View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Creating a Professional Learning Community through Self-Study

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Creating a Professional Learning Community through Self-Study
Language: English
Authors: Tidwell, Deborah L., Wymore, Lisa, Garza, Anel, Estrada, Maricruz, Smith, Howard L.
Source: Studying Teacher Education. 2011 7(3):315-330.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 16
Publication Date: 2011
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: Elementary Education
Elementary Secondary Education
Descriptors: Faculty Development, Native Speakers, Professional Development, Communities of Practice, Bilingual Education Programs, English Instruction, English Language Learners, Spanish, Partnerships in Education, Collegiality, Educational Practices, Learning Experience, Self Evaluation (Individuals), Lesson Plans, Observation, Transcripts (Written Records)
Geographic Terms: Iowa
DOI: 10.1080/17425964.2011.617152
ISSN: 1742-5964
Abstract: This article describes the use of self-study as a frame for professional learning that grew out of a professional development program for teachers examining their practice in a dual-language K-4 school. Located in the center of the rural state of Iowa, the school's development of a bilingual program for native speakers of both English and Spanish created challenges for the educators involved. The authors reflect the spectrum of collegial partnerships fostered by the experience, representing two classroom teachers, a program coordinator, and two university professors. They present their analysis of the development of a dual language program and the impact of their collegial self-study on how they thought about their practice, how they engaged with others, and how they were able to achieve change within and across their practice.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 29
Entry Date: 2012
Accession Number: EJ953233
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFRmT8sCn8hTYfrd7nVX_3NAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDG3RwIQEARN_0TMdrAIBEICBmuo_X_pNNDvZ4N3XEVBMXqt4nsE3zD7Gm50jTOR3Z5nY7nIjwg2NwUu805w47-JvT2bd7hPpmpHMY6Bh1mtEDjziAg4ZM1YHtES3tbNPfZ2rIDtVLv2WpuSLuQue4snCVVczEYqUOT9N1ATIKWhK3fkSClsY6MWULqNpuuijIkfDsg2FekahPacxwumqXmAGa_-bLl3gEyr3H-s=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0067043039;v1m01nov.11;2019Mar20.13:51;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0067043039-1">Creating a Professional Learning Community through Self-Study. </title> <p>This article describes the use of self-study as a frame for professional learning that grew out of a professional development program for teachers examining their practice in a dual-language K-4 school. Located in the center of the rural state of Iowa, the school's development of a bilingual program for native speakers of both English and Spanish created challenges for the educators involved. The authors reflect the spectrum of collegial partnerships fostered by the experience, representing two classroom teachers, a program coordinator, and two university professors. They present their analysis of the development of a dual language program and the impact of their collegial self-study on how they thought about their practice, how they engaged with others, and how they were able to achieve change within and across their practice.</p> <p>Keywords: professional learning; change in practice; bilingual education</p> <p>In the spring of 2009, a group of second grade teachers are sitting together at their school site discussing issues on teaching and learning in their dual language program (instruction using two languages with students representing both language groups). In this particular scenario, they are focusing on their practice in the classroom and mapping their instructional activities across a semester-wide thematic unit planned for integrated instruction. Sitting with them is a long-time colleague from the university, a professor of literacy and bilingual education who has been working with them for several years. As they discuss their work, one teacher is typing on a laptop while the others are looking at the thematic map laid out before them. They are discussing how to embed their reading selections into the social studies content. As they discuss their ideas, one of the teachers, Anel, suggests they think a bit more about the bigger picture: what are the outcomes they wish to see with this activity. Anel relates her own teaching of this unit to the group and explains her own thinking about her teaching. As she negotiates with her team about what is important, she is sharing her ideas from her self-study of her own practice. She learned to use self-study to examine her own practice through a professional development process that used a self-study frame for developing a professional learning environment (Hoban, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref1">11</reflink>]). The context for this moment in time was over 20 years in the making. How this professional learning moment came to be and how these teachers came to be discussing their implementation of a dual language program began with the story of a changing community.</p> <p>The authors of this article represent the varied participants in this evolution of a dual language program. Anel and Maricruz, bilingual teachers in second and first grades, respectively, are both native Spanish speakers who have played a key role in developing the Spanish language instruction for the dual language program. Lisa (a native English speaker) has served as the director of the district's ESL and bilingual programs and more specifically as a bilingual teacher and director for the school's dual language program. Deb, a professor specializing in literacy with a focus in bilingual education, has provided ongoing professional development in program implementation and literacy instruction. Howard, a professor specializing in Spanish-English dual language programs, has provided professional development for program implementation and language instruction. We came together in this article to present the development of a dual language program (Gomez, Freeman, & Freeman, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref2">9</reflink>]), the development of a professional learning approach for improving practice (Samaras, Freese, Kosnik, & Beck, 2008), and our understandings that emerged from using self-study to examine our practice in the context of a dual language program.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-2">Innovation in a Changing Community</hd> <p>In the center of the rural state of Iowa, an elementary school has a unique program that provides dual language (Spanish-English) instruction to their K-4 student population. This unique school-wide program developed from innovative planning by the district in response to the changing linguistic landscape of their community. Within this dual language school are children from both English-speaking families and Spanish-speaking families. The goal of the school is to develop both bilingual and biliterate students who will be able more fully to participate in the rich linguistic demands of the world around them.</p> <p>Why would a district in the heart of a rural agricultural state choose to develop such an encompassing bilingual program for their students? It was an amazing journey that began during the late 1980s and into the 1990s, when the community experienced an increase in the population of Spanish-speaking families. Many of the families came from the same region of Mexico to work in local processing and production plants, with the intent to settle in the area and raise their families. The influx of such a large number of Spanish-speaking children into the public schools created new instructional demands on the school district. As the families settled into the community, new businesses arose in the area, including shops, grocery stores and restaurants catering to the Spanish-speaking population. This change in the area's schools and businesses challenged the status quo and at the same time created the potential for dual language engagement in the community. This language context supported the proposal to create an innovative bilingual program, a school-wide dual language program that would allow both native speakers of Spanish and native speakers of English to learn in two languages. This dual language model came to fruition in 2002, with initial instruction implemented in the Kindergarten, first grade, and second grade classrooms within one school site. Over the next few years, as these K-2 students progressed through the grades, the program progressed as well. By the end of the third year of the program, the dual language model was school wide from Kindergarten through fourth grade (with an additional dual language fifth grade class). In the following year, the district reorganized grades across school buildings, enabling the dual language program to be a stand-alone K-4 dual language school.</p> <p>A challenge in developing this dual language program was the limited access to bilingual teachers in the region. The core of the native Spanish-speaking bilingual teachers for dual language instruction came out of a teacher preparation career-ladder grant at the University of Northern Iowa (a federal grant supporting teacher preparation for non-native speakers of English). The dual language program also had native English-speaking teachers who were bilingual in English and Spanish. The third group of teachers in the school included interested monolingual English speakers who worked in partnership with the bilingual teachers to create a dual language model. The English teachers taught lessons that targeted the English language, while the bilingual teachers taught lessons that targeted the Spanish language with opportunities to teach lessons that targeted English as well. The program was designed around a progressive 50-50 model (Gomez, Freeman, & Freeman, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref3">9</reflink>]). This meant that in Kindergarten and first grade the students were taught in their native language for 90% of their language arts instruction and in their target language (the language they did not know) for 10% of their language arts instruction. The content areas (e.g., science, mathematics, social studies) were split 50-50, meaning that 50% of the instruction was in Spanish and 50% of the instruction was in English. In second grade, the instruction became 50-50 across all content areas, including language arts. The rotation of language instruction followed a weekly to two-week pattern, depending on the grade level. Typically, there were two classrooms at each grade level. Students would be split into two language-mixed groups, with half the grade being taught in Spanish in one classroom while the other half would be taught in English in another classroom. The groups would rotate after one or two weeks.</p> <p>A critical aspect of the creation of this dual language program was ongoing professional development for the teachers and staff. This professional development focused primarily on curriculum planning for a dual language program, effective instructional approaches for language learners, and cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP) (Cummins, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref4">4</reflink>]; Fillmore, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref5">8</reflink>]; Hakuta, Butler, & Witt, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref6">10</reflink>]). CALP is crucial in developing an effective dual language program. Both the Spanish-English bilingual teachers and the English specialist teachers needed support in learning how to develop CALP in the target language in which they instructed.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-3">Professional Development as a Professional Learning Experience</hd> <p>As we created the initial professional development for the dual language program, Lisa, Deb, and Howard recognized the complexity of moving from a more traditional monolingual classroom environment to a dual language teaching and learning perspective. We realized this process of transition must be an integral part of the professional development agenda. The faculty at the school during the first three years was a complex mixture of monolingual English speaking teachers, who were long time veterans of the district, and newer bilingual teachers, like Anel and Maricruz, who had the linguistic expertise for a dual language program but lacked the teaching experience of their monolingual colleagues.</p> <p>In the first two years of the dual language program, professional development sessions were created within a more traditional model, providing specific content designed by others (Deb and Howard) for a targeted group (the dual language teachers) to meet the needs of that group (Wilson & Berne, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref7">29</reflink>]). As the first bilingual Spanish-English dual language program in the state, we focused our attentions on specific instructional strategies and approaches that have been shown to facilitate language development and learning success: thematic units, cooperative learning, and the effective use of sheltered practices (Echevarria & Graves, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref8">6</reflink>]). While thematic units and cooperative learning are practices often used in monolingual classrooms, and would possibly be familiar to both monolingual and bilingual teachers, sheltered practices provide a context-rich approach for students who are not native speakers of the language of instruction. The emphasis on comprehensible input, where teachers use effective instructional practices to help make classroom instruction understandable to students who are not fluent in the language of instruction (Echevarria, Short, & Powers, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref9">7</reflink>]; Krashen, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref10">12</reflink>]), requires the teacher to be both linguistically and content aware. Deb worked with the teachers in developing thematic approaches to their teaching, in integrating curriculum across the content areas, and in providing instructional practices for language learners (including sheltered practices and cooperative learning). Howard worked with the teachers in supporting their instructional practices in a dual language model and their instructional practices fostering cognitive academic language proficiency, especially in the area of Spanish instruction. Our rationale in creating such a traditional professional development plan was to provide the knowledge base needed to enable teachers to make informed decisions about their practice, school organization, curricula, and materials as the program matured.</p> <p>During the first three years of professional development for the school, Lisa, Deb, and Howard encouraged the classroom teachers to engage in ongoing conversations about their application of a dual language program in their classrooms. Working in grade level teams, the teachers shared their practice, discussed and analyzed the effectiveness and usefulness of practice, and continually reflected on the efficacy of their practice through guided prompts from Deb and Howard. Results from teacher feedback from these initial staff development sessions revealed that teachers saw the grade-level team meetings as helpful in developing a sense of collaborative partnerships, becoming more comfortable about their teaching practices in a dual language program. This feedback influenced our thinking about the professional development plan, and encouraged our move away from the more traditional model.</p> <p>An additional influence on our plans for professional development was the state's department of education professional development model, introduced state wide around the same time. In the state model, teachers were asked to establish their own plans for professional development, involving four major components: collecting and analyzing student data, goal setting and student learning, selecting content, and designing a process for professional development. While many school districts used this state model to develop an overarching district plan or a specific school-wide plan for teachers' professional development, we saw this model as supporting more individualized professional development that resembled a professional learning approach (Berry, Clemans, & Kostogriz, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref11">3</reflink>]). The model from the state focused on four questions:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 1. What do data tell us about our student learning needs?</item> <p></p> <item> 2. What do/will we do to meet student learning needs?</item> <p></p> <item> 3. How do/will we know that student learning has changed?</item> <p></p> <item> 4. How will we evaluate our programs and service to ensure improved student learning?</item> </ulist> <p>Imbedded in all four questions is accountability for student learning and growth. This is often associated with test scores and performance on mid-year and end-of-year criterion-referenced assessments. However, the state's professional development model promoted a "cycle of professional development" (Showers & Hansen, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref12">25</reflink>], Part 1, p. 4). This notion of an ongoing cycle is intriguing because it suggests more of a recursive and expanding dynamic that meshes well with a professional learning approach (Samaras et al., 2008). From such a professional development model, the interest of the teachers becomes the focus of professional change. As the dual language school moved from monolingual to bilingual in their instruction, the teachers' focus was on developing a successful dual language program that met the needs of the students but also met the professional development (professional learning) needs of the teachers.</p> <p>Similar to professional learning, the intent of the state model was to integrate teachers' genuine needs and concerns into the focus of their professional development sessions (Deppeler, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref13">5</reflink>]; Loughran, Mitchell, & Mitchell, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref14">15</reflink>]; Tudball, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref15">28</reflink>]). While the state's focus was mostly on the efficacy of instruction on the students' learning, to us the state's model seemed uniquely different from traditional professional development because of the role the teachers would play in developing and creating their own professional learning experiences (Loughran, Mitchell, & Mitchell, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref16">15</reflink>]; Samaras, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref17">19</reflink>]). In other words, those same teachers who were engaged in learning about and improving their own practice would also be integral to planning and creating their own professional learning (Hoban, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref18">11</reflink>]; Senese, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref19">24</reflink>]). In addition, creating a professional learning context for teachers within a widely diverse school would enhance the collaborative nature of their professional development efforts and improve their understanding of the complexity and power of the diversity within their school setting (Bell-Angus, Davis, Donoahue, Kowal, & McGlynn-Stewart, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref20">2</reflink>]).</p> <p>By applying the state professional development model through a lens of professional learning, it enabled us to shift our professional development plans from expert delivery to teacher-centered negotiation. Deb brought to the discussion the idea of teachers using self-study as a way to examine their own practice (LaBoskey, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref21">13</reflink>]; Loughran, Hamilton, LaBoskey, & Russell, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref22">14</reflink>]). It can be argued that professional learning connects well with self-study, especially if teachers work collaboratively to improve their practice (Aubusson & Schuck, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref23">1</reflink>]). In such a context, teachers would have the opportunity to be both a colleague and a critical friend (Russell & Schuck, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref24">18</reflink>]; Samaras, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref25">19</reflink>]) – someone who provides thoughtful and insightful feedback on the action and engagement of practice (Schuck & Russell, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref26">22</reflink>]). Schuck and Segal ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref27">23</reflink>]) have raised questions about the role of the critical friend, especially when such a dynamic inhibits rather than promotes teacher self-study of practice. One of the issues they raise is the confrontational potential that may arise in a critical friend relationship. Here, the critical friend is truly a critic of practice, providing information that may be difficult for the recipient to hear. The role of critical friend as described by Schuck and Segal matches to some degree the traditional professional development model of an expert providing insights. Their work encouraging a different approach to collegial interactions has inspired the idea of collegial partner, as provided on the self-study frame given to the teachers.</p> <p>Using self-study to frame their professional development plans, each teacher would be encouraged to take risks and push boundaries in examining the efficacy and quality of practice (Loughran & Northfield, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref28">16</reflink>]). While the onus for professional learning can be negotiated among the different participants, ultimately it is determined individually by each participant (Russell, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref29">17</reflink>]; Samaras & Freese, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref30">20</reflink>]). Such an approach to our professional development would not only change the decision making about content, but redefine the power roles of the participants (Tudball, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref31">28</reflink>]). These changes in roles also would impact decision-making processes. For example, the notion of efficacy of practice within a particular classroom context would become the domain of the individual teacher and informed by collegial friends. This creates a rich environment in which to work with teachers in developing their own self-study research about their own practice. As we began plans for the third year of staff development, the collaborative partnerships that had developed during the first two years served as a catalyst for moving toward professional learning through self-study.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-4">Self-Study as a Frame for Professional Learning</hd> <p>In the third year of the dual language program, we created a professional development plan that incorporated self-study for teachers to examine their own practice. Borrowing heavily from the language of the state's professional development model, we put together a professional learning plan that encouraged teachers to create their own self-studies of practice through a concrete frame with specific prompts (see Appendix 1). The prompts included:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> • What is the area of focus in your self-study?</item> <p></p> <item> • What change do you hope to accomplish?</item> <p></p> <item> • What evidence will you use to determine if you have made a change in your teaching and how will you collect that evidence?</item> <p></p> <item> • What evidence will you use to determine if you have made a change in your students and their learning and how will you collect that evidence?</item> </ulist> <p>While Deb initially had conflicts about creating a template for self-study that seemed to contradict the context-specific, self-generated design of many self-study researchers (Tidwell & Fitzgerald, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref32">26</reflink>]; Tidwell, Heston, & Fitzgerald, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref33">27</reflink>]), we realized the importance of providing a place to begin. By offering the self-study prompts to facilitate finding a colleague with whom to share research, determining an area of interest to focus upon, and thinking through the documentation of data related to that focus, teachers were given a common language for talking about their self-study of practice.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-5">Creating a Safe Environment for Self-Study Research</hd> <p>It was important to all of us that we each felt safe enough to engage in examination of our own practice. This meant that, early on, the variance in teaching experience and in linguistic expertise needed to be acknowledged as part of the school culture and as part of the professional self-awareness in which teachers needed to engage. We saw the first priority as the creation of a safe environment for teachers to feel comfortable in discussing their practice and critiquing their own work without concern about such critique being seen by administration or colleagues as weak and unprofessional. The procedure of pushing boundaries to look outside the comfort zone of practice is critical in developing meaningful self-study of practice (Loughran & Northfield, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref34">16</reflink>]; Tidwell, Heston, & Fitzgerald, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref35">27</reflink>]). To facilitate this aspect of their professional learning, the principal of the school became a visible promoter of self-study in professional development planning. This encouraged teachers to seek out collegial friends to engage in critical discussions of their practice and of their plans for improving their teaching, to take risks, and to ask hard questions.</p> <p>The idea of forming collegial communities had actually begun early in the dual language program development as teachers worked closely in grade level groups to discuss their use of cooperative learning and to plan their thematic units. As we moved into the self-study focus for their professional development in the third year, many teachers chose to work in grade level teams in developing their research focus. Some chose to work outside their grade levels in teams of two or three with colleagues that shared similar self-study focus areas. Once formed, teachers worked together in their self-chosen teams to brainstorm areas of interest and concern, and from the self-study framework prompts, began developing self-studies in areas of their practice they would like to improve.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-6">Data Sources and Analyses</hd> <p>Teacher-created self-study focus areas were examined through specific data sources chosen by the teachers to directly address their self-study. Some examples of data sources included: lesson plans of classroom instruction and teacher field notes of student response; student (and teacher) language use in the classroom as documented in field notes, student artifacts, and colleague observations; documentation of student participation with the target language; and self-reports of sheltered practice use in the classroom.</p> <p>Prompts to address data analysis were not provided on the initial self-study frame used by teachers to develop their self-study focus. Teacher teams worked together and with Deb, Lisa, and Howard to examine their data and to analyze what the data meant to their teaching and their students' learning. Most data analyses fell into three areas: assessment data analysis, language use analysis, and analysis of instructional practice. Assessment data analysis of summative assessment results focused on mapping a change over time in test scores. Data analysis of formative assessment results focused on the patterns of change over time within the student responses. For example, running records data provided both summative data of book level and performance percentage, as well as formative data on cues used in word recognition and types of errors recorded. Language data often included the language spoken or written by the child, and the language used by the teacher during instruction. These language data were analyzed for content and meaning. Student language analysis focused more on the level of competence reflected in the language use, while teacher language analysis focused more on the clarity and context of engagement. Analysis of instructional practice focused on the specific use of instructional strategies and the organization of the lesson. In addition to the teachers' use of self-study to examine their practice, Deb and Lisa conducted their own self-study of their practice within the professional learning community. Howard served as a collegial friend in the process of examining practice.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-7">Use of Self-Study in Practice</hd> <p>We now present four self-studies conducted as part of the professional development in the dual language program. These studies illuminate the type of information that self-study can provide within these bilingual classrooms and across the dual language program. Anel and Maricruz discuss their self-studies as bilingual classroom teachers. Anel worked with a colleague outside of her grade level team who shared an interest in vocabulary development. Maricruz chose to work with the teachers within her first grade team. They chose specific artifacts to help inform them of their practice. From that data they developed a specific professional learning focus question that guided their self-study. Deb and Lisa focused their self-study research on their own practice as facilitators for the staff development. As the coordinator for the program, Lisa observed teachers in their development of their self-study work. She also created her own self-study of practice that focused on her teaching as a bilingual classroom teacher. Deb, as the bilingual education consultant, focused most of her attention on the implementation of self-study by the teachers, designing her own self-study that focused on that process.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-8">Anel's Self-Study</hd> <p>In working with my second grade colleague who was a monolingual English-speaking teacher, I initially found the process of framing the professional learning focus through a self-study question somewhat challenging. In our original plan to develop our self-study questions, we had decided to examine the data and find similar areas of focus for our self-studies. However, the data from my own instructional practice showed different areas of need from my colleague. The data I used for self-study were the Individual Reading Inventory (IRI), reading fluency probes, teacher-made pre/post assessments, IPT (Idea Proficiency Tests), anecdotal records, class notes on my practice, and documentation of amount of student talk. As I teach predominantly in Spanish during my classes, I found that the class data supported a focus on the improvement of students' vocabulary. I used this focus to frame my self-study of what happens during my teaching in the classroom.</p> <p>Because of my focus in Spanish vocabulary, I switched to a different partner for self-study, a colleague who also taught in Spanish and was also interested in vocabulary as her self-study focus. We made the decision to focus on vocabulary not as an isolated topic but as something to incorporate into the different content areas. The comfort level of the collegial friend was essential. My colleague and I were able to give each other feedback that not only benefited me as a teacher but ultimately improved the academic skills of my students. "The process of the self-study, it enabled me to think increasingly about how I can change my teaching to better serve my language learners" (both Spanish and English).</p> <p>During my teaching, I found through my field notes that the use of sheltered instruction was/is crucial in the area of my self-study focus. The sheltered instruction enables my Spanish language learners (SLLs) to better understand the context of my lessons, and from better understanding the context they are able to better understand the language and vocabulary to be used during that instructional session. From observing my own practice using sheltered instruction, through a close examination of my lesson objectives and my lesson plans, and through my debriefing of my instruction with my partner and team colleagues, I was able to self-study my practice in a way that helped focus my attention on the language and vocabulary needs of my students in a very intentional manner.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-9">Maricruz's Self-Study</hd> <p>As the bilingual first grade teacher, I worked with my colleagues in determining areas of concern and interest from my classroom data. I used artifacts of my students' writing, my students' reading through running records and comprehension assessment, my students' use of language in the classroom through my own classroom notes, and my students' overall participation in the classroom from observational notes by myself and my colleague. From this data I found that my students did not always focus on the target language of instruction. Because the Kindergarten and first grades have reading instruction in their native language and then instruction in the content areas in Spanish 50% of the time and English 50% of the time, I chose to focus my attention on the bilingual portion of my instruction (during content area instruction when 50% of the instruction time is in Spanish and then in English). I focused my professional learning on self-study of how I might improve my students' focus on the target language during content instruction (sheltered instruction).</p> <p>By studying my own instructional practices through the lens of how I might improve students' focus on the target language during my lesson, I centered my attention on my use of sheltered instruction to engage students. The change I hoped to accomplish was to improve on how I deliver sheltered practices so that all students can learn a second language. I collected data with anecdotal notes from my observations of all my students. I found it difficult to collect data every day, but was able to collect observations focusing on their language use for each student in a two- to three-week cycle of observations. When I do have this observational information, it helps me analyze any patterns I see emerging from the data and it helps me to recognize if there are any changes I need to make in my teaching. Through the observations I made during the four years I taught in the dual language program, I made many changes by analyzing data and noticing the amount of participation from the students. My strategies improved and the feedback I got from group meetings and the professional development sessions helped me determine what areas I needed to improve. I also collected running records once a month on my first language students (students learning Spanish and students learning English) and looked to see which students were gaining levels. With this data, I was able to see which students needed additional intervention and adjusted my instruction to meet their needs.</p> <p>I found that most of my students who did not connect to the target language often lost track rather early in the instruction. If I was able to connect with them early on through the use of sheltered practices that kept them engaged, I found they were more likely to stay engaged throughout the lesson. However, I did realize the use of my voice to connect students through expression and through tone also helped to maintain their interest. In the process of examining my practice, I also focused my attention on the materials I chose for instruction. I found that my materials continued to be effective and appropriate as long as I was able to help students stay connected to the language through sheltered practices and through the use of my voice.</p> <p>Since the teachers in our building used self-study to focus their attention on specific aspects of their teaching, I noticed that the students came to my first grade classroom with better skills in both languages (Spanish and English). When our dual language program was in its first two years, the students were cautious initially about using a language they were not comfortable speaking, often stating "I can't speak Spanish" or "I can't speak English." Students were reluctant to participate in class. As we were involved in our focused self-studies on our own practices in a dual language program, I saw the impact of the change in our teaching on our students. They accepted that they were in a bilingual classroom and they saw learning languages as something very natural. They participated in class and showed progress in both languages. The data that I have collected has helped me to make changes to help my students become more successful in both languages. I have continued using self-study as a model for my professional development plan for the district in concert with professional development meetings, such as the Literacy Excellence meetings on PWIM (Picture Word Inductive Method) and the bilingual professional development meetings. The use of self-study as a frame to examine the effectiveness of my teaching seemed helpful to me, especially when I chose a focus that was clear and narrow. Examining teaching through a very specific issue, such as my use of sheltered practice in the classroom, helped me to consistently think about and better understand what works and what needs to be changed in order for my students to be successful in learning in two languages.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-10">Lisa's Self-Study</hd> <p>As a bilingual classroom teacher and the coordinator for the bilingual program, I focused specifically on literacy and language for two large global reasons. One reason was to prepare to meet district requirements for the following year. The second reason, perhaps more important to me, was to help me see the process of self-study through the eyes of the other teachers who were asked to do their own self-studies – some of whom were quite skeptical. Some of the more experienced teachers in the building initially felt it was unnecessary to self-study their practice because they knew what they were doing. Other teachers who were cautious about self-studying their own practice initially felt the planning for a self-study was just "one more thing" on their plate. I was hoping that by participating in my own self-study of my practices it would increase our credibility with the teachers (I as the director of bilingual education in the district and Deb as the bilingual education consultant).</p> <p>The focus for my self-study was vocabulary development for second language learners within the guided reading groups and within the texts used. In addition, I examined my practice through my use of sheltered instructional practices (presented in our professional development as well as in conferences and university classes I had attended). I examined lesson plans and reflected upon those lessons with regard to language objectives and vocabulary development to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> • Planned sheltered instructional practices</item> <p></p> <item> • Adjustments and monitoring made during my instruction to meet the needs of the students</item> <p></p> <item> • Any additional sheltered practices employed (unplanned; implemented in response to student performance).</item> </ulist> <p>I examined and evaluated data to answer the question, Did student performance on measures of performance improve (also recognizing that multiple factors affect outcomes on these measures)? The data used were the following:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> • IDEA Proficiency Tests (English and Spanish)</item> <p></p> <item> • Informal Reading Inventories (English and Spanish)</item> <p></p> <item> • Running Records (English and Spanish)</item> <p></p> <item> • Reading Probes (English and Spanish)</item> <p></p> <item> • Lesson Plans (mine from guided reading lesson)</item> <p></p> <item> • Anecdotal Records of students, with a language and literacy focus</item> <p></p> <item> • Artifacts of student work.</item> </ulist> <p>I looked at students' progress over time, on scores and in their daily performance using the language structures and vocabulary. I had targeted books during instruction that were very repetitive in vocabulary and structure, including the use of poetry. To determine their use of these targeted vocabulary and language structures I then examined their language production, and what they said when they created language on their own.</p> <p>What I found helpful in this self-study was how the process of examining student performance and my own teaching helped me make changes in my teaching. By developing and implementing a self-study of my practice focusing on vocabulary and language development of my Spanish students, I became more conscious of what I was doing as a teacher, especially:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> • How accurately I anticipated need for sheltered strategies and where/when they were needed</item> <p></p> <item> • How effectively I used the sheltered strategies I chose to support student learning</item> <p></p> <item> • How accurately I identified vocabulary words that would pose difficulty to my students</item> <p></p> <item> • How appropriate my language level was compared to the linguistic level of my students</item> <p></p> <item> • How I selected material – by being more conscious of my students' linguistic capabilities and needs as well as the linguistic model I needed to present, I was able to better choose appropriate texts and provide more targeted support through the use of sheltered practices.</item> </ulist> <p>Using this self-study approach to my teaching, I was better able to make visible and concrete the connection between my instructional choices as a teacher and my students' performance.</p> <p>Another intriguing dynamic of self-study was the impact on my colleagues. We worked in self-study teams of our own choosing and would meet as a team to discuss the progress of our self-study work. I felt that I received more accurate (versus censored) comments from teachers because I was also doing a self-study; there was more of a "she's in the same boat" perception than if I had not been engaged in my own self-study. I could see how it was beneficial to work with someone in a safe environment; I gained many insights and ideas through discussions and was reminded of other things I knew, but was not wholly conscious of those ideas in my daily teaching. This exemplifies the importance of the sense of authenticity that is created by mutual vulnerability. By making myself equally vulnerable to the self-study process I was creating an authentic experience both for me and for the teachers involved in this professional learning experience. This self-study of practice can be seen as a process of public introspection. In order for a person to be given entrée into the lives and minds of others, that person must grant the same to those in the group. Trust and feeling safe were key to the process; while my team had that, it was obvious when other teams did not. The difference was clear in the strained and guarded communication, competitiveness in their work, and an unwillingness to be open to suggestions, often limiting a free exchange of ideas. An important aspect of this professional learning experience was the realization that the challenge of openness and authenticity is not always accepted. There are individuals who, for whatever reason, decide not to grant entry or not to be open with those in their group.</p> <p>The self-study frame we used (see Appendix 1) was helpful and straightforward. It provided a guide throughout the process, helping us to decide what to consider and what to look at; it also helped me and the teachers in my team to narrow things down and to focus. Another real benefit for us was that this frame led right into the Professional Growth Plan (PGP) required by the district the following year. Many teachers commented that after being involved in their own self-study of practice through the dual language professional development program, it was not as big a jump for us to complete our PGP plans as it was for those in other buildings.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-11">Deb's Self-Study</hd> <p>As the university consultant providing professional development, I focused my attentions in my self-study on my practice as the facilitator for the professional development process. I examined my practice through the lens of the focus question: How am I facilitating the self-study experiences of the classroom teachers? By focusing my practice on facilitating the self-studies of our colleagues in the classroom, I concentrated my debriefing discussions with Lisa on the professional development sessions I had with the teachers. In addition, I analyzed the PowerPoint files and handouts I developed for each session, my field notes when working with teachers in the self-study teams, and the post-session notes I wrote following each professional development day.</p> <p>My field notes, post-session notes, and debriefing sessions with Lisa showed that providing classroom teachers with the time to collaborate with colleagues seemed the most useful facilitation we provided in the process of making self-study viable. I did find that teachers appreciated the more traditional content presentations about self-study as part of their professional development for studying their own practice. For my own connection to the teachers' self-studies, it was very helpful when developing the PowerPoint content and materials to preview the presentation content with Lisa, review the self-study areas of the teachers, and connect the content to specific areas of their research focus. In trying to facilitate the process, I needed to keep asking myself, "What's the point?" This helped me try to keep the content minimal, real and meaningful. The use of the self-study framework helped me to connect the teachers' ideas with a research design. While the teachers had found the frame useful, I, too, had found the frame helpful as an instructional tool for me in working with teachers as they problem-solved their research design. In my debriefings with Lisa, I found from both our observations during sessions that asking teachers how their self-study work was going came across as invasive and big brother-ish to several teachers. What seemed to be most facilitative was to provide time during the week for teachers to get together to discuss their practice, and through that process their self-studies. But mostly, keeping out of the way was the most important facilitation – allowing teachers to develop their self-study in their own space and to have a focused time to work with colleagues.</p> <p>One aspect of the self-study process that I found less effective for some teachers was the development of a safe environment for discussing practice. In my efforts to facilitate what would be safe for every teacher, the process was successful for about 80% of the teachers. In debriefing with Lisa and Howard on the elements of my facilitation that may have affected the success of creating a safe space, two variables emerged repeatedly: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref36">1</reflink>) the importance of the teachers' selection of their collegial partners, and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref37">2</reflink>) the difficulty for some teachers to allow entry into their practice or to be open in their discussion of their work. While a majority of the self-study teams were able to provide that context for their work, there were a few teams that had difficulty negotiating a safe space with some of their colleagues.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-12">What We Have Learned</hd> <p>Our experiences in developing a professional learning approach to improving practice were similar to those in other professional learning communities. The opportunity to work with our colleagues over a period of time and through a focused context helped us to better understand our own practice and to better connect with the students and teachers with whom we worked (Samaras et al., 2008). The use of self-study as the frame for our professional learning experience was seen as a powerful and positive experience overall, impacting both our own practice and the dual language program at large.</p> <p>Within our practice, self-study helped to focus attention on issues that mattered to the teacher. The value of choosing individualized topics for self-study came up again and again with many teachers. Choice was seen as instrumental in honing in on specific and cogent issues in practice that enabled significant change to occur. For Anel, the focus on vocabulary helped her better understand the language demands and needs of her students. Maricruz was able to better connect to the target language when addressing the needs of her students. Lisa's focus on assessment performance helped her see both vocabulary issues and target language issues for her students. Lisa and Deb both were able to focus on the efficacy of self-study for teachers, and realize the complexity of creating a safe environment for all. We found that the teachers chose their collegial partners for different reasons. Some chose a colleague with compatible professional interests, others chose collegial friends for reasons of personal comfort, while some grade level teams felt a need to stay together despite the discomfort experienced in revealing vulnerable aspects of their teaching. Anel highlighted the importance of the role and makeup of the collegial partner as critical to her success in self-study research of her practice.</p> <p>Anel, Maricruz, and Lisa all found sheltered instruction more clearly realized through self-study. They all commented on the impact that sheltered instructional practices had on their students' learning, and they credited the process of self-study in helping them to see and to appreciate the effects. As Maricruz commented, the value of self-study and sheltered instruction was seen in the performance of students across grade levels and over time. Anel found the use of sheltered instruction critical to her students' success in a dual language program. This realization came about not just from her own self-study data, but from the debriefing of her study with her self-study colleague and her self-study team. This validated the nature and importance of sheltered instruction for language learners but also validated the power of focused examination of practice through data-driven self-study.</p> <p>The concept of being intentional in their teaching and their professional planning was voiced by many teachers. By focusing their self-study research on a particular aspect of their professional work, teachers were moving the data they gathered about their students and their teaching from anecdotal to intentional in nature, and in this way legitimizing the artifacts they created in the process of self-study. This collection of legitimized artifacts not only helped focus teachers' examination of their practice but provided a specific focus for the application of that information to their instructional plans. As Maricruz describes, this process provided the lens by which she addressed the needs of her students in the classroom.</p> <p>An interesting outcome of having the facilitators and the teachers work on self-study research of their practice was the leveling of the playing field. Lisa found in her self-study work that the teachers appreciated that she, too, was making herself vulnerable, laying out her practice in front of everyone. This vulnerability and engagement as a collegial friend allowed everyone to be engaged at the same level.</p> <p>During the process of self-study, many of the teachers became supportive collegial friends, colleagues who appeared genuinely interested in working together to improve practice. Developing these collegial groups for self-study influenced more than just the individual teacher's approach to improving practice. By working as collegial friends, by engaging in critical discussions of genuine issues and teacher-chosen interests in improving practice, the dual language program as a whole benefited. Teachers seemed more clearly able to articulate programmatic issues and concerns as well as strengths and successes. Particularly exciting was the development of a strong sense of community among the teachers and the administration as a result of their collaborative approach to school improvement and to learners' success realized through self-study of their teaching practice. Maricruz found the impact of the self-study work made teachers across the building more conscious of the language skills being addressed in their classrooms. And she saw how this impacted the students and their learning.</p> <p>A key difference for the teachers in their professional development work through self-study was the role of data in their work. In contrast with professional development, where an outside expert referenced the data of other outside experts, in self-study the participants recorded and analyzed their own practices, hypotheses, and concerns for future study. In the same way, student data served a different purpose; the data were gathered to inform the practitioners of their performance and to suggest new directions for professional growth. The use of data gathering to determine the need and focus of their self-studies provided a valuable source of information. The same type of data was used to inform teachers of their improvement in their change of practice. In essence, the teachers (and the school) were getting a "better bang for the buck," as Howard stated when referring to teachers' responses to required assessments. Through the process of self-study, teachers created a new lens for examining the artifacts from assessment; rather than looking at the data as information gathered for someone else, the data are seen as something they needed to inform their own practice.</p> <p>The recursive nature of self-study also served as a catalyst for self-examination of practice and improvement. Teachers' self-study of their practice led to questions that fostered improvement of practice, which, in turn, led to new questions regarding their practice, which then led to additional study and improvement of practice. This recursive nature of self-study is another indicator of the power of teacher-driven professional learning.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-13">Conclusions and Recommendations</hd> <p>Self-study as a model for professional development, when used as a community building dynamic, seemed to encourage the teachers' own professional learning and helped facilitate the development of a unique professional environment within a school. The collegial friendships that develop for most of the teachers within a safe professional learning environment encouraged both honesty and ownership in teaching practice and seemed to facilitate positive professional growth for teachers involved in professionally challenging their own instructional change.</p> <p>While at first providing a self-study frame seemed somewhat prescriptive, we discovered it was actually quite helpful in providing teachers with the structure for thinking about their practice and developing their own self-study work. We found the use of a self-study frame a useful tool to begin the process of thinking about self-study of practice. This frame seemed most helpful when used in the context of a professional learning community where colleagues can work together discussing their ideas and sharing ways to think about data and to gather data. The role of data was critical in establishing the focus area of self-study. Teachers spent many hours gathering data about their students and about their teaching and discussing these data with colleagues to determine strengths and needs in the classroom. Both Maricruz and Anel found the time spent on examining disaggregated data from their classrooms as critical in determining authentic areas of focus for self-study.</p> <p>An interesting aspect of the self-study process involved the redirecting of teacher discussions of student performance from the students to the instructional planning and teacher practice. While this was not always a comfortable connection, it was a powerful evolution of the program toward accessibility for all students through the self-study of teacher practice and teacher actions on student learning.</p> <p>Professional development that incorporates self-study does afford teachers the opportunity to engage in deeper discussions about practice and enables them to form collegial groups for critical reflection and support. This seems especially true when the teachers are able to deliberate on and to discern aspects of their own teaching. We must raise a note of caution about the concerns raised by some teachers regarding the creation of a safe environment for sharing teaching and for being vulnerable among colleagues. We worked closely with the teachers and the school administration to ensure an environment where disclosure of strengths and needs in teaching practice was seen as a positive entity. Even with a safe context secured, not everyone was comfortable engaging in discussions of conflicts or issues of personal practice.</p> <p>We found the use of collegial friends works well when colleagues feel safe sharing their stories, discussing their practice, and critiquing their own strengths and needs. These dynamics helped foster improvement in our own practice and in our own professional learning for the purpose of improving our practice and making a difference for the learners we affect. We found it particularly helpful for the administration to be visible and public in their support of self-study research in the classroom. An intriguing aspect of this professional learning experience is the interactions across all levels of teaching when we work together as a community engaging in genuine discussions of our practice as teachers. Such a dynamic creates synergy across the learning environment that seems to encourage connections across professional learning, student learning, and teaching practice.</p> <hd id="AN0067043039-14">Appendix 1. Personal Plan for Self-Study</hd> <p>Name:</p> <p>Collegial Partner:</p> <p>What is the area of focus in your self-study?</p> <p>What change do you hope to accomplish?</p> <p>What evidence will you use to determine if you have made a change and how will you collect that evidence?</p> <p>In your teaching:</p> <p>In your students and their learning:</p> <ref id="AN0067043039-15"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref23" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Aubusson, P. and Schuck, S., eds. 2008. Teacher learning and development: The mirror maze, Dordrecht: Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref20" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Bell-Angus, B., Davis, G., Donoahue, Z., Kowal, M. and McGlynn-Stewart, M.2008. "DICEP: Promoting collaborative inquiry in diverse educational settings". In Learning communities in practice, Edited by: Samaras, A.P., Freese, A.R., Kosnik, C. and Beck, C.19–30. Dordrecht: Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref11" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Berry, A., Clemans, A. and Kostogriz, A., eds. 2007. Dimensions of professional learning: Professionalism, practice and identity, Rotterdam: Sense.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Cummins, J.1979. Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19: 121–129.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref13" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Deppeler, J.2007. "Collaborative inquiry for professional learning". In Dimensions of professional learning: Professionalism, practice, and identity, Edited by: Berry, A., Clemans, A. and Kostogriz, A.73–88. Rotterdam: Sense.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref8" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Echevarria, J.J. and Graves, A.2007. Sheltered content instruction: Teaching English language learners with diverse abilities, 3rd ed., Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref9" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Echevarria, J., Short, D. and Powers, K.2008. Making content comprehensible for non-native speakers of English: The SIOP Model. The International Journal of Learning, 14(11): 41–50.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref5" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Fillmore, L.W.1982. "Instructional language as linguistic input: Second-language learning in classrooms". In Communicating in the classroom: Language, thought and culture, Edited by: Wilkinson, L.C.283–296. New York: Academic.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref2" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Gomez, L., Freeman, D. and Freeman, Y.2005. Dual language education: A promising 50-50 model. Bilingual Research Journal, 29(1): 145–164.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hakuta, K., Butler, Y.G., & Witt, D. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? (University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute Policy Report 2000-1). Retrieved August 14, 2009, from <ulink href="http://www.stanford.edu/∼hakuta/Publications/%282000%29%20-%20HOW%20LONG%20DOES%20IT%20TAKE%20ENGLISH%20LEARNERS%20TO%20ATTAIN%20PR.pdf">http://www.stanford.edu/∼hakuta/Publications/%282000%29%20-%20HOW%20LONG%20DOES%20IT%20TAKE%20ENGLISH%20LEARNERS%20TO%20ATTAIN%20PR.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hoban, G.F.2002. Teacher learning for educational change, Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Krashen, S.D.1988. Second language acquisition and second language learning, New York: Prentice-Hall.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> LaBoskey, V.K.2004. "The methodology of self-study and its theoretical underpinnings". In International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices, Edited by: Loughran, J.J., Hamilton, M.L., LaBoskey, V.K. and Russell, T.817–869. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Loughran, J.J.,, Hamilton, M.L.,, LaBoskey, V.K., and Russell, T.2004. International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Loughran, J., Mitchell, I. and Mitchell, J., eds. 2002. Learning from teacher research, New York: Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Loughran, J. and Northfield, J.1998. "A framework for the study of self-study practice". In Reconceptualizing teaching practice: Self-study in teacher education, Edited by: Hamilton, M.L.8–20. London: Falmer Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Russell, T.2006. "How 20 years of self-study changed my teaching". In Making a difference in teacher education through self-study: Studies of personal, professional, and program renewal, Edited by: Kosnik, C., Beck, C., Freese, A.R. and Samaras, A.P.3–18. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Russell, T. and Schuck, S.2004. "How critical are critical friends and how critical should they be?". In Journeys of hope: Risking the journey of self-study in a diverse world (Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Self-Study of Teacher Education Practices), Edited by: Tidwell, D.L., Fitzgerald, L.M. and Heston, M.L.213–216. Cedar Falls, IA: University of Northern Iowa.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Samaras, A.P.2011. Self-study teacher research: Improving your practice through collaborative inquiry, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Samaras, A.P. and Freese, A.F.2006. Self-study of teaching practices primer, New York: Peter Lang.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Samaras, A.P., Freese, A.R., Kosnik, C. and Beck, C., eds. 2008. Learning communities in practice, Dordrecht: Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schuck, S. and Russell, T.2005. Self-study, critical friendship, and the complexities of teacher education. Studying Teacher Education, 1(2): 107–121.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schuck, S. and Segal, G.2002. "Learning about our teaching from our graduates, learning about our learning with critical friends". In Improving teacher education practices through self-study, Edited by: Loughran, J. and Russell, T.88–101. London: RoutledgeFalmer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Senese, J.C.2005. Teach to learn. Studying Teacher Education, 1(1): 43–54.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Showers, B., & Hansen, D. (2005 update). Iowa professional development model training manual. Retrieved January 12, 2006, from <ulink href="http://www.iowa.gov/educate/pdmtm/state.html">http://www.iowa.gov/educate/pdmtm/state.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tidwell, D. and Fitzgerald, L., eds. 2006. Self-study and diversity, Rotterdam: Sense.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tidwell, D.L., Heston, M.L. and Fitzgerald, L.M., eds. 2009. Research methods for the self-study of practice, Berlin: Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tudball, L.2007. "Professional learning communities: Exploring their power and influence on teacher professional learning". In Dimensions of professional learning: Professionalism, practice, and identity, Edited by: Berry, A., Clemans, A. and Kostogriz, A.121–136. Rotterdam: Sense.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilson, S.M. and Berne, J.1999. Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. Review of Research in Education, 24: 173–209.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By DeborahL. Tidwell; Lisa Wymore; Anel Garza; Maricruz Estrada and HowardL. Smith</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref33"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ953233
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Creating a Professional Learning Community through Self-Study
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Tidwell%2C+Deborah+L%2E%22">Tidwell, Deborah L.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wymore%2C+Lisa%22">Wymore, Lisa</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Garza%2C+Anel%22">Garza, Anel</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Estrada%2C+Maricruz%22">Estrada, Maricruz</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Smith%2C+Howard+L%2E%22">Smith, Howard L.</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Studying+Teacher+Education%22"><i>Studying Teacher Education</i></searchLink>. 2011 7(3):315-330.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; 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: 16
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2011
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Education%22">Elementary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Secondary+Education%22">Elementary Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Faculty+Development%22">Faculty Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Native+Speakers%22">Native Speakers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Professional+Development%22">Professional Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Communities+of+Practice%22">Communities of Practice</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Bilingual+Education+Programs%22">Bilingual Education Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22English+Instruction%22">English Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22English+Language+Learners%22">English Language Learners</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Spanish%22">Spanish</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Partnerships+in+Education%22">Partnerships in Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Collegiality%22">Collegiality</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Practices%22">Educational Practices</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Learning+Experience%22">Learning Experience</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Evaluation+%28Individuals%29%22">Self Evaluation (Individuals)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Lesson+Plans%22">Lesson Plans</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Observation%22">Observation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Transcripts+%28Written+Records%29%22">Transcripts (Written Records)</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Iowa%22">Iowa</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/17425964.2011.617152
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1742-5964
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This article describes the use of self-study as a frame for professional learning that grew out of a professional development program for teachers examining their practice in a dual-language K-4 school. Located in the center of the rural state of Iowa, the school's development of a bilingual program for native speakers of both English and Spanish created challenges for the educators involved. The authors reflect the spectrum of collegial partnerships fostered by the experience, representing two classroom teachers, a program coordinator, and two university professors. They present their analysis of the development of a dual language program and the impact of their collegial self-study on how they thought about their practice, how they engaged with others, and how they were able to achieve change within and across their practice.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 29
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2012
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ953233
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ953233
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/17425964.2011.617152
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
        StartPage: 315
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Faculty Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Native Speakers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Professional Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Communities of Practice
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Bilingual Education Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: English Instruction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: English Language Learners
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Spanish
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Partnerships in Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Collegiality
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Practices
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Learning Experience
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Evaluation (Individuals)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Lesson Plans
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Observation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Transcripts (Written Records)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Iowa
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Creating a Professional Learning Community through Self-Study
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Tidwell, Deborah L.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wymore, Lisa
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Garza, Anel
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Estrada, Maricruz
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Smith, Howard L.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2011
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1742-5964
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 7
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Studying Teacher Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1