Division K, in its focus on teacher research and teacher education, is uniquely positioned to highlight the work happening in PreK-12 classroom across the country. Every quarter, our Teacher x Research Spotlight will feature work of teacher research directly informed by, conducted by, or in conjunction with classroom teachers. This spotlight will shine on the potentials of inquiry projects and research agendas across a vibrant spectrum of the teaching profession at large, illuminating new pathways to answering education’s most pressing questions from those with an up-close view of our nation’s classrooms.
The spotlight will showcase one teacher research agenda/project on our blog per quarter, along with a description of the research framework, project description, and initial findings. If you are interested in being featured, please fill out the Interest Form with the requested details about your project.
The spotlight will showcase one teacher research agenda/project on our blog per quarter, along with a description of the research framework, project description, and initial findings. If you are interested in being featured, please fill out the Interest Form with the requested details about your project.
This quarter's Teacher Research spotlight features the work of Dr. Miriam Raider Roth. The practitioner inquiry.that led to the development of the notion of relational learning communities (RLCs) demonstrate how our own practice as teacher educators can help generate theory and practice. It underscores the importance of "insider research" and the kind of knowledge that is uniquely constructed by those who "live" in the classroom—teacher educators and teachers together.
Fall 2017 | Spotlight #2
Teacher Educators as Teacher Researchers: Relational Learning Communities in Professional Development
How can our work as teacher educators be sites of knowledge generation about teacher education? Over the past decade the Center for Studies in Jewish Education and Culture at the University of Cincinnati has been asking this question as we plan, implement and evaluate the professional development opportunities that we offer to teachers across North America. One example of this kind of systematic reflection on practice is discussed in Dr. Miriam Raider-Roth's recent book (2017), Professional Development in Relational Learning Communities; Teachers in Connection. This book is rooted in practitioner action research studies of three summer seminars in which teachers came together to study the teaching and learning of Jewish culture in their classrooms. Hailing from public, private, urban, rural PK-12 schools that were both secular as well as parochial, the teachers gathered for week-long seminars to deepen their content knowledge as well as pedagogical practices. While Jewish culture was the focus, our hope was to create a model that could be applied to the study of many cultures.
Designing rigorous studies of our practice as teacher educators and of the participants’ perceptions of learning was a cornerstone of our work. This figure illustrates how our research informed each iteration of our work as well as the field of professional development.
Teacher Educators as Teacher Researchers: Relational Learning Communities in Professional Development
How can our work as teacher educators be sites of knowledge generation about teacher education? Over the past decade the Center for Studies in Jewish Education and Culture at the University of Cincinnati has been asking this question as we plan, implement and evaluate the professional development opportunities that we offer to teachers across North America. One example of this kind of systematic reflection on practice is discussed in Dr. Miriam Raider-Roth's recent book (2017), Professional Development in Relational Learning Communities; Teachers in Connection. This book is rooted in practitioner action research studies of three summer seminars in which teachers came together to study the teaching and learning of Jewish culture in their classrooms. Hailing from public, private, urban, rural PK-12 schools that were both secular as well as parochial, the teachers gathered for week-long seminars to deepen their content knowledge as well as pedagogical practices. While Jewish culture was the focus, our hope was to create a model that could be applied to the study of many cultures.
Designing rigorous studies of our practice as teacher educators and of the participants’ perceptions of learning was a cornerstone of our work. This figure illustrates how our research informed each iteration of our work as well as the field of professional development.
Fig. 1: Research Design Cycle
By creating an iterative study of these seminars, our aims were both to improve the quality of teaching and learning in the local context and also to "go public" with the work to inform the field and garner important feedback from peers in the field (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009). Having both the local and global purposes in mind, the research team sought to be responsive to Christine Sleeter's call that "teacher educators themselves be active shapers of a shared and usable research agenda on teacher education" (p. 146).
One important outcome of this study was understanding the importance of relational awareness for both the teacher educators and participants. Through studying teachers' reflections on their learning that occurred during and after the seminars, in addition to in-depth open-ended interviews conducted 3-6 months after the seminars, the researchers developed the notion of relational learning communities (RLC) and their place in supporting teachers' learning of complex subject matter, like the study of culture.
Building on a rich history of research on professional learning communities and communities of practice (e.g. Allen, 2013, Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009; Little, 2006; Wenger, 1998), RLCs pay explicit attention "the the construction and nurturing of relationships between and among participants, facilitators, texts/content, and context" (Raider-Roth, 2017, p.2). RLCs are differentiated from other models in that RLC facilitators need to build and refine their relational awareness. In other words, they need to build the capacity to attend to the dynamics of relationships between all the partners in the learning process, detect when relationships fall apart of disconnect, and create opportunities for repairing those relationships. RLCs also teach participants the skills of relational awareness so that members of the community can take responsibility for one another's learning.
One important outcome of this study was understanding the importance of relational awareness for both the teacher educators and participants. Through studying teachers' reflections on their learning that occurred during and after the seminars, in addition to in-depth open-ended interviews conducted 3-6 months after the seminars, the researchers developed the notion of relational learning communities (RLC) and their place in supporting teachers' learning of complex subject matter, like the study of culture.
Building on a rich history of research on professional learning communities and communities of practice (e.g. Allen, 2013, Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009; Little, 2006; Wenger, 1998), RLCs pay explicit attention "the the construction and nurturing of relationships between and among participants, facilitators, texts/content, and context" (Raider-Roth, 2017, p.2). RLCs are differentiated from other models in that RLC facilitators need to build and refine their relational awareness. In other words, they need to build the capacity to attend to the dynamics of relationships between all the partners in the learning process, detect when relationships fall apart of disconnect, and create opportunities for repairing those relationships. RLCs also teach participants the skills of relational awareness so that members of the community can take responsibility for one another's learning.
RLCs are differentiated from other models in that RLC facilitators need to build and refine their relational awareness...they need to build the capacity to attend to the dynamics of relationships between all the partners in the learning process."
Tamar, a middle school humanities teacher recounted: "The unaccustomed sense of responsibility for another student's learning...forced me to think simultaneously as a student and teacher. It caused me to slow down to pay attention to my learning partner and to think metacognitively about how I was learning the material and whether there were other ways to approach it." As Tamar details this kind of work is profoundly psychological, intellectual, and contextual.
Another essential finding was that RLCs which focus on the teaching and learning of culture may challenge participants' personal, professional, and cultural identities. This kind of challenge is often necessary in order to let go of assumptions and bias and to open the capacity to build new knowledge and assume other perspectives.
This kind of work can be fundamentally unsettling, and without careful consideration, can reify bias rather than break it down. The RLC framework with building a holding environment (Kegan, 1994), where trust is built, interpersonal relationships are nurtured, and intrapersonal reflective time is protected. Sonia, an artist and congregational school teacher, described this environment as a place where "we did a lot of development work to lower our barriers, to trust each other, and to be able to challenge and be challenged."
Then built into the curriculum of the RLC are opportunities to engage in relational-cultural pedagogies such as hevruta text study (Holzer with Kent, 2013)—curricularized paired learning based on the traditional text study practice, descriptive practices (Himley & Carini, 2000), and historiographical inquiry (Raider, 2010). Common to these pedagogies are practices that help participants learn to observe and describe texts and artifacts, support and challenge their colleagues' learning and voice nascent ideas as they emerge. This kind of intentional environment, together with the associated pedagogies and practices can create a learning context for teachers to build a new knowledge that can then be brought back to their teaching contexts.
Hadassah, a middle school science teacher described her experience: "I became more aware of my voice as a learning. I became more aware of my presence as a teacher. I gained a greater understanding of the significance of learning with a partner and what that relationship stands for."
Another essential finding was that RLCs which focus on the teaching and learning of culture may challenge participants' personal, professional, and cultural identities. This kind of challenge is often necessary in order to let go of assumptions and bias and to open the capacity to build new knowledge and assume other perspectives.
This kind of work can be fundamentally unsettling, and without careful consideration, can reify bias rather than break it down. The RLC framework with building a holding environment (Kegan, 1994), where trust is built, interpersonal relationships are nurtured, and intrapersonal reflective time is protected. Sonia, an artist and congregational school teacher, described this environment as a place where "we did a lot of development work to lower our barriers, to trust each other, and to be able to challenge and be challenged."
Then built into the curriculum of the RLC are opportunities to engage in relational-cultural pedagogies such as hevruta text study (Holzer with Kent, 2013)—curricularized paired learning based on the traditional text study practice, descriptive practices (Himley & Carini, 2000), and historiographical inquiry (Raider, 2010). Common to these pedagogies are practices that help participants learn to observe and describe texts and artifacts, support and challenge their colleagues' learning and voice nascent ideas as they emerge. This kind of intentional environment, together with the associated pedagogies and practices can create a learning context for teachers to build a new knowledge that can then be brought back to their teaching contexts.
Hadassah, a middle school science teacher described her experience: "I became more aware of my voice as a learning. I became more aware of my presence as a teacher. I gained a greater understanding of the significance of learning with a partner and what that relationship stands for."
References
Allen, D. (2013). Powerful teacher learning: What the theatre arts teach about collaboration. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Himley, M., & Carini, P. F. (2000). From another angle: Children’s strengths and school standards. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Holzer, E. (with Kent, O.). (2013). A philosophy of havruta: Understanding and teaching the art of text study in pairs. Brighton, MA: Academic Studies Press.
Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Little, J. W. (2006). Professional community and professional development in the learning-centered school [Best practices learning paper]. Washington DC: National Education Association.
Raider, M. (2010). Education and Jewish studies. Unpublished manuscript, distributed at Summer Seminar, Cincinnati, OH.
Raider-Roth, M. (2017). Professional development in relational learning communities: Teachers in connection. New York: Teachers College Press.
Sleeter, C. E. (2014). Toward teacher education research that informs policy. Educational Researcher, 43(3), 146–153.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Allen, D. (2013). Powerful teacher learning: What the theatre arts teach about collaboration. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Himley, M., & Carini, P. F. (2000). From another angle: Children’s strengths and school standards. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Holzer, E. (with Kent, O.). (2013). A philosophy of havruta: Understanding and teaching the art of text study in pairs. Brighton, MA: Academic Studies Press.
Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Little, J. W. (2006). Professional community and professional development in the learning-centered school [Best practices learning paper]. Washington DC: National Education Association.
Raider, M. (2010). Education and Jewish studies. Unpublished manuscript, distributed at Summer Seminar, Cincinnati, OH.
Raider-Roth, M. (2017). Professional development in relational learning communities: Teachers in connection. New York: Teachers College Press.
Sleeter, C. E. (2014). Toward teacher education research that informs policy. Educational Researcher, 43(3), 146–153.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
To see more Division K teacher research work we have featured, visit our Past Spotlights!
Have transformative teacher research you'd like us to feature here on the blog? Let us know about it using the interest form.
(Link opens in a new window)
(Link opens in a new window)