BROCK UNIVERSITY  FACULTY OF EDUCATION
EDUCATION 5P77
LEARNING IN ORGANIZATIONS
Instructor:
Coral Mitchell
Phone: 905-688-5550 x 4413 (office)
Cell: 905-933-6756
E-mail: coral.mitchell@brocku.ca
Office: Welch Hall 9E
Fax: 905-641-5091
Course Description
This course is intended to familiarize participants with theories, practices, trends, and issues
related to the learning community as a concept and to learning in organizations as a process. The course
is oriented toward enabling individuals to reflect on their personal stances and practices and to analyze
and critique learning issues and structures in a variety of organizational contexts and from a variety of
personal perspectives. Readings are intended to provide a basis on which to ground the reflections,
analyses, and critiques. The theory is expected to illuminate practice, and different practical expressions
are expected to inform the theory. Consequently, diverse interpretations and applications of the readings
are to be expected. That is, theory and practice will be integrated such that a “situated cognition” develops
with respect to the question of how professional learning grows in educational institutions.
Course Objectives
1. To gain familiarity with various models and theories related to individual, collective, and
organizational learning processes and related to the concept of learning communities
2. To analyze and critique the current debates and issues related to learning in organizations
3. To examine interactive effects of individual, collective, and organizational learning on professional
practices, group dynamics, professional competence, and organizational outcomes
4. To participate in an experience of building a community of learners
5. To articulate a personal professional learning stance or framework within an organizational context
Course Readings
1.
2.
3.
4.
Mitchell, C., & Sackney, L. (2011). Profound Improvement: Building learning-community capacity
on living-system principles (2nd ed.). London, UK: Routledge. (available from Brock Bookstore)
Readings from course CD (specified on Course Schedule; available from instructor)
Additional personally selected readings
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological
Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
2
Course Schedule
Topic
Readings
Introductions, course overview, orientation,
expectations
Learning in organizations: questions and issues
Professional learning communities
Bausmith & Barry, 2011,
plus response
Hord & Roy, 2014
Stoll & Louis, 2007
Foundations of learning in organizations
Learning organization/learning community
Organizational learning as process and structure
M & S, 2011, Intro, ch. 1
Senge, 1990
Individual domain
Problems of practice and knowledge construction
Reflection and sensemaking
M & S, 2011, chap. 2
Scribner, 2005
Weick, 1995
Learning for practice
Searching for knowledge
Action research and reflective practice
M & S, 2011, chap. 3
A Johnson, 2012
York-Barr et al., 2001
Collective domain
Culture and norms
Communities of practice
M & S, 2011, chap. 4, 5
Wenger, 2000
Learning together
Discourse patterns
Interactivity and inquiry
Collinson & Cook, 2007
Illeris, 2011
either Amason et al., 1995 or
Johnson & Johnson, 2009
Organizational domain
Organizational knowledge
Organizational processes/practices
M & S, 2011, chap. 6, 7
Gherardi, 2008
Learning in/for a place
Learning structures and processes
Knowledge anchors
M & S, 2011, chap. 8, 9
Mitchell & Sackney, 2009
pp. 114-146
Consultation sessions: instructor available for
individual consultation and support;
phone or e-mail for appointment
3
Evaluation Components and Criteria
1. Class activities
2. Seminar presentation
3. Written assignment
4. Individual assignment
ungraded
30%
40%
30%
Written assignments (except for optional journal) are to follow APA form and style and must be double
spaced, 12-point font, one-inch margins, 8½ x 11 size. Assignments exceeding the maximum length are
subject to penalty. (I stop reading/listening after the maximum length.) All assignments except the
seminar have an automatic one-week extension if work or family circumstances warrant. Except under
unusual circumstances, assignments will not be accepted beyond one week after the due date. Attendance
is expected at each class, unless prior arrangements have been made with the instructor. Additional
assignments will be required if more than two classes are missed. For written assignments, electronic
copy is preferred.
1. Class Activities: (a) Journal: Reflections on the course material, to be handed in at the student’s
discretion. Journals are intended to be a summary of personal thoughts, feelings, insights, ideas,
questions, points of confusion, agreement, disagreement, wishes, needs, concerns, issues, etc. about the
course content. (b) Class participation: Engagement in class discussions. Your contribution should
relate material to personal experience, analyze and evaluate concepts, and/or make connections among
various themes, models, or strategies.
Although class activities are ungraded, it is to your advantage to participate in some way so that I can
hear your voice and get to know you as an individual prior to grading your assignments.
2. Seminar Presentation: You will prepare and conduct a seminar related to theory and practice on a
topic of interest in the course content. You may select from the list on the course outline or negotiate a
different topic with the instructor. For the content, prepare a synthesis (not a summary) of the thoughts
and theories from assigned course readings and, if you desire, from additional readings of your choice.
Use the synthesis to organize the ideas into an original framework. Remember that you are teaching a
topic, not simply presenting material. In your presentation, describe the content within your original
framework, assess its utility for learning in organizations, and discuss how it relates to specific contexts.
Plan a class activity or discussion that helps your colleagues to make sense of the ideas in relation to some
practical issue or concern. Prepare a brief handout of material, to be distributed to class members (no
more than 2 pages) either in paper or electronic form. The handout should serve as a study guide for the
topic to which your classmates may refer in the future.
Key strategies: synthesis, contextualisation, presentation, instruction
Maximum length: 45 minutes. Try for a 10-15 minute time-limit for delivering the content of the
seminar, along with a 30-35 minute time period for discussion/activity and final debrief.
3. Written Assignment (Select ONE of the following formats):
(a) Case Study: The case study provides you with an opportunity to integrate theory and practice. Select a
real or hypothetical case in which the events of the case or the actions of the individuals were particularly
stellar, confusing, or troubling. In the first section of the paper, describe the case briefly (no more than 3
pages). In the second section, use concepts and theories from course material and other related literature
to analyze the case, to explain the events or behaviours, and to make recommendations for future action.
Conclude by describing how this case contributes to an understanding of how learning in organizations
occurs, should occur, or should not occur.
4
(b) Argument Paper: This option will take the form of a position paper related to some Big Question or
Big Issue concerning learning in organizations. The paper will begin with an introduction in which you
present the question/issue you are addressing and your perspective on the question (i.e., your argument).
In the bulk of the paper, you will develop your ideas by presenting several supporting and oppositional
statements, each of which will be grounded in evidence from the course material or other related literature
and by concrete examples from organizational contexts. Conclude the paper by describing the importance
of the Big Question/Issue and your position relative to that question for understanding how learning in
organizations does/could/should/should not happen.
(c) Personal Narrative: During the course, keep track of how the course material and other readings are
informing your thoughts and understandings about learning in organizations. In a formal paper, describe
your own learning “story,” that is, (a) your beliefs and assumptions about the essential and/or desirable
character of professional learning, and (b) what your own professional learning looks like in practice. The
paper will include a descriptive section that outlines how the literature has shaped your learning story, and
an analytic section that uses concepts from course readings to explain and critique the reasoning, learning
practices, and professional features that underlie the story. Conclude with some thoughts on what you see
as the key issues, the critical contributing influences, the major understandings, and/or the unanswered
questions about learning in organizations.
Regardless of the format, the paper must focus on a topic that is directly connected to the purpose of the
course and must incorporate concepts that have been described in assigned material and/or discussed in
class. It must also address a topic different from the topic presented in the seminar. At least 50% of the
material you use to support your lines of reasoning must be drawn from course readings. You should
supplement with other readings, but you must include course content. (Because I am required by
university regulations to check for academic honesty, this is my chosen strategy.)
Please remember to follow the conventions and values of academic writing (i.e., simplicity, parsimony,
and clarity) and to use APA format. (It helps to prepare an outline prior to writing.) This assignment is
where you can hone your writing skills, which will stand you in good stead in future assignments and
your exit course/MRP/thesis.
Key strategies: analysis, evaluation, theory-practice integration, and academic writing
Suggested length: 10-12 pages; maximum: 15 pages
4. Individual Assignment: This assignment provides you with an opportunity to present what you have
learned from the course in a way that makes sense for you. You may choose any topic related to learning
in organizations and any presentation format. Some examples of possible formats include, but are not
limited to, a game, power point presentation, image collage, daily log, question-answer, mock interview,
concept map, discussion/presentation, video presentation, graphic display, formal writing, etc. In addition
to the grading criteria, my expectations are that (a) the focus of the assignment is on learning in
organizations; (b) course literature is used to explain and situate concepts (at least 10 different citations
from assigned readings plus any additional material you find relevant); (c) the product is substantial,
substantive, well designed, and well executed; and (d) your thinking moves beyond description or
narrative to include some aspects of analysis, synthesis, evaluation, integration, and/or contextualization.
This assignment should reflect your own learning style. Have some fun with it, but remember that I am as
impressed with a well-written, well-argued paper as I am with a well-designed creative assignment. If
you choose a specific topic, it must be different from the topics of the seminar and written paper.
Key strategies: conceptualization, exploration, and independent learning
Medium and format will strongly influence the product, but it should take no more than an hour and
no less than 20 minutes to digest and evaluate.
5
Course readings
Amason, A. C., Hochwarter, W. A., Thompson, K. R., & Harrison, A. W. (1995). Conflict: An important
dimension in successful management teams. Organizational Dynamics, 24(2), 20-35.
Anderson, G. L., & Herr, K. (2011). Scaling up “evidence-based” practices for teachers is a profitable but
discredited paradigm. Educational Researcher, 40(6), 287-289.
Bausmith, J. M., & Barry, C. (2011). Revisiting professional learning communities to increase college
readiness: The importance of pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Researcher, 40(4),
175-178.
Collinson, V., & Cook, T. F. (2007). Organizational learning: Improving learning, teaching, and leading
in school systems (chap. 7). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fendler, L. (2006). Others and the problem of community. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(3), 303-326.
Gherardi, S. (2008). Situated knowledge and situated action: What do practice-based studies promise? In
D. Barry & H. Hansen (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of new approaches in management and
organization (pp. 516-525). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Hord, S. M., & Roy, P. (2014). Reach the highest standard in professional learning: Learning
communities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Illeris, K. (2011). The fundamentals of workplace learning (chap. 8). London, UK: Routledge.
Johnson, A. P. (2012). A short guide to action research (4th ed.). Boston, AM: Pearson.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). Energizing learning: The instructional power of conflict.
Educational Researcher, 38(1), 37-51.
Mitchell, C., & Sackney, L. (2009). Sustainable improvement: Building learning communities that
endure. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
Mitchell, C., & Sackney, L. (2011). Profound improvement: Building learning-community capacity on
living-system principles (2nd ed.). London, UK: Routledge.
Scribner, J. P. (2005). The problems of practice: Bricolage as a metaphor for teachers’ work and learning.
Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 51(4), 295-310.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization (chap. 1-2).
New York: Doubleday.
Stoll, L., & Louis, K. S. (2007). Professional learning communities: Elaborating new approaches. In L.
Stoll & K. S. Louis (Eds.), Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemma
(pp. 1-13. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (chap. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(2), 225-246.
York-Barr, J., Sommers, W. A., Ghere, G. S., & Montie, J. (2001). Reflective practice to improve
schools: An action guide for educators (chap. 3). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
6
(A Few) Additional Readings
Argyris, C. (1993). Knowledge for action: A guide to overcoming barriers to organizational change. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Argyris, C. (1994). Good communication that blocks learning. Harvard Business Review, 74(4), 77-85.
Argyris, C. (2004). Reasons and rationalizations: The limits to organizational knowledge. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice (chap. 1).
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. London, UK: Penguin.
Bovbjerg, K. M. (2006). Teams and collegiality in educational culture. European Educational Research
Journal, 5(3-4), 244-253.
Bruce, C. D., & Ross, J. A. (2008). A model for increasing reform implementation and teacher efficacy:
Teacher peer coaching in grades 3 and 8 mathematics. Canadian Journal of Education, 31(2),
346-370.
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better
conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181-199.
Dimmock, C. (2012). Leadership, capacity building and school improvement: Concepts, themes and
impact. London, UK: Routledge.
Dixon, N. M. (1997). The hallways of learning. Organizational Dynamics, 25(4), 23-33.
Eppler, M. J. (2004). Making knowledge visible through knowledge maps: Concepts, elements, cases. In
C. W. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management (pp. 189-205). Berlin: SpringerVerlag.
Gajda, R., & Koliba, C. J. (2008). Evaluating and improving the quality of teacher collaboration. NASSP
Bulletin, 92(2), 133-153.
Galluci, C., DeVoogt van Lare, M., Yoon, I. H., & Boatright, B. (2010). Instructional coaching: Building
theory about the role and organizational support for professional learning. American Educational
Research Journal, 47(4), 919-963.
Gherardi, S. (1999). Learning as problem-driven or learning in the face of mystery? Organization Studies,
20(1) 101-124.
Gherardi, S. (2006). Organizational knowledge: The texture of workplace learning. Maiden, MA:
Blackwell.
Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure,
and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 479-507.
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
Hargreaves, A. (1993). Individualism and individuality: Reinterpreting the teacher culture. In J. W. Little
& M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), Teachers’ work; Individuals, colleagues, and contexts (pp. 51-76).
New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2006). Sustainable leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. New
York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Hargreaves, A., & Shirley, D. (2012). The global fourth way: The quest for educational excellence.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Humphries, B., & Martin, M. (2000). Unsettling the ‘learning community’: From ‘dialogue’ to
‘difference’? Community, Work, & Family, 3(3), 279-295.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Isaacs, W. N. (1993). Taking flight: Dialogue, collective thinking, and organizational learning.
Organizational Dynamics, 22(2), 24-39.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social
interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365-379.
Kayworth, T., & Leidner, D. (2004). Organizational culture as a knowledge resource. In C. W. Holsapple
(Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management (pp. 235-252). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
7
Kim, D. H. (1993). The link between individual and organizational learning. Sloan Management Review,
35(1), 37-50.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Lieberman, A., & Wood, D. (2003). Sustaining the professional development of teachers: Learning in
networks. In B. Davies & J. West-Burnham (Eds.), Handbook of educational leadership and
management (pp. 478-490). London, UK: Pearson.
Lipman, P. (1997). Restructuring in context: A case study of teacher participation and the dynamics of
ideology, race, and power. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 3-37.
McGregor, C. (2012). Learning to lead and leading for learning: The power of coaching in educational
leadership preparation. Journal of Educational Administration and Foundations, 22(1), 54-74).
Mills, G. E. (2000). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Mitchell, C., & Sackney, L. (2006). Building schools, building people: The school principal’s role in
leading a learning community. Journal of School Leadership, 16(5), 627-640.
Mulford, B. (2005). Organizational learning and educational change. In A. Hargreaves (Ed.), Extending
educational change: International handbook of educational change (pp. 336-361). Dordrecht, the
Netherlands: Springer.
Nikolova, N., & Devinney, T. (2008). Building community. In D. Barry & H. Hansen (Eds.), The Sage
handbook of new approaches in management and organization (pp. 503-513). Los Angeles, CA:
Sage.
Nonaka, I. (2005). Managing organizational knowledge: Theoretical and methodological foundations. In
K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt (Eds.), Great minds in management: The process of theory
development (pp. 373-393). New York: Oxford University Press.
Petrides, L. A., & Guiney, S. Z. (2002). Knowledge management for school leaders: An ecological
framework for thinking schools. Teachers College Record, 104(8), 1702-1717.
Roy, P., & Hord, S. M. (2006). It’s everywhere, but what is it? Professional learning communities.
Journal of School Leadership, 16(5), 490-501.
Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic
Books.
Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G., & Smith, B. (1999). The dance of change: The
challenges to sustaining momentum in learning organizations. New York: Doubleday.
Servage, L. (2009). Who is the “professional” in a professional learning community? An exploration of
teacher professionalism in collaborative professional development settings. Canadian Journal of
Educaiton, 32(1), 149-171.
Shirley, D. (2009). Community organizing and educational change: A reconnaissance. Journal of
Educational Change, 10, 229-237.
Starratt, R. J. (2002). Community as curriculum. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second
international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 321-348). Dodrecht,
Netherlands: Kluwer.
Stoll, L., & Earl, L. (2003). Making it last: Building capacity for sustainability. In B. Davies & J. WestBurnham (Eds.), Handbook of educational leadership and management (pp. 491-504). London,
UK: Pearson.
8
GRADUATE STUDIES, FACULTY OF EDUCATION
GRADING CRITERIA
90 - 100 A+
Exceptional paper in all respects
Contains original creative thought
Very well organized and expressed
Sound critical evaluation
Clear command of techniques and principles of the
discipline
Publishable
Consistently exceeds expectations
High level of synthesis
New understandings
Extension of content
80 - 89 A
Very good paper
Well organized with few errors
Shows clear understanding of concepts and evidence
of critical thought
Ability to discriminate and interpret relevant issues
Analytic treatment of content
Application of ideas
Synthesis - able to make connections among
disparate details or ideas
Evaluation of ideas and content
Manipulation and interpretation of data
Concepts and understandings grounded in real
applications
75 - 79 B+
Good paper
Meets some of the above criteria
Shows basic competence in synthesis and critical
thinking
Shows competent grasp of writing and reference
styles
Adheres to proper reference and grammatical styles
Logically organized
70 - 74 B
Adequate paper
Constitutes baseline for graduate papers
Shows comprehension of course content and draws
together information of the course in a coherent,
understandable fashion
Descriptive treatment of content
Identification of key elements recognition of basic
facts knowledge and recall
Retrieval of information
Grammatically correct writing
Little integration of concepts
60 - 69 C
Does not constitute baseline for graduate papers
Some comprehension of course content and relevant
literature
Descriptive treatment of content
Ideas presented are not central to course content and
argument
Underdeveloped arguments
Inadequate analysis or conclusions
General and/or unsupported claims - Little evidence
of ability to draw together information from the
course in a coherent, understandable fashion
Grammatical and surface structure errors
50 - 59 D
Does not constitute baseline for graduate papers
Very limited recognition and retrieval of important
concepts
Limited integration of concepts
Inability to utilize course content and relevant
literature appropriately
Inability to utilize relevant literature
Inadequate synthesis
False, general and/or unsupported claims
Poor internal organization of paper (structure,
coherence)
Many grammatical and surface structure errors
Revised March 2007
9
SEMINAR PRESENTATIONS
NAME:
TOPIC:
GRADE:
Use of literature (quality of sources, balanced coverage of concepts)
Synthesis (original organization of the ideas gleaned from all sources)
Relationship to organizational context (examples, discussions, etc.)
Class activity (collegial participation, personal understandings)
Pacing (use of time, flow, and organization of presentation pieces)
Handout (brief overview of synthesis and major concepts; summary for future reference)
10
EDUC 5P77
Final Assignment Grading Criteria
Name:
Product:
(a) The assignment focuses on learning in organizations
(b) Course literature is incorporated into the assignment
(c) The assignment is substantial and substantive
(d) The product is well designed and well executed
(e) Thinking moves into analysis, synthesis, evaluation, integration, and/or contextualization
Grade:
Click here to enter text.