This paper discusses three characteristics of ongoing professional development in Communities of Practice-mutual goals, texts to negotiate knowledge, and the development of evaluation tools to monitor and adjust practice. Data from the Literacy Environments for Accelerated Progress (LEAP) project are used to showcase these characteristics in practice and highlight the transformation of teacher and researcher knowledge. Central to the development of long-lasting change in practice is teacher and researcher discourse anchored in the ongoing context of students in the classroom.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Applebee, A. N. (1996). Curriculum as conversation.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2.
Barab, S. A., Barnett, M., & Squire, K. (2002). Developing an empirical account of a community of practice: characterizing the essential tensions. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 11(4), 489–542.
3.
Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D. Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 25–56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum As-soc.
4.
Brown, A. L., Ash, D., Rutherford, M., Nakagawa, K., Gordon, A., & Campione, J. C. (1993). Distributed expertise in the classroom. In G. Salomon (Ed). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 188-228). NY: Cambridge University Press.
5.
Cobb, P. McClain, K., Lamberg, T., & Dean, C. (2003). Situating teachers' instructional practices in the institutional setting of the school and district. Educational Researcher, 32 (6), 13–24.
6.
Cochran-Smith & Lytle, S. L. (1999). The teacher researcher movement: A decade later. Educational Researcher, 28(4), 15–25.
7.
Cunningham, P. M. (1979). A compare/contrast theory of mediated word identification. Reading Teacher, 32, 774–778.
8.
Cunningham, P. M. (1980). Applying a compare/contrast process to identifying polysyllabic words. Journal of Reading Behavior, 12, 124–129.
9.
Englert, C. S., Berry, R. A., & Dunsmore, K. L. (2001). A case study of the apprenticeship process: Another perspective on the apprentice and the scaffolding metaphor. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34 (2), 152–71.
10.
Englert, C. S. & Dunsmore, K. (2002). A diversity of teaching and learning paths: Teaching writing as a situated activity. In. J. Brophy (Ed.), Social constructivist teaching: Affordances and constraints. Advances in research on teaching, (Volume 9) (pp. 81–130). Boston: JAI.
11.
Englert, C. S., Garmon, M. A., Mariage, T. V., Rozendal, M. S., Tarrant, K. L., & Urba, J. (1995). The Early Literacy Project: Connecting across the literacy curriculum. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18(4), 253– 275.
12.
Englert, C. S., & Mariage, T. (2003). The sociocul-tural model in Special Education interventions: Apprenticing students in Higher-Order Thinking. In H. Lee Swanson, Karen Harris, & Steve Graham (Eds.), The Handbook of Learning Disabilities (pp.) . Guilford Press.
13.
Englert, C. S., & Tarrant, K. L. (1995). Creating collaborative cultures for educational change. Remedial and Special Education, 16(6), 325–336.
14.
Englert, C. S., Tarrant, K. L., & Rozendal, M. S. (1993). Educational innovations: Achieving long-lasting curricular change through extended collaboration and reflective practice. Education and Treatment of Children, 16 (4), 441–473.
15.
Fullan, M. G. (1991). The new meaning of educational change.New York: Teachers College Press.
16.
Fullan, M. G. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform.NY: Falmer Press.
17.
Gaskins, I. W., Ehri, L. C., Cress, C., O'Harra, C., & Donnelly, K. (1997). Analyzing words and making discoveries about the alphabetic system: Activities for beginning readers. Language Arts, 74, 172–184.
18.
Gaskins, R. W., Gaskins, I. W., Anderson, R. C., & Schommer, M. (1995). The reciprocal relationship between research and development: An example involving a decoding strand for poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27, 337–377.
19.
Gee, J. P. (1992). The social mind: Language, ideology and social practice.NY: Bergin & Garvey.
20.
Gersten, R., & Brengelman, S. (1996). The quest to translate research into classroom practice: The emerging knowledge base. Remedial and Special Education, 17(2), 67–74.
21.
Goatley, V. J. (1997). Talk about text among special education students. In S. I. McMahon, T. E. Raphael, with V. J. Goatley & L. S. Pardo (1997). The book club connection: iteracy learning and classroom talk (pp. 119- 140). New York: Teachers College Press.
22.
Goatley, V., Highfield, K., Bentley, J., Pardo, L. S., Folkert, J., Scherer, P., Raphael, T., & Grattan, K. (1994). Empowering teachers to be researchers: A collaborative approach. Teacher Research, 1(2), 128–144.
23.
Gover, M. (1999, December). Quantitative Results of Learning Environments for Accelerated Progress. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Reading Conference, Orlando, Florida.
24.
Heap, J. L. (1989). Writing as social action. Theory into Practice, 28(2), 148–153.
25.
Hiebert, E. H., & Taylor, B. M. (Eds.) (1994). Getting Reading right from the start: Effective early literacy interventions.Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
26.
Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., & Stigler, J. W. (2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: What would it look like and how can we get one?Educational Researcher, 31(5), 3–15.
27.
Little, J. W. (1982). Norms of collegiality and experimentation: Workplace conditions of school success. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 325–340.
28.
Moody, S. W., & Schumm, J. S. (1996). Making words manual.Coral Gables, FL: School of Education, University of Miami.
29.
Moll, L. C. & Greenbert, J. (1990). Creating zones of possibilities: Combining social contexts for instruction. In L. C. Moll (Eds.). Vygotsky and education (pp. 319–348). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
Palincsar, A., S. Magnusson, S. J., Collins, K. M., & Cutter, J. (2001). Making science accessible to all: Results of a design experiment in inclusive classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24(1), 15–32.
31.
Palincsar, A. S., Magnusson, S. J., Marano, N., Ford, D., & Brown, N. (1998). Designing a community of practice: Principles and practices of the GisML community. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14 (1), 5–19.
Rozendal, M. S. (2003, December). Are study groups a viable staff development effort? A cross case analysis of teacher study groups. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Reading Conference, Scottsdale, AZ.
34.
Schiller, E., & Malouf, D. B. (1995). Practice and research in special education. Exceptional Children, 61(5), 14–124.
35.
Short, K. G., Crawford, K., Kahn, L., Kaser, S., Klas-sen, C., & Sherman, P. (1992). Teacher study groups: Exploring literacy issues through collaborative dialogue. In C. K. Kinzer & D. J. Leu (Eds.), Literacy research, theory, and practice: Views from many perspectives. Forty-first Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 367–377). Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.
36.
Shotter, J. (1996, November). Vico, Wittgenstein, and Bakhtin: 'Practical Trust' in dialogical communities. Paper presented at the Democracy and Trust Conference, Georgetown University.
37.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
38.
Wells, G. (1993). Changing schools from within: Creating communities of inquiry.Portsmouth, NH: Heine-mann.
39.
Wells, G. (1996). Using the tool-kit of discourse in the activity of learning and teaching. Mind, Culture and Activity: An International Journal, 3(2), 74–101.
40.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Toward a sociocul-tural practice and theory of education.NY: Cambridge University Press.
41.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice.Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press: Boston.
42.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
