View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Using District-Wide Professional Learning Communities for Continuous Professional Development in Physical Education: A Promising Example

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Using District-Wide Professional Learning Communities for Continuous Professional Development in Physical Education: A Promising Example
Language: English
Authors: Zack Beddoes (ORCID 0009-0008-3361-6609), Brendan Quest, Jenna Starck, Silvia Silva, Diana Stein, Christina Rios, Debra Sazama
Source: Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. 2025 96(2):36-46.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 11
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Physical Education Teachers, Faculty Development, Communities of Practice, Teacher Competencies, School Districts, Administrator Role, Participative Decision Making, Teacher Collaboration, Facilitators (Individuals)
Geographic Terms: New York (New York)
DOI: 10.1080/07303084.2024.2437985
ISSN: 0730-3084
2168-3816
Abstract: In 2015, four physical education specialists launched the creation of district-wide physical education professional learning communities (DPE-PLCs) designed to enhance the effectiveness of continuing professional development (CPD) for physical educators. By the start of the 2019-2020 school year, 37 DPE-PLC units were fully operational within 25 geographic subdistricts. DPE-PLCs provided physical education teachers with monthly professional learning designed to enhance content knowledge, create instructional resources, and engage in continuous improvement. The reach, organization, and sustainability of the DPE-PLC structure invites a closer look into this model and signals potential for replication/modification in other school district contexts. Using the DPE-PLC structure as a functioning proof of concept, this article introduces and provides a rationale for district-wide PE-PLCs as one potential form of CPD to help physical educators improve practice, exchange ideas, and seek help from like-minded professionals.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1500184
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFsJQLVvxY8QXvKeLB2Vsx8AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDBLxorUw-D_BcM2lxgIBEICBm4HRCIEUEKsDoo30txW6xZzm_5MmvgiGq4STtWqfoqsw5a7lKC0P9ZbgmAk2Nv0B97Wwg56JWn2iDYI6NGBMQefHtHm87xe8MZhMo0GsNcB2W2qClTXPcR9C7DLiqTUPdww0IrGu7jTfmuGPZeeaXM3O8PHsg7hLHpApNQLpd0z8YYqRti3Bfp99kSI01-cO_4kNTBuwMCC8kSE7
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0183273953;erd01feb.25;2025Feb28.01:28;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0183273953-1">Using District-Wide Professional Learning Communities for Continuous Professional Development in Physical Education: A Promising Example </title> <p>In 2015, four physical education specialists launched the creation of district-wide physical education professional learning communities (DPE-PLCs) designed to enhance the effectiveness of continuing professional development (CPD) for physical educators. By the start of the 2019-2020 school year, 37 DPE-PLC units were fully operational within 25 geographic subdistricts. DPE-PLCs provided physical education teachers with monthly professional learning designed to enhance content knowledge, create instructional resources, and engage in continuous improvement. The reach, organization, and sustainability of the DPE-PLC structure invites a closer look into this model and signals potential for replication/modification in other school district contexts. Using the DPE-PLC structure as a functioning proof of concept, this article introduces and provides a rationale for district-wide PE-PLCs as one potential form of CPD to help physical educators improve practice, exchange ideas, and seek help from like-minded professionals.</p> <p>Teacher engagement activities designed to enhance practice (Day & Sachs, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref1">5</reflink>]), such as structured, collaborative, and continuing professional development (CPD), are a critical component of the training and development of the physical education workforce (Lawson et al., [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref2">13</reflink>]). Perhaps more than ever, contemporary challenges in education (e.g., disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, teacher turnover, low enrollment in teacher training programs, rise in childhood trauma) points to the need for greater emphasis on CPD for physical education teachers. However, replacing isolated, decontextualized professional development workshops with meaningful CPD remains a challenge. Context variability, differing curricular philosophies, and instructional methodologies have been shown to introduce difficulties with designing a "one best" CPD approach (Lawson et al., [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref3">13</reflink>]). What works in one setting, district, or school may not be appropriate for another. A structured CPD approach accounts for teamwork around unique contexts and challenges rather than an exclusive reliance on traditional top-down professional development efforts (Collin et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref4">4</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-2">Continuing Professional Development Through Professional Learning Communities</hd> <p>Many different types of teacher communities can effectively provide CPD for physical education professionals (Vangrieken et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref5">18</reflink>]). One conceptual teacher community framework that has been especially influential for CPD at the school level is professional learning communities (PLCs; DuFour & Eaker, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref6">7</reflink>]). In conjunction with being a space to exchange ideas, there is some evidence that school-based PLCs can positively influence physical education teacher perceptions of status, empowerment, and belonging within the school community (Beddoes et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref7">3</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref8">2</reflink>]). In its simplest form, a PLC is a school community of professionals with the collective purpose of enhancing teacher and student learning (Hord & Sommers, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref9">12</reflink>]).</p> <p>According to Hord and Sommers ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref10">12</reflink>]), PLC formations share five defining characteristics, including (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref11">1</reflink>) shared and supportive leadership—for example, ownership, defined autonomy, defined roles; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref12">2</reflink>) shared values, visions, and goals—for example, common purpose and shared agenda; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref13">3</reflink>) collective learning and application— for example, action research, teacher and student learning; (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref14">4</reflink>) shared individual practice—for example, collaborative decision making, data-driven instruction; and (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref15">5</reflink>) supportive conditions—for example, allotted collaboration time, supportive team dynamics. Individually and together, the foregoing defining characteristics of PLCs are important to explore within the context of physical education CPD.</p> <p>Drawing from Hord and Sommers' ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref16">12</reflink>]) framework, the purpose of this article is to describe a functioning district-wide physical education PLC (DPE-PLC). Each of the authors of this article contributed to the DPE-PLC design and/or implementation. The DPE-PLC may currently be identified as conceptual because research is needed to explore and test its theoretical and empirical warrants as a viable, transferable, and sustainable model for physical education CPD. Nevertheless, its longevity (nearly a decade) and workability in a very large district on the Eastern Seaboard of the United States invites initial exploration and description. PLCs hold a potential for increasing physical education teacher collaboration and learning around difficult, contextual challenges related to problems of practice (Beddoes et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref17">3</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref18">2</reflink>]). Given the author's combined experience and scholarship relative to PLCs in physical education, the replication of the DPE-PLC structures and principles is recommended, where appropriate.</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-3">District-Wide Physical Education PLC: Origins and Participants</hd> <p>What follows is a brief backstory to provide context for the origins of the DPE-PLC, the professionals who conceptualized and implemented it, and the justifications whereupon it was constructed. For clarity, the author team conceptualized the entire district as one DPE-PLC (just as an entire school can be operationalized as a PLC; DuFour & Eaker, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref19">7</reflink>]) comprising multiple levels, teams, and leadership positions. However, for the purposes of this analysis, DPE-PLCs often refer to structured <emph>teams</emph> because of the multitiered nature of the teams involved.</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-4">Origins and Growth</hd> <p>The New York City (NYC) School District is the largest and most diverse district in the United States. It serves over 1.1 million students in over 1,800 schools spanning five boroughs, subdivided into 33 geographic districts. One of the districts provides highly specialized instructional support for students with disabilities.</p> <p>In 2015 a report by the NYC comptroller was issued on the state of physical education in NYC public schools. The report described what physical education teachers across the city were painfully aware of: NYC public schools were not programming physical education to meet state requirements for time and frequency. Moreover, schools did not have adequate space to provide physical education classes. As part of an agreement with the mayor's office, funds were provided to the Office of School Wellness Programs to assess what schools and teachers needed to meet the state-level requirements. This effort included the organization of district-level physical education specialists: Brendan Quest, Silvia Silva, Diana Stein, and Christina Rios. These leaders were tasked with assessing needs and providing CPD for all physical education teachers across the city. As a teacher, Diana had previously organized PE-PLCs in her district and brought experience to this city-wide expansion. With the backup of district leadership, Brendan, Siliva, Diana, and Christina supported DPE-PLCs as a systematic form of CPD for physical education teachers by launching 11 DPE-PLC units across 8 geographic districts. By the start of the 2019–2020 school year, 37 DPE-PLC units were fully operational within 25 geographic districts (see Figure 1 for a map of DPE-PLCs citywide as of 2020). During the crafting of this article, DPE-PLCs provided physical education teachers with monthly professional learning opportunities designed to enhance content knowledge, create instructional resources, and engage in continuous improvement tied to an identified student learning gap or pedagogical practice.</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 1. Plotted PLCs in 2019–2020</p> <p>Early in 2020 the COVID-19 pandemic altered the educational system in an unprecedented way. New York City schools were particularly impacted by the highly concentrated spread of the coronavirus and resulting hospitalizations. Every teacher was faced with the prospect of being professionally and socially isolated. District leaders sought alternative methods to preserve community and avoid losing the PLC momentum among the physical education teachers. They turned to virtual-based DPE-PLCs.</p> <p>Online communities can be a useful support tool for encouraging participants to engage in work between meetings. During the online phase, DPE-PLC leaders served as facilitators for online resource sharing and monitoring and supporting local PLC teams. Participation by the teachers was voluntary. Online DPE-PLC collaboration meetings were held in the afternoon, during contractually negotiated professional development time. Online participation approximated in-person participation rates. Participants within each borough varied as follows: Manhattan, 74; Bronx, 57; Brooklyn, 59; Queens, 74; and Staten Island, 18, with a total of 282 participating teachers in online DPE-PLCs city-wide.</p> <p>Monthly meetings were organized as a forum for each geographic borough. During remote learning these PLC forums focused on resource sharing and development of content knowledge for remote physical education. The invitation was for teachers to implement these resources and/or strategies, reflect on successes and challenges, and return to the following online DPE-PLC collaboration ready to share their experience. The DPE-PLC leads did not view these forums as a replacement for monthly face-to-face meetings but rather as an alternative and temporary method of supporting physical educators relative to their unique needs during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-5">Physical Education Leaders and PETE Faculty</hd> <p>Prior to their roles as PLC support staff for physical education, Brendan, Silvia, Diana, and Christina worked as health and physical education teachers across the NYC school district. Collectively, this group's teaching experience covers positions in all five geographic boroughs in Grades K–12. During their teaching career, each member of this group experienced challenges that are unique to the NYC school district (e.g., teaching in a building that was originally designed as housing, without dedicated space for physical education) as well as those that are global within the field (e.g., being the only physical education teacher in a building, large class sizes, diverse student body).</p> <p>Based on their collective experiences with professional learning, specifically within the PLC framework, the DPE-PLCs were organized and structured around the five themes of PLCs identified by Hord and Sommers ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref20">12</reflink>]) and reported earlier in this article. The district leaders identified several practices that collaborative teams could utilize in creating a supportive climate necessary for a successful PLC. Some of these included meeting regularly to build relationships of trust, developing a clear focus on a specified problem of practice, creating routines that support honest dialogue and disclosure, and developing a core set of strategies for connecting teacher learning to student learning.</p> <p>The remaiming three authors, Zack Beddoes, Jenna Starck, and Debra Sazama, are assistant professors in physical education teacher education (PETE) at Brigham Young University and The University of Wisconsin–La Crosse. Each of these scholars are former K–12 physical education teachers with considerable experience working within and studying PLCs in a variety of contexts. Their roles included collaboration with the district leaders via an online platform, phone calls, and email exchanges. These PETE faculty were regularly involved with providing insight into planning and assessment practices for the participating physical education teachers during the online phase of the DPE-PLCs.</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-6">Toward District-Wide Physical Education CPD Through PLCs</hd> <p>The following sections describe the DPE-PLC as informed by these PLC characteristics. Additionally, principles and ideas derived from implementing the DPE-PLCs (based on the five characteristics) are expounded upon to draw connections to and from other contexts. Consideration of the size, demographics, and variability of the school district is a practical necessity in any effort to adopt or adapt this or other frameworks.</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-7">Supportive and Shared Leadership</hd> <p>A PLC is effective and sustainable to the degree that school and/or district administrators are supportive and work collaboratively with teachers (Hord, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref21">11</reflink>]). Teachers must be equipped with the ownership, defined autonomy, trust, and professional agency to work collaboratively toward student learning outcomes (DuFour & DuFour, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref22">6</reflink>]). The DPE-PLC model is designed for teacher collaboration and problem solving within localized teacher teams. Guided by a collective mission and vision, teacher autonomy is particularly critical for supportive and shared leadership within any PLC (Vangrieken et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref23">18</reflink>]). Given the large, variable, and complex nature of the NYC school district, the DPE-PLCs were organized with designated leadership team positions, which included leads, facilitators, and points (see Figure 2). At the time this article was drafted, DPE-PLCs were sustained by five district leads. Under the direction of the leads, each facilitator had a point person (1:1 ratio) to rely on for support. Fifty-three facilitators directed 37 local PLCs consisting of approximately 250 regular physical educator attendees across 25 geographic districts. These leadership positions are described below.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 2. Important people to know in the DPE-PLC loop</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-8">Leads</hd> <p>Leads were the district-level physical education specialists responsible for city-wide planning, organization, ongoing monitoring, selection of facilitators, and supporting the entire PLC process. As described previously, this leadership team was tasked with providing CPD to physical education teachers city-wide. The leads were involved in other ongoing projects like developing and publishing physical education curricula, including the associated scope and sequence documents. They contributed to ongoing collaboration with the city's Office of Periodic Assessment to create standardized assessments for secondary physical education teachers. Most of their time was spent mentoring individual teachers and schools through 1:1 coaching.</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-9">Facilitators</hd> <p>Facilitators served as school-based physical education team leaders (at least one per school) responsible for planning and facilitating meaningful monthly PE-PLC meetings and ongoing communication with the teachers within their stewardship. Specifically, facilitators oversaw the collaborative efforts of their teams, which included assisting in the establishment of group norms, resolving conflict, and monitoring data-driven inquiry and action research. Facilitators were also the communication bridge between district leadership and the participating physical education teachers on their teams.</p> <p>Because the work of PLCs is driven by localized teacher teams (DuFour & DuFour, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref24">6</reflink>]), it was exceptionally important to recruit dedicated and capable facilitators. Facilitators in the DPE-PLC were selected via a formal application process, which included an interview and written essay (see Table 1 for an example application question and rubric). Of 72 completed applications, 53 facilitators were selected. Facilitators had to apply each year and were provided with two hours of overtime compensation for time spent planning the DPE-PLC sessions.</p> <p>Table 1. Sample Interview Application Questions and Rubric for DPE-PE Facilitators</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>2019–2020 Physical Education Professional Learning Communities Facilitator Application</td></tr><tr><td>Responses are evaluated based on this rubric.</td><td>Meets criteria Point range: 6–10</td><td>Approaching criteria Point range: 1–5</td><td>Does not meet criteria Point range: 0</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Question 9 Please list and describe two examples of how being part of a PLC will advance your professional development? (minimum 75 words, maximum 200 words)</td><td>The applicant presents at least two concrete and detailed examples for: How being part of a PLC will advance their professional development. The examples include detailed relevant background information and existing practices and processes. (Examples of this could include learning opportunities, solving problems of practice, best practice instructional strategies, collaborating with like-minded individuals.)</td><td>The applicant presents one general example for: How being part of a PLC will advance their professional development. The examples include detailed relevant background information and existing practices and processes. (Examples of this could include learning opportunities, solving problems of practice, best practice instructional strategies, collaborating with like-minded individuals.)</td><td>The applicant presents no examples or one example with no details for: How being part of a PLC will advance their professional development. There is no background information, supporting school and community data, and existing practices and processes.</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>After facilitators were selected, and prior to their service, they collectively participated in a two-day in-person training organized by the district leads. Each year, leads selected a resource that focused on the impact of teacher leaders. For example, in 2018 the leads selected "When Nice Won't Suffice" by MacDonald ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref25">14</reflink>]) and in 2019, "Taking the Helm: Physical Educators Managing Change Through Professional Learning Communities" by Beddoes and colleagues ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref26">1</reflink>]). The training consisted of a discussion of the preassigned article, reviewing the central components of a PLC, and participation in a hands-on workshop. Within the workshop, facilitators practiced identifying, articulating, and planning around a specific problem of practice within their given context. After modeling a problem of practice, district leaders provided a problem of practice checklist (Figure 3) and a PLC agenda planning template to facilitators to use in PLC collaboration meetings. District support was a continuous process, but the initial two-day training was an essential introduction to the duties of facilitators within DPE-PLCs.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 3. Problem of practice checklist</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-10">Points</hd> <p>Points were licensed physical educators serving in district-level instructional coaching roles. Instructional coaches were assigned to support physical education instruction in schools by grade band (K–5 or 6–12). When DPE-PLCs were implemented, instructional coaches were tasked with supporting and building upon the relationships they had developed with teachers. Given that not every member within the district office had the same level of familiarity with the DPE-PLC model, or PLCs in general, the instructional coaches created internal professional development that was delivered to all Office of School Wellness Programs staff. This was offered so that anyone who was directly supporting instruction in physical education or health education could speak about DPE-PLCs as an opportunity for professional growth and collaboration during school visits. Instructional coaches became known as points.</p> <p>Points functioned as the glue between and among PLC teams, facilitators, and leads. Assigned to oversee one DPE-PLC site and the assigned facilitators, points were responsible for co-planning the monthly DPE-PLC sessions with facilitators, outreach and recruitment for monthly collaboration meetings, attendance tracking, and communicating with borough PLC leads.</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-11">Attendees</hd> <p>Attendees were identified as all physical education teachers who attended DPE-PLC meetings. The DPE-PLCs were designed to be cohesive and systemic district-wide, but operational at local levels. District leads, facilitators, and points collectively provided the structure for DPE-PLCs so teacher participants could focus on the important work of meaningful collaboration (Prusak et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref27">16</reflink>]).</p> <p>Though supportive and shared leadership is an essential characteristic of all PLC or PLC-like formations, its application can be variable. The size and complexities of school districts necessitate adaptations and modifications. Even so, implementors of DPE-PLCs should strongly consider the roles, responsibilities, and qualifications of school and district leadership. School leadership (e.g., facilitators in the DPE-PLCs) is critical. Most of the day-to-day operations of a PLC rely on strong local leaders who understand how to build a collaborative culture, facilitate problem solving, and improve people (Hattie, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref28">10</reflink>]). Yet, bereft of district oversight (e.g., point and lead positions in the DPE-PLCs), school-based PLCs alone will likely not outlast the dedicated leadership and dogged efforts of the visionary leaders who facilitate them.</p> <p>Support from the central district office dramatically increases the likelihood of sustainability for PLCs (DuFour & Marzano, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref29">9</reflink>]). This phenomenon has likewise been observed in physical education–specific CPD. For example, Prusak et al. ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref30">16</reflink>]) provided compelling evidence that a district coordinator was invaluable for the sustainability of district-wide efforts to implement coordinated CPD. Examining a school district that had modeled effective CPD for nearly four decades, the researchers concluded that district oversight was critical for removing traditional barriers (e.g., advocacy concerns, class size, and time constraints), acting as gatekeepers, and maintaining accountability for physical education teachers.</p> <p>Like the CPD model proposed by Prusak et al. ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref31">16</reflink>]), DPE-PLCs should designate and train at least one district administrator to oversee, support, and advocate for the collective efforts of the physical education teachers within the district. District leaders can advocate for meaningful and equitable CPD, create a common language, defend against barriers to student learning, provide essential training for school-based leadership teams, and enact healthy accountability. Granted, support from the district office may not come easily or naturally. For a more thorough treatment of collective advocacy strategies designed to increase the likelihood of securing both school- and district-level support, see the work of Pennington et al. ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref32">15</reflink>]). As a summary of the article, the authors conceptualize an advocacy model for PLC teams and describe six related action items, including (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref33">1</reflink>) interdependently enhancing the quality of the physical education program, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref34">2</reflink>) cultivating co-assessment literacy, (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref35">3</reflink>) nurturing relationships of trust and reciprocity, (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref36">4</reflink>) relentlessly involving the school administration in the PLC process, (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref37">5</reflink>) joining PETE professionals with local K–12 PLC teams, and (<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref38">6</reflink>) becoming involved in state, regional, and national associations.</p> <p>One traditional disrupter to the success and sustainability of PLCs generally is a lack of training for various levels of leadership (DuFour & Marzano, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref39">9</reflink>]). Well-intended implementation of dispersed leadership within any type of PLC formation can lead to frustration and confusion at the local level unless leaders are equipped with the knowledge and skillset to mobilize a team around a common objective (Prusak et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref40">16</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-12">Shared Values, Vision, and Goals</hd> <p>The success of any dispersed pattern of leadership within a PLC formation is contingent upon shared values with a compelling vision and clearly stated goals (DuFour & DuFour, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref41">6</reflink>]). As such, all DPE-PLC operations were guided by four shared purposes:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Resource sharing and development of content knowledge</item> <p></p> <item> Collaborative development of resources</item> <p></p> <item> Data-driven inquiry</item> <p></p> <item> Curriculum study</item> </ulist> <p>Figure 4 provides supporting details describing DPE-PLCs relative to the four shared purposes. Clarity of purpose is contingent upon the clarity of messaging from school and district leadership. Though teachers and teams are given a degree of autonomy, DPE-PLC leaders provide ongoing guidance so that all PLC practices are directed by and connected to the shared values, vision, and goals of the DPE-PLC. DuFour and Marzano ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref42">9</reflink>]) suggested:</p> <p>Graph: Figure 4. Professional learning communities in physical education: Four purposes of DPE-PLCs</p> <p>Effective district leaders will build shared knowledge throughout the organization as to why an improvement initiative is needed and will create guiding coalitions to help champion the initiative. At some point, however, they will be direct and explicit about the goals that are to be achieved and a few critical conditions they expect to see in every school. (p. 33)</p> <p>Professionals aspiring to enact DPE-PLCs should facilitate collective engagement and collaboration around a shared mission and then supportively maintain the accountability necessary for sustainability.</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-13">Collective Learning and Application</hd> <p>A key feature of any PLC formation is the combined and continuing learning of all community members. Professionals within a PLC collaborate often and use student-level data to inform curricular decision making (DuFour & Fullan, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref43">8</reflink>]). Collective learning invites accountability and organization because all cognitive resources are shared in a PLC and combine for the discovery and application of new knowledge (Vangrieken et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref44">18</reflink>]). The DPE-PLCs followed an organized meeting structure so that attendees could focus on the important work of meaningful learning and collaboration.</p> <p>DPE-PLC meetings were organized according to a monthly four-meeting structure. Week one was designated as <emph>teams meeting week</emph>, where each team was led by the facilitator. Points attended these meetings according to which facilitators and teams they had stewardship over. Leads participated in each team meeting at least once during the year. During weeks two and three, facilitators met with their respective points to plan for the next PLC session, share successful strategies, discuss community building, and provide examples of common lesson plans and assessments. Week four was reserved for facilitators to work with the physical educators in their PLC teams (e.g., sending the agenda for the following meeting; follow-up; next steps; preparation for focused, productive meetings; data analysis; and presentation). Table 2 displays the preparation steps for facilitators as they planned their PLC collaboration meetings.</p> <p>Table 2. Facilitator Steps for Collaboration-Meeting Preparation</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Timing</td><td>Completed by DPE-PLC facilitators</td><td>Completed by DPE-PLC leads</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td char=".">4 Weeks prior to PE-PLC</td><td>Complete PE-PLC planning agenda to address PE-PLC's self-identified problem of practice.</td><td>Complete co-planning and/or provide resources and support to PE-PLC facilitator for planning of upcoming PE-PLC.</td></tr><tr><td char=".">2 Weeks prior to PE-PLC</td><td>Review planned agenda for upcoming PE-PLC to ensure relevancy.</td><td>Complete co-planning and/or provide resources and support to PE-PLC facilitator for planning of upcoming PE-PLC.</td></tr><tr><td char=".">1 Week prior to PE-PLC</td><td>Send proposed PE-PLC agenda to district support for record keeping/approval. Send invitation and registration link to PE-PLC distribution list (those who have attended a previous PE-PLC meeting in the current school year).</td><td>Review planned PE-PLC agenda. <italic>If needed, provide feedback and resources to support necessary updates.</italic> Send PE-PLC facilitator registration link to be distributed to PE-PLC participants.</td></tr><tr><td char=".">2 Days prior to PE-PLC</td><td>Send upcoming PE-PLC session agenda and invitation/registration information to PE-PLC distribution list.</td><td>Monitor registration. Ensure PE-PLC facilitator sends agenda and registration reminder ahead of PE-PLC meeting.</td></tr><tr><td>Day of PE-PLC</td><td>Facilitate PE-PLC session. Ensure that meeting notes for the PE-PLC session are taken. Record highlights, progress toward solving stated problem of practice. Identify next steps/action items to be addressed between PE-PLC meetings.</td><td>Print PE-PLC sign-in/attendance sheet. Print copies of PE-PLC agenda for distribution to participants. Support PE-PLC facilitator as needed. Collect sign-in/attendance sheet at the conclusion of PE-PLC.</td></tr><tr><td>Within 2 days, following PE-PLC</td><td>Send follow-up email to PE-PLC distribution list (those who have attended at least one PE-PLC in the current school year). Include meeting minutes, next steps/action items, resources shared at this PE-PLC meeting, date of next PE-PLC meeting, and any other pertinent information from the most recent PE-PLC.</td><td>Send meeting recap, attendance numbers, and copy of PE-PLC sign-in/attendance sheet to PLC lead.</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>To enhance accountability, all facilitators, points, and leads within the district participated in leadership meetings each December and March to share resources and exchange ideas (e.g., designing common assessments, grant writing, creating community, enhancing adult problem-solving skills). Leads were assigned to take notes and disseminate organized ideas from the meetings back to each of the facilitators. Because collective learning is a core PLC characteristic (Vescio et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref45">19</reflink>]), it was intentionally structured and accounted for in the DPE-PLC model.</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-14">Shared Individual Practice</hd> <p>Out of necessity, many teachers make curricular decisions behind closed doors. Time constraints preclude the coverage of all learning outcomes that a teacher might hope to target during instruction. Within a PLC, teachers make important curricular decisions openly and collaboratively, prioritize essential student learning outcomes, and identify criteria with which to assess those outcomes (DuFour & Eaker, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref46">7</reflink>]). PLC members share pedagogical strategies and student assessment data in nonevaluative ways (Hord, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref47">11</reflink>]).</p> <p>In DPE-PLCs, shared individual practice was closely tied to collective learning and application. Each teacher had to be willing to share and explore teaching practices and results from student assessment data in an open and nonthreatening manner. Prusak et al. ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref48">16</reflink>]) reported that "systemic success" for CPD within their district of study was contingent upon a common, mandated curriculum, methodologies, and language. Though it may or may not be necessary to mandate a common district-wide curriculum in district-wide PLCs, it could enhance the likelihood and effectiveness of shared individual practice. For example, a common curriculum can foster the creation of common assessments for student learning. These assessment resources and instructional techniques can be shared among district physical education teachers.</p> <p>With acknowledgment of the difficulty in creating common practices and common curricula, the following two ideas are shared based on experience: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref49">1</reflink>) revisit group norms regularly and renew them yearly and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref50">2</reflink>) begin with the resources already available. For example, pertaining to group norms, since the inception of DPE-PLCs, facilitators were expected to begin each year leading a discussion to (re)establish norms. These norms were encouraged to be actionable, governing expectations. In 2018–2019 (aligned with MacDonald's [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref51">14</reflink>] article "When Nice Won't Suffice"), leads added suggested practices that facilitators could use to improve engagement and break the stigma surrounding the sharing of instructional resources/assessments. In addition to a facilitator "going first," leads encouraged the collaborative creation of instructional resources and assessments to improve buy-in.</p> <p>With regards to developing and utilizing a shared curriculum, all participating DPE-PLC teachers were encouraged to plan collaboratively based on the district K–12 scope and sequence document. Though this is a resource specific to the NYC school district, collaborative teams might begin the PLC process by identifying common learning outcomes based on SHAPE America – Society of Health and Physical Educators grade-span learning indicators (SHAPE America, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref52">17</reflink>]). District or team leaders who use the grade-span learning indicators could help teams become familiar with and utilize these national resources to create instructional pacing and develop common, formative assessments. The creation of DPE-PLCs takes time and intentionality. It is recommended that leaders and teams start small, celebrate initial successes, and pursue a steady course.</p> <p>An important consideration when implementing common curricula and assessment data is the facilitation of trust and a positive culture among team members. Teachers who fear judgment from peers are not likely to voice opinions or share authentic examples of student work or responses to a particular lesson (Beddoes et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref53">2</reflink>]). Shared individual practice invites vulnerability and authenticity. It takes the posture of concern for and support of "our students" rather than "my students." Supportive conditions were imperative for effective shared individual practice within DPE-PLCs (Webb et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref54">20</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-15">Supportive Conditions</hd> <p>Supportive conditions encompass two separate but related components, physical and human (Webb et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref55">20</reflink>]). Physical conditions include the structural elements of support necessary to collaborate and sustain a community (e.g., allotted collaboration time during the school day). Human conditions involve supportive team dynamics including member attitudes, behaviors, and cognitions (e.g., respectful interactions, every participant's views are valued and considered; Beddoes et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref56">2</reflink>]).</p> <p>DPE-PLCs balanced physical and human support with accountability. District leads provided supports (training) and resources (curriculum and idea sharing), and reduced barriers (reduction of class sizes, advocacy for resources and equitable policy). In turn, teachers were expected to collaborate with their teaching peers to enhance student learning. The following is a list of DPE-PLC supports which also reinforced accountability:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Facilitators engaged in biweekly phone checks with points.</item> <p></p> <item> Facilitators submitted PLC meeting agendas to points and leads, creating opportunities for feedback to inform the next planning session. Feedback was generally constructed for guiding teams toward aligning practice with the four purposes of the PLCs.</item> <p></p> <item> PLC points actively monitored PLC progress and visited each PLC school regularly.</item> <p></p> <item> Session evaluations (consisting of number of participants, problems of practice addressed, session highlights, feedback from members, next steps, and resources shared) were submitted to the leads following every PLC meeting.</item> <p></p> <item> Culminating evaluation surveys describing impact on teacher practice, professional/personal growth, and professional learning were submitted to leads each year.</item> </ulist> <p>In addition to the district-level supports, facilitators and points in DPE-PLCs were trained to navigate group conflict, resolve contention, organize around a common problem of practice, and ensure that all teacher voices were heard and all communication was cordial and respectful. A PLC, by nature, is a <emph>social</emph> and <emph>emotional</emph> structure. The work of a PLC can be derailed by <emph>adult drama</emph>. Each PLC team embedded quality control mechanisms, not only to facilitate student learning but also to foster the conditions where adult learning, open sharing, and the full expression and exchanging of ideas could occur (Beddoes et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref57">2</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-16">Summary and Conclusion</hd> <p>The increasingly complex nature of being a teacher in K–12 schools invites focused, organized CPD. Unfortunately, professional development opportunities in physical education are often neither discipline-specific nor continuous. Yet, the physical education workforce must persistently adopt and adapt to new skill sets to meet the learning and development needs of their students. Though this service might be facilitated in a variety of ways, PLCs offer guidance for structuring CPD. Professional learning communities (local or place-based) are signature features in a growing number of schools, and physical educators could benefit from these embedded collaborative structures. Expanding the PLC framework to include the entire district could be helpful in augmenting and providing layered support to school-based collaboration. This may be particularly effective for schools with only one or two physical education teachers.</p> <p>The DPE-PLC described in this article demonstrates how the school-based PLC framework could be expanded to an entire district. District-wide collaborative PLCs that are structured and organized with embedded accountability measures can provide support for teachers who do not have the opportunity to engage in meaningful collaboration. Physical educators within a shared district can work together to identify common essential learning outcomes and create common formative assessments for students. The structural arrangement (e.g., leadership positions, training, accountability measures, meeting organization and schedule, feedback loop) of the DPE-PLCs adds unique insight to the physical education and general education literature in an era when effective CPD is increasingly imperative.</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-17">Acknowledgements</hd> <p>We acknowledge members of the Office of School Wellness team: Despina Zaharakis, Senior Executive Director, Office of School Wellness Programs, and Elizabeth McSpedon, Physical Education and Wellness Partnerships Specialist, Office of School Wellness Programs.</p> <p>Diana, Cristina, Silvia, and Brendan express their deepest gratitude to senior-level staff within the Office of School Wellness Programs. We could not have undertaken the endeavor of supporting DPE-PLCs without their guidance and expertise. We also acknowledge the physical education instructional specialists working within the Office of School Wellness Programs and the physical education teachers who served in the role of facilitator. Your leadership and support of physical education professional learning communities have left a lasting impact on physical education in New York City schools.</p> <hd id="AN0183273953-18">Disclosure Statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.</p> <ref id="AN0183273953-19"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref11" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Beddoes, Z. E., Prusak, K. A., & Barney, D. (2019). Taking the helm: Physical educators managing change through professional learning communities. Quest, 71 (4), 479 – 496.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref8" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Beddoes, Z., Prusak, K., Barney, D., & Pennington, T. (2023). Attending to the emotional side of professional learning communities (PLCs) by cultivating positive team dynamics. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 94 (4), 21 – 25. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2023.2172114</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref7" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Beddoes, Z., Sazama, D., & Starck, J. (2022). "I wish I had had you as a PE teacher": Physical educators' experiences in a professional learning community. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 41 (1), 2 – 10. https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.2020-0177</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Collin, K., Van der Heijden, B., & Lewis, P. (2012). Continuing professional development. International Journal of Training and Development, 16 (3), 155 – 163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2419.2012.00410.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref1" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Day, C., & Sachs, J. (2004). Professionalism, performativity and empowerment: discourses in the politics, policies, and purposes of continuing professional development. In C. Day & J. Sachs (Eds.), International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers (pp. 3 – 32). Open University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref22" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> DuFour, R., & DuFour, R. (2016). Learning by doing: A handbook for Professional Learning Communities at WorkTM: An actionable guide to implementing the PLC process and effective teaching methods (3rd ed.). Solution Tree Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref6" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities. National Educational Service.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref43" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> DuFour, R., & Fullan, M. (2013). Cultures built to last: Systemic PLCs at work TM. Solution Tree Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref29" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> DuFour, R., & Marzano, R. J. (2011). Leaders of learning: How district, school, and classroom leaders improve student achievement. Solution Tree Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hord, S. M. (1997). Professional learning communities: Communities of continuous inquiry and improvement. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hord, S. M., & Sommers, W. A. (2008). Leading professional learning communities: Voices from research and practice. Corwin Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lawson, H. A., Jones, E., & Richards, K. A. (2022). Prioritizing a physical education workforce research and development agenda. Quest, 74 (4), 359 – 373. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2022.2139736</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> MacDonald, E. (2011). When nice won't suffice. Journal of Staff Development, 32 (3), 45 – 47.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pennington, T., Prusak, K., & Beddoes, Z. (2023). Preparing successful advocates through PETE programs: A framework for advocacy in physical education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 94 (2), 19 – 24. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2022.2146608</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Prusak, K. A., Pennington, T., Graser, S. V., Beighle, A., & Morgan, C. F. (2010). Systemic success in physical education: The East Valley phenomenon. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 29 (1), 85 – 106. https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.29.1.85</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> SHAPE America – Society of Health and Physical Educators. (2024). National Physical Education Standards. https://<ulink href="http://www.shapeamerica.org/standards/pe/new-pe-standards.aspx">www.shapeamerica.org/standards/pe/new-pe-standards.aspx</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vangrieken, K., Grosemans, I., Dochy, F., & Kyndt, E. (2017). Teacher autonomy and collaboration: A paradox? Conceptualising and measuring teachers' autonomy and collaborative attitude. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 302 – 315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.021</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24 (1), 80 – 91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.01.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Webb, R., Vulliamy, G., Sarja, A., Hämäläinen, S., & Poikonen, P. L. (2009). Professional learning communities and teacher well‐being? A comparative analysis of primary schools in England and Finland. Oxford Review of Education, 35 (3), 405 – 422. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054980902935008</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Zack Beddoes; Brendan Quest; Jenna Starck; Silvia Silva; Diana Stein; Christina Rios and Debra Sazama</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Zack Beddoes () is an assistant professor in the McKay School of Education at Brigham Young University in Spanish Fork, UT.</p> <p>Brendan Quest is a physical educator in the New York City School District in New York City, NY.</p> <p>Jenna Starck is an assistant professor in the Department of Exercise and Sport Science at the University of Wisconsin–LaCrosse in LaCrosse, WI.</p> <p>Silvia Silva , Diana Stein , and Christina Rios are physical educators in the New York City School District in New York City, NY.</p> <p>Silvia Silva , Diana Stein , and Christina Rios are physical educators in the New York City School District in New York City, NY.</p> <p>Debra Sazama is an assistant professor in the Department of Exercise and Sport Science at the University of Wisconsin-LaCrosse in LaCrosse, WI.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref54"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1500184
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Using District-Wide Professional Learning Communities for Continuous Professional Development in Physical Education: A Promising Example
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Zack+Beddoes%22">Zack Beddoes</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0008-3361-6609">0009-0008-3361-6609</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Brendan+Quest%22">Brendan Quest</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jenna+Starck%22">Jenna Starck</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Silvia+Silva%22">Silvia Silva</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Diana+Stein%22">Diana Stein</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Christina+Rios%22">Christina Rios</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Debra+Sazama%22">Debra Sazama</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Physical+Education%2C+Recreation+%26+Dance%22"><i>Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance</i></searchLink>. 2025 96(2):36-46.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 11
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Physical+Education+Teachers%22">Physical Education Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Faculty+Development%22">Faculty Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Communities+of+Practice%22">Communities of Practice</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Competencies%22">Teacher Competencies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22School+Districts%22">School Districts</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Administrator+Role%22">Administrator Role</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Participative+Decision+Making%22">Participative Decision Making</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Collaboration%22">Teacher Collaboration</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Facilitators+%28Individuals%29%22">Facilitators (Individuals)</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22New+York+%28New+York%29%22">New York (New York)</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/07303084.2024.2437985
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0730-3084<br />2168-3816
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: In 2015, four physical education specialists launched the creation of district-wide physical education professional learning communities (DPE-PLCs) designed to enhance the effectiveness of continuing professional development (CPD) for physical educators. By the start of the 2019-2020 school year, 37 DPE-PLC units were fully operational within 25 geographic subdistricts. DPE-PLCs provided physical education teachers with monthly professional learning designed to enhance content knowledge, create instructional resources, and engage in continuous improvement. The reach, organization, and sustainability of the DPE-PLC structure invites a closer look into this model and signals potential for replication/modification in other school district contexts. Using the DPE-PLC structure as a functioning proof of concept, this article introduces and provides a rationale for district-wide PE-PLCs as one potential form of CPD to help physical educators improve practice, exchange ideas, and seek help from like-minded professionals.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1500184
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1500184
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/07303084.2024.2437985
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 11
        StartPage: 36
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Physical Education Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Faculty Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Communities of Practice
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Competencies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: School Districts
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Administrator Role
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Participative Decision Making
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Collaboration
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Facilitators (Individuals)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: New York (New York)
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Using District-Wide Professional Learning Communities for Continuous Professional Development in Physical Education: A Promising Example
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Zack Beddoes
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Brendan Quest
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Jenna Starck
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Silvia Silva
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Diana Stein
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Christina Rios
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Debra Sazama
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0730-3084
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 2168-3816
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 96
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance
              Type: main
ResultId 1