Thursday, October 27, 2011
Professional Development
For the last several years, the state of NC has not allocated money to school districts for professional development. Based on your own experiences participating in various kinds of professional development, do you think that this was a bad decision? Should schools and districts put money into professional development activities, or is professional development usually a waste of time?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
In the spirit of what is most important, I can understand why money has been pulled from professional development. Why this is important, as a professional in the field of education, it is one's ethical and professional duty to continue their education. In order to maintain licensure in nearly any field, the professional is responsible for staying abreast of current issues, strategies, theory, etc. that will assist them in better perfecting the craft and meeting the needs of the target population. While it would be a appreciated if school/districts could fund this, it is not on the top five list of “must haves”. With dwindling budgets, districts must maintain the budget to fund positions, supply text books, class materials and supplies, investing in reform programs to close achievement gaps, maintain safety and facility expenses, and fund public transportation for all students. These task are primary and funds must be secured to carry these needs out indefinitely.
I do not believe this is a bad idea because the district still has money that it can allot for professional development. The good thing about these hard economic times are they have forced us to make things happen with less.
Professional development is not a waste of time but I would say we need to evaluate the the effectiveness of the sessions we are offering. They are not always as effective as they are intended to be. I think the most effective form of professional development can come from the expertise of those inside the school building. Not only does it build capacity but it empowers teachers to feel like they are improving instruction throughout the building.
I do not think that the idea of professional development is a waste of time. I think that as professionals we need to continue to grow. We should never get to the point where we know everything. Our students are changing and schools are changing. We need to know certain things in order to adapt to a changing school environment. Some of us teach in areas that is always adding new information (science), therefore we need to keep up with the latest information in that area. Also, technology is changing the way we look at education and it is important that we know how to effectively utilize that information in our classrooms.
However I think that much of our staff development is about the latest and greatest thing that is going to change the face of education or we are learning the same things over and over again. I have rarely seen staff development used effectively and that is why teachers see it as a waste of time. Even when we are forced to participate in staff development that is actually effective, teachers tune it out. I think administrators should work to make staff development more meaningful and teachers should take staff development more serious.
Staff development should focus on what the school or teachers need. Administrators should survey the staff and find out what they would like to learn or look at what the students need to know and use that to decide what they will do for staff development. Do I need to spend thousands of dollars to bring DuFour in to teach my staff about collaborating or can I use team building exercises to show my staff the importance of collaboration and teach them how to work together? Education is all about using common sense, but most of the time it looks like the field of education does not have any common sense.
As some of my peers have already stated, Professional Development is really the teacher’s responsibility. If my school is willing to make an investment in me, then that’s wonderful, but certainly it’s not a job “benefit” I expect. Furthermore, I can say that I have sat through some PD sessions that have been irrelevant - I’ve sat through workshops that are poorly crafted and meaningless to my practice.
On the flipside, I agree with Xavier that one of the most effective types of professional development is the kind that comes from the collective experience of those within the school building. I’m preparing to attend a Professional Development conference even as I write this and I have purposely sought out sessions for the coming days that will be facilitated by educators currently practicing their craft. Why? So I can learn from the relevant experiences they have to share.
Conclusion: I think teachers should collaborate with administrators to choose relevant professional development activities they can attend- ones that will positively impact their practice. Furthermore, while not necessary, I think that schools that can support teacher’s professional development are sending a positive symbolic message to teachers related to the value they have for those teachers.
In my experience, professional development has been a waste of time, but then again, I’ve only been a teacher for the last five years. I wonder if the professional development has been bad because of lack of funding? It seemed as if my first school avoided professional development at all costs… the only professional development I ever completed was training provided by the district through the Exceptional Children’s department on compliance and paperwork. In my second school, the principal allocated some Title I money for professional development, and the workshops select teachers attended weren’t bad… but there was also very little support when we returned to the school ready to implement some of the practices and ideas we had learned about. So, I guess having not really experienced good professional development at any point in my career, I can’t say if it has had more to do with to do with a lack of funding or a lack of good decision making on the part of the people choosing what opportunities are made available.
During my first three years as a teacher, I had opportunities for more professional development than I had in my last six years of teaching. I do not feel this was related to the amount of money allocated to the school district, but in the principal’s desire for the staff to remain current in teaching practices. The staff development at the first school I taught at was extremely beneficial and was geared to meet the needs of our teachers and students. Some of our professional development was led by outside consultants and some was led by teachers at our school. Regardless of who led the professional development I never felt it was a waste of my time.
I do feel schools should put money into professional development. Teachers need to stay current in their teaching practices to meet the ever changing needs of their students. With this being said, I feel administrators and school districts need to do a better job of differentiating the professional development opportunities offered. If for example, a teacher has a Master’s degree in reading; chances are they don’t need to learn how to administer a running record.
I know of several schools that are offering multiple options for professional development opportunities. For example, at the beginning of the year the principal surveyed the staff about the professional development they would like to have for the current school year. The principal and leadership team agreed on four choices and are offering those choices are early release days. The leadership team has found teacher leaders or county employees who will lead the yearlong training. By doing this, the administrator is better meeting the needs of the teacher and working within the tight constraints of the budget.
I have always dreaded the mandated professional development sessions. Usually I found that the information presented had no impact on my classroom; it always seemed like good ideas that might work for other teachers in other situations. Sometimes I found that the ideas presented might be good ones, but I was too distracted by all the things I could be doing in my classroom instead of sitting in the professional development session, and I ended up resenting the sessions instead of gaining valuable information from them. Or the worst situation: the presenter was a former elementary teacher and treated us like a class full of children; I was extremely resentful then!
Most recently, professional development has been much more “in house” than in the past. We’ve had mostly people from central office come and facilitate the professional development. I have actually preferred that. Although I may not always like the district or school mandates, the in house professional development has been much more applicable and also has allowed for follow up. We’ve been able to incorporate the knowledge into our classrooms, then follow up with subsequent professional development, allowing us to grow and improve. We’ve also done a fair amount of “train the trainer” types of workshops. This has also allowed us to tailor the information to our school and make it more usable information.
Since this shift is probably due to the lack of funding, I’d have to say that the lack of funding has actually been a good thing. As in many other areas, it has forced us to do more with less. It has forced us to look within to affect change. It has allowed us to focus our attention on one or two major topics a year instead of a smattering of superficial training. I do believe schools and districts should put money into professional development, but I do not believe they need to spend a ton of money hiring expensive “experts” to deliver the instruction. We have a wealth of knowledge and experience within our system, and we need to capitalize on that.
Like many of you, I have had to suffer through horrific professional development, but I have also had the pleasure of sitting through great development as well. Most of these opportunities have been very rewarding, however, they are overshadowed by lack luster performances that are the target of criticism. I think professional development is a necessary component to promoting professionalism and increasing growth in a school
I agree with Katrina in that it is understandable why money has been pulled from professional development. The sad reality is that without professional development being offered in the school would result in teachers not being self-motivated to become better at their jobs. There are teachers in this field that go from year to year doing the same thing with no change and no implementation of research proven practices. By implementing professional development in the schools, you are giving them experiences, and sometimes mandating changes that teachers would not normally implement on their own. By doing this, you are encouraging teachers out of their comfort zones for the benefit of the students and themselves as a professional.
Like many things in education, it seems that the fat needs to be trimmed so as to get to the bare bones of what works and get rid of what does not and is a waste of time and money. Professional development is not one of these pieces of fat.
I can see why the state pulled funding, but I think if the state is involved in issuing mandates about new initiatives or changes in educational law, they need to fund the staff development necessary to put those in place. I believe the same should be true of school districts. Professional development ought to be based on school building level/PLC needs. I agree with Xavier that we ought to look in-house for expertise before sending representatives to something that may or may need meet the school's needs. The reality of teachers choosing workshops and reporting back to the larger community is that it rarely happens. There is so much else on everyone's plates and little faculty interest in listening to a couple of teachers who are jazzed about what they learned. On the flip side, I think meaningful, useful professional development does inspire worn down teachers and serves an important role in that way. This doesn't mean that that can't be accomplished in house, but it takes a wise administrator to pull from teacher expertise without alienating or causing superiority issues with the rest of the faculty. There is likely a smart way to go about using the "in-house" model.
I do believe that professional development, up to a point, is a teacher's responsibility. We are responsible for keeping ourselves current with best practices just as doctors have to keep up with the latest procedures. For the most part, teachers do this every day in the literature they read, the lessons they research and develop, and the management techniques they glean from a multitude of sources. The problem arises when one of two things happen. The first is when districts or schools put on professional development activities because they are mandated to present them (state requirements or district initiatives). Often they are not well planned out and the presenters aren't that well versed in what they are presenting. Having presented in several PD's under these conditions, I can say that often they are a waste of time. The second reason is related to what others were alluding to: schools have spent money on PDs because, well, they had money to spend and, "by God we better spend that money or the state will take it back and not give us more!" Again, as has been said, forethought? Nope. Follow up? Naw. Money spent? Check! lather, rinse, repeat.
That being said, the concept of professional development is not a waste of time and they do need to be provided by the district/school in order for teachers to be supported in delivering district/school goals. But as others have mentioned, quality PDs do not have to cost a ton of money. Standing on the shoulders of the giants who have posted before me, focused, school-based PDs are the way to go. When a school has ownership, it is more likely to provide follow-up to a professional development (something we have all noted is often lacking). And when a school reallocates existing resources (a.k.a. teachers), extra money does not need to be spent.
While I think professional development sounds good in theory, the way it is implemented in most schools is a waste of time. The professional development that is given at mandatory bi-weekly meetings is typically chosen by the administration and teachers usually tune it out (as Yasmin said).
However, this type of professional development is relatively inexpensive. The professional development opportunities that are no longer going to be available are those that teachers opt to take advantage of, such as conferences or National Boards. Unfortunately, these are also the most beneficial because the teachers that participate make a choice to do so, making the PD more meaningful. Budget cuts will not prevent teachers from having to sit through whole-faculty worthless PD sessions, just reduce the number of opportunities for motivated teachers to grow at little out of pocket costs.
I do believe that site-based decisions for professional development are a good start. However, I honestly don't care whether some area superintendent in the central office or a math teacher on the 6th grade hall chooses the PD session. It is highly unlikely that any one PD session will be beneficial for every staff member in any school or that every teacher needs to focus on the same thing. It doesn't matter if the PD opportunity is a $1K three day conference, a $30 subscription to a professional journal, or a free book from the local library. It is more beneficial when a reflective teacher takes responsibility for seeking out ways to grow on their own.
Many experts agree that the most important factor in a classroom is the teacher’s effectiveness. Schools need to have ways to ensure that their teachers are as effective as they can be. While there are many gifted and effective teachers out there, they will only remain that way if they are continuous learners. I think we can agree that many schools are failing to educate many of their students and need to learn more effective practices for meeting the needs of all students. Schools can help their teachers to learn by providing staff development based on the needs of the teachers in their school. Admittedly, most staff development I have attended has been lacking; however, I don’t think that means it should be abandoned all together. More efforts need to be made to ensure that staff development is as effective as it can be. I agree with Xavier that when the money is not there, we just have to get more creative with our solutions. I have long since believed that the teachers within a building can often be the best source of staff development. I have attended many sessions given by people who charged a lot of money and thought, I could have done that or another teacher could have done that and done it better. By enlisting teachers in our buildings to conduct staff development sessions, we are not only sharing best practices within our schools, we are also empowering and affirming the excellent teachers we have. I do think that a cut in the funds for staff development was necessary, because it forces schools to become more creative with the staff development they provide; however, I also feel it is important to have some money for staff development. There are some areas, such as equity in education and social justice education, which many schools need an outside expert for because there are not experts within their school.
Professional Development is often determined by the people who are not intimately aware of what the specific needs of the teachers might be. Central Office makes a fair number of district decisions in manners which seem like isolation from the actual school needs. I am in favor of getting rid of broad professional development. Instead, targeted, specific professional development options should be funded and presented to the teachers. The teachers should be given a menu of options and then they chose what area(s) they wish to focus on. Most district wide professional development sessions are really no more than an ineffective "one size fits all" lesson plan.
Professional development usually is a waste of time... because we don't spend the time, effort, or sometimes necessary money, to ensure that the professional development teachers receive is tailored to their needs. Every professional development workshop or training I've been to has been one-size-fits-all; If our school can afford to bring one person for one professional development workshop, that workshop is not going to be meaningful or helpful to everyone on the staff. At the same time, just throwing more money into professional development does not necessarily mean a higher quality or better-suited series of professional development opportunities. More can help create opportunities for more meaningful and beneficial professional development, but my guess it that it would just end up with bigger name people coming in to lead the one-size-fits-all workshops. It seems there could be some balance between providing more money for more professional development opportunities, as long as more (I hate to say it) oversight or accountability on making sure that the money is used to provide MORE opportunities, not just bigger ones.
I think it was a bad decision for North Carolina to stop allocating funds for professional development. With so much research going into new initiatives, it only seems right to pay for schools to implement some of these new ideas. It seems to me like a double standard, the state wants improved test scores, but is unwilling to fund the programs necessary to increase the test scores.
That being said, in my experience most professional development has been a waste of time. So it may not make sense me wanting the state to pay for something that is a waste of time. I think the state should pay for it, but professional development needs to be restructured at the county level. I believe that we implement too many different programs. Counties need to focus on one or two initiatives and put all their efforts into those programs. That way, teachers receive multiple trainings over a couple of years and become experts in that program. Counties also need to allow adequate time to go by, before judging something as a success or failure. When I was a teacher, I felt every other year we were going in an entirely new direction. Changing direction so frequently made me resent professional development. Why should I care about something that is only going to be in place for two years?
Counties lower the number of initiatives and actually see them through, and maybe the state will pay for it.
In my experience, any initiative is only as effective as its implementation and therefore professional development is essential to school success. I agree with Kathy that if a person/group requires implementation of an initiative then they must also provide opportunities and resources for professional development. Lack of support, direction and consistency in initiative implementation causes frustration and irritation for teachers and administrators. If we want effective initiative implementation to reform schools then we must rely on quality professional development. The key word here is “quality.”
I agree with the sentiments already expressed about the challenges and drawbacks of required professional development. However, I have also participated in required PD that helped transform schools and teachers. The quality PD was connected to school and classroom initiatives. Teachers and administrators were interested and invested in the PD’s focus because it was applicable and imbedded both practice and reflection into the preparation, activities, and follow up. PD should balance whole school shared experiences with individual support and development. It is part of a focused goal or movement and not an isolated event. Resources (including but not limited to money and time) are necessary for comprehensive and quality PD. If schools and districts stop funding quality PD then they risk sending a message about maintaining the status quo. If a district or administrators don’t want to provide quality professional development to the staff, then at least have resources available to support individual teachers in seeking out quality PD for themselves.
To be truthful, I haven't noticed any difference (with regards to content) in the professional development that I've received on Early Release days since the PD cut began. What I have noticed, however, is that our PD has been more focused and relies more on the "experts in the building" when delivering training.
I agree with Xavier in that I think the cuts have forced schools to really evaluate what is important for reaching long-term goals. Since the cuts went into affect, our school has decided that our PD would be inspired exclusively from expressed teacher needs. As such, they have scoured through free and low-cost resources and, combined with teacher leaders, have delivered training that they felt would help us most long-term.
Additionally, I think that if a school is really committed to a certain type/kind of PD then they will make it happen, whether it is free or requires a fee. I think that ultimately, however, the reality that there is no longer a "blank check" has forced us to be realistic and thoughtful in the way we spend on money on training teachers, and that is a good thing!
It depends on what the professional development is and who is participating. Alot of times teachers have little training and even less time implementing a new program or initiative. Professional development can be very beneficial. Unfortunately, it is often ineffective. I think the success of professional development depends on a school's climate and culture. If the staff welcomes new ideas and are willing to try, professional development can be beneficial. Likewise, if the staff are resistant to change then professional development can be a nightmare and alot of money will be wasted.
I do not think it is bad that N.C. stopped allocating money to school districts for professional development. The reason I believe this, is because I do not think it takes a whole lot of money to have professional development (PD) opportunities.
Usually, money tied to PD opportunities has to do more with expenses like travel, rather than the actual learning and knowledge.
With that said, I think that PD is only a waste of time if there is no evidence of learning, knowledge, and growth. The problem with PD is that there is often times no accountability with what happens with the learning and the knowledge that supposedly took place. In other words, how do we assess what happens in the classroom and in the school, and determine the impact that PD has had?
Each person should invest their time, their energy, and even their resources into PD. Those who do so on their own are driven to improve their existing knowledge, skills, and performance.
However, this does not mean that schools should not invest in PD. Every person on a staff is not driven to learn and improve on his/her own. Schools should provide PD inexpensively, by using their own staff as experts in a particular area. For example, one teacher might do a PD session on how to implement culturally relevant practices in the classroom.
All in all, real PD can happen regardless of the money. If it is a waste of time, then there is no real knowledge acquisition taking place, which then propels teachers to demonstrate that knowledge in the classroom.
At my former school, we had a significant amount of PD on equity. It made an impact in the school and in the classroom. It also did not cost a lot of money, because our equity team created, developed, and presented PD sessions to the staff. It was great!
Based on my experience professional development is a good investment of funds. There are times when I have attended workshops or conferences and felt that I did not come away with any new information. However, attending workshops is typically rejuvenating and it sparks new ideas for me. At the same time, I can understand that professional development is often the area that gets cut from the budget. Continuous learning is a part of the code of ethics for most professions. Even if the district did not provide the opportunities, I would expect professionals to seek these opportunities on their own. Professional development could be as simple as reading professional journals. In addition, technology such as webinars has made professional development more convenient and cost effective.
I believe that if the state is mandating policy that requires school employees to attend training, then the state should pay. Allocating some monies for professional development not tied to policy would help reinforce the idea that school employees should seek ways to grow in the profession. Similarly, if districts or schools are mandating something for teachers, they should provide the training if needed. And, they should also have some monies set aside for training that staff may need in addition to mandated training.
The effectiveness of professional development depends. I have been through required and self-selected professional development that proved not to be helpful. But I’ve also attended some that were helpful. Sometimes I think teachers’ attitudes are better about the activity if they had some input. I’ve heard a lot of complaining, sometimes my own, when a workshop was mandated that teachers felt would be a waste of time. Last year, at the beginning of the year, my county required we attend one workshop and then gave us a choice of a second. That seemed to go over a little better with teachers. At my school, teachers seemed to be more engaged in the training if it was something hands-on that we were going to be implementing in our classrooms. Professional development on topics such as RTI was not as well received. For me, the best professional development sessions were those in which I gained information and strategies that would help me help my students. Professional development is definitely necessary. There is no perfect teacher and we should always be looking and involving ourselves in activities that will help us perfect our craft.
Due to my position as the Professional Development Coordinator at my school I have a very different view on the lack of funds being allocated to NC schools. I have seen, in isolated cases, instructional practices deteriorate because of the lack of opportunities provided to our staff in the area of professional development. It is important to remember that while some schools have received adequate resources based on the population(Title I) and student allotment, other schools like my own has had to rely heavily on the expertise of it’s staff to help increase the effectiveness of instruction throughout the school. This has empowered several professionals to spawn and facilitate PLTs on various topics and techniques throughout the school which has been positive for our school culture.
Our school and for the most part the county have no “extra” funds for substitute teachers so that our staff can attend professional development sessions off campus. We don’t have “Professional Development” funds from the county to bring anyone in to help facilitate meaningful professional development either. I can remember when I first came to Wake County I was given plenty of opportunities to attend professional development sessions led by Rick DuFour, David Langford and several other researchers and practitioners that help mold and hone my teaching practices. These types of opportunities are almost non-existent or not practical for our teaching professional. As a result most staff development that we as an Office of Continuous Improvement and Professional Development has become a huge WAST OF TIME, not because we don’t know what we want for our individual staffs but because we have no resources to provide it in a meaningful and ongoing fashion.
I think there are valuable skills to be gained from professional development if the recipient has the right frame of mind. However, from my experience, I would prefer time with teachers in my department and subject area to discuss lessons/units and teaching strategies that work with the current issues in our classrooms. I am not convinced that we utilize the people in our building sufficiently. We are quick to rely on professional development for creative ideas or technological innovation when there are people in are own buildings who are pioneers in the classroom. I believe that using the resources in the building would go a long way to enriching the school culture by recognizing professional strengths. Unfortunately, the money saved by eliminating professional development has not be reallocated to providing this time for teachers, thus causing a professional growth deficit.
Post a Comment