Concept Paper beginning draft

I am working on a second draft of my concept paper. My first draft was completed for my AOR KA and I am expanding and refining it for a second draft that I will share with my disseration committee at the end of the month at National Session in Atlanta. I now have a fairly good picture of what my research plan is. I know more or less how I will conduct research, what instruments will be needed, data collection methods and some ideas for data analysis methods.

My rationale is in fair form. I would like to continue to develop it as the proposal stage moves along.

My literature review is non-existent. I have done 3-4 database searches and have generated abstract and citation lists for quite a few articles and research studies. The latest search on dialogue/pedagogy/teachers was most promising as I was able to find close to 8 dissertations that relate to my topic. I am excited to read them. I need to continue to do searches related to my topic and do some bibliography scans for the foundational theorists in my topic area.

Here is draft 2 of my concept paper:

Colmenarez
Concept Paper Draft [2]
7/11/09

Oppression is transformed through praxis; [t]o no longer be prey to its force, one must emerge from it and turn upon it. This can be done only by means of the praxis: reflection and action upon the world in order to transform it
Freire (1998)

Working Title: Change in Classroom Practice through Critical Transformative Dialogue within Supported Communities of Practice in a K-12 School District

Research Question: Does critical transformative dialogue within a community of practice change instructional practices?

Rationale:
I seek to understand the conditions that support critical transformative dialogue in teacher learning communities. I want to understand how teachers experience transformative dialogue from a critical stance and what supports it. I will study this phenomena within a supported communities of practice structure in a K-12 school district (resources to support communities of practice is being provided by an outside foundation). The challenge of supporting open-ended dialogue in teacher learning communities is compounded by the universal power/knowledge relationship that silences subjugated knowledges and promotes the status quo (Foucault, 1972). This is a fractal relationship that occurs at global, national and local levels.

Schools are mechanized systems that oppress underserved communities (Foucault 1972, Kozol 2005, Said 1978). The domain and strategic intent of this particular community of practice effort is differentiated instruction. Differentiated instruction reflects a shift from a one-size fits all curriculum and pedagogy to a customized approach that brings student assets and needs into the tailoring of instruction. It challenges the status quo and attempts to address needs of underserved students.

Introducing supported communities of practice in a school district is a political act that supports autonomy and networked structures. Teachers have autonomy by exercising choice in their learning. They choose the literacy practice that they want to learn in community on. The network structure of communities of practice alone challenges the traditional hierarchical/mechanistic structure of present-day schools. Networks are the organizing structure of living systems (Capra, 1996) and represent a paradigmatic shift from the fragmented and isolating structures of schools to structures that support learning in a living systems paradigm.

As teachers examine their practice, dialogue about practice and previously held pedagogical assumptions and beliefs ensues. Dialogue can be instrumental, improving accepted practices, or transformative, challenging accepted practices (Servage, 2008). Transformative dialogue challenges accepted methods (process) and bodies of knowledge (content) and has the potential to inspire transformation in individuals and collectives. It is within the realm of transformative dialogue that individuals question their assumptions and beliefs and can more explicitly connect reflection with action. Praxis, connecting reflection with action, transforms oppressive dynamics (Freire, 1972).

Few studies on critical transformative dialogue within teacher learning communities exist. Most work has been done on how teacher learning communities improve practice but not that question practices and connect them to a critical perspective (Servage, 2008). It is my intent to try and understand how a critical stance is nurtured within communities of practice.

Literature Review

I will discuss dialogue, transformative learning, systems and critical pedagogy. I am still looking for research done on critical transformative dialogue within teacher learning communities.

Plan of Research: Context

This mid-sized, urban K-12 school district is situated in Southern California and has a diverse student population, largely Hispanic, Asian and white. Over the past 30 years it has changed from a predominantly white middle-class student population to an ethnically, linguistically and economically diverse population. The instructional practices of the past no longer match student needs and educators seek new ways to engage students in learning.

The school district is involved in a whole systems change effort supported by an outside foundation. The foundation partnership is a 5 year commitment that formally began in the 2006-2007 school year. Activities of the partnership over the past 3 years included a baseline assessment, support of the construction of a strategic plan, and broad engagement activities in professional learning around data, learner-centered principles and change in a living systems paradigm. The mission statement crafted during the construction of the strategic plan reflects the districts desire to put student learning at the center of schooling. The mission statement is as follows:

The mission of the _______ school district, the progressive international community united in learning, is to empower students so that each actualizes his or her unique potential and responsibly contributes to a global society, through a system distinguished by rigorous academics, innovative use of technology, creative exploration, and nurturing learning experiences.

Apart from the mission statement, the strategic plan consists of a set of beliefs, parameters, objectives and strategies. At the heart of the strategic plan is the “transform[ation] of teaching and learning to ensure the actualization of each students’ unique potential” (strategic plan). The district plans to achieve this through the implementation of learning principles and the identification of teaching principles unique to the district. These teaching and learning principle are lived out through the praxis of teachers as they implement and reflect on their practice.

In the 2009-2010 school year, the district will formally launch a communities of practice effort to connect teachers and administrators around instructional, organizational and leadership practices. The foundation will provide financial resources (e.g. money for substitutes and professional learning materials) and coaching and consulting support. The domain for all communities of practice will be differentiated instruction in literacy. This domain is captured in an inquiry question for all communities of practice to use: how will differentiating instruction in literacy improve student outcomes?

Four strands of role-type groups will characterize the communities of practice effort. The strands are the executive leadership team, the newly formed instructional cabinet, site-based leadership teams (1 principal and 3-4 teachers from each site) and teacher-based instructional communities of practice, called the Literacy Network. The Literacy Network is comprised of a set of communities of practice focusing on instruction. Though the communities of practice are comprised primarily of teachers, principals, vice principals, literacy coaches and parent coordinators are also members. Parents will also be invited into the community of practice centered on parent engagement. People have self-selected into communities of practice around a particular passion, need or interest in an instructional practice. Currently, there are 13 identified instructional communities of practice with membership ranging from 5 to 30 members each. Total membership in the Literacy Network stands at approximately 150 teachers, support staff and administrators. It is this strand of communities of practice, the Literacy Network, that will be the representative group from which I invite participants into my research study.

Plan of Research: Timeline

I plan to have my dissertation proposal, IRB application and district research study approvals complete by December so that I may begin data collection in January. This will require submittals far in advance of December, in case any revisions need to be made before final approval.

Data collection will begin in January 2010 and end in June of 2010. I will conduct data analysis over the summer and complete writing chapters in the Fall of 2010. I hope to have the dissertation complete by December 2010.

Figure 1: Dissertation Timeline
Time
Dissertation Activity
July-October 2009
Write dissertation proposal, IRB application, and district research study application
October-December 2009
Get approval on dissertation proposal, IRB application and district research study application.

Invite participants
January-June 2010
Collect Data
June 2010- September 2010
Analyze Data
September 2010-December 2010
Complete Dissertation writing (Chapters 4-5)

Schedule Oral Review


Plan of Research: Procedures and Limitations

I will invite participants from instructional communities of practice in the Literacy Network. Participants need to agree to participate in the study and allow audio recording as part of the data collection procedure. They need to understand that, as part of the research study, I and other of their colleagues will be collecting data on dialogue within a community of practice meetings as well as in classroom observations. I need to be sensitive to the perceptions of evaluation in data collection. To mitigate this, I will attempt to spend time in the classrooms of likely participants in the Fall to lessen the effect of observation on the behaviors of teachers and students in the classroom. Trust is an important factor in obtaining trustworthy data. I have, over the past year, in working with members of the Literacy Network, built a level of trust that I think will contribute to the collection of trustworthy data.

The sample population of my research study is a self-selected group of teachers and administrators. Choice is an important part of learning and has been an organizing feature in the forming of communities of practice. Communities of practice members choose to participate in communities of practice, choose the content of which they study (the instructional practice) and choose the people they want to work with (their community). This study will be limited to this group of educators who may by the nature of participation, represent motivated and social learners who are willing to take risks (communities of practice are a new way of professional learning for these educators).

I will use an action research orientation to my investigation. I will work closely with 1-2 communities of practice from the period of January-June. No more than 30 people will participate in this study altogether. Previous to January, I will have invited participants, and selected the communities with which I will be working. For both the pre-assessment in January and the post-assessment in June, I will use a surveys, interviews, and observation (group dialogue and classroom instruction) as methods to collect data. In all three methods, I seek to understand how teachers experience transformative practice, what supports transformation of their practice, and how they are actually changing instruction in classrooms. During the surveys and interviews, I will probe for any relationship that teachers see between dialogue and changing practice. Interviews and group dialogue sessions will be recorded using an audio recording device and fieldnotes.

Classroom observations are part of vital communities of practice. I will seek additional substitute time (2 days for all participants) to conduct observations in January (pre-assessment) and June (post assessment) for data collection purposes. As a community of practice, we will collect data on the actual practices happening in a few classrooms. I will create an observation instrument and protocol and follow-up observations with group reflection. This reflection will constitute the group dialogue structure from which I collect audio and fieldnote data. I will collect these classroom observation instruments and along with surveys and interview data, I will analyze for pre and post assessments.

I will use constant comparative analysis (maybe discourse analysis) and Atlas Ti program to analyze transcripts of audio records and written data. In late February or early March, I will feedback data to the respective communities of practice for reflection. Jointly, we will reflect on data collected and make adjustments to work based on the evidence of changing practice. Teachers will implement changes and continue to reflect on intermittent data they collect in March-April.

In May-June, I will conduct the final data collection process. I will collect surveys, observe dialogue within a community of practice, conduct classroom observations and interviews. I will use survey, interviews and classroom observations and dialogue observations for analysis using constant comparative analysis and/or discourse analysis.


Figure 2: Data Collection Schedule
Time
Activities
January

Pre-Assessment
Survey-All

Classroom Observations (as many classrooms as possible) with CoP group reflection as follow-up

Interviews-individual or group (not sure yet)
February-April

Analysis, Reflection, Implications for Action
Analyze pre-assessment data

Feedback data and reflect in CoP. Make recommendations for action

CoPs continue to collect intermittent data, reflect and adjust actions
Late May-Early June

Post-Assessment
Survey-All

Classroom Observations (as many classrooms as possible) with CoP group reflection as follow-up

Interviews-individual or group (not sure yet)
Fall 2010
Feedback summary of complete study to participants and district


Expectations


References
Aronowitz, S., & Giroux, H. (1991). Postmodern education: Politics, culture, and social criticism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Capra, F. (1996). The web of life. New York: Anchor Books.

Clark, C., Moss, P., Goering, S., Herter, R. J., Lamar, B., Leonard, D., Robbins, S., Russell, M., Templin, M., Wascha, K. (1996). Collaboration as dialogue: teachers and researchers engaged in conversation and professional development. American Educational Research Journal. 33 (1) 193-231.

Foucault, M. (1972). Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977. New York: Pantheon Books

Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of the oppressed. (1970). New York: The Continuum International Publishing Group.

Giroux, H. (1992). Border crossings: Cultural workers and the politics of education. New York: Routledge.

Harris, A. (2008). Leading innovation and change: knowledge creation by schools for schools. European Journal of Education, 43 (2) 219-228.

Kozol, J. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of Apartheid schooling in America. New York: Crown Publishers.

Penlington, C. (2007). Dialogue as a catalyst for teacher change: A conceptual analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1304-1316.

Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Random House.

Servage, L. (2008). Critical and transformative practices in professional learning communities. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35 (1) 2008. 63-77.

Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Wood, D. (2007). Teachers’ learning communities: Catalyst for change or a new infrastructure for the status quo? Teachers College Record, 109 (3) 699-739.