This week’s review is on How to Develop PLCs for Singletons and Small Schools by Aaron Hansen.
This book forms a short companion to Learning by Doing offering advice for smaller schools and singletons. For many of our schools, such a resource is a must read; even while I would hope for something more from such a book. The book is divided into five short chapters focusing on types of schools. This enables a broader conversation; but it felt somewhat shallow as well.
The introduction offers up the biggest critique of PLCs – pointing out that “not being thoughtful about the roles singletons can play within this new collaborative culture…it’s not unusual for become resistant to the process, because they feel it is a waste of their time — largely, because it is!” (2). However, the proper incorporation of PLCs requires collaboration and not “collaboration lite” where a team “isn’t administering common formative assessments” (5). How then to square this circle?
The five chapters answer this question in different ways. The first is a common feature of K-8 schools with one or two classes – “vertical teams” with a focus on the same subject, if different grades. The key question here is “what skills at each grade level do you have in common?” (8). Here the focus can be on discussing “commonality in their students’ struggles” leading to a cross grade rubric to measure progress on a similar skills (9). This leads to an intervention cycle were students move into being “our” students – with opportunities for greater collaboration and support. The team can line up levels of rigor for each skill with careful delineation and discussion.
The second method is to set up interdisciplinary teams – “who all teach different content but work together to develop common assessments around universal essential skills” (19). Here the common denominator is less content based but a universally applicable skill. These tend to be “big picture” (25) such as study skills and force “team members to determine not only the skills that they have in common but also those skills that have not traditionally taught within their subject area” (28). This might be especially applicable to a “specials” PLC.
Third comes those singletons who “support” – where they “join a traditional team and support team goals, even when those goals have nothing to do with the singleton content” (31). They are called to “understand their role and be willing to support the goals the team sets” (31). This might be the drama teacher who kids love helping students recognize parts of speech (the example in the text). These are best set up for teammates that can also get their learning bucket filled from other resources. The team will want to start by establishing a “secondary skills list” or a discussion around strategies for student engagement and practice. In such cases, the singleton must not be a part of every PLC – but given a focus with a specific role, schedule, and system of accountability. This must be communicated “first to the singleton and then, with the whole team” (42) with all factors of knowledge, experience, goal, and personality considered.
Next, Hansen presents the idea of virtual PLCs – using the internet to connect teachers around subject and grade level across schools, districts, states, and even countries. Here norms, commitment, and accountability become the challenge. A strong leader, transparent plan, and good communication are certainly required. Hosting such a team at the diocesan or network level can be a big help. Common assessments and data conversations also require an extra step given the differing student populations and needs that might arise. A connection between principals can also be a big help here.
Lastly, the idea of structural change is presented. We can shift what teachers teach in terms of subject or grade level to facilitate data gathering, discussions, and growth. Such changes enables “the focus of the work…[to shift]…from answering PLC fundamental questions 1 and 2 to focusing on questions 3 and 4” (60). This chapter is obviously shorter due to its more limited and greater personalized aspects.
However, a greater depth – one that mirrors the strength of Learning by Doing by walking through the whole process with singleton schools would greatly enrich the resources and support for such schools. Without it, the practical implementation feels like a big of a jump in the pool of PLCs.
How to Develop PLCs for Singletons and Small Schools by Aaron Hansen.
Rating: 4/5 Stars
Good For: Smaller schools who want PLCs.
Best nugget: Look for common skills, then build common assessments.
Please note: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. However, I am not paid to provide reviews or use content.
Leave a Reply