FBLA #3

EDL 279
 THE PROBLEM: IMPLEMENTING PLCS

• Several failed attempts in the past

• Veteran staff has bitter disposition
• Skews understanding of what a PLC is
• Daily schedule does not support the work of PLCs
• No intervention time
• No common planning
• Limited common understanding of the work within
PLCs
• Scattered experiences with PLC institute
• Some went last summer, others went 7 years ago, many
have never been
FACTORS THAT AMPLIFY THE PROBLEM

• All teachers have 1-4 new courses this school year

• Some content areas have 11 new courses
• Essential standards may change as new courses shift from
theory to practice
• Most teachers are sharing courses for the first time
• Little to no time to collaborate
• Staff new to system
• 14 of 39 teachers are new to the school (~36%)
• 11 new positions this school year
• Trying to create stability in a system that is in flux
 INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS: ADMIN.
#1
• Elementary—successfully uses PLCs
• Essential standards and proficiency levels already
defined
• Teachers have common planning
• Data Days each quarter
• “We discuss management as well as instructional decisions for
the time in the meeting… We get 8 subs for all the teachers
and they rotate through the data day.”
• Look at data binders
• Plan for WIN interventions
• ILT meetings every Friday
• “When I took over [as principal], our proficiency levels
were generally in the 70s. Now we’re closing in on the
90s across the board.”
INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS: ADMIN.
#2
• High school—successfully uses PLCs
• “Implementing PLCs is never over… you have to be
responsive to your teachers”
• Regularly review work that should be done in PLCs
• Have to make it a constant priority
• “PLCs are not something you can add on to what you’re
already doing. It has to be something you do everyday”
• WIN intervention period built into regular day
schedule
INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS: ADMIN.
#3
• High school—admittedly struggles with PLCs
• “Trying to do too much at once”
• Keep in mind that it’s a process
• Make sure each step is completed properly before moving
onto the next
• Will have its ups and down
INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS: ADMIN.
#4
• High school—does not use PLC model; uses
Authentic Intellectual Work
• “The most important thing when implementing AIW
was to not rush into it.”
• “I turned it over to the teachers. I knew that if I
controlled too much of the work then they wouldn’t
embrace [AIW].”
• Didn’t plan on being fully implemented for three years
• Most of staff’s PD time is spent on AIW
BONE DIAGRAM
 MOVING FORWARD

• Abandon universal timeline for staff

• Give autonomy to departments
• Have each department use a tool for continual improvement to
determine next steps
• Identify specific supports administration can provide

• Differentiate for departments

• Varying amounts of work to do between departments
• Work to avoid staff burnout
 MOVING FORWARD

• Scrap current goal of being “up and running” by second

semester
• Focus on doing foundational work properly
• Essential standards, vertical alignment, defining proficiency
standards, etc.
• High leverage in the long run; best for students and learning
right now
• Increase value of work in long run
• Currently, many teachers are “jumping through the hoops”

• Restructure bell schedule

• Common planning time
• Daily intervention period
• Implement a system for determining students’ use of
intervention period
• FlexiSched