RSA #4 - Game-Based Learning

“All fun & games? Understanding learner outcomes through educational games.” http://www.edutopia.org/blog/learner-outcomes-through-educational-games-kristen-dicerbo

“Digital game-based learning”

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/pages/4970

Summary of the Module

Game-based learning (GBL) offers students a learning environment that is “effective, interactive experiences that motivate and actively engage” them in the learning process (Trybus, 2014). Students provided with an environment where students make choices to reach a goal. Some choices will be successful, while others will have consequences students will need to respond to. According to Moore (1989) for effective learning to happen, there are three essential types of interaction: learner-content interaction, learner-instructor interaction, and learner-learner interaction (p. 1).  These three types of learning are all evident in GBL. The levels of interaction varies, but GBL allows students to interact with instructors and peers while still being motivated and engaged in content. Traditional learning for students can be lacking in some of these interactions. GBL provide “learning experiences that are authentic models of real world situations, allowing for strong transfer of understanding to real world situations” (Klopfer, Osterweil, Groff, & Haas, 2009, p.9). Even though the GBL can provide interactive experiences for students and the military and businesses are using it in training employees, there are barriers GBL must overcome in the classroom. Klopfer, Osterweil, Groff, and Haas (2009) discuss four factors teachers are capable of influencing with their actions: The Context (School), The Innovator (Teacher), The Innovation (Project/Tool), and The Operator (Students) (p.14). Teachers need to think about these four things when planning and implementing GBL into their classroom. The best way to avoid problems in using GBL is to “spend a little bit of time with these technologies before hitting the classroom floor, in order to address and potential obstacles” (Klopfer, Osterweil, Groff, and Haas, 2009, p. 15). When thinking about The Operator/student’s learning , there are four key principles to consider. Trybus (2014) mentions that students’ prior knowledge can help or hinder learning, students’ motivation determines, directs, and sustains what they do to learn, to develop mastery, students must acquire component skills, practice integrating them, and know when to apply what they have learned, and goal-directed practice coupled with targeted feedback enhances the quality of students’ learning (p. 3). Each of these is an important principle is addressed in GBL, but not always in traditional teaching environments. The world is changing. Students are changing. When teachers can “harness the power of well-designed games to achieve specific learning goals, and the result is a workforce of highly motivated learners who avidly engage with and practice applying problem-solving skills” (Trybus, 2014, p. 1). Isn’t that what teachers want...to create problem-solvers that will have a successful future ahead of them?

Ideas from Independent Reading

In the article “All Fun & Games? Understanding Learner Outcomes Through Educational Games, DiCerbo (2014) states “advocates of game-based learning for K-12 students cite the value of digital games to teach and reinforce skills that prepare students for college and career, such as collaboration, problem-solving, creativity, and communication.” GBL is growing tremendously among educators. There are lots of articles and reports out there supporting GBL, but not often do they discuss “using students’ in-game actions as evidence for theassessment of skills and knowledge” (DiCerbo, 2014). It is the “invisible” assessments that GBL allow teachers to see the ways students interact with the learning. GBL provides teachers and parents timely feedback so that changes can be made or help can be given to the students. GBL allows teachers to “observe a student’s sequence of actions, time spent on tasks, multiple attempts at activities, requests for help, and communication process” (DiCerbo, 2014). This is all valuable information in knowing what students have learned and if they are mastering the skills. DiCerbo (2014) does remind educators to remember what are education games and what is gamification of education, “defined as the use of game design elements in non-game contexts.” Educational games are a balance between engagement, assessment, and learning. In looking towards the future, DiCerbo (2014) states “much work is still needed to maximize their [games] value, particularly in the area of integration.” GBL still need work in becoming part of the curricula. Teachers still need to determine when and how GBL can integrated into the classroom, which can be quite a burden along with how to take information gained from the game and integrating it into the gradebook. The full potential of GBL has not been discovered by educators, but game developers are working with educators. If educators can can collect meaningful evidence from students’ interaction with games, “we have the potential to create new models of students’ knowledge and skills that expand our ability to both understand and influence student learning” (DiCerbo, 2014).

In “Digital Game-Based Learning,” Coffey (2009) discusses digital GBL as an “instructional method that incorporates educational content or learning principles into video games with the goal of engaging learners.” Students in K-12 have had access to technology their entire lives. These “digital natives” have come to process information differently that generations before them. GBL is one way to teachers can change their teaching to reach the digital natives. Coffey (2009) states digital GBL “involves activities that can range from completing very simple tasks to the development of intricate problem-solving skills. It does not matter what type (action, fighting, role-playing, etc.) of digital GBL the teacher is planning to use in the classroom the teacher still need to select the game based on the students. Students’ age, gender, competitiveness, previous gaming experience, and special needs are just a few things the teacher must consider. It is when the teacher can select an effective digital game that benefits will be seen. Students will be engaged and motivated while learning concepts and becoming problem-solvers. Coffey (2009) mentions that role-playing, simulation and adventure games are recommended to relate to the curriculum, but also help develop vocabulary skills and enhance mental quickness. Even with benefits, digital GBL does have some limitations. Digital games can “be more distracting than a typical learning tool” and “goals of the games do not necessarily always align with the learning goals of the classroom” (Coffey, 2009). Another concern with using digital games is that they are constantly being upgraded can be difficult for teachers to keep with.

 

Compare and Contrast

GBL is making its way into the educational classroom. The articles I read were very much in support of this learning mode, but did acknowledge the other side. Coffey (2009) and Klopfer, Osterweil, Groff, and Haas (2009) both mention how various applications of GBL are tied to the constructivist theory of education. GBL include learners “construct their understanding not just through interaction with the material, but also through collaboratively constructing new knowledge with their peers” (Klopfer, Osterweil, Groff, & Haas, 2009, p.13). All the articles mentioned how the teachers need to take into account various things about the students like age, gender, and level of gaming experience. The articles also mentioned how GBL could beneficial to students with autism or attention deficit disorder. Klopfer, Osterweil, Groff, and Haas (2009) were the only authors to mention how social networking, and not just digital games and simulations, as a valuable tool for teachers. “‘Knowledge cultures’ assembled in these online communities produce the capacity for cognition and accomplishment far beyond what one person alone could accomplish” (2009, p.12). Social networks been very successful for teacher to communicate assignments and class discussions.

Application in your setting

GBL has been a part of my classroom in the past years. I used several simulations when I taught ancient civilization, but they were not digital. I have used various website games as reviews for ELA and Geography. With my students being “digital natives,” I see myself using more GBL in the classroom. The resources I read will be a big help to me as I look forward into using digital games in the classroom. I would like to look at the using a digital game in my geography classes to help understand different cultures. We used the Peace Corps Challenge: Malaria last year, but I would like to incorporate more into the class. I like the collaboration, feedback, engagement that GBL offers teachers and students.

Coffey, H. (2009) “Digital game-based learning.” Learn NC. Retrieved from

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/pages/4970

DiCerbo, K. (2014). “All fun & games? Understanding learner outcomes through educational games.” Edutopia. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/learner-outcomes-through-educational-games-kristen-dicerbo

Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Groff, J., & Haas, J. (2009) “The instructional power of digital games, social networking, and simulations and how teachers can leverage them.” The Education Arcade. Retrieved from http://www.newmedia.org/game-based-learning--what-it-is-why-it-works-and-where-its-going.html

Moore, M. (1989). “Editorial: three types of interaction.” The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2). Retrieved from http://blackboard.cuchicago.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-1494690-dt-content-rid-4929409_2/courses/5352-5356.201520/Week6-reading-moore-interaction-edt6030-v14.pdf

Trybus, J. (2014).  Game-based learning: What it is, why it works, and where it's going.  New York, NY:  New Media Institute.  Retrieved from http://www.newmedia.org/about-new-media-institute-(nmi).html

RSA #3 - Resource-Based Learning

“Mapping and Managing Knowledge and Information in Resource-Based Learning”

(Peer Reviewed Journal)

http://blackboard.cuchicago.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_5_1

“Teachers’ View of the Implementation of Resource-Based Learning”

(Peer Reviewed Journal)

http://blackboard.cuchicago.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_5_1

Summary of the Module

Resource-based learning (RBL) is a deep learning mode that “is not tied to a single learning theory or to any specific pedagogy” (Campbell, Flageolle, Griffith, & Wojcik, 2004). RBL is an environment that is “designed for a particular audience and educational purpose” (Greenhow, Dexter, & Riedel, 2006). In RBL, teachers work collaboratively with the media specialist or LMC directors to create a unit. This unit is “designed to actively engage students with multiple resources in both print and non-print form” (Campbell, Flageolle, Griffith, & Wojcik, 2014). In RBL, the teacher is a coach that helps students navigate through the various resources and information. The teacher or media specialist can help guide individual students or groups through questioning, researching, and presenting their knowledge of the topic. According to Fitzpatrick, n.d.), RBL “fosters the development of individual students by accommodating their varied interests, experiences, learning styles, needs and ability levels.” Differentiation and student choice are both easily done within the RBL model. Also, students are challenged to analyze and evaluate the information they find. RBL provides an opportunity to collaborate with peers, construct meaning, formulate questions that guides them in their learning, and become problem-solvers. By using a variety of resources in RBL, students develop the necessary information literacy skills they will need in the future.

Ideas from Independent Reading

In the peer reviewed journal article “Mapping and Managing Knowledge and information in Resource-Based Learning,” Tergan, Graber, and Neumann (2006) state “students are often overwhelmed by the complexity of task-relevant knowledge and information.” Students are being encouraged to follow their curiosity and search through various types of resources to find answers to their questions. In this article, computer-based concept mapping is discussed and how it is a valuable tool for students during RBL. Concept mapping is “a visualization technique, which has a long tradition in the educational context as a cognitive tool for enhancing learning” (Tergan, Graber, & Neumann, 2006). When concept mapping is taken from two-dimensional to an advanced computer-based mapping, students can take the new understanding of information and elaborate on “the conceptual knowledge like notes, summaries, weblogs, and graphics” (Tergan, Graber, & Neumann, 2006). Students can use hyperlinks to connect information to resources used. Digital concept-mapping allows for “(re)constructing, (re)organizing, (re)representing mapped knowledge” (Tergan, Graber, & Neumann, 2006). Students can effectively use digital concept-mapping to organize the new information and complex content they find during their research.

“Teachers’ View of the Implementation of Resource-Based Learning” is a peer reviewed journal that focuses on teachers’ experiences on planning and implementing RBL into their classroom. The emphasis of this study was “on the subjective meaning and the factors which affected teachers’ implementation of resource-based teaching” (Meyer & Newton, 1992). The data was collected through interview questions given to teachers in four schools and analyzed from a large matrix of verbatim statements. The findings ranged from one end of the spectrum to the other in all areas. Teachers may have been implementing RBL into their classrooms, but had not changed their beliefs about teaching methods. Teachers were implementing RBL, but it was the principal who influenced at what level teachers were using it. The study divided the implementation of RBL into eight levels: self-contained teaching, teaching with a private collection, teaching with a ‘borrowed’ collection, using the library media staff as an idea source, using the LMC staff and resources for enrichment of a unit, using LMC resources as a part of unit content, teacher/library media specialist partnership, and curriculum development (Meyer & Newton, 1992). Teachers using RBL at the higher levels had principals who backed the learning mode. Another factor the study found to to differ between teachers and implementing RBL was the meaning and demands of the learning mode. Some teachers found RBL to be a positive collaborating experience with the teacher-librarian. Others found personality conflicts to get in the way. Still some teachers didn’t understand the value of the teacher-librarian and felt they have always been using the  RBL model. The study supported the importance of administration support and teacher/teacher-librarian collaboration.

Compare and Contrast

The articles and resources I have read about RBL have all had similar information. They all mention the collaboration between the teacher and the media specialist and time being a  concern with planning a successful unit. The teacher role is also mentioned as moving to a coach or guide for the student. Tergan, Graber, and Neumann (2006) were the only authors to discuss how to help “learners coping with subject-matter complexity and ill-structuredness.” It is important as teachers to help students, especially when being introduced to RBL, to organize their thoughts and research information. RBL, like many other learning modes, can be easily scaffold for students and support can be adjusted throughout the unit and in future units. Digital concept mapping can be valuable to students and much more than the two-dimensional ones.

Application in your setting

RBL is a learning mode that I could see working well in both my ELA and Geography classes. We do research in both classes, so why not allow them more of a choice in the direction it takes them. It seems that collaborating with my LMC director would be the key to doing this, but time could be one of the problems we face. I recently talked with my LMC director about using the RBL model with our upcoming South America unit in Geography. I am excited to work with her and am hoping that by using Google Docs we can collaborate within our time constraints. This should be a great unit for the students to not only follow their own curiosity about South America, but also to become more information-literate learners.

Campbell, L., Flageolle, P., Griffith, S., Wojcik, C. (2014). Resource-Based learning. Emerging Perspectives on Learning, Teaching, and Technology. Retrieved from Retrieved from http://epltt.coe.uga.edu/index.php?title=Resource-Based_Learning

Fitzpatrick, C. (n.d.).  Resource-based learning: What is it?.  Information Literacy &  Learning.  Prince Edward Isle, Canada:  Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.  Retrieved from http://www.edu.pe.ca/bil/bil.asp?ch1.s2.gdtx

Greenhow, C., Dexter, S., & Riedel, E. (2006). Methods for evaluating online, resource-based

learning environments for teachers. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 23(1), 21-27.

Meyer, J., & Newton, E. (1992). Teachers’ view of the implementation of resource-based learning. Emergency Librarian, 20(2-), 13-18. Retrieved from http://blackboard.cuchicago.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_5_1

Tergan, S., Graber, W., & Neumann, A. (2006). Mapping and managing knowledge and information   in resource-based learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(4), 327-     336. Doi: 10.1080/14703290600973737.

RSA #2 Problem-Based Learning

“Project-Based Learning: A Short History”

http://www.edutopia.org/project-based-learning-history

“Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skill for the Future” (Peer Review Journal)

http://blackboard.cuchicago.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_5_1

Summary of the Module

            Project-based learning (PBL) is a teaching strategy where “by focusing students on a project teachers put them on a path that deepens their knowledge and builds skills they’ll need in the future” (Buck Institute for Education, 2010). Teachers design real life problems for students to build their knowledge, think critically, collaborate in groups, and revise and reflect on their projects and learning. PBL is a shift in teaching for most teachers. Dauphin (2013) states “the teacher is more of a coach who guides them through their own reflections and ideas.” The teacher is making a shift in teaching practices to meet the challenges of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and 21st Century Skills. According to Markham (2012), there are a number of shifts the teachers need to make simultaneously. One shift is for teachers to move from instruction of the content to inquiry. Teachers need to “teach students how to take charge of themselves, to respect the inquiry process, and to become self-directed learners” (Markham, 2012). Teachers are providing more feedback and questioning students while pushing them in their achievement. Students are working collaboratively in groups and presenting their knowledge, which are part of the 21st Century Skills. PBL is a strategy that provides inquiry experiences for students to dig deep for meaning and understanding. It is these experiences that have led to studies showing that “students who use project-based learning remember the material much longer and have healthier attitudes toward education” (Dauphin, 2013).   

Ideas from Independent Reading

            In the article “Project-Based Learning: A Short History,” Boss (2011) states when PBL is infused with technology, it “may look and feel like a 21st-century idea, but it’s built on a venerable foundation.” PBL is not a new idea. PBL has come from a strong foundation. Confucius, Aristotle, Socrates, John Dewey, Maria Montessori, and Jean Piaget are all philosophers and theorists whose ideas can be seen in PBL. Whether it is learning by doing or through inquiry and meaning, PBL is a combination of all these strategies. Learning from real life problem emerged a half of century ago in various science fields. Boss (2011) states “although problems are defined in advance by the instructor, they tend to be complex, even messy, and cannot be solved by one "right" or easy-to-find answer.” K-12 education has evolved from a project being added on after the learning is done to PBL being the center of the learning. Boss (2011) mentions there are several trends in recent times that account for why PBL is fitting so well into education. Several of these trends are motivation and diversity or students, navigating and evaluating information, and complex challenges after schooling. “Knowing how to solve problems, work collaboratively, and think innovatively are becoming essential skills -- not only for finding future careers but also for tackling difficult issues in local communities and around the world” (Boss, 2011). PBL is not without challenges for students, but also for teachers. This is causing a teachers to become more of a facilitator of knowledge rather than the expert.

            “Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future” is a peer reviewed journal in which Bell (2010) discusses how students develop 21st century learning skills through the PBL strategy. Bell (2010) states that student choice is the key to PBL. Teacher facilitate students and are there for every step of the process, but it is the students who are “designing their own inquiries, planning their leaning, organizing their research, and implementing a multitude of learning strategies” (Bell, 2010). PBL is holding students accountable for setting their own goals and becoming responsible and independent learners to reach those goals. Student are also learning the valuable 21st century skills of collaboration and communication. PBL also provides teachers the ability to differentiate for their students. By providing students the choice of how to demonstrate their understanding, students will create their own interests and deeper learning path which will lead to self-motivation. But choice is not the only place that differentiation can be seen in PBL. Teachers can scaffold the instruction for students who are first learning the PBL process or to bridge gaps that exist in knowledge and skill. These scaffolds are only meant to be temporary and should be removed as the student becomes confident and capable on his/her own. Another 21st Century Skill mentioned is the students’ use of technology. Bell (2010) states “technology as a means, not an end, enables students to experiment with different technologies for all aspects of PBL.”  Students use the computer to research answers to their questions, but still need to be taught the different between reliable and unreliable sources. Technology is not only used in the research part of PBL. Students can use technology in a variety of ways to present the knowledge they learned as well as a blog or wiki to collaborate within their groups. Bell (2010) does mention one critical aspect of PBL is self-evaluation and reflection. Students need to reflect on how well they collaborated within their group, but also reflect about their own efforts, motivation, and productivity levels. Bell (2010) reports evidence supports that PBL causes “students to become better researchers, problem solvers, and higher-order thinkers.”

Compare and Contrast

            “By implementing PBL, we are preparing our students to meet the twenty-first century with preparedness and a repertoire of skills they can use successfully” (Bell, 2010). This is implied in all the articles read in this model. Whether it is communication and collaboration or critical thinking and problem solving, PBL, if used correctly, creates an environment for students to grow as learners and develop the skills they will need in the future. All of the articles discuss pros of PBL. In “Problem-Based Learning: A Short History,” Boss is the only article that shares a concern about PBL. “It's demanding of students -- and of teachers. Especially for teachers who have never experienced PBL before, projects require planning and management skills that may be unfamiliar” (Boss, 2010). The article all did agree that professional development is essential for teacher using PBL.

Application in your setting

            Up until this year, PBL was not something that I had thought about for my classroom. I didn’t feel like PBL strategy would fit into the district curriculum. This year we have a new curriculum based on CCSS. At the end of each unit, students have a Performance Task to complete. We build throughout the unit to this task. As I think about the Performance Task and our essential questions, I could see PBL as a strategy I could use, but even then I don’t feel what I could do would be a true PBL. I feel that certain things, like the students creating questions and their own path of inquiry for research, would be missing. Like all the article I read, I would definitely need professional development.

References

Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. Clearing House, 83(2), 39. Doi:10.1080/00098650903505415.

Boss, S. (2011, September 20). Project-based learning: A short history. Edutopia. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/project-based-learning-history

Buck Institute for Education. (2010, December 9). “Project based learning: explained.” Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMCZvGesRz8&feature=youtu.be

Dauphin, S. (2013). 12 timeless project-based learning resources. Teach Thought. Retrieved from http://www.teachthought.com/learning/project-based-learning/13-timeless-project-based-learning-resources/

Markham, T. (2012, February 21). Project-based learning and common core standards. ASCE Whole Child. Retrieved from http://edge.ascd.org/blogpost/pbl-and-common-core-standards

RSA #1 Professional Learning Communities

“Professional Learning Communities Impact Student Success” https://www.naesp.org/resources/2/Leadership_Compass/2007/LC2007v5n2a3.pdf

“A Situated Account of Teacher Agency and Learning: Critical Reflections on Professional Learning Communities” (Peer Review Journal) http://eric.ed.gov/?q=professional+learning+communities&pr=on&id=EJ968812

Professional learning communities (PLC) is a framework that schools are using to improve student learning. The focus of the PLC is “on learning rather than teaching, work collaboratively, and hold yourself accountable for results” (DuFour, 2004). The PLC model focuses on four “Big Ideas.” These four principles are ensuring that students learn, a culture of collaboration, a focus on results, and hard work and commitment. To ensure the student learning, PLC addresses not only what each student should learn and what will be used to measure if they did, but also how to help those students that struggle to learn it. The second principle focuses on collaboration between teachers “to analyze and improve their Classroom practice (DuFour, 2004). The third principle is where teachers focus on individual student achievement and what they can do to help the students improve. The most important principle of a PLC is about the hard work and commitment of the teachers. With collaboration being an essential part of a PLC, communication needs to be open between all involved. There are a couple of things that could provide negative effects on collaboration if not addressed. According to Daoudi and Bourgault, different work practices, such as “different objectives and priorities among sites involved in the project, different ways of handling technical issues, the difference of decision-making processes, and different working conditions,” can easily breakdown the effectiveness of collaboration. In “Five Dysfunctions of a Professional Learning Community,” Weber mentions the lack of communication can occur when teachers are not taking advantage of technologies to help make collaboration possible. “Some communication barriers occur because teachers fail to take advantage of e-mail, discussion threads, Web 2.0 tools (such as blogs, wikis, Google docs), and other methods of communicating between meetings (2011).

In the article “Professional Learning Communities Impact Student Success”, Rentfro writes about how South Elementary in Eldon, Missouri, has been successful in using PLC to improve student learning. South Elementary teachers collaborate together “by writing common assessments, planning curriculum, and sharing teaching duties” (2007). The PLCs meet by grade-level twice a week and have a common planning period each day. They keep a notebook that contains meeting agendas, data from assessments, and progress of at risk students. South Elementary uses frequent common assessments to monitor student learning. It is from this data that they determine which students need additional support to improve their achievement level. Interventions, like Systematic Intervention in Phonics, Phonemic Awareness, and Sight Words, are used across grade levels at the same time so that flexible grouping is possible. South Elementary also meets with the administration team three times a year to identify and monitor at-risk students. The PLC success at South Elementary is evident in the data. The school showed a 24.1 percent gain in the Missouri Assessment Program between 2001 and 2005. South has also received national recognition by All Things PLC for its use of the PLC model and as a Missouri Model PLC  for the past two years.

The peer-reviewed journal “A Situated Account of Teacher Agency and Learning: Critical Reflections on Professional Learning Communities” states that collaboration is not a new thought in education reform. By looking at the history of education reform, Riveros, Newton, and Burgess found that “school improvement initiatives focused on peer collaboration, like professional learning communities, need to engage in deeper reflection about the nature of action and practices in schools” (2012). They discuss how a deeper reflection can reveal a reality of conflict within the school. This reality can be that “whoever disagrees with the institutionalized discourse will fall outside the boundaries of the institutional dynamics, unperceived as an actor” (Riveros, 2012). Schools must eliminate variables like political climate or social reality for teachers to examine educational practices that would increase student learning. When these variables are present in the school, the thought of change in educational practices will find resistance from teachers. It is also mentioned that for educational practices to change enactment, the process of actively transforming the environment through action, needs to take place. “The concept of enactment implies a different way of explaining why people’s understanding of reform initiatives influences the way reform is implemented” (Riveros, 2012). It is through the implementation of reform that teachers understand why the change needs to happen.

In looking closely at all five articles about the PLC, it was evident that collaboration is key to success. When looking closer, you will find differences about what collaboration needs to work. DuFour states that for collaboration to be successful “teams must develop norms or protocols to clarify expectations regarding roles, responsibilities, and relationships among team members” (2004). Every teacher must feel like an equal and be open to sharing with the group. South Elementary, in the article written by Rentfro, seems to have had success with collaboration because of one reason: time (2007). Teams have two collaborative planning times every week, have a one-hour early release on Wednesdays, and meet three times a year with the administration. There is also professional development provided throughout the year and common planning time. With time like this allowed for collaboration, teams can focus on their four critical questions. These questions are the same ones that DuFour mentions in his article: What do we want students to learn? How will we know if they have learned it? How will we respond when a student experiences difficulty or do not learn it? South Elementary has a fourth question they focus on. What do we do if they do learn it? They look at enrichment for students. Time is needed for teams to work together and create common assessments, analyze the data, and discuss changes in teaching practices. Riveros, newton, and Burgess found the environment could affect the collaboration of the group. Teachers must feel that there is meaningful and supportive relationships within the school and group. If teachers feel that the environment is one where a certain change is expected, they will resist being open when collaborating with the group. Daoudi and Bourgault find that successful collaboration cannot happen when differences like objectives, handling of technical issues, decision-making, and working conditions are evident within the team. Weber’s article “Five Dysfunctions of a Professional Learning Community” is the only article that overlaps with the others since it mentions five reasons a PLC could fail. Lack of norms, team goals, trust, communication, and essential learning outcomes are all things that the team must work together to create. In all the articles read, collaboration must be present for a PLC to be successful in improving student learning.

When a PLC is implemented in a school, teachers must understand why there is a shift from teaching to learning. Riveros, Newton, and Burgess found the acceptance of this shift and willingness from teacher so change depends on the environment. Before student learning can improve, teachers must understand that there is no hidden agenda, no one answer. Teachers must be open to discussing new ways to help the student that are struggling to learn. The first year our school created time for PLCs there were teachers that felt like their thoughts and ideas were not equal to other group members. I remember a fellow group member telling me that she had nothing to say in our PLC because the “new” strategies to try with students was already being implemented before we had even looked at any data. She was use to being told how things had to be done or new things to try. It is in this type of environment where teachers will not be open to changing the strategies they use in the classroom, which will lead to no improvement in student learning. When the school environment is one of trust and collaboration can happen between teachers, we will find data being looked at and new strategies being implemented into the classrooms. Interventions being used for students who need the concepts taught in a different way. When teacher are open to collaborating and sharing their thoughts and ideas, student learning will improve.

Daoudi, J. & Bourgault, M. (2012).  Discontinuity and collaboration:  Theory and evidence from technological projects.  International Journal of Innovation Management, 16(6), 1240012-1 - 1240012-15.

DuFour, R. (2004).  What is a "professional learning community?"  Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.

Rentfro, E.R. (2007). Professional learning communities impact student success. Leadership Compass. Retrieved from https://www.naesp.org/resources/2/Leadership_Compass/2007/LC2007v5n2a3.pdf

Riveros, A., Newton, P. & Burgess, D. (2012). A situated account of teacher agency and learning: critical reflections on professional learning communities. Canadian Journal of Education, 35(1). Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ968812

Weber, Steven. (2011).  Five Dysfunctions of a Professional Learning Community. The Whole Child. Retrieved from http://www.wholechildeducation.org/blog/five-dysfunctions-of-a-professional-

     learning-community