Professional Development On the Cheap - Suggestion 1 - Content Collaboration Time

There has been a lot of focus on professional development for teachers in light of all the new technology, 1:1 initiatives, Common Core Standards...the list goes on. It's definitely a concern because in order for anything new or different to be effective in the classroom, teachers need training and practice. Which of course has many schools and districts in a bind since everyone is also in the midst of budget constraints.

The question then is how do we pay for the necessary professional development when we don't have the money to do so? One answer is look within - good professional development doesn't have to cost money.  There are ways to utilize the resources in your own building or district and get quality professional development.  All that's really required is a little time, effort and commitment.

Having been both a teacher, administrator, and now a provider of professional development, I have had a wide range of experiences with professional development and the many models that are out there. Each week I thought I would offer one suggestion for providing professional development on the cheap - looking within your school or district and using the resources you currently have to improve and support teacher change.

Let's start with defining professional development (from wikipedia ):

 Professional Development - refers to skills and knowledge attained for both personal development and career advancement. Professional development encompasses all types of facilitated learning opportunities, ranging from college degrees to formal coursework, conferences and informal learning opportunities situated in practice. It has been described as intensive and collaborative, ideally incorporating an evaluative stage ^[1] There are a variety of approaches to professional development, including consultation, coaching, communities of practice, lesson study, mentoring, reflective supervision and technical assistance

I think teachers in particular lose sight of the fact that professional development is for personal development and growth, probably because so often the professional development they experience is mandated and irrelevant.

This weeks suggestion is something I have experienced myself and something I have seen personally be very successful. The suggestion is to provide designated planning time, where teachers who teach the same content (i.e Algebra teachers or 1st grade teachers) meet together and collaborate on new strategies or skills. It does require a commitment from administration to provide the time, and a commitment from the teachers involved to use that time constructively, but when it does happen, the differences in both teachers and student learning is powerful.

Collaboration on new strategies or skills can mean something like everyone deciding to use a cooperative group strategy to teach a specific lesson, or using a new technology tool as a warm-up, or trying out an exit pass at the end of a specific lesson. Everyone focuses on learning together about that strategy or tool in their time together, plans the lesson or warm-up or review...whatever the focus is, and then everyone tries it in their classroom and comes back and reflects on what happened. Maybe they look at student work, or discuss the problems that might have occurred and how to address those, or maybe it went really well for a few and they share the differences in what they might have done.  The importance is everyone is focused on a similar change/strategy, they try it, share the results and then add to, improve, do a similar lesson or expand to something new. In my experience this works well if these content teams are meeting at least once a week together and trying one or two small changes within that week for discussion the next week.

Learning and practicing and reflecting together to improve instructional practice - slow and steady change. The collaboration and support from peers go a long way in helping teachers feel motivated and empowered to change practice. Creating this culture of collaboration is one way to provide professional development and growth and promote slow, consistent change and improvement in instructional practice. And all it costs is a little time and commitment.

"The Assessment Tail is Wagging The Dog" - Reflections on Francis Gilberts LWF2012 Talk

(I cannot believe I haven't posted for a week! My goal of at least 2 posts a week, preferably more, seems to be getting more difficult, especially as my travel schedule picks up.  I will have to be more diligent.  The good thing about the travel though is I am out and about talking with teachers, teaching myself, and so getting some fodder for my posts.  This should get the creative juices going).

I wanted to reflection on another talk from the Learning without Frontiers 2012 because I find them quite thought provoking, especially as I go back and re-listen to them.  (See my previous 2 reflections, "Technology Is Neutral" and Mobile Devices In Education). The talk I want to focus on this post is from Francis Gilbert, a teacher in the UK. Francis gave a great talk called Escaping the Education Matrix, which I have posted below.



I agree with all Francis' points, and, even though he was speaking from a UK perspective, I found what he said about assessment and teacher evaluations creating a 'regulatory' matrix that controls the ways in which teachers and students operate in school and which defines and impacts teacher and student self-esteem to be applicable to the US educational arena as well.

I want to focus on the assessment component he speaks of (standardized testing as well as teacher observation/evaluation) which directly creates  the "regulatory discourses" that control teachers, or create the "matrix" in which they live in and teach in,which is directly related to self-esteem. As Francis puts it "the assessment tail is wagging the dog" and "creates the atmosphere we are creating for our education system".  Meaning that assessment is dominating everything that goes on in education, and as a result, we forget the intrinsic reason for education and why teachers do what they do.

Francis' gives an example of a teacher who had a heart-attack as a result of a low rating on an observation, which immediately made me think of all the horrible things going on currently here with NYC posting the ratings of teachers based on standardized test scores (read these two related stories on "the worst teacher in NYC": The True Story of Pascale Mauclair and Value-Added Evaluation Hurts Teaching). This trend of rating teachers based on the standardized test scores is becoming prevalent (Texas is about to do the same), and it is not going to improve anything, but rather, as Francis' points out, ruin the self-esteem of teachers and make us lose site of the purpose of education.

So, what is the purpose of education?


Certainly, judging quality education and teaching based on an observation at one point in time or a test score given on one day at one point in time (standardized testing) disregards the complexity of our educational system and the complexity of good teaching. I completely agree with Francis' when he says "we need to question discourse that reinforces inequality and creates false-hierarchies", which is very much what these standardized test scores, NCLB, RTTT and publishing teacher ratings are doing.  Francis' talks about education being about experiential learning, where teachers and students are engaged in sharing, promoting, stimulating knowledge and focused on individual identity.  Let's get back to that type of teaching and learning.

Demoralizing teachers is NOT going to make things better - it's going to put the focus on minimal skills needed to pass the test, it's going to drive quality teachers out of the classroom, and it's going to leave us with a shortage of teachers and a more dire situation than we already have.  It's going to create stressful classroom environments, for both teachers and students. Teachers are going to be focused on that single test score or evaluation for which they are being judged. They won't be focused on quality teaching and learning, rather, they will focus making sure their students do well on the test.  It's NOT THE SAME THING!

As an example, my 11th grade daughter came home yesterday complaining to me that for the past week or so, her English teacher has been going over test taking strategies (how to eliminate answers on MC for example) because of the Texas Assessment test coming up tomorrow in English (TAKS).  Quote from my daughter: "It's so stupid and boring - a week learning how to guess correctly and set up a paper for a four hour test that is so stupid and easy to begin with, all because her job depends on the score we get".

If my daughter's class has great scores, does this mean the teacher is a good teacher? What about the rest of the year?  Can my daughter read a story and analyze it?  Can she write a logical argument or research paper? This example simply supports Francis' point that the educational culture we currently work under creates an atmosphere ruled by "anxiety, dependent learners, managers,motivation by fear, depression, closed-off, and obedience".  I don't know about you, but I don't want that to be the culture in which my daughters have to learn.