Week 4

Collaboration Theory into Practice

 

Farwell, S. (1998). Successful Models for Collaborative Planning. Knowledge Quest, 26(2), January/February, 24-30.

“To encourage team planning among grade-level teachers and to provide a substantial time block for planning between the library media specialist and teachers, the principal offered to provide substitutes using funds from the school’s budget (25)”.

I found the above quotation from, “Successful Models for Collaborative Planning” shocking, particularly the part that read: “school district’s budget”.  Naturally, I assumed that the monies for substitute teachers needed for this project would come from the grant.  Then, I read the date of the particular publication and realized that in 1998 the economy was still booming.  We were told not to ask for substitutes a few years ago and collaboration and project work time was severely cut.  Current conditions got me thinking about the ways in which it will be possible for successful collaboration to occur in our current economic conditions.  The only way to overcome this obstacle is to be flexible and strive to work in a way that offers the best education possible for students when collaboration time is not allotted in the budget.

As I read on in the article, I examined the levels of learning constantly thinking of the way each level can be achieved on today’s budget. Level one is easily achievable, however, totally impractical.  Students cannot learn research skills out of context.  Isolated research skills are totally uninteresting and inappropriate for K-8 students.  Level two seems like more of a support level rather than a collaborative model that encourages true communication with the media specialist.   Level three begins to shows a true collaborative effort with very little time for planning and discussion.  At this level, however, the media specialist is allowed to work within the realm of the lesson plan and no additional funding is needed to further this level of collaboration.  At level four is a more pure form of collaboration where both media specialist and the teacher shape the lesson together.  Level four, however, requires time and discretionary budget that many schools no longer have.

As I read about the schools featured in this article, I continually wondered if this type of collaboration is possible in Michigan’s public schools today.  In the conclusion of the article Farewell writes, “the most promising formula for successful information literacy instruction is a combination of energetic, knowledgeable…media specialist…a principal who understands change, how to manage both staff and budgets, and the advantages and needs of intergraded resource-based instructional program; and a system for providing regular planning time during the school day” (p.30).  I believe that there are a plethora of media specialist that fit this description and that principals understand the need for solid collaboration.  Yet, I fear that with ever-shrinking school budgets in Michigan these programs will not be implemented to serve the needs of our students at the level that true collaboration allows teachers and media specialist to achieve.