Improvement routines: Research by and for practitioners

The relationship between research and practice in K-12 is complicated and fraught. Research publications are unlikely to become more “user-friendly,” and teachers are unlikely to change their practice quickly or more willingly — nor should they. Recognize that reality, Isobel Stevenson and Richard Lemons explain that schools need to engage educators in improving practice in ways that incorporate research evidence but also value educators as creators of knowledge. One way of achieving that is improvement routines — a method for embedding repetitive examination and reflection into the business of schools and districts. Using instructional rounds as an example, the authors explain how to develop routines that have potential to improve practice and discuss some of the pitfalls to avoid when incorporating these routines.

Developing Mutually Beneficial Partnerships Through Purposeful Field-Based Experiences

In this chapter, two teacher educators share lessons learned when they adapted professional development structures for use with teacher candidates during the clinical practicum experience. Highlighted in this chapter are two field-based teacher education approaches that support the development of mutually beneficial partnerships. Teacher candidates and their cooperating teachers collaboratively used lesson study to examine mathematical discourse in an elementary setting, while teacher candidates used instructional rounds as a way for teacher candidates to observe more experienced teachers in secondary classrooms. Both structures attempted to bridge the persistent divide between university learning and clinical practice to the benefit of K-12 students, teachers, and teacher candidates. The chapter concludes with recommendations for increasing the number of teacher candidates and partnership schools involved in this field-based learning in ways beneficial to all those involved.

Co-Development of Professional Practice at a Professional Development School through Instructional Rounds and Lesson Study

This chapter examines the co-development of professional practices for both clinical faculty and teacher candidates at a Professional Development School through instructional rounds and lesson study. In particular, the authors highlight the nature of the transformative partnership of a collaborative network composed of two university teacher educators, a school-based site facilitator, and clinical faculty who co-designed and implemented a clinical model to enhance the teaching and learning of mathematics methods for elementary teacher candidates and faculty. The model of instructional rounds (City, Elmore, Fiarman, & Teitel, 2009) and lesson study (Lewis, 2002; Lewis, Perry, & Murata, 2006; Fernandez & Yoshida, 2004) were used in an elementary mathematics methods course at a Professional Development School to support teacher candidates in becoming reflective practitioners alongside clinical faculty. The chapter explores the following research questions: (1) In what ways did the targeted Instructional Rounds and Lesson Study impact the development of teacher candidates and clinical faculty's professional practice? (2) How does the co-development model for professional development enhance the transformative partnership at the Professional Development School?

Relationships, instruction, understandings: one district’s implementation of rounds

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to show how instructional rounds contributes to shared understandings and facilitates the development of relationships among administrators. Design/methodology/approach – This mixed methods study draws on three years of data in a district engaged in rounds. Administrators annually completed a social network survey, which focussed on how often they interacted around instructional issues. Additionally, the authors conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposeful sample of administrators. Findings – Administrators have increased their participation in and understanding of instructional rounds, as well as their understanding of district initiatives. However, results are mixed when looking at the quantitative data. While the theory of rounds suggests that the process would lead to increased interactions, the authors found a statistically significant decrease. Research limitations/implications – Implications include examining rounds as part of a district’s set of formal and informal structures. Also, results suggest further examination of how turnover impacts networks. Finally, expanding the number of interviews may present a more mixed qualitative experience of rounds. Practical implications – As districts adopt initiatives based on observations, rounds can be used to support administrators’ growth in understanding these initiatives. Simultaneously, districts need to consider the purpose for both central office and building administrators and how those purposes align with protocols, norms, and practices they use. Originality/value – This paper advances the empirical knowledge on instructional rounds, which has been gaining popularity, though little empirical analysis exists of the process, how its theory of action is enacted, and how administrators experience rounds.