Spring 2007 Leading Change

How to Build a Professional Learning Community

The Michigan School Improvement Framework Guides the Way

In December 2005, the Michigan State Board of Education approved the Michigan School Improvement Framework to provide a cohesive foundation to develop, review, or revise school and district school improvement plans. The Framework is based on current research that identifies proven practices for effective and continuous school improvement. The Framework can be individualized and used in multiple ways to develop, support, and enhance school improvement plans. It was also developed to support the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Title I, and the Michigan School accreditation system, Education YES!

The Framework is organized into a familiar curriculum development layout with strands, standards, and benchmarks. The five “strands” provide areas of general focus. Drilling down from the strands, practitioners move into the 12 “standards,” followed by 26 “benchmarks” that further define the standards within each strand. Each benchmark also contains helpful key characteristics and sample questions that districts and schools can use to guide discussion and increase understanding of the research-based school improvement benchmarks.

Strand III: Personnel & Professional Learning

Strand III of the Michigan School Improvement Framework focuses on personnel and professional learning and promotes lifelong learning in support of student achievement. Recent research and promising practice indicate that the most promising strategy for sustained, substantive school improvement is building the capacity of school personnel to function as a professional learning community (McLaughlin, 2004).

The strand expands on this notion to include improving the skills and knowledge of ALL school and district staff. The strand includes two standards: Personnel Qualifications and Professional Learning. Schools and districts can use Strand III standards—along with the subsequent benchmarks, key characteristics, and sample discussion questions—to guide and challenge local practice as personnel work toward creating a results-driven and aligned system based on best practice.

Strand III works interdependently with the other four strands of the Michigan School Improvement Framework. The shared leadership within a school (Strand II) supports the focus on teaching and learning and continuous improvement (Strand I) and allocates the necessary resources for effective personnel and professional learning to take place. Using data (Strand V) for analysis and decision making is crucial in the school improvement process. Engaging families and the community (Strand IV) in understanding the teachers’ efforts to support students, as well as encouraging their participation in this effort, provides a critical link to student success.

Below is a sample of the Michigan School Improvement Framework Rubrics for self assessment. This set of rubrics provides new, research-based indicators for Education YES! The Michigan Department of Education’s Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability (OEAA), together with the Office of School Improvement (OSI), developed 39 school performance indicators approved by the State Board of Education in December 2006. The Board requested one more indicator addressing mentoring and coaching of new teachers, which brings the new total to 40 indicators.

Under Education YES!, schools receive grades of A, B, C, D-Alert, or Unaccredited. Every individual school building in Michigan receives seven letter grades. Grades are given in the areas of Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) achievement status, MEAP achievement change, MEAP achievement growth, indicators of engagement, indicators of instructional quality, indicators of learning opportunities, and an overall composite grade.

To learn more about the benchmarks, key characteristics, and sample discussion questions for the standards of Personnel and Professional Learning or any of the other Michigan School Improvement Framework strands or to download the complete Michigan School Improvement Framework Rubrics for self assessment, visit www.michigan.gov/schoolimprovement.

For more information, contact: Yvonne Caamal Canul, Director, Office of School Improvement, Michigan Department of Education, P.O. Box 30008, Lansing, MI 48909, (517) 241-3147, canuly@michigan.gov.

Reference
McLaughlin, M. (2004). Phi Delta Kappan.

Michigan School Improvement Framework Rubrics for Self Assessment

Below is a sample of Standard 2, Benchmark C of Strand III of the Michigan School Improvement Framework. To download the complete Michigan School Improvement Framework Rubrics for self assessment, visit www.michigan.gov/schoolimprovement.

Strand III: Personnel & Professional Learning—The school has highly qualified personnel who continually acquire and use skills, knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs necessary to create a culture with high levels of learning for all.

Standard 2: Professional Learning—Professional learning is conducted with colleagues across the school/district on improving staff practices and student achievement.

Benchmark C: Alignment—School/district professional development is needs-based, aligned, job-embedded, and results-driven.

Characteristic/ Key Attributes	Getting Started	Partially Implemented	Implemented	Exemplary
Professional development is strategically aligned with the school improvement plan. The expected outcome from these initiatives is an increase in student achievement. Planning efforts include taking into account the teaching staff and their needs as adult learners.	The majority of the professional development decisions are not based upon the needs of the individuals and instructional groups within the school. Little attention is paid to the standards and benchmarks under which the school is supposed to operate.	Although there is an effort to align professional development initiatives to school improvement planning, the needs of individuals and/or groups of staff members frequently take precedence.	A committee of staff members from across the grade levels and content areas has been formed to assure that professional development is directly linked to the teaching and learning goals. Professional development initiatives take into account the diversity of staff experience, backgrounds, areas of expertise, and teaching assignments.	All professional development experiences are aligned with the Michigan Curriculum Framework, the district strategic plan and/or the school improvement plan. Self-selected, multi-content or grade level teacher teams are engaged in self-determined project-based learning and/or problem-based initiatives throughout the school.

TOP of Page