PME 801 
Collaborative Inquiry 

Group Problem Brief 

─ 

Vivian Cai 
Cathy Hynes 
Amy Sundher 
Sarah Jordan 
 
 1 
 

Introduction 
Although educators are surrounded by children all day, teaching can be an isolating job as many 
teachers do all their planning and assessment on their own. Current research shows the benefits of 
collaborating with colleagues, especially through collaborative inquiry. Working through 
collaborative inquiry promotes professional learning, increased student learning, and team 
members grow stronger professional relationships (Deluca, 2017). Even with these benefits of 
collaboration, educators can be averse to collaborative inquiry. For some, this can be due to 
negative past experiences during collaboration, lack of time, lack of knowledge, or lack of 
engagement from all team members (Deluca, 2017). However, this kind of experience does not 
reflect what collaborative inquiry could look like with some basic protocols in place.  

Taking the time at the beginning of a collaborative inquiry cycle or project to set some agreed upon 
guidelines can improve both teacher and student learning. When everyone understands and agrees 
to using a protocol, participants are able to work more effectively both independently and 
collaboratively, often in ways they are not in the habit of doing, acting as a metacognitive tool. 
Protocols can also be a powerful way to scaffold learning for those involved by allowing the cognitive 
load to focus on specific content. The collaborative nature of protocols can also build in a level of 
challenge for advanced educators, asking them to share, teach, and build on their knowledge 
through the contributions of their colleagues (Learning Forward Ontario, 2014).  

Inquiry Question 
Based on our research, our group has discovered that setting protocols can be a positive way to 
facilitate the collaborative inquiry and help everyone understand the process better. We wanted to 
investigate whether or not protocols actually increase the effectiveness of collaborative inquiry, and 
if so, what types of protocols work best for educators. Therefore, our inquiry question for this 
project is: H
​ ow do protocols help increase the effectiveness of collaborative inquiry? 

Definitions 
For the purpose of this project, please refer to the following terms we have defined throughout this 
report. 

Collaborative Inquiry (CI):​ CI is a cyclical process in which educators and school staff come 
together to examine their own educational practices using techniques of research. The team may 
include 2 or more participants who are interested in addressing a similar issue driven by student 
needs. Teams work together to narrow a research question, gather and analyze evidence, determine 
action steps, and share their findings and recommendations for next steps (Learning Forward 
Ontario, 2011).  

F2018 PME 801-002 

 2 
 

Retrieved from Collaborative Inquiry, Schnellert & Butler, 2014

Protocols: P​ rotocols are a set of agreed upon guidelines by group members engaging in 
collaborative inquiry. These guidelines are for reading, recording, discussing, and reporting that 
ensure equal participation and accountability by all members involved in the process. Protocols hold 
each participant responsible for learning, and teach people how to lead their own learning. (Berger, 
2016). 

Contextual Concerns 
There are a few contextual concerns that arise from protocols within collaborative Inquiry. Lack of 
organization can occur because the group may not have enough knowledge of the steps involved in 
order to run the process smoothly. People feel pressured if they are not participating enough and 
there may be a lack of leadership. Another concern we face is the accountability and ownership of 
stakeholders. How can we ensure that all members will have equal participation and be responsible 
for their own parts without feeling disengaged? Team members may be reluctant to participate due 
to the lengthy process of CI and the time it takes to learn and implement protocols. These are all 
contextual concerns we will be addressing in our proposed solutions below.   

 
 

F2018 PME 801-002 

 3 
 

Proposed Solutions 

1. Organized Steps for the Procedure  

Why is it important to have an organized framework during the CI process? 
During the collaborative inquiry process teachers and administrators come together to form 
an integrative team in order to focus on a common goal. To make this run efficiently and effectively, 
teachers and administrators should start with clear organized steps that they follow throughout the 
process. Some of these steps will consist of: Creating your own definition of CI, group roles, 
time/meeting places, platforms for communication and, discussions/reflections. 
 

Creating your own definition of CI- T ​ his should be the first step in collaboration with your team. 
By working together to create a definition of CI that best represents your school, you are able to 
determine the purpose of everyone coming together to focus on one goal. During this process 
educators will be able to share their ideas and values to generate one concrete definition of CI. 
Educators should develop a common language at the beginning of the meeting/process to ensure 
that everyone is on the same page. This language should also carry over to students so it is 
important to make it clear and concise.   

Time/meeting places- I​ t is important to establish a time and meeting place each 

week so that colleagues can plan ahead to ensure they are on time. Furthermore, if 
anyone is unable to make a meeting, they should have plenty of time to let the group 
know beforehand as the meeting time(s) have been scheduled well in advance. 

Platforms for communication- F ​ ind an accessible online 

resource to share your learning with one another and organize it 
in a way so that all members are able to edit and make changes at 
any time. During each week’s meeting, the recorder will write a 
brief summary of what happens in the meeting, so if anyone 
missed out they are able to refer back to the notes. The recorder 
can include the inquiry question, evidence, plans of action, and 
reflections.   

Group roles- E ​ stablishing roles at the beginning of the meeting facilitates a discussion where all 
members have an equal say. To ensure equity, during each meeting members can rotate roles so 
they all have a chance to experience all of the roles. This gives a sense of ownership and 
responsibility to each member so they all play a part during the meeting.   

Discussion/Reflection- ​After creating an organized framework (like the CI model below), it becomes 
easier for educators to go through the steps of the CI process. During this time, educators are able 
to develop an inquiry question by connecting their experiences between professional practice and 
student results.   

F2018 PME 801-002 

 4 
 

Stage 1-Problem Framing: 

● The team identifies an inquiry that relates to students’ learning needs 

● The leader may provide prompts to help develop questions i.e. “what are some challenges 
that your students face during literacy hour?”  

● Members may record their responses on sticky notes by creating a vision board 

● Find the most important and common concerns when creating a question 

Stage 2-Collecting Evidence: 

● Discuss the various types of data that can be used when collecting evidence 

● Group members may want to use the same form of data collecting or split up the different 
types (student learning data, demographic data, perceptual data, and school process data) 

Stage 3-Analyzing Evidence: 

● Teams come back together and utilize a five step approach when analyzing evidence 

● These steps consist of organizing, reading, describing, classifying, and interpreting 

Stage 4-Celebrating and Sharing: 

● During this reflection process members share their learning and experiences of the process 

● They will discuss any challenges, successes and recommendations for next time. It is 
important to come together as a group and reflect back to the question 

● The recorder, with assistance from the team, will create a report that includes an 
introduction, context, method, findings and next steps/recommendations (Learning Forward 
Ontario, 2011) 
  

F2018 PME 801-002 

 5 
 

There is no “one way” to organize your steps through the CI process but there is a common 
framework that educators can follow to ensure they are on the right track. Organization of CI is built 
around communication and trust/responsibility of participants. Although this is not a foolproof 
system, organization helps to create a process that will be consistent across all platforms of 
education. 

2. Specific Roles for Procedures  

Establishing specific roles for participants of collaborative Inquiry will allow all members to 
establish a place to inform others (based on expertise) and gain knowledge based on what others 
bring to the table. Without the establishment of roles accountability of those involved may falter, 
causing distrust among those involved in the collaboration process. The roles of participants play an 
integral part to collaborative Inquiry, they give participants the ability to perform within the 
established norms and structured protocols of time and phases of CI. 

For this Inquiry project group roles will be defined as :Group work roles are tasks for group 
members involved in collaborative pedagogy. The rationale for establishing specific roles is for the 
group to function more effectively and efficiently. 

Why Establish Roles for Individuals 

1. Roles establish a sense of purpose for each individual throughout the collaboration. 
2. Roles allow for structure that will allow for Inquiry to move forward and not be stalled by 
confusion, irrelevant conversations that do not move participants toward solutions. Hijacked 
collaboration can quickly derail success. 
3. Group roles will often change and effective collaboration often puts members in positions 
that allow for expertise (technical skills) and interest in areas to drive the work towards 
finding a solution. 
4. Often roles are established and created as gateways to scholarly discussions around 
common concerns that require adaptive learning to happen in order to find a solution. 
5. The increased effectiveness of Collaborative inquiry come from established roles that allow 
for parallel thinking to create cohesiveness in collaboration and discussions. 

Roles 
One example that through research and practice seems to offer effective results for having 
team members adopt specific roles would be the adaption Of Edward de Bono’s ‘Six Thinking Hats”. 
Although this example does not lend itself to the more traditional and common established roles 
that individuals take (such as the following example will), it does allow for individuals to take on roles 
of thinking that keeps everyone involved in collaboration with the team. The 
following roles have been created keeping the framework of the thinking 
hats in mind. The hat color represents the role that each team member will 
adopt. Often the best decisions are made when you change the way you 
think about problems, and examining them from different viewpoints. When 
participants of CI want to establish roles that challenge the way people 
would normally think, the adoption of the “Six Thinking Hats” will 
accomplish this. The coloured hats will allow members of the collaborative 

F2018 PME 801-002 

 6 
 

team to look at problems from different perspectives, but one at a time, to align thinking and avoid 
confusion from too many angles crowding your thinking. ​This is also a very powerful decision 
making technique to use within CI as everyone explores the situation from each perspective at the 
same time. This type of role assignment reflects a truly risk free environment for collaboration as 
the individual does not have to own the belief or statement it is a reflection of the hat colour.

There are many benefits to using this method, including: 

•M
​ ore power:​ We are now fully utilizing the thinking capacity, experience and knowledge of all the 
group members. 

•S
​ ave time:​ There is no longer a need to respond out of politeness, or to argue every point of view. 
Meetings can take half to one-fifteenth of the time. 

•​ Remove ego:​ There is no ego to be exerted from attacking and putting down others, to get your 
way or show off how clever you are. The only way to exert your ego with Six Hats is to be a good 
thinker. 

•S
​ imple:​ By focusing on one thing at a time, it is easier to manoeuvre complex tasks/ challenges 
and get a full picture at the end. (Edward de Bono, 1985) 

The following links show how the “Six Thinking Hats” model is used in business and a video of the 
process in action: 

● https://www.modernanalyst.com/Careers/InterviewQuestions/tabid/128/ID/3197/What-is-th
e-Six-Thinking-Hats-model.aspx 
● https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG0LRtaEjC4 

A second example of the use of designated roles within a PLC (professional learning 
community) or Collaborative Inquiry Team is a little more simplistic in that it will give specific roles 
for members to be identified to allow for contribution and involvement. Thus, creating a culture of 
collaboration that allows everyone to be accountable to the group as defined by their specific role.  

In this example of defined roles, norms and protocols fit nicely within their description to 
enhance the success of effective collaboration. The​ facilitator​ will adhere to recognizing that norms, 
time and phases of inquiry are being followed. The t​ imekeeper​ is of course adhering to time, The 
recorder​ will make sure the norm of displaying info and making sure everyone's views have been 
recorded as well as next steps. There are roles that establish effective listening, such as the 
explainer​. There will be others who within their role will make sure that all perspectives and angles 
are being explored to avoid premature solutions, the ​thinker​, once again the phases of Inquiry are 

F2018 PME 801-002 

 7 
 

being recognized and followed. Finally within this more traditional model of roles to promote 
effective collaboration someone must handle the disagreements that can sabotage collaboration 
and once again possibly leading to distrust among participants, this person would be the 
conciliator​. 

The above method outlines a role for each person within a smaller group. Each person is given a 
position that will contribute to the effectiveness of the discussion , therefore allowing the work 
towards a solution the main objective of the entire group. 

3. Developing Time Frames for Each Step  

Another solution to help increase the effectiveness of collaborative inquiry is to implement 
protocols around setting time frames for each step of the previously agreed upon collaborative 
inquiry procedure. This protocol determines when participants do each step and for how long.  

One major contextual concern of collaborative inquiry is that it can be a time consuming 
process, group members may not buy-in to the concept of collaborative inquiry or be aversive to 

F2018 PME 801-002 

 8 
 

participating altogether (DeLuca et al., 2015), especially if that amount of collaboration time is not 
readily available or planned for during the workday. Determining protocols for all group members to 
know when to do each step and how long to spend on each step is key in preventing the 
collaborative process from being a very strenuous and time consuming process. It also prevents the 
group from being stuck on one step for too long as new ideas are constantly shared and discussed.  

As we have mentioned, collaborative inquiry is a cyclical process. Reviewing, reflecting, and 

discussing the research and data will occur in the process naturally. Leaders usually set aside time 
for group members to engage in CI, but if a protocol regarding use of time is put into place, 
meetings times can be scheduled and less sporadic for whenever people are available. Below are 
some time-management strategies we have determined that can be implemented for a more 
effective collaborative inquiry process. 

Example of time frames associated with collaboration steps 

 
Strategies in Developing Time Frame Protocols 
● Implement structural supports during contractual day:  

Structural supports create opportunities for collaborative inquiry. Some 

ways to create time for collaboration include: scheduled blocks of time 
for working with colleagues, release time for teachers to meet, “late 
start” days for students, and building inquiry into staff meetings. (The 
Power of Protocols, p.1) Structural supports can facilitate educators’ 
inquiry processes within learning team meetings. They can also create 
opportunities for teachers from different perspectives to come 
together, for example, by forming cross-role inquiry teams (Schnellert & 
Butler, 2014) when they normally do not get a chance to collaborate during the work day.  

F2018 PME 801-002 

 9 
 

● Spend time becoming familiar with protocols:  

Sharing protocols with group members early on in the beginning of the CI process is a good 
way in making sure everyone is on the same page regarding time frame protocols and 
follows the same set of guidelines (Clayton, 2015). For example, the facilitator must be strict 
on protocols for interruption or continuing the conversation past the predetermined 
time-frame when it is not on the agenda. 

● Set specific time-structure for meetings: 

Distribution of or displaying a visual agenda for everyone to see 

and predetermining projected time frames for each part of 
agenda helps the whole group stay on the same timeline. The 
Time Keeper keeps track of time and ensures group does not go 
over projected time. Facilitators may modify the length of time in 
a protocol, but should not skip any steps of the inquiry process. In 
order for a protocol to be effective, steps should not be left out 
(Clayton, 2015). 

See diagram below for an example of visual agenda with time frames. 

4. Norms for Participants  

To help with teacher engagement and accountability norms should be set collaboratively as a team.  

What are Norms? 

Norms are working agreements that each member of the team helps 
set and agrees upon for collaborative inquiry and group meetings. 
Norms set the expectations for the group so that each member is 
aware of the guidelines, encouraging active participation and 
accountability and later trust between group members (Learning 
Forward Ontario, 2014).  

F2018 PME 801-002 

 10 
 

Why Do Norms Help the Success of Collaborative Inquiry? 

When team members collaboratively create team norms, there is a sense of responsibility to the 
shared vision. Each person has contributed, meaning that there are norms that they value and see 
as important, thus ensuring they feel they are part of the team. These norms create a shared 
commitment between team members, therefore increasing the trust and engagement of each 
member (Solution Tree, 2016).  

How Can Norms Be Established and Reinforced? 

In order for norms to be effective in increasing accountability and engagement, groups 
need to: 
1. Collectively Establish Norms: 
Each member needs to have a voice suggesting what actions and behaviours they believe will 
contribute to an effective collaboration. These should focus around increasing accountability, 
participation, and trust amongst members. Using language like “ We will..” , “We promise to…” or We 
agree to…” strengthens norms as these phrases suggest commitments (Clayton, 2015). There are 
different protocols that can be used for this purpose. Below is a sampling of an effective norm 
protocol: 

● ​http://bit.do/developingnorms 

2.​ Publicize the Norms 

It is important to publish the norms in a place that all team members have access to. This could be 
at the beginning of a shared agenda or posted in the room where meetings take place. Publishing 
norms ensures that all team members can review these norms each meeting or when needed. This 
also gives each team member the shared responsibility of these norms that they would not have if 
only one member was the “keeper” of the norms.  

3. Review Verbally​ ​at the Beginning of Each Meeting  

Reviewing the set norms at the beginning of each meeting/session ensures each person is aware of 
the norms and is on board. It is important to take turns reading norms each week to ensure that all 
members are active participants of this process and know the agreed upon norms (​Clayton, H. 
(2015)​. When members are aware of the norms, they are more empowered to help reinforce them 
when team members are off-topic, spend too long on one aspect, or there is conflict.  

  4. Re-Evaluate the Norms  

To ensure that the values of each member of the team are being met, it is important to periodically 
review the norms. Reflecting about whether the set norms still meet the needs of each member and 
the collaborative inquiry ensures that each member is If members are not following norms, team 
members can ask questions like:  

● “Are we following the norms?” 

● “Do we need to review/change/add to our norms?” 

F2018 PME 801-002 

 11 
 

A survey is a helpful tool for members to share their thinking and questions around their norms and 
protocols. Below is an example of one that could be used to survey team members: 

Conclusion 
The purpose of Collaborative Inquiry is a practice of engaging educators as researchers. 
Through CI, educators work together to improve their understanding of what learning is (or could 
be), generate evidence of what’s working (and what’s not), make decisions about next steps and take 
action to introduce improvements and innovations. And then they start again on emerging new 
issues and challenges (Learning Forward Ontario, 2014). Established protocols will allow for the 
integrity of CI to continue while providing a safe way for educators to be involved. Protocols around 
Design, time norms and roles will allow for engagement that is embedded within the structure to 
generate success. Educators while following set protocols are accountable to the team, themselves 
and the process. In the end professional learning and informed next steps are created that 
essentially benefit our classroom instruction and student learning. Effective Collaborative Inquiry is 
essential to any successful educational institute. Teacher collaboration does not occur naturally; it 

F2018 PME 801-002 

 12 
 

runs against prevailing norms of teacher isolation and individualistic approaches to teaching 
(Educational Leadership ASCD, 2009). Through CI, educators work together to improve their 
understanding of what learning is (or could be), generate evidence of what’s working (and what’s 
not), make decisions about next steps and take action to introduce improvements and innovations 
(Collaborative Building Series, 2016).   

The importance of establishing protocols and norms for collaborative learning teams is that 
it provides guidelines for behaviors and structure for conversations. Establishing protocols for use 
prior to starting your team’s Collaborative Inquiry will ensure the success of the process. Protocols 
help facilitate sustained conversations that ensure every voice is heard in an equitable and balanced 
way. Protocols help to achieve trust, and create an environment where participants are comfortable 
taking risks and sharing ideas, successes, and challenges (Clayton, 2015). In summary, by adhering 
to the established norms and protocols during collaborative Inquiry you will improve the 
effectiveness of the process and improve the ability of the team to find a solution to their framed 
problem.       

F2018 PME 801-002 

 13 
 

References 
Berger, R. (2016). ​Learning That Lasts: Challenging, Engaging, and Empowering Students with Deeper 
Instruction​. John Wiley & Sons Inc, 345-347. 

Bulletin #3. Winter 2013-14 

Clayton, H. (2015). ​“Norms and Protocols: The Backbone of Learning Teams.” Making the Standards Come 
Alive!​ Volume IV, Issue III. Retrieved from 
https://justaskpublications.com/just-ask-resource-center/e-newsletters/msca/norms-and-pro
tocols-the-backbone-of-learning-teams/  

Deluca, C., Bolden, B. & Chan, J., 2017. Systemic professional learning through collaborative inquiry: 
Examining teachers perspectives. T​ eaching and Teacher Education​, 67, pp.67–78.  

DeLuca, C., Shulha, J., Luhanga, U., Shulha, L. M., Christou, T. M., & Klinger, D. A. (2015). ​Collaborative 
inquiry as a professional learning structure for educators: A scoping review.​ Professional 
Development in Education, 41(4), 640-670. 

Easton, L. B. (2016, December). ​Strategic accountability is key to making PLCs effective: PLCs that have 
active and overlapping levels of accountability among members and between the PLC and school 
and district leadership as well as other stakeholders are likely to be more effective.​ Phi Delta 
Kappan, ​98​(4), 43 

Hendricks-Harris, M. (2014, February, 26). ​Focusing on the Work. ​Retrieved from 

http://www.allthingsplc.info/blog/view/239/focusing-on-the-work  

https://ereserves.library.queensu.ca/ares/ares.dll?Action=10&Type=10&Value=86225​Learning 
Forward Ontario. ​The Power of Protocols.​ (2014) Retrieved from: 
https://www.uen.org/literacyresources/downloads/Learning_Forward_Power_of_Protocols.p
df  

Learning Forward Ontario. (2011). C

​ ollaborative inquiry: A Facilitator's Guide​. Retrieved November 8, 
2018, from  

Ontario Leadership Strategy (213-2014). I​ deas into Action: For Schools and System Leaders.  
Richardson, Joan. (1999, August-September) ​Norms put the ‘Golden Rule’ into practice for groups. 
Retrieved 
from:​https://learningforward.org/publications/tools-for-learning-schools/tools-for-learning-s
chools/1999/08/01/tools-for-schools-august-september-1999-vol.-3-no.-1  
Schnellert L. & Butler D. (2014, June 9). ​Collaborative Inquiry: Empowering teachers in their professional 
development.​ Retrieved from: ​https://www.edcan.ca/articles/collaborative-inquiry/  

Solutiontree.s3.amazonaws.com. (2016). [online] Retrieved from: 

https://solutiontree.s3.amazonaws.com/solutiontree.com/media/pdfs/Reproducibles_LD3/w
hyshouldwecreatenorms.pdf  

T. (2010, September). ​Capacity Building Series​. Retrieved November 8, 2018, from 

https://ereserves.library.queensu.ca/ares/ares.dll?Action=10&Type=10&Value=86210 

F2018 PME 801-002