ERIC EJ974367: Literacy Learning Communities in Partnership

2012·0.66 MB·English

by  ERIC

Literacy Learning Communities in Partnership
Deidre M. Clary, PhD
Mary E. Styslinger, PhD
Victoria A. Oglan, PhD
University of South Carolina
ABSTRACT: This article describes how a literacy learning community model was developed
between two high school partnership sites and a large southern public university, and how
teacher collaboration and shared learning across content areas in the first year impacted
teachers’ learning about literacy instruction and their school’s vision for literacy. Specifically,
teachers’ learning was analyzed using multiple data: in-depth teacher interviews, surveys and
inventories, teachers’ coursework and portfolios, and classroom artifacts.Findings indicate that
embedded staff development characterized by collaborative approaches to teachers’ learning
located in professional learning communities is effective especially with respect to teaching
contentareareading;teachercollaborationthathonorscontinuousprofessionallearning,either
in a school-university partnership or within a wider group at the school or district level, offers
rich possibilities for generating viable literacy learning communities.
Seven teachers of varying disciplines from two rural conversations about their school’s concern with
high schools sit around a table on a Saturday student achievement.
morning. The focus of discussion is adolescent literacy This short vignette illuminates key char-
and test scores. Frustrated teachers ask questions like acteristics of professional learning commu-
‘‘How can I get my students to read assigned texts? nities. In such communities, teachers engage
HowcanIgetthemtocomprehendwhattheyreadin in mutual collaboration as they establish
the text? How can I get my students to improve their shared goals designed to motivate and support
vocabulary?’’ As they continue to swap stories and student learning. In the instance described
share what is not working in their classrooms, the above, one of their common goals was to
university facilitator suggests that they try to develop shared resources for helping students
understand their students’ reading processes and acquire effective reading skills and strategies.
practices, as well as interrogate their own thinking Regrettably, teacher learning communities like
about instruction. They agree on a common goal to the one depicted above rarely exist in second-
findoutabouttheirstudents’readinghabitsandtheir ary schools faced with inherent challenges to
metacognitive awareness strategies. At the next teacher collaboration.
meeting, the teachers bring student data based on Historically, high schools were organized
reading inventories provided by the facilitator. Amid according to the factory model (Steiny, 2007)
pleasfor‘‘quick fixes’’andmisgivingsabout whatcan that resulted in segmented curriculum and
be done to help their students, they come to a shared organizational norms that seemed incompatible
understanding of how they will problem solve together with a culture of collaboration (Fullan &
and locate resources for improving their students’ Hargreaves,1996).Untilrecently,littleattention
literate lives. They come to learn about what is was given to how teachers learned, as it was
happening in classrooms other than their own. customary for districts to schedule ‘‘one shot’’
Although they do not explicitly discuss the supports in-service sessions featuring high profile speak-
behind the constructive shifts at this meeting, it is ers. Accordingly, teachers were mandated to
clear that they are coming to realize how their gain in-service credit; they received training that
partnership enables them to participate in larger was often disconnected from daily instructional
28 School—University Partnerships Vol. 5, No. 1
Literacy Learning Communities in Partnership 29
practice, and subsequently returned to their mining mutually meaningful relevant and
classrooms no better equipped to serve their essential joint work to serve children, families
students and without being asked to document and communities...[because] [w]hen stakehold-
how they were implementing these ‘‘best ers share a vision, they eagerly embrace
practice’’ skills they had just been spoon-fed. responsibility for action’’ (Hoffman, Dahlman
Overtime,staffdevelopmenthas‘‘morphed &Zierdt,2009).Thepurposeofthisarticleisto
from a passive saturation of information to describe specifically three results of our imple-
interactive communication in the form of mentation of a learning community model in
professional learning communities’’ (Lent, our PDS: 1) how a literacy learning community
2007, p. ix). According to recent research, what model was developed within two ‘‘partnership
distinguishes professional learning communities sites,’’ 2) how the model was significant in
from other staff development models is their deepening school-university partnerships over
scopebeyondtheindividualandadeepcoherence time, and 3) how teacher collaboration and
that includes: shared learning in the first year was instrumen-
tal in arousing teacher confidence and instilling
(cid:2) Connection to something larger responsibility for teaching content area reading,
(cid:2) Coordinated perspectives, discourse and ac-
as well as providing the impetus for the
tions
development of each school’s collective vision
(cid:2) Shared resources to address recurring prob-
for literacy.
lems of practice
(cid:2) Making visible tacit knowledge of learning
(NCTE, 2011, p.15–16).
Project RAISSE
Researchers also confirm that teacher
collaboration is critical to professional learning. We conceived Project RAISSE (Reading Assis-
‘‘The right kind of continuous, structured tance Initiative for Secondary School Educa-
teacher collaboration improves the quality of tors), a professional development literacy
teaching and pays big, often immediate, initiative adapted from the literacy coaching
dividends in student leaning and professional model (Clary, 2008), in partnership with two
morale in virtually any setting’’ (Eaker, DuFour rural high schools both based in low socio-
& DuFour, 2002, p. xii). Researchers concur economic environments, and likewise con-
that high quality professional development with cerned with students’ low performance on tests.
embedded support positively affects student Project RAISSE was based at the University of
learning and improves standardized test scores South Carolina where we teach graduates in
(Fullan, Hill & Crevola, 2006; Joyce & content literacy, and funded over two years at a
Showers, 2002; Thompson, Gregg & Niska, total cost of $150,000 by the Arthur Vining
2004). Davis Foundation.
Essentially,ProfessionalDevelopmentSchools We designed Project RAISSE to facilitate
(PDSs) embrace inquiry-based teaching and secondary teachers’ understanding of content
learning that utilizes teacher collaboration area reading and to expand teachers’ knowledge
within the context of a site-based professional about adolescent literacy through inquiry into
learning community, either with a partner such the theory and practice of teaching reading.
as a university or within a larger group at the While Project RAISSE served to strengthen
school or district level. PDS partnerships school partnerships in secondary schools, it
between school districts and universities have utilized literacy and collaborative approaches to
the potential for continuing staff development support content area instruction in the context
effortsthatattempttoblendtheoryandpractice of embedded staff development. Consistent
(National Council for Accreditation of Teacher with current thinking about literacy education
Education, 2001). At the heart of a PDS and teachers’ learning, the theoretical frame-
partnership is the practice of ‘‘[c]arefully deter- work for Project RAISSE was grounded in
30 DEIDREM.CLARYETAL.
constructivist and adult learning principles (cid:2) The school should be sensitive to multicul-
(Lent, 2007). Teachers enrolled in three mod- tural concerns in its curriculum and pro-
ules—‘‘Literacy Graduate Study,’’ ‘‘Collegial grams.
Study Groups,’’ and ‘‘Teacher Professional (cid:2) The schoolshould be innovative and progres-
sive in its policies and practices, with faculty
Development’’—which were led by instructors
willing to allow USC candidates to try a
in the College of Education. The Literacy
variety of teaching practices.
Graduate Study and Collegial Study Groups
(cid:2) The school should have adequate physical
modules were intended to stimulate interroga-
facilities and up-to-date instructional equip-
tion of teachers’ attitudes about reading and ment and materials.
their current instructional practices. The Teach- (cid:2) The school should have a curriculum that
er Professional Development module attempted includesoptimumeducationalexperiencesfor
to challenge static views of high school culture both pupils and teacher candidates.
by opening up possibilities for fostering teach- (cid:2) The school should have a well-organized in-
service program to stimulate professional
ers’ ongoing collaborative professional learning
growth of the instructional staff.
through cross-disciplinary study groups. At the
heart of Project RAISSE was professional
learning aimed at preparing teachers to lead
Partnership sites are P-12 schools interested
site-based,cross-contentareastudygroups(small
in providing clinical placements for teacher
teacher learning communities consisting of 6–8
candidates and may include whole schools
teachers), serving in roles similar to the now
(typicallyattheelementarylevel)ordepartments
common literacy coach. Ultimately, the project
within a school (a possibility particularly
anticipated serving 48 teachers over two years
relevant to high schools). University-based
(2006–2008).
faculty visit partnership sites regularly to
supervise advanced practicum students and
teaching interns. Partnership sites provide
PDS at the University of South
opportunities for teacher candidates to work
Carolina
with P-12 students to develop their teaching
skills and meet university course requirements,
The University of South Carolina (USC) offers as appropriate for each candidate’s level in the
two models for envisioning school-university program. While there is variability across
partnerships:‘‘partnershipsites’’andProfession- schools regarding academic requirements and
al Development Schools (PDS). Each model practices, teachers working with candidates in
requires different levels of support from both partnership sites support these pre-service
the schools and the university, but both models teachersin testing ‘‘new ideas’’thatthese novice
require a shared commitment by all parties to educators have typically learned about in their
improve teaching and learning for all constitu- education coursework.
ents. Partnership sites and professional develop- Like partnership sites, professional develop-
ment schools are identified through discussions ment schools (PDS) in the USC model also
between university and school district person- provide quality placements for teacher candi-
nel, with the following criteria serving as the dates.However,PDSsitesmovebeyondthisone
basis for selection: element of collaboration by agreeing to a three-
year commitment to the following:
(cid:2) The school should have an instructional staff
which is interested in working with teacher (cid:2) a demonstrated emphasis on inquiry-based
candidates and which understands the re- teaching and learning;
quirements of doing so. (cid:2) the presence of a critical mass of faculty
(cid:2) The school should have well-qualified faculty working with USC teacher candidates
who employ effective teaching techniques. throughout their programs;
Literacy Learning Communities in Partnership 31
(cid:2) a faculty-wide examination of the National fessional development that utilizes study
Network for Educational Renewal’s Agenda groups, and how does new learning about
for Education in a Democracy; content literacy grow their responsibility for
(cid:2) completion of at least one research or teaching literacy?
demonstration project in collaboration with & How do collaborative approaches such as
USC faculty over the course of the three-year teachers working together in professional
relationship; learning communities support teachers’ new
(cid:2) the hosting, whenever possible, of pre-service knowledge about instructional practices and
courses on-site; research, with a particular focus on content
(cid:2) active participation in the governance of the literacy?
PDS Initiative within USC’s School Univer- & What new understandings does Project
sity Partnership Network; RAISSE afford about teachers’ professional
(cid:2) the provision of a dedicated physical space learning supported by rich school-university
within the school for use by a USC Liaison partnerships?
anddistrictremunerationof50%oftheUSC
Liaison’s annual salary; and
Participation
(cid:2) the assignment of a P-12 faculty member or
administrator as the site’s Clinical Adjunct Seven secondary teachers participated in this
responsible for collaborating with the USC
study. Most had earned masters degrees in their
LiaisoninguidingPDSinitiatives,anddistrict
teaching content area or in education. Two
remuneration of 50% of the Clinical Ad-
teachers taught social studies; two taught
junct’s annual stipend.
English; two taught science; and one taught
math. They ranged in teaching experience from
two to fifteen years.
Research Purpose and Design
Our sample was bound by a caveat that
included teachers already identified by their
The purpose of our inquiry was twofold. We
schools as potential leaders for literacy coaching
firstwantedtoexplorein-serviceteachers’initial
positions. One ELA participant recalled in a
perceptions about reading, including their
scheduled interview the tenor of an early
willingness and ability to teach reading, at the
conversation with the school’s administration:
entry into this embedded professional develop-
ment project, and then examine subsequent When the whole thing first started, I met
changestotheirthinkingasaresultof theirfirst with the principal . . . to talk about who
year of Project RAISSE experiences that were would be best to be in this project because
designed to modify teachers’ thinking about we wanted people who were enthusiastic.
We wanted people who were going to stay
literacylearningandclassroompractice.Wealso
there. We really thought it out before we
wanted to evaluate the professional learning
even went and asked anybody, and of the
community model developed within the frame-
threepeopleweaskedinitially,twoofthem
work of a PDS partnership, how relationships
said yes. . . . I think it was because the
between key stakeholders developed, and the
administration was excited that people
impactofnewlearningontheteachersandtheir wanted to join.
respective schools.
In the first year, the participants were
In this inquiry, we employed a practitioner-
enrolled in six hours of graduate study taught
researcher design that enabled us to serve as the
at alternating partnership school sites. The goal
course instructors and researchers, respectively
of the six hours of coursework was to build
(Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999). Three key
foundational knowledge in the teaching of
questions guided our research:
reading and writing congruent with current
& To what extent do secondary teachers’ literacyteachereducationtheoriesandpractices.
perceptions about literacy instruction shift Aligned with constructivist principles, the
following participation in job-embedded pro- courses involved participants in a variety of
32 DEIDREM.CLARYETAL.
literacy engagements designed to build their Appendix) with the seven participants were
meaning-making around reading and address conducted at the end of the first year (Marshall
any perceived lack of confidence and confusion & Rossman, 2011). Course-related documents
about reading. Consistent with the tenets of a werealsocollected.Forexample,atthefirstclass
professional learning community (Lent, 2007), meeting, the teachers were asked to define
the curriculum, engagements, and projects were ‘‘reading’’ in an Admit Slip. To provide some
negotiated with the participants. Initial class- means of comparison, the teachers were asked
room engagements drew on their own under- again to define ‘‘reading’’ at the end of the first
standingsofreadingprocessesincludingcrafting year of graduate study. To gather insights about
a literacy memoir and sharing personal artifacts participants’ thinking during graduate study,
from their reading lives. During graduate study, teachers completed exit slips at each meeting
the participants were immersed in young adult and wrote mid-point and end-point reflective
literature and picture books through instruc- narratives. To document whatwas happeningin
tional practices such as read alouds, book clubs, their content area classrooms, teachers kept a
andbookpasses.Teacherspreparedreadalouds, portfolio of artifacts including assignments,
enjoyed time for independent reading, and plans, materials, and resources. To foster
learnedhowtobuildprofessionalandclassroom reflection about their own reading processes
libraries with the assistance of grant funds. and provide another source of data, teachers
Informed by current research about what completed surveys such as a Burke Reading
adolescent studentsneed, ‘‘workshopping’’ strat- Interview (1987), a literacy profile, and a
egiesoncomprehension,vocabulary,andcritical metacognitive awareness of reading inventory
thinking were systematically built into group (Mokhtari & Reichard, 2002). The university
meetings. instructor took observational notes during
The participants also tested out literacy course meetings.
strategies in their classrooms and shared these To understand and make sense of the data,
with the wider group; they also shared their we used various analytic procedures such as
learning through attendance at professional locating patterns within data sets, developing
literacy experiences outside the course. Several case descriptions, and finding patterns across
classroom projects were planned to connect case descriptions. The project instructor, direc-
literacy theory with classroom practices; these tor, and co-director analyzed data initially by
included a Reader’s Profile that described and datasetsatmonthlyresearchteammeetings.We
documented the world of two struggling hadtheadvantageofeachothers’analysesofthe
adolescent readers, a unit plan taught and data and achieved triangulation across both
supported by the creation of a text set, and a researchers and data sources as we analyzed the
Teachers’ Portfolio submitted at mid- and end- same data sets and compared analyses. Our
points of the year. All of the course experiences study was designed to make sense of the
were designed to position the participants to teachers’ lived experiences. Following the initial
lead study groups and present learning at analysis by data sets, we organized data
teacher conferences in the second year of the chronologically by case (Stake, 1995). In this
project. way, we followed an individual teacher across
the year using the patterns and themes estab-
lished in the analysis phase. We then searched
Data Collection and Analysis
for categories within and across each case. For
For the purposes of this study, data was example, data seemed to easily fall into
collected over the first year of the project. As categories related to teachers’ changing beliefs
Yin (2009) suggests is necessary, multiple aboutreadingandinstructionalpracticesrelated
sources of evidence/data were collected includ- to content literacy and their disposition toward
ing interviews, documents, surveys, and obser- literacy leadership and responsibility, as well as
vation. Structured in-depth interviews (see revelations about teachers’ lived experience in a
Literacy Learning Communities in Partnership 33
professionallearningcommunity(inmanycases, Shifting Theoretical Orientation Towards
for the first time) during the project’s imple- Reading and Beliefs about Instructional
mentation. Practice and Teaching Content
From these categories, we developed several
We found that none of the teachers began this
themes that we share here. We used an open-
professional learning experience with a deep
coding system to develop these themes (Strauss
understanding of the reading process; none of
& Corbin, 1990) that were related to teachers’
the teachers taught explicit strategies when
perceived notions about literacy and their
reading text. A science teacher with five years’
ability to teach reading. We confirmed our
teaching experience wrote: ‘‘When I think of
themes by revisiting the data systematically at
teaching reading in the science classroom, I
our monthly research meetings; we checked in
think of teaching them how to dissect their
with our participants to validate our themes.
reading...I try to get them to read for content,
Forexample,thenotionthat secondaryteachers
little bitty pieces of information instead of the
do not have to teach reading and that it is
huge picture.’’ Midway through the project, we
someone else’s responsibility was consistent
observed a gradual shift in some teachers’
across the teachers’ initial data. These teachers
understanding about reading as a socio-linguis-
repeatedly expressed their lack of confidence
tic process that is not defined and taught in
and expertise in taking responsibility for literacy
‘‘pieces and parts’’; this shift was evidenced in
instruction; their theoretical orientation was
teachers’talkinclassmeetingsandartifactssuch
steeped in the behaviorist tradition that was
as reflective narratives and exit slips.
incompatible with evidence-based reading in-
Consistent with their training and qualifi-
struction. Over the course of a year, multiple
cations, secondary content teachers including
data were able to confirm that most teachers’
English language arts (ELA) teachers are not
views about the importance of content area
expected to teach reading. The teachers identi-
reading and their responsibility for teaching
fied for this professional learning did not
literacy started to shift with encouraging results
perceive their roles to include teaching reading.
from their students. The inductive analytic
A typical response came from a social studies
process suggested that the emerging themes
teacher: ‘‘Teachers do not include reading
were grounded more in the data than in the
becausetheybelieveitisnottheirjobs.’’Neither
research literature.
were these teachers prepared to teach reading.
AnELAteacheropined:‘‘Icamefreshoutofmy
bachelor’s degree and realized that I didn’t
Findings
know how to teach children to read and I had
lotsofstudentswhodidnotknowhowtoread.’’
Asweanalyzedthedata,weuncoveredthreekey
She continued:
themes that represent secondary teachers’ learn-
ing about content literacy, located within the I was kind of struggling with my own
philosophy about it because I really never
context of a professional learning community
thought I was going to have to figure out
that afforded productive collaboration and joint
whattodowithkidsatsuchlowlevels.Then
cooperation. In the subsequent section, we
aftertenyears,Iwentbacktoschoolandgot
expand on the following three themes:
amaster’sinelementaryeducationandthat
has been the most helpful education I’ve
& shifting theoretical orientation towards read- had, really, when working with English
ing and beliefs about instructional practice
students. I...become more familiar with
and teaching content
adolescent literature that would help me
& changing thinking about adolescents and accommodate these children.
adolescent literacy
& growing responsibility for teaching literacy Finding ways to implement content area
and demonstration of literacy leadership literacy in their classrooms was not easy as the
34 DEIDREM.CLARYETAL.
teachers navigated systemic and institutional access content in geometry. She acknowledged:
demands located in the high school culture. ‘‘It’sworkedsogood...WhenIhaveusedthese
They nursed pre-existing notions about content reading strategies my students have responded
standards and curriculum mandates. For exam- well. These students have improved over last
ple,theycontinuallyfeltconstrainedbycoverage year’s students’ scores.’’
of content, rigorous adherence to content It became apparent early on in the project
standards, and insufficient time to include that these teachers lacked agency, deferring to
new strategies as well as testing. These teachers ‘‘other people’’ to make decisions about their
privileged the teaching of content fixated instruction. A novice teacher justified: ‘‘There
primarily on reading textbooks, writing essays areotherpeoplemakinguptherulesformethat
and summaries, testing content, answering I have to go by . . . I can usewhatever means
questions, and completing projects. A creative necessary, you know, like a read aloud . . .but I
science teacher who encouraged her students to am still kinda restricted to, you have to teach
use non-print and print sources resorted to this.’’ Although external demands initially
conventional assessment—taking tests, answering appeared to constrain these teachers’ sense of
questions, and completing projects. agency,inanuncannywaythechallengeofthese
These teachers attempted to incorporate demands fostered their development of agency
bestpracticesinreadingwithintheirpre-existing as teachers of literacy.
instructional practices, in most cases, with some
challenges. For example, the science teacher
Changing Thinking about Adolescents
acknowledged her biggest challenge in an exit
and Adolescent Literacy
slip:
These teachers entered the project with a deficit
Teaching all of my standards in an
viewofadolescentliteracyandof theirstudents.
interesting way. I think I am able to work
Initially, these teachers harbored perceptions of
in the standards through inquiry when
given the opportunity – that’s the only their students’ reading grounded in unconstruc-
approach I can take. You must do the best tive attitudes toward their students. For exam-
with what you are given as well as the ple,asocialstudiesteacherrecounted:‘‘Itseems
guidelinessetout.DoIhavetoteachallmy like the high school students that I’ve had the
standards–yes.Istheendofthecoursetest last 12 years, many of them don’t want to read,
going away – no. I can just try to make my andtheydon’twanttowrite....Theywon’tread
students interested while keeping the
it. They’ll go home. They’ll play on the video
administration happy.
games; they’ll talk on the phone; they’ll do
She later reflected that her teaching ‘‘became anything but their work.’’ An ELA teacher also
morerelaxedandmorefocusedonthestudents, captured this prevailing view: ‘‘Our students do
not the standards’’ and that her students were not read or are expected to read nearly as much
‘‘more open to new experiences and activities.’’ as they should be. They see it as a form of
She related that her students were ‘‘the most punishment, not as a form of escapism or
prepared they have ever been for testing.’’ relaxation.’’
As the university-school partnership deep- These teachers could not concede that they
ened, we found that the teachers’ beliefs and ought to play a role in helping students become
practices about literacy began to shift as they literatecitizensintoday’sworld.Anexperienced
startedtosynthesizeandapplynewlearning.We social studies teacher declared: ‘‘It was some-
observed that they were better prepared to meet body else’s job to teach them how to read. Why
the challenge of transitioning to teaching that should I be teaching them how to read in high
makes connections between the literacy skills school?’’ They asserted that students deemed as
students learn in the classroom and the skills struggling learners could not be helped. The
required of them to function in the real-world. same teacher rationalized, ‘‘a lot of high school
Notably, a math teacher used book clubs to kids that do have literacy problems have found
Literacy Learning Communities in Partnership 35
ways to mask their problems in high school.’’ applies to their classroom. We wanted to know,
When asked how they would help a struggling after one year’s embedded professional learn-
reader, we discovered that few teachers pos- ing, whether these teachers were convinced of
sessed appropriate strategies to help students. their responsibility for teaching literacy in their
Responses ranged from ‘‘look it up,’’ ‘‘find the content areas, and if they were ready to enact
appropriate person to help them learn to read the role of helping students understand the
better,’’ ‘‘skip it,’’ ‘‘sound it out,’’ ‘‘ask some- reading process which, in turn, would help
one,’’ ‘‘dictionary always near,’’ to ‘‘I’d ask an them to discover how to become ‘‘effective
English teacher.’’ We were not surprised by readers, learners, and thinkers’’ (Feathers,
these responses. As expected, these teachers 2004). It was disconcerting to learn that, after
lacked a deep understanding about a struggling one year of this embedded professional learn-
reader’s world. Nonetheless, this finding was ing project, one social studies teacher was not
disturbing. convinced that he should be a teacher of
As the university-school partnership deep- reading: ‘‘Is it my responsibility? Is it my
ened, however, we noticed how a steady shift in responsibility as a high school teacher, to do
teachers’beliefsaboutadolescentliteracyaltered this now?’’ On the other hand, the other six
their instructional practices. As the teachers teachers were convinced. An ELA teacher who
graduallygrewintheircommitmenttoacademic believed that ‘‘content teachers need more
strategies’’ saw herself as a role model for
literacyandimprovinginstructionalpractices,so
other teachers and held aspirations for moving
toodidtheirconvictionthatstudentsbenefitted
into a school role as a literacy leader: ‘‘People
from metacognitive strategic instruction. As the
are going to be looking to me for a model of
teachers’ own learning increased their cogni-
what they are supposed to be doing in their
zance of students’ personalities, strengths, and
classroom.’’
literate needs, there emerged some insight into
As the teachers began to enact new beliefs
thegenuineplightof adolescentliteracy.As one
and experiment with new practices over time,
teacher reflected, ‘‘I don’t think that I ever
some began to embrace the notion of literacy
actually considered adolescent literacy before
leadership that was steadily felt by some
this class.’’ We ask: would teachers’ gradual
colleagues on their hall. In particular, the math
realization about adolescent literacy have oc-
teacher caught our eye. As she continued to
curred in any professional learning setting? And
witness changes both in her teaching and in her
we posit: when a partnership promotes a
students’ learning, so too did she realize how
professional learning experience that juxtaposes
teacher transformation can influence her peers
teachers’ instructional practice with some theo-
and the wider school vision for literacy:
ry, and fosters stakeholders’ collaboration and
investment in the goals and expected outcomes Whenstudentstryoneofmynewstrategies
of the professional learning experience, then they do much better with that change if
thereiseverypossibilitythatteachers,supported they have already tried one of these
by their administrators, will embrace new strategies in another teacher’s class. I think
learning that challenges instructional norms this is a useful point. The more teachers
that we can get to change the way they
and promises to raise students’ academic
teach, then the more change that we can
achievement.
create when pushing for change.
Growing Responsibility for Teaching We were ambitious to hope that a growing
responsibility for teaching literacy and showing
Literacy and Showing Literacy Leadership
literacy leadership would manifest in all teach-
Following completion of the graduate study ers. Nevertheless, we observed that the teachers’
module, we learned that each teacher had been learning journeys collectively provided the
nudged, in some way, toward rethinking impetus for each school to continue its two-fold
literacy learning and instruction and how it mission of building capacity and sustaining
36 DEIDREM.CLARYETAL.
professional learning about literacy knowledge delegated the leadership of the school’s ap-
and instructional practice. proaching professional development program—
to be embedded in collegial study groups—to
these three teachers. The principal’s decision to
Guiding and Sustaining Successful
involve the entire faculty in collegial study
School-University Partnerships groups wasaccompanied bysupplemental funds
to extend the reach of the project. In the other
Our experiences with this collaborative profes- high school, the principal, not a hands-on
sional development model, focused on literacy administrator, gave token support to the project
learning, yielded salient understandings about initsfirstyear.Bycontrast,thenewlyappointed
implementing ongoing, embedded, site-based principal in the subsequent year provided the
professional learning that explores possibilities necessary direction for the school’s teacher-
for connecting theory to teachers’ experience leaders and brought enhanced commitment to
and instructional practices, and is nurtured by the project.
successful school-university partnerships. We
think, therefore, that the following elements
Assessing an Individual School’s Needs
are important in guiding and sustaining a
successful school-university partnership: enlist- Itseemscriticalthattheuniversityprovidingthe
ingtheleadershipandcooperationoftheschool professional learning collaborate with partners
principal in instilling goals for professional on the professional needs of the school’s
learning; assessing an individual school’s needs; community. Project funds were expended to
structuring effective partnerships between the support district professional development that
high school, district, and the university; scaf- meshed with university-project priorities for
folding structures to sustain ongoing profession- literacy. Although graduate study courses were
al development at the school and district level; already in place at the university, it was deemed
and building capacity for a school-wide literacy importanttocustomizethecurriculumtofitthe
learning community. We briefly discuss each of needs of content teachers at these specific
these elements below. school sites. Accommodating teachers’ profes-
sional and family schedules for site-based
professional learning was important in forming
Enlisting the Leadership and Cooperation
a sound basis for a workable partnership.
of the School Principal in Instilling Goals
for Professional Learning
Structuring Effective Partnerships
The collaborative professional development Between the High School, District, and
model adopted by Project RAISSE emphasizes
the University
the necessity for the promotion of mutual goals
and collaboration by the university partner, but At the start, we recognized that the successful
it also depends on principal leadership and implementation of the professional develop-
cooperation. The degree of leadership and ment model relied on an effective partnership
enthusiasm demonstrated by the two participat- between the local high schools, the school
ing school principals about the project’s possi- district, and the state university. Ongoing
bilities was noticeably inconsistent in the first communication between the university and key
year. In one high school, the principal recog- facilitators at the school and district level kept
nized the need for improved test scores; the stakeholders apprised of developments in
subsequently, she saw the potential of Project Project RAISSE. The partnership benefitted
RAISSE as a tool to improve student achieve- from project funds allocated to provide dis-
ment across the content areas. This principal trict-wideprofessionaldevelopment.Fundswere
tappedintothecollectiveleadershippotentialof also allocated for teachers’ graduate study
the three participating teacher-leaders and facilitatedbyArtsandSciencesuniversityfaculty
Literacy Learning Communities in Partnership 37
in collaboration with the teacher-leaders. As a Closing Thoughts
measure of support for what the project was
doing for the school, one high school commit- Our inquiry suggests that a collaborative model
ted funds to expand the number of participants that honors continuous professional learning,
in the Study Group module in the second year. either in a school-university partnership or
We conclude that reciprocity can play an within a wider group at the school or district
important part in developing deep relationships level, offers untapped possibilities for creating
with stakeholders. literacy learning communities that allow teach-
ers space and time to examine literacy beliefs
Scaffolding Structures to Sustain and instructional practices, and build and apply
new knowledge. Our inquiry shows that inter-
Ongoing Professional Development at
disciplinary collaborative groups can grow
the School and District Level
content area teachers’ learning, and that
It seems important that structures are put in embedded staff development, by its ongoing
place or that existing structures are utilized to nature, has the capacity to boost teachers’
guarantee sustainability over time such as confidence to integrate literacy strategies into
utilizing district/school professional develop- content instruction.
ment days. Project RAISSE, for example, Within the context of a reciprocal partner-
funded the ‘‘Teachers as Professional Leaders’’ ship, we contend that the RAISSE model is
module that provided the teacher-leaders with within reach of most secondary schools, since it
opportunities to showcase their new learning at fulfills a need for the process and practices
state forums and attend best practice seminars. requisite for implementing a school’s mission
There was an expectation that schools would for building capacity and sustaining profession-
continue to sponsor and make these opportu- al learning that leads to improved instructional
nities available to faculty. practice and student achievement. But our
inquiry also suggests that the RAISSE model
has wider application beyond literacy learning.
Building Capacity for a School-Wide
As schools and universities look for bipartisan
Literacy Learning Community
ways to improve teaching and learning that
Over two years, Project RAISSE impacted over leads to higher graduation rates, professional
51 teachers across the two high schools. One development schools might invest in infrastruc-
instance deserves special mention in demon- ture afforded by a school-university partnership
strating the power of literacy learning commu- as a means for establishing professional
nities in partnership with content area teachers. learning communities, either within or across
Partway through graduate study, three teacher- content areas, to which teachers bring their
leaders of varying disciplines in one high school own knowledge and experience and collaborate
announced: ‘‘We are more connected to one on an agreed learning agenda, supported by
anotheras aresult ofRAISSE.’’ProjectRAISSE new understandings about instructional prac-
‘‘didn’t force us to do anything. It’s allowed us tice and research facilitated by university
or encouraged us, provoked us to collaborate.’’ faculty.