In the past few weeks I have been reflecting on teacher leadership, and more specifically, the roles of team lead, associate chair and chair. While the role might seem appealing to many, it strikes me that anyone considering taking on one of these roles might first need to do a bit of soul searching. Teacher leaders that I have worked with over the years have all shared how difficult the transition could be. One day they were just another colleague, sharing a laugh in the faculty lunch area and the next day they have “gone over to the dark side” and “become one of them”. Their motives, decisions, work habits and leadership style became fair game to be questioned by others, and they felt like they lived in a bit of a fish bowl. That is not to say that these people didn’t enjoy being in this leadership position, they just had to learn that actually working in the position was a little different from observing it as another instructor. Teacher leaders are called upon to provide real and timely leadership in three different ways; they need to provide professional, administrative and instructional leadership. Depending on the size of the department and the duties assigned, this can mean: advocating for students and faculty, balancing budgets, mapping out the scope and sequence of a program, assigning course loads, scheduling classes, problem solving, and dealing with challenging personalities. On top of all these tasks, teacher leaders must be change agents, advocating for quality practice, encouraging professional reflection, and pressing for improved student learning and achievement. Complicating all of this is the fact that roles like team lead or associate chair are usually term appointments and often come with a considerable teaching load in addition to leadership responsibilities. People in these roles have said that they feel caught between two worlds; they aren’t really in the overall leadership team and stream, but they are no longer in the community of instructors. Stepping into such leadership is not easy; the work cannot be done half-heartedly. So why would one bother to take on such a role? So why take on teacher leadership?Teacher leaders have a single guiding purpose - to build capacity in others. They use their talents to influence, shape, support, and catalyze change that results in increased student achievement. Their actions reveal their fundamental belief that they more they build capacity in others, the more they contribute to sustaining long-term, deep transformation that allows others to address today’s challenges and to be prepared for facing those that arise tomorrow. (Killion, 2011, p. 11) I love this quote from Joellen Killion. Although it refers more to those who take on teacher leadership roles in the K-12 system, I think it captures the essence of why instructors consider taking on academic leadership roles like team lead, project lead, associate chair, or chair. For the most part, people take on these roles because they want to make a difference, a difference for the students and for the staff that they have come to know so well. In addition to the need to make a difference for students and colleagues, those looking to move into leadership roles may also be enticed to do so for any combination of six different factors:
Who should take on such a role? From my experience, there is no one profile of the ideal candidate for an academic leadership position. I have seen very different types become very successful leaders. Some of these people saw an associate chair position as a stepping stone in their career; they had their sights on institutional leadership (Look out Carolyn, here I come!). Others were almost reluctant leaders. They hated to leave their classrooms and the students who gave them energy, but they also felt an obligation to the program, to their colleagues and to the students, to take on a leadership role that might ensure the viability of the program. Regardless of how or why each stepped into the role, all of these new leaders needed to develop a new set of skills. Working with students in an online or face-to-face environment is much different from working with colleagues who are masters in their own domain. A teacher leader’s greatest challenge is in building trust, gaining credibility, and establishing purposeful, productive relationships. These leaders are sometimes faced with apathetic, reluctant or resistant colleagues. Often, they are “caught in the middle”, having to roll out unpopular or demanding decisions or initiatives that they might have previously had questions about. This delicate challenge means that they must instead use credibility and kinship as practicing instructors to gently lead–through encouragement, support and even courageous conversations. As such, effective leadership involves constant negotiation and it requires tremendous flexibility, tact and perseverance. What are the keys to success? Some of the important leadership actions or processes that prospective teacher leaders might ask themselves about before making the leap have to do with:
Several years ago, I asked successful “teacher leaders” to share their strategies for creating positive working relationships with their colleagues. They suggested that life will go easier if you:
References: Killion, J. (2011). A bold move forward: consortium outlines new standards for teacher leaders. Journal of Staff Development, 32 (3), 10-12. Kuntz, J. (2015). Exploring the Experience of AISI Instructional Teacher Leaders. (Doctoral Thesis) University of Alberta. Department of Secondary Education. Accessed online at: https://era.library.ualberta.ca/downloads/41687m37h (Permanent link)
0 Comments
Forming and NormingThe NorQuest Faculty Community of Practice NorQuest has officially started. At the time of writing this we have approximately 40 members who will be participating through networking, online gatherings, resource sharing, team inquiry and mentorship. One of the first things done was to establish Learning Teams, each with a particular instructional focus. Combining some of the 8 suggestions we have settled on three independent groups:
Each group will now be looking to have an initial meeting so they might chart out their next steps. If you would like to join one these teams, just shoot me an email and I’ll add you. It is not too late, we’re only taking the first few steps! I’m hoping that, in the first couple of meetings, each team will have a chance to form and norm. They’ll need to consider their purpose, how often they would like to meet (and when) or how they would like to carry on conversations and inquiries. To support each group in this initial planning I put together a few questions that might help them focus and perhaps build a bit of a “team charter” 1) What would you like your team to be called/known as? (these names were only place holders) 2) Who are the members of your team? 3) How might you describe your team to others who may want to join? (in 2-3 sentences): 4) What are your team’s major goals? Do you hope to:
8) How will you know that the team should shut down? The last question is often one that often gets overlooked. However, from years of working with learning teams (Professional Learning Communities), I know that teams eventually lose their steam and members look to find a new challenge. This life cycle corresponds with Bruce Tuckman’s five stages of group development: forming (gathering the team and choosing a focus), norming (deciding on the processes and procedures), storming (experiencing tension as boundaries are pushed), performing (producing important work) and adjourning or mourning (fulfilling the original purpose or losing focus and energy) (Tuckman, 1965 and Tuckman & Jensen, 1977). It is important to acknowledge this cycle and perhaps even re-visit question #8 on a regular basis to check whether the team is alive and relevant. In the coming months, we will also look at developing a bit of a cross-faculty mentorship group. I realize that a number of departments already have some type of mentorship for new hires, but there is room for something that would function across the institution. When I asked if instructors were interested in participating in such a program, quite a number said that they were. Some were instructors who were new to NorQuest, but many were not. And there were instructors who said that they would like to participate as both a mentor and a mentee. There were areas of teaching that they were quite confident in, but there were some other areas where they would appreciate a sympathetic friend who might provide them with feedback or share approaches techniques or apps or help them work through the intricacies of Moodle and BBCU. It’s my belief that the larger Community of Practice together with the targeted Learning Teams and a Mentorship Program could provide an important vehicle for community building and professional development for faculty at all stages of their career in post-secondary education at NorQuest. Now we’ll just have to see if this becomes a reality! References: Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384–399. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022100 Tuckman, B.W., & Jensen, M.A.C. (1977) Stages of Small-Group Development Revisited. Group & Organization Studies. 2(4), 419-427. https://doi.org/10.1177/105960117700200404 Last Week's Faculty Talking Circles - The InspirationThe growth of any craft depends on shared practice and honest dialogue among the people who do it. We grow by trial and error, to be sure—but our willingness to try, and fail, as individuals is severely limited when we are not supported by a community that encourages such risks. (Palmer, 1998, p. 144) A week ago, we had two Faculty Talking Circles at NorQuest College where we continued to explore the concept of learning teams. I asked these faculty groups several big questions. The first was “What, in your experience, allows a learning team to work well?” In the chat and discussions individual faculty said that, in their experience, a learning team works well when there is:
This group also suggested that it might also help to have:
Most of all, our colleagues suggested that a learning team would need to be passionate and committed “owners” of the learning team. A powerful learning team should be built by instructors - for instructors. Thankfully, these observations validated the musings from Jan 11! So on to my next few questions: “Do you have an idea for a team?”, “Who should form these teams?” and “What should their goals be?” Instructors wrote suggestions on a Padlet and we took turns discussing some of them. Ideas for learning teams included a/an:
These were wonderful ideas! That said, I cannot count how many times I have worked with groups of keen individuals and gotten to this point, only to have the enthusiasm ebb out with a bit of time and the pressure of staying on top of daily teaching commitments and student concerns. So how might we take some of these ideas and establish learning teams that meet regularly, sustain a clear and practical focus and make a difference for team members and for our students? One idea: A NQ Faculty Community Of PracticeThe onset of Covid and the switch to online everything has left many of our instructors feeling overwhelmed and disconnected. LRN sessions are not as popular as in the past; people cannot find the time to invest in one-off workshops that may or may not apply to their current teaching contexts and pressures. However, if these same people knew that they could regularly connect with colleagues who face the same challenges and then collectively address ongoing concerns it might lead to professional growth, community building and alleviate some anxiety and stress.
So here’s my idea going forward. I think it is time for NorQuest to establish a Faculty Community of Practice. This umbrella group would be able to facilitate the networking, sharing, and resource development necessary for a wide range of learning teams. Your faculty developers would help to coordinate this community, but they would not be the ones who lead it. The NQ FC of P would be a true professional learning community. Some thoughts: With tight budgets and Covid cutbacks, it would be difficult to secure funding or dedicated time to run this Community of Practice. While being supportive, our college leadership would not be able to carve out something for us. That said:
A plan: I know that we have a core group of dedicated and innovative instructors who might champion learning teams. I have been in their classrooms (online and F2F) and I have listened to their reflections and presentations. Now we just need to find out if there is enough interest to make a go of this idea.
If all goes well, we might be able to stage several NorQuest College Community of Practice Showcase afternoons. This would allow individual groups to share what they have tried and learned with colleagues. However, at this point, let us just see if there is enough interest to go forward. Many thanks to Mabyn Grinde from Lakeland College who attended our last talking circle, shared the Parker Palmer quote and the suggestion that “Members of a learning team need to be owners, not renters!” Palmer, Parker J. The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher's Life. San Francisco, Calif. : Jossey-Bass, 1998. The Promise and Pitfalls of Professional Learning Communities Instructors learn about their craft in many different ways:
In today’s musing, I want to focus on the fifth way, collaborative professional learning through focused inquiry and sharing. This is where a small group of people meet regularly to discuss promising practices, implement thoughtful changes in their daily planning and practice, and share their efforts with the group in order to promote program improvement and optimize student learning. This kind of collaborative learning is sometimes called a “Community of Practice”, a phrase coined by Etienne Wenger in 1991 (see: https://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/ ). Communities of Practice involve practicing professionals (not researchers or academics) who form a learning community based upon a shared commitment or domain of interest. Another term sometimes used to describe collaborative learning is a “Professional Learning Community” or PLC. I am much more familiar with this term. PLCs are narrower than Communities of Practice; they have very specific goals and focus on tangible results. So what is a PLC? In the late 1990’s American educators such as Dufour and Eaker (1998) and Hord (1997) advocated for goal-oriented, accountable, teacher collaboration as the best way to transform underperforming schools, boost teacher morale and improve student achievement. PLC advocates were quick to link Professional Learning Communities to adult learning principles put forward in the 1970's by Malcolm Knowles (2005), successful adult learning links to need, self-concept, foundation, readiness and orientation. Professional Learning Communities should build upon:
A Professional Learning Community should value and validate teachers, drawing upon internal motivators rather than external (credits or recognition). Of course there are some preconditions; in order to be successful, PLCs need to meet regularly, sustain their inquiry and action research for an extended period (years rather than months), and focus their energies on reasonable and measureable targets (establish SMART goals). From my experience from 20 years of working with PLCs, I have seen groups that worked wonderfully well, creating a culture of continuous improvement. These PLCs encouraged teachers to learn together, explore new ideas, and implement changes that paid great dividends for their students. I have also seen PLCs that quickly dissolved into coffee socials or worse yet, bitch sessions. One group that I had a loose connection with ended up spending their allotted PLC time on rejigging the wording on their multiple choice assessments - which was a far cry from their original intention of helping adolescent readers develop the confidence and skills to meet the literacy demands of challenging texts and tasks. At one point, when certain Alberta school districts became frustrated with the inefficiency of their PLCs (some districts provided money and time for PLCs but little leadership), they tried to mandate for tangible results. They advocated for “data-driven” PLCs, but this action ended up frustrating teachers who felt that they had to tweak their teaching to get better scores on standardized exams (Provincial Achievement Tests and Diploma Exams) rather than engage in meaningful learning and reflection. In the end, this push to focus and control PLCs backfired. Teachers felt conscripted and handcuffed. Here at NorQuest, my experience with PLCs has been limited. Some faculty might want to call the Innovative Teaching Group a PLC, but the group was too large, the meetings too infrequent and the focus was too scattered for it to be a real PLC. However, the Innovative Teaching Group did foster inquiry, reflection, sharing and networking. The NorQuest Learning Circle on Intercultural Competence that Sarah Apedaile spearheaded last year was much closer to being an actual, factual PLC. This group was smaller, regularly checked in, engaged in thoughtful readings and discussion, implemented changes in their classrooms and shared their learnings. I also believe there may be other groups around the college that more closely reflect the spirit of a PLC. I know of curriculum development groups, professional reading groups and other focus groups that are making a real difference for students and instructors. Why do some PLCs thrive while others lose their way? Well, from my perspective (and from some of the literature I consulted) a PLC has to allow for ownership and agency. Externally mandated PLCs often work against instructor investment. Andy Hargreaves, a PLC proponent from Britain, cautions against PLCs which design or follow too rigid a protocol and ultimately create a “"prison of micromanagement that constrains it" and will foster a “contrived collegiality” (Hargreaves as quoted in Vause, 2009, p.88). Educators need to know that they are able to shape the direction, set the goals and respond to immediate and longer-term issues that affect them and their classrooms. All too often, teachers see PLC work as an add-on or a fad and feel that “this too shall pass”. Some teachers actually view it an assault on their own professionalism; the very fact that an institute or district mandates PLCs is an assumption that they, as teachers, are lacking in skill, commitment or collegiality. PLCs should be built from the ground up, by the teacher participants - in response to real issues, not manufactured or arbitrary agendas. Given the educational context, their experience, and their knowledge of their community, PLC members should be able to collaboratively and individually frame a vision for their department and the type of learning they hope to achieve. There also needs to be ample space for dissent as well as discussion and time enough to really reflect upon and respond to the issues they face. To be successful a PLC needs to acknowledge experience. PLCs should be about shared exploration not didacticism. Faculty developers, chairs (and associates), and lead teachers charged with leading change through a PLC process should be especially aware of this. I have observed too many well-meaning instructional leaders lose credibility because they figured they could “fix” the pedagogy of their colleagues. Especially off-putting was when leaders started preaching about “best practices” and tried to hammer home recent research. Many teachers felt their own methods devalued (since they were not using “best practices”) and their experience discounted just because something may (or may not) have been proven in an entirely different context. A PLC needs to have a mission that goes beyond student achievement and program improvement. It cannot be just “reformative” but must tilt towards being “transformative” (Servage, 2008). In most cases, the PLCs I have worked with were reformative; teachers discovered new strategies or made adjustments in the way they planned or assessed. The truly powerful PLCs I worked with pushed educators to experience significant change forcing them to rethink their whole view of student learning and their role as a teacher. These “transformations” often revealed a shift in understanding related to core beliefs about planning, curricula, assessment, engagement, program relevance, critical literacy and many other foci being were working on. These transformations gave a glimpse into what PLCs could and should be. What is the real purpose of a PLC? Most proponents of PLCs would agree that PLCs are meant to:
Educators need to ask these questions:
Ultimately, I believe the key in building and maintaining a healthy PLC is in promoting and allowing for individual agency. Those who place student achievement as the only core of PLC work (“It’s always and only about student learning.”) actually denigrate the role of teacher as learner and constrict creativity (see Servage, 2006). Student learning may be the muse, but if the PLC is to succeed and thrive as a model for professional development and adult education it must allow for self-actualization, align with the principles of adult education, and avoid getting trapped in the world of data-driven reformation as opposed to professional and personal transformation. So how does this impact NorQuest? As we move forward in response to various initiatives like Reimagining Higher Education and our efforts to create a NorQuest College culture, and as we respond to pressures associated with the current teaching conditions brought on by Covid-19 and economic and structural pressures, PLCs and/or Communities of Practice hold promise. They present encouraging models to build community and resiliency. Moreover, I am eager to support the efforts of those who would like to start one of these learning communities or nurture the efforts of an existing one. In fact, in the next few months our faculty development team will be piloting a “Faculty Community of Practice” as we move to consolidating our support materials and providing access to instructors and academic leaders at NorQuest. However, I am conscious of the pitfalls too, and I am hoping that we can build this community and accompanying PLCs from the ground up, with 1) shared vision, 2) committed participation, 3) regular, sustained and focused work, 4) meaningful and honest inquiry and discussion, and 5) inspired leadership.
References:
|
AuthorJeff Kuntz Ph.D. ImagesExcept where indicated, images used in the blog posts are personal photos, images from NorQuest College or images from Pixabay. Pixabay is a vibrant community of creatives, sharing copyright free images, videos and music. https://pixabay.com/ Archives
March 2024
Categories
All
|