This research reports data from case studies of three intermediary organizations facing the challenge of scaling up teacher learning. The turn of the century launched scaling-up efforts of all three intermediaries, growing from intimate groups, where founding teachers and staff were key supports for teacher learning, to large multistate organizations. The authors draw on data from three earlier qualitative studies, as well as newly gathered data on professional development at Big Picture Learning, EL Education, and the Internationals Network, and reveal some of the challenges and benefits of taking teacher learning to scale.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BallD. L., & CohenD. K. (1999). Instruction, capacity, and improvement (CPRE Research Report Series RR-4). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania.
2.
BrownJ. S., & DuguidP. (1991). Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2, 40–57).
3.
BuchananL. (2014, March). How do you go from this to this without losing what makes you great?Lessons in the art of scaling a company. Inc., 30–40).
4.
CoburnC. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3–12).
5.
CohenD. K., & HillH. (2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
6.
CrockettM. D. (2004). Inquiry as professional development: Creating dilemmas through teachers’ work. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(5), 609–624).
7.
Darling-HammondL. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing in quality teaching. Kutztown, PA: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future.
8.
Darling-HammondL., & PrinceC. D. (Ed.). (2007). Strengthening teacher quality in high-need schools —policy and practice. Washington, DC: The Council of Chief State School Officers.
9.
Darling-HammondL., & RichardsonN. (2009). Research review/teacher learning: What matters. Educational Leadership, 66(5), 46–53).
10.
DruckerP. F. (1998, October 5). Management's new paradigms. Forbes, 152–177).
11.
ElmoreR. (1996). Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 1–26).
12.
GlennanT. K., BodillyS. J., GalegherJ., & KerrK. A. (2004). Expanding the reach of education reforms: Perspectives from leaders in the scale-up of educational interventions. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
13.
GreenE. (2014). Building a better teacher: How teaching works (and how to teach it to everyone). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.
14.
HanushekE., & RivkinS. (2004). How to improve the supply of high quality teachers. In RavitchD. (Ed.), Brookings Papers on Education Policy 2004 (pp. 7–25)). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
15.
HonigM. I., & IkemotoG. (2008). Adaptive assistance for learning improvement efforts: The case of the institute for learning. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(3), 328–363).
16.
Jaffe-WalterR. (2008). Negotiating mandates and memory: Inside a small schools network for immigrant youth. Teachers College Record, 110(9), 2040–2066).
KleinE. J. (2007). Rethinking professional development: Building a culture of teacher learning. The New Educator, 3(3), 179–197).
19.
KleinE. J., Jaffe-WalterR., & RiordanM. (2015). Scaling up teacher professional learning: How to grow teacher knowledge while growing school networks. Current Issues in Education, 18(2) 1–18).
20.
KleinE. J., & RiordanM. (2009). Putting professional development into practice: A framework for how teachers in Expeditionary Learning Schools implement professional development. Teacher Education Quarterly, 36(4), 61–80).
21.
KleinE. J., & RiordanM. (2011). Wearing the “student hat”: Experiential professional development in Expeditionary Learning Outward Bound Schools. Journal of Experiential Education, 34(1), 35–54).
22.
KleinE. J., RiordanM., & McDonaldJ. (2010, May). Scaling-up high schools: What are the challenges and strategies of growing innovative designs for schooling? Panel presentation at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.
23.
LiebermanA., & GrolnickM. (1996). Networks and reform in American education. Teachers College Record, 98(1), 7–45).
24.
LittleJ. W. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers’ professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91(4), 509–536).
25.
LittleJ. W. (1999). Organizing schools for teacher learning. In Darling-HammondL., & SykesG. (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 233–262)). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
26.
LouisK. S., KruseS., & BrykA. S. (1995). Professionalism and community: What is it and why is it important in urban schools? In LouisK.S., KruseS., & Associates (Eds.), Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools, (pp 3–22)). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
27.
McDonaldJ. P. (1996). Redesigning school: Lessons for the twenty-first century. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
28.
McDonaldJ. P., & KleinE. J. (2003). Networking for teacher learning: Toward a theory of effective design. Teachers College Record, 105(8), 1606–1621).
29.
McDonaldJ. P., KleinE. J., & RiordanM. (2009). Going to scale with new school designs: Reinventing high school. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
30.
McLaughlinM. W., & MitraD. (2001). Theory-based change and change-based theory: Going deeper and going broader. Journal of Educational Change, 2(4), 301–323).
31.
McLaughlinM. W., & TalbertJ. (2001). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
32.
National Education Association. (2013). Families and educators working together for student success: Collaborative strategies for helping students transition to common core state standards. NEA Center for Great Public Schools. Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/NEA-PTA-CCSS-Student-Success-Brochure.pdf
33.
PennellJ. R., & FirestoneW. A. (1996). Changing classroom practices through teacher networks: Matching program features with teacher characteristics and circumstances. Teachers College Record, 98(1), 46–76).
34.
RogersB. L. (2007). The power of practitioner expertise: Building and using teacher knowledge in service of school reform. The New Educator, 3(3), 199–220).
35.
SchmidtM., & DatnowA. (2005). Teachers’ sense-making about comprehensive school reform: The influence of emotions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(8), 949–965).
36.
SengeP. M. (1994). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Currency Doubleday.
37.
StringfieldS., & DatnowA. (1998). Scaling up school restructuring designs in urban schools. Education and Urban Society, 30(3), 269–276).
38.
SuttonR. I., & RaoH. (2014). Scaling excellence: Getting to more without settling for less. New York, NY: Crown Business.
39.
ViadaroD. (2007). Lessons learned on “scaling up” of projects. Education Week, 26(25), 1, 16.
40.
WayneA., & YoungsP. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73(1), 89–122).
41.
WengerE. (2004). Knowledge management as a doughnut: Shaping your knowledge strategy through communities of practice. Ivey Business Journal, 68(3), 1–8).
42.
WylieE. C. (Ed.). (2008). Tight but loose: Scaling up teacher professional development in diverse contexts (ETS Research Rep. No. RR-08-29). Princeton, NJ: ETS.
43.
YinR. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
