Advertisement

Journal of Educational Change

, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 403–420 | Cite as

Communities of practice with teaching supervisors: A discussion of community members’ experiences

  • Yamina Bouchamma
  • Clémence Michaud
Article
First Online:

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a study of interviews (N = 17) conducted with members of a community of practice (CP) comprised of school principals, vice principals, and department heads responsible for teacher supervision in their respective schools. This CP met once a month over the course of 2 years to work on adapting the New Brunswick Department of Education’s Francophone Teacher Evaluation Program. Using Wenger’s (Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge University Press, New York, 1998) CP theoretical framework centered on four main concepts, namely meaning, practice, community, and identity, our study reveals that participants acquired knowledge by sharing their teacher supervision experiences. The participants learned new knowledge from others, enriched their supervision practices, and also gained indispensable practical skills with regard to the supervisory process. Furthermore, their fruitful discussions resulted in the creation of friendships and a sense of collegiality as they became agents for change.

Keywords

Communities of practice Teacher evaluation Teacher supervision Educational change 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgment

We thank the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for funding this project, District 11 and District 1 of New Brunswick, Canada for allowing its staff to participate in this community of practice, and the participants.

References

  1. Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978). Organisational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  2. Barth, R. S. (1990). Improving schools from within: Teachers, parents, and principals can make a difference. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  3. Blades, D. W. (1997). Procedures of power and curriculum change: Foucault and the quest for possibilities in science education. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  4. Bouchamma, Y. (2006). School principals’ perceptions of personal and professional efficacy with regards to teacher supervision in New Brunswick. Journal of Educational Administration and Foundations, 17(2), 9–23.Google Scholar
  5. Bouchamma, Y., Godin, M., & Jenkins Godin, C. (2008). A guide to teacher evaluation: Structured observations for all evaluators. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Education.Google Scholar
  6. Bouchamma, Y., Godin, M., Jenkins Godin, C., Lê, T., & Kardouchi, M. (2005). Évaluation du personnel enseignant: Guide d’accompagnement. Moncton, NB: Éditions de la Francophonie.Google Scholar
  7. Brassard, A., Cloutier, M., De Saedeleer, S., Corriveau, L., Fortin, R., Gélinas, A., et al. (2004). Rapport à l’activité éducative et identité professionnelle chez les directeurs d’établissement de l’ordre primaire d’enseignement. Revue des Sciences de l’Éducation, 30(3), 487–508.Google Scholar
  8. Bussière, P., Cartwright, F., Knighton, T., & Rogers, T. (2004). Measuring up: Canadian results of the OECD PISA study. The performance of Canada’s youth in mathematics, reading, science and problem solving: 2003 First findings for Canadians aged 15. Ontario, CA: Statistics Canada, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, and Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-590-x/81-590-x2004001-eng.pdf.
  9. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1996). Teachers’ professional knowledge landscapes: Teacher stories–Stories of teachers–School stories–Stories of schools. Educational Researcher, 25(3), 24–30.Google Scholar
  10. Colantonio, J. N. (2005). On target: Combined instructional supervision and staff development. Principal Leadership, 5(9), 30–34.Google Scholar
  11. Conseil Supérieur de l’Éducation du Québec. (1995). Vers la maîtrise du changement en éducation: Rapport annuel sur l’état et les besoins de l’éducation, 1994–1995. Québec, CA: Author.Google Scholar
  12. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. (1997). The SAIP 1997: Report on mathematics II assessment. Retrieved from http://www.cmec.ca/Programs/assessment/pancan/saip1997/Documents/SAIP1997-Math.en.pdf.
  13. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. (1998). The SAIP 1998: Report on reading and writing II assessment. Retrieved from http://www.cmec.ca/Programs/assessment/pancan/saip1998/Documents/saiprw98.pdf.
  14. Cwikla, J. (2007). The trials of a poor middle school trying to catch up in mathematics: Teachers’ multiple communities of practice and the boundary encounters. Education and Urban Society, 39(4), 554–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  16. Danielson, C., & McGreal, T. L. (2000). Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  17. DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.Google Scholar
  18. Ebmeier, H. (2003). How supervision influences teacher efficacy and commitment: An investigation of a path model. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18(2), 110–142.Google Scholar
  19. Ellett, C., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Teacher evaluation, teacher effectiveness and school effectiveness: Perspectives from the USA. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 17(1), 101–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fidler, B. (1997). School leadership: Some key ideas. School Leadership and Management, 17(1), 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  22. Gimbert, B. G. (2000, April). Interns’ lived experience of mentor teacher supervision in a PDS context. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED468425).Google Scholar
  23. Government of New Brunswick, Department of Education. (1999). Programme d’évaluation du personnel enseignant. Fredericton, NB: Direction de la Mesure et de l’Evaluation.Google Scholar
  24. Government of New Brunswick, Department of Education. (2002). Plan d’apprentissage de qualité. Fredericton, NB: Province du Nouveau-Brunswick.Google Scholar
  25. Government of New Brunswick, Department of Education, Office of the Premier. (2003, April). Quality learning agenda: Ten-year vision to strengthen N.B.’s education system. Retrieved from http://www.gnb.ca/cnb/news/edu/2003e0414ed.htm.
  26. Hargreaves, A. (1997). Rethinking educational change with heart and mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  27. Holland, P. E. (2004). Principals as supervisors: A balancing act. NASSP Bulletin, 88(639), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Holtzapple, E. (2003). Criterion-related validity evidence for a standards-based teacher evaluation system. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 17(3), 207–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Huffman, J. B., & Hipp, K. K. (2003). Reculturing schools as professional policy for effective schools. Toronto, ON: OISE Press.Google Scholar
  30. Kearney, K. (2005). Guiding improvements in principal performance. Leadership, 35(1), 18–21.Google Scholar
  31. Krug, S. E. (1992). Instructional leadership: A constructivist perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28(3), 430–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lafortune, L. (2008). Un modèle d’accompagnement professionnel d’un changement: Pour un leadership novateur. Québec, QC: Presses de l’Université du Québec.Google Scholar
  33. Lafortune, L. (2009). Professional accompaniment model for change: For innovative leadership. Québec, QC: Presses de l’Université du Québec.Google Scholar
  34. Lieberman, A. (1992). The meaning of scholarly activity and the building of community. Educational Researcher, 21(6), 5–12.Google Scholar
  35. Matadin, N. L. (2005). Educators’ experiences concerning teacher evaluation: Micropolitical and professional learning community perspectives (Doctoral dissertation, New York University, New York). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 3184033).Google Scholar
  36. Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (2003). Analyse des données qualitatives: Recueil de nouvelles méthodes (2nd ed.). Bruxelles, BE: De Boeck Université.Google Scholar
  37. Mitchell, C., & Sackney, L. (2000). Profound improvement: Building capacity for a learning community. Lisse, NL: Swets and Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  38. Morissette, R., & Voynaud, M. (2002). Accompagner la construction des savoirs. Montréal, QC: Chenelière/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  39. Nicklaus, J., & Ebmeier, H. (1999). The impact of peer and principal collaborative supervision on teachers’ trust, commitment, desire for collaboration, and efficacy. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 14(4), 351–378.Google Scholar
  40. Ovando, M. N. (2001). Teachers’ perceptions of a learner-centered teacher evaluation system. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 15(3), 213–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Paillé, P. (1996). De l’analyse qualitative en général et de l’analyse thématique en particulier. Revue de l’Association pour la Recherche Qualitative, 15, 179–194.Google Scholar
  42. Paillé, P., & Mucchielli, A. (2003). L’analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales. Paris: Colin.Google Scholar
  43. Sachs, J. (2003). Teacher professional standards: Controlling or developing teaching? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 9(2), 175–186.Google Scholar
  44. Sackney, L. (2007). History of the school effectiveness and improvement movement in Canada over the past 25 years. In T. Townsend (Ed.), International handbook of effectiveness and improvement (pp. 167–182). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sarason, S. B. (1996). Revisiting the culture of the school and the problem of change. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  46. Savoie-Zajc, L. (2004). Les stratégies de pilotage du changement au sein d’une école déconcentrée: De la position de témoin à celle d’acteur. In M. St-Pierre & L. Brunet (Eds.), De la décentralisation au partenariat (pp. 173–197). Sainte-Foy, QC: Presses de l’Université du Québec.Google Scholar
  47. Sentell, C. M. (1997). Seven preservice MAT students’ and their instructor’s evolving understanding of literacy theory, practice, and pragmatics in a learning community (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). National-Louis University, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  48. Sergiovanni, T. J. (1994). Building community in schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  49. Sim, C. (2006). Preparing for professional experiences: Incorporating pre-service teachers as “communities of practice”. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(1), 77–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Smith, M. K. (2003). Communities of practice. The encyclopedia of informal education. Retrieved from www.infed.org.
  51. Stoll, L., Fink, D., & Earl, L. (2003). It’s about learning (and it’s about time): What’s in it for schools? London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  52. Tremblay, D. G. (2005). Les communautés de pratique: Quels sont les facteurs de succès? Revue Internationale sur le Travail et la Société, 3(2), 692–722.Google Scholar
  53. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Wenger, E. (2006, June). Communities of practice: A brief introduction [Online description]. Retrieved from http://www.ewenger.com/theory/.
  55. Wenger, E., & Snyder, W. (2000). Communities of practice: The organisational frontier. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 139–145.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fondements et pratiques en éducation, Faculté des sciences de l’éducationUniversité LavalQuébecCanada
  2. 2.Université de MonctonMonctonCanada

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options