Research Concerning Professional Development Programs in Education

In business, it's location, location, location. In education, it's professional development, professional development, professional development. ~Burke & Meade (2007)

Professional development refers to continuous learning opportunities available to teachers, and other education personnel, through their schools and districts. Effective professional development is crucial to school success and teacher satisfaction. With schools today facing multiple challenges, from working with an increasingly diverse population of students, to integrating new technology in the classroom, to meeting rigorous academic standards and goals, observers have stressed the need for teachers to be able to enhance and build on their instructional knowledge (National Commission on Teaching & America's Future, 1996). According to an article in Phi Delta Kappan, Kelleher (2003) discusses current research on professional development, which has shown that practice must be embedded in teachers' daily work to improve student learning. This thinking has led school boards and administrators across the country to evaluate the results of their investment in adult learning processes. Embedding new found knowledge helps to improve the transference of learning into the classroom. The standardized testing and accountability movement, along with the push to increase the use of data in educational decision making, has intensified the pressure on school administrators to prove that professional development is showing positive results. Educators are compelled to measure our investment in professional development and make data driven decisions to create the professional learning communities necessary to help educational system flourish. Surveying teachers to better understand what they thought of a particular workshop session or guest speaker does not guarantee effective transference in to the classroom and may not result in improved student achievement. Teacher satisfaction is important; however, the questions concerning professional development should revolve around what effect the professional development will have on student learning and the reassurance that the same research based instruction that we require of teachers is being utilized in our implementation of professional development programs. Creating professional development schools is an avenue that is being pursued by many school systems.

With the emerging needs of our schools and the shortages of teachers, many classrooms are filled with career switchers that have been granted licensure in an emergency style of quick train to get a warm body in the classroom; meanwhile student achievement and accountability are in the forefront of educators' missions. Leaders from various agencies came together and decided that the old ways of increasing teacher effectiveness were no longer helping schools to make the necessary gains (Neapolitan & Berkely, 2005). Leaders decided that thinking out of the box was necessary and looked to the guidance and support that could be found at the local universities to aid them in their quest to help train and retain teachers for this era of high stakes standardized testing. In terms of content professional development schools have standards that address the need for ongoing professional development and the critical role that university partnerships play in this era. The concept of everyone learning within a learning community, which is emphasized in the professional development schools model, emphasizes partnerships and is central to best practices outlined by many researchers and change agents (Hargreaves, Earl, Moore, & Manning, 2001; Bellanca, 1995; Deal & Peterson, 1999; DuFour & Eaker, 1998). DuFour & Eaker (1998) stress the need for professional learning communities that collaborate and share a common purpose; improvement strategies are based on efforts to improve and enhance the knowledge skills of organizations. This collaboration builds school capacity and ownership which creates a collective expertise (Neapolitan & Berkely, 2005). Professional development schools have been one method for making a difference in the preparation of teachers and the continued professional growth of educators (Darling-Hammond, 1998). Darling-Hammond (1998) notes that teachers learn best from studying, doing, and reflecting; they learn by collaborating with others as opposed to teaching in isolation. Educators learn through closely examining student work, peer coaching, and communicating successes and failures; this process creates a professional learning community.

The goals of professional development schools fit models of professional development prescribed by leading educational theorists: promoting the development of effective pre-service teachers, increasing student achievement in the public schools, developing strong and collaborative professional relationships, increasing the use of technology to enhance teaching and learning, developing teachers in undertaking leadership roles, and assisting districts and pre-service teachers in determining a strong employment fit (Neapolitan & Berkely, 2005, Teitel, 2003)). The benefits stemming from partnerships produces better working relationships between schools and universities; they are often compared to teaching hospitals bridging the gap between theory and practice and result in renewal of both school systems and universities (Teitel, 2003). Professional development schools revolve around the five standards created by the National Staff Development Council and are summarized by Guskey (2005). If standards-based reforms are to succeed, meaningful professional development is required. Professional development leaders must utilize and understand five essential understandings that are the building blocks for improving student achievement and producing standards-based work through professional learning: (1) standards are not new; (2) standards are a philosophy of learning; (3) ideas are more important than terminology; (4) good ideas can be poorly implemented; and (5) success hinges on what happens in the classroom (Guskey, 2005).

Staff development revolves around building the climate for growth and success; it is a life-long pursuit to improve the quality of education (Zepeda, 1999). Danielson (1996) notes that continued professional development is the mark of a true professional, an ongoing effort that is never completed. It is necessary for educational leaders to possess a moral responsibility to set the conditions for adults to grow and is essential to organizational growth to build capacity; this empowers educators to make meaningful change (Danielson, 1996).

Leaders must encourage educators to pursue lifelong learning; without this construct our children will be shortchanged in the educational process (Zepeda, 1999). The educational leader's role is to assist teachers in finding their passions and “learning” voices (Zepeda, 1999). According to the Report of the National Commission on Teaching and America 's Future (1996, p. iv) “What teachers know and can do is the most important influence on what students learn.” The construct of professional development should encompass three constant variables: context, content, and process ( Caldwell , 1989). Professional development initiatives should address specific needs, theses needs provide the context for the process of events that must occur within the model of development utilized by educational organizations (Caldwell, 1989, Zepeda, 1999).

According to the National Staff Development Council there are several themes that must be present in order to initiate effective professional development programs: staff development must be ongoing, collaborative, research based, driven by data-based decision making, and supported with adequate resources Zepeda, 1999), NSDC, 1997). According to Zepeda (1999), leaders must embody essential qualities to promote life-long learning within high quality educational organizations. Leaders must understand reciprocity; the mutual interchange among the individual both internal and external to the organization. Effective leaders must understand the construct of followership and be secure enough to know that they can be both a leader and a follower; this concept creates people who are committed to purpose, a cause, and a vision of what the school is and can become, (Sergiovanni, (1992). The last aspect of this construct states that courage helps leaders to guide their schools in directions to meet the organizational needs while removing obstacles that might impede meaningful improvement (Zepeda, 1999).

Joyce (1988) writes that at the time of writing his book on professional development, the field is evolving and undergoing a transformation that moves from workshops and sit and get sessions to an ongoing system to enhance educators' knowledge bas of content and practices. The purpose of professional development must be to increase student learning; this will mandate great changes in the workplace by increasing the study of teaching and learning and supporting the communities of members working together for the good of all students (Joyce, 1988).

Only schools that have a passion for learning will have an enduring influence (Covey, 1996). Every enterprise must become learning and teaching institutions; organizations that build in continuous learning in jobs will dominate the 21 st century (Drucker, 1992). The most successful organizations of the future will be learning entities (Senge, 1990). The new problem of change… is what would it take to make the educational system a learning organization; educators must become experts at dealing with change as a normal part of work, not just in relation to the latest policy, but as a way of life (Fullan, 1993). According to DuFour (1998) there are five characteristics involved in professional learning communities; these constructs aid the professional development endeavor: shared mission, vision, and values, collective inquiry, collaborative teams, action orientation and experimentation, and continuous improvement.

In 1994, Mullins writes that program evaluation is of the utmost importance in order to assess the effectiveness of professional development; however, few programs are evaluated as of today. One has to wonder, when so many models exist and profess the need for both formative and summative evaluation, why do educational organizations leave out the important aspect of evaluation. Mullins (1994) and others note that evaluation is important to assess whether the program is responsive to the needs of the organization, discover if current practices should be altered, expanded, or eliminated, and continue to improve the efforts to help educators improve practice and transfer knowledge into the classroom.

All staff have the capacity for professional growth; a culture and climate must be fostered to support an effort that is organic, teacher directed, and sustained throughout the year (Sullivan & Glanz, 2005). To meet the emerging needs of high quality educational organizations teachers need to participate in peer observations, classrooms would serve as demonstration sites, there would be structured opportunities for daily interaction around instructional issues and ongoing reflection that replaces one day workshops, and an abundance of resources housed in an accessible library would be available, and in-house specialists would be developed to build capacity within the organization (Airasian & Gullickson, 1997; Sullivan & Glanz, 2005; Harper, 2007; Quick, 2007). Limited time, funding, and imagination impede this important effort (Sullivan & Glanz, 2005; Harper, 2007; Quick, 2007).

Much of school reform is insufficiently concerned with professional development, the quality of the teaching force, and the working conditions of teachers (Cohen & Scheer, 2003). Teacher centered schools focus on recruiting, training, and supporting novice and veteran teachers; in a truly teacher centered organization attrition rates would subside and there would be less of a need for career switchers (Cohen & Scheer, 2003). There is little call for second-career lawyers, second-career doctors, and second-career architects (Cohen & Scheer, 2003).