On Meaningful Professional
Development
This month we are discussing Creating a Knowledge Base
for Teaching: A Conversation with James Stigler. I will be facilitating
this month and hope we have a lively discussion. Professional development
is a subject near and dear to my heart.
Stigler says that professional development has changed a lot in the past 5
- 10 years -- do you agree? I have been teaching six years and in Los
Angeles, I have seen a change from no professional development at my
school site to district-mandated training for Open Court and math training
that is strongly recommended. Where there was no money before, now
teachers are paid for attending. Has anyone else seen changes like this
and if so, do you think the training is meeting your needs?
Jill Manning
Los Angeles
December 2, 2002 |
Happy Holidays Everyone!
Stigler states that professional development has changed a lot over the
past 5-10 years. I have been teaching for over 15 years and although I
have seen positive changes overtime, I have to say most of the
professional development that I attend remains to be too disconnected.
In this I mean that the majority of professional development that is often
offered by my district is still off site and delivered in workshop style.
Don't get me wrong, there are benefits to this one-shot type of PD; I
should know, I use to lead workshops all the time and still do from time
to time. Last year I offered several two-hour workshops in my classroom
centered on literacy and English Language Development. I had over 20
teachers come to my classroom on Friday evenings looking for "stuff." I
shared what I knew and presented strategies and work samples, but I also
allotted time for teachers to converse and talk about their students and
concerns. Most of the teachers that came to the workshop needed hours or
wanted things they could implement, but some of them shared that they
wanted to examine the topic deeper and would be interested in continuing
the conversations started at these workshops.
So what's the problem? Well, to make a long story short, my local district
still does not, or won't recognize networks as professional developments.
When I asked "them" if I could offer salary points for starting an ongoing
network centered on literacy, I was told that I could not use the word
network in my proposal, but I could write up a planned course of study and
call it teacher coaching. I was told that as long as it followed the
format of a planned agenda, I could stray from it if needed to address
teacher needs. What does this tell me? It tells me that teacher talk is
not valued and that some people outside the loop may not trust teachers to
talk about instruction.
Not all is bad in the district. Professional development is slowly
beginning to change. Several years ago when the district purchased the
Open Court Reading series, they mandated that teachers also be trained in
using the program. Not that I am a fan of the program, I am not, but I do
think the way they organized the training is a start in the right
direction. They offered teachers salary points and/or pay for 40 hours of
professional development (the kind that Stigler refers to as divorced from
practice, taking place in hotels, generic, and lecture type), but in
conjunction to that training they also required extra hours in which
teachers were to meet on site with a facilitator to discuss implementation
and reflect on their practice. Reading scores have "gone up" and the
program is credited, but if you look deeper, could it be the ongoing
professional development?
At my school we just started the kind of PD that Stigler describes as what
teachers need from PD. My principal has gently guided the staff in the
direction of lesson study. Teachers are given opportunity to observe other
colleagues and different kinds of teaching; and then provided time to come
together to analyze, discuss, and reflect on what they saw. The focus is
on the lesson and students, not the teacher. The observed teachers benefit
greatly from all the extra eyes and experience. Lesson focus come from the
needs of the students and teachers, and lessons are observed and analyzed
by the teachers. It is site and curriculum based. What a powerful way to
develop your practice.
Okay, as you can tell, professional development is some near and dear to
my heart. In the end, effective PD will lead to effective teaching, and
effective teaching will lead to student achievement.
Anyone experiencing good or bad PD in their district?
Take Care,
Jane Fung
Los Angeles
December 9, 2002 |
Hi, all!
Jane's anecdotes reinforce something else Stigler mentions: the importance
of support for meaningful professional development from the principals.
Because Jane's principal is guiding the teachers towards lesson study,
more teachers are probably participating.
At my school, I am really fortunate to have a principal who is a strong
supporter of networks and teacher collaboration around instruction. Each
Wednesday, our students don't start school until 10 am, and the teachers
collaborate for 2 hours. We have been doing lesson studies, creating exit
portfolios together, and sharing concerns and strategies. We have had
powerful discussions about diversity, racism, and ways to motivate our
students. Many new teachers have said that Wednesdays have kept them from
quitting-- that talking to other teachers has given them new hope week
after week. My principal provides coverage for teachers to leave their
classrooms and go observe their lesson study lessons being taught by their
colleagues and for teachers to examine student work together when there
isn't enough time on Wednesdays.
Though two hours a week is not nearly enough, we also work in teams and
share a common planning hour each day. I do think a more professional
calendar would allow far more than the one pupil-free day a semester for
staff development; sometimes we do need 8 hours to go deeply into a topic.
What kind of calendar would you all be willing to work? If your pay were
increased significantly, would you be willing to have two weeks for
teacher networks during off-track? Would your less-intense colleagues? (I
know this is not your average group on line here!)
Lara Goldstone
Los Angeles
December 9, 2002 |
In reply to Jane:
I totally agree with Stigler and Jane. The only way we will see meaningful
change in teaching and learning is to rethink how professional development
takes place and build in a customized system of on-going work built around
collegial conversation, reflection, and study of what we are doing and
what the research is saying. Along with lesson study, of course, is the
essential need to reflect on student work.
My feeling is that any effort we can make in this direction is to be
celebrated.
Has anyone had problems with fellow teachers wanting to get off track in
such settings and how did you handle that?
Thanks,
Carol Gregor
Santa Barbara County, CA
December 10, 2002 |
Carol,
Yes, I have had people get off track at those collegial meetings where we
are addressing student work/assessments/instruction, whatever. If I'm not
there, I use a form to guide them or one person is appointed to pull them
back on task/ask the tough questions. What works the best is when the
issue they are discussing/solving is pressing and they need the solution
to implement immediately. They data they track each week can also add
urgency to their efforts.
I am convinced that our teachers have massive amounts of knowledge and
these collegial work sessions finally provide them the opportunity to
share and gain new teaching strategies and new knowledge.
Marilyn Vercimak
Wyoming
December 11, 2002 |
Carol,
Our school sent a team of four to be trained as Critical Friends Coaches
and one of the things we learned was how to set up group norms. The first
thing we did when we came back from training was make some group norms for
our staff meetings and professional development days and it has made a big
difference. Since everyone agreed to the norms everyone sticks to them,
for the most part. It makes it so much easier to stay on track because the
moment people start to stray they are reminded on the norms. People have
actually said in our meetings, "No sidebars" or "Save that thought for the
question and answer period." Some staff members have taken longer to
convince than others, but it was well worth the initial time investment.
Jill Manning
Los Angeles
December 16, 2002 |
Lara brings up an interesting point, when she asks us
what kind of calendar are we willing to work. In The Teaching Gap, Stigler
points out that collaborative activities are already built into the
teachers' professional day. Are teachers willing to work longer hours or
more days in order to collaborate? Would the teachers you work with be
willing to do this?
Jill Manning
Los Angeles
December 16, 2002 |
Great idea! Makes so much sense.
Thanks,
Carol Gregor
Santa Barbara County, CA
December 16, 2002 |
Jane,
My job as an Academic Facilitator in Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools in
North Carolina is similar to the staff developer in New York. It is the
best teaching job in the world! I work with my faculty and administrators
to promote best practices and school improvement. I have been the chairman
of our school's Leadership Team and I am working closely with an Assistant
Principal to improve our middle school.
A large part of my job is the professional development of our faculty, and
I have learned during my three and one half years in this position that
the key word is "professional" rather than "staff" development.
Professional teachers want to be respected and want to feel empowered to
make or assist in making decisions about what they need to know in order
to do their jobs well. Too often the system requires them to attend
useless training sessions; however, I have also noticed that some teachers
in the new teaching force too often show a lack of commitment to
professional development and school leadership.
Also, if teachers are disgruntled about staff development, they need to
take a stand against poor practices. If they don't fix the problem, no one
else will. I wonder why they haven't done anything so far. I know I have
most of the time. I usually find a way not to waste my time in useless
training.
Sheryn Northey
Charlotte, NC
December 17, 2002 |
Reading Jill and Lara's messages about a calendar for
professional development brings to mind some issues in my district.
Currently, the only time built in for professional development revolves
around school accreditation and tasks we are required to accomplish. While
accreditation is important, there are too many repetitive tasks that eat
up valuable time. Other, more meaningful professional development usually
takes place in the form of meetings before or after school when teachers
are "donating" their time. This causes some very hard feelings with some
people and leads many to completely discount very useful teaching
practices. Once our accreditation visit is over, the professional
development days will be absorbed back into the school calendar and we
will continue to have to "give" our personal time to the district. I think
teachers would be more open if they were fairly compensated for their
time. I am not even opposed to extending teacher contracts as long as
appropriate compensation is attached. Unfortunately, our community is not
very progressive and sticks closely to the agrarian "start near Labor Day
and end by Memorial Day" calendar.
Does anyone have suggestions for how to help a school district move in the
right direction? Also, does anyone have experience with a very seasoned,
traditional staff that balks at any form of change to research-based best
practices of classroom instruction?
Debra Meredith
Wyoming
December 17, 2002 |
Debra,
I have had an experience with teachers balking at lesson study. I tried it
in Charlotte and was met with resistance. I was teaching a differentiation
class for our gifted program and asked the teachers to present a lesson
study as part of the course requirement. Feedback was that I didn't model
enough or lecture enough. The negative feedback may have been because the
course was required and teachers were there to meet the requirement rather
than to learn. I was disappointed that the teachers were not more
enthusiastic about research lessons and leading from the classroom. They
wanted lecture.
Sheryn North
Charlotte, NC
December 18, 2002 |
I know what Sheryn is talking about! The past few years
I've been working to help schools support new teachers in NYC. I've found
that often, teachers (actually, it's usually the more experienced ones)
don’t know how to respond to professional development that requires them
to be active and thinking and central to its success. They are so used to
sitting and being bored and lectured at that they are just not sure about
being the actors, rather than the passive recipients.
Simply asking them what they want and feel they need in terms of their own
P.D., either informally in conversation or with a written needs
assessment, has proven to be remarkably illuminating and powerful. I can
then suggest ways in which their needs can be met--always ways that
require participation, discussion and sharing of practice. We do peer
coaching, Critical Friends Groups, support groups, modeling lessons and
debriefing, study groups, lesson study, among other things. (I am lucky to
be able to have a small budget to back up what I suggest with materials,
books and small teacher stipends for outside of school time).
I am currently working with a school which has provided very traditional,
expert-to-teacher P.D. They are struggling to plan across the school
writing tasks through a district initiative. We are incorporating a lot of
sharing of student work and teacher practice in order to reduce teacher
stress levels and to make it real for them. Some teachers are loving it
and some are resistant, but everyone is learning so much and gaining so
much insight into the teaching and learning of writing. I know that I am.
Judi Fenton
New York City
December 18, 2002 |
Two comments I have are: 1) differentiation can be a very
difficult concept to grasp and many teachers do not see how they could
apply it in their classroom ("transference" of philosophy to application
can be tricky for many participants in any PD setting), or 2) they see the
implications of the large amount of work involved in generating a
differentiated lesson. Differentiation, in particular, is a tricky PD to
do and get cooperation and good comments with a large group. Another topic
may have garnered increased cooperation. However, my school has dedicated
itself to differentiated instruction for all students and, as the staff
struggles to learn how to differentiate all six ways, their attitude is
slowly changing about it. Redirecting teaching from a didactic to
differentiated approach takes major commitment and perseverance.
Anne Buchanan
Fayette County, KY
December 18, 2002 |
Debra,
I agree a large part of the problem is accreditation requirements--both
real and perceived--by federal, state, and local districts. I know in our
district we frequently get into repetitive activities that no longer serve
their originally intended purpose. Part of our answer to this was to add 5
professional days (yes, paid, and prorated according to each teacher's
salary). This decision was not arbitrary. Our district planning team
surveyed teachers prior to the decision and a large majority agreed to the
days with pay.
The other positive change this year is that our PD days are planned by a
committee which is mostly run by teachers. PD has not so far become a one
size fits all approach. Among activities are optional collaborative
reading groups, and lesson study. Action Research/Reflective Inquiry
projects are required (Not necessarily a popular decision district wide).
Teachers are learning about the responsibilities, advantages, and pitfalls
of making administrative decisions for the entire staff. There is still
bound to be a lot of grumbling: some by teachers who routinely resist
change, but also by master teachers who are genuinely fed up with
arbitrary top-down PD requirements, esp. from NCLB and our own State Dept.
Most teachers I talk to feel they are now and have been "accountable" with
or without external requirements. Our staff is very "seasoned", as yours
is. A positive for us is that the superintendent and at least a couple of
principals are generally open to sharing power and ideas. Without that, it
can be very difficult. The key, as you know, is ownership by the staff.
Sometimes a core of teachers can get some control over the planning--it
takes a lot of extra time and work. This could be a good inquiry/research
project. Maybe get at least a few seasoned teachers involved in a group
project. All in your spare time, right?
Good luck with your efforts.
Gary Miller
Wyoming
December 18, 2002 |
Two issues seem to have come up here; Compensation for
Professional Development and Control of/over Professional Development.
In terms of compensation, how much money is enough? For some teachers
there is no amount of money that they can be paid to stay after school or
work on Saturdays and others would do it for free just to have the
opportunity to learn. Currently, LAUSD teachers get paid about $16/hour to
attend Open Court training during their off-track time and $25/hour for
'training' pay from the district. Some of these training opportunities
allow the participant to get university or district credit so that they
can advance on the salary scale. Stigler never mentions compensation, so
wonder how some of the practices he talks about were successful. Maybe
this is a situation where you get what you pay for, pay nothing, get
nothing.
In terms of control of professional development, it seems to me that some
schools are making progress in that direction. At my school, the teachers
decided to look at writing and that is where our energy is focused as a
whole staff. A splinter group has taken up the call of lesson study and
will convene in January start the ball rolling. Stilger notes that once
teachers find professional development to be valuable, "suddenly it's not
so hard to find the time to do them." Do you think this is true? If the
professional development offered at your schools were really in tune with
the needs of the teachers, would they find the time?
Jill Manning
Los Angeles
December 18, 2002 |
That is disappointing Sheryn, but I am not surprised.
Some teachers will need more time to ease into more "progressive" kinds of
PD. Change is not always a comfortable thing is it? But once teachers
experience the power of examining their own practice on a deeper level,
and how to improve student achievement, they will buy into it more. It has
to come from them and they have to see how PD can benefit them in some
way. I think some teachers have just given up on good PD. Lesson study can
sound a bit overwhelming at first, but once teachers experience it, they
realize that the focus of lesson study is to look at a lesson and how to
make it more effective, not the teacher. Sheryn, were you going to be the
demonstrating teacher for the lesson study, or did you ask for a
volunteer?
I still can't believe that the teachers requested more lecture! Eeek!
Jane Fung
Los Angeles
December 19, 2002 |
Judi,
I agree with you. Asking teachers what they want is the answer. With our
Gifted Certification, however, we do have course requirements, so, within
limits, we can ask teachers what they want. Unfortunately, too often what
I am seeing they want is lecture, which according to research results in
5% in learning. When I taught my course, I asked teachers to teach (which
nets 90% in learning) a model of differentiation. I was amazed that many
of the participants felt I had asked for too much.
One of the best models for professional development I have experienced is
the National Board process. Teachers volunteer to go through the process.
They choose to "jump through the hoops" to document master teaching and to
grow professionally. Even those who do not immediately certify learn a
great deal about analysis, reflection and professional decision making,
which moves them far beyond the typical teacher. I wish professional
development programs would promote some of the processes demanded by the
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
Sheryn Northey
Charlotte, NC
December 19, 2002 |
Debra,
Shirley and I (from FCPS) experienced a staff's resistance to change last
year when we tried to implement Lesson Study at our school. We ended up
reading Michael Fullan's body of work on change, which I highly recommend
to anyone who is considering implementing change of any kind. The bottom
line is, before you can even address "the content" (i.e., the change you
want to make), you have to create a climate for change. Which, as one
might suspect, is not easy. In fact, Fullan says, "Change is a
frustrating, discouraging business." But worth the effort!
Anne,
I am currently researching math differentiation. I would really appreciate
clarification of your statement "differentiation in all six ways."
Thanks!
Jill asks, "Stilger notes that once teachers find professional development
to be valuable, "suddenly it's not so hard to find the time to do them."
Do you think this is true? If the professional development offered at your
schools were really in tune with the needs of the teachers, would they
find the time?" To this, I say YES, YES, YES! As I mentioned before,
Shirley and I attempted to implement Lesson Study at our school last year.
For the teachers who "bought into" lesson study, it became a valuable
means of professional development, and they were more than willing to
invest the time in it. Again this year, I am finding a core of teachers
who are willing to invest the time, once they find out it IS worth their
time. One of the problems we have to overcome is that much of PD is still
"one size fits all" and teachers are tired of having their time wasted by
sitting through presentations about stuff they already know.
If we differentiate for children, we should differentiate for adults, as
well. I think that's one of the (many!) reasons we like lesson study--we
plan and develop it ourselves, based on our own needs as professionals.
Gail V. Ritchie, MEd, NBCT
Fairfax County, VA
December 19, 2002 |
I absolutely agree with Gail in her answer of Jill's
question about teachers finding the time to do P.D. that is valuable to
them. I have found that that the key is that there has to be clear
connection for them to what is going on in their classrooms. For example,
I think if we present doing lesson study as something that will support
teachers in doing something they already are doing, but doing it better,
it is much more palatable than doing a math lesson study when teachers are
struggling to implement a new writing curriculum. This sounds so
elementary, however, it is what schools and districts so often expect
teachers to do. I think that often I am successful in presenting new forms
of P.D. merely because I am able to explain to the teachers how it can
support them in what they are attempting to do, not what someone else want
them to do!
Judi Fenton
New York City
December 19, 2002 |
One way to set up PD so that teachers are more willing to
participate in activities is to tell them to bear with you, but that you
are going to place them in the role of the student in your classroom so
that they feel the power of the lesson that the students will feel when
they present it to their respective classes. For teachers that still
refuse, I compliment them on their astuteness for being able to see the
implications ahead of time for how much work this will be—that usually
gets them started.
Sure, lessons can be differentiated by content, process, product,
readiness, interest, and learning profile. (One can rarely differentiate
just one way at a time; often it is a combination like interest and
process, etc) One way to differentiate for math by content and readiness
is to use the "ASK" (Assessing Student Knowledge) Process, developed by
Toyota Corporation. This is where strands of content (computation,
concepts, relationships, algebraic ideas, etc) from state or national
standards are organized into long range plans and students are given
weekly assessments -using review and preview questions- to determine their
mastery of content. Depending on how they score, they are placed into
groups for enrichment/curriculum compacting or remediation. Then, they are
tested again to monitor mastery and efficacy of the lesson. They graph and
track their own progress, which helps a lot towards their motivation to
succeed. I have lots more info on Toyota's strategies, again for anyone
who is privately interested.
Anne Buchanan
Fayette County, KY
December 19, 2002 |
I agree with Sheryn that if staff development
opportunities could model those of National Board Certification lessons
and procedures, much more enrichment can be derived. I wish there was
actually some sort of National Board Certification that could be completed
at the local level (in a kind of cohort setting). As far as local
development/staff enrichment opportunities are concerned, the ones that
seem to work best is ones in which the instructor models a lesson quickly,
then gives the participants a chance to “get their hands dirty”, followed
by a question/answer/feedback session. Lectures aren’t very effective,
usually … just time-consuming.
Thom Jones
Fairfax County, VA
December 19, 2002
|
|
