ASCD Poll: Enhancing Professional Practice

In the ASCD poll, we asked who is most responsible for teacher professional development. If you haven't taken the poll yet, please vote now.

Tell us about professional development in your district or school. What types of professional development work best? What types don't work? Please share your thoughts by posting a comment.

Comments

[Gloria M. Hale]

I believe that teachers are the most responsible for their own professional development. Principals and Administrators can and should require it, but the actual effectiveness of such programs depends upon the teacher. I have done professional development training and some teachers resent being made to participate in professional development. Many do not want to try anything new and they are negative.
A real teacher is always looking for ways to improve himself/herself.

[nani]

I agree with Gloria on this one. My professional development opportunities are frequently tainted by teachers who don't want to be there, and don't buy in. I often go to conferences on my own because many of my colleagues are not willing to give up a Saturday or a weekend or a few weeks in the summer for PD, though my principal will gladly pay for it and give me leave to attend.

[John Bennett]

I also voted for the teachers themselves. BUT I also need to add quickly that such "control" must be accompanied by the desires noted by Nani above. That is, teachers must decide that indeed quality professional development associated with topics of importance [both necessary for teacher motivation and engagement in the professional development] is important enough to participate - for the right reasons! I would suggest that all teachers should see professional development as important to them - believing that their facilitation of student learning can most certainly always be improved through effective professional development.

[Liam]

This is a poorly worded and rather uninformative question. A more interesting question would be who *should* be in charge of PD. Currently, I think the answer to the stated question is "the teachers themselves," but unfortunately this PD is often disconnected from the overall needs of the systems in which educators work. Plus, often beginning teachers need stronger induction and guidance for mentors to better identify their individual PD needs. And that occurs far too infrequently.

[Dr. Nikki N. Tsangaris]

It is the "central office" and the superintendent who are most responsible for taking the lead in terms identifying the themes of the PD endeavors that take place within the schools. Without the direction and support of a visionary superintendent, any PD endeavors taken on by individual principals within their schools are likely to fail--especially if the schools are filled with teachers who embrace the status quo and the "old way of doing things." Once the themes/directions for PD endeavors are identified, then principals and teacher-leaders can begin to make plans to implement PD activities in accordance with their schools' unique needs and contexts.

[Roy Abshire]

We've long held that teachers should be the chief learners in the school systems. It's about time, then, that we start practicing the best of what we know about how people learn with teacher PD. A primary problem in much PD efforts is that the targets for the teachers have been nebulous and they rarely stand still long enough for any learner to achieve them. Districts leap, seemingly willy nilly, from one hot button topic to the other leaving teachers gasping in the wake of the whirl they are in. No wonder the result is that too many teachers develop the "ok, here we go, AGAIN, into another dust collecting topic" attitude that is prevalent. Additionally, we know that quality in anything can never be achieved without the ability for the learner or the doer to self assess. In spite of that truth, the typical teacher experiences very little encouragement to frequently and honestly self assess and virtually no assistance in obtaining what is needed in the process. Feedback is limited to a couple of remarks from an isolated couple of observations a generally over worked and detached administrator has conducted because he or she has to. The result is generally a meaningless cooperation on the part of the teacher rather than the vigorous and honest analysis of improvement needs required if effective professional development is going to occur. TEACHERS ARE MOST RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, BUT EFFECTIVE SYSTEMS WILL SUPPORT THEM APPROPRIATELY!.
A simple place to start would be to sit down with teachers. Find a foundational focus for instructional improvement in the entire district. Make those targets explicitly clear in teacher understood terms. Then hold those targets still for a few years in the teachers' lives so they can legitimately hit them. It wouldn't hurt a bit if the district could also provide the teachers with the tools of time and legitimate data collected regularly about their instructional growth efforts so the teachers could analyze that data in a meaningful manner. Teachers reflecting professionally with accurate data after focused instruction will grow dramatically.

[Georgia Squires]

Teachers must be involved in identifying, planning and implementing their own professional development, otherwise they feel "done to" by "experts". Teachers are the experts in the classroom, but know they can learn more by working with colleagues to meet the needs of the students and families that are their primary area of concern.

[Janet Nolan]

Is a teacher a factory worker or a professional like a medical doctor? If the teacher is a factory worker, then the factory owner ought to provide the training. If the teacher is like a medical doctor, professional devopment is a necessity. The teacher needs to have the salary and time to participate in professional development necessary to continue development in the field.

[Brian Every]

I believe that there are three areas of professional development that need to be addressed, the first two are content knowledge and instructional delivery the third is follow up and support. The first two are the responsiblity of the teacher in conjunction with the professional who ought to be a fixture in every school, the academic coach. The academic coach will be helping identify areas in content knowledge and instructional delivery that with PD will increase the effectiveness of the teacher. The academic coach will also have a lengthy list of available PD in both content area and instructional delivery giving the teacher multiple choices of delivery options, length of commitment, subject area etc. The academic coach in conjunction with principal and superintendent are responsible for follow up, and helping the teacher self assess effectiveness and future PD. They are also responsible for fiscal aspects of PD.

It is fairly obvious that academic coaches also require PD, and of course that they are sorely missing in public education. Probably make too much sense.

[rl]

I agree with all the comments above. However, the key to teachers (me) being responsible for their professional development is realizing it is important. Many of my colleagues do not believe they have much to learn. There has to be high expectations for the profession. Without specific expectations and measures of those expectations PD becomes a time filler. There must be high standards for those providing the PD. I am intent on improving my skills as a teacher however, much of the PD I have had to attend in my district has been very poor.

[Carole Newman]

I believe teachers are in the best position to identify they type of professional development activities that will help them enhance their skills and be most effective for the students they teach. However, I also believe that if a district hopes to initiate a systemic change, it must provide the professional development and on-going imbedded support needed to bring about change.

We know one-shot trainning sessions don't work and we know forcing teachers to attend when they don't recognize the need does not bring about change in practice. Therefore, PD alone is not sufficient. Teachers and administrators must also be helped to recognize that in order to be good for kids, we must continue to improve our skills.

[Rosemarie]

A poll is only as good as the question(s) asked. . . What do you mean by "responsible"? For DOING professional development? For FUNDING professional development? For providing OPPORTUNITIES for professional development?

[Betty Worrell]

Reading all the comments from this question has been a great method to analyze where other educators are coming from. A few years ago the term "staff develpoment" was preceived as meaning "GREAT - I AM GOING TO LEARN NEW METHODS FOR ENGAGING LEARNERS! Now, due to excessive data driven required workshops it has been come almost a burden for teachers. Too often the powers that be in in central offices or principals select the staff development - often using canned programs sold by companies that lead one to think through the purchasing of a program all problems will be solved. Those of us known as teachers who are actually in classrooms know our students, therefore it is appparent no one program will work for all learners.
Teachers are often forced to implement programs when they are not in alignment as what we see as best practices to meet the needs of our population. I feel, when given the support and ownership of selecting what areas we need to grow in, professional teachers seek opportunities for growth.
Staff development should be viewed as change over time with constant monitoring and adjusting.

[Lee Evans]

I agree with the person who commented that the question was poorly phrased, and that it should have stated who "should" be in charge. At my school, there is very little push for professional development, and unless the teacher is a member of ASCD or other professional organizations, the likelihood of finding appropriate professional development that will truly enhance student learning is slim. Also, schools need to implement professional development across the board in a school so that students truly can benefit from a systematic approach. Therefore, this needs to come from the Principal or Administration.

[Cheryl Huff]

I really liked what Carole said about how the question was worded. As one who is a teacher AND has served on a BOE PD is definitely a complicated, multifaceted issue. Where I live the biggest problem is funding. The teachers want PD and many take personal days and pay for it themselves because they can get it no other way (and on our teacher's pay, 49th in the nation that is saying something!). A sad commentary for any district or school. The funding is controlled by the BOE but the BOE must deal with district administrators and their priorities for their individual budgets. Hence, it is in fact a tangled web.

[Vera Loyd]

While states and local districts should be responsible for the cost and logistics of professional development, teachers must be consulted/surveyed regarding their needs. The professional development that is delivered must support and enhance the job the teachers are doing. The teachers are best equipped to know what they need. In addition, once it is decided that a certain type of PD is needed, the program and the presenters must be both knowledgeable and well-trained, and they should know a great deal about how adults learn. So, before any workshop is brought to a district or school, it must be evaluated and found to be of top quality.

[J Fraser]

I found the question to be ambiguous from my perspective. Responsibility has two levels, not one. I believe teachers need to be responsible for taking appropriate professional development to be remain current and that they need to be responsible for determining their professional development needs in concert with their administrative teacher colleagues. It is however the responsibility of policy makers and boards to provide the funding and time support. I work for an enlightened district that provides up to 800 teacher-controlled dollars a year for up to three professional development activities. This does not include the costs of substitutes- which is also covered. The events can be multi-days,workshops, teacher-directed inquiries, etc. Every third year instead of the $800/3 event option, you may have $1300/1 event funding to attend an national or international conference. I will use that to attend ASCD next year.

[Gloria Comfort]

It is a personal responsibility to improve oneself professionally, and if educators want to be a part of this country's professional community, we will stop asking this question. Others (districts, policy makers, for-profit organizations, etc.) should encourage and provide opportunities, with accountability and performance standards clearly stated. If you are not constantly striving to improve, your performance will not be up to expectations and you should consider a job where you are sure you will not ever need additional skills or training. Good luck with that.

[Barry Wansbrough]

To build a strong learning environment, there are three areas for R&D: the system, the school and the individual. In Ontario, the weight is with the individual for professional and financial advancement. This may or may not advance the goals of the system or schools. Schools do have growth plans, but they depend on strong principal leadership, and very often a principal is not at the school long enough to make a difference.
Systemically, all the Western world is suffering from trying to make the Industrial Age model work in the Knowledge Age (KA). Laptop and smart boards do not necessarily inform KA learning. (www.lika.ca)
The result is that in the absence of a strong and engaging systemic vision to maintain and grow our quality of living based on the most intelligent educational system, most children will continue to be left behind - as, of course, will we all.
Only in education is this a stumper.

[Chris Garno]

I agree the question was difficult to answer because in my opinion everyone who is in the educational field is responsible for PD. Teachers have a responsibility to look for opportunities to remain current within their profession and always striving to do better. However, it cannot stop there. If we are to make an impact on childrens education, we must continually work together to provide teachers with the necesssary infomation to meet the needs of our students. This takes everyone (teachers and administrators) working together to determine the needs of our students. The principals provide the support within the buildings where the PD occurs and Central Office provides the financial means and time structure. Effective PD must be long term, sustained and researched. It should assist teachers in meeting the needs of the students we are serving. Looking at student data across the district should be one of the first steps in helping to determine what PD is needed to support the staff. If the entire school community is involved in determining those needs and the ensuing PD, then perhaps the problem of staff disinterest and the feeling of being "forced" to attend would be diminished.

[Lorrie Turner]

I work at an international school in Indonesia which functions very much like a mini 'school district' in that it has two elementary schools, a middle school and a high school all under the direction of a chief administrator and a school board. The PD at the school is 3 tiered so the responsibility is shared by everyone. The school provides monetary assistance for teachers interested in taking PD courses/workshops for maintaining their U.S. certification. In addition, admin. spearheads whole school PD based on its 3 established PD goals. (Understanding by Design, Standards Based Curriculum Development, Differentiated Instruction) The third tier, and the one that I think is the most important is the systematic allocation of TIME for teachers to collaborate on developing curriculum and common performance assessments as well as to collaboratively evaluate student work. I feel thatthis is the most valuable as it allows teachers to become reflective practitioners who are constantly working together to improve their teaching and their students learning. The responsibility for PD should be shared by all but the administration must take responsibility for setting up a system which focuses PD on specific research based practices and then supports teachers with money and more importantly TIME to work together, reflect, and revise based on concrete student data.

[Roy Abshire]

While I agree that teachers should be the most "responsible" for their PD, there remain problems if we leave it there. Consider this: would we think it is ok for an engineer to build bridges we must drive across from unsound structural principles? Obviously not. Can we agree that we know much more about how the brain learns today than ever before? Probably yes. If so, is it any longer ok for teachers who may be unknowledgeable about the best of what we know about learning to guide their own PD foci? Probably not, unless we are willing to let engineers construct unsafe bridges due to building from unsound structural principles. The minds of children are at least as valuable as the cars and people who must drive across bridges every day. Effective PD must be focused at the heart of the matter - what is best in what we currently know about instruction!

[Rochelle]

I second Roy's post: "Effective PD must be focused on the heart of the matter - what is best in what we currently know about instruction!" Unfortunately, sometimes that conversation goes off course.

For most of 2007, some individuals in Florida said that teaching reading to native speakers is the same as teaching reading to non-native speakers. They also said that the reading endorsement training was sufficient to teach English Language Learners (ELLs). These positions were used as a basis for supporting legislation that reduces teacher training for those who teach reading to ELLs across the entire State. Governor Crist vetoed the bill in June 2007.

The same legislators, representing districts with a low number of ELLs, reintroduced the bill without change in September and ignored input from districts with high numbers of ELLs. Last month, in the Education PreK-12 Senate Appropriations Committee, an invited reading expert testified that teaching reading to native and non-native speakers is not the same and the current reading teacher training did not prepare teachers to serve ELLs.

When asked the question if the two were the same, the newly appointed DOE Commissioner of Education also stated that they were not. The bill passed the committee anyways and on it goes to the House.

Looks like there is a disconnect between information the policy makers use to make their decisions and facts related to second language acquisition. And certainly does not get to the "heart of the matter" with regard to quality PD.