End
of Course Reflection
As I begin the end of course
reflection for this class that focused on Teacher Leadership Standard 6: Communicates and collaborates with a variety of
stakeholders, I will restate what I said at the very beginning of
the quarter before digging deep with the learning and instruction. As I
wrote at the start and before reading the Hilty and Zepeda texts, I have
never heard of the different types of teacher leadership in schools. Or the
adult learning styles, that really correspond with how we respond to
professional development courses. The three-different type of leadership styles
emphasize the importance of collective verses individual leadership. As stated
on page 272, “Ogawa and Bossert argue that leadership occurs not though the
actions of individuals but through the INTERACTIONS AMONG individuals. Because
it occurs through the interaction, influence that is exerted through leadership
cannot be assumed to be unidirectional; it can flow up and down levels and
between units of organization...leadership is not confined to certain roles but
is distributed across roles, with different roles having access to different
levels and types of power and influence.” What I really liked about this
paragraph was that it informs the reader that leadership doesn’t always have to
fall on certain, established people at our schools. In reality at
Horizon, I believe that a lot of our climate and culture of the school believe
just that. We have always struggled with following the “old way” or educators
not feeling comfortable in sharing knowledge, thoughts and feelings. With this
climate being the “norm” of Horizon it has caused a lot of people to leave the
school-resulting in high turnover and being dubbed the “revolving door” of
teachers.
Two of the goals for this
course that I really took note of were in the character and competence section.
The first being that as students of this course, we will “examine factors
related to collaborating with peers that hinder and promote student learning.”
And the second goal of competence: students will “learn the major theories of
adult learning and how they apply to ongoing professional
learning.” As it states in the “Building Hope, Giving Affirmation”
article: “a school organized to support schoolwide as well as team based
professional learning offers a powerful setting for social justice to grow,
develop, and impact the school’s citizens” (Hirsh & Hord ,2010). This just
really resonated with me coming into a new year, with a new principal. Over the
past 3 years, we have had a schoolwide leadership team then it was dissolved.
PLCs became a “choice” among teachers and teams who wanted to participate, but
had no set guidelines. Our last principal had a very difficult time developing
a following (Hilty), or a group of people that were willing to work underneath
her leadership and go in the direction she wanted to go. Which resulted in our
school not having vertical alignment amongst grade levels. There wasn’t much
commonality throughout the school, which I believe really impacts our students
and their achievement. As being the team leader for my grade level when
Hirsh and Hord explained that “team learning at the grade level or subject area
increases consistency across classrooms and helps teachers address challenges
associated with grade-level or content-specific learning objectives”
(Darling-Hammond et al., 2009; Hirsh & Hord, 2008), I really want to
provide a change within my grade level team. With the recent changes at
Horizon, I am hoping that our school as a whole and even my team can come
together more to collaborate, share strategies and student data to make
adjustments within our practice to better our students learning and
performance.
The issues or a dilemma that
was raised, came about the more I researched for my final project for this
course. My project was focused on a program that previous leadership
implemented a few years ago. This model of teaching was presented in a manner
that exhibited many benefits in teaching practice and for student
achievement. The need to have quality educational services for special
education students and English learners at Horizon is evident. “To provide an
intensive educational environment for students with significant learning needs,
many districts are increasingly opting to institute co teaching models (Wilson
& Bledick, 2011, p. 9). “The goal of the co teaching strategy is to help
focus all instruction in a classroom by combining the strengths of both
certified teachers. A general education teacher may have an expertise in
curriculum, classroom management and pacing while the special education teacher
may have additional expertise in differentiation and progress monitoring” (East
Hartford, 2013). All students learn and achieve success. Every
student in the class is provided different educational options from small group
instruction to individualized attention. Classroom participation for students
with disabilities is increased with lower student to teacher ratios.
Expectations for students with disabilities are increased. Students learn
tolerance and respect for diversity. Both professionals positively support each
other as they plan lessons jointly and monitor student progress together
(Wilson & Blednick, 2011). As a team taking this on, we had heard all of
the good things and benfits of the co-teaching model. However, when I dug
deeper into this model, I came to realize that the co teaching model that we
have at Horizon really does not align with what the pioneers of the model
believe to be best practices.
First, we are instructed to not
assume that everyone knows and understands what co-teaching is or how it will
play out in classrooms. This was our administrators first problem.
When this was adopted, we had major push back from the staff, which made the
culture and climate of Horizon to take a huge dive. Wendy W. Murawski
and Philip Bernhardt the authors of An Administrator's Guide to
Co-Teaching clearly state the need to try and avoid having everyone view
co-teaching be seen as a "special education thing," or a “English
Language thing,” but rather as a "best practices in education thing."
Unfortunately, this has not been avoided at Horizon. There is still minimal buy
in, even from the coteachers themselves. There was great strength when the
original coteach began, but now, it is almost nonexistent. The next issue with
this model being used at Horizon is the avoidance of “having more than 30
percent of a general education class designated as having special needs
(Murawski & Dieker, 2013). This includes students with disabilities,
English language learners, students on 504 plans, and even students who are
highly gifted. Each of these students is likely to require more attention than
the typical learner; plus, the more students with special needs there are in
the class, the more their needs begin to dominate classroom instruction and the
less "inclusive" it truly becomes.” The demographics of Horizon do
not allow this percentage to happen. Our current classes have over 50% of
students with needs. Just as Murawski stated, these needs dominate our
classrooms resulting in teacher frustration leading to burn out.
Zepeda’s
book offers many great ideas on adult learning and what we as teachers truly
want when we show up to professional development classes. Dalellew and Martinez
(1988) provided Zepeda with an overview of principles of adult learning while
Roberts and Pruitt (2003) contributed strategies to engage adult learners
(Zepeda 2008, 48). The two principles that really stood out to me where:
· Adults
seek knowledge that applies to their current life situation; they want to know
how this new information will help them in their development.
· Staff
who voluntarily attend in services, workshops, and seminars are those who have
determined that they want to learn more.
When I read these
principles, I realized that my district and even my building have not quite
made professional developments in the structure where all adult learners are
reached. My district has really been focusing on our feedback as employees are
hearing what we want for professional development classes. Which is a step in
the right direction. Roberts and Pruitt say for the above principles that
facilitators need to “employ novelty…but give opportunities to apply the new
knowledge to what [we] already know or have experienced” (48).
This course has allowed me to gain
knew knowledge in terms of how adults learn. As educators, we are mostly
focused on how our students learn, but as teacher leaders, we need to also take
on the way our adult peers learn during professional developments. Another big
take away came from my research for my final project. As one of the original
pioneers of the coteahing model at Horizon, I have come to realize that even
though I see and have seen the great benefits of the coteach model, it does not
work for our school any longer. Even with my proposed plan for intervention, or
new leadership has no buy in to the model. So there is not buy-in with the
staff either. Our school’s demographic also just does not align with best
practices either with the model. The students that we want to help in this
model outnumber the rest of the class, which is not what this model supports.
In the end, from my teacher perspective, I have learned more insight of what I
had been told was best practice for my students really isn’t much anymore.
Lastly, from my teacher leadership perspective, I have gained much knowledge on
adult learning styles and how to make professional development classes
beneficial for educators. Just as our students need a purpose and take away
from our lessons, as adults, we need to the same. We need to have
acknowledgment of what we know and how we can further that for the benefit of
our student’s growth.
Artifacts:
Artifacts:
Works Cited
Hirsh, S., & Hord, S. M.
(2010). Building Hope, Giving Affirmation: Learning Communities
That Address Social Justice
Issues Bring Equity to the Classroom. National Staff
Development Council , 31,
10-17.
Murawksi, W. W., &
Bernhardt, P. (2015, December). An Administrator's Guide to Co
Teaching. Retrieved November
15, 2017, from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/dec15/vol73/num04/An_Administrator%27s_Guide_to_Co-Teaching.aspx
Ogawa, R. T., & Bossert,
S. T. (1995). Leadership as an Organizational
Quality. Educational
Administration Quarterly,31(2), 224-243.
Wilson, G. L., &
Blednick, J. (n.d.). Teaching in Tandem: Effective Co-Teaching in the
Inclusive Classroom.
Retrieved November 15, 2017, from
Zepeda, S.J. (2012). Professional
Development: What Works. Larchmont, NY: Eye on
Education.
No comments:
Post a Comment