University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Professional development at an international school

(USC Thesis Other)

Professional development at an international school

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

1

Professional Development at an International School

by

Steven Andrew Caley

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2019

ii

Copyright 2019
Steven Andrew Caley

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This doctoral program has been one of the most challenging, yet rewarding experiences
of my life. I never imagined as a younger man that I would reach such academic heights, but,
fortunately, I have my immediate family that provided unconditional guidance, support, and love
during this process. Throughout this endeavor, I have experienced immense personal growth,
expanding my beliefs, ideas, and opinions of the world and my place in it.
To begin, I would like to thank my parents who have contributed significantly to both my
personal and professional success. To my father, Harold, and to my mother, Pauline, who have
always empowered and inspired me, wherever I am in this world, to be the very best and most
complete person I can be, thank you. I certainly could not have accomplished this without the
two of you. To my older brother, Greg, thank you for your continued and steadfast support. Even
though you face adversity on a daily basis, you do so with an air of optimism and humor that I
admire and respect.
To my grandparents, Nanny and Pops and Grandad and Grandma, I truly wish you were
still alive to celebrate this remarkable milestone with me. The values of determination, grit, and
resiliency that you instilled in me at such a young age have helped me through my life’s journey,
especially through the highs and lows of this program.
Lastly, to my chair, Dr. Artineh Samkian, I give a heartfelt thank you. I feel extremely
lucky to have had the opportunity to learn from you and work with you over the last 3 years.
Your kindness, counsel, and advice through this undertaking made it both possible and
enjoyable. To my committee members, Dr. Douglas Lynch and Dr. Julie Slayton, thank you for
your enlightenment and feedback during this process—this study is much stronger because of
your support and encouragement.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................. iii
TABLE .......................................................................................................................................... vii
FIGURE ........................................................................................................................................ vii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. viii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
The Problem of Practice ...................................................................................................... 1
Organizational Context and Mission .................................................................................. 2
Importance of Addressing the Problem .............................................................................. 4
Purpose of the Project and Questions ................................................................................. 5
Organizational Performance Goal ....................................................................................... 6
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal ............................................................ 8
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ......................................................................... 9
Professional Development ................................................................................................ 11
Professional Development Context Within the International School of the Middle
East .................................................................................................................................... 15
Contextualized Professional Development ........................................................... 16
Coaching ................................................................................................... 17
Coherent training ...................................................................................... 19
Collaboration ............................................................................................. 21
Teacher Turnover .................................................................................................. 29
The Interaction of Stakeholders’ and the Organizational Context .................................... 30
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODS ...................................................................................... 35
Data Collection and Instrumentation ................................................................................ 36
Interviews .............................................................................................................. 36
Participating Stakeholders with Sampling Criteria for Interview ......................... 37

v

Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 39
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 40
Ethics ................................................................................................................................. 42
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 43
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS ............................................................................................................ 45
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 45
Teachers’ Perceptions of How Professional Development Supports Their Learning ...... 46
Felt Unsupported ................................................................................................... 47
Informal Support Structures .................................................................................. 49
Coaching ............................................................................................................... 53
Reflection in Isolation ........................................................................................... 55
Collaborative Time ............................................................................................... 60
Informal Relationships .......................................................................................... 63
Teacher Confidence .............................................................................................. 66
Frustrations ........................................................................................................... 70
Teachers’ Recommendations ............................................................................................ 73
Coaches ................................................................................................................. 73
Collaboration ......................................................................................................... 75
Increase Professional Development Funds ........................................................... 76
External Professional Development ...................................................................... 77
Support Networks ................................................................................................. 80
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 82
Implications ....................................................................................................................... 82
Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 84
Support Networks ................................................................................................. 85

vi

Relevant Professional Development ..................................................................... 87
Collaborative Structures ........................................................................................ 89
Reduce Teacher Turnover ..................................................................................... 90
Future Research ................................................................................................................ 91
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 92
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 95
APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL .............................................................................. 107

vii

TABLE
Summary of Teachers Interviewed ............................................................................................... 46

FIGURE
Figure 1. Conceptual framework for PD. ..................................................................................... 32

viii

ABSTRACT
In this study, the researcher explores a performance gap in the perceptions of professional
development in the middle and high school environment at an international school in the Middle
East. The purpose of this study was to examine factors, related to professional development, that
could ultimately help and support teachers to improve their instructional practice to enhance
student achievement. Of the three main components within the Clark and Estes framework—
knowledge, motivation, and organization—the organizational influences were the focus of this
study. Using qualitative data collection, through one-on-one interviews, the researcher found that
(a) teachers felt unsupported through professional development, (b) teachers were not receiving
appropriate or relevant professional development, and (c) teachers felt that common
collaborative time was not being used as effectively as it could have been. The perceptions
presented during this study were used to present strategies and solutions to improve employee
performance and happiness.

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The Problem of Practice
The Constitution of the United States (U.S. Congress, 1776, Article 1) requires that all
children be given equal educational opportunity no matter their race, ethnic background, religion,
gender, socioeconomic status, or citizenship. The purpose of the No Child Left Behind Act of
2001 was to hold states, districts, administration, and teachers accountable for making
meaningful improvements in students’ academic achievement (Yell, Katsiyannas, & Shiner,
2006). When President Barack Obama signed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015
(p. 1), he reauthorized that dedication to the improvement of student performance. The mission
of the United States Department of Education “is to promote student achievement and
preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal
access” (ESSA, 2015, p. 1). Not only do students deserve equal opportunities within the United
States of America, but also every student around the world deserves an equal opportunity to
succeed. Education is a human right for every child around the world and it is necessary for all
other human rights (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, n.d.).
International schools, of all sizes, whether for-profit or nonprofit, offer an educational
experience to children from the diplomatic, expatriate, and host national communities in hopes of
providing rigorous courses recognized by top universities in the United States. To improve the
quality of education and to provide students with advance standing in colleges and universities,
many international schools have implemented the International Baccalaureate or Advanced
Placement programs (Stuart, 2016). In the United States, the U.S. Department of Education
implemented regulations to ensure national and state accountability, data reporting, and state
plans (ESSA, 2015, p. 1). However, at international schools, few national (accrediting agencies

2

every 7 years) or local (the U.S. State Department, Office of Overseas Schools every 2 years)
mechanisms of accountability to ensure student success (Stuart, 2016). Therefore, although the
curriculum is matched to American standards, no mechanism is in place, other than agencies
depending on local laws, to ensure its equitable and effective implementation. Lack of effective
professional development, coupled with a high teacher turnover rate, which is common for many
international schools, leads to a significant problem of practice: inconsistent and low quality
instruction, which leads to an inconsistent (and often inadequate) educational experience for
students.
The organizational performance evaluated in this study was related to a larger problem,
within education: that of providing all students with equitable opportunities to ensure the success
of all children (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). For teachers to help students achieve the
high expectations set for them by educational reforms around the world and in the United States,
professional development is crucial to the improvement of schools by enhancing teacher
performance and, ultimately, improving student achievement (Bissonnette & Caprino, 2015;
Borko, 2004; Desimone, 2009; Guskey, 2002; Kennedy, 2016; Webster-Wright, 2009). Both
ESSA (2015) and its predecessor No Child Left Behind Act (2001), placed a high value on
ensuring that all states provide teachers with high-quality, professional development to help
close the achievement gap by improving their instruction (Bissonnette & Caprino, 2015). In this
study, the researcher examined the professional development support that teachers were given to
help students meet the English Language Arts Common Core State Standards.
Organizational Context and Mission
The International School of the Middle East (the ISME), a pseudonym, is a privately
owned (for-profit) Kindergarten–Grade 12 school that operates within the Middle East. The

3

ISME, founded in the early 1960s, is an independent, coeducational college preparatory school
whose American curriculum follows the Common Core State Standards and prepares its student
body for higher education at colleges and universities in North America and Europe. The mission
of the ISME reflects the need for students to be empathetic citizens who are prepared for life
beyond school. The ISME is accredited by the Middle States Association of Colleges and
Schools, and its most recent accreditation was completed in the fall of 2012. Additionally, within
the country, the school is formally regulated and licensed by the United States Department of
State, Office of Overseas Schools (n.d.), and is an assisted school that is subject to evaluation
every 2 years. In addition, the ISME is a member of the Near East South Asia Council of
Overseas Schools (n.d.), which “is a nonprofit association of more than 100 private, independent
American/international schools serving students and their families in North Africa, the Middle
East and South Asia” (p. 1).
In the 2017–2018 academic year, approximately 200 full-time faculty members worked at
the school, including roughly 50% American citizens, 20% Canadian citizens, and 30% teachers
who were citizens of 15 other countries. The ISME is the designated American school in the
Middle East region, enrolling students from the United States Embassy, American military, and
American multinational companies. Current enrollment was more than 2,000 students: 50%
elementary school, 20% middle school, and 30% high school (retrieved from the school’s
website, September 2017). Of this total, about 400 were American citizens, 1,100 were host
country nationals, and 500 were of 65 other nationalities. When the school began many years
ago, it strictly catered to American families. However, over the years, the demographic of the
student population has shifted to account for more local families and host nationals.

4

Importance of Addressing the Problem
Organizational improvement requires moving the whole school (teachers and
administrators) toward a culture, structure, norms, and processes that support effective
professional development (Elmore, 2002). Professional development refers to activities that are
designed to increase the skills and knowledge of teachers (Elmore, 2002). An essential
component to nearly every educational improvement plan is offering high-quality professional
development (Guskey, 2002), for the main goal of professional development is to improve
student learning outcomes (Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman, & Yoon, 2001; Guskey, 2003; Hill,
2009; Kennedy, 2016). High-quality professional development activities can help teachers
solidify their knowledge and transform their teaching (Borko, 2004). Bissonnette and Caprino
(2015) suggested that successful professional development is sustained over time, content-based,
contextually situated, and teacher-centered. However, designing and then implementing
meaningful professional development has typically been inadequate because it is often
fragmented, intellectually superficial, and lacks teacher-centeredness (Bissonnette & Caprino,
2015; Borko, 2004).
The purpose of professional development programs is specific efforts to bring forth
change in a teacher’s classroom practices, in their beliefs and attitudes, and in the learning
outcomes for students (Borko, 2004; Desimone, 2009; Guskey, 2002). Elements of a professional
development system include the program, the teachers, the facilitator, and the context in which it
occurs (Borko, 2004). When sustained context, a lack of guidance, and follow-up sessions are
absent, Bissonnette and Caprino (2015) contended that it often results in lack of implementation.
The ISME attracts many young teachers (who need much support) and it has a high teacher
turnover rate (roughly 30% annually); therefore, the researcher found it essential to address

5

whether current professional development was supporting teachers’ instructional practice to
enhance student achievement and performance.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of the project was to examine the factors that are related to professional
development and that can ultimately help and support teachers to strengthen their capacity to
provide high-quality instruction. The analysis was focused on the organizational influences that
the teachers perceived as affecting their instruction, specifically the professional development
support that they were or were not receiving at the ISME. Desimone (2009) described
professional development opportunities as complex, interactive, formal, and informal. Rather
than focusing on the type of activity (workshop or study group), the researcher focused on any
activity that increased teacher learning and change of practice, resulting in an improvement of
student learning (Desimone, 2009).
More specifically, the study of professional development was intended to understand the
specific needs of middle school and high school English teachers as they sought to meet the
academic needs of each student. Although a complete evaluation would focus on all
stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholder group of focus for this study was middle and
high school English teachers. English teachers were selected because one of the school’s student
performance objectives is, by 2019, students will demonstrate improvement in reading skills as
measure by (a) at least an annual four-level increase from September to May for Grades 1–3
students according to the Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System; (b) at least 80%
of the students in Grades 3–9 will be in the “average” or “high” category in reading as
determined by Northwest Evaluation Association, (c) all students in Grades 3–9 will meet or
exceed the annual expected growth on their Measures of Academic Progress test as determined

6

by NWEA; (d) at least a 15% increase over the 2012 baseline for students’ achievement on the
respective, Preliminary Scholastic Aptitude Test, critical reading composite score according to
the American national norms; (e) at least a 15% increase over the 2012 baseline for students’
achievement on the respective, Scholastic Aptitude Test, critical, reading composite score
according to the American national norms. The following two questions guided the study:
1. How does professional development at the ISME support teachers’ literacy
instruction by improving their learning?
2. What are English teachers’ recommendations for organizational practice, specifically
the provision of professional development, to support better their knowledge and
motivation to provide high quality literacy instruction?
Organizational Performance Goal
At the ISME, the superintendent sets the organizational goals, after which they are
approved by the government. The Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools approved
the school in the fall of 2012, and reaccreditation will happen in 2019. Formed in 2011, the
school’s planning team, which oversees the entire process of reaccreditation, includes
stakeholders who represent the school community (e.g., administrators, teachers, students, and
parents) and who established this goal. Because of the accreditation, the planning team created
five strategic committees to improve the organization’s performance: reading, mathematics,
student engagement, technology integration, and collaborative learning. Each committee is
composed of voluntary coaches, teachers, and administrators whose purpose is to focus on their
particular committee’s goals, analyze organizational data, and develop action plans to reach the
goals. One of the ISME’s nonstudent performance goals is that, by 2019, all faculty members
will increase their participation in collaborative learning activities through professional

7

development. This goal is termed “nonstudent”; nevertheless, it influences teacher performance,
which affects student achievement.
The Collaborative Learning Committee developed three strategies to promote the
increase of professional development within the school: (a) conduct initial and ongoing needs
assessments of faculty and students to determine desired professional development, in-house
expertise, and program assessment; (b) build a stronger collaborative environment among the
staff by creating a continuous program of professional development to build school-wide
connections and learning opportunities; and (c) continue to foster and build on the existing
professional learning structures and opportunities. It was important to explore how successful the
organization was in relationship to the organizational goal because the study (a) maintains a
collective focus on the school’s strategic objectives; (b) promotes, develops, and creates buy-in
along with ownership of student success for new and experienced employees; and (c) helps to
prioritize resourcing to determine the school’s needs. If the organization were not to have
conducted the study, which would provide data to inform possible recommendations for
improvement, it would have risked not adequately or equitably preparing its teachers to provide
consistent and high-quality instruction to its student population.
For this study, focus was placed on the ISME’s goal to increase the participation of
teachers in collaborative learning activities (e.g., professional learning communities (PLCs), peer
coaching, and peer observation) through professional development. Specifically, the researcher
examined the instructional support that teachers felt they needed to meet the academic needs of
students within their classroom. By improving and expanding the professional development
opportunities within the ISME, the teachers believed their job performance and satisfaction
would improve.

8

Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal
Within the ISME, many stakeholders affect the academic growth, achievement, and
performance of students; however, teachers have the greatest influence on student learning.
Although a complete analysis would involve all stakeholder groups, to gain an in-depth
perspective from a key stakeholder group, middle school and high school English teachers were
chosen as the focus of this study. This stakeholder group was selected because their job is to
improve the literacy skills (i.e., reading, writing, speaking, and listening) of students, which, in
turn, directly affects the organization’s performance goal. Professional development was offered
to all teachers, including the religion and Arabic teachers; however, English is the required and
expected language within the classroom environment. The organizational goal of teachers
increasing their participation in collaborative learning activities through professional
development would help teachers attain the following stakeholder goal: By December 2018,
middle school and high school English teachers will use collaborative learning activities to learn
relevant, contextualized, and effective teaching strategies to improve student performance.
However, the central goal under investigation in this study was how the organization did or did
not support the teachers’ learning through professional development.

9

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The Clark and Estes (2008) analytic framework provided a way for organizations to
clarify organizational and stakeholder goals, while identifying possible gaps that exist between
the current performance level and the intended performance level of the organization. This
problem-solving approach was developed through (1) understanding stakeholder goals with
regard to the organizational goal, and (2) identifying assumed performance influences in the
areas of knowledge, motivation, and organization using general theory, context-specific
literature, and an existing understanding of the organization (Clark & Estes, 2008). Within the
framework, each of the three main components is divided into specific topics such as
Krathwohl’s (2002) four divisions of knowledge: (a) factual, (b) conceptual, (c) procedural, and
(d) metacognitive for attaining performance goals. As presented by Clark and Estes (2008) and
Rueda (2011), motivational influences include (a) whether stakeholders consider actual goal
achievement, (b) whether they choose to work towards the goal, and, finally, (c) whether they
choose to exert the mental effort necessary to accomplish the goal. Rueda (2011) analyzed
motivational performance gaps, which include factors such as self-efficacy, attributions, values,
and goals during the analysis. Lastly, organizational influences such as work processes, resource
allocation, and distribution of resources, along with the culture and climate of an organization
further affects stakeholder performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). One way to improve and support
employee growth with an organization is to provide adequate knowledge, skills, and motivational
support for everyone through training and professional development. Of the three main
components in the knowledge, motivation, and organization framework, the organizational
influences were the focus of this study and literature review. According to Clark and Estes
(2008), the third and final cause of the performance gap in the work environment “is the lack of

10

efficient and effective organizational work processes and material resources” (p. 103). Even if
employees have the right amount of motivation and the necessary skills and knowledge to
perform their jobs successfully, they might not have the two organizational influences intended
to promote change: the necessary work processes and the imperative materials needed to perform
effectively (Clark & Estes, 2008). Work processes are how people, equipment, and materials
work together over time to attain a particular goal, and materials are the physical equipment and
supplies that employees require to achieve their performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Moreover, Clark and Estes (2008) believed that a positive emotional work environment
helps to support employee motivation and to increase work commitment, which indicates that an
organization should do all it can to support a healthy workplace. Fisher (2000) found that
improving moods and emotions at work could pay off if employees’ attitude at work were
enhanced. Although mood and emotions are transient and they vary from individual to
individual, at an international school where teachers come together from all over the world,
mood and emotions must be positively supported at work because they influence job satisfaction.
Messer and White (2006) found that maintaining a fair working environment in which all
employees are treated fairly is extremely important for employee happiness and organizational
productivity. They also stated that perceptions of unfairness significantly decrease employee
productivity and have a detrimental effect on employee performance.
Along with work processes and materials, organizational change largely involves the
culture of an organization, which is a conscious and unconscious understanding of identity,
values, and how an organization functions (Clark & Estes, 2008). Schein (2010) described
culture as an abstraction that leans towards patterning and integration of shared assumptions
learned by a group. In addition, all groups (no matter their size) face two major problems:

11

(a) survival, growth, and adaptation in their environment; and (b) internal integration that allows
day-to-day functioning along with the ability to adapt and learn (Schein, 2010). Organizational
culture lives at a deeper level of employees’ psychology because it involves the beliefs and
values of its members (Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo, 1996). Although cultural forces are
significant influencers of job performance, the source of its identity is rather difficult to
understand because they operate outside of our awareness (Schein, 2010). Nevertheless, Clark
and Estes (2008) described three frequent cultural approaches in organizations. Approach 1 was
that culture in the organization is the view or belief that culture is the organization or
environment. Approach 2 was that culture in groups is the property of groups of people within
the organization. Approach 3 was that culture in individuals is the individual identities of
employees as they work collaboratively. Each organization functions differently and what works
in one environment might not work in another. Therefore, to gain an understanding of the
ISME’s organization, the researcher conducted a study to understand inefficient workplace
processes and current resource allocation that are specifically related to professional
development (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Professional Development
One way to understand how an organization performs is to look internally and to examine
the learning opportunities that teachers are given to improve their knowledge and skillset. Every
year, almost every teacher participates in some form of learning at his or her school or within his
or her district with the goal of fostering improvements in both teaching and student achievement
(Drago-Severson, 2012; Elmore & Burney, 1997; Hill, 2009; Kennedy, 2016; Whitcomb, Borko,
& Liston, 2009); the term “lifelong learner” has become a mantra that is often used to describe
the role of teachers (Webster-Wright, 2009). Public schools in the United States spend roughly

12

$20 billion annually on professional development activities (Zhou, 2008), which are considered a
principal component in nearly every current proposal to reform teaching and learning
(Desimone, 2009; Guskey, 2002). Ideally, professional development activities should bring forth
change in a teacher’s classroom practices, in his or her beliefs and attitudes, and in the learning
outcomes for students (Borko, 2004; Desimone, 2009; Guskey, 2002; Hill, 2009). However,
inadequate, low-quality professional development often leaves teachers feeling uninspired (Hill,
2009) because the development is usually fragmented, intellectually superficial, and lacks
teacher-centeredness (Bissonnette & Caprino, 2015; Borko, 2004).
Professional development approaches aim to “engage teachers in learning about their
own learning, in studying their own teaching, and in sustaining relationships with other teachers,
both near and far away” (Sykes, 1996, p. 4). Over the years, a shift has occurred from typical
professional development (usually in the form of a workshop that happens outside the teacher’s
classroom) to “reform” types of professional development (e.g., study groups or coaching and
mentoring; Garet et al., 2001). In these traditional settings, teachers are expected to meet and talk
about teaching outside of their classroom walls, and then take that new knowledge back into their
classroom practice (Kennedy, 2016). In fact, Webster-Wright (2009) felt strongly that a shift in
terminology was needed from professional development to continuing professional learning, a
term that would represent and reflect teachers as engaged and self-directed learners. Multiple
characteristics affect professional development, and effective professional development has
multiple, highly complex dimensions; nevertheless, it is essential that professional development
time be well organized, carefully structured, and directed with a purpose (Guskey, 2003). A
critical factor impeding the success of professional development is not that the ideas do not work
or that teachers reject the ideas, but that the ideas due are not implemented (Ferguson, 2006).

13

Another problem that teachers face is their ability to transfer successfully their newfound
knowledge from professional development into their classrooms (Hill, 2009).
Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) discussed three contrasting relationships of teacher
learning: (a) knowledge-for-practice, which is formal knowledge and theory that teachers can use
to improve their practice; (b) knowledge-in-practice, which is practical knowledge situated in
practice and in teachers’ reflections; and, (c) knowledge-of-practice, which is the knowledge that
teachers gain when they use their own classrooms as places of inquiry to generate material for
interrogation and interpretation connected to larger social issues. Within this stance, teachers
come together in learning communities that engage in mutual construction of knowledge through
discourse and other forms of collaborative analysis and interpretation (Cochran-Smith & Lytle,
1999).
Guskey and Yoon (2009) suggested that anyone who is responsible for planning and
implementing professional development must (a) learn and know how to accurately assess the
effectiveness of what they do; (b) demand sufficient evidence from consultants on new strategies
and practices; (c) begin by piloting a small-scale study to test its effectiveness; and (d) pursue
greater rigor in the study of professional development to determine the relationship between
professional development, changes in teaching practices, and improvements in student learning.
Researchers agree on the following characteristics of what constitutes high-quality professional
development: (a) a focus on content (Birman, Desimone, Porter, & Garet, 2000; Elmore, 2002;
Garet et al., 2001; Kennedy, 2016; Sun, Penuel, Frank, Gallagher, & Youngs, 2013) and
collective learning through active participation (Birman et al., 2000; Garet et al., 2001; Kennedy,
2016; Sun et al., 2013); and (b) sustained the learning over time (Birman et al., 2000; Kennedy,
2016; Sun et al., 2013). Specifically, Guskey’s (2002) Model of Teacher Change outlines three

14

specific suggestions when planning effective professional development that will result in
significant and sustained educational improvements:
Suggestion 1: Recognize and realize that change is a gradual and difficult process for
teachers. Finding meaning in a new way of doing something and doing it well takes both time
and effort, which likely requires a lot of work (Guskey, 2002). This process can be both
challenging and frustrating because students might learn less than they would have under the
current classroom structures. Therefore, administrators must understand that change takes time
and that it can be difficult for teachers; however, if teachers see that a new program is working
well in their classrooms, change in their attitudes and beliefs will likely follow (Guskey, 2002).
Suggestion 2: Ensure that teachers receive regular feedback on student learning progress.
It is crucial that teachers receive feedback on their practice and instructional results to increase
their perception of competence and effectiveness (Guskey, 2002). If they are given positive and
constructive feedback on their practice, new instructional strategies and practices are more likely
to be ingrained in their daily routine.
Suggestion 3: Provide continued follow-up, support, and pressure. In the model,
Guskey’s (2002) suggested that change occurs after implementation takes place and once
teachers see evidence of improved student learning which makes follow-up, support, and
pressure following the initial training even more important (Guskey, 2002). Professional
development must be seen as a process, not a one-time event, so sustaining and maintaining
change cannot be neglected. Support often entails giving those engaged with the change process
opportunities to fail and grow, whereas pressure gives the encouragement and motivation that
many teachers need to persist during challenging tasks (Guskey, 2002).

15

The next section provides insight into the current professional development practices
within the ISME that affect teachers and their instruction.
Professional Development Context Within the International School of the Middle East
The ISME follows the Common Core State Standards, and professional development
plays a significant role in tackling the gap between teacher preparation and standards-based
reform (Birman et al., 2000). However, at the ISME, the opportunities are limited for hosting
professional development, and it is restricted to teachers teaching teachers at either faculty
meetings or department meetings, although researchers found that effective professional
development must be teacher-led (Birman et al., 2000; Clark & Florio-Ruane, 2001). Experts are
not brought in to deliver in-house workshops; therefore, all professional development activities
(unless teachers travel to a conference or take an online course) are conducted within the ISME.
Both new and returning teachers need immediate, job-embedded help as they struggle to adapt to
new curricula expectations and new instructional practices to their unique classroom settings
(Guskey & Yoon, 2009). Teachers require professional development opportunities that will help
them enhance their knowledge and skills, while developing new instructional practices (Borko,
2004; Elmore, 2002) through sustained, content-based, contextually situated, and teacher
centered (Bissonnette & Caprino, 2015). In the Model of Teacher Change, Guskey (2002)
suggested that the experience of successful implementation changes a teacher’s attitudes and
beliefs, not necessarily the professional development itself. Guskey (2002) presented a model
that suggests teachers make a change in their practices, which results in student learning
improvements that ultimately change teachers’ beliefs and attitudes. Sykes (1996) felt that
teachers need help in trying out new practices in their classrooms, and that they need the
opportunity to receive feedback and to engage in dialogue. Whitcomb et al. (2009) argued that it

16

is crucial to grow and support talent from within; therefore, the ISME should use its youthful and
inexperienced teacher population to promote growth and to nurture young teachers to be
successful. The ISME hopes to design a professional development program that focuses more
closely on improved teaching for enhanced student learning (Cohen & Hill, 1998).
Contextualized Professional Development
School administrators face challenges when they design staff development activities that
support teacher improvement and promote instructional change (Swafford, 1998). Training must
help teachers learn new knowledge and skills, and must transfer these skills into their
instructional practice (Joyce & Showers, 2002). To meet the differing needs and interests of each
teacher, the ISME should provide a variety of meaningful opportunities for sustained and
intensive professional development, rather than shorter development (Garet et al., 2001) through
peer coaching, coherent training, and opportunities for collaboration. For teachers to be
successful in helping students learn, they require a strong content-specific, conceptual
knowledge that is taught or discussed during professional development (Birman et al., 2000;
Borko, 2004; Garet et al., 2001; Guskey & Yoon, 2009; Little, 1993). Fullan (2002) believed that
“knowledge sharing must be seen in relation to the overall development of the intellectual and
moral aspects of the teaching profession” (p. 418); however, it is challenging to find a common
language and to define teachers’ work, and precisely to describe the knowledge needed to guide
their work (Kennedy, 1999). With a shift away from textbook-centered or recitation-style
teaching, teachers need a strong knowledge base of content to integrate subject matter for
successful opportunities for students to learn (Little, 1993). Professional development
activities—that focus on concepts of the discipline, how ideas are connected, and the processes
used to determine new knowledge—could help teachers to develop strong connections and

17

understandings (Borko, 2004). For teachers to teach successfully standards and complex thinking
skills, it is imperative they have a deep understanding of the content (Birman et al., 2000). A
critical component of effective professional development—and perhaps the most influential
according to Desimone (2009)—is content focus, by which activities are focused on subject
matter content. After reviewing 93 case studies whose authors examined the effectiveness of
various approaches to continuing education, Kennedy (1999) found that programs that prescribe
a set of teaching behaviors and programs that provide general guidance on both curriculum and
pedagogy for teaching a particular subject are the most effective. Through professional
development at the ISME, teachers need to build their knowledge capacity, which is related
directly to the content of what they teach.
In a study that was focused on mathematics teaching in California, Cohen and Hill (1998)
examined school-level data on results from a statewide mathematics test and data on teachers’
professional development experiences, and found that students performed better in schools where
teachers had participated in professional development that was focused on teaching specific
mathematics content. In a review of well-designed experimental studies of the relationship
between student achievement in mathematics and science and professional development,
Kennedy (1999) found similar results: professional development that is focused on specific
content has larger positive impacts on student achievement outcomes.
Coaching. Joyce and Showers (1982) first introduced coaching in relation to teaching
when they began to discover the similarities between the problem of transfer in teaching and the
problem of transfer in athletic skills. Galbraith and Anstrom (1995) regarded peer coaching as a
professional development strategy that had been shown to increase collegiality and improve
teaching. According to Swafford (1998), the goal of peer coaching is to improve instruction for

18

all students, and the most beneficial form of coaching depends on the needs of each teacher—as
their needs change, so does the coaching. When teachers who were coached were given a
program that included accountability, support, companionship, and specific feedback over time,
they experienced a substantial positive change in their behaviors (Galbraith & Anstrom, 1995).
In a yearlong study of collecting data from interviews, postobservation conferences, and
reflection papers, Swafford (1998) found three benefits of peer coaching. Benefit 1 was the three
levels of support that coaching provided teachers when implementing new, instructional
strategies: procedural, affective, and reflective. Benefit 2 was that peer coaching facilitated
teacher change by implementing the procedural, affective, and reflective levels of instructional
strategy. Benefit 3 was that peer coaching provided a different lens (from an experienced peer
coach or videotape) from which teachers could observe their instruction. The study also revealed
certain characteristics that the teachers found beneficial from coaching: (a) postobservation
conferences are most effective when they happen immediately after the observation;
(b) conferencing with a more experienced coach was important because he or she could relate
more; (c) continual observations, roughly twice a month, were preferred; and (d) observations
should start early in the year to give teachers opportunities to apply new skills and to gain more
confidence.
In an inclusion study, Kovic (1996) found that coaches should support teachers
procedurally and affectively through consistent teacher–coach meetings, informal conversations,
team meetings, and classroom observations. During team meetings, the coach can encourage
collaboration to focus on the teachers’ common goal of providing high-quality and appropriate
instruction for all students. Through one-on-one conferences and informal conversations, the
coach can tailor and individualize the discussion to help meet the needs of a specific teacher,

19

building confidence and self-efficacy. During postobservation conferences, objective feedback
was seen as crucial for facilitating professional dialogue and encouraging teachers to reflect on
their instruction, In addition, it is important for coaches to help teachers identify and
subsequently to solve their own problems, rather than expecting the coach to solve the problem.
Rather than a one-time workshop, coaching provides ongoing feedback and assessment of
a certain skill or instructional strategy that allows teachers to learn, train, and improve in their
classrooms (Galbraith & Anstrom, 1995).
Coherent training. One of the criticisms of professional development is that activities
are unrelated and disconnected from one another and not part of an integrated program of teacher
learning—an activity is more likely to be effective and to improve teaching if it is part of a
coherent plan (Birman et al., 2000; Garet et al., 2001; Newmann, King, & Youngs, 2000).
Activities that are consistent with teacher goals, built on prior activities, and involve both teacher
and administrative collaboration (Desimone, 2009) make professional development coherent.
Garet et al. (2001) regard coherence regarding whether professional development activities are
aligned with standards and assessments, connected to other professional development activities,
and fosters professional communication. The coherence, the extent to which teacher learning is
consistent with teachers’ knowledge and beliefs (Desimone, 2009), of professional development
with professional experiences is related to increased teacher learning and improved classroom
practice (Birman et al., 2000).
In a large-scale study that used a national probability sample of 1,027 mathematics and
science teachers, Garet et al. (2001) sought to determine the effects of different characteristics of
professional development on teachers’ knowledge and practice, and found that coherence is a
core feature of professional development. Specifically, coherence had substantial positive effects

20

on enhancing teacher knowledge and skills, indicating that activities that are more connected to
teachers’ other professional development experiences are more likely to produce enhanced
knowledge and skills. Their findings also suggest that teachers who experienced coherent
professional development are more likely to change their teaching practices.
In a longitudinal study of 207 teachers, Desimone, Porter, Garet, Yoon, and Birman
(2002) examined the features of teachers’ professional development and its effects on changing
teaching practice in math and science, and found substantial benefits of coherence that were
specifically linked to other activities or that built on teachers’ previous knowledge. With their
findings, they suggested that schools should seek to provide a coherent, coordinated approach to
professional development and instruction by increasing emphasis on strategic and systematic
planning.
In a 2-year study of nine urban schools in the United States, Newmann, King, and
Youngs (2000) examined professional development, and found that a school’s professional
development for student and staff learning should be coordinated, focused on clear learning
goals, and sustained over a duration of time. When programs are uncoordinated and stop after a
brief period, organizational fragmentation weakens both staff and student learning.
Penuel, Fishman, Yamaguchi, and Gallagher (2007) surveyed 454 teachers engaged in an
inquiry science program to examine the effects of different characteristics related to professional
development; with their findings, they suggested that teachers’ interpretations of professional
development activities are important in shaping the effectiveness of these activities. If teachers
find the professional development to be focused on an aspect related to their classroom teaching
and their goals, they are more likely to adopt or adapt to the particular purpose of that
professional development.

21

Therefore, it is imperative that the ISME promote coherent professional development by
incorporating experiences that (a) are consistent with teachers’ goals (Desimone et al., 2002;
Penuel et al., 2007), (b) are aligned with state standards and assessments, and (c) encourage
ongoing professional dialogue among educators (Desimone et al., 2002).
Collaboration. Researchers have indicated that having collaborative structures in place
(e.g., PLCs) is an essential component of professional development to improve classroom
instruction and student learning (Borko, 2004; Lieberman, 1995; Saunders, Goldenberg, &
Gallimore, 2009; Vescio, Ross, & Adams, 2008; Whitcomb et al., 2009). Learning experiences
are quite effective when they happen in a friendly and comfortable learning environment in
which educators work collaboratively to inquire and reflect on their practices to bring
meaningful action into their classrooms (Borko, 2004; Lieberman, 1995; Whitcomb et al., 2009).
Teachers need to see the advantages and benefits of collaborating, for this will ultimately
improve their instruction and help the organization attain its goal of improving students’ literacy
skills. Internally and intrinsically, teachers need to see the personal benefits of collaborating to
improve and, ultimately, to provide high quality instruction to their students. Identifying the
strategies and practices of teachers and sharing them with their colleagues could provide a
structure for highly effective professional development (Guskey, 2003).
In a 2-year study, commissioned by the Annenberg Institute for School Reform, Dunne,
Nave, and Lewis (2000) used interviews and observation data to compare the practices of
teachers who participated in critical friend groups to the practices of nonparticipants. Regarding
collaborative professional development, Dunne et al. found that participants (a) were willing to
put effort into their work than what was expected of them, (b) felt they were improving as
educators each year, and (c) were always happy to hear about ways they could improve their

22

instructional practice. The interviews provided insight into the reason that this collaborative
structure was more satisfying compared to other professional development structures: (a) it was
continual; (b) it was focused on their teaching and students’ learning; and (c) it happened with a
small group of colleagues. Another theme that emerged from interviews was that educators
became more aware about the connections between curriculum, assessment, and instruction;
therefore, the collaborative professional development made them more student focused.
One way that the organization can help support teachers is to provide support through
collaborative structures such as a PLC. When teachers have a strong sense or belief in their
ability to attain a certain result, they are more likely to engage in professional learning activities
that increase motivation (Thoonen et al., 2011). Opportunities for teachers to collaborate are
significant motivational factors because these occasions play a monumental role in professional
development, while fulfilling the psychological need for teachers to relate and connect to each
other—a strong connection with other teachers builds a stronger sense of self and purpose
(Hildebrandt & Eom, 2011). Collaboration leads to greater experimenting and reflection upon an
individual’s teaching practice, which lead to a greater sense of self-efficacy (Thoonen et al.,
2011). One approach that researchers have found successful to improve teacher effectiveness is
participating in a PLC (Englert & Tarrant, 1995; Forte & Flores, 2014; Graham, 2007; Hollins,
McIntyre, DeBose, Hollins, & Towner, 2004; Strahan, 2003). According to DuFour and Mattos
(2013), creating a collaborative culture and collective responsibility of a PLC is the most
powerful strategy for improving both teaching and learning. DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, Many, and
Mattos (2016) defined a PLC as “an ongoing process in which educators work collaboratively in
recurring cycles of collective inquiry and action research in order to achieve better results for the

23

students they serve” (p. 10). PLCs get teachers away from feeling isolated and into a community
of like-minded individuals who are focused on teaching and learning.
In a study that the National Science Foundation funded during the spring of 1998, Becker
and Riel (2000) found that 21% of teachers seldom or never discussed how to teach a particular
concept to the class. In addition, 20% of teachers seldom or never discussed ideas about student
or group projects. Furthermore, 23% of teachers never or seldom discussed different views about
an issue within a common subject area (Becker & Riel, 2000). However, Forte and Flores (2014)
found that teachers stressed the personal benefits of collaboration (e.g., motivation, job
satisfaction, and support), along with the impact on the school as an organization (e.g., visibility
of the projects and their sense of identity in the community). Providing opportunities for teachers
to collaborate has the potential to improve a teacher’s practice, which would improve student
achievement.
Englert and Tarrant (1995) studied four teachers and the way that their practices changed
because of a learning community. By encouraging teachers to reflect on their practices and to
decide which direction to take students’ learning according to their needs, an environment of risk
taking was encouraged and established. Given the diversity of teachers who participated in the
study, researchers learned three lessons about developing collaborative communities: (a) the
variation of knowledge from different professional backgrounds (i.e., years of experience,
teaching in different environments) provided a richness of collective knowledge; (b) teachers
grew the most in the areas in which they had the greatest needs; and (c) the most significant
change happened when the community came together to share the goals of the project. The
discourse that teachers participated in helped them to understand the curriculum and their
instruction much better. By talking about instruction, activities, and strategies, teachers gained

24

more insight and knowledge into their practice and practical knowledge about teaching. Lastly,
the process of creating collaborative communities takes time to develop properly the type of
professional community desired in a school.
One way to reflect and discuss one’s teaching strategies is through a collaborative
learning activity such as a PLC, which encourages teachers to think about how they process
information and connect that new understanding to their reading instruction. Metacognition gives
teachers the useful knowledge and understanding about their own strengths and weaknesses
related to a certain activity (Pintrich, 2002). Thinking about teaching strategies—what works and
what does not work, and whether learning activities help students to learn—gives teachers time
to question, think, and improve their own teaching practices (Prytula, 2012).
Louis and Marks (1998) completed a multisite study (both quantitative and qualitative
design) on the impact of PLCs at eight elementary schools, eight middle schools, and eight high
schools. Their results indicate that discussions around student needs and pedagogy allowed
teachers to reflect, and gave them the opportunity to change and improve their teaching practice.
The deprivatization of practice in the context of a PLC provided teachers with the opportunity to
focus on improving their teaching practice and to cultivate supportive relationships with their
students. The researchers found that the existence of a professional learning community provides
a higher level of social support for both teacher and student achievement.
When reflecting, self-regulation allows individuals to learn how they learn and to take
ownership for that learning (Mayer, 2011). The structure and environment of a PLC is
collaborative with a common goal of student learning; therefore, teachers’ thinking should be
aligned towards attaining the same shared goal (Prytula, 2012). According to Rodgers (2002),
collaborative reflection has three unique benefits : (a) affirmation of one’s experience; (b) seeing

25

things in a new light by other individuals offering a new perspective; and, (c) assistance to
engage in the process of inquiry. A reflective community (a) allows teachers to make public what
they are thinking, (b) serves as a safe space to acknowledge their interdependence, and
(c) provides teachers a place to test their understanding as ideas move from the personal to the
public (Rodgers, 2002).
More than reading professional books on education, teachers’ quality of instruction is
better affected and improved through experimenting and reflection (Thoonen, Sleegers, Oort,
Peetsma, & Geijsel, 2011). Teachers need to see that the process of reflection and
experimentation, although at times arduous and uncomfortable, leads to the benefit of better
teaching practices (Clark & Estes, 2008). Rodgers (2002) reexamined Dewey’s (1910/1933,
1916/1934) view on reflection, and discussed the following four areas related to reflection:
(a) reflection is a meaning-making process that moves a learner from one experience to the next;
(b) reflection is a systematic way of thinking that is grounded in scientific inquiry; (c) reflection
needs to happen in a community; and (d) reflection requires a belief in the value of personal and
intellectual growth individually and collectively. In this process, reflection is cyclical, for
questions, problems, and ideas move throughout the four specific phases. Phase 1 is an
experience; Phase 2 is a description of that experience; Phase 3 is an analysis of that experience;
and Phase 4 is an action taken through experimentation from the previous experience. Antoniou
and Kyriakides (2013) found that reflection is more effective when areas for improvement are
identified by the teacher and followed by an action plan that addresses their professional needs.
Teachers must have the ability to perceive an experience and then make meaning of that
experience.

26

Wilson (2008) discussed and examined Schön’s (1987) work on reflection, specifically
(a) reflection-on-action, (b) reflection-in-action, and (c) reflecting-on-the-future. Reflection-on-
practice refers to practitioners reflecting on past actions to evaluate what happened and to
identify possible ways to improve performance. Reflection-in-practice (also referred to as
‘thinking on your feet’) happens when practitioners draw upon internalized knowledge to inform
and guide current behavior in the present. Reflecting-on-the-future occurs when one reflects on
the future and considers or imagines the various alternatives and strategies that would be
necessary to attain one’s goals (Wilson, 2008).
Hollins et al. (2004) investigated an approach to create a learning community that would
allow teachers to nourish high academic achievement in literacy for African American students
in Kindergarten–Grade 4. With their findings, they indicated that, over time, (a) the discussions
among teachers about their students became more positive; (b) teachers made more connections
between themselves and the culture of their students; and (c) by engaging in group discussion
and reflection, teachers learned new strategies and instructional approaches to improve their own
teaching. Although the PLC process takes time, the benefits to improving a teacher’s practice
(and ultimately the organization’s performance) are substantial.
Strahan (2003) conducted a 3-year case study of three elementary schools in which the
goal was to improve student achievement in reading by promoting a collaborative school culture.
At all three schools, grade-level meetings (collaborative time) allowed teachers to come together
on a regular basis to identify student needs, develop strategies to improve their practice, and
connect staff professional development to their daily practice. The participants stressed that
continuous dialogue, driven by data, provided a platform for them to engage in meaningful
conversations that focused on the needs of their students and the ways to support each other.

27

These conversations consistently focused on what the students needed to be successful; when the
needs could not be met, the teachers discussed strategies and suggestions to help each other. In
PLCs, teachers learn through discussion, reflection, and then trial-and-error by enhancing the
knowledge they need to be successful in the classroom.
PLCs provide teachers with a space where they can collectively learn together through
supportive conditions and a shared practice, where colleagues assist each other to improve their
instructional practices (Borko, 2004; Bullough, 2007; Vescio et al., 2009). By participating in
professional learning activities, teachers invigorate their minds through professional discourse,
which improves their instructional strategies and, subsequently, student achievement (Thoonen et
al., 2011). Researchers have suggested that teachers are strongly motivated to become better
teachers for an internal sense of happiness and pride, and to work collaboratively together
(Hildebrandt & Eom, 2011). A collaborative environment (e.g., a PLC) provides that unique
opportunity to move from isolation to a collaborative experience where discussion and reflection
are encouraged, which enhances their utility value.
In an empirical study involving 24 teachers and the collection of interviews, group
meetings, and lesson plans, Briscoe and Peters (1997) found that collaboration positively
influenced teachers’ motivation in two significant areas. Area 1 was a support network of other
teachers who try similar activities and discuss the positives and negatives, which would provide
teachers the strength to take more risks in the classroom. Area 2 was collaboration, which would
allow teachers a safe space to talk and reflect openly about what went well and what did not go
well, for these interactions refresh and excite teachers. The benefits of a strong support network
and a safe, trusting, and respectful (Whitcomb et al., 2009) space to talk and reflect help teachers
improve as educators.

28

In a case study that was focused on a first-year, middle school that had incorporated the
PLC principles that DuFour (2004) advocated, Graham (2007) found that the primary strength of
the PLC came from the opportunities that teachers had to learn from other teachers in their
building. Teachers found that the professional conversations gave them an opportunity to discuss
strategies together, instead of merely reflecting on them individually. Establishing norms that
allow teachers to have challenging conversations about teaching is very important for successful
learning communities (Borko, 2004). Graham (2007) also found that, when teachers learned
from each other, their learning was more professionally rewarding and effective than if an
instructor had been brought in from outside their school or community.
Teachers must see the value in collaborative work and realize how beneficial it is to their
growth and improvement as educators. In a 5-year, quasi-experimental investigation to compare
achievement gains, Saunders, Goldenberg, and Gallimore (2009) found that significant gains
were made when teams of teachers were provided with consistent meeting times, school-wide
instructional leadership, and specific protocols that focused their collaborative time on students’
academic needs and how they might be addressed through instruction. Collaborative structures
allow teachers to explore new ideas, current practice, and evidence of student growth, and to
place the ownership of instructional improvement and an increase in student learning on
themselves (Vescio et al., 2008).
In conclusion, to meet the ever-changing needs of students in today’s classrooms and,
more specifically, the needs of the international population reflected at the ISME, teachers’
continuing professional development is critical to improve instruction and student achievement
(Swafford, 1998). Through coaching, coherent professional development activities, and
collaborative networks, researchers have found that teachers need professional development that

29

is focused on concrete classroom applications of general ideas; opportunities for observation,
critique, and reflection; and, deliberate evaluation and feedback from skilled professionals
(Elmore & Burney, 1997).
Teacher Turnover
Part of the organization’s culture that was not explicitly part of this study, but that is
important to mention because it visibly and invisibly (Rueda, 2011) affects the school’s cultural
setting is the high rate of teacher turnover. Over the last decade, teacher attrition has grown by
50% (Vanderslice, 2010), while researchers have suggested that schools with high teacher
turnover rates perform lower in both English and Mathematics (Ronfeldt, Loeb, & Wyckoff,
2013). This evidence highlights the direct correlation between teacher turnover and poor student
performance and achievement. Furthermore, the effects of teacher attrition include cost
implication, increases in workload, and burden of school administration (Wushishi, Foo, Basri,
& Baki, 2014).
A high turnover rate of teachers creates challenges to developing a consistent school
culture. Macdonald (1999) discussed teacher turnover as a big factor that prevents schools from
reaching their desired goal of promoting student development. If schools want to maintain a
certain culture, they must face the challenge when new first-time teachers are entering the fold
every year. The yearly teacher turnover rate at the ISME is roughly 30%–40%, which translates
as 48–56 teachers needing to be hired every year in the school—this proves to be a significant
organizational inhibitor. Not only is this a cultural challenge, but hiring such a large number of
teachers each year takes up a tremendous amount of time and resources—both of which could be
better spent on student achievement. One of the benefits of teaching and living abroad is the
opportunity to work in different countries; therefore, it is expected and inevitable that teachers

30

will leave. A high teacher turnover rate makes quite difficult the task of building a consistent
community and culture that meets the needs of the ISME’s international student population.
Total organizational change is a concept that is used to focus on various levels, functions, and
persons, and that rests on the assumption that people seek three attributes in an organization: (a)
people want growth and development; (b) people value interpersonal interactions with peers and
superiors; and, (c) people need trust, support, and cooperation (Schneider et al., 1996). The
researcher notes the issue of teacher turnover to provide context to the current situation at the
ISME.
The Interaction of Stakeholders’ and the Organizational Context
A conceptual framework provides a foundation or underlying structure that frames a
study with concepts, models, ideas, and theories (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For this study, the
researcher used a conceptual framework, incorporating Clark and Estes’ (2008) framework and
specific literature related to coherent professional development and its influence on teachers’
instructional practices. A conceptual framework establishes a tentative theory of the topic being
investigated, while providing structure, coherence, and scaffolding between the various
components of the study (Maxwell, 2013). This tentative theory informed the rest of the study to
assess and refine goals by developing realistic and relevant research questions, deciding upon
appropriate research methods, and identifying possible validity threats to the conclusion
(Maxwell, 2013). Furthermore, the conceptual framework collates assumptions made through the
research, general expectations, beliefs of the author, and corollary theories that support the
research being conducted (Maxwell, 2013). The purpose is not only to pay close attention to the
existing research to understand what is happening with this phenomenon, but also to provide
additional research to the current problem of practice (Maxwell, 2013). This conceptual

31

framework will offer a world-wide understanding of the possible contributing factors from the
literature on professional development and how teachers’ knowledge and motivation are
influenced by organizational supports or lack thereof (Clark & Estes, 2008; Maxwell, 2013).
To provide structure, Merriam and Tisdell (2016) described various lenses that an
individual could take when making sense of the questions asked. When conducting a study, the
lens used is derived from four main sources: (a) researcher’s experiential knowledge; (b) existing
theory and research; (c) pilot and exploratory research; and, (d) thought experiments (Maxwell,
2013). The researcher and his or her background, experiences, and perceptions of the world, also
known as their disciplinary orientation, influence the research conducted (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The purpose of this study was to understand and examine how professional development
at the ISME supports teachers’ literacy instruction by improving their learning.
For organizations to be competitive and reach high levels of success, they must be aware
of the knowledge-motivation-organizational influences either enhancing or impeding the
organization’s ability to reach its performance goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). The factors in Figure
1 illustrate the framework for this study and demonstrate how organizational cultural settings
have intricate interactions with stakeholders’ performance.

32

Figure 1. Conceptual framework for professional development.

Organization
Cultural Settings and Cultural Models
The organization needs to provide contextualized professional
development through coaching, content-specific training, and
collaborative communities.

Organizational Goal
By 2019, all faculty members will
increase their participation in
positive collaborative learning
experiences that will support their
knowledge and motivation to
provide high-quality instruction.
Teacher Knowledge
Professional development should provide teachers with
knowledge, specifically related to their content area to
improve their literacy instruction.

Teacher Motivation
Professional development should provide teachers with
the motivation to collaborate with colleagues to improve
their literacy instruction.

Stakeholder Goal
By December 2018, middle and
high school English teachers will
use collaborative learning
activities to learn relevant,
contextualized, and effective
teaching strategies to improve
student performance.

33

To align organizational culture with behavior, the core beliefs of the ISME guide the
processes and procedures implemented to achieve the performance goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Potentially, a clear, compelling, and shared vision within the ISME, establishing the focus on
meaningful professional development to improve instructional practices, could help the school
attain its performance goal. Professional development has the potential to influence the entire
organization because, if professional development is implemented correctly, it has the ability to
influence both the knowledge and motivation of teachers. Relevant to this study, an
organization’s culture involves beliefs about the significance of individual initiative and
competition, while valuing the way a group functions and collaborates (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Armed with content-specific knowledge, teachers can make substantive changes in their
practice (Englert & Tarrant, 1995), they can shift their practice to a more strategic focus to
improve instruction (Hollins et al., 2004), and they can feel more socially supported and a higher
level of authentic pedagogy occurs (Louis & Marks, 1998). These knowledge sources are
situated within professional development because learning opportunities give teachers a space
where they can improve their instructional knowledge by having meaningful discussions (Hollins
et al., 2004) about their teaching practice, having open dialogue to reflect metacognitively on
their instructional practices (Louis & Marks, 1998), and to learn new instructional strategies
(Strahan, 2003).
Peer support and collaboration influence teachers’ motivation because, through
professional conversations that improve their instructional strategies, teachers invigorate their
mind and soul (Thoonen et al., 2011). In addition, by developing a shared school purpose
through collaboration (supported by the organization), teachers’ initial negative attitude about
student performance and learning can change to a positive attitude (Strahan, 2003). Collaboration

34

leads to a deeper level of reflection and experimentation on one’s teaching practice (Thoonen et
al., 2011), while fulfilling a psychological need for teachers to connect with each other to build a
greater sense of purpose and meaning (Hildebrandt & Eom, 2011). By successfully
implementing relevant and contextualized professional development, learning communities, and
peer support through coaching, teachers’ motivation could ultimately improve as well.
Figure 1 demonstrates how teachers’ knowledge and motivation are interconnected and
directly related to the organizational influence of creating a culture that provides relevant
professional development, peer support through coaches, and a collaborative community.
Although the “big three” causes of performance gaps of knowledge, motivation, and
organization are individual entities, they are shown through the conceptual framework (Clark &
Estes, 2008) as tightly interwoven together and directly linked to the overall performance of the
organization. Therefore, it is important to explore teachers’ experiences with and perceptions of
professional development and learning opportunities that the organization in which they work
provides.

35

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODS
In this study, the researcher used a qualitative research design to gather and analyze data,
to explore and understand the meaning that teachers give to a social or human issue that was
framed using words and open-ended questions (Creswell, 2014). The purpose of qualitative data,
according to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), is threefold: (a) to understand how people interpret
experiences, (b) to understand how people construct their worlds, and (c) to understand what
meaning they attribute to their experiences. The insights, experiences, and understandings of
middle and high school English teachers were used to explore their perceptions of how the
organization supports or does not support their literacy instruction by improving their learning
through professional development. Qualitative data allows the researcher to make sense of the
information by “consolidating, reducing, and interpreting what people have said” to answer the
research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 202). Qualitative research is an intricate
procedure that involves both inductive and deductive reasoning by revolving between tangible
samples of data and larger more abstract ideas (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Qualitative data
allows the researcher to attain a deeper and richer contextual understanding and interpretation of
how participants construct meaning from their experiences in response to the research questions
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Qualitative data was gathered through one-on-one interviews, which were intended to
elicit views and opinions from the participants (Creswell, 2014), which is further discussed in the
following section.

36

Data Collection and Instrumentation
Interviews
For the purpose of this study, face-to-face, in-depth interviews were used to collect
qualitative data, which consisted of open-ended questions to determine the participants’
perceptions of professional development at the ISME, specifically as it related to professional
development’s ability to support their literacy instruction by improving their instructional
practices. In essence, the purpose of the interviews was to gather unique information (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016) that would be related to how teachers perceive current organizational supports
provided to them to improve literacy instruction and their recommendations for organizational
practice to support better their capacity to provide high quality literacy instruction. When
behavior cannot be observed or when past events are of interest because they cannot be
replicated, interviewing is a necessary form of data collection (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The cycle of interviews occurred during the springtime after teachers had experienced a
year of teaching at the ISME. Through informed consent forms, participants were made aware
that their participation was voluntary and they could stop their interview or participation at any
time (Glesne, 2011). Interviews were conducted in a neutral and discreet location to create an
environment that was respectful, nonjudgmental, and nonthreatening as suggested by Merriam &
Tisdell (2016). The participants were given the opportunity to have the interview conducted in
their classroom or my office, allowing for a place that was most comfortable for them. Each
participant scheduled an individual time with the researcher to visit his or her classroom or to
come to the researcher’s office, whichever was most suitable for him or her. One-on-one
interviews with the nine sampled middle and high school English teachers allowed the researcher
the opportunity to enter each individual’s world and to discover his or her experiences and

37

feelings that might directly relate to the research questions. Each teacher was interviewed once
(for about 60 minutes), through a semistructured interview protocol with open-ended questions,
to minimize the possibility of obtaining predetermined responses with an option to conduct a
follow-up interview (Creswell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2002). Although notes
were taken, the interviews were also recorded to ensure accuracy—a total of 9 hours of interview
data were gathered.
With all nine participants, a semistructured interview protocol was used that included a
variety of more or less structured questions; all questions were flexible; the most significant part
of the interview was guided by a list of questions to be explored; and, no predetermined wording
or order was made (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Asking excellent questions was the key to
obtaining important information and data; therefore, the following six types of questions were
incorporated (Patton, as cited in Merriam & Tisdell, 2016): (a) experience and behavior,
(b) opinion and values, (c) feeling, (d) knowledge, (e) sensory, and (f) background/demographic.
By asking different types of questions, the researcher provided different information valuable for
this study. The interview protocol (Appendix A), from Patton’s (2002) six kinds of questions,
was used to ensure that a consistent line of questioning was used with each individual.
Participating Stakeholders with Sampling Criteria for Interview
The sample for this study included nine middle and high school English teachers at the
ISME, who were responsible for educating students in literacy on a daily basis. Within their
classroom, they were expected to provide high-quality instruction and assessment. The
participants for this study were selected according to specific criteria to help me gain an
understanding of the problem of practice and answer the research questions.

38

The population sampled to examine perceptions of organizational support and
recommendations for organizational practice the better to support teachers’ growth were middle
and high school English teachers at the ISME. According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016),
purposeful sampling allows the researcher to discover, understand, and gain insight; therefore,
the researcher must select a sample from which the most can be learned. Merriam and Tisdell
continued to say that, to begin purposeful sampling, the researcher must decide what selection
criterion is necessary when choosing the people to be studied.
Specifically, the criteria used during the selection of participants for this study consisted
of the following elements: a male or female English teacher in middle or high school; a teacher
that was retuning for the 2018–2019 school year; and, a teacher who was employed full-time.
For the first criterion, the participants had to have been employees at the ISME to participate in
interviews so they would have a job similar to each other’s. The second criterion required that he
or she be a returning teacher for the 2018–2019 school year because I might have needed to
conduct a follow-up interview, ask clarification questions, or review the findings during member
checking. For the last sampling criterion, teachers selected to participate in this study were full
time employees because they spent the most amount of time at the ISME, and they were
involved with the day-to-day expectations and routines with students rather than a part-time
employee.
Criterion 1. A male or female middle or high school English teacher employed at the
ISME.
Criterion 2. A teacher that is returning for the 2018–2019 school year.
Criterion 3. Employed full time at the ISME.

39

To recruit participants for the one-on-one interviews, I reached out to the middle and high
school principals to seek their permission for the study and to identify teachers who met the
criteria. Once the potential participants were identified, they were sent an email, explaining the
purpose of the study, the research questions, and the way that their voluntary participation would
be used to improve teacher support at the ISME. If teachers were interested in participating in the
study, they sent me an email notifying me of their interest. We then corresponded through email
until a one-on-one interview was scheduled with me that was most convenient for the participant.
To show appreciation for their participation in the study, the participants were sent a thank you
email, and they were offered a coffee of their choice from Caribou.
Although the focus was the research questions, I collected detailed information from all
of the participants (e.g., age, experience, years at the ISME, teaching certificate, master’s degree,
and nationality). The perceptions of the current organizational support provided to teachers were
examined to understand the organization gaps to determine the ways that the organization could
better support teachers’ knowledge, motivation, and ultimately, their literacy instruction.
Data Analysis
During data analysis, the researcher determined the essential themes or patterns that were
relevant across all cases of teachers and the organization’s ability to support their instruction at
the ISME (Johnson & Christensen, 2015). Analytic tools, thinking techniques used to facilitate
the coding process, were used to help categorize and dissect the interview data to illustrate
patterns and themes (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). These tools provided a way to gain a holistic
relationship of the conceptual framework linked directly to the research questions. Thinking
Technique 1, questioning, allowed the researcher to probe, develop alternative answers, think
outside the box, and become familiar with the data (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Thinking

40

Technique 2, making comparisons, was used to determine how responses compared across
different questions and whether a common theme or thread was apparent from the responses
(Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Thinking Technique 3, looking at language, was used to provide
insight into the experiences of the participants and their philosophical orientation—language
from the participants provided tremendous awareness of their beliefs (Corbin & Strauss, 2008).
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Maxwell (2013) defined validity as “the correctness or credibility of a description,
conclusion, explanation, interpretation, or other sort of account” (p. 122). Qualitative research is
constructed on assumptions and people’s experiences; therefore, the qualitative research
produced must be valid, while it is retrieved in an ethical manner (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). By
paying close attention to the study’s conceptualization and the manner in which the data were
collected, analyzed, interpreted, and presented, a study’s credibility can be improved (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). A consistent focus to ensure trustworthiness with the interview protocol, data
collection, and the analysis and interpretation of data can lead to useful research that has the
potential to improve teacher performance and satisfaction. Strategies for promoting credibility
included a critical self-reflection of the researcher through reflexivity, a detailed trail of
procedures, and rich descriptions of the findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
A researcher’s reflexivity refers to acknowledging the researcher’s assumptions,
worldview, biases, and relationship to the study that might affect the findings. To counter the
validity threat that my assumptions would shape the findings in ways that were not accurate,
open-ended questions were used during the interviews to minimize indications of research bias. I
was the sole interviewer, which established consistency and presented standard instructions that
were clear to participants in an attempt to eliminate any confusion. All efforts were made to

41

reduce external effects of timing, calendar, and distractions and ask questions had a moderate
level of ease for participants (Salkind, 2017). I was the primary instrument for data collection
and analysis; therefore, it was imperative that I identified, made visible, and monitored any
potential biases that could have influenced the data collection and interpretation (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). An obvious bias was that I worked as the elementary school principal in the
organization that was studied and, therefore, I have a stake in the success of the school. During
this process of data collection, I reviewed my personal biases and assumptions prior to reviewing
the findings to establish a clear baseline, while considering the extensive history related to the
topic. To achieve a complete and thorough understanding of the topic, I conducted an extensive
literature review on all topics related to my study. Through this process, a detailed procedural
review additionally occurred to confirm the audit trail of findings for validly sake. I made a
detailed account of the methods, procedures, and decision points throughout the study. All
concluding findings were developed with enough description to contextualize the study in a
manner that was reasonable to common understanding, and such that readers could review the
findings for comparability to their own related situations.
Significant issues facing any research are a study’s validity and reliability, and much of
the responsibility lies with the researcher to minimize these threats (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
By implementing reflexivity, an audit trail, and providing rich descriptions, I hoped to ensure
both a credible and trustworthy study. Through careful attention to the study’s conceptualization
and the way in which data were collected, analyzed, interpreted, and the way in which the
findings were presented, concerns of credibility and trustworthiness were addressed (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).

42

Ethics
The primary purpose of a researcher is to achieve an understanding of how people make
sense of their lives, describe the process they experienced, and recount how individuals explain a
particular experience, as directly related to the research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To
ensure respect for persons, beneficence, and justice, it was imperative to make ethical decisions
when carrying out this study. The credibility of the research, specifically the validity (is the
research credible?) and reliability (is there consistency in the findings?), depended upon the
ethics of me, the investigator (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Participants of the study were recruited through an email, which identified the purpose of
the study and their voluntary participation. To avoid coercion or pressure to participate, an email
was sent out and, if they were interested in participating in the study, they would email me back
expressing their interest. After emailing back-and-forth a few times to determine a suitable time
and place, the interview was determined. At the commencement of the study, information forms
were given to all participants to ensure that they knew that (a) their participation would be
voluntary, (b) all information collected would be kept confidential, and (c) they could freely
leave the study at any point during the study (Glesne, 2011; Krueger & Casey, 2009). Full efforts
were made to provide participants sufficient information to make informed decisions about
participating in the study, and they were provided with the choice to withdraw from the study at
any point without penalty. I obtained informed consent forms in writing from participants,
allowing each to indicate his or her interests that might affect the research and noting the
dynamic and continuous nature of consent. Permission to record subjects was obtained prior to
the compilation of data, while also reminding the subjects periodically of the presence of the
recorder. All data (interview transcripts and audio recordings) were stored within a secured

43

storage location for confidentiality purposes. At no time during the study did I enter the
classroom of the teachers participating in the study to observe them teach. I respected the
participants in the study.
To ensure the safety of all participants, I submitted the study to the University of
Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) and followed its rules and guidelines
regarding the protection of the rights and welfare of the participants in this study. On April 20,
2018, I received Institutional Review Board approval to conduct my research study. To prevent
any form of coercion, participants were informed that they would not receive any means of
incentives or compensation for their participation in the study. I reminded interview participants
that this study was voluntary and their identity would be kept confidential. However, at the
conclusion of the study, I sent each participant a thank you email and offered to purchase a
coffee of their choosing to show my thanks and appreciation.
Limitations and Delimitations
At the time of this study, I was the elementary principal at the ISME. I knew some of the
participants, but did not serve in any supervisory capacity over the participants. A possible
limitation for this study was that the participants were dishonest with their answers or telling me
what they thought I wanted to hear during the one-on-one interviews. The decision to interview
the research participants in a 1-hour, audio recorded, face-to-face setting at school could have
influenced the truthfulness of the respondents as well, even though we were in a safe and
confidential environment. Another limitation was the size of the sample: initially, my goal was to
interview 12–15 teachers.
A delimitation for this study was that only middle school and high school English
teachers were part of the population studied; all other teachers were not included - the study

44

comprised of nine participants and only two out of the nine participants were men. In addition,
classroom observations were not conducted; therefore, teachers were not observed teaching a
literacy lesson or observed during any professional development opportunities. As such, I relied
primarily on self-reported interview data without the ability to observe teachers directly in the
context of the organization and in their classrooms. In addition, another delimitation was the
knowledge–motivation–organization framework, for this approach originally limited the study to
only knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences affecting the ISME. It bound the
study in such a way that it limited participant responses during interviews.

45

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS
This chapter presents the findings from interview data collected that related to the
research questions that guided this study:
1. How does professional development at the ISME support teachers’ literacy
instruction by improving their learning?
2. What are teachers’ recommendations for organizational practice, specifically the
provision of professional development, to support better their knowledge and
motivation to provide high-quality literacy instruction?
A description of the participating stakeholders is presented, which is followed by the findings
that related to the research questions and conceptual framework. Implications, recommendations,
and future research sections follow, after which the researcher concludes the study.
Participating Stakeholders
The sample for this study included nine middle and high school English teachers from the
ISME, who were responsible for educating students in literacy on a daily basis. Overall, of the 15
teachers (Canadian or American) who were asked to participate in the study as full-time
employees of the middle school and high school, nine teachers actually participated. The average
age of the nine participants was 31 years, with the youngest being 24 years and the oldest being
39 years. Seven female teachers and two male teachers were interviewed. Their total years in
teaching varied from 1 year to 11 years of experience; the average tenure at the ISME was 2.2
years. Six of the nine participants held a master’s degree and all held a valid teaching certificate.
Lastly, of the nine teachers, seven were American and two were Canadian. Table 1 displays the
relevant characteristics of the teachers interviewed.

46

Table 1
Summary of Teachers Interviewed
Name
(pseudonym) Age
Years in
teaching
Years at the
ISME
Master’s
degree
(yes or no)
Teaching
certificate
(yes or no)
Home
country
Layanne 31 8 4 Y Y USA
Kim 36 9 2 Y Y USA
Sarah 27 4 2 N Y USA
Maria 24 1 1 N Y USA
Newton 39 10 4 Y Y USA
Kari 29 3 2 Y Y USA
Samantha 37 11 2 Y Y USA
Mike 28 3 1 Y Y Canada
Emily 25 2 2 N Y Canada
Note. ISME = International School of the Middle East.
The interviews for this study were conducted over 3 weeks with nine individuals who satisfied
the selection criteria. The findings are organized into the two research questions.
Teachers’ Perceptions of How Professional Development Supports Their Learning
From the one-on-one interviews, six themes emerged that were related to the teachers’
perceptions of how the organization supports their learning. Theme 1 was that teachers felt that
they were gaining knowledge in their understanding of the Reader’s and Writer’s Workshop;
however, they were learning this knowledge by trial-and-error or from an informal relationship
that they sought out. Theme 2 was that, although participants valued the importance of reflecting
on their teaching practices to improve their craft and the learning experience for their students, it

47

was almost entirely done in isolation without the direct support of the organization. Theme 3 was
that a disconnection appeared to exist between what the organization said it was doing for
professional development and what the teachers felt they were receiving from the organization.
Theme 4 was that, although the participants of the study felt unsupported through organizational
professional development to improve their instructional practice, they nevertheless found
informal ways to support their professional growth with fellow colleagues. Theme 5 was that
participants felt that the school was not investing in them professionally, either on a personal or a
collective level. Theme 6 was that the participants expressed their appreciation and value in
collaborating with peers, but that they wanted more structures in place so that common planning
time would be used more effectively.
Felt Unsupported
The general perception of the current organizational support provided by the school
through internal professional development to improve their instruction was consistent among all
nine participants: they felt unsupported. Most of the participants had something to say about how
the professional development was lacking in some way if that is the right term. For example,
Samantha shared, “PD [professional development] is very much lacking, almost nonexistent.”
Maria supported this view, saying, “I don’t think we have a lot of professional development at
all.” Newman et al. (2000) found that a school’s professional development should be
coordinated, focused on clear learning goals, and sustained over a duration of time, something
neither Samantha nor Maria saw was happening. Newton also offered a similar but more detailed
description of his perception of the current reality of professional development at the ISME:
I’d describe it as underwhelming. I think that the school has a right-minded approach to
professional development, and in the school, everyone in the school understands that PD

48

is important and valuable, but there is no focus or purpose. I think we’ve struggled to put
effective PD into place.
Newton believed that the school understood the importance and significance of professional
development, but that it lacked the successful implementation of effective professional
development, which is what ultimately influences teachers’ knowledge. When Newton
mentioned a “right-minded approach,” he was referring to the belief that upper management
understands the value and importance of professional development, but that no follow-through
existed to provide it. When Newton commented on having “no focus or purpose,” it related to
Newman et al.’s (2000) belief that uncoordinated programs, those that do not align with teachers’
goals, do not improve staff learning.
Kari reported her frustration with having to participate in professional development just
for the sake of doing professional development and not taking the opportunity to make it more
useful and meaningful for teachers. A consistent theme of useless and aimless professional
development resonated through many of the interviews. Kari discussed:
I think our culture is okay, we’ll do a PD, but are we actually going to use it? We have
one workshop and that is it. I feel as though teachers don’t see it as “Oh, this is an
opportunity that maybe I might gain something and be able to use it”; it’s more “Oh, we
have to do this.”
Kari noted the lack of relevancy with the current professional development and whether teachers
could use any of the information provided in their classroom. When Kari said, “We have to do
this,” she communicated the perception that professional development was provided simply to
meet compliance, and that less care was taken to provide effective professional development that
would be relevant and useful for teachers, and that could actually help them learn something.

49

Kari defined professional development as “any kind of experience I could bring into my own
classroom and share or apply.” Desimone et al. (2002) stressed the importance of making
professional development coherent, coordinated, and continued over time to support best the
needs of teachers, which is something that Kari noted was missing in the current professional
development opportunities.
Informal Support Structures
The participants felt unsupported by the organization; therefore, they sought out informal
supports. Although the participants felt that they were not learning through traditional
organizational structures of professional development, they were gaining knowledge through
informal structures that were specifically related to the Lucy Calkins’ and Teachers College
Reading and Writing Project colleagues’ (2018) Units, Tools, and Methods for Teaching Reading
and Writing: A Workshop Curriculum – Grades K–8. In fact, all nine participants in the study
agreed that the skills that they gained in their literacy instruction were directly related to the
workshop model. Most teachers felt good with their knowledge development and understanding
of the workshop model of teaching, but it was usually unclear whether they attained that
particular knowledge. When talking about what new literacy skills she learned at the ISME, Kim
mentioned how she learned to engage students in reading. She said:
I would say because we used the reading and writing workshop model here as pedagogy
I’ve learned a lot about how to engage kids in reading. Not necessarily the technical skills
of reading, but engaging kids in wanting to read so getting kids excited about reading.
Kim relayed a common theme, which was mentioned by four participants, that teachers learned
how to engage and excite students with various genres of texts. With an international population
of students, Kim felt that her knowledge of how to engage students in reading and getting them

50

“excited about reading” greatly improved. Along with other participants, Kim was very proud of
improving the students’ reading engagement by understanding the importance of providing
students with choices during their lessons. How Kim attained the knowledge to improve reading
engagement was unclear, for she did not refer to professional development related to reading
engagement, but simply said that they “used the reading and writing workshop model.” One
might conclude that she had figured out student engagement through observations.
The ISME adopted the Reader’s and Writer’s Workshop was 4 years ago, and Sarah
discussed her early implementation of the Lucy Calkins and TCRWP colleagues (2018)
workshop and the way that it allowed her students more choice in what they wanted to read. This
choice allowed for greater student ownership and autonomy of their learning through active
choice. She compared her students’ experience with her own learning experience and the way
that she (and her entire class) had had to read the same book that the teacher had determined.
Sarah explained:
The Lucy Calkins curriculum is very new to me, but I’ve become more familiar with it. I
think that how she applies reading what you want so that the kids get to choose their
books. There’s no set work. When I was in school, you had to read Shakespeare, you had
to read To Kill a Mockingbird, whereas now they can pick whatever they want. Which
sometimes is a little bit tricky because you have to kind of guide them, but then I’ve also
learned what are good books for these groups of kids, or they can read graphic novels if
they want. I think that the Lucy Calkins program has changed my viewpoint.
Sarah believed that the Lucy Calkins and TCWRP colleagues (2018) model of teaching changed
her instructional approach (that literacy instruction should involve whole-class novel instruction,
such as she experienced) to a centers or small-groups approach to teaching literacy. Although she

51

found it “a little bit tricky” at first, she alluded to the benefits of learning “what are good books
for these groups of kids” and by giving them choice. The challenging experience that Sarah went
through during her implementation phase could be seen as an area in which Guskey’s (2002)
support was required to allow “those engaged in the difficult process of implementation to
tolerate anxiety and occasional failures” (p. 388).
Similar to Sarah, Layanne mentioned how she was introduced to the workshop model and
how the literacy coach taught her specific reading strategies that moved away from the whole-
class novel experience: “I was introduced to the Reader’s and Writer’s Workshop. We worked
with our literacy coach at the time, and she taught different reading strategies, specifically
around Reader’s Notebook and pushing kids away from whole-class novel instruction.”
Layanne’s comments, that Sarah had previously discussed, suggest that she had learned how to
move kids away from whole-class novel instruction towards an individualized or small-group
literacy setting. Additionally, Layanne was the only participant who talked specifically about
getting direct support from her literacy coach to improve her teaching practice. Her comments
briefly touched on the power of a coach in providing ongoing support to help a teacher with a
specific skill or strategy (in this case reading strategies) that enabled Layanne to continue her
training in her classroom.
Kari, a young teacher, talked about her initial experience with Lucy Calkins’ and
TCRWP (2018) workshop because she had never used it before and about her need for support.
She recounted:
I’d say reader’s workshop. I’d never done it before. I did need some support as to how to
implement it. It was a learning curve, but I have learned how to run conferences, how to
ask the right types of questions to the students so that I’m not giving answers per se, but

52

helping them delve a bit further into their own knowledge to be able to self-apply and be
more independent. I find it a struggle as an eighth-grade teacher in this generation to try
and encourage and prompt literacy and reading. I think, in general, it’s a tougher age
group to teach that, but it’s so valuable. I mean, it’s a fundamental skill.
Kari discussed her experience with learning and understanding the workshop model of teaching
and commented how “I did need some support” suggesting that coaches were not being used in
that capacity. She mentioned her struggle with getting students in Grade 8 excited to read, but
she recognized how “it’s a fundamental skill” for all students. Kari explained how it was a
learning curve, but learning the skill of how to conference with students and improve her style of
questioning allowed her students to expand their knowledge and be more independent learners.
Thus, she perceived an increase in her conceptual knowledge related to working with students in
a more student-centered way. Garet et al. (2001) referred to this feature of professional
development as focusing on content, a process in which teachers focus on changes in their
teaching practice such as the teaching strategies that Kari mentioned.
Newton, an experienced teacher, talked about feeling very strong in his content
knowledge and instructional practice and that the school helped him strengthen the knowledge he
felt that he already had. He described:
I think I brought with me most of my practice. I came here as a seasoned teacher, so I
think most of my practices were pretty well established by the time I came here. I think
that I did get a bit tightened up as far as the Calkins model of reading workshop goes, so I
run a much tighter writing workshop in line with her processes than I did before.
Newton described how he had a strong foundation in the workshop model of teaching prior to
joining ISME, but his experience helped him “run a much tighter writing workshop” than he did

53

before, demonstrating growth and improvement in his craft as an educator, despite perceiving
himself as a “seasoned teacher.”
Although Samantha did talk about developing her conceptual knowledge related to Lucy
Calkins’ and TCRWP colleagues (2018) workshop model, she was the only participant who
talked about attaining knowledge within a different realm of teaching: standards-based grading.
She elaborated:
I became better at standards-based grading and aligning the standards to reading. And I
would say that this is directly a result of this school, this alignment. And also better
refining my ability to do the Lucy Calkins workshop model. Yes, I did know a bit before,
but I didn’t really get the freedom to implement and do it until I came here.
At first, Samantha talked about gaining a better understanding of standards-based grading and
aligning those standards to her reading instruction. Similar to all the participants, Samantha
talked about the workshop model of teaching and the “freedom” she experienced at the ISME
when she implemented the Lucy Calkins and TCRWP colleagues (2018) workshop, referring to
having the chance to fully integrate the program.
Coaching
Galbraith and Anstrom (1995) suggested that, when a culture of coaching that provides
accountability, support, and specific feedback over time, teachers experience a positive change in
their instructional behaviors. Not reflective of this practice, Emily disclosed a lack of purpose
and direction with professional development and the ineffective use of coaches:
I think that we say that we have a sense of PD, but I don’t think that we do. I think part of
the issue is the resources. I also don’t think coaches are used as effectively as they could
be, nor are they clearly as defined as they should be. So that coaches are going in and

54

understanding exactly what their role is, then creating transparency between what a
literacy coach or an instructional coach does, and what teachers know. Like, what do they
expect their coach to do. I think there’s not enough transparency or understanding
between the two.
A common pattern, presented by Emily and other participants, was the disconnection between
what the school says it does and what the school actually does. In addition, she raised two issues
regarding coaches at the ISME. First, she felt that coaches were not being used effectively or that
people did not understand the role of the coach. Emily felt that a lack of a relationship existed
between herself and the coach. Second, she believed that, by creating more transparency about
the actual role of a coach, teachers would better understand how to use them more effectively as
a resource. Coaches should support teachers through consistent teacher–coach meetings,
informal conversations, team meetings, and classroom observations (Kovic, 1996).
The data suggest that most teachers were involved with what Birman et al. (2000), Garet
et al. (2001), and Desimone (2009) refer to as collective participation—the participation of
teachers from the same department, subject, or grade. In this situation, teachers were collectively
participating in the implementation of Lucy Calkins’ and TCRWP colleagues (2018) workshop.
Although the study’s participants did not explicitly state it, their experiences describe collective
participation—an opportunity for teachers to integrate what they learn with other areas of their
instructional content because all the other teachers are also implementing the same program,
allowing teachers to share resources. In addition, collective participation contributes to a shared
professional culture in which teachers who use the same program “develop a common
understanding of instructional goals, methods, problems, and solutions” (Birman et al., 2000,
p. 30).

55

Reflection in Isolation
The organization did not provide formal structures for teachers’ reflection. Nevertheless,
they were reflecting, but in a limited way. The overwhelming perception of the teachers
regarding whether they reflected on their instructional practice was that most of them felt that
they did reflect on their teaching. In fact, eight of the nine participants in the study claimed to
reflect on their teaching practice, but only one did it with a peer. Of the nine participants in this
study, only one said she did not reflect. Layanne remarked, “No, I do not reflect on my teaching,
I probably should.” Layanne was quite honest and upfront, but she also realized that she should
probably start reflecting on her teaching practice. All of the participants who said that they
reflected on their teaching were aligned with Wilson’s (2008) three areas of reflection in his
review of Schon’s (1987) work on a reflective practitioner: reflection-on-action, reflection-in-
action, and reflecting-on-the-future. In addition, a few participants demonstrated the ability to
reflect in more than one phase.
Mike talked about reflecting on his teaching practice, but that he did not do it on a regular
basis or as much as he thought he should. Mike recalled:
I probably do not reflect as much as I could, but I reflect weekly or at least after a unit. I
try and think about what I could’ve done better. With having three of the same class I’m
usually changing something one class to the next just because something might work or
something I said helped a little bit more.
Mike described the way that he reflected through reflection-on-action at the end of the week or
after a unit had been completed. He also mentioned that he made changes because of this
reflection. Reflection-on-action allows a practitioner to reflect consciously on past actions;
therefore, the practitioner has an opportunity to evaluate and understand what happened, and

56

then to identify possible areas for improvement (Wilson, 2008). Mike detailed his ability to
reflect on a lesson and make necessary adjustments because “something might work” along with
his ability to improve his verbal instruction because “something I said helped a little bit more.”
Through Mike’s explanations, he indicated that the organization was not supporting him in his
process of reflection, yet, individually, he was able to improve his metacognition.
Different from Mike, Newton explained and went into detail about how he typically
reflects-in-action to improve his learning environment. He said:
I reflect all the time during my lessons. As students are working or not working, as the
case may be, I try to think about what did I do to scaffold that environment. If everyone’s
on task and they’re all obviously learning, what did I do to make that happen? If students
are off task or uninterested, what did I do to make that happen?
Nathan commented twice “what did I do to make that happen?” referring to reflection-in-action
which draws upon internalized knowledge to inform and guide current behavior in the immediate
present (Wilson, 2008). Nathan was seeking a deeper understanding regarding “when” and
“why” (Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011) something was or was not working in his classroom
environment. According to him, he would reflect “during” his lessons. Similar to Mike, Newton
experienced individual reflection that helped him improve his instruction, but he did not receive
support from the organization in this process.
Sarah described her experience of reflecting on her instructional practices, which
exhibited how she reflected on-action. She chronicled:
Yes, I do. Sometimes a lesson goes completely wrong, or it’s too long, it’s too short,
sometimes my time management doesn’t work out, so I have to tweak it. I also change
things, depending on the class that I have. One of my groups is really quiet and they’re

57

not fond of group work, so I have to push them. Whereas I have another class that they
always participate in group work, where it’s a lot of management. I have to really keep
everyone on track and make sure that I’m conferencing with each group.
She explained how when a lesson was not going well, either too short or too long, she needed to
“tweak” (make an immediate change) to her lesson to fit how her students were performing,
representing her ability to reflect-in-action by ‘thinking on her feet’ (Wilson, 2008) when a quick
response was needed for immediate action. She further described the drastic differences in
student behavior between two classes, in which one class needed a lot of one-one-one support
and another class was much more independent. She thought about and reflected upon what
teaching strategies worked and which strategies did not work, and whether these learning
activities helped students learn. Like Mike and Newton, Sarah discussed how she, on her own,
routinely reflected on her lessons to make any necessary changes to improve her instruction. She
made no indication that the organization supported her efforts during her reflective practices.
One participant, Samantha, described her experiences of reflecting on her instructional
practices, which exhibited how she has evolved from looking at external factors to internal
factors. She stated:
I reflect an overwhelming amount. That’s all I do. I beat myself up about it. I view myself
as almost someone who’s always calibrating what I’m doing. In the early years, it’s
almost like this lesson didn’t work, or this method didn’t work, that means the method is
terrible. But I feel like now it’s kind of no, maybe Socratic seminars aren’t terrible, but
maybe it’s the type of questions I’m asking. Or maybe it’s that I didn’t give them enough
background. So I’m just always fiddling with things, which can kind of be frustrating.

58

When she said, “I beat myself up,” Samantha indicated how she was very hard on herself. This
would suggest that she was very self-aware and has high expectations of her performance. She
described an evolution of her reflective practice from her early years as a teacher, when she
blamed the method (external), to her later years when she was becoming more internally
reflective so that she critiqued her instructional strategies. Samantha found reflection and
“fiddling with things” a frustrating experience, but Clark and Estes (2008) felt it was necessary
for teachers to go through a process of reflection and experimentation that could be arduous and
uncomfortable, but would lead to better teacher practices. Samantha’s comment about being
frustrated suggests that she is doing something right, and that she has metacognitive knowledge,
for it should not be a comfortable, straightforward process.
Another participant, Maria, described her experiences reflecting on her instructional
practices which exhibited how she reflected-on-action and reflected-on-the-future. Maria
expressed:
It really just depends on the time of year because, if it’s right when grades are due and
it’s really hectic time of year, it’s more “Oh in hindsight, I should’ve done this
differently.” But currently, right now, in a different example we’re just finishing up a
reading unit that I did, and I found that the kids didn’t do as well on the summative [as]
they did on the formative. I really stuck to a Lucy frame and did the whole system, and
I’m really confused at why those results came out. This is actually my first time sitting
down and talking to my literacy coach about it, and just say like “Here’s what happened.
Why do you think this was the outcome when it should have gone this way?” That’s more
of a conferencing style of reflection. But usually, when I do it, I just think back on things
and think how I wanna do it in the future.

59

Maria talked about how her reflection was dependent on the time of year: if it was a very busy
time of year, it was much more casual than when it was not as busy. On a recent reading unit, she
explained how students performed much better on their formative assessment than on their
summative assessment and that she could not figure out why. Maria was the only participant who
talked about reflecting, through collaboration, with another colleague. Through reflection-on-
action with her literacy coach, Maria was trying to sort out what happened during the reading
unit, and how she could improve the future performance of her students. Although not a PLC,
this participant was the sole participant who spoke about deprivatizing her practice to focus on
improving her teaching practice and cultivating a supportive relationship with a colleague (Louis
& Marks, 1998). She discussed how she wanted to improve her future performance when she
said, “How I wanna do it in the future,” but she did not go into detail about which strategies were
required. Maria was the first participant who talked about a lack of structure the organization
offered when learning how and when to reflect as she described her experience as “more of a
conferencing style of reflection.”
Kim, too, recounted how she used reflection-on-the-future to improve her instructional
capacity the following year. Kim said:
I do reflect. What I do because I have a terrible memory is that, usually, if a lesson hasn’t
gone particularly well, I take these Google slides and I’ll take notes in the note section
about what to do differently next time because, otherwise, I’ll forget. In a year’s time
from now, it will have totally slipped my mind.
Reflection-on-the-future refers to how we might reflect on the future by imagining various
possibilities and the strategies which are needed to achieve them (Wilson, 2008). Being self-
aware and recognizing that she does not possess a strong memory, Kim talked about her strategy

60

to write thoughts and ideas down “about what to do differently next time” to improve the lesson,
which is consistent with the idea of imagining various possibilities and strategies with which to
experiment.
Collaborative Time
There are limited, if any, formal structures for improving literacy instruction. In the
absence of the organization providing opportunities for collaboration, the teachers still sought it
out. Seven out of nine participants found that (a) working with a peer through a one-on-one
situation or (b) working with a team in more of a collaborative setting was extremely beneficial.
A few participants discussed the utility value they gained from working collaboratively and why
the organization should encourage and offer collaborative opportunities with structures in place.
Sarah indicated the power of communication during collaborative time. She remarked:
No man or no woman can really work in isolation, I think, and come out to be the best
that they can be. Honestly, even if just the only value of working with someone is to have
someone to talk with, that’s still a valuable element in the workflow process. I think the
value is far beyond that, and you get ideas that go back and forth, and they build on each
other.
Sarah talked about having someone to talk with in the “workflow process,” but she alluded to a
far greater value beyond that perhaps referring to becoming “the best that they can be” by
learning from each other. Sarah mentioned the importance of just having “someone to talk with”
as an important component in the working environment because teaching can be so isolating.
Through conversations, teachers can “get ideas that go back and forth,” which can improve their
teaching practices. According to Vescio et al. (2008), an important part of collaboration is the
time set aside to analyze and reflect on one’s teaching practice and to engage in productive

61

discussions of teaching and learning. Saunders et al. (2009) found that a key element of
promoting effective discussions is for teachers to focus on cause-and-effect relationships
between certain instructional strategies and student learning.
Samantha discussed not merely the instructional support of collaboration, but also the
less tangible areas such as insight and advice of working as an expat in a foreign country. She
recounted:
It’s not just instructional support that you get through that, but it’s also just having . . .
Teaching is a very isolating profession. You’re with the kids for most of the day, and you
don’t have a chance to really talk because you’re grading. That has really helped too in
terms of, for me, coming in as a first year teacher to a new country, it was like “What’s
the culture like? What can I expect from the kids?” That’s something that if I didn’t have
that instructional shared time, I wouldn’t have been able to figure out. It would’ve been a
lot harder to figure. It would’ve been actually learning as you go, so much as just a heads
up, students might do this, but this is the expectation.
Along with the value of collaboration for the purposes of building instructional knowledge,
Samantha also recognized how important it is to receive cultural information regarding cultural
nuances and students’ expectations through informal discussions with peers. In this example,
Samantha named the “instructional shared time” specifically, a time set aside by the organization
to allow teachers to collaborate. Some participants saw this time as a planning period and others
viewed as an opportunity to discuss other areas of education. Saunders et al. (2009) found that
when teachers were given consistent meeting times, school-wide instructional leadership, and
protocols that focused on the academic needs of students, significant academic gains were made.
A few other participants agreed with Samantha’s comment, especially because moving to a new

62

country to teach is quite challenging. Although research has found that collaboration between
teachers is extremely beneficial, this is especially true in a school like the ISME where teachers
must need extra support because they must also contend with a new culture and environment.
The teacher turnover rate is high; therefore, the school helps new teachers acclimatize to a new
environment and culture in many different ways: (a) an orientation committee helps to answer
their questions, and (b) they are given a “buddy” teacher to answer any questions—to name just
a few ways. However, Kim talked about the positive nature of collaboration that helped teachers
who were new to the ISME. She described:
I would say yeah. We have a lot of turnover in teachers. What happens, especially at the
beginning of every year, is the collaborative time is spent, “What assessments are we
giving? When are we giving them? What lessons are we doing and when?” Our plans are
very well, at least in literacy in middle school, very well in sync. All the teams are doing
this same lesson on the same date almost without exception. All of the time. Same
assessments. I see the potential there for it to go well beyond planning, but it’s hard once
the teams of teachers have gotten into that habit because they need it in the beginning
because they’re new and unfamiliar with the curriculum. It’s kind of really hard to then
start to pull them away from that planning time and ask them to do things like look at
formative assessment or do a book study.
Kim discussed how collaborative team planning time helped new teachers to stay on track and
helped teams to stay on the same page. Usually, all of the meetings at the beginning of the year
were focused on what assessments were coming up and what lesson was being taught. Kim saw
the value in this planning time, especially for new hires. Graham (2007) found significant value
in teachers having professional conversations around instructional strategies and how

63

professionally rewarding they are for teachers. Additionally, Kim saw great potential for making
those collaborative times more than just planning meetings by getting teachers to look at
formative assessments or to take part in a book study. Yet, she found it potentially challenging to
move teachers away from planning together because “teachers have gotten into that habit” and
this gave them comfort and seemed to be quite useful.
Informal Relationships
Emily talked about learning from so many different teachers, regardless of their subject
area, through conversations. Emily elaborated:
You just learn so much from so many people. I find like even talking to someone who
teaches math or someone who teaches social studies is always something you can learn
for your own subject that they kind of have a different point of view or perspective.
Something that maybe you’re not seeing. I think just talking and having a relationship
with your colleagues that way you can discuss school or work or anything like that, helps
a lot.
Emily found tremendous value from collaborating with a variety of teachers, whether they taught
math or social studies because, as she reported, they have a “different point of view” to offer.
Whitcomb et al. (2009) found that a strong support network that is safe, trusting, and respectful
helps teachers improve and grow as educators. Emily mentioned the power of “talking and
having a relationship with your colleagues” so that she can chat about school or areas of work
that she needed to.
In-depth, Maria discussed the incredible value she placed on her relationship with a
colleague, who she considered to be her mentor. Maria explained:

64

I view it as the mentorship of a lifetime. We got together at the beginning to plan for
honors night because we both teach that and we just clicked. She definitely has pushed
me the most because she’s willing to try anything and I think that’s the thing that is the
most important . . . is like it’s never a no, it’s always an “Okay cool. Let’s tweak it a little
bit, but let’s do it,” and she is willing to jump off the deep end on these random crazy
projects that maybe wouldn’t have ever worked. Dialogue, reflection, and being able to
talk about different students and what they’re into in ninth grade, things that they’re
interested in and all of that kind of stuff is very helpful.
Maria conversed about how her mentor relationship “just clicked” after they planned for an
honors night and then that transitioned into a relationship where Maria felt both pushed and
supported. She talked about how her mentor was “willing to try anything” when it came to
exploring different ideas and through dialogue and reflection they were able to talk about grade
nine students. Briscoe and Peters (1997) found that a positive support network, who are trying
similar activities and available to discuss the positives and negatives, gives teachers the strength
to take more risks. Maria seemed to recognize the value of this relationship as suggested in the
literature. Their particular relationship was established by their own action and initiative and was
not set-up by the organization. Had they not “got together,” which was quite informal and
internally driven, they might not have developed this relationship
The collaborative relationships that teachers referenced, for the most part, were
established informally. Formal structures were not in place and little professional development
money was available to attend regional workshops; therefore, teachers needed to create informal
interactions between each other to provide the necessary support. Kim described a culture of

65

professional support through informal teacher collaboration, where teachers help each other out
to become better educators. She elaborated:
I would say the main source of professional development we have here is each other. I
think people really rely on each other to learn, especially in middle school. We have, in
the last 2 years since I’ve been here, a really highly talented staff, people with a lot of
experience. I know people rely on each other. I would say there’s a lot of potential for
some more serious or more focused community of professional development that we’re
not tapping into.
Kim discussed a culture of teachers coming together, learning from each other, and relying on
each other for their learning. She seemed to suggest that this needed to be formalized. What Kim
described, Englert and Tarrant (1995) also reported as a professional learning community in
which teachers came together to talk about their instruction, which led to more insight and
knowledge about their teaching practice. Internal structures of professional development that are
focused on teacher goals, built on prior activities, and involve collaboration between teachers
and administrators are crucial to providing coherent professional development (Desimone, 2009).
Two key areas of a PLC are professional collaboration and a focus on learning (Garrett, 2010),
which Kristi reported was happening in the middle school between colleagues.
Extending collaboration outside of the organization, Layanne talked about a very similar
and powerful relationship that she had with a colleague and how their collaboration shaped their
instruction and unit planning. Layanne remarked:
Usually it’s in my living room. Usually it’s over dinner. So, when we start, we don’t
actually use the UBD [Understanding by Design] at first, because it’s sort of
overwhelming. So, usually we start with an idea, or something that makes us curious, and

66

then we start throwing spaghetti against the wall. Wouldn’t it be cool if? Wouldn’t it be
neat if? I find so much value working with someone else and feeling safe as we move
from the broad picture to more specifics. And after that process, then we sort of narrow
down and figure out what are the standards that we have to teach? And then with pulling
the piece of spaghetti and combining that with the standards, we can kind of get an idea
of what that end product is.
Layanne talked about how her collaboration with a colleague happened in her apartment, usually
over dinner, as they would begin with an idea and “start throwing spaghetti against the wall” in
reference to brainstorming as many other ideas as possible. By extending their professional
relationship beyond the organization’s walls, it demonstrated how valuable both Layanne and her
colleague viewed collaboration. They did not simply see their job as confined to the hours and
walls of the ISME. She articulated the value that she found in working alongside someone else,
while “feeling safe” in the process that they went through. Briscoe and Peters (1997) talked
about the way that collaboration allows teachers to have a safe, open space to talk openly and
freely about what went well and what did not go well. By opening up her living room to a fellow
colleague after work and by engaging in dialogue that moved from “the broad picture to more
specifics,” Layanne described a place where she and a colleague felt safe to collaborate actively.
Teacher Confidence
The overall perception of collaboration (time the organization provided during the work
day for colleagues to collaborate)—whether it was in a group setting, one-on-one, or observing
another teacher—was positive and it was perceived to greatly improve teacher’s self-efficacy.
Mike discussed his experience working with his team and how that made him feel more
confident in what he was about to start teaching. He said,

67

Usually, we’ll sit down before unit starts and come up with what standards we wanna use
to teach, break down those standards, figure out minilessons for those standards, and then
choose kind of how we’re going to assess those standards both formatively and
summatively, Usually it’s kind of bouncing ideas back and forth and that’s the best part,
going through whether this would work with each class and what wouldn’t work, and
trying to come up with something that’ll work well. This time together makes me feel
pretty confident in what and how I need to teach my students going into the unit.
Mike began talking about how he and his team break down a unit before they start teaching it,
which gives them a roadmap for what content they need to cover and how they are going to teach
it. He seemed to enjoy and get the most out of “bouncing ideas back and forth” with his team on
what could possibly work and what would not work. If teachers have a strong belief in their
ability to attain a particular goal or result, they are much more likely to engage in professional
learning activities that will increase their motivation (Thoonen et al., 2011). This collaborative
time left Mike feeling “pretty confident” in his ability to meet the academic needs of his
students, pointing to the perceived importance of the organizational supports embedded in
collaboration time in increasing teachers’ self-efficacy.
Samantha discussed how her experiences working with a coteacher was quite profound
and how the teamwork helped her grow and improve as an educator. She said,
I’m a different teacher by the end of this year and it’s a result of this teamwork that I
have with my coteacher. Exploring and forgiving each other if it didn’t work. That was
hard because her and I are both very much go-getters and perfectionists and we don’t like
to . . . It’s not failing, right, because even at the end of the day, you won’t be a failure. So
it was hard for us, but we supported each other where it was this unconditional support.

68

Like even if this doesn’t work, I still think you’re great. And we needed to hear that from
someone because we weren’t going to hear that anywhere else, right. Admin wasn’t
going to come and tell us, you’re doing great. We needed to do that, and so that’s how we
helped one another.
Samantha talked about the power, difficulty, and reward of teamwork in a one-on-one support
network setting with her teaching partner and how, at times, it was quite difficult because they
were both “very much go-getter and perfectionists” who did not want to fail. She talked about
offering each other “unconditional support” if even things were not working because they really
needed to hear encouraging words from someone. Teachers are willing to put more of an effort if
they feel they are improving as an educator by hearing ways in which they could improve their
instructional practice (Dunne et al., 2000). Samantha referenced that administration was not
giving them positive feedback; therefore, they needed to offer kind and inspirational words to
help one another.
Although not directly related to self-efficacy a few participants discussed how
collaboration had a positive impact on their mood and emotion increasing their level of
motivation. Layanne welcomed any opportunity to engage and interact with her colleagues. As
she explained:
Any opportunity or chance to interact with my colleagues is really helpful and usually
makes me feel good. I was part of organizing an afternoon of PD for the high school. It
was great because morale is kind of low right now. It sounds so stupid to say, but that’s
the happiest I’ve seen the staff in a long time. There’s something really validating about
boosting morale and doing something meaningful.

69

Layanne talked about her enjoyment in interacting with her colleagues because it “is really
helpful” and made her feel good. Clark and Estes (2008) believed that a positive emotional work
environment helps support employee motivation, indicating that an organization should do what
it could to support a healthy workplace, something that does not seem to have been happening at
the ISME. Layanne then reminisced about organizing an afternoon of professional development
for high school teachers and how happy that made other teachers; in fact, she even said that it
was “the happiest I’ve seen the staff in a long time.” Hildebrandt and Eom (2011) believed a
strong connection with fellow teachers nurtures a stronger sense of self and purpose within a
community. A strong sense of self and purpose, which happened by “organizing an afternoon of
PD” helped teachers feel good about themselves, increasing their happiness.
Another participant, Emily, discussed how her team reflected on units and then planned
together to make assessments more meaningful to students. Emily discussed her mood
improvement as a direct result of collaboration. She remarked,
As a team, we’ve been doing a lot of reflecting lately on our units, but basically, it’s
starting with the standards we want to assess and thinking about authentic assessment and
how do we make it relevant to the students. I feel really good leaving those meetings
because we talk about student learning and growth through formative assessments and
how to make it relevant to them and link it their lives.
Like Layanne, Emily also felt a sense of happiness about interacting with her colleagues,
specifically, when leaving her meetings after they had talked about making learning and
assessments meaningful for her students. Fisher (2000) found that improving moods and
emotions at work produced results because it enhanced employees’ attitude at work. Although
mood and emotions are transient and vary from individual to individual, at an international

70

school where teachers come together from all over the world, mood and emotions must be
positively supported at work because they influence job satisfaction. Dunne et al. (2000) found
that a team is successful when it (a) meets consistently, (b) focuses on teaching and learning, and
comprises a small group of colleagues. Emily also talked about how her team reflected on the
previous unit, linking back to collective metacognition that was previously discussed, and how
she felt “really good leaving those meetings” because it gave her a sense of purpose and
meaning.
Frustrations
Although Layanne was quite positive about her experiences with a peer outside of work,
she explained her frustration with receiving no professional development, along with the lack of
formal structures in place to help support and improve teacher development. She said,
I really haven’t received much PD at all. There aren’t really any structures in place at the
school that support teacher development. We certainly don’t do it at any of our faculty
meetings. I have a colleague that, when there is a free period, we push into each other’s
classroom because we learn a lot from each other.
In this comment, Layanne reiterated her value for collaboration, but made it clear that it happens
only because they “push into each other’s classrooms” and not because of the school is actively
doing anything to encourage it. One structure that the organization put in place, which all of the
participants agreed was an opportunity to meet and collaborate, was common planning time.
Nevertheless, Layanne and a colleague found time to implement their own structure of collegial
learning through peer observations. Layanne’s comments suggest the need for more formal
structures to be implemented that will provide teachers with coherent professional development
to increase teacher learning and to improve their classroom practice as the authors in the

71

literature supported regarding effective professional development (Birman et al., 2000;
Desimone, 2009).
Although many participants spoke positively about collaboration, another participant,
Mike, found working collaboratively to be both a positive and negative experience. He said,
I would say it’s kind of a balance. Sometimes, [I] think it takes away with kind of what I
would like to do because you have to do what everyone wants to do. So I think, early on
in the year, [it] was kind of . . . . We were kind of trying to combine all our ideas into one
idea and that didn’t really go as well. And then we kind of were able to give into other
people’s ideas and just kind of go with what maybe one person wanted to do, more or
less, so that the unit was kind of more uniform instead of everywhere else. So in that
sense, there’s been some things that I have liked that I’ve learned or done that other
teachers have wanted, and some things that I haven’t enjoyed as much and that I would
maybe do differently, so in that sense it’s good and bad.
Mike shared his frustration with having to conform to what the group wanted to do and
how it took away from his autonomy in the classroom. His comments suggest a self-centered
approach to teaching, indicating an “I” approach to teaching as opposed to a “we” collective
approach. By saying that “we kind of were able to give into other people’s ideas and just kind of
go with what maybe one person wanted to do” Mike spoke about a drawback of working
together, such as having “to do what everyone wants to do.” However, despite Mike’s response,
the majority of teachers saw the benefits of participating in collaboration with their peers. In fact,
as mentioned above, many teachers welcomed more opportunity to collaborate to learn together
and to improve their practice.

72

An overarching issue influencing teachers’ perception of organizational support, which
influenced their motivation, was their frustration related to the lack of money allocated for
professional development. Maria discussed her frustration with the lack of professional
development offered at the school site and the fact that most professional development is located
at a different location costing teachers more money. She stated,
The school does an ok job of reminding teachers of their PD money but often times that
PD isn’t here—it’s somewhere else. So you have a small amount of money to be able to
maybe pay for what you wanna do, but then you have to buy the flight and the hotel and
all the things on top of that so the cost makes it more difficult.
Maria, who viewed professional development as external and going somewhere, reiterated a
common pattern that professional development is not available at school, but at another location,
which involves paying for flights and hotel rooms. The professional development allocation does
not cover these expenses; therefore, the teachers have to pay out of pocket and, as Maria said,
“the cost makes it more difficult.”
Another participant in the study, who also felt frustrated that roughly 330USD per year
was an insufficient amount of money to put towards attaining any useful form of professional
development, echoed the lack of school-supplied funds. She commented, “What am I supposed
to do with around three hundred dollars? It barely covers the cost for anything.” The current
yearly professional development allowance does not cover the expenses for teachers to attend
external professional development in another country. Being located in a Middle Eastern country
in school that does not provide professional development, external professional development is
the only option for the majority of teachers.

73

Teachers’ Recommendations
To address Research Question 2, the researcher provides in this section the teachers’
recommendations for organizational practice, specifically in the area of professional
development, to support better their learning to provide high quality literacy instruction.
Professional development casts a wide net around a variety of activities that improve the
performance of teachers through informal and formal learning communities (e.g., workshops,
conferences, coaching, mentorship, reflecting on lessons, peer observation, and many more;
Desimone, 2009). Specifically, the participants recommended various ways that the organization
could better support them in various capacities: using coaches, structured collaborative time,
more money for professional development, and bringing in outside experts.
Coaches
Four participants felt a strong need for collegial coaching and cognitive coaching that
would focus on improving existing practices (Showers & Joyce, 1996). Coaching provides
ongoing feedback on a certain skill or strategy that would help teachers learn, train, and improve
in the classroom (Galbraith & Anstrom, 1995). Newton saw a clear need for investing in
instructional coaches to provide teachers with instructional expertise, while building up the
confidence of teachers through interpersonal skills:
I think really what the school needs in this regard is instructional coaches. More
investment in instructional coaches, and specifically training with those coaches. When
you look at the most successful schools, that’s one thing they all have. They have expert
coaches who have the time and the directive to be going in and lifting everybody up.
They have not just the expertise in reading, but also the . . . what’s the word? The

74

interpersonal skills to be able to actually get people to pick up the expertise in the
different practices.
Newton strongly supported the notion of investing in instructional coaches to help teachers to
improve their practice. Swafford (1998) found three benefits in having peer coaching: (a) it gave
them three levels of support (procedural, affective, and reflective), (b) it facilitated teacher
change, and (c) it provided a different lens for teachers to observe their practice. In addition,
Galbraith and Anstrom (1995) supported Newton’s claim that teachers who were coached
experienced a substantial positive change in their behavior.
Throughout the interviews, four participants expressed frustration with the lack of
consistent and specific feedback related directly to their instruction—generally the role of an
instructional coach or principal as an instructional leader. Although teachers did have access to
an instructional coach, the coach did not do the things they wanted. Maria, an advocate for more
coaching, explained:
It would be nice to have somebody who knew more about my field that could say,
“You’re slipping there in your content” or “This is cool. What if you did this?” That
would be helpful too so to have somebody in more consistently to help with that. I think
one of the biggest things would be, like I said earlier. is bringing in fresh people. I think
there’s something about having somebody you don’t know come in and say like, “Here’s
some ideas and some resources.” It’s like, “This is awesome and this is great.” It’s so
helpful.
Maria felt strongly about bringing in an expert in the field to provide honest and consistent
feedback to improve instruction. Additionally, she valued an outsider’s perspective and
feedback, which would be the role of a coach. Maria also felt a need for someone to give her

75

positive reassurance on her teaching practice through praise such as, “This is awesome,” which
would support her self-efficacy. Kovic (1996) found objective feedback to be critical for
facilitating professional dialogue and for encouraging teachers to reflect honestly and openly on
their practice.
Collaboration
Teachers have collaborative time built into their schedules through common planning
time, but Kim suggested using this collaborative time more for learning purposes than only for
planning:
The language arts teachers in middle school and the math teachers have all the same
planning periods, but they spend those periods planning, not learning. I think [that] if that
were an expectation and model and then [if it were] followed through on, that’s kind of
provided with some more structure, [it] could be really great potential for learning.
Kim talked about teachers having the same planning time, which gave them an opportunity to
collaborate, but she felt that they needed a structure in place (indicating a dependence on the
administration to model and set expectations) that could facilitate more learning for teachers.
Although the teachers were happy with their informal collaborative experiences, they wanted
more structures in place during their common time to make it more meaningful. Planning is the
process of preparing what teachers will teach in their upcoming lessons, whereas a structure or
model of collaboration could unlock a “great potential for learning” by making the meetings
more meaningful. Hollins et al. (2004) and Strahan (2003) found that conversations and dialogue
around learning and teaching during PLCs provide an opportunity for teachers to identify student
needs and to develop strategies for improvement, while encouraging a stronger sense of agency

76

and collective efficacy. Building in a PLC structure could improve both knowledge and
motivation through a focus on learning, not only planning.
Emily agreed with Kim, stating, “It is helpful to have common planning time, but I think
there’s definitely opportunity for growth in creating time for teachers to make better use of it.”
She felt the need to “make better use if it” so that teachers would have an opportunity to grow
and learn as educators. In both instances, Emily and Kim seemed to suggest that merely having
planning time to collaborate was not the best use of time and did not support their conceptual or
metacognitive knowledge. They perceived an increase in both their motivation and knowledge
because of informal collaborative structures that they instigated and initiated.
Increase Professional Development Funds
Currently, a teacher in his or her first or second year receives roughly 330USD annually
for professional development, and a teacher in his or her third year or later year receives almost
500USD annually. Of the nine participants, four recommended increasing the current
professional development stipend for teachers. Mike recommended an increase, although no
specific number was offered, in the current professional development stipend, so that teachers
would be able to attend a conference or pay for a course in full:
They do offer money for PD; offering a little bit more money would be great. I was
interested in doing an AQ [additional qualification] course back home, but they’re pretty
expensive so it would only really cover half. A little more money, it would just allow you
to go out and do some PD rather than in-school PD offered by other teachers here. You
could go do it professionally.
Mike indicated that more money would allow him (and other teachers) to pay for a course, or
would give teachers the opportunity to “do some PD rather than in-school PD,” indicating that he

77

would rather receive professional development from a recognized “professional” than from other
teachers. Mike’s comments suggest that he did not feel that he could learn much from other
teachers within the organization. Mike also mentioned taking a “course back home,” which is
more costly than training or workshops in a local setting. The majority of literature related to
professional development suggests that one-time workshops or courses are ineffective at
improving a teacher’s daily practice. As previously mentioned, teachers require professional
development that is continuous, relevant, and timely to improve their practice. Garet et al. (2001)
suggested that professional development should be sustained over time, and not be a one-time
workshop, because longer activities are more likely to offer a platform for in-depth discussion of
content, student conceptions and misconceptions, and instructional strategies. In addition,
professional development activities over time allow teachers to experiment with new practices in
the classroom and then receive feedback on their teaching. The course Mike referred to was an
additional qualification course, which is taken to attain certification in different content areas
within education.
External Professional Development
Of the nine participants, three recommended that the organization bring in external
professional development the better to support teachers’ growth and development. Maria
believed that the school should “to bring in people more consistently to have professional
development sessions to help teachers grow.” Maria felt that external people should be brought
in “consistently” to help teachers develop. She went on to say,
I think one of the biggest things would be . . . like I said earlier . . . is bringing in fresh
people. I think there’s something about having somebody you don’t know come in and
say like, “Here’s some ideas and some resources.” It’s like, “This is awesome and this is

78

great.” It’s so helpful. So, I think that bringing in people more consistently to have
professional development, I think, would be great.
The interest and hope to bring in “outside experts” to help educators with their teaching craft
reflected the demographic of these participants, for they were all young with little teaching
experience: the average age of the three participants was 26.6 years with an average of 2.6 years
of teaching experience. With very few experienced teachers at the ISME who could help or
mentor young teachers, these teachers felt that there was not much expertise or many teachers to
learn from; therefore, most likely, an external professional development source would help.
Kari supported this belief, that is, that it would be very beneficial to bring in an outside
professional to help teachers grow:
It would be great if we could get some kind of workshop to come to our school. I’m sure
there’s a bunch of red tape associated with that, but it would be great to have a
professional come out and train us in subject-level specific [topics], such as reading.
Kari disclosed a hope that a professional could come to school and train teachers, through a
workshop, in subject-specific content, but she felt there was some kind of “red tape” involved
with making it happen. At the ISME, the attrition rate of teachers is high, which might influence
the organization’s desire to invest in teachers who only stay for a few years then move on to
another school. Kari’s assertion indicates that an organizational barrier is perceived that prevents
external professional development from happening within the organization. There was no
indication that the school did not bring in any outside experts simply because the professional
development researchers have said that it is ineffective; however, most likely, the school did not
bring in any outside experts because of the high cost of flying in an expert to the Middle East.

79

Sarah supported both Kari and Maria’s view in bringing in external professional
development into the organization:
Definitely more outside PD. We have requested PD and it always gets denied in the high
school, and this is something very, very frustrating. I tried to get the cartoonist to come,
and that got denied. It’s not like we see this money or funds going somewhere else.
Sarah shared an experience that she had in the high school that was “very frustrating” because
she requested external professional development that was denied—perhaps this is the “red tape”
that Kari was referring to within the organization. Sarah referred to professional development
funds (of which this researcher is not aware) within the organization, saying, “It’s not like we see
this money or funds going somewhere else.” Birman et al. (2000) suggested that traditional
forms of professional development (e.g., a workshop or conference) are less effective than
reform approaches (e.g., study group, teacher network, mentoring relationship) because they do
not foster meaningful change in teachers’ classroom practice. A lack of guidance, an absence of
context, and follow-up sessions often result in lack of implementation (Bissonnette & Caprino,
2014). Traditional activities are criticized for not providing teachers with the time, the activities,
and the content necessary to improve their knowledge. The interviews for this study were
conducted near the end of the school year; therefore, the teachers might have felt that they were
not given much (or any) professional development over the year, and that some form of external
professional development would have helped their instruction. The teachers’ comments also
suggest that they did not perceive expertise to be resident in their school, which might have
resulted in their defaulting to a recommendation about obtaining external professional
development through workshops.

80

Support Networks
Two teachers, Kim and Emily, recommended putting in place two similar but slightly
different support structures for teachers. Kim shared how students struggle academically,
specifically when it involves reading. She explained:
Having an understanding of our students’ abilities is really important. I absolutely agree
that we should continue to teach to grade level standards, but the reality is that we also
have a lot of students who actually struggle with reading and are not at grade level in
reading, according to our data. That’s not just anecdotal. I see it every day. We don’t do a
great job of supporting teachers to know what to do with those kids. A lot of our teachers
are new and the concept of scaffolding [is that] they get it, they know that they need to do
it, they understand that kids are struggling, but the actual how to do that every day . . . . I
think a lot of teachers are at a loss.
Kim described how many teachers had students who struggled in their class and “are not at grade
level” according to both anecdotal and external data. She felt that teachers realized their students
needed help, they knew they needed to help them, but they didn’t know “how to do that every
day.” Kim recommended that teachers need to learn how to differentiate their instruction to meet
the needs of all learners in the classrooms, and that there should be more work related to
“supporting teachers.”
In the same vein of offering support, Emily recommended providing support to teachers,
but making it more visible and articulated clearer. She chronicled,
If you were having a problem with instruction, here is who you should go to. If you’re
having a problem with behavior, go here. If you’re having a rough time adjusting, here’s
how we can help you. I think the school has been around long enough to anticipate what

81

common struggles are, [that is ,] why someone would need support. So to make them
visible for how to support you is something that would be very important. For example,
my experience when I first came here as a 22-year old, single female was very different
from a married family with two kids. And we’re gonna have so many different struggles
come up. So again, that differentiation, being able to say okay, for people who are going
through this, this is what support might look like.
Emily described putting into place a structured system of support where teachers would know
exactly where to go if they were struggling, not just with instruction, but with adjusting to their
new jobs as well. She talked about how many different teachers from various backgrounds come
to teach at the ISME and that it is crucial to differentiate who needs what in “terms of what
support might look like.”
Recommendations from teachers can serve as a guide for the ISME to align the culture
with all of the important policies, procedures, and communications necessary to achieve the
organizational goals (Clark & Estes, 2008) through more effective organizational structures that
support teachers’ knowledge and motivation. Furthermore, a shift in developing and changing
the current culture of professional development for teachers can lead to a change and
improvement in performance (Clark & Estes, 2008).
This chapter presented data from the qualitative interviews that were designed to gain
insight into the factors that are preventing the ISME from achieving its organizational goals for
increasing teaching participation in collaborative learning activities through professional
development.

82

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION
Implications
The findings from this study have a number of implications at both the individual level
and the organizational level within the ISME. Implication 1 is that, when teachers feel
unsupported by their organization, for example, through the provision of professional
development, as the findings suggested they do, the likelihood is greater that they will look for
other employment, affecting the longevity of their time at the ISME. By supporting teachers
emotionally, especially by creating and fostering a positive and enjoyable work climate, the
ISME can increase work commitment and maximize its effort (Clark & Estes, 2008). The
motivation of teachers is critical so that they will be productive and so that the organization will
reach its goal, for motivation moves teachers forward, keeps them moving, and dictates how
much effort they will spend on work tasks (Clark & Estes, 2008). This implication is particularly
true, and a lack of perceived appreciation and value are particularly problematic in an
international school context where attrition rates are already very high. Therefore, not motivating
teachers can (a) produce instability among the faculty, (b) lead to inconsistency in instruction,
and (c) require more resources to recruit and train new teachers to meet the needs of students. A
high teacher turnover rate, of roughly 30%–40% at the ISME each year, makes it very difficult to
develop and implement a consistent school culture, both socially and instructionally, which
affects teacher performance and negatively affects student performance and achievement
(Ronfeldt et al., 2013; Wushishi et al., 2014).
Implication 2 is that, when teachers feel that the organization is not investing in them
professionally by helping them to grow and improve as educators by providing opportunities to
collaborate truly with each other, rather than merely planning or seeking out external

83

professional development opportunities, it is likely that they will feel a level of resentment or a
shift in their mood towards the school. It is not pertinent that teachers must always be happy to
be effective and productive; however, positive emotions such as happiness and joy do support
work commitment and enhance motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008). Resentment can be
problematic because it can affect teacher morale and job satisfaction, potentially influencing
their motivation at school. A decrease in motivation and job satisfaction could affect their
dedication to provide high-quality instruction to their students.
Implication 3 is that, although the organization expects teachers to implement programs
such as the Lucy Calkins and TCRWP colleagues (2018) workshop, if they are not up-to-date
with the current practices expected of them, it is challenging for them to implement the programs
successfully. The teachers said they were gaining knowledge of the workshop model of teaching;
however, they were not gaining or receiving it through organization-led workshops. Therefore, if
teachers are not receiving the training they need, other mechanisms and structures must be put in
place to help them be successful.
Implication 4 is that, although teachers did admit that they reflect on their practice, they
must clearly understand the “when” and “why” to do something (Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011).
First, teachers will need to reflect actively and frequently on their teaching and, from this
reflection, set professional goals to grow and improve as educators. This is particularly true in
the ISME’s environment because most of the teachers are very young and have few years of
teaching experience. Second, teachers need to gain a better understanding of what is happening
in their classrooms; therefore, to gain this understanding, they will need to work with a fellow
teacher or coach who will provide them with feedback on their instructional practice. They will
need someone who will support them through the growing pains of teaching. Third, teachers

84

need a strong collaborative support network to help them to improve as educators, to assist with
their understanding of the student culture, and to ease their transition into the new country.
Recommendations
Organizational processes and materials play an integral role in the ability of employees to
achieve their performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Organizational gaps
typically fall under four categories: culture, structure, policies, and practices (Rueda, 2011).
Organizational culture, which Clark and Estes (2008) believed is the most important process of
work because it determines how employees work together to get things done, is further divided
into cultural models and cultural settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Cultural models,
often invisible and unnoticed (e.g., values, beliefs, and attitudes) are the shared mental schema of
how the world works, or how it should work (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Cultural settings,
the more visible aspects of an organization (e.g., who, what, when, where, why, and how), are
organizational policies and procedures (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Rueda, 2011). The
cultural settings (aka. cultural contexts) of an organization can be useful in understanding the
more visible aspects of what happens in specific workplace settings such as classrooms, offices,
and playgrounds (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Rueda, 2011). If one or more of these contexts
changes, it can be considered a new cultural setting (Rueda, 2011). In this study, it was noted
that teachers did not feel that cultural settings were in place so that they could be successful and
reach a high level of job performance.
The one-on-one interviews indicated that three organizational influences affected job
performance: (a) teachers were not receiving meaningful support transitioning into a new school
environment in areas such as instruction, behavior management, and school culture; (b) teachers
were not receiving appropriate or relevant professional development; and (c) teachers were

85

happy with having common collaborative planning time with their peers, but the majority of the
participants felt that it was not being used effectively; therefore, they had resorted to informal
collaboration.
Support Networks
One cultural setting that influenced job performance was that teachers felt that they were
not receiving meaningful support to assist with their transition into the community. To aid with
their transition into a new school and culture, the researcher offers two specific
recommendations: (a) the ISME should implement effectively the use of instructional coaches
and (b) the ISME should implement a mentorship program to help teachers to understand clearly
all the cultural nuances of acclimatizing to a new school and country.
Recommendation 1, under the umbrella of support, is that the organization should use
instructional coaches, who have years of teaching experience, to provide consistently to teachers
meaningful, relevant, and immediate support to improve their instruction. Clark and Estes (2008)
believed that team organizations require feedback from coaches to provide skilled support to
help improve individual confidence and job performance. Although many participants asked for
outside professional development to come in and lead a workshop, according to Schön (1987),
professionals who receive instead real-time coaching and encouragement to think critically and
carefully learn in a more meaningful way. If teachers experience first-hand the power of peer
coaching and how it can positively transform one’s practice, perhaps the need for external
professional development (as the participants at the time of this study desired) would not be so
great. Peer coaching, a professional development method, (a) improves teaching by facilitating
the transfer of training, (b) increases collegiality (Galbraith & Anstrom, 1995; Joyce & Showers,
2002), and (c) always has the same goal: to improve instruction for all children (Swafford, 1998).

86

Teachers more often embrace peer coaching because they feel a sense of collegiality and
equality, whereas feedback from a principal can be seen and felt more as an evaluation and
critique. It is essential to increase further the level of teachers’ self-efficacy because doing so
will help them to have a greater belief in their own competence and a higher expectation for
positive outcomes (Rueda, 2011). Pajares (1996) noted the way that people interpret the results
of their performance informs and how it often changes their self-beliefs, which then informs and
changes their subsequent performance. A teacher’s belief in his or her ability to promote learning
in his or her classroom affects the type of learning environment created and the level of academic
progress for his or her students (Bandura, 1993). One hopes that working one-on-one with a
coach will offer teachers the instructional coaching needed to improve their practice and their
self-efficacy.
Recommendation 2, under the umbrella of providing teachers more support, is the
organization should implement a mentorship program to help new teachers as they transition into
a new country and school. Each new hire should be paired with a returning teacher within his or
her building level so that a new high school hire is paired with a returning high school teacher, a
new middle school new hire is paired with a returning middle school teacher, and a new
elementary school hire is paired with a returning elementary teacher. One hopes that this
mentorship program would serve as a support network for new hires to give them a designated
person to whom they could go with questions or concerns about school or life in their new
surroundings. With many new teachers and young teachers beginning their teaching careers at
the ISME, a concerted effort must be made by ISME to make them feel supported and successful
within the walls and outside of their classrooms. Given the participants’ comments about
transitioning into a new community, beyond contextualized professional development offerings

87

to all faculty members, it is crucial that the ISME work to teach new teachers the same
foundational knowledge each year as they arrive and transition into a new school, culture, and
country. The evidence affirms the need for the organization to provide both instructional and
emotional support to help teachers be successful by the implementing a mentorship program with
instructional coaches.
Relevant Professional Development
A second cultural area of concern, identified by participants, was that they felt they were
not receiving appropriate or relevant professional development through formal structures. A
second recommendation, therefore, is to build an internal structure of support and collaboration
through professional development by empowering teachers in two ways: (a) have teachers work
with each other to reflect and set professional goals and (b) have teachers lead monthly
contextualized professional development workshops related to teaching and learning at the
ISME.
Recommendation 3, professional development programs are ways to bring about change
in classroom practices, in beliefs and attitudes, and in the academic achievement of students
(Guskey, 2002). During the one-on-one interviews, it was noted that almost all of the participants
consistently reflected on their practice, but the reflection did not usually lead to setting goals for
future improvement. Clark & Estes (2008) feel teachers require the new knowledge and skills
that are needed to achieve the organization’s goals, and knowledge enhancement is needed to
improve job performance under two conditions: (1) when people do not know how to accomplish
their performance goals, and (2) when one anticipates that future challenges will need new
problem solving. Within the ISME, teachers need to know a tremendous amount of information
(e.g., how to design effective instruction, how to assess accurately, how to collaborate, and how

88

to reflect effectively on their instruction). Teacher metacognitive knowledge is essential in
meeting both the stakeholder and the organizational goals. Therefore, a specific organizational
recommendation, under the umbrella of improving school-wide professional development, is to
provide teachers with specific and meaningful ways to set professional goals tied to their
classroom practice that is reflected upon with a coach or administrator.
Recommendation 4, related to improving the culture of professional development within
the organization, is to provide a structure and platform for teachers to teach other teachers,
making the content contextually-specific to the ISME, through teacher-led workshops.
Opportunities for high-quality professional development programs help teachers deepen their
knowledge and develop new instructional strategies that contribute to their growth and
effectiveness with students (Borko, 2004; Guskey, 2002). For professional development to be
effective, it needs to be sustained, content-based, contextually situated, and teacher centered
(Bissonnette & Caprino, 2014) that provides teachers with practical and specific ideas, directly
related to their daily classroom routines (Guskey, 2002). One participant suggested organizing an
afternoon of workshops and the powerful effect the teachers perceived it would have on their
practice, in addition to improving the morale of the school. Therefore, giving teachers a platform
on a monthly basis (not only once a year) to share their knowledge and skills (related directly to
their practice) would provide the community with a meaningful, content-based structure to
support the needs of teachers. The evidence affirms the need for the organization to create and
nurture a culture of contextualized, formal professional development where teachers learn from
each other through reflection and goal setting along with monthly workshops led by teachers.

89

Collaborative Structures
A third cultural setting noted during the one-on-one interviews was that teachers were
happy with the common collaborative time they had but felt it was not used effectively or
efficiently. Thus, Recommendation 5, is to provide teachers a more concrete structure of
collaboration during their common planning time through a PLC. A PLC is dedicated to ongoing
and sustained improvement and a shared responsibility of student performance that is grounded
in a shared goal (DuFour & DuFour, 2010; Lieberman & Miller, 2011; Rasberry & Mahajan,
2008). With meeting agendas (focused on student learning), goals (shared direction according to
student achievement), and norms (protocols to work together), PLCs work as a cohesive group
focused on two things: teaching and learning (Rasberry & Mahajan, 2008). A PLC is unique in
three key ways: a focus on learning, professional collaboration, and a focus on results (Garrett,
2010). Collaborative teams, defined by DuFour et al. (2016) as “a group of people working
interdependently to achieve a common goal for which members are held mutually accountable”
(p. 219) are foundational for PLCs. There are three big ideas that drive the work of a PLC
(DuFour et al., 2016): First, the essential purpose of a school is to ensure that all students learn at
a high level, linking directly back to the stakeholder goal of providing high quality reading
instruction; second, educators must work collaboratively and take shared responsibility for each
student’s success, which relates to the organizational influence of PLCs; and, third, the need to
focus on results—the need for the organization to reach its goal. Additionally, if high levels of
learning are the focus of a school’s collaborative purpose then they should ask the following four
questions (DuFour et al., 2016):
1. What do we want our students to learn?
2. How will we know if each student has learned?

90

3. How will we respond when some students do not learn? And,
4. How can we extend and enrich the learning for students who have demonstrated
proficiency?
All of these questions relate directly back to how PLCs provide teachers with an opportunity to
come together to improve their reading instruction and meet the needs of their students. In
addition, if teachers have a higher level of self-efficacy and self-confidence, it will make them
more motivated and confident to engage in PLCs, which will increase their collective self-
efficacy (Rueda, 2011). The evidence affirms the need for the organization to provide teachers
with a structured collaborative setting through a PLC or through a structure that works best for
teachers at the ISME.
Reduce Teacher Turnover
Finally, in closing, the organization must find a way to retain its teachers and reduce the
turnover rate so that consistency and continuity can be improved. High turnover significantly
affects four categories of an organization, as determined by Ebrahim (2010), that relate to
finances, governing a constantly evolving staff, ensuring a high level of teacher and student
performance, and aligning values and beliefs to our mission. First, at a for-profit school in the
Middle East, the finances are not disclosed to the public, and, therefore, no financial information
is known by the organization’s stakeholders. Potentially, there could be room to improve
financial remuneration but nobody has access to that information. Second, the school’s
governance has a fiduciary obligation and responsibility to oversee the finances and the way that
the organization spends its money (Ebrahim, 2010). Therefore, the overall allocation of finances
by the board could potentially affect teacher turnover. Third, the school has a moral and ethical
obligation to hire the most qualified teachers who will perform their duties ultimately to improve

91

student performance and achievement. Unfortunately, high teacher turnover affects instructional
consistency that directly affects student achievement. Fourth, low teacher retention significantly
affects the organization’s ability to successfully live its mission on a daily basis because of the
yearly disruption of staffing. Education, both nationally and internationally, is constantly
evolving and changing to meet the social, emotional, and academic needs of students in a
complex world. There are a plethora of issues facing the ISME under the domains of knowledge
and skills, motivation, and organizational gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008). However, through solid
performance evaluation methods and proper decision making, it has the potential and ability to
improve (Ozcan, 2008). Armed with this knowledge and understanding, administrators and the
governing board could establish an action plan to improve organizational structures, specifically
related to improving teacher learning through meaningful professional development, and teacher
satisfaction with the hopes of decreasing teacher turnover.
Future Research
After considering implications and recommendations for this study, there are areas that
should be considered for future research:
1. Unbound the study to include all relevant stakeholders.
2. Unbound the study to include all middle and high school teachers.
3. Unbound the study to follow teachers until they leave the ISME.
4. Triangulate methods to add document analysis, observation, and surveys.
5. Evaluate the implementation of an intervention that might result from the
recommendations above.
6. Study the role of coaches, contextualized professional development, and PLCs in
improving teacher performance after they have been implemented.

92

Since the organization was unique with its location in the world and background of
teachers, inferences and conclusions cannot be generalized to fit other individuals in other
settings (Creswell, 2014). This study was not intended to be generalized and placed within the
context of another organization. In fact, the purpose of this study was to learn about the ISME
and its specific organizational context. As such, generalizing from this sample to a larger
population outside the context of the ISME was not a desired outcome. Because the results were
time-bound, they cannot be generalized to past or future situations (Creswell, 2014). Each year,
there is a high turnover rate of teachers, so results of the initial study may not be applicable to the
following year. Therefore, to determine if the same results occur as the initial time, the study
would need to be replicated at a future date. As such, future research should be done internally
on a continual basis and aimed at uncovering more information related to teachers’ perceptions
regarding organizational support and how it changes and how the implementations of
recommendations affect teachers’ performance in the classroom.
Conclusion
Initially, in this study, the researcher sought to identify the knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational influences that facilitated or inhibited teachers from providing
high-quality literacy instruction at the ISME using the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis as the
methodological and conceptual framework for the study. As is quite often the case in qualitative
research that focuses on meaning and understanding, the researcher was the primary instrument,
an inductive process was used, and rich descriptions were sought (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As
such, the study shifted focus. By having a research design that was flexible, the study sought to
understand teachers’ perceptions of the current organizational supports provided to them to

93

improve literacy instruction and their recommendations for organizational practice to support
their capacity to provide high quality literacy instruction.
Interview findings suggested three implications because teachers felt unsupported by the
organization. First, if teachers feel unsupported and unappreciated by their organization, they
will be more likely to look for other employment, affecting the longevity of their employment. In
a school that already has a high, teacher turnover rate, this situation is possibly quite problematic.
Second, when teachers feel that the organization is not investing in them professionally by
helping them grow and improve as educators, it is likely that they will feel a level of resentment,
or a shift in their mood, towards the school. Third, the organization expects teachers to
implement successfully instructional programs; however, if the teachers are not current with the
practices expected of them, their success would be a challenge.
The implications of the findings suggested the following five recommendations: First,
implement the use of instructional coaches to provide teachers with consistent, meaningful,
relevant, and immediate feedback to improve their instruction. Second, provide new teachers
with a mentorship program to help them adjust to life in a new country and prepare them with the
knowledge to understand the culture. Third, provide teachers with specific and meaningful ways
to set professional goals, tied directly to their classroom practice, that is reflected upon with a
coach or administrator. Fourth, provide a structure and platform for teachers to teach other
teachers, making the content contextually-specific to the ISME, through teacher-led workshops.
The fifth organizational recommendation is to provide teachers with a structure that is more
concrete during their common planning time through a PLC that focuses on teaching and
learning. Last, with a high teacher turnover rate that affects organizational growth, the ISME

94

must look at solutions to enhance its retention rate to improve organizational consistency and
continuity.
In the 21st century, which is a knowledge-based economy, improving employee
performance is the highest leverage activity available to an organization (Clark & Estes, 2008).
By implementing the recommended solutions, the ISME might be able to improve more readily
teacher performance and satisfaction, which, in turn, would affect and improve both the quality
of instruction and student achievement. Viewing employees as capital by investing in them
brings about positive change in their performance increasing results for the organization (Clark
& Estes, 2008). No matter what school students attend around the world, the most important
priority for any school is student learning--providing them with the opportunity to learn at a high
level, while preparing them for life after school (Stuart, 2016). For ISME to improve as an
organization, it must invest (personally, professionally, and financially) in its teachers by
providing them with meaningful learning opportunities through professional development to
thrive and flourish as professionals.

95

REFERENCES
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich,
P. R., . . . & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A
revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, abridged edition. White Plains,
NY: Longman.
Antoniou, P., & Kyriakides, L. (2013). A dynamic integrated approach to teacher professional
development: Impact and sustainability of the effects on improving teacher behaviour and
student outcomes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 1–12.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning.
Educational psychologist, 28(2), 117–148.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.
Birman, B. F., Desimone, L., Porter, A. C., & Garet, M. S. (2000). Designing professional
development that works. Educational leadership, 57(8), 28–33.
Bissonnette, J. D., & Caprino, K. (2015). A look at ineffective and effective professional
development: Moving toward action research. Mid-Atlantic Education Review, 2(1),
12–22. Retrieved from http://maereview.org/index.php/MAER/article/view/2/2
Becker, H. J., & Riel, M. M. (2000). Teacher professional engagement and constructivist-
compatible computer use: Teaching, learning, and computing: 1998 national survey.
(Report No. 7). Irvine, CA: Center for Research on Information Technology and
Organizations; and Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain.
Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.

96

Briscoe, C., & Peters, J. (1997). Teacher collaboration across and within schools: Supporting
individual change in elementary science teaching. Science Education, 81(1), 51–65.
Bullough, R. V. (2007). Professional learning communities and the eight-year study. Educational
Horizons, 85(3), 168–180.
Calkins, L., & Teachers College Reading and Writing Project colleagues. (2018). Units, Tools,
and Methods for Teaching Reading and Writing: A Workshop Curriculum – Grades K–8.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Retrieved from http://www.unitsofstudy.com/
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Clark, C. M., & Florio-Ruane, S. (2001, March). Chapter 1: Conversation as support for teaching
in new ways. In C. M. Clark (Ed.), Talking shop: Authentic conversation and teacher
learning (pp. 1–15). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Chapter 8: Relationships of knowledge and practice:
Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24(1), 249–305.
doi:10.2307/1167272
Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. C. (1998). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The
mathematics reform in California. (CPRE Research Report Series RR-39). Philadelphia,
PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania Graduate
School of Education.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Chapter 4: Strategies for qualitative data analysis. In
Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.; pp. 65–86). Los
Angeles, CA: Sage.

97

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development:
Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational researcher, 38(3), 181–199.
Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of
professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal
study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81–112.
Dewey, J. (1910/1933). How we think. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Dewey, J. (1916/1944). Democracy and education. New York, NY: Free Press.
Drago-Severson, E. (2012). New opportunities for principal leadership: Shaping school climates
for enhanced teacher development. Teachers College Record, 114(3). Retrieved from
ERIC Database. (EJ1000010).
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”? Educational Leadership, 61,
6–11.
DuFour, R., & DuFour, R. (2010). Chapter 4: The role of professional learning communities in
advancing 21st century skills. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st century skills:
Rethinking how students learn (pp. 77–95). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., Many, T., & Mattos, M. (2016). Learning by doing: A
handbook for professional learning communities at work (3rd ed.). Bloomington, IN:
Solution Tree.
DuFour, R., & Mattos, M. (2013). Improve Schools?. Educational Leadership, 70(7), 34–39.
Dunne, F., Nave, B., & Lewis, A. (2000). Critical friends groups: Teachers helping teachers to
improve student learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 28(4), 31–37.

98

Ebrahim, A. (2010). The many faces of nonprofit accountability. In D. O. Renz and associates
(Eds.), The Jossey-Bass handbook of nonprofit leadership and management (3rd ed.; pp.
101–123). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley and Sons/Jossey-Bass.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from the Education.com
website: http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-
theory/
Elmore, R. F. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington, DC: Albert
Shanker Institute.
Elmore, R. F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The imperative for
professional development in education. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute.
Elmore, R. F., & Burney, D. (1997). Investing in teacher learning: Staff development and
instructional improvement in Community School District# 2, New York City. New York,
NY: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.
Englert, C. S., & Tarrant, K. L. (1995). Creating collaborative cultures for educational change.
Remedial and Special Education, 16(6), 325–336.
Every Student Succeeds Act. Pub. L. 114-95 (2015). Retrieved from https://www.ed.gov/
essa?src=rn
Ferguson, R. F. (2006). 5 Challenges to effective teacher professional development. The
Learning Professional, 27(4), 48.
Fisher, C. D. (2000). Mood and emotions while working: missing pieces of job satisfaction?
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(2), 185–202. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-
1379(200003)21:2<185::AID-JOB34>3.0.CO;2-M

99

Forte, A. M., & Flores, M. A. (2014). Teacher collaboration and professional development in the
workplace: A study of Portuguese teachers. European Journal of Teacher Education,
37(1), 91–105.
Fullan, M. (2002). The role of leadership in the promotion of knowledge management in schools.
Teachers and Teaching, 8(3), 409–419.
Galbraith, P., & Anstrom, K. (1995). Peer coaching: An effective staff development model for
educators of linguistically and culturally diverse students. Directions in Language and
Education, 1(3). Retrieved from ERIC Database. (ED394300).
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56.
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes
professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers.
American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.
Garrett, K. (2010). Professional Learning communities allow a transformational culture to take
root. Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 76(2), 4–9.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Graham, P. (2007). Improving teacher effectiveness through structured collaboration: A case
study of a professional learning community. RMLE Online, 31(1), 1–17.
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and teaching,
8(3), 381–391.

100

Guskey, T. R. (2003). What makes professional development effective? Phi Delta Kappan,
84(10), 748–750.
Guskey, T. R., & Yoon, K. S. (2009). What works in professional development? Phi Delta
Kappan, 90(7), 495–500.
Hildebrandt, S. A., & Eom, M. (2011). Teacher professionalization: Motivational factors and the
influence of age. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 416–423.
Hill, H. C. (2009). Fixing teacher professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), 470–476.
Hollins, E. R., McIntyre, L. R., DeBose, C., Hollins, K. S., & Towner, A. (2004). Promoting a
self-sustaining learning community: Investigating an internal model for teacher
development. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 17(2), 247–264.
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1982). The coaching of teaching. Educational leadership, 40(1), 4.
Joyce, B. R., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Kennedy, M. M. (1999). Form and substance in mathematics and science professional
development. NISE Brief, 3(2). [National Institute for Science Education]. Retrieved from
ERIC Database. (ED435552).
Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching?. Review of
Educational Research, 86(4), 945–980.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016, October). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training
evaluation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Talent Development.

101

Kovic, S. (1996). Peer coaching to facilitate inclusion: A job-embedded staff development
model. Journal of Staff Development, 17(1), 28–31.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research
(4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lee, J. C. K., Zhang, Z., & Yin, H. (2011). A multilevel analysis of the impact of a professional
learning community, faculty trust in colleagues and collective efficacy on teacher
commitment to students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(5), 820–830.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational
conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational Administration,
38(2), 112–129.
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven strong claims about successful school
leadership. School leadership and management, 28(1), 27–42.
Lieberman, A. (1995). Practices that support teacher development. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8),
591.
Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (2011). Learning communities: The starting point for professional
learning is in schools and classrooms. Journal of Staff Development, 32(4), 16–20.
Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy2.
usc.edu/docview/964171678?accountid=14749
Little, J. W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational reform.
Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 15(2), 129–151.

102

Louis, K. S., & Marks, H. M. (1998). Does professional community affect the classroom?
Teachers’ work and student experiences in restructuring schools. American Journal of
Education, 106(4), 532–575.
Macdonald, D. (1999). Teacher attrition: A review of literature. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 15(8), 835–848. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(99)00031-1
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., & Hartley, K. (2006). The effect of general relevance
instructions on shallow and deeper learning and reading time. The Journal of
Experimental Education, 74(4), 291–310.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Messer, B. A., & White, F. A. (2006). Employees’ mood, perceptions of fairness, and
organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Business and Psychology, 21(1), 65–82.
Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Youngs, P. (2000). Professional development that addresses
school capacity: Lessons from urban elementary schools. American Journal of Education,
108(4), 259–299.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Pub. L. 107-110 (2001).
Office of Overseas Schools. (n.d.). Schools worldwide. Retrieved from https://www.state.gov/
m/a/os/c1684.htm
Ozcan, Y. A. (2008). Chapter 1: Evaluation of performance in health care. In Health care
benchmarking and performance evaluation: An assessment using data envelopment

103

analysis (DEA; pp. 3–14). International series in Operations Research and Management
Science. New York, NY: Springer Science+ Business Media.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research,
66(4), 543–578.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from the Education.com website:
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. P. (2007). What makes
professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation.
American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921–958.
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing.
Theory into practice, 41(4), 219–225.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
Prytula, M. P. (2012). Teacher metacognition within the professional learning community.
International Education Studies, 5(4), 112.
Rasberry, M. A., & Mahajan, G. (2008). From isolation to collaboration: promoting teacher
leadership through PLCs. Carrboro, NC: Center for Teaching Quality.
Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking.
Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842–866.
Ronfeldt, M., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2013). How teacher turnover harms student achievement.
American Educational Research Journal, 50(1), 4–36. Retrieved from

104

http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/1
322240577?accountid=14749
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Salkind, N. J. (2017). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics: Using Microsoft Excel
2016 (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Saunders, W. M., Goldenberg, C. N., & Gallimore, R. (2009). Increasing achievement by
focusing grade-level teams on improving classroom learning: A prospective, quasi-
experimental study of Title I schools.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 2). John Wiley and Sons.
Schneider, B., Brief, A., & Guzzo, R. (1996). Creating a culture and climate for sustainable
organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 7–19.
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner (p. 27). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Showers, B., & Joyce, B. (1996, March). The evolution of peer coaching. Educational
leadership, 53(6), 12–16. Retrieved from ERIC Database. (EJ519769).
Strahan, D. (2003). Promoting a collaborative professional culture in three elementary schools
that have beaten the odds. The Elementary School Journal, 104(2), 127–146.
Stuart, T. S. (2016). Global perspectives: Professional learning communities at work in
international schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Sun, M., Penuel, W. R., Frank, K. A., Gallagher, H. A., & Youngs, P. (2013). Shaping
professional development to promote the diffusion of instructional expertise among
teachers. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(3), 344–369.

105

Swafford, J. (1998). Teachers supporting teachers through peer coaching. Support for learning,
13(2), 54–58.
Sykes, G. (1996). Reform of and as professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(7), 464.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (n.d.). Right to education.
Retrieved from the UNESCO website: https://en.unesco.org/themes/right-to-education
United States Congress. (1776/2018, December 7). The Constitution of the United States: A
transcription. Retrieved from https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-
transcript
United States Department of Education. (n.d.). Equity of opportunity. Retrieved from
http://www.ed.gov/equity
Thoonen, E. E., Sleegers, P. J., Oort, F. J., Peetsma, T. T., & Geijsel, F. P. (2011). How to
improve teaching practices: The role of teacher motivation, organizational factors, and
leadership practices. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(3), 496–536.
Tin, L. G., Hean, L. L., & Leng, Y. L. (1996). What motivates teachers. New Horizons in
Education, 37(1), 19–27.
Vanderslice, R. (2010). ABC’s of keeping the best: attrition, burnout, and climate. Childhood
Education, 86(5), 298–301. Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/733014071?accountid=14749
Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional
learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and teacher
education, 24(1), 80–91.
Webster-Wright, A. (2009). Reframing professional development through understanding
authentic professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 702–739.

106

Whitcomb, J., Borko, H., & Liston, D. (2009). Growing talent: Promising professional
development models and practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(3), 207–212.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109337280
Near East South Asia Council of Overseas Schools. (n.d.). Who we are. Retrieved from the
NESA Center website: https://www.nesacenter.org/who-we-are
Wilson, J. P. (2008). Reflecting-on-the-future: A chronological consideration of reflective
practice. Reflective Practice, 9(2), 177–184.
Wushishi, A. A., Foo, S. F., Basri, R., & Baki, R. (2014). A qualitative study on the effects of
teacher attrition. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 2(1), 11–16.
Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy2.
usc.edu/docview/1746910189?accountid=14749
Yell, M. L., Katsiyannas, A., & Shiner, J. G. (2006). The No Child Left Behind Act, adequate
yearly progress, and students with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(4),
32–39.
Zhou, L. (2008). Revenues and expenditures for public elementary and secondary school
districts: School Year 2005–06 (Fiscal Year 2006). (NCES 2008-345). Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for
Education Statistics.

107

APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
I. Introduction
I want to begin by thanking you for agreeing to participate in this interview, focusing on
professional development needs at our school. I truly appreciate the time you have set aside to
answer some questions. The interview should last roughly an hour.
Before we get started, I want to provide you with an overview of what we will be talking
about today and answer any questions you might have about participating. I will be having
conversations with teachers, and I am hoping to get a holistic view of teachers’ beliefs and
experiences. Specifically, I want to understand your feelings, beliefs, and values related to how
the organization currently supports or doesn’t support your improvement in teaching reading and
your recommendations for how the organization can better support your knowledge and
motivation to provide high quality reading instruction. Do you have any questions about the
purpose of today’s discussion?
I want to assure you that everything said here today is strictly confidential. If a quote
from you or any other individual is used, I will indicate that by using a pseudonym—no names
will ever be associated with the findings. Furthermore, no identifying or personal information
will be shared with your principal, your participation is voluntary, and that none of the data will
be used for teacher evaluation purposes. All data will be de-identified. Do you have any
questions?
If you have any questions about your rights while taking part in this study, or you have
concerns or suggestions and you want to talk to someone other than the researcher about the
study, please call the Institutional Review Board at 1-213-821-5272 or email rfleming@usc.edu.
You can reference IRB # UP-18-00269.

108

The last few things that I would like to cover include the procedures of the interview
process. I have brought a recorder with me today so that I can accurately catch what you share.
By using a recorder, it helps me focus on our conversation and not on taking notes. All interview
notes will be locked in a filing cabinet that can only be accessed by me. The recording will be
transcribed by an outside party and any identifying factors will be removed from the data to
ensure anonymity. All files will be password protected and only accessed by me. If at any time
you wish to turn off the recorders, you can just let me know. If you want to skip a question at any
time, you may do that. Simply say, pass. Your participation in all aspects of data collection is
completely voluntary. May I have your permission to record and get started?
Start recording, mention time, and date.
I would like to start by asking you to reflect on your experience as an educator, specifically about
reading instruction.
1. Tell me about what motivated you to become an educator.
a. How long have you been teaching reading?
b. What do you like about teaching reading, if anything?
2. During your studies, either undergraduate or graduate in education, what helped you
learn about reading instruction?
3. What continuing education classes have you completed recently?
4. What new skills have you gained in reading instruction over the last 3 years?
5. Discuss the content knowledge you received about providing reading instruction
during your teacher education.
a. What are your thoughts on how prepared you are because of your teacher
education program?

109

b. Do you have a better literal or theoretical knowledge of teaching reading or is it
equal?
6. What would you say are the best ways to teach reading?
7. Can you describe what implementing this kind of instruction looks like?
8. What learning activities do your students do during reading instruction?
9. What do you do during reading instruction?
10. How do you reflect on your reading instruction, if at all?
Now, I would like to turn to your professional development experiences.
11. How would you define professional development?
12. Tell me about the knowledge or skills you’ve acquired from professional
development outside of the school that has improved your reading instruction.
13. Tell me about the knowledge or skills you’ve acquired from professional
development outside of the school that has improved your reading instruction.
Now, I would like to turn to what supports or impedes you here at this school.
14. How would you describe this school’s culture of professional development?
15. Describe the professional development you have received on reading instruction since
you have been at this school.
16. Who, within the school, has helped you the most improve your reading instruction?
17. Tell me about a typical interaction between your grade level team as you plan for
reading instruction.
a. Probe: How is student data used in these conversations, if at all?
3. Tell me about a time you observed a teacher to learn new reading instructional skills,
if at all?

110

a. Yes – what did you learn?
b. No – What were the factors that prevented you from doing this peer observation?
Is that something you could benefit from?
4. How does the organization support collaboration between teachers, if at all?
5. Has collaborative work with your colleagues improved your reading instruction?
a. Probe for examples.
b. If yes, how so?
6. How does collaboration influence your instructional practices, if at all?
a. Probe for examples.
7. How could the school better support your growth and development with reading
instruction?
Closing and Follow-up
Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts, ideas, and experiences with me today. I really
appreciate your time and openness to share. Everything you shared is extremely helpful. If I find
myself with any follow-up questions, I will contact you via email. Is that ok? Again, thank you
so much for participating.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

E-TECH professional development: a Mountain View University initiative

PDF

An evaluation study: quality contextual professional development

PDF

Decolonizing independent schools in Hawaii

PDF

Principals' perceptions of their ability, as school leaders, to apply learning from district-provided professional development

PDF

Labor displacement: a gap analysis an evaluation study addressing professional development in a small business environment

PDF

Authentic professional learning: a case study

PDF

Administrators' role in supporting teachers through feedback

PDF

The intersection of teacher knowledge and motivation with organizational culture on implementing positive psychology interventions through a character education curriculum

PDF

An evaluation study of effectiveness of continuous professional development in Ethiopia

PDF

How teachers identify and respond to bullying: an evaluation study

PDF

An examination of a social justice teacher cohort and its capacity to support transformational professional learning

PDF

Technological pedagogical skills among K-12 teachers

PDF

A gap analysis of the community school: an evaluation of the implementation of self-directed learning

PDF

Investigating the enactment of professionald development practices in a high performing secondary school setting: a case study examining the purpose, process, and structure of professional development

PDF

Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study

PDF

Role of a principal supervisor in fostering principal development to support instructional improvement and a positive school climate

PDF

Implementing standards-based grading in the era of common standards: an evaluation study

PDF

The importance of technological training among public school teachers integrating one-to-one computing: an evaluation study

PDF

Building academic vocabulary for English language learners through professional development: a gap analysis

PDF

The role of professional development and certification in technology worker turnover: An evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Caley, Steven Andrew (author)

Core Title Professional development at an international school

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 01/30/2019

Defense Date 12/20/2018

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Coaching,International,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational influences,professional development,Professional Learning Community

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Samkian, Artineh (committee chair), Lynch, Douglas (committee member), Slayton, Julie (committee member)

Creator Email scaley@usc.edu,stevecaley@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-116188

Unique identifier UC11675755

Identifier etd-CaleySteve-7032.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-116188 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-CaleySteve-7032.pdf

Dmrecord 116188

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Caley, Steven Andrew

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA