Resources

[Excerpted from Whatever It Takes: How Professional Learning Communities Respond When Kids Don't Learn, Richard DuFour, Rebecca DuFour, Robert Eaker, Gayle Karhanek: National Educational Service (2004)]

Highlights from this book appeared in an article in Educational Leadership (May 2004) titled "What Is a 'Professional Learning Community'?". Learn more

Often in our workshops we ask participants to consider four different sample schools whose staffs would endorse the statement that "all kids can learn." Upon closer examination, however, it becomes apparent that each school is driven by very different assumptions and, because of those differing assumptions, the schools would respond to a student who was not learning in very different ways. Participants in the workshop are asked to review the assumptions and then predict how each school would respond when a student experiences academic difficulty. The description of the four schools is presented below.

The Charles Darwin School
"We believe all kids can learn. . .based on their ability."

We believe that all students can learn, but the extent of their learning is determined by their innate ability or aptitude. This aptitude is relatively fixed, and as teachers we have little influence over the extent of student learning. It is our job to create multiple programs or tracks that address the different abilities of students and then guide students to the appropriate program. This ensures that students have access to the proper curriculum and an optimum opportunity to master material appropriate to their ability.

The Pontius Pilate School
"We believe all kids can learn. . .if they take advantage of the opportunity we give them to learn."

We believe that all students learn if they elect to put forth the necessary effort. It is our job to provide all students with an opportunity to learn, and we fulfill our responsibility when we attempt to present lessons that are both clear and engaging. In the final analysis, however, while it is our job to teach, it is the student's job to learn. We should invite students to learn, but if they elect not to do so, we must hold them accountable for their decisions.

The Chicago Cub Fan School
"We believe all kids can learn. . .something, and we will help all students experience academic growth in a warm and nurturing environment."

We believe that all students can learn and that it is our responsibility to help all students demonstrate some growth as a result of their experience with us. The extent of the growth will be determined by a combination of the student's innate ability and effort. Although we have little impact on those factors, we can encourage all students to learn as much as possible and we can and will create an environment that fosters their sense of well-being and self-esteem.

The Henry Higgins School
"We believe all kids can learn. . .and we will work to help all students achieve high standards of learning."

We believe that all students can and must learn at relatively high levels of achievement. We are confident that students can master challenging academic material with our support and help. We establish standards all students are expected to achieve, and we continue to work with them until they have done so.

Participants in the workshop typically have very little trouble predicting the responses of the various schools. The Charles Darwin School will respond to a student who is not learning by recommending that the student be placed in a less rigorous program. If a student is experiencing difficulty in getting over the proficiency bar that has been established in a course, the school responds by lowering the bar.

The Pontius Pilate School holds the student accountable for not doing what was necessary to learn by failing the student. The hope is that a student who suffers the logical consequences of irresponsibility (that is, failure) will learn the error of his or her ways and become more motivated in the future.

The Chicago Cub Fan School adjusts the goals for individual students within the course or grade level, assuming that low-performing students lack the ability, motivation, or developmental readiness to learn at high levels. The priority in the school becomes ensuring students feel good rather than ensuring that they have learned.

The Henry Higgins School calls upon staff to devote extra time to students who experience difficulty in learning and to continue to seek new strategies until every student has achieved the intended academic goals. Teachers never give up and simply work harder at meeting the needs of individual students.

We then ask participants to identify which of the four schools they believe is most prevalent in North America today. We have asked this question of tens of thousands of educators all across the continent and found invariably consistent responses. Most participants divide themselves fairly equally among the Darwin, Pilate, and Cub Fan schools. A few lonely souls will content that most schools operate according to Henry Higgins assumptions. Often participants will suggest that the response varies according to the grade level of the school—elementary schools tend to operate according to Cub Fan principles while high schools may be more prone to embrace Darwin principles.

Once everyone has had the chance to weigh in on the debate, we ask this question: "Is it not true that in the real world of schools in North America today, we have all four of these responses occurring in the same school at the same time?" In one classroom where a student is struggling, the teacher is likely to call for the student to be placed in a different, less rigorous program. In a classroom down the hall, another student with similar difficulty will remain in the class and receive a failing grade. In yet another classroom, the teacher begins to make concessions to the student's perceived deficiencies and adjusts his or her academic goals for the student. Finally, in even the lowest-performing schools, there are those heroic teachers who continue to exert extraordinary effort in their quest to help all students achieve at high levels. Every time we have posed this question, the audience of experienced teachers has agreed: Students in the same school who experience difficulty in learning will be subject to very different responses based upon the beliefs and practices of individual teachers.

We contend that a school truly committed to the concept of learning for each student will stop subjecting students to a haphazard, random, de facto educational lottery program when they struggle academically. It will stop leaving the critical question, "How will we respond when a student is not learning?" to the discretion of each teacher. It will instead develop consistent, systematic procedures that ensure each student is guaranteed additional time and support when needed. In fact, until the staff of a school begins to respond to students communally rather than as individuals, the school will never become a Professional Learning Community.