The Effect of Participation in a K-16 Professional Learning Community on Teaching and Learning Practices - Further Evidence

Author: Judith Monsaas

Multivariate Analyses of Variance (MANOVA) were run for science and mathematics teachers separately to address both questions.  The analyses were run separately for Spring 2006, Spring 2007 and Spring 2008.   The dependent variables were the three subscales of the ITAL and the independent variable was participation in a PRISM LC.  Participation in a PRISM LC is associated with greater emphasis on standards-based teaching and learning practices in both mathematics and science K-12 classrooms.  This finding is not surprising given the context in Georgia.  New, more rigorous, performance standards in science and mathematics are being implemented on a phased rollout schedule.  The state of Georgia has been using a train-the-trainer model and large workshops to deliver training to teachers.  This is reflected in the relatively high means on reported emphasis on standards-based teaching and learning for both PRISM LC participants and non-participants.  PRISM LCs have the potential to increase the impact on teaching practices because they are community-based, ongoing and focus on data use and action research to improve practice. These findings are consistent across subjects and years.

A further finding is that teachers report greater emphasis on inquiry-based teaching and learning practices when there is an IHE faculty member working with the LC. Again the effect size was relatively small, but the finding was consistent over three years.  Future studies will explore this relationship further, including investigating whether or not the role of the IHE faculty member (e.g., participant, facilitator, resource) is related to teaching effectiveness and whether the impact on teaching and learning of participation in a LC, with and without an IHE member, influences student achievement.  Studies will also investigate the effectiveness of working with P-16 LCs on IHE teaching and learning practices.  Descriptive statistics, F statistics, p values and effect sizes are included in Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1.  PRISM LC vs. no LC.

Mean Scores on ITAL subscales for mathematics and science teachers who did and did not participate in a PRISM learning community (LC). Scale ranges from 1 = No Emphasis to 6 =Very Strong Emphasis. 

¹ mean difference for standards-based teaching and learning, mathematics, p<.001; h2p = .006
² mean difference for standards-based teaching and learning, science, p<.01; h2p = .004
³ mean difference for standards-based teaching and learning, mathematics, p<.01; h2p = .004
⁴ mean difference for standards-based teaching and learning, science, p<.001; h2p = .008
⁵ mean difference for standards-based teaching and learning, mathematics, p<.001; h2p = .005
⁶ mean difference for inquiry-based teaching and learning, science, p<.005; h2p = .005
⁷ mean difference for standards-based teaching and learning, science, p<.000; h2p = .012

Table 2. IHE vs. no IHE faculty in LC

Mean Scores on ITAL subscales for mathematics and science K-12 teachers who participated in a PRISM leaning community (LC) with or without a higher education faculty member.  Only PRISM LC participants who regularly attended LC meetings are included in this analysis. Scale ranges from 1 = No Emphasis to 6 =Very Strong Emphasis. 

¹ mean difference for inquiry-based teaching and learning, mathematics, p<.001; h2p = .023
² mean difference for inquiry-based teaching and learning, science, p<.01; h2p = .016
³ mean difference for standards-based teaching and learning, mathematics, p<.05; h2p = .007
⁴ mean difference for inquiry-based teaching and learning, mathematics, p<.001; h2p = .020
⁵ mean difference for inquiry-based teaching and learning, mathematics, p<.001; h2p = .014
⁶ mean difference for inquiry-based teaching and learning, science, p<.012; h2p = .009