1. 1. Whole-Faculty Study Groups Carlene Murphy states, whole-faculty study groups is a student driven approach to professional development. It is a job-embedded, professional development system to build a community in which professionals continuously strive to increase student learning. (Murphys Whole-Faculty Study Group, n.d.) By: Golden Sant For: EDLE 5005
2. 2. Carlene Murphy defines whole-faculty: HOW is this accomplished? This is accomplished as practitioners deepen their own knowledge and understanding of what is taught, reflect on their practices, sharpen their skill, and take joint responsibility for the students they teach. WHAT does Whole-Faculty mean? Whole-faculty means that every faculty member at a school is a member of a study group focusing on data- based student instructional needs. In such a context, a study group is a small number of individuals joining together to increase their capacities to enable students to reach higher levels of performance. The collective synergy of all the study groups advance the whole school. (Murphys Whole Faculty Study Groups, n.d.)
3. 3. In particular, study groups are teacher centered, inspire reflection, give opportunities for experimentation, provide authentic learning experiences, and motivate teachers to go beyond traditional boundaries and construct new learnings and meanings. These groups allows faculty members to come together and form relationships and create conditions where they can gain understanding and learn together. (Murphys Whole-Faculty Study Group, n.d.)
4. 4. Dale Lick lists some teachers comments about the importance of study groups in an article, Whole-Faculty Study Groups: Facilitating Mentoring For School-Wide Change.: The whole-faculty study group approach is a new process aimed at changing schools. It enables teachers to design their own learning agenda and implement their findings for the benefit of their students, themselves and the school. Teachers participating in these study groups generally gain self- confidence and feel confirmed that their craft is based on a professional field of knowledge (Murphy & Lick, 1998). Where properly implemented, the study group process has been unusually successful, facilitating school-wide and enhancing student learning. The focus question for faculty study groups is: What is happening differently in the classroom as a result of what you are doing and learning in study groups> With that vision, study groups are motivated, work harder, and take responsibility for the successful implementation of the required processes and procedures (Murphy & Lick, 1998, p. 18). Lick, Dale (2000)
5. 5. The Guiding Principles Zepeda (2012), The guiding principles identified by Murphy and Lick (2005) for whole-faculty study groups can be adopted by any teacher study group. The guiding principles include: Students are first; Everybody participates; Leadership is shared; Responsibility is equal; and, The work is public. (pg. 187)
6. 6. The Functions of Whole-Faculty Study Groups Zepeda (2012), The functions that serve as overall goals are: To support the implementation of curricular and instructional innovations; To integrate and give coherence to the schools instructional strategies and programs; To target a schoolwide need; To study the research and latest developments on teaching and learning; and, To monitor the impact of innovations on students and on changes in the workplace. (pg. 188)
7. 7. Zepeda (2012), Five of the 15 process guidelines for WFSGs are: Keep the size of the study groups to no more than six; Establish and keep a regular schedule, letting no more than two weeks pass between meetings; Agree on a written Study Group Action Plan that is shared with the whole faculty by the end of the second meeting; Complete a Study Group Log after each study group meeting that is shared with the whole faculty; Establish a pattern of rotating group leadership; (pgs. 188-189) Zepeda (2012), according to Murphy and Lick (2005), Todays principal must be a reflective practitioner and must model the value of learning for the faculty, staff, and students. (pg.189). A few ways that principals can be champions of the whole-faculty study group is by: Being involved in the WFSG process. Keeping study groups focused. Focusing on research. Using the decision-making cycle. Sharing the work. Using data. Dealing with reluctant teachers (pgs. 189)
8. 8. An example of these study groups is mentioned by Lick in an article, Whole- Faculty Study Groups: Facilitating Mentoring For School-Wide Change. about a middle school with 40 teachers and 550 sixth, seventh, and eight graders (Murphy, 1991, pp. 63-67). The whole faculty trained in several models of teaching and then organized them into study groups to support the implementation of new teaching repertoires. During the first summer of the initiative, administrators and teachers attended a 2-week training program that focused on several models of teaching. During the school year the teachers met weekly for an hour in their groups for collaboration. For 2 years, administrators and teachers attended similar trainings and continued to meet in their groups during the school year. Throughout the implementation of the study group program, other factors stayed the same as they were. The only interventions were the study group design and training. However, changes in results were dramatic: Students reaching promotion standards rose from 34 to 94 percent, writing skills went from eleventh to third in the district, and out-of-school suspensions declined from 343 to 124. Lick, Dale (2000)
9. 9. On Carlene Murphys website, under Center Services, it lists support and technical services for schools that are engaged into WFSGs. There are three options to determine how WFSG will be launched at a school. Faculty can either send a group to a Level I Institute, have a WFSG consultant conduct a level I Institute at a location within a district or RESA area for focus teams from several schools, or have a WFSG consultant lead on whole faculty through the Decision-Making Cycle. The support during the first year is determined by the consultants and school leaders and the consultant would come and visit the school to conduct on-going trainings and provide support. During the second and third years the consultants and school leaders also determine what types of on-going support are needed. (Murphys Whole-Faculty Study Groups, n.d.)
10. 10. By the end of the 3rd year it is expected that: Student achievement has improved in the areas targeted The culture of the school is more collaborative. All faculty use WFSGs to address specific instructional student needs. All faculty use student data to make decisions about their own professional development needs. All faculty see the relationship between study group work and improved classroom practice. All faculty use LASW as a strategy to reflect on instructional practice. The instructional component of the School Improvement Plan is generated from recommendations from the WFSG. Time for study groups to meet has been built into the school day. Continuation of WFSG is a given. (Murphys Whole-Faculty Study Groups, n.d.)
11. 11. References Zepeda, Sally (2012). Professional Development: What Works (pp 186-190). Larchmont, New York: Eye on Education. Lick, Dale W.. (2000) Whole-Faculty Study Groups: Facilitating Mentoring for School-wide Change. Theory Into Practice, 39(1), 43. Murphys Whole-Faculty Study Groups. (n.d.). Retrieved February 18, 2015, from http://murphyswfgs.org/