The End of “Sit & Git” PD: Powerful, Professional Learning Communities Fueled by Blended, Personaliz by Public Consulting Group

The End of “Sit & Git” PD

Powerful, Professional Learning Communities Fueled by Blended, Personalized Content Collections By Dr. Richard Vineyard and Dr. Jack McLaughlin March 2016

The End of “Sit & Git” PD

Summary In the landscape of the 21st Century, education is global in its reach and personal in its impact. In order to meet the needs of students, teachers and the lifelong learners of our current generation, educational systems will need to effectively use technology to allow the learners to access content that is relevant and useful for the questions they are trying to investigate. However, the use of technology is also going to have to provide for structured opportunities for individuals to create and grow communities of learning to add depth and texture to the application of what they learn to impact the world in which they learn, live, and work. The Pepper Online Professional Learning Network was developed as a system to provide high-quality, personalized, professional learning opportunities to a growing community of learners. An important and critical component of Pepper and its ability to support personalized learning is the capacity in the system for the creation of professional learning communities. Educators in Pepper have the opportunity to create a personal network of instructional coaches and peers from their school, District, or across the country. Educators use these community networks to share progress as they interact with content collections, discuss course work in portfolios and discussion boards, and share chunks of content from a particular course in small groups. It is within these communities that the individual participants have the chance to engage in a structured discussion around the challenges and successes in their education programs. The communities can be virtual or face-to-face, but in all cases, the ability to make the learning visible and communicate their results to others who are engaged in the same program, strengthens the collective learning for all.

Blended Learning v. Traditional “Sit & Git” In a 2014 presentation, Tom Wheeler, Chairman of the FCC stated that,

“Harnessing the power of digital technology is central to improving our education system and our global competitiveness. In the Internet age, every student in America should have access to state-of-the-art educational tools, which are increasingly interactive, individualized and bandwidth-intensive.” As the number and variety of online education programs continues to grow, there have been a number of recent studies on the impact of blended learning (online + on-site, in-person instruction) relative to traditional classroom-based instructional models. One of the early, but still often cited studies, SRI International conducted a meta-analysis study that looked at online and blended learning programs from 1996 through 2006. Key findings included:  

Although the programs studied dealt mostly with college-level and adult learners, they found that students in blended learning programs out performed those in fully online or fully in-person classes. Programs that provided for teacher or peer facilitated interactions to discuss and process the content delivered by online systems that were most successful in supporting increased learning.

In a more recent study, Enyedy (2014) found that more schools and districts were experimenting with bringing blended instruction, where some, but not all, instruction is delivered online. He found that the blended model was gaining favor because it allowed teachers new flexibility in how they could plan their instruction and to decide what type of interactions they would have with their students.

Page 1

The End of “Sit & Git” PD

“Teachers may choose to offload remedial instruction of background knowledge to the online environment. Freed from having to lecture and review earlier material with students who are behind, teachers may spend their time implementing more engaging activities or more challenging work, or perhaps providing individualized feedback to students.” - Enydey (2014) With many indications that online and blended learning programs provide measurable improvements in the academic outcomes for students, the challenge becomes how to make these programs more available to students and their teachers. In one of the final recommendations in his 2014 study, Enydey stated that:

“Policymakers should encourage more partnerships among developers, educational researchers and teachers. Such partnerships have great potential to produce systematic and rigorous evidence of what works and what doesn’t, including studies that take into account the various combinations of technical features, pedagogical approaches and implementation models. We cannot trust market forces alone to sort out which systems are effective.” - Enydey (2014) Combining the Power of Blended Learning with Personalized Instruction The addition of an online or blended learning component to traditional classrooms, adds options for increased variety and depth of instruction to make both decisions about instructional strategies and learning goals more personal for both teachers and students. In his 2014 study, Enydey defined personalized instruction as focusing on the ability to tailor the pace, order, location, and content of a lesson uniquely for each student. He characterized it as an updated version of individualized (differentiated) instruction that has long been an option in classroom teaching. Personalized learning, however focuses on the process of learning instead of the delivery of content. Personalized learning includes the ways that:

“teachers or learning environments can vary the resources, activities, and teaching techniques to effectively engage as many students as possible—as when, for example, students with a stronger intuitive understanding of the topic are assigned to small groups and given a challenging task to independently extend their understanding while the teacher concurrently works directly with a small group of students who have less prior knowledge of the topic. This interpretation of “personal” does not imply that each student receives a unique educational experience, but instead that students are provided with multiple entry points and multiple trajectories through a lesson.” - Enydey (2014)

Page 2

The End of “Sit & Git” PD

Building an Online Professional Learning Platform In addressing the challenge of developing a program to meet the need for high-quality online learning systems, the Education Practice of Boston-based Public Consulting Group (PCG Education) worked in partnership with over 5000 school districts, 27 State Departments of Education, major educational research universities, and well-established market-leading content publishers to develop the Pepper Online Professional Learning Network. PCG Education consultants talk with State and District partners every day, ask questions, listen, and work with them to design solutions that meet the diverse needs of their districts, schools, teachers, and students. Pepper is a vibrant, online community where K-12 educators have anytime, anywhere access to rigorous, highquality content collections. The community manages facilitated and self-paced, professional learning courses for educators. Launched in 2014, Pepper has become the professional learning network of choice for more than 750,000 educators in the U.S. Pepper is built on the powerful edX platform, the Cambridge-based education partnership founded by Harvard University and M.I.T., to support two important missions: improving online education, and advancing teaching and learning through research. The use of edX as the platform allows for the online courses and workshops to be accessed from nearly any web connected device. In addition to managing and delivering content and pedagogy based courses, Pepper includes capacities and flexibilities to meet the expectations for high-quality, engaging, and interactive online learning. According to the Michigan Merit Curriculum’s Online Learning guidelines, a high-quality online learning program exhibits a number of characteristics. Online learning programs are expected to:         

Be organized in a coherent, sequential manner Have instructional goals, objectives, strategies, and assessments that are aligned with state standards, benchmarks and expectations Compare in rigor, depth and breadth to traditionally delivered curriculum Include the principles of Universal Design for Learning by providing multiple approaches to meet the needs of diverse learners Be relevant and address many learning styles Include asynchronous and/or synchronous interaction between teacher and student, and student-tostudent Include teachers who are knowledgeable in web-based instruction techniques Incorporate resources outside the classroom Include a monitoring plan

Based on the Michigan guidelines, a quality online learning experience is a combination of structured, sustained, integrated, meaningful learning activities. A student that has been successful in this type of experience should develop competency for being able to learn in a virtual environment (lifelong learning). Another feature of high quality, online learning, that supports its inclusion as part of personalized, professional learning programs, is that the content and delivery can be directed to maximize the effectiveness of the programs to improve learning. In this context, we define effectiveness as the ability of the system to engage learners in interaction with content that is relevant and useful for them to maximize the return on investment for the time and effort they devote to the courses. Pepper courses are designed to include elements to make them as effective as possible in providing a high return in learning, for the investment of time that is required to complete the course.

Page 3

The End of “Sit & Git” PD

High-Quality Online Learning PCG Education’s approach to online and blended learning is directly informed by the Quality Matters benchmarks and standards for online course design. PCG is an organizational subscriber and works with course authors to encourage use of these standards As stated on their website,

“Quality Matters (QM) is a leader in quality assurance for online education and has received national recognition for its peer-based approach to continuous improvement in online education and student learning.” As part of PCG Education’s organizational commitment to rigorous standards for online course design and implementation, PCG subject matter experts and instructional designers use QM’s rubrics, digital design and review tools, and continuous improvement models to align our own courses to the Quality Matters nationallyrecognized standards, and to assist our clients in doing the same. For professional development work with clients, PCG Education uses the QM Continuing and Professional Education quality rubric. Pepper allows educators to track and promote their progression and content mastery to others with shared visibility of their personal profile, current course load, roster of completed courses, shared portfolio of course work and reflections, and course completion certificates. The ability to create and curate an online professional portfolio is increasingly important for all teachers as they work to document their commitments to professional learning and assessment of their teaching performance.

Professional Portfolios & Discussions with Coaches and Peers For each course, course creators/authors will have the ability to both present AND collect data from the students. Asking educators to submit samples of work, complete rubrics and planning guides, complete reflection activities during the course will allow for them to save all of their progress into a professional portfolio for sharing with instructional coaches and peers. Personal course portfolios are powerful tools for the organization of all coursework for future personal reference and allow learners to select portfolio elements to make available for others to view for feedback and collaboration. Sharing a course portfolio – as well as viewing and collaborating on peer portfolios – is a great way for learners to gather peer support and feedback, and ensure learner accountability as a course participant. The course portfolio is intended to serve multiple purposes: An organization tool – to review and reference easily all submitted work by session; A presentation tool – to share progress, work, and reflections with coaches and peers; and, A collaborative tool – to reach out with a question or ask for feedback on your work and get support and suggestions from your peers. When used as part of a structured evaluation program instructional coaches and peers can provide immediate feedback in the portfolio which then “triggers” an internal and external notification that someone has reached out to provide feedback/interaction. Feedback can be in the form of links, photos, videos, documents and text.

Page 4

The End of “Sit & Git” PD

Bringing it Together in Online Professional Communities Much has been written in the last decade about both community formation and online community interaction. The following are four of the key, research-based best practices around using professional communities with teachers and students.



Communities build social capital and maximize participation by focusing on the gifts and abilities that members bring to the table. As Peter Block writes in Community: The Structure of Belonging, “Focus on gifts… [C]ommunity is built by focusing on people’s gifts rather than their deficiencies… [D]efficiencies have no market value; gifts are the point. Citizens in community want to know what you can do, not what you can’t do.”

In Pepper, we want educators to want to participate—even if their participation is incentivized through resumebuilding certificates or mandated via their district administrators, the goal is to create a community in which the expertise, experiences, talents, and perspectives of each member can be maximized. Rewards are a valueadd, and if community members know their contributions are valued, they will return and invest and grow social capital.



Strong, thriving communities require shared and overlapping interests, and easy, intuitive ways to communicate about these interests. Shared interests ramp up the social cohesion and sense of common purpose, and if communities encounter difficulties, often the shared interests provide an incentive for working through challenges. As Rich Millington of FeverBee explains, “A clear, strong community identity is the key element of keeping a highly-engaged audience.” (Millington, 2013)

In Pepper, this community identity should center on a desire to appropriate, learn about, engage with, and share information about new assessments and standards and the best practices associated with them.



Communities that flourish rely on robust governance – but this governance needs to be emergent, and grow out of the concrete context and situations of the community itself. It cannot easily be delivered from the top down in a prescriptive fashion, beyond the most basic guidelines about expectations and unacceptable behaviors.

Research shows that top-down governance is often resented by community members, but when members themselves are partly responsible for developing codes of conduct, organizing communication structures, and innovating within the platforms provided, that sense of ownership leads to stronger community cohesion and longer community duration.



Adaptability, dynamism, and flexibility are critical characteristics for online communities to succeed. Strong communities are not rigid structures. They need a free market approach in which social capital can move from member to member and locus to locus. As new community needs emerge, the community structures need to be able to adapt or members will find other resources and communities to meet their needs.

As the Pepper learning community of educators grows, we may discover that community members want to collaborate across content areas in ways we had not originally envisioned. We will need to ensure that the tech is in place to allow those collaborations to happen. Or we may find that sub-groups develop, and offer a space for more in-depth, content-rich conversations and learning to take place. We would need to ensure that those sub-groups maintain cohesion with the community as a whole while still providing that unique space.

Page 5

The End of “Sit & Git” PD

References: Block, P. (2009) Community: The Structure of Belonging. Berrett-Koehler, 2009. Enyedy, N. (2014). Personalized Instruction: New Interest, Old Rhetoric, Limited Results, and the Need for a New Direction for Computer-Mediated Learning. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. (2014) Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies. Conducted by SRI International for the U.S. Department of Education, 2010. Millington, R. (2013) How to Build an Online Community. www.FeverBee.com. February 27, 2013. The Michigan Merit Curriculum's Online Learning Experience Guideline document (http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/Online10.06_final_175750_7.pdf) ABOUT THE AUTHORS Richard N. Vineyard, Ph.D., is Lead Program Manager for Science at PCG Education. His extensive experience in science education and assessment informs his work with the K-12 community, specifically in helping schools understand the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). Dr. Vineyard works with state, district and school administrators to design and develop new instructional programs based on the NGSS. He also supports projects focused on the professional development of teachers in science and other Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) education initiatives. Prior to joining PCG in 2015, Dr. Vineyard was Assessment Director for the Nevada Department of Education (NDE) where he worked to supervise the development and implementation of all state level assessments in Nevada. His career with the NDE spanned more than 17 years, during which time he worked first as the state Science Specialist on statewide education initiatives including the development of science content standards and Nevada’s first assessments in science. As Assessment Director, Richard was also instrumental in the development and revision of content standards in all areas and state level assessments in ELA, Math, Science, including the Nevada Alternate Assessments for students with disabilities. Richard has served on numerous state and national committees on science education and assessment, and is Past President of the Council of State Science Supervisors. Dr. Jack McLaughlin is a Manager for PCG Education. Dr. McLaughlin comes from a proud family tradition of service in public education. Jack has served as school teacher and administrator in New York and California. In California, Jack served as a kindergarten teacher, Director of Curriculum and Instruction and as District Superintendent. Working in New York City, Jack served as an educator in District 75 (Special Education) and as Director of Educational Services. Jack has served as an executive in the private industry since 2001, working to improve student achievement. Jack has worked with more than 400 school districts in the US and the Bahamas. Dr. McLaughlin received his Master’s Degree in Education from the University of Southern California, and his Doctorate in Educational Administration from Teachers College, Columbia University in New York City.

To reach the authors or for more information, please contact PCG Education at (775) 313-3121.

Page 6