The Impact on Mathematics Teaching Environments Through Establishing, Developing, Maintaining, and Sustaining Professional Learning Communities
The evaluation design was not limited to the study of PLCs. Specifically, the summative evaluation included: 1) Nature and Quality of Summer Professional Development, 2) Impact on Schools' Mathematics Culture-Development of Professional Learning Communities, 3) Impact on Teachers, 4) Impact in Classroom Practice, 5) Principal Support for TASEL-M, and 6) Reflections of the Above from Project Leadership.
Determine the strength of the PLC using multiple methods:
- 10-point checklist (teachers' and coaches' perceptions)
- Examination of Common Agreements, Common Assessments, Action Plans, Common
- Observations of the PLCs in action,
- Interviews with teachers.
The 10-point checklist of a PLC was designed by our outside evaluator using the guidelines from DuFour (Whatever It Takes) with input from coaches, Faculty Partners and PIs and focused on each teacher's self-reported perception of Shared Knowledge, Teacher Focus, Common Formative Assessments, Common Goals, Collective Inquiry, Consistent Application of Grading Criteria, Improvement Goals Focused on Classroom Actions and an overall strength of the PLC.
Observations of the PLCs in action and teacher/coach interviews were conducted by the evaluation team. The protocols were developed by the evaluator and focused on the goals outlined in the original project proposal. The observation protocols were revised from HRI and RTOP to reflect change anticipated by TASEL-M. Interview protocols were developed considering the major research questions outlined in the evaluation design. An additional survey of coaches determined number and names of active, passive and non-PLC participants, and frequency and length of meetings was also conducted by the evaluator
