January 2011 Archives

StudentsFirst, the advocacy group led by former D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee, recently released its Policy Agenda. The agenda, called "A Challenge to States and Districts: Policies That Put Children First," lays out three policy priorities for elevating the teaching profession, empowering parents, and getting the greatest return on investment for the taxpayer's dollar.

Unfortunately, we found that the StudentsFirst Policy Agenda puts professional learning last.

While the Policy Agenda mentions the importance of professional development in its introductory statement, it fails to provide any guidance on developing policies that promote effective professional learning based on students' learning needs. We respectfully recommend that StudentsFirst consider adding the following three items to their policy priorities on teaching:

1. Require that professional development offered to educators is based on students' learning needs as identified by formative and summative assessment data.


2. Require that states, districts, and schools evaluate the impact of professional development on teacher practice and student learning.


3. Require that professional learning take place in collaborative team environments during the teachers' workday where the knowledge, skills, and practices of the best teachers are transferred to all teachers within the school.

By adding these three policy solutions to its agenda, StudentsFirst will get closer to its objective of transforming public education for all children.

M. René Islas
Policy Advisor, Learning Forward

Posted by Learning Forward at 10:37 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

We all know that the school is the site for student learning. We may engage in substantial discourse about what students are to learn, how they are to learn it, and when, but student learning remains the ultimate goal.

We also know that the most significant factor in whether student learning is taking place at school is teaching quality. Not just teacher quality, but teaching quality.

If teaching quality is the most important influence on student learning, how do we maintain, increase, enhance, or improve teaching quality? The answer is continuous professional learning. And the most powerful setting or environment for continuous professional learning is the community of professional learners.

Where this community focuses its attention is key to improving student learning. Effective communities of professional learners begin their work by studying the wide array or of student outcome data available to them. As they study the data, they determine where students have performed well, and where student performance shows disappointing outcomes.

While we take time to celebrate our successes for our students' results, we also recognize our responsibility for the areas where they were less successful. Since students did not learn well from the content and instructional strategies that we used, we look to another way of understanding and/or teaching what they didn't get. If we simply repeat the same efforts, we should expect the same results.

As a result, the staff turns it attention to exploring multiple solutions (new practices, programs, processes) that will better serve students' learning needs. After extensive study, a new and different way is decided; these steps occur in any typical school improvement process.

At this point in the professional learning community, the journey takes a hard right turn as the community recognizes that these practices are new to them, and acknowledges that they do not know precisely what the new practices will look like in their own theatre of the classroom.This is the moment of truth! The staff realizes that while they have identified new strategies that according to their research should produce better results, they must learn how to implement the strategies appropriately., The staff will undertake its own intentional learning of the new practice so as to be able to use the new way well with students.

For decades of school improvement activity, we have glossed over the needs of staff members to learn deeply and thoroughly what new practices will look like when they are implemented in a high-quality way. Both staff development and change process research have informed us that continuous staff learning and support is necessary for successful classroom implementation.

This is the intentional or deliberate learning that is the purpose of and focus of attention in the community of professional learners. This is why the "L" is in the middle word in PLCs for adult learning must define the community's work for it to truly impact students' learning.

Shirley Hord
Scholar Laureate, Learning Forward

Posted by Learning Forward at 10:54 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

For years, state departments of education and courts have struggled with educational adequacy. A report summarized in the Wisconsin Center for Education Research's Fall 2010 WCER Research Highlights compares the cost of educational adequacy across all 50 states, something researchers and economists have striven to accomplish for many years. The variations in state funding for education have made this task challenging until now.

In the report, Allan Odden, Lawrence Picus, and Michael Goetz define adequacy as the provision of resources to schools to make "substantial improvements in student performance." They further explain that, while individual school performance expectations may vary based on current performance, substantial improvement means raising the percentage of students who achieve proficiency and advanced proficiency standards.

What is important to note is the recommendation about where to begin implementation. The report urges states to consider multi-year plans for increasing funding over time. Furthermore, it urges states to begin with investments that will directly impact instruction, primarily the professional development components of instructional coaches, added resources for teacher development, and additional days for teacher professional development.

By calling first for investments in professional development, and especially professional development closest to classroom practice, Odden and his colleagues acknowledge that ongoing professional learning for educators is a priority investment for improving student performance. By investing in instructional coaches, opportunities for learning, and additional time for learning, school systems will invest directly in improving the quality of teaching students experience each day. Investments in professional development establish a foundation of effective teaching that will outlast any short-term initiatives for improvement.

If investments in professional learning are aligned with Learning Forward's definition of and standards for professional development, the result will be schools that build collective responsibility for student achievement, while strengthening teaching and increasing student academic success.

Joellen Killion
Deputy Executive Director, Learning Forward

Posted by Learning Forward at 10:02 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

A few weeks ago I was invited to participate in an Ed Week live chat. In preparation, I decided to do some advance planning, anticipating some of the questions and preparing responses. You can access the entire chat transcript here, but I wanted to post just a few of the questions that I'm frequently asked. These answers may be a little short - but I hope they get some conversation going.

Q: Why do school systems still rely on one-shot workshops?
A. One-day workshops can be useful in providing foundational knowledge and skills. The problem is when districts either 1) use these workshops to define their PD approach; or 2) hold teachers accountable for implementing what is introduced in a one-shot workshop providing no support for implementation.

Q: What types of professional development have the greatest impact on teachers?
A: This might seem like a simple question, but it isn't. The goals of the professional development are what matters. Professional development that impacts teaching and learning occurs over a sustained period of time, includes developing knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors, and provides intensive support for implementation within the classroom. This form of support includes coaching, peer observation and feedback, principal support for creating conditions for changing practice, and time for collaboration and reflection to assess the effectiveness of the new learning on teaching practices and student learning.

Q: There is an impression that high-quality PD involves having teachers working on issues for a significant length of time, with opportunities to revisit material, etc. How do you get school systems to commit time and resources over an extended period of time?
A: First, examine time that currently exists within the schedule that includes faculty meetings, planning time, professional development time, etc. Always share information on the impact of your investments. Providing information about how other high-performing countries use workday time is one way to provide information to districts and policy makers about the importance of time.
Our book, Finding Time for Professional Learning, is another valuable resource.

Q: How do you evaluate professional development?
A: First, ensure you have something worth measuring. Second, get clear on the measurable results you are seeking. Third, choose an appropriate design for evaluating. There are a number of resources on our web site to help you in this area.

If you've got a question about professional learning, we'd love to hear from you.

Stephanie Hirsh
Executive Director, Learning Forward

Posted by Learning Forward at 10:43 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The third and final phase of a study exploring the state of professional learning in the U.S. was released at Learning Forward's 2010 Annual Conference in December. Conducted for Learning Forward by researchers at Stanford University's Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education, Teacher Professional Development in the United States: Case Studies of State Policies and Strategies explores professional development policies and strategies in four states: Colorado, Missouri, New Jersey, and Vermont.

The study concludes that these states, which take an active role in professional development, have improved both professional development and student achievement.

The study identifies four key factors that determine the impact of state policy on professional development:

1. The states' leadership for professional development, characterized by strong focus on professional development and engaging stakeholders in decisions about professional development;


2. Investment in infrastructure for professional development, such as regional centers, initiatives for professional development, and strong partnerships;


3. Resources designated for professional development through direct, indirect, and leveraging federal funding;


4. Leveraging intermediaries and outside organizations such as professional associations and independent providers.

The four states used a number of strategies to affect professional development. They implemented multiple accountability systems. They had systems to monitor participation in and quality of professional development. They required mentoring and induction programs that provided intensive professional development to novice teachers and their mentors. They emphasized the importance of collaboration among educators through implementation of professional learning community models. They engaged professional organizations in advancing professional development and used partnerships with intermediary organizations to support instructional improvement. Finally, each of the states used much-needed federal resources available under No Child Left Behind, particularly Title I and II funds, to support professional development.

The study's authors identify several state policy implications emerging from the study. They recommend that states:

• Develop a common and clearly articulated vision for professional development that permeates policy and practice;


• Implement effective monitoring of professional development quality;


• Establish mentoring and induction requirements that link to and create a foundation for ongoing professional learning;


• Build an infrastructure of organizations to support professional development; and


• Ensure stability of resources for professional development.

Leaving professional development solely to the purview of school districts without strong state-level parameters, standards, overlapping systems of accountability, monitoring, and resources, leaves to chance one of the most substantive pathways to strengthen educator practice and increase student achievement.

Joellen Killion
Deputy Executive Director, Learning Forward

Posted by Learning Forward at 10:10 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

This is the third entry in a series documenting the effort of Spring Creek Elementary in Richardson, Texas to implement professional learning communities. You can read Part 1 of the Spring Creek story here, and Part 2 here.

I checked in with Spring Creek Elementary's staff late last year to see how they were progressing on their professional learning community journey. My daughter Leslie commented that everyone has been incredibly busy. Many good conversations are occurring, and exciting ways to improve teaching are being explored. As I listened to Leslie describe the school's efforts, I recognized many comments typically associated with the early phases of any change initiative. PLCs create new challenges for schools and we need to think about how to help schools prepare for their implementation. The energy created by initial brainstorming can lead to many good ideas; and yet staging and timing have significant implications for long-term success.

Leslie commented that the PLC initiative is creating lots of energy in the school. As you recall, she is chairing the "Enrichment" team. Her team just completed the first round of Enrichment Clusters. It was a huge success, with all staff and students excited to focus on something other than state objectives. On the other hand, it demanded a lot of extra time and effort. The leadership team is taking time to review the effort and determine their next steps.

Leslie's principal shared that, through informal conversations with teachers, she sees similar enthusiasm for the PLC. She is concerned about her teachers' workload and continues to seek ways to give teachers time to reflect and appreciate all they have accomplished. She also shared that the district had adopted a new initiative, called 2020 Vision. As one part of the initiative, each district school has been challenged to increase its use of technology in the classroom. Teachers have been given air slates and mini companion computers, and staff development to support integration. The district also has a new reading program that requires additional planning and time to implement.

School leaders are asking the right questions about how to integrate the new initiatives and the PLC. How can the PLC become the coordinating structure for everything they are trying to accomplish for the students?

Michael Fullan describes one successful approach to change as "ready, fire, aim." Schools do lots of "firing" during the readiness phase, and then they ultimately find their aim. I am confident they will find it at Spring Creek.

Stephanie Hirsh
Executive Director, Learning Forward

Posted by Learning Forward at 10:26 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Findings from a survey of state education agencies published Jan. 6 by the Center on Education Policy reveal that states may undercut their own implementation of the Common Core State Standards.

On the one hand, states say they adopted the standards because of their "rigor" and "potential to guide statewide education improvement." However, states are also "expecting, rather than requiring, districts to...make complementary changes in curriculum and teacher programs." Districts may or may not develop new curricula, materials, and instructional practices, provide relevant professional development, and implement standards-related teacher induction programs and evaluations.

Maybe state education agencies deserve some sympathy. Local school officials frequently deride them for being heavy-handed and intrusive. Sometimes that is true, but sometimes when school districts want to fend off complaints from disgruntled educators or parents, they use their state department of education as a convenient scapegoat: "The state requires us to do it..."

If one thing is certain in efforts to improve student performance, it is that courageous leadership is necessary from each level of school governance--local, state, and federal. Adopting the Common Core State Standards is an important step, but that is not enough. States have been down this road many, many times in the past. They know that when school districts are left to choose for themselves whether to take difficult steps to improve education, some will not do so. Often, these are districts with persistent records of low performance, and many students from low-income families.

The Common Core State Standards will not have the impact state education agencies want unless states do four things: (1) require school districts to take actions that states know are essential for effective standards implementation; (2) provide high quality and sustained technical assistance to support districts' implementation of the standards; (3) monitor and assess standards implementation in each school district; and (4) publicly report the status and results of districts' standards implementation during each of the next five years.

The Common Core State Standards are not stand-alone reform. They are simply statements that describe what students should know and be able to do as a result of their public education. The standards are a challenging vision, but that is all they are. Without more effective curricula, professional development, and instruction, students will not develop the knowledge and skills necessary to perform at standard. State education agencies know this, and they should not leave it to school districts to decide for themselves whether they will "make complementary changes" that will determine whether the standards facilitate improved student performance, or frustrate it.

Hayes Mizell
Distinguished Senior Fellow, Learning Forward

Posted by Learning Forward at 12:30 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

On the Washington Post's Answer Sheet blog Jan. 5, guest blogger Mike Rose posted a dozen education "resolutions" for 2011. Rose, author of Why School? Reclaiming Education for All of Us, included among his resolutions, "To assure that teacher professional development gets increased and thoughtful support. For this to happen, we will need at the least: a) A major shift from the last decade's punitive accountability system toward a program of growth and development. b) A rejection of typical development fare: a consultant jets in, lays down a scheme, a grid, a handful of techniques and aphorisms, then jets out. c) A replacement of said fare with ongoing, comprehensive, intellectually rich programs of the kind offered by the National Writing Project and the National Science Foundation."

We at Learning Forward wholeheartedly agree with the resolution to ensure that more teachers experience the kind of professional development that advances their knowledge and skills and helps all students achieve. And we offer our own list of 10 resolutions for this year:

1. In 2011, more educators will engage in professional learning that transforms their practice and turns them into advocates for effective professional learning for everyone.

2. Learning Forward's definition for professional learning will become the framework for strengthening professional learning in school systems across the country.

3. Policymakers will move their attention from debating the connection between professional development and student learning to demanding that substantial investments in professional development are awarded based on measurable goals and benchmarks for assessing progress.

4. The focus of ESEA reauthorization will shift from the laundry list of acceptable uses of professional development funds to investments in school-based and on-the-job focused professional learning.

5. District and union leaders will craft agreements that ensure every educator has substantive time on a weekly basis for collaborative professional learning, joint lesson planning, assessment analysis, and problem solving.

6. Comprehensive and thoughtful professional development plans to assist all educators with the transition to new standards and assessments will be adopted in all states.

7. Key leaders from all sectors will understand that investing time and resources into professional development as the most important and effective turnaround strategy.

8. Teachers and principals will be offered attractive career paths and opportunities based on their commitment to continuous improvement and the applications of their learning to their work.

9. All schools will aspire to become learning schools--places where teachers and students apply standards of professional development in a professional learning community setting to advance performance for both staff and students.

10. Everyone will understand that the phrase professional development addresses individual development, school improvement, and organization/program implementation; and that all three are necessary if schools are to achieve the intended results for all students.

Stephanie Hirsh
Executive Director, Learning Forward

Posted by Learning Forward at 12:24 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Learning Forward has decided to contribute to the National Conference of State Legislatures' (NCSL) Foundation for State Legislators Partners Project on Educator Effectiveness. The foundation has chosen to support a Partners Project focusing on "Ensuring Effective Teachers and Principals for All Students." With many state legislators eager to move forward with education reform, NCSL wants to ensure that they do so with the best resources and information at their disposal.

This yearlong Partners Project will match foundation members who choose to join the partnership with state legislators and legislative staff to provide information, resources and tools to legislators as they address teacher and principal quality and effectiveness. The end product will be an NCSL Educator Effectiveness State Policy Toolkit for legislators and staff.

From the conversation at the project's inaugural meeting last month, it was evident that everyone involved has a sincere desire to identify policy options that are supportive of effective teaching. Where many states already have education effectiveness efforts in motion, it has been considerable time since NCSL has made the topic a priority. I am optimistic about our decision to make our involvement in this effort a priority for the coming year. I know we have valuable information to share over the course of the partnership, and I'm hopeful that the partnership will yield sound recommendations, relationships, and road maps for influencing state policy into the future.

At the December NCSL meeting, David Spence of the Southern Regional Education Board indicated that while many students are taking courses recommended as college preparatory, they are not getting the right skills and knowledge to be successful. His advice for states included developing one set of standards, and providing effective teacher development to ensure that educators know these standards.

This recognition of the importance of teacher professional development was contrasted by a presentation from Corporate Voices for Working Families. Its concern is driven by the statistic that for every 100 students who start ninth grade, only 18 complete four years of college. And those who never go to or complete college are not prepared for entry-level jobs. This group offered ten recommendations to state legislatures, but did not address the teacher development that is critical for the successful implementation of the recommendations. This serves as a reminder that anyone who has ideas about how we need to improve schools needs to understand that changing the system requires change in the people who will deliver the reforms, and that requires professional development. These improvements will not happen without it; and it must be addressed in all these conversations.

So I return to the purpose for joining the partnership. One way we will measure our success is when major reform initiatives and plans for actions no longer minimize the level of professional development and support that will be required to achieve success. We will carry that message and look for opportunities to institutionalize higher quality professional development for all educators into state policy. If you have suggestions for us to consider, do not hesitate to share them.

Stephanie Hirsh
Executive Director, Learning Forward

Posted by Learning Forward at 10:41 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Over the past two years, there has been increasing talk among policy analysts, legislators, and education reform advocates about "teacher effectiveness." This phrase means different things to different people, but in some circles it is a euphemism for more rigorous evaluation of teachers' performance, and the termination of teachers who are ineffective, incompetent, or who do not meet certain performance expectations. Right now 20 states are overhauling their teacher evaluation systems, and throughout the country there will almost certainly be greater scrutiny of teachers' performance in coming years.

As part of increasing attention to teacher evaluation, some people have invoked "professional development" as a potential response to a determination that teachers are not performing effectively. In Wyoming, a local assistant superintendent speculated on the implementation of new state guidelines that require teachers to demonstrate how they use student performance data "to improve teacher and learning." He said, "The principal may look at the data and say, 'I see a consistent trend over time that your students aren't doing well in this particular area, so I want you to have some professional development.'" This view seems to illustrate a narrow understanding of professional development that is limited to its role as a fixer, rather than as a catalyst for addressing students' learning challenges.

In other discussions of teacher evaluation, references to professional development seem to be throwaway lines intended to counter concerns about fairness and other potential vagaries of teacher evaluation. It is as though the role of professional development should merely be one component of due process in which teachers are given a chance, or repeated chances, to improve their performance before their possible termination. And some of the people who, in other contexts, question the utility and effectiveness of professional development are the same people who cite professional development as an appropriate and potentially effective strategy to improve the performance of teachers who are found wanting.

In my view, the references to professional development as related to teacher evaluation reveal a profound lack of understanding about what professional development is, its many and diverse manifestations, and what it can and cannot accomplish in regards to the effectiveness of teachers' knowledge, skills, behaviors, and practice. What we need In discussions about teacher evaluation is serious attention to whether there is an appropriate role for professional development and, if so, what that role should be and what it can realistically accomplish.

Hayes Mizell
Distinguished Senior Fellow, Learning Forward

Posted by Learning Forward at 10:24 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend