My school has implemented a whole school reform model, as per the state’s requirements for Abbott schools.  Part of this model is that the school is broken down into small learning communities.

As it is implemented in our school, students are divided into clusters of approximately 100 students.  These students share the same Social Studies, Language Arts and Literacy, Math, and Science teachers.  These teachers also have a common planning period where they meet each day to perform various duties.

The argument going on in the school now is… should teachers be compensated for this?

In our district, the common planning period replaces a normal duty.  So, instead of cafeteria duty, hall duty, or something similar, a teacher needs to attend the common planning period each day.

While in this planning period, there are various things that need to be done.  Teachers should discuss their common students, spending at least one day per week going through the complete roster and noting any major problems.

Teachers should also spend time planning together so that they can integrate their classes.  One requiement of this is the devleopment and implementation of at least one cross-curricular project that involves all four classes.

Teachers are available to meet with parents during this planning period, so that parents can come in and see all of their students’ teachers at once.

A secretary or recorder keeps minutes of each meeting, and a monthly report needs to be sent to the principal.

Is this the same as a duty?

As many of the teachers in the district have argued, this involves far more in terms of time, effort, and planning than a simple duty.  Extra time is spent contacting parents, doing paperwork, and organizing joint efforts.  This can easily overflow into other time after school or in a regular prep period.

By contrast, a duty is simply a duty.  A teacher patrols the designated area and has no responsibilities once the period is over.

Since the model was introduced last year, teachers have been arguing with the administration over some form of compensation.  Some have argued that we should get monetary compensation.  The school did receive a $500,000 grant to implement this model, so why shouldn’t some of that money filter down to the teachers who are doing the brunt of the work?

A more realistic claim, though, is that we should receive professional development hours for this.  Our common planning period engages us in collaborative planning and learning, and it qualifies in some districts as professional development.  In fact at one of the middle schools in the district, teachers do receive professional development hours for participating in these types of clusters and small learning communities.

What do you think?  Should we get anything extra compensation?  Money, professional development hours, or something else?

This entry was posted on Sunday, September 23rd, 2007 at 2:55 pm and is filed under Education, Ramblings. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.