Professional Development Worth Paying for

The National Center on Education Statistics projects that, in 2009, nearly 3.3 million teachers will teach in public schools across this country. That's a projected increase of 36,000 teachers over 2008, or about 1% of those in the classroom. If improving the quality of instruction truly is a goal, we cannot ignore the fact that 99% of staff are already working with kids. Certainly, improving teacher preparation programs can impact that 1% or so of teachers entering the profession each year, and over the years, those numbers do add up--but we also need to pay greater attention to developing teachers already in our classrooms. Determining Cost-Benefit While state leaders understand the value of professional development, they also need to consider the costs. Such costs are some of the most difficult to calculate. The complex way in which professional development is interwoven into recertification and local salary schedules and included in the required number of school days makes it difficult to pinpoint what's spent and who pays. For policy makers, cost increases the importance of showing results. Some states try to ensure program quality by accepting recertification credits only from approved program providers. Until recently, evaluation based on results of those and other programs has been scarce. For the most part, educators have received credit for "seat time," with little attention to changes in instructional practices. If state leaders are going to pony up for improving the instructional skills of teachers and principals, they want to know that their dollars are well-spent. The same can be said for taxpayer parents, who increasingly find their children at home on early-release or late-start days. They want a reasonable assurance that noninstructional time is well-spent and is making a difference to their kids. A growing number of policy makers are insisting on evaluation--particularly tied to increased student learning. Equating Quality with Impact According to A Vision for Quality Professional Development in All Vermont Schools, "Quality professional development has the power to increase educators' knowledge of academic content and teaching skills, while changing what educators believe about student learning and how they interact with students. Powerful professional development can transform schools into places in which all adults and students are deeply engaged in learning and making meaning of their lives. " How can we tell what's powerful? The National Staff Development Council (NSDC), author of the Standards for Staff Development, asserts that "If staff development is to improve student learning, many levels of change are required, each with its own particular evaluation challenges. Unfortunately, a great deal of staff development evaluation begins and ends with the assessment of participants' immediate reactions to workshops and courses. While this information may be helpful to staff development planners, good evaluation design also gathers additional information. Beyond the 1) initial collection of data on participants' reactions, evaluation must focus on 2) teachers' acquisition of new knowledge and skills, 3) how that learning affects teaching, and in turn 4) how those changes in practice affect student learning. In addition, evaluators may also be asked to provide evidence of 5) how staff development has affected school culture and other organizational structures. " Tied to Student Learning More states are beginning to focus on evaluation. Arkansas' criteria for evaluating the impact of professional development include improving student achievement on state assessments, other related indicators as defined by the state's accountability system, and evaluations of professional development. In Iowa, 2007 legislation requires the state department to collaborate with local districts to establish teacher development academies for school-based teams of teachers and administrators. …