You are here

01/04/2015

Between September and December 2014, Jolien De Norre, a sociology graduate, spent four months researching the functioning of Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) as part of her Master’s studies in Cultural and Development Studies at the University of Leuven. Her work focused on how PLCs are implemented in practice.  How educators in the district understand PLCs, how they see it functioning and whether functioning PLCs resemble their theoretical conception.

The study was mainly qualitative. Jolien used observations of PLCs, cluster meetings and educational events, interviews with subject advisors, teachers and principals and focus groups as sources of information.

Some take-aways from the study

"Some teachers, in particular female teachers, indicated that at times there are unavoidable commitments that excuse participants from coming to PLC meetings, like for example child care, study commitments or long commuting time in the remote areas."

"Teachers from foundation phase are very fragile. Some teachers lack the confidence to engage with teachers from other schools. With their own colleagues this is less of a problem than when teachers from other schools, whom they don’t know that well, are involved. Also, these teachers feel undervalued compared to intermediate phase teachers."

"In my observations and questions, I tried to find out what these successful PLCs did in order to overcome the challenges formulated above. What did they do right and what can be learnt from their experiences? It was not easy to find a right answer to this, but what was striking was that they did not follow a blueprint, but that they adapted to the specific challenges in their context."

"Another dilemma concerns the focus of the PLCs; should they be assisting with the implementation of the new curriculum, or is the discussion of broader issues like learners’ vulnerable family situations, language proficiency or material classroom conditions also welcome (or essential), and where is the balance? Teachers often took initiative in talking about these social and familial issues to me (e.g. overcrowded class rooms, learners’ concentration issues due to hunger, tiredness or parents’ divorce), when I had asked them more general questions. I got the feeling from this that these issues are prominently on these teachers’ thoughts, and would therefore be necessarily discussed in these PLCs."

"Participation requires agency, agency requires trust and professional independence. We have seen that not everyone has the same amount of agency (time, transport, commitments). Subject advisors and teachers have indicated feeling powerless regarding their workload and their professional philosophy.  Yet at the same time teachers, subject advisors and PLCs are not powerless and passive objects and can 'manoeuvre within the local'. For example, during one PLC I participated in, teachers indicated they prefer receiving the agenda on time, in order to be more prepared for the meeting. Such a small thing is also related to the politics of facilitated meetings: who sets up the agenda, who sends out the agenda and invitations, and does this happen in time?"

 

However, reading these small extracts does not mean you shouldn’t read the whole report (*). It’s well worth a read!

Ideally, the research will be continued when more PLCs are functional. This will allow for more in-depth analysis on how PLCs are implemented in schools, if and how they change school culture and what their impact is on classroom teaching.

 

(*) The full report is freely accessible on simple request.