking responsibility for they own professional

learning is significant in being a member of a PLC. Most or 82% of the questionnaire

participants described that PLCs are useful for schools and students. Participants

described the characteristics that facilitate a PLC to include staff buy in, time,

collaboration, and data. These resulted from the contributing open-ended excerpts

collected from the questionnaire participants: “there needs to be time to do it without just

adding one more thing for teachers to fit in along with everything else,” “talking about

student progress on a regular basis and planning together as a team to better

accommodate all of our students,” “we must have dedicated time to meet with our PLC

teams to ensure that we can analyze the data and answer the four key questions,” “the

whole staff to have buy in, everyone has to be part of the process in order for it to work

effectively, sustaining a PLC should be ongoing training for new staff and even refresher

course for everyone.”

Next, the factors that were identified as challenges of PLCs included providing

time, training, member attitudes, or openness. Questionnaire participants described these

challenges by indicating in the following open ended responses: “New teachers might not

have the training/experience of a PLC,” “district changes from year to year,” “making

sure everyone can agree and be on the same page the majority of the time,” “when one

170

person takes over the entire meeting and doesn’t allow others to share- can ruin a PLC,”

“teachers are expected to do a lot with limited resources and incentives which also affects

teacher buy in and sustaining a PLC.”

The researcher identified three themes relevant to RQ3, which were consistently

common planning time that must be provided and that it should be structured and

purposeful to support professional growth and instructional effectiveness. Further,

instructional effectiveness is driven by purposeful collaboration that requires ongoing

conversations that are relevant to content and student achievement. Teachers buy-in when

they can authenticate and validate a structure of what and why PLC’s are in place. When

mutual trust exists between colleagues and school leaders, as stated by one participant:

“We (teachers) trust them (administrators) to make decisions they need to make and they

trust us to make the decisions we need to make” then sustainable change is probable.

Also, this structure should ensure that all members are respected, valued and empowered

to be collaborative members of a school organization and that all stakeholders have fluid

communication. It was significantly recognized that collective commitments, norms and

expectations be priorities when meeting in a PLC to confirm that professional growth and

instructional effectiveness be the focus. A reoccurring component of the success of PLC

was heavily grounded in teacher support. Teachers believed that continued development

is linked to support and this ultimately supports doing what is best for all kids.

Summary

This study explored how professional learning community models in one K-8

school district were designed and implemented with a focus on teaching and learning and

how educators perceive participation in PLCs influenced their professional growth and

development. Five schools in the southwest United States participated in this study. The

171

case study included 14 participants that were interviewed and 39-41 participants who

completed the electronic questionnaires. Finally, artifacts that included three of the five

schools’ continuous improvement plan, PLC minutes and achievement data collected

during the implementation process were used to support the results. Hatch’s (2002) data

analysis strategy of coding was used to determine specific patterns and themes in the

following.

The first research question focused on teacher perceptions of the PLC model

being implemented the district. The researcher identified three themes responding to this

question: collaborative conversations structured in grade level teams or leadership teams

that are focused on data supporting student achievement, along with a shared

responsibility to ensure that all members are accountable to each other and to all the

students by sharing instructional strategies and data. Finally, mutual commitment to

common practices was indicative of how teachers supported one another.

The second question focused on how the PLCs were structured and implemented

to show a primary focus on data based decisions to improve teaching and learning. The

researcher identified three themes responding to this question. These included that

teaching and learning are dependent on common assessments, common goals, progress

monitoring and teacher support. This included that common assessments are used to

improve student learning by ensuring grade level members are teaching student

objectives during the same time so that teams can collaborate or support one another on

next instructional steps observed through data analysis. Continuous monitoring student

progress and giving priority to student learning are all important factors of decisions that

improve teaching and learning. Further, three out of five continuous improvement plans

and teacher PLC notes indicated that a focus on strengthening instruction for all students

172

and data driven decision making aligns to the processes substantial in the success of

PLCs. This is simply the ideal way of creating common goals.

The third question determined how K-8 educators explain and describe

participation in professional learning communities’ influenced their professional growth

and instructional effectiveness in the southwest region of the United States. Most do

agree that learning together with colleagues, learning from each other, having protected

time for joint planning or development and having opportunities for professional

development that contribute to influencing professional growth and instructional

effectiveness. The researcher identified three themes relevant to RQ3, which were

consistently common planning time that must be provided, structured and purposeful

forums that support professional growth and instructional effectiveness. Further,