A School Board Member Addresses PLCs

This story is Part One of a series concerning the Northfield School District’s controversial adoption of Professional Learning Communities, or PLCs. Professional Learning Communities, in which teachers meet outside of class to evaluate student learning through data, have met with significant disapproval from some parents and others in the school district. This series is meant to allow for greater transparency on the issue:  What are PLCs? What do they do? Why are many members of the community unhappy with their implementation? I will be providing responses to such questions from a number of individuals, including teachers, a district curriculum coordinator, a parent, an anti-PLC “activist,” and, this week, a school board member. Also please note that this topic has been widely posted about on local online forums, including the Northfield News website and Locally Grown Northfield. I encourage you to refer to these posts for more information. I also encourage readers to post their own thoughts, observations, and questions! 

A School Board Member Speaks

I spoke with school board clerk Ellen Iverson, who proved an eloquent spokesperson for those who support Professional Learning Communities. In the interest of transparency and full disclosure, I should note that Iverson is also a Northfield.org board member. Furthermore, Ms. Iverson noted that she had not yet been elected to the school board when the district initially began planning the implementation of PLCs. However, since her election to the school board, Iverson has been a strong supporter of the PLC method. Ms. Iverson began our interview with her general definition of PLCs, saying that “PLCs are a method for teachers to collaborate, but the ultimate goal is to improve student learning.” 

Iverson traced the history Professional Learning Communities in the district, noting that the early release/late start days started approximately three years ago. During these two-hour blocks, occurring every other month, the district began “piloting” PLC-style learning. The past January, Iverson said, “was when the proposal first started to do this on a weekly basis for one hour, rather than every other month for two hours.” Iverson said that having PLC time every other month was not a great enough frequency “to get traction.”

Iverson,  "not having been on the school board back then,” didn’t know exactly why the district started looking at PLCs. She did note that the idea of incorporating PLCs came at a time when there were various cuts in the district that led to larger class sizes. It was at this time, Iverson says, that the district “started thinking ‘how can we still be successful’ given larger class sizes?" Iverson said that PLCs are one way “to continue to provide better ways for students to learn,” in spite of larger student-to-teacher ratios.

Iverson also said that the implementation of Professional Learning Communities was part of a “national conversation,” and that federal mandates such as No Child Left Behind have “really changed how we teach, and what assessments we have to do.” It was in conjunction with this national dialogue that several school administrators attended a forum led by Richard DuFour, whose particular PLC model the district eventually adopted. 

“Student-Centered” Teaching

Greater Transparency and the Future of PLCs

Iverson believes that a large part of the public dissatisfaction with the implementation of PLC time is attributable to a lack of transparency. She said she was surprised to find recently that many people still didn’t know what a Professional Learning Community was. “One of the big issues is that the district needs to be much more proactive” in letting parents know “how is it going to be measured? Why the weekly Wednesday late starts instead of a monthly late start?”  She says that in the near future, the school district will be providing newsletters and more information on their website.

Iverson says that providing empirical evidence may also be crucial in gaining public approval. One difficulty in providing empirical evidence of the PLCs’ success is that “the kids don’t take the MCAs [Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments, standardized tests] until April or May,” although Iverson says she “wants to see some data earlier than that.” In the meantime, the district and parents will need to “rely on” individual teacher assessments as signifiers of improvement. She stated that “there are a variety of different ways to measure the success of PLCs, but the important thing is that there is a way to measure it.”

Although Iverson was glad that PLCs would provide an easier way to measure progress, and is likely to “improve test scores,” Iverson says she’s “more interested” in seeing “stronger connections across curriculum” and in how PLCs “impact our approach to learning.” Iverson believes that Professional Learning Communities will lead to “deeper learning and stronger connections” for students. She hopes to see students not only memorizing “math facts” but also understanding “key concepts.” “The dream,” Iverson concluded, would be having broader connections “across schools,” so that key concepts, particularly “reading and writing” skills and ways of thinking carry over from “elementary school to middle school to high school.”

Addendum: Four documents from the school district concerning PLCs are available here.  They are:

1. Details of the 2009-10 School Calendar and Professional Learning Community Implementation. PDF.
2. FAQs about PLCs (posted on the district website in the spring of 2009). PDF.
3. Support for Professional Learning Communities in Northfield. PDF.
4. The PLC Big Picture (adapted from the work of Richard DuFour, et al.).  Word Document.