Learning from collaboration: the role of teacher qualities.

Learning from collaboration: the role of teacher qualities. Teachers learning and working together to achieve common goals isconsidered by many scholars to be a central element of major schoolreform efforts, including those aimed at improving the inclusion ofstudents with disabilities in general education settings(Darling-Hammond & McLaughlin, 1995; Johnson & Bauer, 1992;Pugach & Johnson, 2002). The assumption is that when teachers worktogether to achieve a common vision, they will be able to change theirinstructional practices in important ways. "In collaborativeworking environments, teachers have the potential to create thecollective capacity for initiating and sustaining ongoing improvement intheir professional practice so each student they serve can receive thehighest quality of education possible" (Pugach & Johnson, 2002,p. 6). Inherent in this call for collaboration is that the act ofplanning and working together, by itself, is a powerful professionaldevelopment tool. One only has to turn to descriptions of different collaborativearrangements in the literature and their assumed power for creatingchange to understand that collaboration is viewed as essential topromoting teacher learning (Rogers & Babinski Ba��bin��ski, Joseph Fran?ois Felix 1857-1932.French neurologist who described the diagnostic relevance of Babinski's reflex. , 2002; Thousand &Villa, 1992). Professional development schools, teacher study groups,teacher-researcher partnerships, professional learning communities, peercoaching, collaborative consultation, co-teaching, collaborativeproblem-solving, and teacher mentoring all assume that teachers canlearn when given the opportunity to work together. Moreover, researchershave demonstrated that teachers (and ultimately their students) benefitfrom opportunities to work and learn together (Louis, Kruse, &Marks, 1996; Pugach & Johnson, 1995; Rosenholtz, 1989; Snyder, 1994;Trent, 1998; Walther-Thomas, 1997). These research findings combinedwith scholars' assertions about the importance of collaboration inchanging teacher practice have led to its widespread acceptance as anessential component of any effort aimed at improving teaching. Although the literature provides many examples of how collaborativeefforts result in positive changes for teachers generally, we do notknow much about how individual teachers respond to collaboration. Do allteachers learn equally from working together? Or, do some teachersprofit a great deal while others profit very little? Moreover, whatindividual factors enable some teachers to profit more than others fromcollaboration? Previous research on staff development and collaborationsuggests that individual teachers do not profit equally even when theconditions supporting collaboration are positive (Elmore, Peterson,& McCarthey, 1996; Klingner, 2004; Vaughn, Hughes, Schumm, &Klingner, 1998). Certain teachers are likely to learn a lot and othersare likely to not learn much at all. Studies in the professional development and teacher collaborationliteratureprovide evidence that opportunities to work together with researchersor other teachers do not always result in equivalent learning outcomes,even when teachers work in similar organizational contexts. Researchersexamining teachers' adoption and sustained use of effectiveinnovations for students with disabilities show that teachers benefitdifferently from collaborative opportunities to learn (Klingner, 2004;Klingner, Vaughn, Hughes, & Arguelles, 1999). In these studies,classroom teachers were involved in collaborative professionaldevelopment CPD in the context of NCETM means Collaborative Professional Development (not "Continuing Professional Development" as in some other contexts).The essence of "Collaborative" is that teachers work in groups and develop skills together. efforts aimed at learning research-based innovations toimprove the learning of students with disabilities. Although manyteachers learned the innovations and continued to use them, not allteachers benefited equally. For the most part, researchers blamedorganizational conditions and feasibility of the innovation for standingin the way of innovation adoption and sustained use (Greenwood Greenwood.1 City (1990 pop. 26,265), Johnson co., central Ind.; settled 1822, inc. as a city 1960. A residential suburb of Indianapolis, Greenwood is in a retail shopping area. Manufactures include motor vehicle parts and metal products. , 1998;Klingner). However, researchers also acknowledged that even when theorganizational conditions for promoting change were just right (e.g.,administrative support for change and sufficient resources to changepractice) and the instructional innovation was feasible, some teachersadopted and engaged in sustained use of innovations and others did not(Abbott, Walton, Tapia & Greenwood, 1999; Klingner; Vaughn et al.,1998). Researchers concluded from these studies that a mismatch mismatch1. in blood transfusions and transplantation immunology, an incompatibility between potential donor and recipient.2. one or more nucleotides in one of the double strands in a nucleic acid molecule without complementary nucleotides in the same position on the other betweenthe teachers' style or personality and the instructional practice,problems adapting the instruction to suit their style or student needs,lack of in-depth understanding of the practice, disinterest dis��in��ter��est?n.1. Freedom from selfish bias or self-interest; impartiality.2. Lack of interest; indifference.tr.v.To divest of interest.Noun 1. in learningthe strategy, and forgetting to use or how to use a practice eitherfacilitated or hindered sustained use. In general education, similar findings exist. For example, Elmoreet al. (1996) studied three schools that restructured to promote teachercollaboration around literacy instruction. These researchers found thatdespite opportunities and supports for collaborative dialogue aroundliteracy instruction, teachers had difficulty changing practice. Whenteachers held different conceptions of literacy pedagogy, they haddifficulty learning from each other. Consequently, Elmore and hiscolleagues concluded that opportunities to collaborate on literacyinstruction were necessary, but insufficient, for improving teacherlearning. What teachers knew and believed about literacy instructionalso played a role in teacher learning. In a different study, Ryan(1999) found that teachers in middle school teaching teams who helddifferent conceptions of teaching roles and beliefs about curriculum andinstruction varied in the extent to which they engaged in collaboration.Teachers whose views differed most were least likely to collaborate.Teachers also tended to maintain one conception of teaching, suggestingthey learned little from teachers with different views. These studies demonstrate that individual teachers responddifferently to collaborative professional learning opportunities andraise awareness that individual differences in teacher beliefs andknowledge may result in different learning outcomes. They do not,however, provide in-depth information about how knowledge, skills, andbeliefs work together to enable some teachers to adapt an innovation andcontinue its use and yet others abandon it. Researchers make generalstatements about the contributions of beliefs, knowledge, andpersonality to innovation adoption (Klingner, 2004; Vaughn et al.,1998), and when they do provide a deeper analysis, it focuses primarilyon the role of attitudes and beliefs about teaching and learning(Richardson & Placier, 2001). Researchers have not demonstrated, inmuch depth, how beliefs and knowledge about content and students mightwork together to allow teachers to profit or not profit fromprofessional collaboration. We predict that the impact of collaborationon practice varies by how well the information that teachers acquirefrom peers complements their existing knowledge and beliefs aboutcontent, pedagogy, and students. Teachers are sure to bring differentknowledge, skills, beliefs, motivations, and understandings aboutstudents to the learning process. Because they build on differentfoundations of prior understandings and beliefs, we expect that theyadapt and use interventions acquired during collaboration differentlyeven when organizational conditions for change are equal. Moreover,teachers equally predisposed pre��dis��pose?v. pre��dis��posed, pre��dis��pos��ing, pre��dis��pos��esv.tr.1. a. To make (someone) inclined to something in advance: toward a particular practice may vary onthe degree to which they implement it and the quality of theirimplementation because of variances in their existing knowledge. Thus,the benefits of collaboration will likely vary as a function of ateacher's existing knowledge and beliefs and their congruence con��gru��ence?n.1. a. Agreement, harmony, conformity, or correspondence.b. An instance of this: "What an extraordinary congruence of genius and era" withnew knowledge. Without understanding how individual teacher qualities influence ateacher's ability to profit from collaborative learning Collaborative learning is an umbrella term for a variety of approaches in education that involve joint intellectual effort by students or students and teachers. Collaborative learning refers to methodologies and environments in which learners engage in a common task in which each opportunities, we have no way of understanding how to gauge thepotential success of such efforts or determine what type ofcollaborative structures general education teachers need to learneffective strategies for students with disabilities and other high-riskpopulations. Professional collaboration is an important medium forteacher learning, but researchers need to better understand whatindividual teachers bring to the process and how those individualqualities assist them in applying what they have learned to practice.Many special education scholars believe that collaboration is anessential component of any professional development effort aimed athelping classroom teachers learn to address the needs of students withdisabilities (Darling-Hammond & McLaughlin, 1995; Johnson &Bauer, 1992; Pugach & Johnson, 2002). This belief is so widely heldthat researchers have failed to examine in depth how individual generaleducation teachers might respond to professional collaboration and whatthese individual responses mean for implementing professionaldevelopment efforts aimed at improving the education of students withdisabilities and other struggling learners. General educators play aprimary role in the education of students with disabilities, and oftenthey report feeling unprepared to undertake this role. Deeperunderstanding of how and why they respond differentially to professionalcollaboration is imperative to improving their practice, and ultimately,the inclusion of students with disabilities in their classroom. TEACHER LEARNING COHORTS This study was part of a larger, federally funded, 3-year studydesigned to investigate the use of Teacher Learning Cohorts (TLC TLCtotal lung capacity; thin-layer chromatography. TLCabbr.1. thin-layer chromatography2. ) forpromoting teacher learning about instructing students struggling tolearn as well as students with disabilities. We designed the TLC to be aprofessional development process driven by collaborativeproblem-solving, focusing on what teachers felt they needed to change intheir teaching practice. In doing so, we incorporated processes andstrategies from the research-to-practice and staff developmentliterature (Englert & Tarrant, 1995; Gersten, Vaughn, Deshler, &Schiller, 1997), including (a) providing concrete examples ofinnovations tailored to teachers' classrooms and instructionalpractices, (b) discussing how innovations may be used, (c) providingrepeated opportunities for collaborative discussions about innovations,and (d) giving feedback on the use of innovations. To determine teachers' needs, TLC researchers observed them intheir classrooms and asked questions during both formal and informalmeetings about classroom practices they wanted to improve.Research-based classroom practices, known to be effective with studentswith disabilities and high-risk learners (e.g., classwide peer tutoring;cooperative learning cooperative learningEducation theory A student-centered teaching strategy in which heterogeneous groups of students work to achieve a common academic goal–eg, completing a case study or a evaluating a QC problem. See Problem-based learning, Socratic method. structures; cognitive strategies for reading andwriting; positive reinforcement positive reinforcement,n a technique used to encourage a desirable behavior. Also calledpositive feedback, in which the patient or subject receives encouraging and favorable communication from another person. ; behavioral behavioralpertaining to behavior.behavioral disorderssee vice.behavioral seizuresee psychomotor seizure. contracts; self-monitoringstrategies for changing behavior; peer-mediated conflict resolutionskills; phonological awareness Phonological awareness is the conscious sensitivity to the sound structure of language. It includes the ability to auditorily distinguish parts of speech, such as syllables and phonemes. and fluency flu��ent?adj.1. a. Able to express oneself readily and effortlessly: a fluent speaker; fluent in three languages.b. building strategies;strategies for solving basic mathematics operations; curriculum-basedmeasurement Curriculum-based measurement, or CBM, is an assessment method used in schools to monitor student progress by directly assessing basic academic skills in reading, spelling, writing, and mathematics. ; and responsive classroom strategies, including morningmeeting, designed to improve students' social relations) werediscussed at group meetings. These research-based practices wereselected because they have strong potential for helping students withdisabilities and other struggling learners progress academically andbehaviorally in general education classrooms. During meetings, teachersor researchers provided concrete demonstrations of how these practicescould be implemented. In addition, teachers modeled practices in theirclassrooms to show their TLC colleagues how to use an innovation. AllTLC teachers selected practices to implement. The TLC also provided astructure for discussing classroom problems and describing how teacherswere implementing innovations. TLC researchers served as "criticalfriends" to TLC participants both in their classrooms and atmeetings. Through observations, researchers provided feedback on howbetter to involve students exhibiting emotional and learning problems ininstruction. The researchers also provided feedback on teachers'use of innovations in their classrooms and the quality of thecollaborative process. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY In this study, we examined the pedagogical ped��a��gog��ic? also ped��a��gog��i��caladj.1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of pedagogy.2. Characterized by pedantic formality: a haughty, pedagogic manner. practices and beliefs ofteachers who were adopting practices geared toward improving theeducation of students with disabilities and other high-risk students asa result of their TLC participation. We extended previous research oncollaboration and innovation sustainability by describing in more detailthose qualities that provide the basis for differences in teachers'adoption of innovations (Abbott et al., 1999; Elmore et al., 1996;Greenwood, 1998; Klingner, 2004; Klingner et al., 1999; Vaughn et al.,1998). We wanted to know what role personal qualities played inteachers' acquisition and use of practices learned in collaborativegroups and what variation in teacher qualities meant for structuringteacher collaboration. METHODOLOGY We used case study methodology to study eight general educationteachers involved in the TLC process at two urban schools (Miles &Huberman, 1994; Yin, 1994). The schools, Hidden View Elementary andHilton Elementary (both pseudonyms This article gives a list of pseudonyms, in various categories. Pseudonyms are similar to, but distinct from, secret identities. Artists, sculptors, architectsBalthus (Balthazar Klossowski de Rola) Bramantino (Bartolomeo Suardi) ), were located in a city in theSoutheast. Because few research studies have documented how teacherqualities affect collaboration, we deemed qualitative case study auseful methodology for uncovering complex interactions that occurred. PARTICIPANTS AND CONTEXTS We selected two elementary schools with principals who wererecommended as capable leaders. The teachers at both schools agreed toparticipate in the project. Hidden View Elementary and Hilton Elementarywere 2 of 200 elementary schools in the city where the study waslocated. Hidden View Elementary, a regular education initiative school,had a student population of 570 students, of which 43.2% were minorityand 54.9% received free or reduced-price lunch. All children with milddisabilities were fully included in general education classrooms. TheTLC partnership with Hidden View Elementary existed for 4.5 years. Of the 382 students who attended Hilton Elementary, 73% wereminority and 84% received free or reduced-price lunch. Hilton Elementarywas a cluster school, serving nearly 50 children with physical andcognitive impairments, most in self-contained settings. Only a fewstudents were included in general education full time or part of theday. Hilton Elementary was involved in the TLC project for 3 years. We narrowed our focus on 8 of the 20 TLC teacher participants,purposively selected because they varied in their ability to adoptpractices from the TLC. Each teacher, however, demonstrated commitmentto the TLC through active and sustained participation. The teachers wereassigned as��sign?tr.v. as��signed, as��sign��ing, as��signs1. To set apart for a particular purpose; designate: assigned a day for the inspection.2. pseudonyms: Sarah, Brenda, Diane, Cindy, Marty, Lois, Carl, andMartha. The teachers included 1 African American African AmericanMulticulture A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.See Race. and 7 Caucasian Caucasianor Caucasoid:see race. teachers. Teaching experience ranged from 2 to 22 years. Participantsincluded 1 second-grade teacher, 1 teacher who taught both second andthird grade, 2 third-grade teachers, 2 fourth-grade teachers, and 2fifth-grade teachers. Seven of 8 teachers graduated from elementaryeducation elementary educationor primary educationTraditionally, the first stage of formal education, beginning at age 5–7 and ending at age 11–13. programs at either the undergraduate or graduate level; oneteacher majored in a content area and minored in elementary education.All teachers were certified See certification. or endorsed according to according toprep.1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.2. In keeping with: according to instructions.3. the licensure licensure(lī´snsh standards in their state. Three teachers were also certified in earlychildhood education and English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL ESOL English for Speakers of Other LanguagesESOL Endless Snorts of Stupid LaughterESOL Evaluator Series Online ).See Table 1 for details about each teacher. PARTICIPATING RESEARCHERS As researchers, we began this project with more than 60 years ofcombined experience in special education, general education, and schoolpsychology. Because of our backgrounds, we brought well-defined views ofeducation to the project that included both behavioral and cognitiveorientations to teacher learning and a strong emphasis on inclusion. Wefocused on accommodating individual students in the general educationclassroom by identifying their needs and adjusting curriculum, methods,behavior management behavior managementPsychology Any nonpharmacologic maneuver–eg contingency reinforcement–that is intended to correct behavioral problems in a child with a mental disorder–eg, ADHD. See Attention-deficit-hyperactivity syndrome. techniques, and/or instructional and behavioralexpectations. We also believed that the first step to solving manyinstructional and behavioral problems was highly effective instructionthat actively involved students. Moreover, we believed that teacherscould learn to better address the needs of struggling learners andstudents with disabilities through well-designed collaboration thathelped teachers learn powerful strategies. We felt that if teacherschanged their practices as a result of TLC participation andsubsequently noted student progress, they would become more committed toworking collaboratively in the TLC. The nature of the TLC required that we interact with teachersfrequently. We were helping to facilitate collaboration as well ashelping teachers gain access to research-based practices. In addition,observing teachers, providing feedback, and attending meetings helped usbecome insiders in the school community. Teachers often confided in usabout frustrations with colleagues and shared personal issues. We becameparticipant observers. DATA COLLECTED Data collection involved formal and informal classroomobservations, teacher and principal interviews, field notes of meetings,debriefing de��brief��ing?n.1. The act or process of debriefing or of being debriefed.2. The information imparted during the process of being debriefed.Noun 1. notes from project staff discussions, and documentation ofinformal conversations with participants. The following provides adetailed description of the data sources. Formal Classroom Observations. These data were collected using thePathwise diagnostic and instructional observation system, a version ofPRAXIS prax��is?n. pl. prax��es1. Practical application or exercise of a branch of learning.2. Habitual or established practice; custom. III (Educational Testing Services [ETS ETS Educational Testing Service (nonprofit private educational testing and measurement organization)ETS Emergency Telecommunications ServiceETS Electronic Trading SystemETS Engineering (&)Technical Services ], 1995). Data from thePathwise observation system were used only to triangulate See triangulation. findingssecured first through analyses of other qualitative data (see thefollowing). We chose Pathwise because it is a well-recognized evaluationsystem that yields both narrative descriptions of teaching practices aswell as quantitative ratings for data analysis. We assessed teachers bydirectly observing classroom instruction, reviewing teacher-preparedwritten documentation, and conducting semi-structured interviews witheach teacher before and after observations. On the basis of this recordof evidence, teachers were rated on 19 criteria organized into fourdomains: (a) Domain A: organizing content knowledge for studentlearning, (b) Domain B: creating an environment for student learningwith an emphasis on classroom management, (c) Domain C: teaching forstudent learning, and (d) Domain D: teacher professionalism professionalismthe upholding by individuals of the principles, laws, ethics and conventions of their profession. with anemphasis on reflection. Domain scores range from 1.0 to 3.5, with 1.0being the lowest and 3.5 being the highest score possible. Acrossdomains there was a focus on a teacher's ability to consider theneeds of individual students and adjust instruction or managementtechniques accordingly. Scoring and summaries of Pathwise observationstook approximately 2 hr per teacher. Project staff observed each TLCteacher twice using Pathwise. Prior to Pathwise observations, teachers prepared writtendocumentation including a detailed lesson plan, description of theirclassroom, and demographic information for themselves and theirstudents. During lessons, we took anecdotal anecdotal/an��ec��do��tal/ (an?ek-do��t'l) based on case histories rather than on controlled clinical trials. anecdotaladjective Unsubstantiated; occurring as single or isolated event. notes documenting positiveand negative evidence for Domains B and C (ETS, 1995). Semistructuredinterviews occurred before and after observations and probed forinformation about conceptualization con��cep��tu��al��ize?v. con��cep��tu��al��ized, con��cep��tu��al��iz��ing, con��cep��tu��al��iz��esv.tr.To form a concept or concepts of, and especially to interpret in a conceptual way: of instruction (Domain A) andreflection on implementation of the lesson plan (Domain D). Informal Observations. These data were collected at least fourtimes a year for 1 to 2 hr per observation over the 3 years of thestudy. We took field notes during each classroom visit, constructing arunning narrative of classroom events. For approximately 80% ofobservations, we conducted informal postobservation conferences toobtain teachers' perceptions of the lesson and how well studentshaving academic or behavioral difficulties responded. We also providedfeedback on academic and behavioral concerns. Semistructured Interviews. We conducted two semistructured,individual interviews per year with TLC teachers and their schoolprincipals. Interviews lasted approximately 1 hr. Interview questionsvaried and were selected to gather data related to project goals andresearch questions. Topics included (a) teachers' beliefs aboutinstruction and management, (b) descriptions of strugglingstudents' academic and behavioral needs and how to address them,(c) the nature of TLC collaboration, and (d) barriers and supports forcollaboration. We altered interview protocols in Year 2 to gather moreinformation about issues emerging from the data, specifically thoserelated to teacher leadership and learning. Meeting Minutes and Researcher Reflections. Meetings occurred onceor twice a month and generally lasted 1 to 1.5 hr. During the meetings,we took notes documenting the agendas, discussions, and interactions ofthe group. Following meetings and school visits, we documented informalconversations and general information gathered during the visit, as wellas our initial reactions. DATA ANALYSIS During data collection and analysis, we used three strategies toestablish trustworthiness trustworthinessEthics A principle in which a person both deserves the trust of others and does not violate that trust : (a) triangulation triangulation:see geodesy. The use of two known coordinates to determine the location of a third. Used by ship captains for centuries to navigate on the high seas, triangulation is employed in GPS receivers to pinpoint their current location on earth. of multiple sources ofevidence, (b) peer debriefing during data coding and theme development,and (c) member checks involving TLC teachers. As a first level ofanalysis, we recorded informal reflections for each meeting, classroomobservation, and school visit, making notes about issues and conceptsthat were emerging in the research. We then generated a list of codes, coded all sources of evidenceindependently, and then met to compare and contrast data analysis. Forexample, we compared data coded as effective instructional practicesfrom interviews and meetings to codes from observations (e.g., makingcontent understandable) to develop the theme "Understands how tostructure instruction for struggling students." Once themes wereidentified, we met and discussed whether they appropriately capturedindividual examples from the data. Also, we wrote yearly reports basedon analyzed an��a��lyze?tr.v. an��a��lyzed, an��a��lyz��ing, an��a��lyz��es1. To examine methodically by separating into parts and studying their interrelations.2. Chemistry To make a chemical analysis of.3. data. TLC participants read these reports and providedfeedback. FINDINGS Although we expected teachers to differ in their ability to usestrategies acquired in the TLC, we did not realize the degree to whichthey would vary. Some acquired strategies readily, whereas others usedfew strategies, and their propensity to adopt strategies seemed to havelittle to do with their experience, preparation, or school context.Using data from meetings, interviews, and classroom observations, weidentified various levels of adoption and outlined qualifies thatdistinguished high adopters, moderate adopters, and low adopters. Wefound five characteristics that influenced teachers' willingness toadopt strategies learned in TLC meetings. TLC LEARNER OUTCOMES: THE CONTINUUM Continuum (pl. -tinua or -tinuums) can refer to: Continuum (theory), anything that goes through a gradual transition from one condition, to a different condition, without any abrupt changes or "discontinuities" FROM HIGH TO LOW ADOPTERS Some teachers quickly implemented new strategies, whereas others,despite their willingness to learn and discuss ideas, implementedinnovations poorly, or not at all. We classified teachers as high,moderate, and low adopters based on our perceptions of how frequentlyand willingly they adopted strategies learned in the TLC. In thefollowing narrative, we use examples from observations and meetings todescribe teachers' varying levels of adoption. High adopters were teachers who quickly incorporated new practicesinto their classroom. These teachers were always working on at least onestrategy they had acquired in the group, both behavioral and academic.They were also willing to try strategies that were teacher directed andstudent directed. Moderate adopters used many practices but wereinconsistent in their willingness to adopt certain practices. Lowadopters were the least willing to adopt new practices and often haddifficulty using the new strategy. The three high adopters were always interested in using somethingnew. For instance, one high adopter attended a meeting where one of usbriefly suggested she score correct letter sequences on spelling testsrather than whole words as correct or incorrect. At the next meeting,she described for the group how she was now giving students credit forspelling parts of a word correctly: I am using a [scoring system] where students get credit for partially correct spellings. For example, if a child writes DUG for the word dog, he or she would receive credit for the d and g. The kids' spelling has improved dramatically. There is not enough space on my bulletin board to post all the good spelling tests kids are turning in. The two other high adopters were also quick to implementsuggestions. For example, after Diane missed a meeting, we gave her thereading materials we distributed, which described Classwide PeerTutoring (CWPT CWPT Civil War Preservation Trust ). At the next meeting, she was the only teacher to haveimplemented the CWPT procedures. With one exception, remaining teachersneeded direct assistance from one of us to implement what they hadlearned. Moderate adopters used certain classroom practices and ignoredothers. Over the course of the project, one of the three implementedCWPT, began teaching students multiple strategies for comprehendingtext, and even developed her own strategies for teaching studentsvocabulary, incorporating some of the concepts learned from CWPT; Morethan the other two teachers, she voiced a need to do things differentlyto meet students' needs. The other two moderate adopters changedless. They were willing to use some strategies but ignored many others.For instance, although one was quick to incorporate CWPT for reading,she resisted using more explicit cognitive strategy instruction. Shetold us she had used a summarization sum��ma��rize?intr. & tr.v. sum��ma��rized, sum��ma��riz��ing, sum��ma��riz��esTo make a summary or make a summary of.sum strategy "only a fewtimes," even though we spent months discussing it and providedspecific, concrete ways to use it. She found teaching the strategyunexciting and limiting, and she enjoyed being more spontaneous spontaneous/spon��ta��ne��ous/ (spon-ta��ne-us)1. voluntary; instinctive.2. occurring without external influence.spontaneoushaving no apparent external cause. .Although her TLC colleagues presented many interesting and engagingideas for explicitly teaching summarization, she seemed unwilling, andperhaps unable, to capitalize on Cap´i`tal`ize on`v. t. 1. To turn (an opportunity) to one's advantage; to take advantage of (a situation); to profit from; as, to capitalize onan opponent's mistakes s>. those ideas. There were two low adopters. With considerable assistance, oneimplemented CWPT, used more positive classroom management techniques,and implemented a strategic program for teaching basic math operations.The other tried strategies that his colleagues suggested to rewardbehavior (e.g., putting a marble in the jar to reward the class forappropriate behavior), but decided to do so only when he realized thathe had to do something about the behavior in his class, and the TLCreading materials he encountered kept stressing the need to managebehavior using positive approaches. He refused to implement CWPT,morning meetings (designed to build classroom community), and anyreading strategies, asserting that reading "was not his cup oftea" or that his students lacked the skills for cooperative work. QUALITIES THAT DIFFERENTIATE LEVELS OF ADOPTION As we examined differences among teachers based on theirwillingness to use TLC strategies, we noticed that they differed inimportant ways. High adopters had the most (a) knowledge of curriculumand pedagogy, (b) knowledge and student-friendly beliefs about managingstudent behavior, (c) student-focused views of instruction, and (d)ability to carefully reflect on students' learning. High adoptersalso were able to adapt strategies to meet students' needs, whichin all likelihood derived from the other four qualities. Teachersconsidered moderate adopters varied more dramatically on the fiveinstructional qualities. Finally, low adopters ranked lowest on the fiveinstructional qualities. We used Pathwise scores on Domains A, B, C, and D to triangulatedata from informal observations and the other data sources to separatethe eight teachers into three groups. These Pathwise domains assessedability to (a) organize instruction, (b) create a well-managed andsupportive environment for instruction, (c) carry out cohesive cohesive,n the capability to cohere or stick together to form a mass. instruction, and (d) be professional and reflect on student learning andinstruction. Pathwise scores for the three high adopters wereconsistently higher than other teachers in all four measured domains(see Table 1). Furthermore, differences in Pathwise scores between thesethree teachers and the other five participants were most substantial inDomain A, the domain that measured ability to organize content knowledgefor student learning. The second Pathwise tier consisted of two teacherswe judged to be moderate adopters (Marty and Cindy) who were high on onecategory and moderate on the other four instructional qualities. Onemoderate adopter (Lois) and the two low adopters (Martha and Carl) madeup the bottom Pathwise tier. Knowledge of Curriculum and Pedagogy. High adopters wereconsistently the most knowledgeable teachers. They knew that high-riskstudents needed explicit, systematic instruction that was engaging andgeared to their needs. These teachers could see quickly how ideaspresented in the TLC fit within their curriculum and what they knewabout instruction. Moderate and low adopters were less knowledgeable,took longer to grasp ideas, and did not always implement them well. Someof these teachers needed to have ideas explained in detail and woulddiscard ideas they did not appear to comprehend. When asked why they were teaching specific strategies or contentand how to teach high-risk students in urban schools, high adoptersprovided precise answers that demonstrated their understanding of how toteach struggling learners. For example, Sarah emphasized the need to beexplicit and systematic. She said, The teacher must be very aware of the children's Understanding [of content] and present things more systematically. The students need things broken down. The teachers need to be willing to make adjustments, take longer, try new things.... You have to be tuned in to what is going on with the children. Sometimes you have to restructure your activities based on the students' needs. When we observed high adopters, their instruction was explicit, andcontent was relevant and interesting to children. These teachers couldarticulate articulate/ar��tic��u��late/ (ahr-tik��u-lat)1. to pronounce clearly and distinctly.2. to make speech sounds by manipulation of the vocal organs.3. to express in coherent verbal form.4. why they were teaching a particular concept or strategy andcould develop instruction that was clear and engaging. Sarah'slesson on cause and effect was a good example. In describing her lesson,Sarah talked about the importance of beginning a lesson with clear andengaging examples so students would understand the concept and bemotivated mo��ti��vate?tr.v. mo��ti��vat��ed, mo��ti��vat��ing, mo��ti��vatesTo provide with an incentive; move to action; impel.mo to participate. So, Sarah began the lesson by saying"underwear." As Sarah predicted, all the students responded,"Yuck." Thus, Sarah had the opportunity she was hoping for, topoint out that her statement was a cause and the students' responsewas an effect. Because the students also found this example humorous,Sarah had captured their attention. She followed with more examples andan interactive lesson involving all students acting out causes andeffects. During follow-up follow-up,n the process of monitoring the progress of a patient after a period of active treatment.follow-upsubsequent.follow-up plan independent work, very few students haddifficulty distinguishing cause and effect. The moderate and low adopters were less knowledgeable aboutpedagogy but also were strikingly different from one another. Onemoderate adopter had well-developed knowledge about science and socialstudies curriculum and some knowledge of pedagogy. She was willing touse innovations, but often took longer to determine how to incorporatethem or needed more prompting and support to do so. She could articulatethe need to incorporate cooperative learning strategies into instructionbut did not seem to know how to do so consistently. Many times in herclassroom, we observed that students were reading from textbooks andwriting answers independently with little teacher interaction. Althoughher instruction was never the most interesting, it often was focused onimportant concepts and organized to involve all students. During the3-year study she began to incorporate more cooperative activities andbetter questioning techniques. One low adopter appeared least knowledgeable about both Content andpedagogy. When we first observed in her classroom, we found studentscompleting one independent seatwork seat��work?n.Lessons assigned to be done by students at their desks in the classroom. assignment after another. Thisteacher seemed unable to articulate why she was teaching certain skills.For instance, when she first learned CWPT, she raved about theprogram's ability to "cut down on behavior problems and getthem ready for learning." However, she never commented about howthe program had helped her students to become stronger in math. Knowledge and Beliefs About Managing Student Behavior. TeachersVaried considerably in their beliefs about what constituted appropriateclassroom behavior and a teacher's role in helping children learnto behave. High adopters held two beliefs about managing studentbehavior. First, they acknowledged that well-designed instruction can goa long way toward eliminating behavior problems. Second, they judgedteaching behavior to be as important as teaching academics. Highadopters believed interesting instruction was foundational to classroommanagement, and this belief was evident in how they spoke about theirclassrooms. For instance, one remarked that she was willing to invest agood deal of money in interesting books, materials, and games for thestudents. From her perspective, "spending the money was worth itbecause it made life easier in the classroom." She and other highadopters knew that when children were interested and busy, they wereless likely to be disruptive disruptive/dis��rup��tive/ (-tiv)1. bursting apart; rending.2. causing confusion or disorder. . As a consequence, these teachers took toinstructional techniques such as CWPT that engaged children. High adopters also realized that actively teaching discipline inpositive ways was an important goal of education. They knew how to setup a classroom; they emphasized positive discipline and helped childrenreflect on and change their behavior. As a result, they were mostcapable of helping children with behavior problems. Diane, for example,talked frequently about the importance of teaching children to becomebetter citizens in the classroom and community. In one TLC meeting, shestarted by providing a rationale for character education. She spoke withpassion about the problems occurring in schools because students do notknow how to interact in respectful re��spect��ful?adj.Showing or marked by proper respect.re��spectful��ly adv. and responsible ways with oneanother. As she modeled her approach to character education, it becameapparent how she explicitly teaches responsibility and cooperation. Shedescribed how she highlights qualities by using literature and praiseschildren when they exhibit these qualities in class. She also explainedhow she encourages students to notice other children when theydemonstrate these behaviors. Brenda also realized the importance of teaching childrenappropriate behaviors. When asked what she learned from the challengesin her first year of teaching, she responded, "I realized there isa whole lot more to school than academics. [My first year] made merealize that while teaching academics, I had to teach social skills andmanners." Because she believed teaching behavior was important,Brenda recognized the importance of praising children for appropriatebehavior both as a class and individually. She also knew it wasimportant to provide individual supports for children having the mostdifficulty behaving. For instance, when asked what good teachers do tomanage the behavior of high-risk students, Brenda said, "Goodteachers use behavior modification behavior modificationn.1. The use of basic learning techniques, such as conditioning, biofeedback, reinforcement, or aversion therapy, to teach simple skills or alter undesirable behavior.2. See behavior therapy. charts and break the time that achild has to ... demonstrate appropriate behavior [into smallerintervals]." The moderate adopters differed in that they believed so strongly inthe significance of academic engagement that they failed to recognizethe importance of actively teaching students more appropriate behavior.Instead, these teachers focused exclusively on making instructioninteresting and engaging while downplaying the importance of teachingchildren to behave. One moderate adopter often claimed that goodinstruction made classroom management problems disappear. In aninterview, she remarked, "I eliminate a lot of behavior problems bystructuring lessons. There is no time for behavior problems during myclass. Students have behavior problems before class, in the hall, and inrecess, but not during instruction, normally." Her heavy emphasison instruction, however, often meant she ignored promising managementstrategies presented by her colleagues. For instance, after a jointmeeting between Hilton and Hidden View, she remarked, Meeting with teachers from the other schools was beneficial. I listened to ideas, but I'm so focused on teaching reading that other things are immaterial to me, like morning meetings.... I can't lose sight of my primary objective, teaching reading.... Every minute of my day is scheduled, so there's no wasted time. I don't have time for kids to sit in a circle and hold hands. Although she and several other teachers were able to usewell-structured instruction to help most students, they struggled whenconfronted with more serious behavior problems. More often than not,they would blame children who exhibited the most significant problemsrather than consider adopting more proactive, positive disciplinetechniques. The two low adopters held rigid expectations for student behaviorbut viewed responsibility for managing student behavior differently thanthe other teachers. Martha believed teaching behavior was an importantgoal in her classroom and that she had a moral duty to help allchildren, especially those who were the most trying. Thus, she wouldoften consider changing behavior management practices beforeinstructional practices. In meetings, she focused almost exclusively onconcerns about student behavior. For instance, she monopolized an earlymeeting with concerns about a student and the punitive pu��ni��tive?adj.Inflicting or aiming to inflict punishment; punishing.[Medieval Latin pn strategies shehad used to deal with her. When we observed this child, she seemedrestless restless,adj in Chinese medicine, pertaining to either an abundance of heat energy, in conjunction with redness of face or to overstimulation in which case the face will be pale or greenish. but not excessively disruptive. It was clear from ourconversations and observations that Martha had a low tolerance forbehavior she considered inappropriate and did not know how to use moreproactive or positive strategies to either prevent or reduce behavioraldifficulties. Over time, her concerns about student behavior and hercommitment to help children ultimately enabled her to adopt newbehavioral strategies and become less punitive. As one of us noted inYear 2, "I was hoping to go in and model more positive behaviorsfor Martha, but she was already doing that. I saw Martha giving outpraise and helpful suggestions to the students about how to improvetheir writing." Even Martha acknowledged that TLC had really helpedher "to see the importance of positive interactions withstudents." Carl, in contrast, did not feel responsible for changingstudents' behavior. In fact, he resented having to play this role.He responded strongly to our suggestions that he use more positivemanagement techniques. Specifically, he remarked, I am not going to change my approach to discipline. There is good behavior and bad behavior, and that is it. I do not believe all this behavior modification stuff. Schools should be able to get rid of kids who are disrupting the classroom. I am tired of people telling us that we need to adapt to these kids and set up behavior modification programs. Kids should know how to behave, and that's it. On the bright side, Carl began to make small changes. As hestruggled with students' behavior, particularly in the second year,he knew he needed to change. Often he indicated the need to work onusing more positive reinforcement. For example, he agreed to read anarticle about schoolwide positive approaches to behavior management andto explain the content to his colleagues. Views of Teaching and Student Learning. High adopters had thestrongest student-focused views of instruction, considering academic andbehavioral needs of the class and individual child. These teachers werethe most willing to implement peer learning and management techniques,cognitive strategy instruction, and self-management techniques. Highadopters realized they could not approach students using standardizedcurriculum or strategies. Moreover, these teachers often valuedpeer-mediated approaches to address diversity and foster a positiveclassroom community. Brenda recognized the importance of consideringboth the child's academic and social needs and was not one simplyto follow the text. She realized early on that many of her students hadtoo many needs to teach them in a standardized fashion. In an interview,reflecting on her first teaching experience, also in an urban school,she said, "I could not rely on textbooks and teacher guides.... Ineeded to adjust to students' abilities." Because of herbeliefs, this high adopter thought carefully about struggling studentsand sought to identify how to help them. Another high adopter had a sophisticated, student-centered view oflearning. She believed strongly in creating student choice, helpingchildren learn to work together, and fostering an environment that wasinteresting to children. She created opportunities throughout the dayfor children to choose. She told us that "self-selection readingtime was an important way to incorporate student choice in thecurriculum." She also developed learning centers to support orenrich concepts learned in class, and students had considerable choicein selecting centers. She frequently used cooperative learning and otherstudent-centered strategies and said that students needed opportunitiesto work together and direct their learning, otherwise they would neveracquire the social skills necessary to be successful adults. As sheplanned curriculum, she often considered what would interest and engagechildren. For example, at Thanksgiving Thanksgivingannual U.S. holiday celebrating harvest and yearly blessings; originated with Pilgrims (1621). [Am. Culture: EB, IX: 922]See : AmericaThanksgivingnational holiday with luxurious dinner as chief ritual. [Am. Pop. , she taught a unit about earlyAmerican life. She had students study quilt making and make a quilt,visit a nearby town where people demonstrated colonial crafts, and writeletters using quills. She followed these experiences with acollaborative writing The term collaborative writing refers to projects where written works are created by multiple people together (collaboratively) rather than individually. Some projects are overseen by an editor or editorial team, but many grow without any of this top-down oversight. assignment in which writing strategies studentswere learning and knowledge gained from these experiences wereintegrated. By contrast, the other high adopter and the three moderate adoptersvacillated between teacher-controlled and student-focused orientations.One high adopter was willing to implement conflict resolution techniquesin her classroom but was reluctant to implement cooperative group work.She felt "that the type of students we have will not learn unlessyou are looking over their shoulder." A moderate adopter believedthat cooperative learning was critical to fostering a positive andsupportive classroom environment, and she saw herself as a facilitator,fading fadingfading skin coloring. See Arabian fading syndrome (below). Declining in body condition, general health, activity and productivity.Arabian fading syndromegeneral health is unimpaired. into the background of student activity. She arranged anelaborate science activity that took children several weeks to completeand was almost exclusively student-directed. Students were allowed toselect a science topic, to conduct experiments, and to decide on amanner of presentation. When the students did not cooperate, however,the teacher immediately switched to a more teacher-centered approach.Instead of teaching students to work cooperatively, she held out workingtogether as a reward for students "when they learned to actright." The low adopters demonstrated the most teacher-centered view oflearning. During observations, we noticed that one of them failed tonotice an opportunity to facilitate children working together, andinstead, emphasized behavioral control. For instance, after reading astory about building a dream house, students were asked to draw apicture of their dream house. The teacher provided instructions forcompleting the drawing and reminded students to use many differentcolors to make their dream house "pretty." She instructed themnot to look at each other's drawings because that "would becheating" and reminded them that this was a"noncommunicating" time. On other occasions, she would insistthat students not work ahead in their textbook textbookInformatics A treatise on a particular subject. See Bible. until the entire classwas ready to move on. Ability to Reflect on Students' Learning. High adopters werethe most reflective Refers to light hitting an opaque surface such as a printed page or mirror and bouncing back. See reflective media and reflective LCD. about their instructional practices and classroommanagement. During interviews and postobservation conversations, theseteachers demonstrated an ability to think about the entire class as wellas individual students. They were adept at identifying individualstudents' needs, took responsibility for finding ways to meet them,and were most reflective about academic learning and classroommanagement. Diane was the most reflective TLC member. She always considered howher entire class and individual students were progressing academicallyand socially and wondered what she could do to remedy their problems.She thought a lot about the purpose of instruction and whether she wasachieving those purposes. For instance, Diane was assigned to teachreading to the designated second grade inclusion classroom. Afterlistening to discussions about the importance of fluency in several TLCmeetings, Diane decided she needed to do something different to helpstudents who had difficulty reading the basal text. She organized smallgroup instruction in decodable texts geared to students' readinglevels. At the same time, she also began to conduct fluency timings. Sheused these data to determine whether she was achieving her aims. Two others, Sarah and Mary, also gave much thought to howindividual students were learning, but they sometimes failed torecognize a need to change. Sarah could provide detailed descriptions ofhow students were performing and the steps she undertook to help them,but sometimes blamed students for inappropriate behavior or theirfailure to learn. For instance, one of us watched Sarah teach a lessonabout finding the main idea. Although the lesson was carefully designedand executed, it was too long. The children grew inattentive in��at��ten��tive?adj.Exhibiting a lack of attention; not attentive.inat��ten , and Sarahwas frustrated frus��trate?tr.v. frus��trat��ed, frus��trat��ing, frus��trates1. a. To prevent from accomplishing a purpose or fulfilling a desire; thwart: . When we suggested the lesson was too long, Sarahinsisted that the children could attend for that length of time but werechoosing not to. Later, she reconsidered her stance, as she often did,and we saw her teach shorter strategy lessons, more in tune with herstudents' attention spans. Two moderate adopters were thoughtful about their instruction, butnot as reflective as the teachers in the top group (which included theother moderate adopter). They seemed less able or less willing to adjusttheir practices to address student concerns. For instance, Cindyrecognized individual student needs and wanted to address them, but shedid not always change her practices accordingly. She would incorporatepeer-mediated strategies, yet she would not consider other adaptations.During Year 3 at Hidden View, she talked about the problems of punishing pun��ish?v. pun��ished, pun��ish��ing, pun��ish��esv.tr.1. To subject to a penalty for an offense, sin, or fault.2. To inflict a penalty for (an offense).3. students and sending them to detention The act of keeping back, restraining, or withholding, either accidentally or by design, a person or thing.Detention occurs whenever a police officer accosts an individual and restrains his or her freedom to walk away, or approaches and questions an individual, or stops an for not doing their homework. Sheknew this approach was not improving behavior or encouraging homeworkcompletion, but rather than consider more positive alternatives, shecontinued to rely on detention. Low adopters were least likely to reflect on their practices. Afterone lesson, one of them voiced concerns about two students who werefrequently off task. When asked what he was doing to remediate re��me��di��a��tion?n.The act or process of correcting a fault or deficiency: remediation of a learning disability.re��me theseproblems, he offered simplistic sim��plism?n.The tendency to oversimplify an issue or a problem by ignoring complexities or complications.[French simplisme, from simple, simple, from Old French; see simple strategies for getting their attention,such as calling their names or standing next to them. When one of usprompted him to generate other ideas for working with students, heredirected the conversation to a mother who refused to refer her son forspecial education. Ability to Adapt Instruction. High adopters were able to read oruse information independently to meet their students' needs. Theseteachers were "sponges" for information. Their ability toacquire new ideas and enact them quickly reflected the tremendousknowledge they had about students, content area pedagogy, behaviormanagement, and techniques for helping students direct their learning.It seemed that success bred success: The more success these teachersexperienced with TLC techniques, the more likely they were to implementadditional strategies. High adopters tried new strategies because theyknew they could adapt them to suit their teaching style and studentneeds. High adopters talked about many ideas learned in meetings, oftenfrom colleagues, or picked up from us informally. They integratedinformation from different sources to improve their instruction orroutines. Brenda offered a good case in point when she combined what sheknew of cooperative learning and CWPT. After learning about CWPT in aTLC meeting, Brenda felt it would be helpful for her class. Two weekslater, Brenda told the group that she had learned how to teach teamingskills in a district-sponsored workshop and that she intended to applywhat she had learned to introduce CWPT social skills. At the nextmeeting, she showed all the primary grade teachers her charts forteaching teaming and demonstrated how she used the characters PositivePatty and Negative Nellie See Sooty albatross to teach kids good team behaviors. Theteachers were mesmerized. Another high adopter used information that a colleague presentedfor teaching summarization and created a four-step strategy of her own.She first taught students to highlight key words and phrases Words and Phrases?A multivolume set of law books published by West Group containing thousands of judicial definitions of words and phrases, arranged alphabetically, from 1658 to the present. and to findthe main idea for each page of a story. She then had students drawpictures representing main ideas and record both the main ideas andpictures in a log. When the students finished these steps, she modeledhow they could use the strategy to summarize sum��ma��rize?intr. & tr.v. sum��ma��rized, sum��ma��riz��ing, sum��ma��riz��esTo make a summary or make a summary of.sum the whole story and askedthem to tell the story in as few words as possible. Two moderate adopters also were able to incorporate instructionalideas into existing routines, but they at first seemed reluctant. Cindy,for example, had difficulty seeing how she could use CWPT withoutencountering classroom management problems. With support, sheimplemented CWPT and, seeing the power of peer learning, began to adapther instruction to involve more peer learning. For Cindy, peer learningbecame an increasingly important tool. Ultimately, she taught skills,strategies, and content primarily through peer learning arrangements. Low adopters experienced the most difficulty adapting instruction.They would not attempt new strategies unless the innovation required fewchanges or support was provided. For instance, one tried to use thesummarization strategy but was unable to do so effectively. We watchedhim talk for 25 min while modeling summarization (prompting a student tocomplain, "Here is this man just talking again"). He laterexplained that he "thought students were not allowed to talk duringmodeling, that the teacher did all the talking." He did not pursuestrategy instruction further. Conversely con��verse?1?intr.v. con��versed, con��vers��ing, con��vers��es1. To engage in a spoken exchange of thoughts, ideas, or feelings; talk. See Synonyms at speak.2. , when suggestions were simpleand consistent with his views, he would implement them. After talking to Noun 1. talking to - a lengthy rebuke; "a good lecture was my father's idea of discipline"; "the teacher gave him a talking to"lecture, speechrebuke, reprehension, reprimand, reproof, reproval - an act or expression of criticism and censure; "he had to TLC colleagues about ways to help struggling readers, he was eager tolevel texts and count the number of minutes students spent reading. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS We began this 3-year project with assumptions about the benefit ofprofessional collaboration for helping general education teachersimprove their instruction for students with disabilities and high-risklearners. Like many education scholars, we believed teachers wouldbenefit from meeting with peers and a skilled facilitator over time toexplore problems and to learn how to implement new strategies. We weresurprised at the variability of teachers' responses toparticipation. All of the teachers adopted strategies, but some teachersacquired only one or two. We did not anticipate how little powerprofessional collaboration had for changing the practices of someteachers and wondered what this lack of progress means for helping allor most general education teachers acquire the skills and strategiesthey need to appropriately involve students with disabilities ininstruction. Our participants were volunteers, and they selected strategies forstudy. All eight teachers participated in TLCs for at least 2 years.During meetings, they engaged in discussions of student learning andidentified areas of difficulty on which to focus. New strategies werepresented and discussed, which for some teachers was all it took toimprove classroom practice. Others needed additional encouragement andsupport, and supports such as modeling and coaching were not alwaysenough. All teachers expressed a desire to continue with the TLC andfelt that it was valuable; they seemed eager to learn and grow. Why,then, did some teachers benefit so little? How did their individualqualities work together to enable them to use strategies? We found teachers who readily incorporated new practices differedin important ways from teachers who did not. Teachers who had a strongknowledge base to build on, who were able to consider the needs ofindividual students while responding to the whole class, and whosebeliefs closely aligned with the innovations we presented seemed tounderstand how to adapt novel strategies for their students and weremost likely to adopt them. By contrast, teachers who experienceddissonance in their beliefs, who could not make the needs of individualstudents a priority, or who lacked prerequisite pre��req��ui��site?adj.Required or necessary as a prior condition: Competence is prerequisite to promotion.n. knowledge struggled intheir attempts to use and adapt a strategy, often implementing thestrategy in routinized ways, and were likely to abandon it. It also isinteresting that high adopters received high Pathwise ratings. Ourdata--quantitative and qualitative alike--demonstrate how knowledge,beliefs, skills, and reflective ability work together to influence ateacher's benefit from collaborative professional developmentefforts. Clearly, our findings extend previous research on collaboration, inwhich variability in teaching learning is underplayed (Pugach &Johnson, 2002; Rogers & Babinski, 2002). In addition; our findingsextend special and general education research that is focused on theextent to which teachers implement practices learned throughprofessional development, and then sustain the use of those practices(Klingner, 2004; Vaughn et al., 1998). To date, research examiningcollaboration and sustained use of innovations has focused mostly onidentifying contextual barriers and facilitators that disrupt teacherlearning or collaboration (Klingner), or those attitudes and beliefsthat influence innovation adoption. At present, we do not have muchin-depth information about how the nature of teachers' individualknowledge and beliefs might interact to facilitate or hinder hin��der?1?v. hin��dered, hin��der��ing, hin��dersv.tr.1. To be or get in the way of.2. To obstruct or delay the progress of.v.intr. innovationadoption (Gersten et al., 1997; Klingner; Richardson & Placier,2001). Our study articulated the types of teacher qualities thatmattered in determining how to use an innovation and the ways in whichthose qualities interacted to influence what practices TLC teachersimplemented and their success in doing so. We also found thatteachers' ability to reflect simultaneously on the needs of thegroup and individual students played an important role in innovationadoption. Previous research on teacher education has established theimportance of teacher reflection to becoming a successful teacher;however, this research has not considered how reflection, knowledge, andbeliefs might work together to influence how teachers adapt innovationsand ultimately use them (Bolin, 1990; Griffiths & Tann, 1992;Korthagen, 1988). Moreover, the staff development and collaborationliterature has not examined how the ability to reflect on individualstudents and groups of students, in conjunction with teacher knowledgeand beliefs, influences how teachers adapt strategies and continue touse them (V. Richardson, personal communication, September 10, 2004). Teachers' individualistic in��di��vid��u��al��ist?n.1. One that asserts individuality by independence of thought and action.2. An advocate of individualism.in responses to collaboration in ourstudy and the Elmore et al. (1996) study suggested that havingcollaborative learning structures in place, and even a desire tocollaborate, will not create equal benefit for all participants. Infact, some teachers may benefit very little from well designedopportunities to learn from each other and researchers. Alternatively,some teachers may lust LustSee also Profligacy, Promiscuity.Aeshmafiend of evil passion. [Iranian Myth.: Leach, 17]Aholah and Aholibahlusty whores; bedded from Egypt to Babylon. [O.T.: Ezekiel 23:1–21]Alcinalustful fairy. [Ital. require a lot more information about how to usean innovation and support and time to do so. In addition, they may needhelp in understanding how to consider the needs of individual studentsin adapting a strategy for their classroom. We suggest, as does Klingner(2004), that differential levels of assistance may need to be providedto individual teachers based on their characteristics. Differences amongteachers in our study suggest the need to know more about how differentcollaborative structures affect groups of teachers as well asindividuals. Scholars need to know how curriculum and thesecollaborative structures provide opportunities for teacher learning.Research in general education suggests that structured collaborativelearning around curriculum that helps teachers understand how to takeaction in the classroom may be very effective in supporting teacherlearning (Cohen cohenor kohen(Hebrew: “priest”) Jewish priest descended from Zadok (a descendant of Aaron), priest at the First Temple of Jerusalem. The biblical priesthood was hereditary and male. & Ball, 2000). Staff developers, teacher educators,and others working to help teachers improve their practices need ways ofidentifying those teachers who require considerable assistance to useinnovations and consider ways of providing more learning support. However, providing different types of assistance raises a new setof research questions. What will these different types of assistancelook like? Will they involve more focused discussions of how to use andadapt innovations within current curriculum rather than just extensivelytraining teachers how to use a particular innovation with fidelity (apractice commonly used in the most intensive training efforts in specialeducation)? How will more intense; structures, such as modeling andcoaching, affect the use of new practices? Will more intense,collaborative supports for learning be more likely to influenceteachers' adoption of new practices, even when the practices are atodds with their current knowledge and conceptions of teaching andstudent learning? How can that assistance be provided without hamperingdevelopment of a shared vision for teacher learning or creating anoverreliance on experts? Will too much assistance foster dependence onexperts rather than interdependence among teachers, thus, hamperingteachers' collective capacity for continued learning? Also, what isthe feasibility of providing these more intense (and arguably ar��gu��a��ble?adj.1. Open to argument: an arguable question, still unresolved.2. That can be argued plausibly; defensible in argument: three arguable points of law. moreexpensive) collaborative supports? Finally, we note that in our study we defined benefit fromcollaboration in terms of practices adopted by teachers. However, theultimate benefit--that of improvement in student achievement is moredifficult to determine. We did not collect evidence of student learningas a result of changes in teacher practice related to participation incollaboration. Without that direct link to student achievement, it canbe argued that we are looking for change rather than improvement.Ultimately, professional collaborative efforts are important only ifthey help teachers change in ways that promote student learning. Answersto these and other questions will provide teachers, administrators, andteacher educators much needed information about implementing andsustaining collaborative professional development in schools so that allstudents will achieve. REFERENCES Abbott, M., Walton, C., Tapia, Y., & Greenwood, C. (1999).Research to practice: A blueprint blueprint,white-on-blue photographic print, commonly of a working drawing used during building or manufacturing. The plan is first drawn to scale on a special paper or tracing cloth through which light can penetrate. for closing the gap in local schools.Exceptional Children, 65, 339-352. Bolin, F. (1990). Helping student teachers think about teaching:Another look at Lou. Journal of Teacher Education, 41, 10-19. Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (2000). Instructional innovation:Reconsidering the story. Ann Arbor Ann Arbor,city (1990 pop. 109,592), seat of Washtenaw co., S Mich., on the Huron River; inc. 1851. It is a research and educational center, with a large number of government and industrial research and development firms, many in high-technology fields such as : University of Michigan (body, education) University of Michigan - A large cosmopolitan university in the Midwest USA. Over 50000 students are enrolled at the University of Michigan's three campuses. The students come from 50 states and over 100 foreign countries. , The Study ofInstructional Improvement. Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1995). Policies thatsupport professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan,76, 597-604. Educational Testing Service The Educational Testing Service (or ETS) is the world's largest private educational testing and measurement organization, operating on an annual budget of approximately $1.1 billion on a proforma basis in 2007. . (1995). Pathwise classroom observationsystem: Orientation guide. Washington, DC: Author. Elmore, R. F., Peterson, P. L., & McCarthey, S. J. (1996).Restructuring restructuring - The transformation from one representation form to another at the same relative abstraction level, while preserving the subject system's external behaviour (functionality and semantics). in the classroom: Teaching, learning, and schoolorganization. San Francisco San Francisco(săn frănsĭs`kō), city (1990 pop. 723,959), coextensive with San Francisco co., W Calif., on the tip of a peninsula between the Pacific Ocean and San Francisco Bay, which are connected by the strait known as the Golden : Jossey-Bass. Englert, C. S., & Tarrant, K. L. (1995). Creating collaborativecultures for educational change. Remedial REMEDIAL. That which affords a remedy; as, a remedial statute, or one which is made to supply some defects or abridge some superfluities of the common law. 1 131. Com. 86. The term remedial statute is also applied to those acts which give a new remedy. Esp. Pen. Act. 1. and Special Education, 16,325-336. Gersten, R., Vaughn, S., Deshler, D., & Schiller, E. (1997).What we know about using research findings: Implications for improvingspecial education practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30,466-476. Greenwood, C. R. (1998). Commentary: Align align (līn),v to move the teeth into their proper positions to conform to the line of occlusion. professionaldevelopment, classroom practice, and student progress in the curriculumand you'll improve general education for all students. LearningDisability Quarterly, 21, 75-84. Griffiths, S., & Tann, S. (1992). Using reflective practice tolink personal and public theories. Journal of Education for Teaching,18, 69-84. Johnson, L. J., & Bauer, A. M (t992). Meeting the needs ofspecial students: Legal, ethical and practical ramifications ramificationsnpl → Auswirkungen pl. NewburyPark, CA: Corwin Press. Klingner, J. K. (2004). The science of professional development.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 248-255. Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T., & Arguelles, M. E.(1999). Sustaining research-based practices in reading: A 3-yearfollow-up. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 263-274. Korthagen, F. A. (1988). The influence of learning orientations onthe development of reflective teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.),Teachers' professional learning (pp. 35-50). Philadelphia: Falmer. Louis, K., Kruse, S., & Marks, H. M. (1996). Schoolwideprofessional community. In F. M. Newmann (Ed.), Authentic achievement:Restructuring schools for intellectual quality (pp. 179-204). SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative dataanalysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks Thousand Oaks,residential city (1990 pop. 104,352), Ventura co., S Calif., in a farm area; inc. 1964. Avocados, citrus, vegetables, strawberries, and nursery products are grown. , CA: Sage. Pugach, M. C., & Johnson, L. J. (1995). Unlocking expertiseamong classroom teachers through structured dialogue: Extending researchon peer collaboration. Exceptional Children, 62, 101-110. Pugach, M. C., & Johnson, L. J. (2002). Collaborativepractitioners, collaborative schools (2nd ed.). Denver: Love Publishing. Richardson, V., & Placier, P. (2001). Teacher change. In V.Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.; pp.905-947). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Rogers, D., & Babinski, L. (2002). From isolation toconversation: Supporting new teachers' development. Albany, NY:State University of New York Press The State University of New York Press (or SUNY Press), founded in 1966, is a university press that is part of State University of New York system. External linkState University of New York Press . Rosenholtz, S. (1989). Teachers' workplace: The socialorganization of schools. White Plains, NY: Longman. Ryan, S. P. (1999). Examining the impact of collaborativestructures on teachers' work: Contexts, characteristics,consequences, and complications. Unpublished doctoral dissertation dis��ser��ta��tion?n.A lengthy, formal treatise, especially one written by a candidate for the doctoral degree at a university; a thesis.dissertationNoun1. ,University of California, Los Angeles UCLA comprises the College of Letters and Science (the primary undergraduate college), seven professional schools, and five professional Health Science schools. Since 2001, UCLA has enrolled over 33,000 total students, and that number is steadily rising. . Snyder, J. (1994). Perils and potentials: A tale of twoprofessional development schools. In L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.),Professional development schools: Schools for developing a profession(pp. 98-125). New York New York, state, United StatesNew York,Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of : Teachers College Press. Thousand, J. S., & Villa, R. A. (1992). Collaborative teams: Apowerful tool in school restructuring. In R. Villa, J. Thousand, W.Stainback, & S. Stainback (Eds.), Restructuring for caring andeffective education: An administrative guide to creating heterogeneous Not the same. Contrast with homogeneous. heterogeneous - Composed of unrelated parts, different in kind.Often used in the context of distributed systems that may be running different operating systems or network protocols (a heterogeneous network). schools (pp. 73-108). Baltimore Baltimore,city (1990 pop. 736,014), N central Md., surrounded by but politically independent of Baltimore co., on the Patapsco River estuary, an arm of Chesapeake Bay; inc. 1745. : Paul H. Brookes. Trent, S. C. (1998). False starts and other dilemmas of a secondarygeneral education collaborative teacher: A case study. Journal ofLearning Disabilities, 31, 503-513. Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T., Schumm, J. S., & Klingner, J.(1998). A collaborative effort to enhance reading and writinginstruction in inclusive classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly, 21,57-74. Walther-Thomas, C. S. (1997). Co-teaching experiences: The benefitsand problems that teachers and principals report over time. Journal ofLearning Disabilities, 30, 395-407. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nded.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. MARY T. BROWNELL (CEC (Central Electronic Complex) The set of hardware that defines a mainframe, which includes the CPU(s), memory, channels, controllers and power supplies included in the box. Some CECs, such as IBM's Multiprise 2000 and 3000, include data storage devices as well. FL Federation), Professor, Department ofSpecial Education, ALYSON ADAMS, Program Coordinator, Lastinger Center,PAUL SINDELAR (CEC FL Federation), Professor and Associate Dean forResearch, Department of Special Education, and NANCY WALDRON, AssociateProfessor, Educational Psychology, University of Florida University of Florida is the third-largest university in the United States, with 50,912 students (as of Fall 2006) and has the eighth-largest budget (nearly $1.9 billion per year). UF is home to 16 colleges and more than 150 research centers and institutes. , Gainesville.STEPHANIE VANHOVER Assistant Professor, Curry School of Education The Curry School of Education is a public school of education in the U.S. Located on the campus of the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, the Curry School offers professional programs designed to prepare individuals for a variety of careers related to the practice of ,University of Virginia Virginia, state, United StatesVirginia,state of the south-central United States. It is bordered by the Atlantic Ocean (E), North Carolina and Tennessee (S), Kentucky and West Virginia (W), and Maryland and the District of Columbia (N and NE). , Charlottesville. Address correspondence to Mary T. Brownell, Department of SpecialEducation, G315 Normal) Hall, Gainesville, FL 32611, 352-392-0701, ext.249. (e-mail: mbrownell@coe.ufl.edu) Manuscript manuscript,a handwritten work as distinguished from printing. The oldest manuscripts, those found in Egyptian tombs, were written on papyrus; the earliest dates from c.3500 B.C. received March 2004; accepted January 2005.TABLE 1Participant Certification/Endorsement, Experience, and Pathwise DomainScores Certification/ Years ofName School Grade Endorsement ExperienceBrenda Hilton 2-3 Elementary 3Sarah Hilton 3 Elementary 13Lois Hilton 5 Elementary 5Carl Hilton 5 Elementary 6Diane Hidden View 2 Elem, ECE, ESOL 22Martha Hidden View 3 Elem, ECE, ESOL 9Cindy Hidden View 4 Elem, ECE, ESOL 18Marty Hidden View 4 Elementary 2 Domain Scores ImplementationName Level A B C DBrenda High 2.7 3.4 3.0 3.0Sarah High 3.3 3.3 3.1 3.0Lois Moderate 1.9 2.6 2.4 2.4Carl Low 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.4Diane High 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.3Martha Low 2.0 2.6 2.0 2.4Cindy Moderate 2.4 2.7 2.7 2.9Marty Moderate 2.4 2.9 2.9 3.0Note. Domain A = organizing content knowledge for student learning;Domain B = creating an environment for student learning with anemphasis on classroom management; Domain C = teaching for studentlearning; and Domain D = teacher professionalism with an emphasis onreflection. Domain scores range from 1.0 to 3.5, with a score of 1.0representing the lowest score possible, and a score of 3.5 representingthe highest score possible. Elem = elementary; ECE = early childhoodeducation; ESOL = English for Speakers of Other Languages.