Professional learning communities (PLCs) have emerged as one of the nation’s most widely implemented strategies for improving instruction and PK–12 student learning outcomes. PLCs are predicated on the principles of improvement science, a type of evidenced-based collective inquiry that aims to bridge the research–practice divide and increase organizational capacity to solve pressing problems of practice. In this article, the Teacher Collaboration Assessment Rubric (TCAR) is presented in which the evidenced-based attributes of rigorous PK–12 PLCs are operationalized. The author describes how the TCAR has been used for developmental, formative, and outcome evaluation purposes in PK–12 settings. The value of the TCAR and the evaluation of PLCs in other complex organizational systems such as health care and the sciences are also discussed. PLC evaluation can help teams to focus on improvement and to avoid “collaboration lite” whereby congeniality and imprecise conversation are confused with the disciplined professional inquiry vital to organizational improvement.
BarryS. K. (2015). Using social network analysis to investigate the relationship between school-based team communication networks and implementation of positive behavior support systems (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA.
2.
BerwickD. M. (2008). The science of improvement. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 299, 1182–1184.
3.
BlytheT.AllenD.PowellB. S. (2007). Looking together at student work. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
BurkhardtH.SchoenfeldA. H. (2003). Improving educational research: Toward a more useful, more influential, and better-funded enterprise. Educational Researcher, 32, 3–14.
6.
CapraraG. V.BarbaranelliC.StecaP.MaloneP. S. (2006). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of School Psychology, 44(6), 473–490.
7.
CityE. A.ElmoreR. F.FiarmanS. E.TeitelL. (2009). Instructional rounds in education: A network approach to improving teaching and learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
8.
CoburnC. E.SteinM. K. (2010). Research and practice in education: Building alliances, bridging the divide. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
9.
ColvinK.CrottsK.LiX.RandallJ. (2011, 10). Rating scale utility for teacher collaboration survey: Collaboration, your instructional practice and student achievement scale. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Northeastern Educational Research Association, Rocky Hill, CT.
10.
CookR.FosterC.RandallJ. (2011, 10). Applying the Rasch model to pilot testing an instrument measuring quality of collaboration among K-12 teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Northeastern Educational Research Association, Rocky Hill, CT.
11.
CurryM. (2008). Critical friends groups: The possibilities and limitations embedded in teacher professional communities aimed at instructional improvement and school reform. Teachers College Record, 110, 733–774.
12.
Darling-HammondL. (2013). Getting teacher evaluation right: What really matters for effectiveness and improvement. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
13.
Darling-HammondL.AncessJ.OrtS. W. (2002). Reinventing high school: Outcomes of the coalition campus school project. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 639–673.
14.
DemingW. E. (2000). The new economics for industry, government, and education. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
15.
DufourR.DufourR. B. (2012). The school leader’s guide to professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
16.
DuFourR.DuFourR. B.EakerR. E. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
17.
DuFourR.EakerR. E.DuFourR. B. (Eds.). (2005). On common ground: The power of professional learning communities (pp. 31–43). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
EarlL. M.KatzS. (2006). Leading schools in a data-rich world: Harnessing data for school improvement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
20.
ElmoreR. F. (2005). What (so-called) low-performing schools can teach (so-called) high-performing schools. Harvard Education Letter, 21, 7–8.
21.
FournierD. (2005). Evaluation. In MathisonS. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evaluation (pp. 239–243). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
FullanM. (1993). Changes forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London, England: Routledge Falmer.
23.
GajdaR.KolibaC. (2007). Evaluating the imperative of inter-personal collaboration: A school improvement perspective. American Journal of Evaluation, 28, 26–44.
24.
GajdaR.KolibaC. (2008). Evaluating and improving the quality of teacher collaboration: A field-tested framework for school leaders. NASSP Bulletin, 92, 133–154.
25.
GaretM. S.PorterA. C.DesimoneL.BirmanB. F.YoonK. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 915–945.
26.
GarmstonR. J.WellmanB. M. (2013). The adaptive school: A sourcebook for developing collaborative groups. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.
27.
GoddardY. L.GoddardR. D.Tschannen-MoranM. (2007). A theoretical and empirical investigation of teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in public elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 109, 877–896.
28.
GoodladJ.Mantle-BromleyC.GoodladS. J. (2004). Education for everyone: Agenda for education in a democracy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
29.
HiebertJ.GallimoreR.StiglerW. (2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: What would it look like and how can we get one?Educational Researcher, 31, 3–15.
30.
HordS. (2004). Learning together, leading together: Changing schools through professional learning communities. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
KellyG. J. (2006). Epistemology and educational research. In GreenJ. L.CamilliG.NelmoreP. (Eds.), The Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 33–56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
33.
LangleyG. L.NolanK. M.NolanT. W.NormanC. L.ProvostL. P. (2009). The Improvement Guide: A Practical Approach to Enhancing Organizational Performance (2nd Edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
34.
LeeM. K.RandallJ. (2011, 10). Applying the Rasch model to evaluate the rating scale measuring the perceptions about collaboration among K-12 teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Northeastern Educational Research Association, Rocky Hill, CT.
35.
LewisT. J.JonesS.HornerR. H.SugaiG. (2010). School-wide positive behavior support and students with emotional/behavioral disorders: Implications for prevention, identification and intervention. Exceptionality, 18, 82–93.
36.
LewisT. J.SugaiG. (1999). Effective behavior support: A systems approach to proactive school-wide management. Focus on Exceptional Children, 31, 1–24.
37.
LittleJ. W. (1987). Teachers as colleagues. In Richardson-KoehlerV. (Ed.), Educators’ handbook (pp. 491–518). White Plains, NY: Longman.
38.
LittleJ. W. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers’ professional relations. Teachers’ College Record, 91, 509–536.
39.
MaeroffG. I. (1993). Team building for school change: Equipping teachers for new roles. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
40.
MarzanoR.WatersT.McNultyT. (2005). School leadership that works. From research to results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
41.
MasseyL. (2009). The principal as PLC leader. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
42.
MathisonS. (2005). Encyclopedia of evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43.
McLaughlinM. W.TalbertJ. E. (2006). Building school-based teacher learning communities: Professional strategies to improve student achievement. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
44.
National Academy of Education Report. (1999, 3). Recommendations regarding research priorities: An advisory report to the national educational research policy and priorities board. New York, NY: National Academy of Education.
NewmannF. M. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
47.
PageG. (2015, 12). Findings from the 24th NSF EPSCoR National Conference. Evaluation Final Report. SustainaMetrix. Retrieved fromhttp://www.sustainametrix.com/
48.
PappanoL. (2007). More than “making nice”: Getting teachers to (truly) collaborate. Harvard Education Letter, 23, 1–3.
49.
PattonM. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50.
PattonM. Q. (2005). Developmental evaluation. In MathisonS. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evaluation (pp. 184–186). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
51.
PattonM. Q. (2011). Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
52.
PfefferJ.SuttonR. I. (2000). The knowing-doing gap: How smart companies turn knowledge into action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
53.
PounderD. G. (1998). Restructuring schools for collaboration: Promises and pitfalls. Albany: SUNY Press.
54.
PreskillH.TorresR. T. (1999). Evaluative inquiry for learning in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
SalazarM. R.LantT. K.FioreS. M.SalasE. (2012). Facilitating innovation in diverse science teams through integrative capacity. Small Group Research, 43, 527–558.
57.
SchmokerM. (2005). No turning back: The ironclad case for professional learning communities. In DufourR.EakerR.DuFourR. (Eds.), On common ground: The power of professional learning communities (pp. 135–153). Bloomington, IN: National Education Service.
58.
ScrivenM. (1991). Evaluation thesaurus (4th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
59.
StevensW. D.KahneJ. (2006). Professional communities and instructional improvement practices: A study of small high schools in Chicago. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
60.
Strategic Education Research Partnership. (2003). National Academy of Sciences. Retrieved fromhttp://serpinstitute.org/
61.
SugaiG.HornerR. H. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: School-wide positive behavior supports. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 24, 23–50. Retrieved fromhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1300/j019v24n01_03
TalbertJ. E. (2010). Professional learning communities at the crossroads: How systems hinder or engender change. In HargreavesA.LiebermanA.FullanM.HopkinsD. (Eds.), The second international handbook of educational change (pp. 555–571). New York, NY: Springer.
64.
TrotmanD. (2009). Networking for educational change: Concepts, impediments and opportunities for primary school professional learning communities. Professional Development in Education, 35, 341–356.
65.
VescioV.RossD.AdamsA. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 80–91.
66.
WasleyP. A.FineM.GladdenM.HollandN. E.KingS. P.MosakE.PowellL. C. (2000). Small schools: Great strides. New York, NY: Bank Street College of Education.
67.
WeglinskyH. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teaching quality. ETS: Princeton, NJ.
68.
WigginsG.McTigheJ. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
69.
WoodlandR.HuttonM. (2012). Evaluating organizational collaborations: Suggested entry points and strategies. American Journal of Evaluation, 33, 366–383.
70.
WoodlandR.KimM.RandallJ. (2013). A validation study of the teacher collaboration assessment survey. Educational Research and Evaluation: An International Journal of Theory and Practice, 19(5), 442–460.
71.
Yendol-HoppeyD.DanaN. F. (2010). Powerful professional development: Building expertise within the four walls of your school. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
72.
ZahorikJ. A. (1987). Teachers’ collegial interaction: An exploratory study. The Elementary School Journal, 87, 385–396.
73.
ZitoM. F. (2011). Is working together worth it? Examining the relationship between the quality of teacher collaboration, instruction and student learning. Open Access Dissertations (Paper 404). Retrieved fromhttp://scholarworks.umass.edu/open_access_dissertations/404
