Effective Professional Development

There are many ideas to consider when determining what we mean by the term effective professional development. Often, there are competing agendas where facilitators are encouraged to take learners to a specific point of knowing, and at the same time foster a feeling of professional inquiry. These seem to be competing agendas, and it is the role of the facilitator to navigate what is known generically about professional learning, and what the community of learners you are responsible for needs.

Traditional Professional Development Traditional models of professional development have an inherent

agenda setting dilemma, where professional developers want to see teachers' practice change in a particular direction but want teachers to ‘buy in’ or ‘own their own learning’. This is similar to classroom teacher dilemma in curriculum implementation, where inquiry and honouring student questions are the most powerful forms of learning yet there is a curriculum to cover (Putnam & Borko, 2000). In traditional professional development, its purpose is to introduce teachers to specific content, where teachers must be taught how to use a new program or method. Someone from outside the classroom has decided what is good for students (Richardson, 1992). Teachers are treated as conduits of information who are expected to follow directions given by experts (Cobb, 1988). These directions focus on the content and methods of teaching (Richardson, 1992), where instructional issues are fixed by ingenious materials and strategies designed to help learners acquire knowledge (Cobb, 1988). Success in this type of professional development is measured by the degree of implementation (Richardson, 1992).

Effective Pedagogy in Professional Learning

Professional InquiryEffective classroom pedagogy begins with dilemmas and questions. In

a mathematics classroom, content presented must be problematic to encourage students to wonder why, inquire, search for solutions, and resolve incongruities (Van de Walle & Folk, 2005). Teachers are being asked to create learning environments where participants learn both content and process. Why would adult learning be any different? By empowering teachers

1 | P a g e

to be meaningfully involved in determining which changes they will enact, both teachers and facilitators will gain new insights into teaching and learning (Putnam & Borko, 2000). We cannot tell children how to think or what habits to acquire (Van de Walle & Folk, 2005). The same is true of adult learners.

Building CommunityA common thread in lists describing effective professional

development is that they include the creation of a learning community. A discourse community is a group of people that provide ideas, theories, and concepts that an individual adopts to help make sense of their own experiences. Learning is not uni-directional, as the community changes ideas and ways of thinking as new members bring their own thoughts to the discourse. In order for teachers to construct new roles, they need to belong to a discourse community with teachers from different backgrounds where they can form new insights into teaching and learning (Putnam & Borko, 2000). The content or specific directions for change are not predetermined (Richardson, 1992), as they are complex and not well developed (Ball, 1996). Higher level thought allows teachers to think about the gap between beliefs and practice and narrow it (Ernest, 1988). The measure of success is whether change takes place in eyes of participants (Richardson, 1992).

It creates points of tension when another person's story is not the same as our own, as we can "mistake their feelings for the feelings of the other" (Denzin, 1984 p. 134 as cited in Hargreaves, p. 968). It "is a pervasive and chronic feature of everyday interactions where people's identities differ and human engagement are not based on the kind of shared experience that fosters close and common understanding that offers the chance to bridge the difference" (Hargreaves, p. 968). Hargreaves recognizes that classroom reform requires an emotional understanding and shared emotional experience among teachers. By developing long standing relationships, teachers can prevent emotional misunderstanding (2005).

Construction of KnowledgeEffective professional development involves teachers having the

opportunity to make sense and construct their own knowledge. Richardson’s belief that teachers can construct their own learning is called the Organizational Development Approach (1992). All people construct or give meaning to things they perceive or think about. For both student and teacher learners, the more connections that are made through reflective thinking, the better and more long-term the understanding. Van de Walle & Folk recognize that if minds are not actively thinking, nothing happens

2 | P a g e

(2005). Teachers and students give meaning to each other’s words and actions as they interact (Cobb, 1988). Professional discourse helps teachers explore their own beliefs and knowledge, reconstruct philosophy and alter practice (Richardson, 1992), with the level of thought and reflection being key to changing any approach. Discourse allows teachers to reconcile beliefs and practice (Ernest, 1988). In the Organizational Development Approach, teachers are professionals who take responsibility for their own learning and practices (Cobb, 1988).

Descriptors of Effective Professional Learning

Key ComponentsEffective professional development attempts to reduce the barriers to

change, emphasize teacher learning, and encourage professional reflection. Higgins & Parsons (2009) have identified key components of professional learning, determining that it must

focus on subject matter knowledge; increase understanding of how students learn that subject; and encompass how to represent and teach content (Borko, 2004; Cohen &

Hill, 2000; Putnam & Borko, 2007 as cited in Higgins & Parsons, p. 232); and

challenge teacher beliefs (Ball & Cohen, 1999; Putnam & Borko, 1997, as cited in Higgins & Parsons, p. 232); and

raise teacher expectation of students (Bishop et al., 2003; Phillips et al., 2002; Timperley, Phillips, & Wiseman, 2003 as cited in Higgins & Parsons, p. 232); and

emphasize every day classroom practice (Cohen & Hill, 2001; Mitchell & Cubey, 2003; Putnam & Borko, 1997; Timperley et al, 2003 as cited in Higgins & Parsons, p. 232); and

use records of practice to build teacher communities (Borko, 2004; Seago, 2004 as cited in Higgins & Parsons, p. 232).

Features of Mathematics Professional DevelopmentCwikla (2004) has attempted to discover how we improve mathematics

teaching in our classrooms, and has identified four features of effective professional development. Essential components of professional development include

Focus teacher thinking and learning on student thinking and learning - when some teachers are challenged at their own level of understanding of mathematics they experience the mathematical learning experience their students are supposed to;

3 | P a g e

teacher collaboration - professional development should build a collaborative community. When teachers believe they can learn from each other they "make practice public, develop shared language, goals, questions, and develop practice together" (Cwikla, p. 323);

gradual, steady improvement - too many changes may create lower degree of implementation integrity; teachers need time to understand new ideas and to convince themselves that change is needed, and receive continuous encouragement and support

teacher experimentation and inquiry - schools that have a norm for risk-taking and experimentation are more successful; few teachers are comfortable sharing observations (Cwikla, 2004)

Standards for Professional LearningThe National Staff Development Council has created a list of Standards

for Professional Learning. These standards recognize that teacher learning must relate to student learning. Professional learning

occurs within learning communities; and requires skilful leaders; and requires prioritizing, monitoring, and coordinating resources; and uses a variety of data sources; and integrates theories and researched learning designs; and applies research on change to support implementation; and aligns outcomes with educator performance and curriculum standards

(2011)

4 | P a g e

Works CitedBall, D. L. (1996). Teacher learning and the mathematics reforms: What we

think we know and what we need to learn. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(7), 500-509.

Cobb, P. (1988). The tension between theories of learning and instruction in mathematics education [Electronic version]. Educational Psychologist, 23(2), 87-103.

Cwikla, J. (2004, February). Show me the evidence: Mathematics professional development for elementary teachers. Teaching Children Mathematics, 321-326.

Ernest, P. (1988). The impact of beliefs on the teaching of mathematics. Retrieved July 25, 2009, from http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/edoc/e/pome/impact.htm

Hargreaves, A. (2005). Educational change takes ages: Life, career and generational factors in teachers' emotional responses to educational change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 967-983.

Higgins, J., & Parsons, R. (2009, May/June). A Successful professional development model in mathematics: A System-wide New Zealand case. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(3), pp. 231-242.

National Staff Development Council. (2011). Standards for professional learning. Retrieved October 15, 2011, from National Staff Development Council: Learning Forward: http://www.learningforward.org/standards/index.cfm

Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000, January). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4-15.

Richardson, V. (1992). The agenda-setting dilemma in a constructivist staff development process. Teaching & Teacher Education, 8(3), 287-300.

Van de Walle, J. A., & Folk, S. (2005). Developing understanding in mathematics. In Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally (1st Canadian Edition) (pp. 28-42). Toronto: Pearson.

5 | P a g e

6 | P a g e