Trust and Collaboration in PLC Teams

Hallam, Pamela R.; Smith, H. R.; Hite, Julie M.; Hite, Steven J.; Wilcox, Bradley R.

doi:10.1177/0192636515602330

Cited by 84 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Richardson (2015) states that PLC teams that exhibit these habits "are more likely to be successful than professional learning communities that have not developed these actions into habits" (p. 29). Hallam, Smith, Hite, Hite, and Wilcox (2015) and Harris and Jones (2010) concur with Richardson (2015) on the notion that PLC teams must be accountable. They make the distinction, however, between formal and informal accountability.…”

Section: Assumptions About and Characteristics Of Plcssupporting

confidence: 59%

“…This work is contextual to the rise of PLC networks in the age of high-stakes standardized testing and uncertain lever of school reform movement associated with it. The literature is replete with references to PLC teams being "data-based" and making "datadriven" decisions about curriculum, instruction, and assessment (Carpenter, 2015;DuFour & Eaker, 1998;Hallam et al, 2015;Hord, 2004;Mason, 2003;Strahan, 2003;Wood, 2007b). Hallam et al (2015) encompass this work by stating, "In their PLC function, these teams analyze data generated from common student assessments and use them to develop instructional practices and specific intervention strategies" (p. 195).…”

Section: Work Of Plcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The literature is replete with references to PLC teams being "data-based" and making "datadriven" decisions about curriculum, instruction, and assessment (Carpenter, 2015;DuFour & Eaker, 1998;Hallam et al, 2015;Hord, 2004;Mason, 2003;Strahan, 2003;Wood, 2007b). Hallam et al (2015) encompass this work by stating, "In their PLC function, these teams analyze data generated from common student assessments and use them to develop instructional practices and specific intervention strategies" (p. 195). Sims and Penny (2015) in their case study of failed PLCs, reported that teachers felt that they were merely "data teams" and were wholly unsure of how to gather, organize, and interpret data that it soured them to the entire notion of PLC.…”

Section: Work Of Plcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In their call for future research, Hallam et al (2015) argue that continued research on trust and the practices that foster trust will likely results in schools functioning more effectively.…”

Section: Climatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…PLC teams improve the quality of teaching and contribute to sustainable progress in student learning (Bolam et al, 2006;Hallam et al, 2015;Vescio et al, 2008). DuFour and Eaker (1998), Harris and Jones (2010), Hord (1997), and Louis and Kruse (1995) agree that the most effective PLCs have an overarching emphasis on student learning.…”

Section: Student Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

High School Professional Learning Communities: A Multiple Case Study

Baran¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Assumptions About and Characteristics Of Plcssupporting

confidence: 59%

Section: Work Of Plcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Work Of Plcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Climatementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Student Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

High School Professional Learning Communities: A Multiple Case Study

Baran¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comprehensive view of trust in education: Conclusions from a systematic literature review

Niedlich

Kallfaß

Pohle

et al. 2020

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trust is considered to be a crucial element of social cohesion. At the same time, as research has shown, education can be understood as an important precondition of trust. Furthermore, contextual conditions are important for the development of trust. In spite of this, the role of trust in the multi‐level education system has been scarcely investigated. This paper introduces a comprehensive model of trust in the education system, based on a systematic literature review of 183 recent peer‐reviewed articles following a thematic and interpretive review approach. The suggested model consists of four interconnected elements (generalised trust, educational governance, educational settings, educational attainment). By introducing a comprehensive model of trust in multi‐level education systems the paper aims at opening up perspectives for future theoretically driven, interdisciplinary comparative research that may shed further light on the role of trust in education systems. The paper proceeds as follows. First, trust is discussed as a complex subject in research, policy and practice in multi‐level education systems, and key research questions are derived from this. Second, the methodology of the systematic literature review is explained. Third, results from the literature review are presented, focusing on three domains of trust and their interrelations. Fourth, the comprehensive model of trust in multi‐level education systems is introduced. The fifth section discusses the findings and explores how future research could advance a comprehensive understanding of trust in education.

show abstract

Organizational sensemaking during curriculum implementation: The dilemma of agency, role of collaboration, and importance of discipline‐specific leadership

Lowell,

Fogelman,

McNeill

2024

Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adopting new instructional materials is an important way to support reform in science education, but implementation can be challenging and complex. Therefore, we conducted a contrasting case study of two middle schools implementing new curricular materials. We conducted semi‐structured interviews with teachers and leaders and collected instructional artifacts and reflections from teachers. Using an organizational sensemaking framework, we investigated the tensions that came up during implementation, the resources leveraged to address those tensions, and resulting instructional and leadership practices. One school focused on implementing the materials with fidelity, relying on networking and past practices, which led to a more traditionalized teaching approach. The other school centered the curricular materials, prioritizing understanding the instructional model and customizing for their students, resulting in more aligned instructional practices. Looking across the two cases highlights three key takeaways. First, we discuss the dilemma of agency, which is how can leaders balance teachers' professional agency with the push for instructional reform, especially when teachers may not fully understand the reform approach. We propose that a focus on understanding the goals of instructional reform might help resolve this dilemma. Second, we discuss the role of collaboration as potentially supporting or inhibiting teacher learning and propose that when teachers collaborate about high quality instructional materials they may be more likely to learn about the reforms inherent in them. Finally, we highlight the importance of discipline‐specific leadership in helping teachers to understand and implement the complexities inherent in new science instructional materials.

show abstract

Trust and Collaboration in PLC Teams

Cited by 84 publications

References 47 publications

High School Professional Learning Communities: A Multiple Case Study

High School Professional Learning Communities: A Multiple Case Study

A comprehensive view of trust in education: Conclusions from a systematic literature review

Organizational sensemaking during curriculum implementation: The dilemma of agency, role of collaboration, and importance of discipline‐specific leadership

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About