Advertisement

Journal of Educational Change

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 49–75 | Cite as

The formation of teacher work teams under adverse conditions: Towards a more realistic scenario for schools in distress

  • Rick Mintrop
  • Jessica Charles
Article
First Online:

Abstract

Group formation studies are rare in the literature on teacher professional learning communities (PLCs). But they are needed to render realistic scenarios and design interventions for practitioners who work in schools where teachers encounter distress and social adversity. Under these conditions, we may need approaches to PLC development that are not adequately captured with conventional models. Drawing from the literature on teacher collaboration, effective work teams, group development and identity, problem solving, conflict and collective resilience, the article traces the development of a grade level team in a distressed urban middle school that was charged to make the learning environment for students safer, more orderly, and more caring. When teachers face the social adversity that students bring to them from their life experiences, the problems faced by teachers are often not “friendly” problems. Rather these problems cause suffering: being challenged in one’s basic competencies as a teacher or one’s personal integrity. Oftentimes, they require collective action while they at the same time increase individual distress, fear of being seen as weak, and isolation. Work team development under these circumstances needs to capitalize on the desire to connect that may be imbued in collective suffering. Against norms of privacy, non-interference, and conflict avoidance, ideological rifts, and interfering interpersonal dynamics work team members need to look for the seeds of the desire to connect in the midst of this suffering.

Keywords

Professional community Safe and orderly environment Group development Work team Adversity Disadvantage Design development 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Morgan Marchbanks as a collaborator in the project, the teachers who allowed us to particpate in their work, the encouragement of the editor, and the very helpful comments of the anonymous reviewers.

References

  1. Achinstein, B. (2002). Conflict amid community: The micropolitics of teacher collaboration. The Teachers College Record, 104(3), 421–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, G., Herr, K., & Nihlen, A. (2007). Studying your own school (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar
  3. Antonovsky, A., & Sourani, T. (1988). Family sense of coherence and family adaptation. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50(1), 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Argyris, C. (1985). Strategy, change and defensive routines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Argyris, C. (1996). Actionable knowledge: Design causality in the service of consequential theory. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(4), 390–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blankstein, A. (2004). Failure is not an option. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bryk, A., Gomez, L., Grunow, A., & LeMathieu, P. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  8. Coghlan, D., & Brannick, T. (2005). Doing action research in your own organization. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, S., & Bailey, D. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Daly, A. J., Der-Martirosian, C., Ong-Dean, C., Park, V., & Wishard-Guerra, A. (2011). Leading under sanction: Principals’ perceptions of threat rigidity, efficacy, and leadership in underperforming schools. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 10(2), 171–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Dreu, C. (2006). When too little or too much hurts: Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between task conflict and innovation in teams. Journal of Management, 32(1), 83–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Dreu, C., & Van Vianen, A. (2001). Managing relationship conflict and the effectiveness of organizational teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(3), 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. de Lima, J. Á. (2001). Forgetting about friendship: Using conflict in teacher communities as a catalyst for school change. Journal of Educational Change, 2(2), 97–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Blommington, IN: Solution Tree Press.Google Scholar
  15. Eaker, R., DuFour, R., & DuFour, R. (2002). Getting started: Reculturing schools to become professional learning communities. Bloomington, IN: National Education Service.Google Scholar
  16. Elmore, R. (2004). School reform from the inside out: Policy, practice, and performance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  17. Evans, R. (1996). The human side of school change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  18. Gersick, C. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 9–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grossman, P., & Wineburg, S. (2000). What makes teacher community different from a gathering of teachers (pp. 6–48). Occasional Paper. Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy. University of Washington, Seattle.Google Scholar
  20. Gu, Q., & Day, C. (2007). Emotional journeys: Teacher resilience counts. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(8), 1302–1316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hackman, J. (1983). A normative model of work team effectiveness. Arlington, VA: Office of Naval Research.Google Scholar
  22. Hackman, J. (1998). Why teams don’t work. In S. Tindale (Ed.) Theory and research on small groups (pp. 245–267). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hackman, J., Wageman, R., Ruddy, T., & Ray, C. (2000). Team effectiveness in theory and in practice. In C. Cooper & E. Locke (Eds.), Industrial and organizational psychology: Linking theory with practice (pp. 109–129). Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. Hargreaves, A. (1991). Contrived collegiality. In J. Blase (Ed.), The politics of life in schools, chapter 3 (pp. 46–72). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  25. Hargreaves, A. (2001). The emotional geographies of teachers’ relations with colleagues. International Journal of Educational Research, 35(5), 503–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hart, P. M. (1994). Teacher quality of work life: Integrating work experiences, psychological distress and morale. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67(2), 109–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hernández, P. (2002). Resilience in families and communities: Latin American contributions from the psychology of liberation. The Family Journal, 10(3), 334–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hipp, K., & Huffman, J. (2007). Chapter Nine: Using assessment tools as frames for dialogue to create and sustain professional learning communities. In L. Stoll & K. Seashore Louis (Eds.), Professional learning communities, divergence, depth and dilemmas (pp. 119–131). New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  29. Hord, S. (1997). Professional learning communities: Communities of continuous inquiry and improvement. Austin: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.Google Scholar
  30. Jehn, K., & Mannix, E. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 238–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 741–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jonassen, D. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and Ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 65–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  34. Little, J. W. (1982). Norms of collegiality and experimentation: Workplace conditions of school success. American Education Research Journal, 19(3), 325–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Little, J. W. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers’ professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91(4), 509–536.Google Scholar
  36. Little, J. W. (2003). Inside teacher community. Teachers College Record, 105(6), 913–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Louis, K., & Kruse, S. (1995). Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar
  38. Marks, M., Mathieu, J., & Zaccaro, S. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of management review , 26(3), 356–376.Google Scholar
  39. Masten, A. S. (1994). Resilience in individual development: Successful adaptation despite risk and adversity. In M. Wang, M & E. Gordon (Eds.), Educational resilience in inner-city America: Challenges and prospects (pp. 3–25).  Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  40. Masten, A. S., Best, K. M., & Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience and development: Contributions from the study of children who overcome adversity. Development and Psychopathology, 2(04), 425–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McLaughlin, M., & Talbert, J. (2006). Building school-based teacher learning communities: Professional strategies to improve student achievement. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  42. Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  43. Mintrop, H. (2004). Schools on probation. How accountability works and doesn't work. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  44. Mintrop, R. (2016). Design-based school improvement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  45. Osher, D., Bear, G., Sprague, J., & Doyle, W. (2010). How can we improve school discipline? Educational Researcher, 39(1), 48–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Osher, D., Sprague, J., Weissberg, R. P., Axelrod, J., Keenan, S., Kendrioza, K., et al. (2008). A comprehensive approach to promoting social, emotional, and academic growth in contemporary schools. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (pp. 1263–1278). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.Google Scholar
  47. Pelled, L., Eisenhardt, K., & Xin, K. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Plomp, T. (2010). Educational design research: An introduction. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), An introduction to educational design research (pp. 9–36). Enschede: SLO Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  49. Reeves, T. (2006). Design research from a technology perspective. Educational Design Research, 1(3), 52–56.Google Scholar
  50. Reynolds, D., Sammons, P., De Fraine, B., Van Damme, J., Townsend, T., Teddlie, C., et al. (2014). Educational effectiveness research: A state-of-the-art review. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(2), 197–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rosenholtz, S. (1991). Teachers’ workplace: The social organization of schools. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  52. Rutter, M. (2000). Resilience reconsidered: Conceptual considerations, empirical findings, and policy implications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-design, 4(1), 5–18.Google Scholar
  54. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  55. Scott, T. M., & Martinek, G. (2006). Coaching positive behavior support in school settings: Tactics and data-based decisions. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8, 165–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Selznick, P. (1992). The moral commonwealth: Social theory and the promise of community. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  57. Sergiovanni, T. (1994). Building community in schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  58. Shields, C. (2004). Dialogic leadership for social justice: Overcoming pathologies of silence. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 109–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Shields, C. M. (2010). Transformative leadership: Working for equity in diverse contexts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(4), 558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Smith, G. (2001). Group development: A review of the literature and a commentary on future research directions. Group Facilitation, 3(Spring), 14–46.Google Scholar
  61. Sprague, J. R., & Walker, H. M. (2005). Safe and healthy schools: Practical prevention strategies. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  62. Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. (1981). Threat rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(4), 501–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7, 221–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide positive behavior support. School psychology review, 35(2), 245–259.Google Scholar
  65. Talbert, J., & McLaughlin, M. (1994). Teacher professionalism in local school contexts. American Journal of Education, 102(February), 123–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Talbert, J., & Scharff, H. (2010). Achieving educational equity through data-based inquiry: Lessons from SAM-NYC. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.Google Scholar
  67. Thompson, J. D. (2003). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  68. Timperley, H., & Robinson, V. J. M. (1998). Collegiality in schools: Its nature and implications for problem solving. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34(Supplement), 608–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. C. (1977). Stages of small-group development revisited. Group and Organization Studies, 2(4), 419–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Turner, M. E., & Horvitz, T. (2001). The dilemma of threat: Group effectiveness and ineffectiveness under adversity. In M. Turner (Ed.), Groups at Work: Theory and Research (pp. 445–470). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  71. van den Akker, J. (1999). Principles and methods of development research. In J. van den Akker, R. Maribe Branch, K. Gustafson, N. Nieveen, & T. Plomp (Eds.), Design approaches and tools in education and training (pp. 1–14). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Walsh, F. (2003). Family resilience: A framework for clinical practice. Family Process, 42(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Westheimer, J. (1998). Among school teachers: Community, autonomy and ideology in teachers’ work, chapter 1 (pp. 8–17, 23–29) and chapter 2 (pp. 30–62). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  74. Wheelan, S. (1994). Group processes: A developmental perspective. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA
  2. 2.Bank Street College of EducationNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options