The goal
of TRG as stated in its initial flyer was to "expand insights, knowledge,
questions, and strategies for improving teacher understanding and classroom
action."
|
Teacher Reflection
Group meets for two hours every other week, except during report card
months, in a room at the district's administrative office building. Depending
on the year there are anywhere from six to twelve teachers who participate
in TRG, with returning group members, so called community "old-timers"
(Stein et al., 1998), comprising the majority of group members. The participants
represent all four of the district's elementary schools and grade levels
3-5. The teachers vary in age, background, marital status, gender, years
of teaching experience, and many other factors. Most hold masters degrees,
are active members of their school staffs, and have easily earned all
the professional development hours the district allows.
|
Jump to:
Figure
1: TRG
Case Cycle
Figure
2: TRG
Yearly Cycle
|
TRG, like
other contemporary approaches, can be described in terms of its rationale,
goals, content, and processes (Richardson & Anders, 1994). Drawing
upon our experience in NBPTS certification, the primary rationale for
creating and participating in TRG was that teacher reflection utilizing
artifacts of practice, social interaction, and consultation of a variety
of sources could enhance teacher learning and improve the experiences
of our students. Literature reviewed in previous chapters gives strong
support to this rationale. The goal of TRG as stated in its initial flyer
was to "expand insights, knowledge, questions, and strategies for
improving teacher understanding and classroom action." Long range
and immediate goals for teacher learning approaches have a way of changing
over time, particularly those that attempt to foster community, but for
the most part this goal remains at the core of what TRG attempts to accomplish
through its work.
The content
and processes of Teacher Reflection Group are the primary research interests
of this dissertation. At this point the content and processes meant to
facilitate movement toward TRG's goal(s) will be described in rather basic
terms to give the reader an overall notion of the work of TRG. The content
of TRG is basically channeled through two routes comprised of individual
member "cases" and group member interaction. Individual participants
create cases, on a rotational basis, to share their action research with
the group. They construct cases around topics that are purposefully on
the edges of their understanding and problematic for them and their students.
Topics for cases are diverse, but often fall within well-defined subject
matter, instructional, or professional areas. Cases are comprised of written
rationale, descriptions of practice, artifacts from practice (student
work samples, instructional video, classroom tasks,
), focus questions,
and relevant research or professional readings. Each case is shared multiple
times during the school year. A "rough case" is prepared during
the first semester, followed by a "revised case" in the second
semester, and "ending" with a brief "summative case"
document. Each version of the case can be seen as a tentative summary
of classroom research that attempts to progressively build upon personal
inquiry, insights of the group and other sources. A second route through
which content is made available in TRG is through group members who bring
case related reactions, experiences, research, or resources with them
to TRG meetings. In a way the content of case is constructed anew by the
group under the leadership of the case's individual creator. This content
is quite diverse including curriculum materials, state benchmarks, school
policies, life experiences, teaching beliefs, research pointers, and pedagogical
alternatives. At times, and increasingly over time, the issues and ideas
of past TRG meetings are available and drawn upon as content that is applicable
to the discussion of each case. In a sense, the content for TRG is an
amalgamation of current individual cases and group interaction with the
various case related sources, including past TRG cases and meetings. The
rich mix of content in TRG is another way in which this approach can be
seen as an appropriate context for studying the practices of teacher learning
in Deliberative Professional Development Communities.
|
|
Group
responsibilities in this process may already be clear from the description
and diagram above. Group members critically consider the cases that are
sent before TRG meetings. Members are active contributors to discourse at
the meeting and bring materials that may facilitate discussion or changes
in practice/research of the case creator. Upon leaving the meeting group
members provide feedback for presenters and also write a reflection about
how the case and its discussion connect to their own teaching practices.
The process comes full circle as group members agree to construct and share
cases based upon their practice. One group component of the process that
has not yet been described is the role of "case partners." Case
partners are pairs of TRG members who collaboratively define and research
the same topic. They agree to help each other through case-focused classroom
observations during each iteration of the case. They also assist each other
with research, writing of the case, and have a slightly elevated participation
requirement when a partner's case is presented.
The basic
contents and processes of TRG create an approach to teacher learning which
spans an entire school year, progressively building upon the action research
of its members and its own accumulated body of interactions. Figure 4.2
represents the current work of TRG across a school year to integrate ideas
and skills from many contents, contexts, participants, and sources. At
present every group member's case is taken through all four phases, whereas
in years one and two of TRG cases were only taken through the rough case
phase.
|