School-based PLCs v. NWP-KSU PLC - IMHO (In My Humble Opinion)

Last school year (2011-2012) at Hannah Gibbons-STEM School (Cleveland Metropolitan Schools), I participated in a PLC that focused on STEM (Science Technology Engineering Math) learning.  The work of Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe in Understanding by Design was our selected text.  Participation was lackluster, at best.  Few people took the time to even scan the readings, much less actually read the selections.  My principal led the discussions, and despite his attempts to engage people, many were very reluctant to participate.  Teachers were paid for professional development if they chose to come.  It was very disappointing to me, as a part of the leadership team.  When I asked people privately about their impressions and lack of participation, I often got the answer that they just didn't have time to read.

NWP-KSU PLCs that I've participated in have been much more successful and beneficial to me.  The discussions were the best part for me.  I truly believe that TCs are a group of teachers that are willing to take risks and share their learning with others.  The "safe writing space" created by the NWP model seems to carry beyond SI.  I feel that TCs have already been "vetted" by way of their application / interview/ SI experiences.  (Unfortunately can't say the say for all of my CMSD colleagues.)  NWP-KSU PLCs always seem to have a sense of shared responsibility.

We will try the STEM PLC again this year.  I hope we have more participants who are willing to "do the work" and "take some risks".