1 Teacher-Driven Improvement
āChanging teaching means changing the understanding that underlies the teachingā (Katz & Dack, 2013, p. 5).
Figure 1.1 Collaborative Inquiry as Transformative Professional Learning
Graphic source: erich007/iStock/Thinkstock
Collaborative inquiry holds the potential to transform learning, leading, and teaching. This is confirmed in research and our work with teams, schools, and districts. Powerful professional learning designs are grounded in educatorās practice, inquiry oriented, and collaborative and reflective in nature. Collaborative inquiry provides a structure for educators to lead and learn together productively. It is an instrumental approach to developing teacher leadership and professional capital, increasing efficacy, and shifting attributions regarding causes for studentsā success or failure. In moving the ālearning of teaching closer to practiceā (Gallimore, Ermeling, Saunders, & Goldenberg, 2009, p. 538), conversations change from what has been taught to what has been learned.
We have witnessed a growing and deep appreciation for the transformative changes that collaborative inquiry can deliver. Many teachers have reported that engaging in collaborative inquiry has not only impacted their teaching practices but also how they understand and value ongoing, relevant, and collaborative professional learning. School administrators echo these sentiments when they share how teachers engaged in collaborative inquiry speak with excitement about their learning in a way that is infectious and felt throughout the school. All agree that when teachers are learning, studentsā learning experiences are enhanced.
The transformative potential of collaborative inquiry is also reflected in the relationship between collaboration, inquiry, and efficacy. Efficacy matters. Eells (2011) examined the relationship between collective teacher efficacy and student achievement. Results from this meta-analysis demonstrated that when educators believe that together they can make a difference, the impact on student gains can almost quadruple. Hattie (2009) synthesized over 800 meta-analyses that examined various factors impacting student achievement. Hattie continues to update this synthesis and recently ranked collective teacher efficacy as the number one factor influencing student achievement (personal communication, November 19, 2015). Studies show that teacherās self-efficacy and collective efficacy increase when teachers collaborate (Beauchamp, Klassen, Parsons, Durksen, & Taylor, 2014; Horton & Martin, 2013; Johnson, 2012; Little, 1990; Moolenaar, Sleegers, & Daly, 2012). Studies also show that when collaborative teams engage in inquiry self-efficacy increases (Bruce & Flynn, 2013; Cooper-Twamley, 2009; Galligan, 2011; Henson, 2001). In addition, Voelkel Jr. (2011) demonstrated a positive relationship between collective efficacy and professional learning communities characterized by collaboration and inquiry.
Gallimore et al. (2009) provided evidence that the inquiry process also helps to bring about changes in attributions. This research demonstrated a shift in attributions of improved student performance to teaching rather than external causes. Instead of attributing student success and/or failure to factors outside of their control, teachers came to better understand their ability to impact student outcomes. The authors noted that teachers shifted from assumptions that included āI planned and taught the lesson, but they didnāt get itā to āyou havenāt taught it until theyāve learnedā as a result of engaging in a collaborative inquiry process.
While the transformation of learning, leading, and teaching rests with all educators, the role and position of teachers in school improvement cannot be overlooked or understated. Hargreaves and Fullan (2012) made this sobering observation:
When the classroom door is closed, the teacher will always remain in charge. Where students are concerned, the teacher will always be more powerful than the principal, the president, or the prime minister. Successful and sustainable improvement can therefore never be done to or even for teachers. It can only ever be achieved by and with them. (p. 45)
Collaborative inquiry is a process that recognizes and values teachers as drivers for school improvement, as opposed to be being the targets of improvement. It provides a systematic approach for teachers to explore issues and determine resolutions through shared inquiry, reflection, and dialogue. Rather than being merely consumers of research and the professional knowledge that accompanies it, teachers engaged in collaborative inquiry become producers and disseminators of knowledge.
Through the collaborative inquiry process, teachers develop professional capital as described by Hargreaves and Fullan (2012). In recasting the teacherās role in improvement efforts, the authors advocate for the development of professional capital that includes human capital (the talent of individuals), social capital (the collaborative power of the group), and decisional capital (the wisdom and expertise to make sound judgments about learners that are cultivated over many years) (p. 5). Professional capital is not something that is bestowed upon educators but rather unleashed within and through them when they engage in a cycle of inquiry. The understanding and definition of teacher leadership expands, and teachers become leaders of their learning.
Addressing Adaptive Challenges
Collaborative inquiry marries professional learning and leadership to simultaneously surface and transform the way student learning is understood and planned for. Since these transformations are manifested in teaching behaviors and beliefs, the challenges accompanying the changes can be described as adaptive in nature. Adaptive challenges are difficult to resolve, as solutions require new learning and upset past ways of doing things. Heifetz, Grashow, and Linsky (2009) pointed out that there is no clear path to solving an adaptive challenge. Solutions are iterative and appear more elusive as they challenge the status quo and existing cultures that may foster resistance. Collaborative inquiry can be understood as a promising way to address adaptive challenges in education. It is powerful because it transforms the learning of teachers by letting them lead their professional learning in ways that address the adaptive challenges of the classroom.
The single biggest failure of leadership is applying a technical fix to an adaptive challenge (Heifetz & Laurie, 1997).
A Collaborative Inquiry Framework
There are numerous collaborative inquiry frameworks, and the one proposed in this book does not differ significantly from others. In fact, it is a slight modification to Timperley, Wilson, Barrar, and Fungās (2007) teacher inquiry cycle. Ideas that draw upon Timperley, Kaser, and Halbertās (2014) revised spiral of inquiry are also reflected in this book. In addition, as we continue to learn and refine our practice as we support collaborative inquiry in school districts, the ideas suggested in one of the authorās earlier works entitled Collaborative Inquiry for Educators: A Facilitatorās Guide to School Improvement are expanded upon.
The collaborative inquiry cycle is situated within the work of a professional learning community. The process begins with teams identifying a needs-based focus. Once a learning need is identified, the team develops an inquiry question that they are genuinely curious about. Teams begin to map out a theory of action in order to identify assumptions and strengthen and share their theorizing. During this process, the team identifies educatorsā learning needs. A driving question the team asks is, āWhat classroom and/or leadership practices (that are different from what we are currently doing) could we learn more about to address the gaps in student learning that we have identified?ā Once participants identify and articulate their own learning needs, they engage in professional learning in order to deepen professional knowledge and refine skills.
Figure 1.2 illustrates different ways in which educators might engage in learning throughout the cycle. While not every avenue that leads to new understandings is depicted in the illustration, the point is that participants are provided the autonomy to pursue a model of learning that best fits the needs they have identified. If a participant needs to understand how to support inquiry-based learning in their classroom, peer observation might be an appropriate starting point. If a participant needs to understand how to utilize instructional time in order to maximize consolidation of learning, he or she might engage in lesson study. If a team member determines he needs to improve questioning skills, he might invite a coach into his classroom. If participants need to better understand strategies for increasing metacognition, they might access research or reach out to an expert in the field. Alternatively, participants might seek opportunities for direct instruction, depending on the learning need identified. These methods of learning are not in competition with the inquiry but are in aid of finding a solution to the inquiry posed.
Figure 1.2 A Collaborative Inquiry Framework
Adapted from Teacher Professional Learning and Development Best Evidence Synthesis Iteration, Timperley, Wilson, Barrar, and Fung (2007).
New practices are tested and, collectively, teams examine artifacts representative of studentsā learning. The team considers the impact of the changes on student outcomes before determining next steps. Notice the arrow circles back from āDetermine next best moveā to āDeepen professional knowledge and refine skills.ā It is likely that teams will cycle back a number of times, as they test and learn more about new and different approaches. The number of iterations usually depends on the willingness and timeliness in which teams examine evidence. If teams adopt a wait and see outlook, then it is less likely inquiries will be sustained. In order to make responsive changes and adjust instruction accordingly, teams need to examine student evidence frequently. This is discussed at greater length in Chapter 4. The cycle moves to a new iteration when team members feel they are able to answer the question posed at the beginning of the cycle. The process of documenting the teamās learning (including recommendations for others) encourages further reflection and helps to consolidate understanding. Recognition and celebration are integral to a teamās engagement in subsequent cycles.
A Flexible and Applicable Approach to Learning
Hopkins Public Schools was seeking a process to better guide educators in seeking answers to student learning challenges. Despite teachers routinely using information from formative assessments to respond to student learning needs and implementing many interventions in classrooms, including school-wide programs, educators were frustrated with the minimal gains in assessment scores. Teachers recognized that students needed more than just content to be successful. Additionally, educators in nontraditional classrooms were looking for a process that would better fit the needs of their work.
In response, Becky Allen, staff development coordinator, and Sandy Homb, Q-Comp manager, offered collaborative inquiry as an option to the existing Professional Learning Community (PLC) process. Teacher leaders provided training and support as nearly 40 percent of PLCs opted to use collaborative inquiry the first year it was offered. Through a series of five face-to-face sessions, teams were guided in developing their inquiry question, theory of action, evidence collection plan, and the use of tools for examining evidence.
Based on this process, PLCs pursued a wide array of questions in an effort to determine how to increase engagement and build student skills, such as independence, literacy skills, technology integration, and problem-solving skills. This process was also a welcomed opportunity for staff working directly with adults and those working with students outside of a traditional classroom. A pretest/posttest model did not fit well with measuring the impact of their practices, and this process allowed for a variety of tools to answer questions about providing support to staff, families, or individual students.
Teachers who engaged in this process have found collaborative inquiry to be applicable and flexible for their needs. A critical part of the evidence collection process centered around gathering data pertaining to their own practice. This created a reflective environment and purposeful dialogue among colleagues. The inquiry process is personal; teams pursued questions that were significant and required them to measure the impact of their practices. Collaborative inquiry worked because teachers inquired into their own problems of practice and used a research process that was relevant and meaningful to their daily work.
What It Is and What It Is Not
Collaborative inquiry is first and foremost a design for high quality professional learning that recognizes and celebrates the critical role of educators in improving student outcomes. While stages of the process share similarities to research designs, the intent is not for collaborative inquiry teams to undertake rigorous experimental research. Hattie (cited in Stewart, 2015) cautioned that teachers should not be expected to conduct research in schools or classrooms, noting that teachers are busy enough and that research skills are acquired through specialized graduate courses. Hatt...
