A school system is successful when it has the understanding, commitment, and support of stakeholders. System and school personnel seek opportunities for collaboration and shared leadership among stakeholders to help students learn and advance improvement efforts (Quality systems standards.p. 6).
Involving teachers as “stakeholders” in school change efforts, as well as making teachers accountable for specific outcomes, increases the likelihood of successful school improvement and reform (Gabel & Manning, 1997). Communication is the key to school improvement and successful reform. The traditional style of teaching is individualistic. Teaching has been viewed as a solitary act and the teacher’s decisions viewed as his or her prerogative. The mystique surrounding quality in such a traditional setting reinforces the belief that certain teachers are “good” and that others simply do not have the same skill or talent (Gideon, 2002). This is very evident in U.S. high schools where a culture exists of teacher isolation and autonomy. Most high schools are organized around content-specific departments that separate colleagues along content lines. Classrooms are also grouped by content area, giving teachers easy access to others who teach in their department but little access to teachers outside their departments. In large schools, teachers may not even know their colleagues who teach in other areas of the building. In traditional school settings, teachers seldom visit one another’s classrooms, and conversations among teachers are more likely to be about other things than the curriculum. These practices result in highly individualistic environments where collaboration is adopted but is unlikely to be made a reality (Gideon, 2002).
Professional collaboration has several distinct advantages over conventional education approaches. First, the shared planning and goal setting process helps the participants gain ownership of the instructional process and establish mutually satisfactory goals; therefore, each party feels equally responsible for ensuring a positive outcome. Collaboration encourages individuals to share goals and objectives, and to direct their own interests for the greater good. Second, collaboration allows participants to learn from one another and to build long lasting, trusting, professional partnerships. Third, collaboration gives teachers an opportunity to work together to bring about school change. Teacher collaboration is consonant with school change in several ways. It includes a number of participants and requires a deliberate shift from schools’ hierarchical and authoritarian structures so that all individuals consider themselves integral to the change process. Collaboration, because it is predicated on equality, leads to a sense of collegiality. It also encourages a climate that is amenable to new perspectives and attitudes (Gabel & Manning, 1997).
Dr. Eric Twadell in his book Leading by Design (2012) defines collaboration as a systematic process in which people work together interdependently to analyze and impact professional practice to improve individual and collective results. Schools can achieve their fundamental purpose of high levels of learning for all students only if all stakeholders work together. And they can cultivate this collaborative culture through the development of high performing teams. Collaboration is essential for the successful integration of information skills instruction into curricular subject areas. But, collaboration is often used to mean cooperation or coordinating, yet there’s a big difference among the three terms.
Cooperation is informal, with no commonly defined goals or planning effort; information is shared as needed. For example, a high school social studies teacher and a high school language arts teacher in a cooperative relationship work loosely together. Each works independently, but they come together briefly for mutual benefit. Coordinating suggests a more formal working relationship and the understanding of missions. Some planning is required and more communication channels are established. For example, in a high school situation the social studies teacher and the language arts teacher may make arrangements to plan to teach a unit together. Here a closer working relationship is required. Collaboration changes the way people work. Collaboration moves from competing to building consensus; from working alone to including others from different fields and backgrounds; from thinking mostly about activities and programs to thinking about larger results and strategies; from focusing on short-term accomplishments to requiring long term results. Collaboration is a working relationship over a relatively long period of time. Collaboration requires shared goals, derived during the partnership. Roles are carefully defined and more comprehensive planning is required. Communication is conducted at many levels to ensure success. Leadership, resources, risk, control, and results are shared. As a result of collaboration, there is a substantial benefit. “More is accomplished jointly than could have been individually.” (Mattessich and Monsey, 1992).
The levels of collaboration are found in the table below.
| Cooperation | Coordination | Collaboration |
| Short term | Longer term | Long term |
| Informal relationships | More formal relationships | More pervasive relationships |
| No clearly defined mission | Understand mission | Commitment to a common mission |
| No defined structure | Focus on a specific effort or program | Results in a new structure |
| No planning effort | Some planning | Comprehensive planning |
| Partners share information about the project at hand | Open communication channels | Well-defined communication channels at all levels |
| Individuals retain authority | Authority still retained by individuals | Collaborative structure determines authority |
| Resources are maintained separately | Resources and rewards are shared | Resources are shared |
| No risk | Power can be an issue | Greater risk; power is an issue |
| Lower intensity | Some intensity | Higher intensity |
(Twadell, 2012)
Gideon (2002) discusses two factors that are necessary to successfully implement a more collegial model of school organization. The collaboration, at least at first, must address issues teachers find immediately useful and be structured into the regular teacher workday. Many collaboration attempts have failed because the innovations or recommendations, although ultimately benefiting teachers and students, were not immediately evident or because teachers were often asked to meet before or after their regular workday–when they were tired and had other responsibilities. If it is truly believed that teacher collaboration is the key to school improvement, it must be part of the regular work of teachers and administrators, teacher recommendations must actually be implemented, and teachers must be publicly recognized for their success. Collaboration develops over time and, with trust, becomes the way a school operates. Structure that is deliberately built to support collaboration is the key.
There are different frameworks used in order to build a culture of collaboration among teachers. One framework is the school leadership team. The school leadership team meets weekly and the dedicated time provides the framework for the other structures that shape interactions within the school each week. Department chairs meet once a week with assistant principals to discuss curricular concerns and visit classrooms as an instructional cabinet. Classroom visits, called “learning walks,” focus on instructional strategies, student work, and congruence of the curriculum (Gideon, 2002). A second and most popular framework is professional learning community. A professional learning community can be described as a collaborative context where teachers (a) get involved in common work; (b) share a range of norms, values, visions, and beliefs concerning themselves, their students and more broadly, teaching; and (c) are organized on collaborative cultures and structures that enhance interdependence (Lavie, 2006). Professional learning communities discuss common experiences for students, and study student achievement on state accountability measures as well as on campus-designed assessments.
A third framework for building collaboration is grade level meetings. During grade level meetings the individual and collective needs of students are addressed in grade-level meetings. These grade-level meetings focus on student attendance, behavior, and external issues that affect achievement. The meetings also serve to strengthen the bond between administrators and teachers. Instead of complaining that the administrators do not respond to their discipline referrals, teachers have opportunities to discuss particular students (Gideon, 2002). A fourth framework to help build collaboration is cadres. Cadres– or working groups–meet to plan and implement school projects and deal with common concerns. Cadres study ways to improve attendance, look at positive ways to improve disciplinary issues, and work to improve school climate (Twadell, 2012).
Frameworks to help support the time and purpose of group endeavors along with real results will sustain collaboration in a school and forever change the way it conducts business. School collaboration depends on a framework that supports collegial work and continuous school improvement.
Gideon, B. H. (2002). Structuring Schools for Teacher Collaboration.Education Digest, 68(2), 30.
Mattessich, P. W., Murray-Close, M., & Monsey, B. R. (2001). Collaboration: What Makes It Work, 2nd Edition: A Review of Research Literature on Factors Influencing Successful Collaboration (2nd ed.). Amherst H. Wilder Foundation.
Quality systems standards. (2010, October 20). Retrieved from http://www.advanc-ed.org/districts
The Prepared Student 