CHAPTER 1

Using High-Performing Collaborative

Teams for Mathematics
The Common Core State Standards provide a consistent, clear under-
standing of what students are expected to learn, so that teachers and par-
ents know what they need to do to help them learn. The standards are
designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowl-
edge and skills that our young people need for success in college and
careers. With American students fully prepared for the future, our commu-
nities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy.
—NGA & CCSSO

Students arrive at middle school with many challenges, and grades 6–8 teachers are
expected to ensure all students achieve proficiency in the rigorous Standards for math-
ematics content as well as the Standards for Mathematical Practice described in the
CCSS. How can you successfully help your middle school students achieve these
expectations?
One of the characteristics of high-performing and high-impact schools that are suc-
cessfully closing achievement gaps is their focus on teacher collaboration as a key to
improving instruction and reaching all students (Education Trust, 2005; Kersaint,
2007). A collaborative culture is one of the best ways for teachers to acquire both the
instructional knowledge and skills required to meet this challenge, as well as the energy
and support necessary to reach all students (Leithwood & Seashore Louis, 1998). Seeley
(2009) characterizes this challenge by noting, “Alone we can accomplish great things. . . .
But together, with creativity, wisdom, energy, and, most of all commitment, there is no
end to what we might do” (pp. 225–226).
A core premise of this book is that professional learning communities provide the best
collaborative environment necessary for you to share your creativity and wisdom, create
more equitable learning experiences for all grade-level students, and harness the energy
and persistence necessary to meet your students’ needs, as well as the challenges of
understanding and implementing of the CCSS expectations for grades 6–8.
Research affirms the value of your collaboration with others and its positive impact
on student achievement (Learning Forward, 2011). Many professional organizations
include teacher collaboration as an essential part of professional growth and responsibil-
ity (Learning Forward, 2011; National Board of Professional Teaching Standards, 2010;

7
8 COMMON COR E M ATHEM ATICS IN A PLC AT WOR K TM

National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics, 2007). Whether you are a veteran or

novice mathematics teacher, your participation in a collaborative team benefits student
learning.
Just as students in groups need direction and support to work together well, middle
school teachers in collaborative teams also need direction and support to effectively col-
laborate. This chapter defines and details how to operate successfully as you make the
paradigm shift from working as an individual in relative isolation to working within a
highly effective collaborative team. Whether you are part of a new team, or a veteran
team with deep experience in the PLC process, this chapter enables you to identify the
current stage of your collaboration and the types of work and discussions in those stages
and provides several critical collaborative protocols through which you can measure your
team’s continued progress.

Professional Development Paradigm Shift

The Common Core State Standards for mathematics (NGA & CCSSO, 2010a) are a
significant advance over previous mathematics standards in terms of their requirements
for students, teachers, and organization and structure and their treatment of particular
mathematical content. These advances include:
●● Emphasis on developing students’ conceptual understanding as well as
procedural skills
●● Fewer topics taught with greater depth at each grade level, providing more
focus and coherence within and across the grades
●● Increased rigor of content and assessment of content knowledge combined with
increased emphasis on applications
●● Focus on the progression of standards across grades, reflecting, to the extent
possible, how students learn necessary content
●● Inclusion of habits of mind—the Standards for Mathematical Practice—that
students are to develop in addition to content expectations
As described in chapters 2, 3, and 4, implementing the CCSS in grades 6–8 will
require reasonable but significant changes in your mathematics curriculum, instruc-
tion, and assessment. To successfully meet those changes, you will need to be engaged
in significant, ongoing professional learning with your colleagues.
The fundamental purpose of professional development is the continuous improvement
of professional practice (Corcoran, Shields, & Zucker, 1998). Typically, professional
development consists of events—experts lead one-day presentations, courses, confer-
ences, or webinars—that you might engage in periodically. While such events can be
valuable and instructive, especially as ways to gain initial understanding of the CCSS,
they are far from sufficient to support ongoing reflection about and changes in your
instruction and assessment.
What is needed is ongoing, sustained professional learning with colleagues—that
is, engaging colleagues in a collaborative learning team as part of a larger professional
 Using High-Performing Collaborative Teams for Mathematics 9

learning community. Linda Darling-Hammond (2010) summarizes effective professional

development, as follows:
Effective professional development is sustained, ongoing, content-focused,
and embedded in professional learning communities where teachers work
over time on problems of practice with other teachers in their subject area
or school. Furthermore, it focuses on concrete tasks of teaching, assess-
ment, observation, and reflection, looking at how students learn specific
content in particular contexts. . . . It is often useful for teachers to be put in
the position of studying the very material that they intend to teach to their
own students. (pp. 226–227)
In other words, effective mathematics professional development is in many ways the
opposite of much of the professional development that you might experience—it is
sustained and embedded within professional learning communities and focused on the
actual tasks of teaching using the materials teachers use with students. What is meant by
sustained? It means effective professional development—programs that have demonstrated
positive and significant effects on student achievement with between thirty and one
hundred hours of contact time for teacher collaboration over the course of six to twelve
months (Darling-Hammond, Wei, Andree, Richardson, & Orphanos, 2009; Garet
et al., 2010). This high-quality professional development often involves collaborative
teacher study in a structured way of the very curriculum that is being taught as well as
students’ acquisition of that curriculum. Embedded in your instructional practice at the
lesson level, this approach ultimately leads to your deeper understanding and thus wider
adoption of the curricular and instructional innovations sought (Cohen & Hill, 2001;
Hiebert, Gallimore, & Stigler, 2002; Penuel, Fishman, Yamaguchi, & Gallagher, 2007;
Wayne, Yoon, Zhu, Cronen, & Garet, 2008). These are precisely the components that
must be included in professional development efforts for middle school mathematics
teachers to enable them to meet successfully the implementation challenges of the CCSS.
Your collaborative effort is part of the necessary professional development paradigm
shift required to effectively address equity, a critical aspect of middle school mathematics
instruction. Equity—ensuring that all students have the opportunities and supports they
need to achieve at high levels—is one of your greatest challenges as a grades 6–8 teacher.
Too often, grades 6–8 teachers work as independent contractors, developing lesson plans,
assessments, and intervention strategies alone, without consultation with colleagues.
This lack of collaborative effort creates inequities in students’ mathematics instructional
experiences and is a contributing factor to achievement gaps. Equity is mostly about
consistency in providing high-quality learning opportunities across classrooms. In order
to improve mathematics education within schools across the United States, this incon-
sistency in quality of instruction due to teacher isolation must be overcome (Kanold,
2006). How can this be done? By engaging in a collaborative learning team as the engine
that drives the professional learning community process in your school, middle school
mathematics teachers can strive to overcome disparities in student achievement. Your
collaborative teams provide the supportive environment necessary to share your creativity
and wisdom and to harness the energy and persistence necessary to meet the demands of
students’ needs and the challenges that arise from Common Core expectations.
10 COMMON COR E M ATHEM ATICS IN A PLC AT WOR K TM

Teacher Collaboration in a Professional Learning

Community
Although great teaching does not look the same in every classroom, the Common
Core standards expect you and your colleagues to commit to high-quality instruc-
tion and assessment processes as an essential element of successful student learning.
Implementing the CCSS with fidelity requires you to not just teach mathematics con-
tent but to teach students processes and proficiencies for ways of thinking and doing
mathematics—a habit of mind, so to speak. In the CCSS, these learning processes are
revealed through the eight Standards for Mathematical Practice (see chapter 2) and the
Standards for Mathematical Content (see chapter 3). Your participation and engagement
in effective collaborative team discussions on a unit-by-unit basis allow for the creation
and implementation of a rigorous and coherent mathematics curriculum and prevent
ineffective instructional practices. Implementing the CCSS for mathematics means you
and your colleagues working together in collaborative teams must “balance personal
goals with collective goals, acquire resources for [your] work, and share those resources
to support the work of others” (Garmston & Wellman, 2009, p. 33).
Professional learning communities have become ubiquitous in education, and you
may equate PLCs with teacher collaboration. At the same time, various definitions and
understandings regarding a PLC culture abound. In this book, we use the work of
DuFour, DuFour, and Eaker’s (2008) Revisiting Professional Learning Communities at
Work and DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, and Many’s (2010) Learning by Doing to define the
conditions for collaborative mathematics learning teams in an authentic PLC culture.
For our purposes, we will refer to grade-level or course-level groups of teachers working
together in a PLC culture and process as collaborative teams.
DuFour et al. (2008) define a PLC as
educators committed to working collaboratively in ongoing processes of
collective inquiry and action research to achieve better results for the stu-
dents they serve. Professional learning communities operate under the
assumption that the key to improved learning for students is continuous,
job-embedded learning for educators. (p. 14)
Typically, schools or districts commit to operating as a PLC with various collaborative
learning teams (like grade-level teachers or mathematics teachers) operating interdepen-
dently within it to accomplish the larger PLC goals. Becoming a collaborative learning
team (collaborative team) is more than meeting regularly to discuss instruction with
your collaborative team members. The defining feature of a learning community is “a
focus on and commitment to the learning of each student” (DuFour et al., 2008, p. 15).
DuFour et al. (2008) identify six characteristics of effective PLCs.
1. PLCs have shared mission (purpose), vision (clear direction), values (collective
commitments), and goals (indicators, timelines, and targets)—all focused on
student learning.
2. There is a collaborative culture with a focus on learning. However, collaboration
is a means to an end, not an end in itself. According to DuFour et al. (2008),
 Using High-Performing Collaborative Teams for Mathematics 11

“Collaboration is a systematic process in which teachers work together, inter-

dependently, to analyze and impact professional practice in order to improve
results for their students, their teams, and their school” (p. 16).
3. Collaborative teams engage in collective inquiry into “1) best practices about
teaching and learning, 2) a candid clarification of their current practices, and
3) an honest assessment of their students’ current levels of learning” (DuFour et
al., 2008, p. 16).
4. PLCs are action oriented; they learn by doing. In other words, team members
not only read, analyze, and plan but also act on their plans, then learn from the
results of their actions.
5. They are committed to continuous improvement. The goal is to create condi-
tions for perpetual learning by engaging in an ongoing improvement cycle of
gathering evidence of student learning; developing and selecting strategies to
address learning needs; implementing the strategies and analyzing their effec-
tiveness; and then applying new knowledge in the next cycle.
6. Collaborative team members are results oriented. All teachers’ efforts “must be
assessed on the basis of results rather than intentions” (DuFour et al., 2008, p. 17).
In short, a PLC process involves a shift from a culture of isolated, independent profes-
sional practice focused on the achievement of students in your class to one of collabora-
tive, interdependent practice with shared accountability for the learning of all students—
even those that you do not teach personally. No longer is the focus on my students or your
students, rather it centers on our students in the grade level or in the course.
Considering the unprecedented clarity of the CCSS for mathematics, DuFour et al.
(2010) verify why is it essential to take action in your collaborative team to develop a
shared understanding of the content and the assessment of what is to be taught, because
doing so:
●● Promotes clarity among your colleagues
●● Ensures consistent curricular priorities among teachers
●● Is critical to the development of common pacing required for highly effective
common assessments
●● Ensures that the curriculum is viable—that it can be taught in the allotted time
●● Creates ownership among all teachers required to teach and assess the intended
curriculum

Teacher Collaboration Versus Cooperation or

Coordination
Although teacher collaboration is an essential aspect of a PLC, what is often considered
collaboration is actually cooperation or coordination. Cooperation is about being a team
player. One potential danger of cooperation is the exclusion of a diversity of team member
12 COMMON COR E M ATHEM ATICS IN A PLC AT WOR K TM

ideas. Consider a scenario in which your team members share ideas and lesson plans about
how they each teach a learning target about defining and interpreting integer exponents
to eighth-grade students. In this case, teachers share resources to cooperate, although each
teacher retains his or her own authority to teach and assess the learning target as he or she
best understands it.
Coordination, on the other hand, requires the teacher team to do more planning and
communicating than cooperation does. Efficiency regarding the management aspects
of the course tends to drive teachers to coordinate. For example, an eighth-grade team
may coordinate a schedule so all teachers have access to the computer lab to explore geo-
metric transformations during the geometry unit, or it might divide up different content
standards from a particular CCSS content standard cluster in order to create end-of-unit
assessments for the team. Note that coordination can serve purposes of efficiency but
does little to push inquiry and discussion of the daily instruction and assessment in the
classroom—the true purpose and high-leverage work of middle school collaborative
teams in a PLC.
Whereas cooperating and coordinating are about individuals on the teacher team mak-
ing decisions, collaborating is about creating interdependence with your colleagues as you
work beyond consensus building. When your team is collaborating effectively, members
are creating new structures and ways of working that are focused on academic success
for all students, not just the students in their own classes. Graham and Ferriter (2008)
offer a useful framework that details seven stages of development of collaborative teams.
The level at which teams fall within Graham and Ferriter’s framework is directly cor-
related to the level by which team members effectively collaborate. Table 1.1 highlights
these seven stages.
Teams that are at the first three stages of collaborative team development are trying
to understand what they are supposed to do and accomplish as a team. Consider the
following scenario. The seventh-grade team begins meeting weekly at the beginning
of the year with little direction as to the purpose of meeting (stage one). Shortly, the
team begins to share how each teacher approached proportional reasoning—7.RP (see
appendix C, page 194)—in his or her respective classrooms (stage two). By the end of
the semester, your seventh-grade collaborative team begins to discuss the homework
problems that best represented what students should know and be able to do as they
work with the constant of proportionality in tables and graphs—7.RP.2b (see appendix
C, page 195)—and who would compile the assignment sheet for this standard to be dis-
tributed to students (stage three). At this stage, the seventh-grade teachers are cooperating
as they begin to share their own classroom practices and delegate team responsibilities.
Teams in stages four and five are coordinating around common planning of instruc-
tion, developing common assessment instruments and tasks, and analyzing student-
learning results. Consider this scenario. An eighth-grade team comes together to develop
a common quiz (stage four) to assess students’ ability to use data from a random sample
to draw inferences about populations—8.SP (see appendix D, page 206). The following
year, the eighth-grade team also creates common assessment instruments for all course
 Using High-Performing Collaborative Teams for Mathematics 13

Table 1.1: The Seven Stages of Teacher Collaboration Diagnostic Tool

Stage Questions That Define This Stage

Stage one: Filling the time What exactly are we supposed to do as a
team? Why are we meeting?
Stage two: Sharing personal practice What is everyone doing in his or her
classroom for instruction, lesson planning,
and assessment during this unit?
Stage three: Planning, planning, planning What should we be teaching during this
unit, and how do we lighten the load for
each other?
Stage four: Developing common How will we know if students learned the
assessments standards? What does mastery look like for
the standards in this unit?
Stage five: Analyzing student learning Are students learning what they are
supposed to be learning? Do we agree on
student evidence of learning during this
unit?
Stage six: Adapting instruction to student How can we adjust instruction to help those
needs students struggling and those exceeding
expectations?
Stage seven: Reflecting on instruction Which lesson-design practices are most
effective with our students?

Source: Adapted from Graham & Ferriter, 2008.

Visit go.solution-tree.com/commoncore for a reproducible version of this table.

units or chapters and uses collaborative team time to analyze and compare results, in
order to determine how all eighth-grade students are performing on the learning stan-
dards for the course and subsequently take action on that learning (stage five).
In the final two stages, teams begin deep collaboration as members take collective
responsibility for the learning of all students, differentiating instruction and designing
assessments based on student needs by reflecting on the question, Which of our instruc-
tional and assessment practices are most effective with our students? After analyzing the
data from the unit common assessment instrument (test), the eighth-grade team has iden-
tified a small group of students struggling to apply some of the Pythagorean relationships
(8.G, see appendix D, page 205). The team develops a differentiated lesson to extend the
knowledge and reasoning of students who have mastered the learning target and provide
targeted support for struggling learners (stage six). The eighth-grade team will be at a
stage seven when it regularly makes adjustments to instruction based on learner needs and
discusses the instructional strategies that have the greatest impact on student learning.
Using table 1.1 to diagnose and assess your collaborative team’s development supplies
crucial data for the appropriate supports, resources, and professional development action.
At what stage do your collaborative teams operate? Are teachers cooperating, coordi-
nating, or collaborating? When your collaborative team works together, are discussions
14 COMMON COR E M ATHEM ATICS IN A PLC AT WOR K TM

focused on sharing each teacher’s lessons or activities without inquiry into assessing stu-
dent learning? Are meetings centered on when the unit test will be given in class without
questioning how teachers are connecting larger concepts throughout the unit? You can
use the descriptors in table 1.1 to determine your current team’s stage of development.
There are several high-leverage actions (see page 20) that describe the work of a high-
functioning collaborative team that has been working together for several years. If your
team is just getting started, or is not engaged in any of these actions currently, do not
try to implement all of these actions simultaneously. Each activity requires considerable
effort and commitment. Less is more. Focus on a few actions for the year and work to
implement them well.

Collaborative Practices
The goal of teacher collaboration is deep, widespread knowledge of subject-area con-
tent and consistent implementation of best-practice instruction for that content. The
structure designed for collaborative efforts is critical for success. Five aspects of collab-
orative practice are the following:
1. Collaborative team participants
2. Collaborative team commitments
3. Collaborative team leaders
4. Collaborative team agendas and meeting minutes
5. Collaborative team time
In order to do the work of the team described in table 1.1 and to move effectively and
efficiently to the more advanced stages of team collaboration, it is important that your
team responds to each of these five collaboration factors.

Collaborative Team Participants

Individual team members’ needs, interests, and expertise will often affect the flow
and the work of your team. Collaborative team members may also vary according to
the needs of your school or district. Typically, middle or junior high school collabora-
tive teams are comprised of all teachers of a particular grade level or course, including
teachers for students with special needs or English learners (ELs) who are supporting
mathematics instruction. Your collaborative teams might also benefit from other faculty
and staff members participating on your team, including faculty members from other
departments and school support personnel, such as counselors or paraprofessional tutors.
Team members need only have a common curricular, instructional, and assessment
focus about which to collaborate. While there is no ideal or magic number of teachers on
a collaborative team, experience seems to suggest that teams much larger than seven or
eight can be challenging (Horn, 2010). When your team is too large, discussions become
unwieldy and a few extroverted teachers can hijack participation, limiting other team
 Using High-Performing Collaborative Teams for Mathematics 15

members’ voices. It is possible for larger teams to engage in productive dialogue; however,
a higher level of facilitation will be required. Your middle school mathematics depart-
ment should also consider individual compatibility when making recommendations for
assignments to grade-level collaborative teams. The ability to work with colleagues who
understand how to share information and work with a positive attitude on various team
projects is important. One way to nurture this expectation for becoming an effective team
member is through the development of clear team commitments and behaviors.

Collaborative Team Commitments

The purpose of collective team commitments is to create a respectful, open environment
that encourages diversity of ideas and invites criticism combined with close inspection of
practices and procedures. Various protocols are available to assist your teams in establish-
ing actions to which team members agree to adhere. The process need not be arduous,
complicated, or time consuming. The protocol in figure 1.1 is one model that your team
can use to establish and review collective commitments throughout the year.

Setting Team Collective Commitments

Because we need our best from one another in working as a team, it is essential that we
set collective commitments for our work cultures. Collective commitments are values and
beliefs that will describe how we choose to treat each other and how we can expect to
be treated.
As we set three to four collective commitments for ourselves, please note that establish-
ing these does not mean that we are not already good people who work together pro-
ductively. Having collective commitments simply reminds us to be highly conscious about
our actions and what we can expect from each other as we engage in conversations
about our challenging work.
Step one: Write three or four “We will” statements that you think will have the most posi-
tive influence on our group as we collaborate on significant issues about teaching and
learning. Perhaps reflect on past actions or behaviors that have made teams less than
productive. These are only a jumpstart for your thinking.
Step two: Partner with another colleague to talk about your choices and the reasons for
your selection. Together decide on three or four commitments from your combined lists.
Step three: Move as a pair to partner with two to four other colleagues to talk about your
choices and the reasons for your selection. Together decide on three or four commit-
ments from your combined lists.
Step four: Make a group decision. Prepare to share your choices with the whole group.
Step five: Adopt collective commitments by consensus. Invite clarification and advocacy
for particular commitments. Give all participants four votes for norm selection. It is wise
not to have more than three or four.

Source: Adapted from P. Luidens, personal communication, January 27 and April 9, 2010.
Figure 1.1: Setting middle school teacher team collective commitments protocol.
Visit go.solution-tree.com/commoncore for a reproducible version of this figure.
16 COMMON COR E M ATHEM ATICS IN A PLC AT WOR K TM

Your middle or junior high school collaborative team should keep collective commit-
ments focused on behaviors and practices that will support the collaborative work of your
team. Some teams find it useful to post their norms in a conspicuous place as a reminder
to each other. Other collaborative teams might choose to highlight a commitment at each
meeting as a reminder of the commitments of the team. For great advice and insight into
collaborative team protocols, go to www.allthingsplc.info under Tools & Resources for
additional ideas. Visit go.solution-tree.com/commoncore for links to additional resources.
As an example, members of a seventh-grade collaborative team decided their collective
commitments would be to: (1) listen to understand, (2) challenge ideas, and (3) keep the
focus on teaching and learning. Although the team included most of the same people
as the previous year, team members reflected on the previous year and observed that
sometimes one or two individuals passionate about their ideas often hijacked the discus-
sions without hearing others’ ideas. The collective commitments reflect the collaborative
team’s dedication to hearing all ideas and respectfully challenging each other.
Each team member has the responsibility to hold one another accountable for the
agreed-on team commitments in a form of lateral or peer-to-peer accountability and
collaboration. To address team members for not adhering to the norms is a permissible
and expected aspect of the team culture. Your collaborative team might find it useful to
establish a collective commitment that addresses what happens when a commitment is
not honored. The purpose of the collective commitments is to raise the level of profes-
sionalism and liberate your team to openly, safely, and respectfully discuss the work at
hand. As your collaborative teams grow and develop or change membership, collective
commitments will likely change. Regardless of whether your collaborative team mem-
bers change, you should revisit your collective commitments a minimum of once each
school year, usually at the start of the year.

Collaborative Team Leaders

Just as effective professional development doesn’t happen without planning and facili-
tation, collaborative team meetings also need intentional forethought and someone from
your team to lead the group. The role of team leader or meeting facilitator might rotate
or be delegated to one individual. On one hand, one person assigned team leader for the
entire school year might bring continuity to team discussions and functions. (A team
leader may have other responsibilities related to the work of the team in addition to
leading team meetings.) On the other hand, perhaps rotating the role of team leader or
meeting facilitator gives more teachers the opportunity to take ownership and develop
in their ability to facilitate discussions. To make the most of the collaborative meetings,
the team leader’s role should involve intentionally maximizing your group’s ability to col-
laborate by inviting diversity of thought and challenging ideas and practices. An effective
collaborative team always knows who is driving the meeting. An effective middle or
junior high school mathematics team leader will encourage all members to participate
and ask questions of each other to push for clarity and understanding. An effective team
leader will also summarize team questions, understandings, decisions, and actionable
items in a timely fashion.
 Using High-Performing Collaborative Teams for Mathematics 17

Collaborative Team Agendas and Meeting Minutes

Designing time for mathematics collaborative teams is a considerable commitment
of resources in people, money, and time. The payoff occurs when collaboration around
teaching and learning mathematics results in professional growth and increased student
achievement. Agendas and meeting minutes are tools that lend themselves to more effi-
cient use of time. The team leader is responsible for seeking input from team members,
determining the agenda, and making the agenda public to the team a few days prior to
the meeting. Agendas acknowledge that time is valuable and are essential to successful
meetings (Garmston & Wellman, 2009). An agenda need not be complicated or long.
Figure 1.2 provides a sample agenda from a seventh-grade collaborative team.

Tuesday, October 16
• Share and analyze results from the ratio and proportional reasoning test.
❍❍ How did our students do overall?
❍❍ Were the results what we expected?
❍❍ Did anyone’s students do much better? What might they have done differently
than the rest of us?
• Review learning targets for the geometry unit.
❍❍ Do our learning targets capture the key content concepts?
❍❍ Do the learning targets together represent a balance of higher-level reasoning
and procedural fluencies?
• Bring your best ideas for reinforcing proportional reasoning in this unit.
❍❍ What have you tried in the past that seems to have worked?
❍❍ Are there ideas, problems, strategies that you have tried that didn’t work?
❍❍ What task or problem might we use to help students understand scale
drawings?

Figure 1.2: Sample team-meeting agenda.

Visit go.solution-tree.com/commoncore for a reproducible version of this figure.

Meeting minutes are beneficial and do not need to be overly detailed. Minutes serve
many useful purposes. First, minutes for each meeting capture the actions and decisions
that the team has made. Teams have found it useful to go back to minutes earlier in the
year or even to the previous year to recall discussions related to the ordering of content
or why they decided to use a particular instructional approach for a concept. Minutes
also capture who is responsible for various action steps, such as creating a scoring rubric
and key for a quiz or test, or arranging for copies of artifacts for all team members.
Notice that the minutes in figure 1.2 are quick bullet points that communicate the
focus of the meeting so team members can come prepared with ideas, data, or other
possible resources for the next meeting. Also note that the team leader provides guiding
questions for team members to reflect on prior to the meeting. He or she primes the
18 COMMON COR E M ATHEM ATICS IN A PLC AT WOR K TM

pump of expectations, so to speak. Team members can give prior thought and consid-
eration to the topics, thus making the meeting more productive.
If you are like most middle school teachers, you serve on multiple teams—both your
mathematics teams and a grade-level team—creating a challenge to attend all team meet-
ings. The minutes are also an efficient way to communicate to others what transpired at the
meeting. So if you are unable to attend a meeting, you can use the minutes as a resource
to see what was discussed and decided. Much like students absent from class, if you are
absent from the meeting, you are still expected to know and carry out the team’s decisions.
Technology is an effective means by which to make minutes public to others. For example,
teams can post minutes in an email, to a wiki, to a team blog, or on a team website.
The minutes also provide one form of communication to the mathematics department
chairperson, school principal, or other relevant school leaders. The minutes allow school
leaders to provide targeted guidance, direction, or resources to support the work of your
collaborative team. Figure 1.3 provides an example of a sixth-grade team’s meeting min-
utes that were posted electronically. Notice how the meeting blends a balance of team
procedural issues (when to give the formative cumulative exam based on the calendar)
with team instructional issues (students’ struggle and teacher review of student work).

• We debriefed the high-cognitive-demand Mixing Juice task, discussed how each

teacher introduced it, discussed students’ struggles, and reviewed our collective
student work. We also updated teacher notes about student solutions, how to score
the solutions, and discussed practices to introduce when students don’t produce
the solution.
• After today’s meeting, we are thinking about doing a variation of Julie’s social-
emotional learning activity after the first quiz, which we’ll discuss at the next meeting.
• We discussed how to deal with the shortened first-term grading period. We are
thinking we should stay with the plan of giving the formative cumulative exam on the
Monday after the grading period ends.
• We decided that we would only spend two class periods on the end-of-unit project—
one to get students started and the other to review completed projects—and have
students complete the rest outside class. Alison is ordering project supplies. We
made a schedule of teachers and classrooms that would be available before and
after school for students who want to work on projects at school.

Figure 1.3: Sample team-meeting minutes.

Visit go.solution-tree.com/commoncore for a reproducible version of this figure.

Laying the groundwork for collaboration by articulating both the expectations of how
your collaborative team members work together (toward constructive discussions and
decision making) and the logistics of announcing and capturing your team discussions is
essential. Attention to these fundamental team-management issues supports deeper and
more meaningful discussions that will impact student learning of mathematics. Once
expectations have been articulated about collaboration, your collaborative teams can
engage in meaningful discussions around mathematics teaching and learning.
 Using High-Performing Collaborative Teams for Mathematics 19

Collaborative Team Time

Clearly, for collaborative teams to work effectively, you need adequate time for collabo-
ration. The research indicates that significant achievement gains are only achieved when
grade-level or course-based teams of teachers are provided with sufficient and consistent
time to collaborate (Saunders, Goldenberg, & Gallimore, 2009).
The world’s highest-performing countries in mathematics allow significant time for
mathematics teachers to collaborate and learn from one another (Barber & Mourshed,
2007; Stigler & Hiebert, 1999). This requires that school districts shift their priorities
to support regular collaborative professional development opportunities in the form of
grade-level or course-based teacher collaborative team time (Hiebert & Stigler, 2004).
Finding adequate team time is clearly one of the challenges educators face in implement-
ing PLCs. But, it can be done.
How much time? As a grades 6–8 teacher you should have dedicated periods of grade-
level, course-based, or cross-grade-level teacher collaborative team time every week, with
at least sixty to ninety minutes of meeting time. This time needs to be embedded within
your professional workday; that is, it should not be scheduled every Tuesday after school
once a week (Buffum et al., 2009).
Figure 1.4 provides a few ideas to make your collaborative team professional develop-
ment time a priority (Bowgren & Sever, 2010; Loucks-Horsley, Stiles, Mundry, Love,
& Hewson, 2009).

1. Provide common time by scheduling most, if not all, team members the same plan-
ning period during the day.
2. Create an altered schedule for early-release or late-arrival students on an ongoing
basis, if feasible to your community.
3. Use substitute teachers to roll through the day, releasing different collaborative
teams for two to three hours at a time.
4. Occasionally release teachers from teaching duties or other nonteaching duties in
order to collaborate with colleagues.
5. Restructure time by permanently altering teacher responsibilities, the teaching
schedule, the school day, or the school calendar.
6. Purchase teacher time by providing monetary compensation for after-school, week-
end, or summer work.

Figure 1.4: Options for scheduling teacher collaboration time.

Visit go.solution-tree.com/commoncore for a reproducible version of this figure.

Typically, schedules in middle schools have built-in time for interdisciplinary team
meetings. A core premise of the original middle school concept was that each teacher is
part of an interdisciplinary team—mathematics; English, reading, and language arts;
science; and social studies teachers—that is responsible for teaching the same group
of students. Ideally, the interdisciplinary team operates as a collaborative team. Both
20 COMMON COR E M ATHEM ATICS IN A PLC AT WOR K TM

discipline-specific and interdisciplinary collaborative teams can operate within a middle

or junior high school: the teams’ goals and work are different but complementary. One
focuses on discipline-specific teaching and learning; the other focuses more on student
support, often the social and emotional needs of students. The challenge is scheduling
the team meeting time so that both collaborative teams can work effectively.

The High-Leverage Work of Mathematics

Collaborative Teams in a PLC
Your collaboration with colleagues is about “purposeful peer interaction” (Fullan,
2008, p. 41). Purposeful peer interaction begins as you use a common vocabulary for
your team discussions. It is an important factor contributing to your focused interactions
with colleagues. The vocabulary and format of the CCSS grades 6–8 may be somewhat
different from what you are accustomed to using. Figure 1.5 defines key terms used in
the CCSS and identifies the domains that are presented in grades 6–8 (see appendices
B, C, and D for complete listings of these content standards).

Standards define what students should understand and be able to do.

Content standard clusters summarize groups of related standards. Note that standards
from different clusters may sometimes be closely related because mathematics is a con-
nected subject.
Domains are larger groups of related standards. Standards from different domains may
sometimes be closely related. The domains for grades 6–8 are Ratios and Proportional
Relationships (grades 6 and 7), the Number System, Expressions and Equations,
Functions (grade 8), Geometry, and Statistics and Probability.

Source: Adapted from NGA & CCSSO, 2010a, pp. 44–45.

Figure 1.5: How to read the CCSS for mathematics.

Visit go.solution-tree.com/commoncore for a reproducible version of this figure.

The focus and coherence of the CCSS for grades 6–8 mathematics (see appendices B,
C, and D for each grade level respectively) and the careful attention paid to standards
progressions mean that some of the topics you traditionally taught in certain grades
have been moved to other grades, and some topics have simply been eliminated from the
middle school curriculum. For example, Numbers and Operations with fractions and
its attendant standards are mostly completed by the end of fifth grade as standards for
Ratios and Proportional Reasoning begin. The purpose of this more focused curriculum
is to provide you more time to teach fewer critical topics in greater depth. (See chapter
3 for a discussion of specific changes.)
You need to spend time in your grade-level, course-level, or cross-grade-level (vertical)
collaborative team reviewing and reaching agreement on the scope and sequence you
will use to ensure alignment of the mathematics content with your district’s expectations
as well as the CCSS. You should also spend some collaborative team time in vertical
team discussions. For example, if you are a seventh-grade teacher, you should meet with
sixth- and eighth-grade teachers to ensure appropriate articulation across grade levels.
 Using High-Performing Collaborative Teams for Mathematics 21

Overall, the work of your collaborative team should focus on reaching agreement and
taking action in five fundamental areas.
1. Content, teaching, and learning: The team must agree on the mathematics
(content) students should learn, the mathematical tasks they should experience,
and the instructional strategies to ensure student engagement and acquisition of
conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, problem solving, and reasoning
capabilities. (See chapters 2 and 3.)
2. Summative assessment instruments: The team must agree on the development
and use of common and coherent unit or chapter summative assessment instru-
ments to determine if students have learned the agreed-on curriculum and how
to respond when students either don’t learn or do learn that curriculum. (See
chapter 4.)
3. Formative assessment processes: The team must agree on the development and
use of a common formative assessment and feedback process to monitor stu-
dents’ learning. (See chapters 4 and 5.)
4. Support and intervention: The team must agree on appropriate mathematics
intervention, instruction, and intentional student support based on the results
of formative classroom assessments, including results on summative assessment
instruments. (See chapters 4 and 5.)
5. SMART goals: The team must agree on SMART (strategic and specific, mea-
surable, attainable, results oriented, and time bound) goal targets and disag-
gregation of data to monitor progress of all students (Kanold, 2011; O’Neill &
Conzemius, 2005). (See chapters 4 and 5.)
Your collaborative team can use these areas to provide direction and consolidate plan-
ning for instruction and assessment. Figure 1.6 describes high-leverage, high-inquiry
collaborative team tasks for your team’s meaningful collaboration.

Collaborative Teacher Team Agreements for Teaching and Learning

1. The team designs and develops agreed-on prior knowledge skills to be assessed
and taught during each lesson of the unit or chapter.
2. The team designs and implements agreed-on lesson-design elements that ensure
students actively engage with the mathematics. Students experience some aspect
of the CCSS Mathematical Practices (such as Construct viable arguments and cri-
tique the reasoning of others or Attend to precision) with the language embedded in
the daily lessons of every unit or chapter.
3. The team designs and implements agreed-on lesson-design elements that allow for
student-led summaries and demonstrations of learning the daily lesson.
4. The team designs and implements agreed-on lesson-design elements that include the
strategic use of tools—including technology—for developing student understanding.

Figure 1.6: High-leverage activities of grades 6–8 grade-level and course-level

collaborative teams. continued →
22 COMMON COR E M ATHEM ATICS IN A PLC AT WOR K TM

Collaborative Team Agreements for Assessment Instruments and Tools

1. The team designs and implements agreed-on common assessment instruments
based on high-quality exam designs. The collaborative team designs all unit exams,
unit quizzes, final exams, writing assignments, and projects for the course.
2. The team designs and implements agreed-on common assessment instrument
scoring rubrics for each assessment in advance of the exam.
3. The team designs and implements agreed-on common scoring and grading feed-
back (level of specificity to the feedback) of the assessment instruments. Two or
more team members together grade a small sample of student work to check on
consistency in scoring and grading feedback.

Collaborative Team Agreements for Formative Assessment Feedback

1. The team designs and implements agreed-on adjustments to instruction and inten-
tional student support based on the results of both formative daily classroom
assessments and the results of student performance on unit or chapter assessment
instruments, such as quizzes and tests.
2. The team designs and implements agreed-on levels of rigor for daily in-class
prompts and common high-cognitive-demand tasks used to assess student
understanding of various mathematical concepts and skills. This also applies to
team agreement to minimize the variance in rigor and task selection for homework
assignments and expectations for makeup work. This applies to depth, quality, and
timeliness of teacher descriptive formative feedback on all student work.
3. The team designs and implements agreed-on methods to teach students to self-
assess and set goals. Self-assessment includes students using teacher feedback,
feedback from other students, or their own monitoring and self-assessment to iden-
tify what they need to work on and to set goals for future learning.

Visit go.solution-tree.com/commoncore for a reproducible version of this figure.

You can use figure 1.6 as a diagnostic tool to measure the focus of the work and energy
of your team. Do you have low implementation or high implementation for each of the
high-leverage actions? Meaningful implementation of the CCSS will require time—time
to digest the CCSS for mathematics for grades 6–8; time to create a focused and coher-
ent curriculum; and time to design instruction and assessments around the high-leverage
actions listed in figure 1.6.

Collaborative Protocols
Several protocols combine collaboration with a spotlight on the teaching and learning
of mathematics. Five structured protocols can be especially beneficial for you and your
team. These protocols provide different settings in which you can collaborate and share
reflections and beliefs about teaching and learning.
1. Lesson study: Lesson study differs from lesson planning. Lesson study focuses
on what teachers want students to learn; lesson planning focuses on what teach­
ers plan to teach. A modified lesson study example is shown in the feature box on
 Using High-Performing Collaborative Teams for Mathematics 23

page 24 and can be used to improve the quality of your lessons and instruction as
a team.
2. Peer coaching: Peer coaching is a kind of partnership in which two or three
teachers engage in conversations focused on their reflections and thinking about
their instructional practices. The discussions lead to a refinement and formative
assessment response to classroom practice. The participants may rotate roles—
discussion leader, mentor, or advocate. Teachers who engage in peer coaching
are willing to reveal strengths and weaknesses to each other. Peer coaching cre­
ates an environment in which teachers can be secure, connected, and empow­
ered through transparent discussions of each others’ practice.
3. Case study: Case study can be used to address a wide range of topics or prob­
lems the collaborative team encounters. The case study presents a story—one
involving issues or conflicts that need to be resolved through analysis of avail­
able resources leading to constructive plans to address the problem. Typically,
case studies are used to examine complex problems—the school’s culture, cli­
mate, attendance, achievement, teaching, and learning (Baccellieri, 2010).
4. Book study: Book study is a familiar and popular activity for you to engage
in conversations with colleagues about professional books. It may be a formal­
ized activity for some collaborative teams; however, book study can emerge in
any number of ways—from hearing an author speak at a conference, from a
colleague’s enthusiastic review of a book, or from the mutual interests of teach­
ers who want to learn more about a topic. Book study promotes conversations
among faculty and staff that can lead to the application of new ideas in the
classroom and improvement of existing knowledge and skills. Book study is
a great way to connect with a personal learning network as you blog, tweet,
Skype, or use other forms of communication to connect with colleagues outside
of your school.
5. Collaborative grading: Collaborative grading occurs as your team reaches
stages four and five (see table 1.1, page 13) of team collaboration. In this situa­
tion, you and your colleagues design a common unit test together and assign
point values with scoring rubrics for each question on the exam. Together you
grade and discuss the quality of student responses on the assessment instru­ment
and develop an inter-rater reliability for scoring of the assessment tool. Achiev-
ing consistency in grading students’ assignments and assessments is an impor-
tant goal for collaborative teams.
From the point of view of instructional transparency and improvement, lesson study
is a particularly powerful collaborative tool that merits close consideration. Lesson study
has been shown to be very effective as a collaborative protocol with a high impact on
teacher professional learning (Hiebert & Stigler, 1999). A modified lesson study provides
a reflective collaborative team activity.
24 COMMON COR E M ATHEM ATICS IN A PLC AT WOR K TM

Example of a Lesson-Study Group in Action

Typically, teachers choose a content area that data indicate is problematic for
students. Consider a lesson-study group that develops a goal related to the CCSS
Mathematical Practices (see appendix A, page 181). The teachers select Mathematical
Practice 1 as the goal—students will learn to make sense of problems and persevere in
solving them. They share ideas about how to help students achieve this goal through
the content of the lesson. The teachers select content from the CCSS domains and
content standard clusters that presents a particular challenge to students. In this
case, the group chooses “Interpret and compute quotients of fractions, and solve
word problems involving division of fractions by fractions” (6.NS.1, see appendix B,
page 188). The teachers use various resources to learn more about the content and
its connections to other mathematical concepts, as well as information from research
about students learning this content. From those resources, the teachers together
designed a lesson to address the goal. One team member was asked to teach the
lesson and be observed by one or two other members of the team. The teacher who
taught the lesson and the observers debriefed the team about their observations
and made changes to the lesson design. The revised lesson was taught with a final
debriefing of the second instructional episode. By the end of the lesson study, these
teachers have increased their knowledge of pedagogy and mathematics content. By
contributing to development of the lesson and engaging in discussions of the lesson’s
strengths and limitations, they have also raised the level of respect and trust among
team members. The lessons learned from participating in lesson study extend to the
teachers’ daily instruction.

Lesson study may seem time and work intensive for a single lesson. Nonetheless, the
benefit of lesson study is the teacher professional learning that results from the deep,
collaborative discussions about mathematics content, instruction, and student learning.
The lesson-design tool in figure 2.16 (page 69) is designed to support your lesson-study
work. Also, see the lesson-study references listed in the Extending My Understanding
section at the end of this chapter for more information about this powerful activity for
stages six and seven (see table 1.1, page 13) collaborative team development.

Looking Ahead
The CCSS for mathematics define what students should know and be able to do to be
college and career ready—which now includes mathematics content through second-
year algebra, along with proficiency in the Standards for Mathematical Practice (see
appendix A, page 181).
Your collaborative team is the key to all students successfully learning the Common
Core mathematics standards for grades 6–8 through effective instruction, assessment,
and intervention practices. In subsequent chapters, we’ll provide tools to assist you and
your colleagues’ work to make the vision of the Common Core for mathematics a reality
for all students.
Highly accomplished middle school mathematics teachers value and practice effective
collaboration, which professional organizations have identified as an essential element
 Using High-Performing Collaborative Teams for Mathematics 25

to teacher profes­sional development (Learning Forward, 2011; National Board for Pro-
fessional Teaching Standards, 2010). Teacher collaboration is not the icing on top of
the proverbial cake. Instead, it is the egg in the batter holding the cake together. Your
school is a learning institution responsible for educating students and preparing them
for the future. Your school is also a learning institution for the adults. The professional
learning of teachers is not solely a prerequisite for improved student achievement. It is a
commitment to the investment in the professionals like you, who have the largest impact
on students in schools. The process of collaboration capitalizes on the fact that teachers
come together with diverse experiences and knowledge to create a whole that is larger
than the sum of the parts. Teacher collaboration is the solution to your sustained profes-
sional learning—the ongoing and never-ending process of growth necessary to meet the
classroom demands of the CCSS expectations.

Chapter 1 Extending My Understanding

1. A critical tenet of a mathematics department in a PLC is a shared vision of
teaching and learning mathematics.
❍❍ Do you have a shared vision of what teaching and learning mathematics
looks like? If not, how might you create one?
❍❍ Does this vision build on current research in mathematics education?
❍❍ Does your vision embrace collaboration as fundamental to professional
learning?
2. Graham and Ferriter (2008) identify seven stages of collaborative team develop-
ment. These stages characterize team development evolving from cooperating to
coordinating leading ultimately to a truly collaborative team.
❍❍ Using table 1.1 (page 13), at what stage are your teams operating?
❍❍ What role might you play in helping your team transition to a more
advanced stage?
3. Using figure 1.6 (page 21), identify the high-leverage actions your team cur-
rently practices extremely well. What is your current level of implementation
on a scale of 0 percent (low) and 100 percent (high)? How might you use this
information to identify which actions should be your team’s priority during this
or the next school year?
4. Implementing the CCSS might seem daunting to some teachers, and as a result,
there may be resistance or half-hearted attempts to needed changes in content,
instruction, or assessment. Consider leading your collaborative team through
a Best Hopes, Worst Fears activity. Give team members two index cards. On
one, have them identify their best hopes for implementing the CCSS. On the
other card, have team members record their worst fears. Depending on the level
of trust and comfort of the team, the team leader might collect the index cards
and read the best hopes and worst fears anonymously, or individuals can read
26 COMMON COR E M ATHEM ATICS IN A PLC AT WOR K TM

their hopes and fears aloud to the group. The purpose is to uncover concerns
that if left covered might undermine collaborative teamwork. Team members
should talk about how they can support one another to minimize fears and
achieve best hopes.

Online Resources
Visit go.solution-tree.com/commoncore for links to these resources. Visit go.solution
-tree.com/plcbooks for additional resources about professional learning communities.
●● The Five Disciplines of PLC Leaders (Kanold, 2011; go.solution-tree
.com/plcbooks/Reproducibles_5DOPLCL.html): Chapter 3 discusses the
commitment to a shared mission and vision by all adults in a school for several
tools targeted toward monitoring collaborative actions. These reproducibles
engage teachers in professional learning and reflection.
●● AllThingsPLC (www.allthingsplc.info): Search the Tools & Resources of this
website for sample agendas and activities and insights for effective collaborative
teamwork.
●● The Educator’s PLN—The Personal Learning Network for Educators
(http://edupln.ning.com): This website offers tips, tools, and benefits for
starting your own PLN.
●● The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement (www
.centerforcsri.org/plc/websites.html): This website offers a collection of
resources to support an in-depth examination of the work of learning teams.
●● Inside Mathematics (2010a; www.insidemathematics.org/index.php
/tools-for-teachers/tools-for-coaches): This portion of the Inside Mathematics
website helps mathematics, teachers, coaches, and specialists support the
professional learning teams they lead. Tools to support lesson study and teacher
learning, including video vignettes that model coaching conversations, are
available.
●● Inside Mathematics (2010b; www.insidemathematics.org/index.php
/tools-for-teachers/tools-for-principals-and-administrators): This portion
of the Inside Mathematics website supports school-based administrators and
district mathematics supervisors who have the responsibility for establishing the
structure and vision for the professional development work of grade-level and
cross-grade level learning teams or in a PLC.
●● Learning Forward (2011; www.learningforward.org/standards/standards
.cfm): Learning Forward is an international association of learning educators
focused on increasing student achievement through more effective professional
learning. This website provides a wealth of resources, including an online
annotated bibliography of articles and websites to support the work of
professional learning teams.
 Using High-Performing Collaborative Teams for Mathematics 27

●● National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics (NCSM; www.math

ematicsleadership.org): NCSM is an international leader collaborating to
achieve excellence and equity in mathematics education at all levels. This
portion of the NCSM website provides a variety of resources for mathematics
coaches and specialists to support the professional learning teams they lead.
●● The Mathematics Common Core Toolbox (www.ccsstoolbox.com): This
website provides coherent and research-affirmed protocols and tools to help
you in your CCSS collaborative teamwork. The website also provides sample
scope and sequence documents and advice for how to prepare for CCSS for
mathematics implementation.
●● Chicago Lesson Study Group (www.lessonstudygroup.net/index.php): This
website provides a forum for teachers to learn about and practice lesson study
to steadily improve student learning. To learn more about lesson study or other
collaborative protocols, see the following resources.
❍❍ Lesson Study: A Handbook of Teacher-Led Instructional Change (Lewis,
2002)
❍❍ Powerful Designs for Professional Learning (Easton, 2008)
❍❍ Leading Lesson Study: A Practical Guide for Teachers and Facilitators
(Stepanek, Appel, Leong, Managan, & Mitchell, 2007)
❍❍ Data-Driven Dialogue: A Facilitator’s Guide to Collaborative Inquiry
(Wellman & Lipton, 2004)
●● The National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (NCTAF &
WestEd, 2010; www.nctaf.org/wp-content/uploads/STEMTeachersin
ProfessionalLearningCommunities.AKnowledgeSynthesis.pdf): With the
support of the National Science Foundation and in collaboration with WestEd,
NCTAF (2010) released STEM Teachers in Professional Learning Communities:
A Knowledge Synthesis. NCTAF and WestEd conducted a two-year analysis
of research studies that document what happens when science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics teachers work together in professional learning
communities to improve teaching and increase student achievement. This
report summarizes that work and provides examples of projects building on
that model.
●● Learning by Doing: A Handbook for Professional Learning Communities at
Work (DuFour et al., 2010; go.solution-tree.com/PLCbooks/Reproducibles
_LBD2nd.html): This resource and its reproducible materials help educators
close the knowing-doing gap as they transform their schools into professional
learning communities.