The Research-Based Components of Tribes TLC^®

^{Tribes Learning Communities}

^{By Jeanne Gibbs}

Origin and Design Stages

The process, known simply as “Tribes,” and more specifically as “Tribes Learning Communities,” was developed by Jeanne Gibbs at a time when concerned educators in eighteen school districts of Contra Costa County, California, were seeking ways …

• to prevent substance use and abuse, and other behavioral problems
• to demonstrate improvement in academic test scores, and
• to stem the tide of teachers leaving the profession.

The time was the late 1970’s. The issues still are prevalent today.

Now, however, these issues along with a complex of others are recognized as a need for whole school reform.

 

NOTE: The learning process of Tribes has evolved through two stages of design that have led to the current Tribes Learning Community – whole school model.

Initial Design: Substance Abuse Prevention

The goal of the first design was to prevent substance use and abuse. The twofold strategy was:

• to develop inclusion, a sense of value and community for all students in every classroom, thereby to overcome the risk of isolation and acting-out behavior; and
• to have well-trained teachers use small groups to teach the content of drug education curriculum in an active learning way.

Secondary students as “Youth Educators” and parent volunteers as “Parent Educators” also were trained in the group learning process to facilitate drug education curriculum in elementary schools, intermediate and high schools. During the 1980’s more than 3000 parent volunteers were active in San Francisco Bay Area schools. For more than ten years the teacher, student and parent models were used in hundreds of schools and youth centers throughout the United States. The professional development was coordinated by the non-profit corporation, the Center for Human Development, which Jeanne Gibbs had founded and managed.

Outcomes: Schools reported…

• significant decreases in student behavior problems
• increases in student self-esteem and self-responsibility
• improvements in school climate.

Un-anticipated outcomes:

• Teachers realized that they could also teach core academic content in small groups – thereby reaching and involving all of the students in a classroom.
• Individual teachers and whole schools began to request training in cooperative group learning.

Second Design:  Tribes Cooperative Learning

Comprehensive studies on cooperative group learning, social development and group process were synthesized for the cooperative learning model. The approach trained teachers to build long-term small membership groups (tribes) for peer support and responsibility; to teach students essential democratic group skills; and to integrate academic concepts into cooperative learning strategies.  A positive culture was built and sustained in classrooms by having students learn, practice and remind each other to honor the four Tribes Agreements….

Attentive Listening                           Appreciation/No Put Downs

The Right to Pass                               Mutual Respect

Training courses emphasized transferring responsibility from teacher to student groups to support each others’ learning, to problem-solve issues and manage their work together. The book Tribes, A Process for Social Development and Cooperative Learning, was published in 1987.

Outcomes:

• significant decreases in student behavior problems (average: 75% decrease in 3 months)
• increase in teacher collegiality and parent involvement
• improvement in teacher-student relationships
• increase in students’ liking of school and motivation (for academic learning).

Un-anticipated outcomes:

• Teachers reported they did not spend as much time managing their classrooms, and that they had more time to teach subject matter.
• More special education students could be mainstreamed into regular classrooms. Teachers of separate special ed classrooms began to report indicators of positive social and emotional development in their students.
• Schools that had all teachers trained together and that set aside time for teacher learning and planning groups better sustained the learning process. Teacher collegiality increased.
• The Tribes Cooperative Learning approach began to be marketed teacher-to-teacher, principal-to-principal and parent-to-parent across the country.

Current Model: Tribes Learning Community

Ever-growing inquiries and training requests from schools throughout the United States and Canada led to the development of CenterSource Systems, LLC. in 1995. The task of the new organization was: (1) to develop a research-based whole school model, and (2) to create a capacity-building training system – based on the long-standing philosophy and process of Tribes.

Philosophy and Goal

We believe that:

• The goal of education is to develop greatness in young human beings, active constructive citizens who are valuable contributors to society. To educate is to call forth all aspects of a student’s human development – intellectual, social, emotional, physical and spiritual.
• Intellectual, social and emotional learning is an interdependent growth process. It is influenced daily by the quality of the systems in a student’s life.
• Schools of excellence are student-centered. They have caring cultures, supportive structures and pedagogy that respond and support the stages of development and the diversity of students’ learning needs.
• School reform depends upon the whole system working together as a learning community – a school community committed to continual reflective practice towards improvement and educational excellence.

The philosophy and concepts above are the foundation of the dual mission and goal statement of Tribes Learning Community schools:

The Mission of Tribes is to assure the healthy development of every child so that each has the knowledge, competency and resilience to be successful in today’s rapidly changing world.

The Goal is to engage all teachers, administrators, students and families in working together as a learning community that is dedicated to caring and support, active participation and positive expectations for all students.

The Design of the Whole School Model

The design moves the four philosophy beliefs forward into a clear action plan framework for school reform. The four-fold philosophy and four-step framework is grounded in a synthesis of a wide-range of literature and research on human development, child and adolescent development, elements of ideal cultures for learning, resilience, cognitive theory, brain compatible learning, multiple intelligences, cooperative group learning, project learning/constructivism, multicultural/gender equity, democratic group process, school climate, classroom management, reflective practice, system change, professional development and authentic assessment… approximately 16 research-based components for effective pedagogy and school reform.

The Developmental Process of Tribes

The purpose of the following graphic is to illustrate the research-based framework for the school renewal process. Brief discussions on the four strategies and the literature on which they are based follow.

Student Development and Learning

• Whole child
• Stages of development
• Resiliency

 

A Caring Culture

• Protective Factors
• Stages of community
  development
• Community agreements
• Multicultural and
  gender equity

 

The Community of Learners

• Small group structures
• Collaborative skills
• Reflective practice

 

Responsive Education – Student Centered Active Learning

• Group development
  process
• Cognitive theory
• Multiple intelligences
• Cooperative learning
• Constructivism
• Reflective practice
• Authentic assessment
• Technology

Student Learning and Development – Re-Focusing

“Unless reform is child centered, children
and society alike are going to be hurt
– are being hurt.”
– James Comer

Although the goal of the majority of schools today is to have higher student achievement on standardized tests, the promise of that happening depends upon the school community as a system: (1) becoming student-centered (Comer, Meier, Darling-Hammond), and (2) learning how to reach and teach the diversity of students (Dewey, Johnson, Wheelock, Goodlad, Gay).  The primary focus of the Tribes school is not computer literacy, not a reading program or preparation for year-end tests – although all may be addressed and sequenced into the school’s action plan. The focus is on the students. All policy, structures, decisions, curriculum and pedagogy depend upon the response to one question:  “How and to what extent will ‘this’ support the learning and developmental needs of these students?”  Even to begin to know how to respond to the on-going question, the Tribes school staff becomes an on-going collaborative “learning community.”  They up-date their knowledge and perspectives on children’s development, resiliency, cognitive learning and multiple intelligences. Rather than teachers taking courses on their own, the whole staff learns together to better identify and respond effectively to the diversity of students’ cultures and needs, and to use multiple ways to accelerate the inseparable interdependent triad:  academic, social and emotional learning.

A Caring Culture – Re-Culturing

“It is only by reculturing a school beforehand or
along with any restructuring effort that meaningful
improvement can be made.”
– Michael Fullan

Given that the focus of a Tribes school is student-centered, the next question becomes, “How do we create an ideal culture for learning?”  Comprehensive studies (Werner, Bruner, Meier, Fullan, Gay) verify that the culture must be safe and caring.  The culture in Tribes school communities is based on the three well-proven principles that foster human resilience:  caring relationships, positive expectations and beliefs, and opportunities for participation and contribution (Benard).  Its components are those of an ideal learning culture.  Namely, it is participative, proactive, collaborative, communal and given over to constructive meaning (Bruner, Fosnot). The safe and caring culture is created and sustained by the students, teachers and the whole school community through daily use of the four previously mentioned Tribes Agreements:

Attentive Listening                           Appreciation/No Put Downs

The Right to Pass                               Mutual Respect

The responsibility to honor and to monitor the agreements is transferred from the teacher to the tribes. Signs are posted throughout the school community, student groups and school meetings begin with reminders of “how we want to be while we work together.” The agreements and the step-by-step community building process of Tribes assure that every student has inclusion  (belonging to a small peer group), a sense of identity and value, and a community of supportive peers and adults.

The Community of Learners – Re-Structuring

“The new model of school reform must seek to develop
communities of learning grounded in communities of
democratic discourse.”
– Linda Darling-Hammond

The culture is activated and sustained throughout the many small learning groups in which the students, teachers, administrators, support staff and parents are involved. Many teacher teams are involved in planning active learning curriculum, decision-making, problem-solving and authentic assessment.  A leadership team – composed of the principal, core teachers and the school or district’s Certified Tribes TLC on-site or district trainers – coordinate overall action planning, implementation and assessment. They too are an inquiry group, raising questions and learning together. The same inquiry group process moves throughout teacher and parent groups. Training opportunities, courses and events are identified to the leadership team. As much as possible, just as with student tribes, integration and alignment of curriculum, problem-solving and decision-making is transferred to faculty and parent groups. District resource coordinators and the Certified Tribes Trainers participate and facilitate as needed.  As learning areas are identified, the core leadership team is informed.  Additional courses and special training is arranged by the school or district Certified Tribes TLC trainer (See Application, Part C: Training and Implementation).  The democratic community-building approach based on the caring culture fosters collegiality, school spirit and achievement.

Responsive Education – Active Learning

“Rather than being powerless and dependent on the
institution, learners need to be empowered to think and
learn for themselves. Thus, learning needs to be conceived
of as something a learner does, not something that is done
to a learner.”
– Catherine Fosnot

“Responsive Education” is an essential pedagogy for academic achievement and school reform. It is the synthesis of artful teaching practices.  It is based on understanding the critical developmental needs of a student age and cultural group.  Its sole purpose is to enable more students to acquire knowledge in a lasting and meaningful way. Crafting a caring culture and trusting small active learning communities throughout a school gives all students the opportunity to excel (Johnson).

The CenterSource Systems professional development courses and training prepare teachers to be responsive to how the students of the school best can learn and grow socially, emotionally, spiritually (inner development) and intellectually… depending upon their respective stages of development, ways of learning and culture. Teachers teach core academic content through well-proven active learning strategies (cooperative learning strategies, project learning, group inquiry, research, composition projects, debates, team performance and peer assessment.)  Tribes materials provide teachers with approximately 175 group strategies (or structures).  Reflection on what was learned and how it was learned is an on-going practice after every group learning experience. Cognitive research validates that this maximizes the recall of information and concepts  (Caine, Johnson, Jensen). Tribes Learning Community teachers use traditional direct instruction as well as active learning. However, once they recognize and experience the positive results of cooperative learning (validated by more than 1000 studies), the majority use classroom tribes as much as possible.

A set of twelve group skills are learned so that students can work well together. Separate time is not needed to teach the skills. They are demonstrated and woven into curriculum learning tasks one or two at a time as  “social learning objectives” that students assess along with assessing the “content learning objective.”  The responsibility to achieve both the content and social learning objectives is transferred by the teacher to the classroom tribes at the beginning of the academic task. The partnership role of students and teacher working consistently together institutionalizes the culture and “responsive education” pedagogy.  The collaborative school community moves toward significant school reform and educational excellence.

REFERENCES

Benard, Bonnie. (1991). Fostering Resiliency in Kids: Protective Factors in Families, Schools and Community. Portland, OR: Western Regional Center for Drug Free Schools and Communities, Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

Bruner, Jerome. (1996). The Culture of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

Caine, Geoffrey and Renate. (1991). Making Connections: Teaching And the Human Brain. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Comer, James. (1999). Child By Child: The Comer Process for Change In Education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Darling-Hammond, Linda. (1993, March). Reforming the School Reform Agenda, Phi Delta Kappan.

Darling-Hammond, Linda.(1997). The Right To Learn, A Blueprint for Creating Schools That Work. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Dewey, John. (1956). The Child and the Curriculum and the Child and Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Fosnot, Catherine. (1996). Constructivism: A Psychological Theory of Learning, In Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives and Practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Fullen, Michael. (2001). Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Fullan, Michael. (1994) Turning Systemic Thinking On Its Head, U.S. Department of Education,

Gardner, Howard. (1999). Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences For the 21^st Century. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Gay, Geneva. (2000). Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research and Practice. New York: Teachers College Press. Columbia University..

Goodlad, John. (1997). In Praise of Education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

Jensen, Eric. (1988). Teaching With the Brain in Mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Johnson, David and Johnson, Roger. (1989). Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Johnson, David, Johnson, Roger and Smith, Karl. (1995). Cooperative Learning and Individual Student Achievement, In Secondary Schools and Cooperative Learning: Theories, Models and Strategies. New York, NY: Garland Publishing.

Meier, D. (1995). The Power of Their Idea: Lessons for America From A Small School in Harlem. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Werner, Emily and Smith, Ruth. (1989). Vulnerable But Invincible: A Longitudinal Study of Resilient Children and Youth. New York, NY: Adams, Bannister and Cox.

Wheelock, Anne. (1998). Safe To Be Smart: Building A Culture for Standards -Based Reform in the Middle Grades. National Middle School Association.