Before I begin my discussion of this weeks readings, I must disclose that I hold a somewhat jaded association with professional development based on my years as a classroom teacher. Professional development was time intensive, and regularly did not address topics I cared about. Though always an over-achiever as a student, during professional development I felt like an apathetic student sitting in the back of the classroom leaning my chair against the wall. It was not always this way. When I first started teaching, I sat at the front of the room, pen and notebook open and eager to be filled. Let this serve as a precautionary tale.
This week, one of our readings was Semandeni's artile about teacher-driven professional development (2010). In this model, teachers were able to select and help lead professional development topics to target their own personal areas for growth. This is an excellent idea in practice; with the rising emphasis on differentiation in the classroom, it only makes sense that professionals should be offered the same specialized opportunities for growth. But there are a few caveats that should be minded:
1. Professional development should be a tool for growing, not assessment.
At my school, we were empowered to pick strands to work on (I hope you sense the scarcasm...), but with the administration it sometimes felt that we were filing our own warrants. With at-will contracts and frequently patronistic leaders, if I admitted weakness, I felt that it could be used agaist me, and I saw more than one teacher chased out mid-year for what frankly seemed like administrative bullying.
This is why I loved the atmosphere described in Kristin's article about professional development in new technologies. Because Kristin was not an administrator, she was able to create a relaxed environment that allowed for play in addition to growth. She understood what teachers needed to excell, and provided it to them in a way that was non-threatening.
It should be kept in mind, however that not all teacher-led instruction was without pressure. At one point, my team teacher and I were identified as meeting the standards of the administration in terms of assessment and lesson planning. We were then asked to lead professional development in a thinly veiled attempt to pressure other teachers to work the way we were. Not only did teachers still feel the "big brother" behind our professional development, it created discomfort in our professional community. The difference is clear; my colleague and I were not allowed to lead professional development that we were passionate about, but rather on what the administration wanted to see others doing.
2. Choice should be balanced with observation and guided growth.
Selecting and independent plan also felt less personal. We had full time "master teachers" who observed us and led professional development. As a new teacher, I wanted someone with more experience to observe my teaching and tell me the things that I didn't notice I was messing up on. I was a teacher who would pick at myself and make constant adjustments improvements and needed feedback ouside of monthly professional development meeting.
3. In giving options, allow for depth, as well as breadth.
My training program optioned 'menu items,' at our monthly professional development days, but we were rarely offered materials "at level" because they worked to develop bredth, not depth. I often found myself going to sessions I was interested in, but being disappointed because it didn't add anything to my knowledge base, but just patted me on the back for what I was already doing. Development cannot be fulfilled in a single session. Items should not only be differentiatied, but also scaffolded to meet teachers where they are.
Whew. I didn't mean to be so negative in my final post for SI 643. Let me leave you with one story of professional development gone-right. At a friend's school, teachers were allowed to guide their own professional development without administration. At the beginning of the year, they selected cohorts based on similar goals. They met monthly and had their own bookclubs for professional development materials where they shared readings, ideas, and best practices. Not only did my friend feel she had improved, she also felt like she was part of a learning community and had a lot of on-site support on campus when she had questions.
I find your comments on PD as a teacher very interesting. When I think of PD, I think of teachers. I suppose there must be PD for other professions, too....
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with your comment about allowing for depth as well as breadth. I get very frustrated that often times PD and online tutorials give no more than introductory skills. Where are the ninja skills, I ask you? If someone who has expertise in a topic is giving a workshop, why are they focusing on baseline skills? While it is possible to allow people to hide and stagnate by focusing only on things they are good at, we must also allow people to explore their interests. Where's the balance?
Yeah I remember the twice yearly PD days that essentially taught non ninja skills. They were so boring. More importantly they were only twice a year. How were we supposed to learn from them.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that as a new teacher admitting a weakness felt like grounds for getting a U rating which would mean no tenure. I can imagine that as a new employee anywhere be it a library or a school this could be a fear. I also agree with your point that too often getting assigned a topic that the administrator wants you to teach can put a bulls eye on your back especially if you are a new staff member.
One of the things I hated most about my first year of teaching was the feedback I received from my "mentor" teacher, a retired teacher who roamed the district to evaluate new teachers. Every time she came into my classroom, it would pretty much be barely controlled chaos, and the only things she ever said to me were 'you're doing fine' and 'clean up your classroom.' Granted, the students weren't throwing staplers and my classroom was messy, but seriously?
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I totally agree with your caveats. Choice, guidance, growth, and depth are important pieces of the productive PD puzzle, but I believe too many administrators fail to take these factors into account.
It is important to realize that even innovative and "good" approaches can be commandeered to produce bad results, or just be a sheen for accomplishing what the people in charge really want. This is probably one of the trickiest areas of professional development-- making sure it's actually serving the goals of the professionals who need development, and not just the interests of the people who mandate it and benefit from its existence.
ReplyDeleteI like hearing about your view of this from your own personal experience as a teacher, especially since I don't have any experience of my own to draw upon right now. I think you make a good point that the community and atmosphere of professional development programs can matter a lot. It's not just about the strategies being used, but also about the intent behind them.
ReplyDelete