Tv Land Schedule

Teams define a personal and a professional journey

Most of my continual professional development and renewal over the past dozen years has been through my experiences as an interdisciplinary team teacher in two different high schools and two universities. In each of my team teaching experiences, I have learned new approaches to teaching and learning from my colleagues, I have learned more about myself as a collaborator, and I have learned new ways to reflect on my own teaching practice.

What fuels my passion even more than my own experiences are the testimonies of hundreds of other team teachers around the country who have had similarly positive experiences despite the lack of any widely read guides or commonly experienced professional development for implementing teaming. My current work with various Minneapolis and St. Paul high schools making the transition to small learning communities has only affirmed these perceptions.

High schools traditionally have been structured for efficiency, with departments formed around single subjects and standard, short class periods. But the resulting isolation, alienation, and disempowerment among students and teacheis have shown up in high dropout rates and school shootings.

A growing body of research shows that communal experiences such as teaming and small learning communities can help students learn (Kling & Zimmer, 2000; Lee, Smith, & Croninger, 1995; Nathan & Febey, 2001; Newmann & Wehlage, 1995; Raywid, 1999; Smith, 1993; Spies, 1998). Interdisciplinary teams can be structured in a variety of ways. Teaming structures range from two teachers teaching an integrated curriculum with a group of students in the same room for an extended time to five teachers from different subject areas having the same students in their individual classes with common planning time to discuss their common students and cross-curricular skills.

TEAMING PROMOTES RENEWAL

"I know 100 percent that I'm a better teacher because of the ideas and support I've received from my teammates."

- Holly Kragthorpe-Shirley, a social studies teacher at Washburn High School in Minneapolis, Minn.

Interdisciplinary teaming directly impacts teachers' professional lives, learning, and effectiveness. Teaming offers:

* New opportunities.

Interdisciplinary teams create new experiences and learning opportunities for teachers and ultimately students when teachers connect curricula, pool resources, and share responsibilities. Teaming allows teachers to extend learning beyond 50-minute periods and beyond their classroom walls. In each of the past two years, for example, I have witnessed how 16 9th-grade teachers and nearly 400 students have worked together within and across four teams at Washburn High School in Minneapolis to learn about environmental issues from the perspectives of science, social studies, English, and math. The teams use blocks of time for extended, community-based research, and they have a culminating Environmental Congress in which all the students develop, present, and debate resolutions to solve environmental problems. Such integrative experiences simply don't happen in traditionally structured high schools where teachers, students, curricula, and time are isolated and fragmented.

* New challenges leading to personal and professional growth.

Many teams' biggest challenge is learning to work with colleagues for a common purpose, but collegial effort is also a catalyst for continual professional development. Exposing to your colleagues what you do as a teacher and how you do it stretches you and can lead to personal and professional reflection. I was recently invited to meet with a 9th-grade team at a local high school where approximately half the students received D's or F's in three or more classes. We discussed interventions - contacting families, peer mentoring, focusing on student resiliency, and engaging students in a thematic, integrated curriculum related to their personal and social concerns. We explored reasons for underachievement, including students' perceptions of going to a "ghetto" school and the cultural incongruity between an all-white team of teachers and students who represent a wide variety of races, cultures, and nationalities. In a moment of critical self-reflection, one teacher publicly questioned how she was supporting student success for some and failure for others.

* Enhanced student perspective.

A key advantage of teaming is the opportunity to learn how a student behaves and achieves in other classes, causing teachers to re-examine their perceptions of students. As one of my teammates once said, "It's the difference between seeing a small black-and-white TV and watching a large, 3D screen with surround sound." I often ask teachers what it is like teaming vs. teaching alone. One team teacher wrote on a survey, "Having team teachers see how a student performs in all of his or her classes helps us meet their needs and learning styles. When they don't do well in my class, I learn about their strengths in other classes and it gives me hope and insight about the kid."

* Enhanced collegiality.

When I first began teaming on a four-person team, my knowledge of who taught at my school of 200 staff and 3,000 students increased three-fold because I was motivated to leave my social studies hallway and venture into other areas of the building. It always amused me when colleagues in other departments either kindly or jokingly asked, "Are you lost? Can I help you?" Eventually, these encounters turned into opportunities to discuss schoolwide issues beyond my department.

* Enhanced understanding of subject(s).

Team teachers learn more not only about curriculum areas other than their own, but also more about their own curricular area. Helping students search for meaningful connections, applications, synthesis, and coherence can be exciting for teachers who feel they know their own subject well. Perhaps the greatest excitement comes in the quest for coherence when teachers get students involved in planning and making connections centered on their personal and social concerns (Beane, 1995b & 1997). When I was part of an American Studies team with 30 students in an English as a second Language program, my teammate and I used five major themes for the year: What is an American?, Rights, Prejudice, War & Peace, and Immigration. Ultimately, our students were empowered not only with enhanced English reading, writing, and speaking skills, but by our efforts to connect our students' lived experience with important historical and current issues in the United States.

* Increased support.

Teaching is a difficult profession, and teachers need colleagues' support in good times and bad. Teaming helps teachers support each other daily so no one feels stranded on a deserted island of despair, especially teachers new to the profession. My first year on a team occurred as two high schools in Waukegan, Ill., merged into a school of 3,000 students and 200 staff despite incomplete school remodeling efforts. My teammates and I often commented on how it felt like we were in an oasis while the rest of the school was in chaos.

Washburn High School teacher Aaron Percy shared similar feelings about his experience with teaming: "Last year I felt so isolated. ... This year I have the support of a network of people. After last spring, I was honestly not thinking about teaching. This year has been such a 180-degree turnaround with ... our teaming structure. I couldn't imagine teaching 9th grade without teams."

* Real empowerment.

When I began my teaching career, I felt personally responsible for trying to meet the needs of the 125-150 students assigned to my classes. I felt overwhelmed because I felt like I had to do it all by myself. When I became part of a team of teachers who shared the same students and the responsibility for teaching them, I felt empowered. Our team worked together to better meet our students' needs by adjusting times, locations, and curricula. We also felt our needs as teachers were more often met because we could present a united voice and rationale for those changes to our administrators.

Interdisciplinary learning teams are site-based management in its truest form, because they empower those most intimately involved in decisions about teaching and learning.

* Enhanced efficacy.

No matter how masterful each teacher may become in his or her own classroom, no one person can accomplish as much as two or more people working well together. Teaming with colleagues enhances the chances of impacting students' lives. An interdisciplinary team of teachers working together to improve student attendance or student writing, for example, can be more successful than any teacher working alone. Success increases feelings of efficacy that are central to teacher motivation. Betsy Ford is a veteran math teacher at Washburn who once taught on successful middle school teams and then came to the high school, where initially there wasn't teaming. "You get the feeling like you're not doing your job very well when you're teaching alone and not on a team," she said.

OVERCOME IMPEDIMENTS

Despite evidence that teaming can have a positive impact on teacher and student attitudes, performance, and growth, high schools and teachers resist teaming. They may fear scheduling conflicts, personality conflicts, and losing control. Succumbing to fear, though, is akin to choosing a slow death, according to Robert Quinn (Sparks, 2001). And these impediments can be overcome.

* Fears about scheduling.

One reason I left teaching high school for a career in teacher education was the last school where I taught didn't have a team for me to join. In my previous positions, I felt like I had been to the promised land, and now I was back at an assembly line in a factory. Although I was hired partly because of my teaming experience, the assistant principal was unwilling to schedule more than the one existing two-person team, despite my effort to share examples of how more teaming could have been implemented.

Schedulers often fear teaming because it adds another variable to an already complex process. However, master schedulers know their work is largely a matter of prioritizing. The master scheduler must first understand the teaming concept and that it's essential for teachers to share the same students, class periods, and planning time during the school day. Assuming that teaming becomes a priority in the process of building the master schedule, the next step is to identify sections of students who enroll in two or more of the same courses. These become the students on the team(s). The scheduler can place team class periods on the master schedule with generic staff positions or with specific teachers in mind. Placing team class periods can also occur after special singletons (e.g., band) are on the master schedule. Next, the master scheduler makes a place for common team planning time during the school day (whether this is common personal preparation periods or additional team preparation time instead of another class). After teams with common students, class periods, and planning time have been created, then the rest of the master schedule can be built.

* Fears about personalities.

"What if we don't get along?" is a common fear among teachers joining a team, and may even keep them from agreeing to join. I've participated on largely dysfunctional and even somewhat stressful teams, but they were still better than being isolated as a teacher because our students formed a community, and I knew exactly who their other teachers were.

Team teachers must realize they are professionals. They do not have to be friends to work together. Although many team teachers become close friends, some teams are ineffective because they were formed solely on the basis of friendships. Teachers need a voice in team composition, and may confidentially talk to an administrator about known conflicts. Then new teams or new team members should participate in team-building activities to promote effectiveness, develop common goals and expectations, build empathy, and nurture respect for diversity of ideas and styles. Team members should define individual roles, set ground rules for working together, and identify their pet peeves, needs, strengths, and weaknesses.

* Fears about control.

Sometimes teachers (and administrators) fear their curriculum, resources, or management style will be compromised rather than enhanced through teaming. Facilitated experiences in teaming and integrating curriculum both before classes start and throughout the school year will help teachers map essential knowledge, concepts, and skills, allow teachers to share their management styles, find commonality and consistency, and ultimately agree to disagree if necessary.

Washburn High School Assistant Principal Eric Schneider's collaborative rather than controlling leadership style is a big reason for the success of 9th-grade teams. In Schneiders words, "I have learned a tremendous amount from the teachers. Their taking ownership of the teaming process had a two-way effect - they were building trust across their team and leadership table, but I was also learning from them, learning how to be more of a servant, flexible rather than directive. ... This was my best year in education, and that says a lot."

SUPPORTING

I know from personal experience as a team teacher and coordinator how difficult it can be to implement and sustain effective interdisciplinary teams within traditionally departmentalized high schools. In the first school where I team taught in the early 1990s, I felt our grassroots, teacherled reform effort had only acceptance and not real advocacy and support from school and district administrators. Our superintendent seemed more interested in bragging that his district's high school had teams than in asking team teachers what we needed to be effective. Unfortunately, our effort that started out as one pilot team and grew to 16 teams at three grade levels involving 60 teachers and 1,500 students became little more than a blip of progressive history at our school, and only the honors program team has survived.

I also know from my research of sustained teams in departmentalized high schools and from consulting work that, to be effective, learning teams must get beyond the traditional, incoherent curriculum and have the participatory, structural, leadership, and environmental supports they need to create change (Beane, 1995a; Darling Hammond, 1999; Muncey & McQuillan, 1996; Spies, 2001; Vars, 2000).

Research and experience over the past decade as a team teacher, team coordinator, and consultant has also taught me that teaming-specific professional development is very important (Burns, 1994; Spies, 1994, 1997 & 1999). While teaching teams have succeeded without planned or facilitated professional development, too many struggle and fail because teachers are left to themselves to figure out how to team and how to integrate curriculum (Siskin & Little, 1995; Dorsch, 1998; Frana, 1998). When team teachers have ongoing, planned professional development experiences in team building and the team process, as well as in integrating curriculum and other topics that address team goals, school officials have not left the potential benefits of teaming to chance.

LEARNING, GROWTH, RENEWAL

Collaborating on an interdisciplinary team is time-consuming and often challenging. However, as the title of an excellent book on teaming in the middle school clearly states, We Gain More Than We Give (Dickinson & Erb, 1997). In fact, several teachers have told me that they delayed planned retirements for several years or turned down higher paying positions because of their positive experiences with teaming. Others have told me they would give up their tenure and change schools or even leave the profession if they no longer had the opportunity to be part of a team. After one teaming workshop I conducted several years ago, two veteran teachers who were new to teaming shared these endorsements with me:

"Teaming gives me a shot in the arm after many years of teaching, because I get to share ideas with other professionals outside of my subject matter," said one. "I feel teaming expands my program."

Another told me, "Learning teams are so positive for students and staff that I don't think I would keep teaching if I had to go back to being on my own again."

Just as our bodies, cars, and homes need to be maintained, our professional lives do also. Teaming can energize us and provide the kind of renewal and learning essential to quality teaching. When teams are well-implemented and sustained, no other high school reform tool can match their power to transform teaching and learning.

REFERENCES

Beane, J.A. (1995a, April). Curriculum integration and the disciplines of knowledge. Phi Delta Kappan, (76)8, 616-622.

Beane, J.A. (Ed.). (1995B). Toward a coherent curriculum. ASCD Yearbook. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Beane, J.A. (1997). Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education. New York: Teachers College Press.

Burns, R. (1994). Interdisciplinary teamed instruction: Development and pilot test. Charleston, WV: Appalachia Educational Laboratory.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1999, Spring). Target time toward teachers. Journal of Staff Development, 20(2), 31-36.

Dickinson, T. & Erb, T. (Eds.). (1997). We gain more than we give: Teaming in middle schools. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.

Dorsch, N. (1998). Community, collaboration, and collegiality in school reform: An odyssey toward connections. Ithaca, NY: SUNY.

Frana, B. (1998, April). High school culture and (mis)perceptions of support: A case study of success and failure for interdisciplinary team teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

Kling, D. & Zimmer, K. (2000, Spring/Summer). Weaving curriculum strands and standards together to improve student performance. Voices from the Field, 2(2).

Lee, V., Smith, J., & Croninger, R. (1995, Fall). Another look at high school restructuring: More evidence that it improves student achievement and more insight into why. Issues in Restructuring Schools, Issue Report No. 9. Madison, WI: Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.

Muncey, D. & McQuillan, P. (1996). Reform and resistance in schools and classrooms: An ethnographic view of the Coalition of Essential Schools. New Haven: Yale.

Nathan, J. & Febey, K. (2001). Smaller, safer, saner, successful schools. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities.

Newmann, F. & Wehlage, G. (1995). Successful school restructuring: A report to the public and educators. Madison, WI: Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.

Raywid, M.A. (1999, January). Current literature on small schools, Retrieved March 26, 2003, from ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools web site: www.ericfacility.net/databases/ ERIC_Digests/ed425049.html

Siskin, L. & Little, J.W. (Eds.). (1995). The subjects in question: Departmental organization and the high school. New York: Teachers College Press.

Smith, K. (1993, October). Becoming the 'guide on the side.' Educational Leadership, (51)2, 35-37.

Sparks, D. (2001, Fall). Change: It's a matter of life or slow death. Journal of Staff Development, 22(4), 49-53.

Spies, P. (1994, Spring). Learning teams: The necessary design of secondary schools for the 21st century. Teaching and Change, 1(3), 219-237.

Spies, P. (1997). Interdisciplinary teams for high schools. (Fastback #416). Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.

Spies, P. (1998, Winter). A research-based argument for interdisciplinary teams. Voices from the Field, 1(1), 5-13.

Spies, P. (1999). Implementing and sustaining interdisciplinary teams in departmentalized high schools: A comparative case study of challenges and supports. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Spies, P. (2001, April). Essential supports for implementing and sustaining interdisciplinary teams: Lessons from two departmentalized high schools. NASSP Bulletin, 85(624), 54-70.

Vars, G. (2000, Spring/ Summer). Another look back at tomorrow's high school: Lessons from the eight-year study for high school methods, guidance, assessment and change. Voices from the Field, 2(1), 27-34.

In the experience of Paul Spies, "when I became part of a team of teachers who shared the same students and the responsibility for teaching them, I felt empowered."

PAUL SPIES is associate professor of urban teacher education. You can contact him at the Education Department, Metropolitan State University, 730 Hennepin Ave., Minneapolis, MN 55403, (612) 659-7183, fax (612) 659-7192, e-mail: paul.spies@metrostate.edu.

Copyright National Staff Development Council Summer 2003
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved

Refinance As Low As 5.48% - Sponsored Link
Ad - Compare Up to 4 Free Offers. Home Refinance Inquiries Only.