UCLA SMP EdNews, May 2007
SMP staff and faculty recently journeyed to the windy city, joining thousands of colleagues in the fields of education, research, and evaluation at the AERA (American Educational Research Association) Annual Meeting. There they presented their research on SMP programs and shared experiences in implementing school improvement efforts.
Attending an AERA conference in Chicago means sharing space with 12,000 others who can select from thousands of sessions to attend over five days. So it was that about 75 people chose to attend the symposium titled, Critical Teacher Education With an Attitude: Learning to Read the World of School and the Lifeworlds of Students. I was one of the four presenters, with Ernest Morrell, UCLA Assistant Professor of Education, as the discussant. My portion was titled Moving From Teaching With Certainty to Teaching With Curiosity: Using Readings From Research and Interactive Discussion Procedures to Change Teaching Culture. I presented research showing how factors other than the organization of the curriculum and teaching techniques effect the results we obtain for our students. This was coupled with descriptors of processes we use at UCLA SMP to help our participants engage with readings on research.
The conference also provided a chance to hear many of the names we see on articles about education – among those most prominently featured were David Berliner on testing and Jean Anyon on social issues. On a personal note, I took great pleasure in sitting in on several talks on math education given by one of my former high school students, Joi Spencer, now a Ph.D. We spend so much time learning what to do that it is a real benefit to take time out to talk about why we do what we do and have conversations with others on understanding our practice and our students.
By Ofelia Huidor, Research & Evaluation Coordinator and Monica Sanchez, Graduate Student Researcher
Overall, survey data indicated that significant gains were achieved in participant understanding with respect to the following key topic areas: (1) Collaboration across learning communities, and (2) How to engage in inquiry and reflection to enhance student learning.
• Post survey results indicated that educators who participated in the CFG institute had greater understanding of PLC concepts – guiding principles that are critical to authentic teacher collaboration and a focus on student learning. • Survey data taken before and after the CFG institute indicated that participants had higher rates of confidence in developing their expertise in the use of protocols and the practice of exchanging feedback with colleagues – skills that are critical to the successful management of a CFG. • Data focusing on CFG implementation collected from respondents at the CFG institute follow-up day confirm that the training has been helpful in providing effective methods and ideas for facilitating collaboration with other colleagues. • Responses from participants in active CFG groups also tended to show a high degree of communication and trust between CFG members, further indicating that the institute was successful in opening up dialogue and providing coaches the necessary training to facilitate a CFG. • Analysis of qualitative data from a participant questionnaire focusing on CFG development several months after the CFG institute indicated that administrative support is critical to the formation of active CFGs. We had about eleven people attend our 40-minute roundtable presentation, mostly university scholars in the field of curriculum and instruction.
I was invited by Richard Elmore to the AERA Annual Meeting to serve on a panel with him, along with Lee Teitel and Elizabeth City of Harvard University; Andrew Lachman of the Connecticut Center for School Change; and Mary Ann Prichard, Julie Burnett and Sybil Madison-Boyd of the University of Chicago. We were exploring our respective support for educators in developing disciplined approaches to collaborative work around instructional improvement.
The panel was dialoguing with a group of about seventy-five attendees that had close to equal representation from researchers and practitioners. We engaged the audience in small group discussions around questions presented, and encouraged them to formulate questions to the panel based on those discussions. We then talked with them about their issues of concern – not just points we wanted to make. It became very evident that while everyone on the panel is doing similar work, our organizations are driven by differing beliefs. What developed from this time together was a new network from which UCLA SMP’S own community of practice could grow and learn. Our conversations will continue and I believe UCLA SMP clearly brought to the table the strong avocation for teachers and their role in leadership and improvement.
In this chapter, John examines SMP’s efforts to guide schools in seeing “themselves as part of a social class system, and to understand how that system, and the different cultures associated with it, governs schooling” (Finn, p. 192). This chapter also explores how SMP, through its instructional leadership institutes and school-site coaching, uses Patrick Finn’s Literacy With An Attitude – Educating Working-Class Children in Their Own Self-Interest – to assist schools in identifying new ways in which they can help their students learn.
No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible.
UCLA School Management Program - UCLA Campus Publication
Date: May 15, 2007 |