Task 2 Strong Examples

The MA PAL strong examples illustrate performance at the Meeting and Exceeding rubric levels for the four Tasks. In general, they are intended to model and help clarify the depth of required work associated with each Task. The Artifacts and Commentaries are followed by Rationales that explain the strengths and appropriateness of the content. All examples are drawn from actual submissions used with permission that have been edited to remove identifying information. The Department's use of these examples is not necessarily an endorsement of the specific protocols or practices they contain but rather the overall quality of the work as it aligns with the rubric language.

Please note: use of the examples' specific content in an actual submission, whole or in part, would be in violation of the Submission Rules governing originality.

Artifact #1: Description of the Priority Area and the Group

Memorandum
To: High School 123 Principal
From: High School 123 Teacher Leader

High School 123 Demographics

High School 123 is a 9–12 Title I urban school serving 2317 students. The 2018–19 MCAS results indicate that only 49% of students are either "meeting" or "exceeding" expectations in ELA, and that there are significant disparities in test scores for students with disabilities and English learners.

Group Identification and Group Formation

While examining 2019 grade 10 ELA MCAS scores, concern arose regarding student achievement on the Next Generation MCAS. The teacher leader invited all academic, special education, and EL teachers to determine interest in participating in a voluntary professional learning community (PLC). Three ELA teachers, two special education teachers, and one EL teacher volunteered to join the PLC. The PLC met for the first time in September 2019. In order to establish a common goal and maintain direction and focus, our work would follow the PLC flowchart established by Smith (2017). According to an initial analysis of 2015–2019 MCAS data (see data below), the PLC determined the priority academic area to be improving writing scores for students identified as requiring EL and SPED learning supports by increasing writing across the curriculum. In addition, I met with High School 123's principal to discuss funding professional development for the PLC in order to maximize use of [brand name]*, an online writing platform. Upon suggestion from the Principal, I invited the school's Technology Integration Specialist.

MCAS Performance

In order to form the SMART goal, I coordinated the team's analysis of High School 123's ELA MCAS writing item results for the 2015–2019 school years.

blank	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019
Total percentage of all 10th-grade students who failed or did not meet expectations on the ELA MCAS	21.2%	19.8%	19.5%	18.7%	27.5%
Total percentage of 10th-grade special education students who failed or did not meet expectations on the ELA MCAS	33.7%	32.6%	30.1%	29.8%	40.7%
Total percentage of 10th-grade EL students who failed or did not meet expectations on the ELA MCAS	28.4%	27.7%	27.1%	26.3%	38.4%
Total percentage of 10th-grade ED students who failed or did not meet expectations on the ELA MCAS	23.9%	23.2%	21.5%	20.8%	30.3%

*2015–2018 percentages based on the Legacy MCAS; 2019 scores based on the Next Generation MCAS

While students made consistent gains in achievement from 2015 to 2018 on the Legacy MCAS, an analysis of MCAS data shows that students require more support in the transition to the Next Generation MCAS test. The percentage of students who did not meet expectations increased 8.8% between 2018 and 2019. Special education students not meeting expectations increased 10.9%; EL students not meeting expectations increased 12.1%. Therefore, the PLC agreed to prioritize the achievement of special education and EL students. I also facilitated an analysis of students' persuasive essays of the lowest performing 25% of students on the 2019 ELA MCAS exam, and the team determined that students specifically struggled to synthesize information from multiple texts.

The SMART goal was created with input from the PLC team and school principal, was based on five years of MCAS data, and was aligned with the school improvement plan. Thus, we determined our final SMART goal: "When completing assessments in the [brand name] online writing platform, 80% of target student groups will "meet" or "exceed" Next Generation MCAS persuasive writing expectations." Although the targeted area is ELA, writing across the curriculum will help increase student opportunities to write, which may in turn translate into increased student achievement.

Team Members & Roles

The team was selected after generating interest from faculty members across departments and meeting with the principal of High School 123, who provided advice on the group's composition. The team will meet during six monthly in-service half-days for ninety minutes each. We will establish norms based on the work of DuFour, DuFour, Eaker & Many (2006). While these meetings will primarily consist of core-PLC members, additional stakeholders may be included. We will determine common assessments, establish a timeline for teacher implementation, calibrate the scoring of student work using the Next Generation MCAS rubric, and conduct teacher observations. Members of the PLC team will provide teachers with guidance and model lessons that demonstrate best practices. PLC members will provide weekly feedback through a Google Forms survey to monitor progress, celebrate successes, relay struggles, and ask questions. A final survey will be provided to PLC members at its conclusion. It is also important that members of the PLC share leadership roles during our work. This will, in turn, promote collaboration across departments in order to improve students' writing skills.

Team Members	Role & Reason for Participation
3 ELA Teachers	To utilize new strategies and best practices and help teachers implement writing into their classrooms in order to improve student writing skills
2 Special EducationTeachers	To provide teachers with strategies and best practices in order to create an inclusive learning environment that accommodates special education students and improves student writing skills
1 EL Teacher	To provide teachers with strategies and best practices in order to create an inclusive learning environment that accommodates EL students and improves student writing skills
1 Teacher Leader	To facilitate the PLC team, provide team members with guidance and feedback, communicate with stakeholders, and ensure the PLC is held accountable in its work toward improving student writing skills
1 Technology Integration Specialist	To support implementation of [brand name online writing platform], and other technologies to provide differentiated instruction and supports

Placement of the Proposed Group

High School 123 implemented department PLCs several years ago and currently provides professional development time for PLCs during a monthly half-day. However, these PLCs are not directly aligned with the school improvement plan, and there is no time provided for interdisciplinary teamwork between academic departments, or with the special education and EL departments. Additionally, there is currently no PLC whose focus is improving the performance of special education and EL student performance on high-stakes testing.

A PLC team composed of teachers from multiple academic departments, the special education department, and the EL department is necessary to increase writing across the curriculum in order to improve the MCAS performance of special education and EL students. With assistance from the Technology Integration Specialist, increasing the amount of writing students do electronically over the course of the year will hopefully translate into increased student achievement on the ELA MCAS exam in 2020. The teachers committed to working cooperatively with me and with one another in order to improve special education and EL student achievement in persuasive writing (from Artifact 2).

References

DuFour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community? ASCD. Retrieved April 6, 2020.

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & Many, T. (2006). Learning by Doing: A Handbook for Professional Learning Communities at Work, pp. 2–4.

Smith, W. R. [Solution Tree]. (Producer). (2017). Practical Steps for Professional Learning Communities [video file].

Rationale

Artifact 1

The candidate engages six members of the faculty, with advice from the principal on the selection of group members, and clearly articulates why each member was chosen. The candidate further suggests that additional members of the PLC may be included depending on need. The candidate clearly defines their facilitation role, outlining the PLC process used, which is research-based, and suggesting that shared leadership opportunities will be integral to their work. The group begins by analyzing ELA student achievement data and, with input from the school principal, formulates a precise SMART goal. A strong commitment among the PLC members to support one another in trying out new instructional practices is cultivated via the peer observation process. The academic priority area is clearly stated in the second paragraph. MCAS achievement data is disaggregated to reveal an achievement gap among English Language Learners and students with disabilities. Existing school practices, a history of PLC development in the school by department, and the school's improvement plan are all cited to strongly connect the priority academic area to the group's work. The candidate clearly articulates a measurable set of goals and an action plan while also explaining the process by which the PLC drafted the plan.

Artifact #2: Description of the Group Learning Experiences and Results

To: High School 123 Principal
From: High School 123 Teacher Leader

Group Process

With my guidance and support, the team of three ELA teachers, two special education teachers, one EL teacher, and one Technology Integration Specialist worked together to research best practices and innovative strategies for teaching writing, examined student work to determine where extra supports may be necessary, calibrated scoring, evaluated assessments data, and made recommendations for improvement. As the team leader, I chose to facilitate our PLC using the principles of DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, & Many (2006). The PLC used this research to conduct our meetings using group norms and to establish clear agendas for each meeting (category 4). At the conclusion of each meeting, the team members provided feedback to establish both successes and areas for improvement (category 6).

By facilitating the group using the practices of DuFour (2004), I ensured that the group remained focused on the priority group and area. Student achievement data and student work samples were analyzed to determine needs and appropriate best practices, strategies, and interventions necessary to improve the writing skills and achievement of the priority group. Once these determinations were made, teachers implemented the agreed-upon strategies and practices and collected data on student progress. They also participated in peer observations to see how other PLC team members utilized the strategies within their classroom and provided one another with feedback.

Norms:

The PLC team spent the first meeting reviewing group norms that would be followed at subsequent meetings and committed to following the seven norms of collaboration as outlined by Ravlin (2017). All members of the PLC agreed to adhere to these seven norms:

Pausing
Paraphrasing
Posing Questions
Putting Ideas on the Table
Providing Data
Paying Attention to Oneself and Others

Presuming Positive Intentions

Schedule and Summary of Steps:

I scheduled meetings during six in-service half-days that were built into the school calendar. Each meeting lasted approximately 90 minutes. I created an agenda for each meeting and emailed it to team members several days in advance. At our first meeting, the team reviewed group norms and decided upon roles and responsibilities for each member. The team also examined FY15 to FY19 ELA MCAS results and narrowed down the focus of our work, per the methods of Smith (2017), in order to establish our SMART goal. Immediately following our first meeting, I reached out to the ELA Department Chair to communicate our goal and gain support. The ELA Department Chair agreed to dedicate time during the next weekly department meeting for a [brand name online writing platform]* training session facilitated by the Technology Integration Specialist. Prior to our second meeting, teachers attended this training and required students to respond to a common persuasive writing prompt in [brand name online writing platform]. In conjunction with FY19 MCAS results, the student responses to this prompt informed the interventions implemented. Between meetings, teachers were required to implement strategies and interventions, as well as observe one another's classrooms and provide feedback to the teacher. At the conclusion of each meeting, teachers responded to a survey to provide feedback about what they learned and what needed clarification (category 6).

Protocols:

Protocols and criteria for examining student work were provided to the team both electronically and on paper in order to calibrate the scoring of student work and ensure consistency, which was needed to determine appropriate interventions (category 5). We utilized the Atlas-Looking at Data Protocol and the ERIC classroom observation protocol to guide our work. These protocols were also used as we examined both FY19 MCAS persuasive writing responses and common [brand name online writing platform] writing prompts. In addition, team members were provided with an observation continuum in order to provide focused, meaningful feedback to the team members they observed. This would also help teachers identify strategies that could be implemented or adapted for their own classroom (category 5).

My Role as Facilitator:

My primary responsibility was to facilitate the team as we worked toward achieving our goal of improving students' persuasive writing skills. In order to accomplish this goal, I gained each member's support in creating a collaborative team that was committed to improving their professional practice. I consistently gathered and analyzed feedback to inform upcoming meeting agendas, support team members, and improve my leadership skills. As the work of the PLC continued, team members were encouraged to take a more active facilitation role. Team members presented interventions that they had researched, shared successes and failures, and led discussions on peer observations and the effectiveness of specific graphic organizers.

Group Learning and Work

I supported the professional practice of team members by providing model lessons and intervention strategies, observing teachers and providing focused feedback, coordinating necessary supports, removing barriers to success, collecting and organizing student work samples and data, monitoring student progress, and leading the analyses of student work to determine the effectiveness and progress of implemented interventions. I empowered team members to facilitate meetings and introduce new writing strategies as well as differentiated instructional practices to support the unique needs of our special education and EL students.

Meeting 1: October 23, 2019
Topics Discussed & Learning Activities
Reviewed the seven norms of collaboration. Analyzed FY15–FY19 grade 10 ELA MCAS results. With guidance from the principal, developed a SMART goal that aligned with the school improvement plan and teacher-student learning and professional practice goals. Identified a common persuasive writing prompt in [brand name online writing platform] to establish a baseline analysis of student persuasive writing skills.
New Content & Practices to Be Implemented Prior to Next Meeting
All teachers will attend the [brand name online writing platform] training session. Teachers will require students to respond to the common persuasive writing prompt in the [brand name online writing platform] platform and will determine which students need additional support in order to meet expectations.
Meeting 2: November 16, 2019
Topics Discussed & Learning Activities
Examined and discussed student work samples and writing data from common [brand name online writing platform] writing prompt. Identified persuasive appeals to be taught (rhetorical triangle—ethos, logos, and pathos) and assessed.
New Content & Practices to Be Implemented Prior to Next Meeting
Teachers will teach students about persuasive appeals and assess student understanding of the appeals in preparation for persuasive writing tasks. The teacher leader will run an early intervention report in [brand name online writing platform] and provide teachers with a personalized list of student performance. The teacher leader will observe team members and provide feedback.
How the Work Relates to the Priority Area & Relevancy to PLC Members
Persuasive appeals are the foundation of persuasive writing. By teaching students about persuasive appeals, they will understand the various purposes of persuasive writing and be able to apply these appeals to their own writing. Examining student work samples and writing data from [brand name online writing platform] helped the team establish a baseline for students' persuasive writing achievement. The team was able to cross-reference this information with FY19 MCAS data.
Meeting 3: November 22, 2019
Topics Discussed & Learning Activities
Examined persuasive appeal assessment results to determine which students did not understand persuasive appeals with 80% accuracy. Selected graphic organizers for persuasive writing to be used by priority group. Established an observation schedule for the upcoming month and reviewed the observation continuum.
New Content & Practices to Be Implemented Prior to Next Meeting
Teachers will dedicate time in class to practicing persuasive writing using the three graphic organizers. Teachers and teacher leader will observe team members utilizing the graphic organizers during writing instruction.
How the Work Relates to the Priority Area & Relevancy to PLC Members
Teachers were able to identify which students need additional support understanding persuasive appeals and shared intervention ideas to improve their understanding. Graphic organizers will help students create well-developed, properly supported persuasive writing paragraphs.
Meeting 4: December 17, 2019
Topics Discussed & Learning Activities
Discussed the process and effectiveness of using graphic organizers with students to support persuasive writing and shared reflections on the feedback from observations. Examined student work samples to determine areas in need of additional instruction. Chose a common [brand name online writing platform] persuasive writing prompt for midyear exam.
New Content & Practices to Be Implemented Prior to Next Meeting
Teachers will continue to implement graphic organizers to support topic development and organization. Teachers will provide instruction on choosing relevant evidence and formatting in-text citations to support an argument. Special education and EL teachers will assist ELA teachers with individual accommodations. Teachers will require students to respond to a common midyear persuasive writing prompt in the [brand name online writing platform] platform. ELA Department Chair and teacher leader will observe team members during writing instruction and provide feedback.
How the Work Relates to the Priority Area & Relevancy to PLC Members
Teachers were able to discern the effectiveness of graphic organizers in supporting student persuasive writing skills and identify areas that students continue to struggle with. Sharing experiences, strategies, and best practices supported professional growth and learning. Special education and EL teachers provided suggestions for additional supports and strategies.
Meeting 5: January 16, 2020
Topics Discussed & Learning Activities
Shared midyear writing prompt data from [brand name online writing platform] and identified students who continue to achieve below the 80% goal of the PLC. Discussed feedback from teacher leader and ELA Department Chair observations and suggestions for improvement, including offering a persuasive writing workshop for struggling students prior to MCAS in March. Planned date for persuasive writing workshop to take place over February vacation week for students not achieving at 80%.
New Content & Practices to Be Implemented Prior to Next Meeting
All teachers will identify and submit writing samples to serve as models for instruction at the boot camp. PLC members who volunteered to teach at the persuasive writing workshop will meet to plan their instruction; teacher leader will compile a list of students in the priority group who are still struggling, send out invitations to the workshop, reach out to families who do not respond to the invitation, and keep track of attendees.
How the Work Relates to the Priority Area & Relevancy to PLC Members
Sharing midyear persuasive writing data helped determine which students are still in need of intervention. Offering priority area students a focused persuasive writing workshop will help improve student writing performance. Using student work samples as models will provide students with an example of effective writing that they can emulate.
Meeting 6: February 26, 2020
Topics Discussed & Learning Activities
Discussed the persuasive writing workshop offered over February vacation. Calculated student growth data between the first common persuasive writing prompt to midyear persuasive writing prompt. Determined if teachers met SMART goal of 80% of students "meeting" or "exceeding" persuasive writing expectations. Debriefed on the PLC process.
New Content & Practices to Be Implemented Prior to Next Meeting
All PLC team members will continue to provide students with persuasive writing opportunities and instruction to reinforce persuasive writing skills and ensure students are prepared for the ELA MCAS in March.
How the Work Relates to the Priority Area & Relevancy to PLC Members
After analyzing the midyear persuasive writing assessment results, including revisions made during the workshop, teachers were able to determine if their student learning SMART goal was achieved and if the PLC was effective. Calculating student growth also helped teachers determine the PLC's effectiveness, because while some students did not meet expectations, they did demonstrate growth in persuasive writing skills.

Group Learning: What Teachers Have Learned Individually and Collectively

PLC team members shared their reflections and what they learned during each meeting.

Meeting	Individual Feedback	Collective Feedback
Meeting #1: Group norms and SMART goal	An ELA teacher wrote, "I learned how to create a meaningful, attainable goal that will improve both my professional practice and student learning." An EL teacher commented, "I feel validated to be a part of a professional conversation about student achievement, and look forward to contributing to the PLC."	All PLC members found conducting an MCAS item analysis to be rewarding and meaningful because it directly informed the group's SMART goal and ensured the goal would target both the priority area and the group.
Meeting #2: Analysis of baseline writing data	A special education teacher wrote, "I never really looked at student writing data because it's not my area of expertise. This gave me something manageable that I can focus on in my class." An ELA teacher said, "I am happy to see that the group will provide students with the background information they need for a solid foundation in persuasive writing, rather than assuming students already know it."	The PLC team agreed that utilizing the [brand name online writing platform] writing platform simplified the data collection process and was a useful tool for both students and teachers.
Meeting #3: Analysis of persuasive appeals data and interventions	An ELA teacher commented that students responded positively to persuasive appeal instruction and that they think it will help improve their persuasive writing skills. Another ELA teacher commented that the group discussion of data and intervention strategies was meaningful and helpful to their professional learning and growth.	Several teachers expressed confusion about whether they should try all three graphic organizers, focus on one, allow students to choose their own, etc. I clarified via email that teachers should make all three a part of their instruction before the next meeting.
Meeting #4: Analysis of intervention effectiveness	An ELA teacher stated that they struggled with requiring graphic organizers because some students were resistant. Moving forward, they plan to make it an expectation for all students, not just the priority group. An EL teacher said that the graphic organizer with the persuasive writing word bank was particularly helpful, and that they would continue to use that in the future.	Team members expressed concern about the number of interventions and assessments required before the next meeting. As a support, I developed a suggested timeline for interventions and assessments that teachers could use.
Meeting #5: Identification of struggling students in priority group and workshop planning	An ELA teacher wrote, "I appreciated the observation feedback and discussion. It was helpful to be recognized for the good things that happen in my classroom, and I value the suggestions for improvement." The ELA Department Chair said, "It is obvious this team supports one another and are all committed to achieving the group's goal. I applaud the effective management of the group and its productivity."	Teachers were excited about the writing workshop and the opportunity to provide struggling students with targeted instruction and individualized attention.
Meeting #6: Analysis of writing data and effectiveness of SMART goal implementation	A special education teacher expressed their approval of examining both achievement and growth data as a way of measuring student learning in order to recognize students who improve, even if they are not yet "meeting" the standard. An ELA teacher commented that they planned to share what they learned with the rest of the department.	All PLC members agreed this experience was valuable and helped improve their teaching, even if they did not achieve their SMART goal.

Problems & Solutions

One challenge that teachers confronted was utilizing the [brand name online writing platform] platform report features and organizing their student writing data. Several teachers expressed concern that they would not be able to bring baseline writing data to the second meeting, so I enlisted the help of the Technology Integration Specialist to schedule individual support sessions with teachers who required extra supports in order to carry out our work.

Another challenge that teachers faced was making time to complete their observation of team members. Several teachers found it difficult to conduct their observation when writing instruction was occurring due to professional obligations. In response, I obtained the approval of the school principal for PLC team members to be exempt from non-instructional assignments twice per month until the PLC process concluded.

References

DuFour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community? ASCD. Retrieved April 6, 2020.

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & Many, T. (2006). Learning by doing: A handbook for professional learning communities at work, pp. 2–4.

Ravlin, M. (2017). Seven norms of collaboration: A supporting toolkit. Thinking Collaborative. Retrieved April 8, 2020.

Rationale

Artifact 2

The candidate convened the PLC six times (90 minutes each time) over the course of six months, thus completing a full inquiry cycle. The group's work and progress are clearly articulated in summary form throughout the artifact. The PLC adopted and implemented research-based norms for their work, which they used with fidelity. The candidate articulates a clear role as the PLC's leader: selecting protocols and gathering consensus for the use of research-based protocols for conducting peer observations and examining students' work. Feedback from group members was gathered after each meeting, thus allowing all members to share their learning with the group. The candidate revised subsequent PLC agendas based on group members' individual and collective needs. The candidate clearly suggests how they promoted the group's work on a collective and individual basis by including group members' feedback in detail. The candidate differentiated interventions for special education, English-Language Learners, and ELA teachers as the group moved through the process of peer observations of writing instruction and the examination of students' writing.

Artifact #3: Findings, Feedback, and Recommendations

Memorandum
To: High School 123 Principal
From: High School 123 Teacher Leader

Assessment of the Group Process and Group Work

An assessment of both quantitative and qualitative data was conducted in order to determine the PLC's effectiveness in improving the priority group's persuasive writing skills as measured by the established SMART goal. Data from common formative assessments helped the team make informed decisions about necessary interventions and adjustments to practice (category 5). In addition, PLC team members completed a Google Form survey at the conclusion of each meeting. The information gathered from these surveys helped the teacher leader support the team members, clarify misunderstandings and confusion, and improve the facilitation of subsequent meetings.

The members of the PLC who completed the survey were: Teacher 1 (ELA), Teacher 2 (Special Education), Teacher 3 (ELA), Teacher 4 (ELA), Teacher 5 (Special Education), and Teacher 6 (EL). The Technology Intervention Specialist did not respond to the survey.

As the PLC was composed of teachers from multiple areas of certification and differing teaching experiences, it was necessary that the team members learn to work productively and cooperatively. A Special Education teacher commented, "At first I was concerned that the content teachers and Special Education/EL teachers might 'bump heads,' but I think establishing norms was a good first step. It helped us all realize that we shared a common goal and wanted what was best for our students." An ELA teacher concurred that including teachers from diverse backgrounds was important, stating, "While I may be a content expert, helping students in our priority group is something I know I need help with. I was so thankful for the input of the Special Education and EL teachers in the group because they helped me approach instruction in a different way." DuFour (2004) says, "Educators who are building a professional learning community recognize that they must work together to achieve their collective purpose of learning for all. Therefore, they create structures to promote a collaborative culture." Based on their willingness to listen to and learn from one another, it was evident that the PLC members were committed to creating a collaborative culture in order to increase student achievement and improve their professional practice.

Teachers were required to implement common assessments and participate in a collective analysis of work samples in order to calibrate the scoring of writing. When the group first began scoring, there was some significant variation in the scores. The calibration process helped teachers look critically at writing and score it using the established criteria, versus allowing teacher perception and bias to cloud their scoring. The quantitative data collected at the end of the PLC process showed that students benefitted from the PLC's work. Two teachers achieved the SMART goal, and even though one teacher did not, all students in that class did show growth and improved their persuasive writing skills.

The qualitative feedback helped improve my facilitation and leadership skills. One ELA teacher stated, "You always listened attentively to our ideas and responded respectfully and thoughtfully. I felt comfortable expressing my opinions because I knew you had created a safe space for the team." A special education teacher commented that I helped remove barriers to success, such as negotiating fewer required professional obligations and collecting and organizing data, so that the team could focus on instruction and work productively and efficiently. In addition, the EL teacher mentioned that the feedback she received from my observations of her class was timely and constructive, and that she always felt comfortable taking risks during my observations.

Another strength identified by the team was my organizational skills. Several teachers stated that they appreciated the agendas I emailed out prior to each meeting, that I helped keep the meetings running smoothly using group norms, and that I provided them with clarification and answers to follow-up questions in a timely fashion. An ELA teacher stated, "I knew I could count on you to answer an email, provide me with necessary materials, and to keep your word when you said you would take care of something."

The PLC survey feedback also provided me with suggestions for ways to improve my leadership skills. One Special Education teacher stated that she thought the team spent too much time rehashing the same point, and that she thought I could have "tabled" some of the discussions to save time. One group member recommended that I find ways to elicit equitable participation among all group members so that there would be more opportunities for individuals to share their thoughts and expertise.

Aligning our SMART goal with the school improvement plan's goal of implementing writing across the curriculum ensured that the PLC's work was meaningful and focused on increasing student achievement. An ELA teacher observed that "using data to make informed decisions helped focus our work on areas of need and provide our students with effective support." All members of the PLC implemented the interventions in their classrooms and accepted constructive feedback willingly in order to improve their instructional practice. After the December meeting (category 6), one Special Education teacher stated, "It was helpful to observe the other team members and their approach to using the graphic organizers with their students. I think all teachers look at classrooms with a different lens and being able to observe one another allows us to learn from one another and reflect on our own teaching."

The achievements of the PLC are evidence that the team members improved their professional practice and increased student achievement of the priority group. Teachers initially disagreed when scoring student work and argued about whether writing samples met specific criteria on the common MCAS rubric. After the December meeting (category 6), the EL teacher noted, "The first time we scored student work samples, we were all over the place and spent a lot of time discussing the scores. This time, our scores were more consistent. It's clear that we are more comfortable using the rubric to assess writing than we were a couple of months ago." While this was initially a challenge, ultimately teachers successfully calibrated their scoring in order to provide accurate feedback to students.

Another achievement of the group was the use of formative assessments to drive instruction. Throughout the process, the team used a variety of formative assessments to gauge student understanding of persuasive writing and used the results of the assessments to determine areas of strength and areas for improvement. After the October meeting (category 6), one ELA teacher admitted that she did not typically assess her students for prior knowledge, and that she just assumed they knew about persuasive appeals. She wrote, "The suggestion that we start by assessing prior knowledge of persuasive appeals was something I had never considered. I usually just start teaching persuasive writing. I am curious if this makes a difference?"

There were a couple of additional challenges the team faced during the PLC process. Teachers were trained to use the [brand name]* online writing platform with their students but were not trained to navigate the complex reporting features of the program. They struggled to use the data collection and reporting features in order to bring the required data to the second PLC meeting. After receiving several emails from teachers who were frustrated and concerned about completing the task, I reached out to the Technology Integration Specialist to schedule individual appointments with teachers who needed assistance. While it was useful for teachers to be able to use the reporting features in [brand name online writing platform], I determined that the most important task for the team members was to support student achievement and improve their professional practice.

The PLC process was successful in that all students improved their persuasive writing skills. The team worked cooperatively in order to analyze student work, identify areas for improvement, determine appropriate interventions, implement the interventions into their classrooms, and provide one another with constructive feedback in order to improve persuasive writing instruction and increase the achievement of the priority group. The team was receptive to the feedback they received and open to suggestions for additional interventions, including volunteering to run a writing workshop over the February vacation for struggling students in the priority group. As the team's leader, I carefully reviewed the team's feedback and analyzed the data in order to guide the work of the PLC, make adjustments to my leadership practice where applicable, and improve the PLC's productivity in order to achieve the desired results.

The quantitative data showed that two teachers achieved the SMART goal of 80% of students meeting or exceeding persuasive writing expectations. While one teacher did not achieve the SMART goal, the class demonstrated overall growth, and all students in the priority group showed an improvement in persuasive writing skills (category 5).

Class	Baseline Essay Prompt		Midyear Essay Prompt
blank	Total Students Who Missed the Benchmark	% of Students Who Met the Benchmark	Total Students Who Missed the Benchmark	% of Students Who Met the Benchmark
1	12	7.6%	2	85%
2	13	19%	7	56%
3	7	53%	3	80%

While 10th grade students in two of the classrooms met the goal set by the PLC, further support is needed in one of the classrooms where the instructional strategies were implemented. In the future, High School 123 may want to consider implementing PLCs whose focus is on at-risk 9th grade students in order to proactively provide necessary interventions.

References

DuFour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community? ASCD. Retrieved April 6, 2020.

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., Many, T., & Mattos, M. (2016). Learning by doing: A handbook for professional learning communities at work. Bloomington: Solution Tree Press.

Rationale

Artifact 3

The candidate describes group members' formative and summative survey feedback and includes student achievement data to show how many, but not all, students were supported in order to meet the group's SMART goal. By using both student achievement data and group members' survey feedback, the candidate clearly articulates what group members learned and how that group learning resulted in changes to instructional practices. Citing PLC learning and leadership research, the candidate shows how the group both individually and collectively gained capacity and expertise over time. The PLC's process and group work, including an analysis of conflicts that arose and how they were resolved, are described in some detail.

Category Documents Notes

Category Documents

ELA MCAS achievement data (multiple years)—specifically as it pertains to persuasive writing and any local assessment data regarding persuasive writing
Teacher list—list of PLC groups existing in the school; include a list of PLC members working as part of this interdisciplinary group
Protocols used—all protocols noted in the works cited/endnotes of each artifact as well as all protocols used to establish and enact PLC norms, protocols used to conduct peer observations, and those protocols used to examine student work
Agenda and minutes—detailed agendas and meeting minutes from all six meetings held over a six-month period; include group roles, process, outcomes, and action steps for subsequent meetings
Other materials—lesson plans created as a result of the group's work, data on student achievement as a result of new instruction/interventions, plans and interventions for students with special needs and English-Language Learners, and the school improvement plan to demonstrate links between the PLC's goals and overarching school efforts
Feedback and summary—all survey and/or feedback instruments as well as survey results disaggregated by team member

Commentary

Task 2—Commentary

Creating and implementing a successful and productive professional learning community (PLC) required that I utilize strong leadership skills. Throughout the PLC process, there were many specific experiences where I used my leadership skills to facilitate the group. For example, I demonstrated initiative by examining MCAS data, identifying a problem, and proposing the solution of a PLC to the high school administration. I used effective communication skills when advocating for the formation of a PLC to the administrative team, emailing the High School 123 staff to seek participants and conducting information sessions in order to persuade staff members that a PLC was needed in order to improve student achievement in ELA. I have learned that leaders must gain the trust of their team in order to create a dynamic where team members are inspired to take risks. Team members need to feel safe and valued in order to feel comfortable offering up ideas, admitting challenges, and seeking assistance. A specific experience where I cultivated trust among team members was when we established group norms during our first meeting. As the leader, I used positive reinforcement to show the team that I valued their thoughts and ideas, and I always made sure to acknowledge their contributions to the PLC at each meeting.

I established a team dynamic that allowed the members ownership of the PLC in order to increase their buy-in. Providing these team members with important responsibilities increased their support for the PLC because they felt valued. I also encouraged the team to provide honest survey feedback at the end of each meeting. This allowed the team members to take ownership of the PLC because I often implemented their suggestions and made changes based on their feedback.

I provided the team with agendas prior to each meeting and, depending on the agenda, asked them to come with questions, work samples, and suggestions. Initially, I allowed the team to discuss the agenda items freely and focused on listening and observing the team. I received feedback that several team members felt the team spent too much time debating the same point, and that they wished I had "tabled" discussions. After reflecting on the feedback, I solicited input from each team member by rotating who I asked to begin the discussion of each agenda item. If someone did not participate, I made sure to ask them if they had anything to add before we moved to the next agenda item. In the future, I will utilize the Final Word protocol from the School Reform Initiative to create a discussion forum that promotes equitable participation for all team members. The survey feedback from team members provided me with valuable insight into my leadership strengths and weaknesses. I assisted the team as they worked toward achieving their SMART goal. I also organized training in the use of [brand name online writing platform]. I helped teachers calibrate their scoring of common writing assessments to ensure consistency among them.

There were a few conflicts that occurred during the PLC process. Initially, teachers did not agree on the scoring of the work samples. Using the seven norms of collaboration, I helped the group discuss the samples in a productive and respectful manner in order to achieve consensus. The team also found it difficult to conduct peer observations due to other professional responsibilities. I spoke to the principal and stressed the importance of conducting peer observations to the success of the PLC, which ultimately resulted in an exemption from two duties each month for team members. Throughout the PLC process, I handled conflict in a respectful, decisive, and timely manner so that the team knew I was a strong advocate for the PLC's success.

I helped and encouraged teachers to take greater responsibility for the PLC by soliciting their feedback and seeking out their input. I encouraged the special education and EL teachers to provide their content area expertise as we brainstormed strategies for intervention and made recommendations to the team. The team conducted peer observations in order to learn from one another, rather than relying solely on the feedback from my observations. At the conclusion of each meeting, I dedicated time to allow the team members to fill out a feedback form. The form asked the team members to identify areas for improvement, and several of their ideas were implemented in order to make the PLC more effective.

I would make changes the next time I facilitate a PLC. Throughout the process, two group members required additional supports in order to meet the team's SMART goal. Throughout the process, I was very cognizant of the time I spent helping individual teachers and tried to ensure I provided each of them with an equal amount of support. However, two group members did require targeted and additional supports in order to effectively implement the strategies. In the future, I will focus first on assisting any teachers who may require additional supports and solicit more feedback so I know where additional supports may be most useful. Much like the PLC's goal of supporting students who require additional supports. I will apply the same practice of identifying areas where additional supports may be necessary and applying interventions and solutions to members of the PLC. Finally, in order to create a more collaborative culture, I will encourage team members to take on leadership roles within the PLC from the very start. My voice was too dominant during the first two PLC meetings, which resulted in the members being more passive learners rather than activists for their own professional development. In the future, I will ask team members to facilitate discussions and the decision-making processes from the first meeting. This will result in better engagement and help team members develop capacity as an on-going learning community.

I am very proud of both the accomplishments of the professional learning community and of the work I performed as its leader. The team was committed to the process and worked diligently to support both one another and their students. Throughout the process, I showed initiative, used data to make informed decisions, demonstrated effective communication and problem-solving skills, established a collaborative culture, and modeled what it means to be a reflective practitioner.

Rationale

Commentary

The candidate articulates four specific leadership skills and reflects on how they developed each skill over the course of the PLC's work. The candidate draws on specific learning experiences to explain how they adjusted their leadership practices based on group members' feedback. The candidate describes conflicts that arose and how they used leadership skills to address and resolve each conflict. In reference to the teacher and students who did not meet the SMART goal, the candidate suggests what they would do differently next time in order to ensure complete success. The candidate also solicited feedback on their leadership of the group after each PLC meeting and at the conclusion of the group's work. The candidate used group members' feedback to identify both what worked well and what could be done differently next time while also proposing specific steps to improve their practice.

Top of Page