Professional and Staff Development Opportunities

This article addresses issues and concerns that teachers raise concerning traditional staff development opportunities. Teachers often express that traditional professional development workshops lack a clear purpose and direct application to every day classroom experience because these opportunities are rarely connected to the varying levels of teacher expertise and skill. Furthermore, many teachers feel that one-size-fits all, one-day workshops do not sustain the types of critical conversations that need to happen frequently to encourage positive professional growth. Given these major concerns, a variety of ongoing, meaningful professional development models have been developed to encourage instructional improvement. Critical Friends Groups (CFG's), Lesson Study, Online Staff Development, Peer Coaching, and Professional Learning Communities are explored as progressive alternatives to the traditional staff development model.

School Administration & Policy > Professional & Staff Development Opportunities

Keywords Cognitive Coaching; Critical Friends Group (CFG); Expert Coaching; Lesson Study; Online Staff Development; Peer Coaching; Professional Learning Communities; Reciprocal Coaching; Technical Coaching; Traditional Staff Development

Overview

Traditional vs. Professional Staff Development

Traditional staff development opportunities for educators usually take the form of one-size-fits-all, one-day workshops. Topics of focus are usually determined by central administrators. Teachers are expected to attend workshops in order to take away key understandings about teaching and learning or specific instructional methodologies and strategies they can employ in the classroom for immediate positive results. The ideology behind traditional staff development opportunities seems rational and seems as though it yields positive results for teachers and students. However, many teachers find these workshops to be a waste of time because of the lack of correlation between their perceived needs as professionals and what is actually offered through staff development opportunities.

Lock (2006) highlights key issues that influence the level of impact that professional development opportunities have on teaching and learning. First and foremost, most teachers find little value in one-size-fits-all, one-day workshops that are not connected to their current, every day practice or experience. Furthermore, such workshops generally rely on transmission of knowledge from experts to teachers. Lock (2006) further asserts that traditional staff development opportunities fail to meet school-specific needs and do not provide sufficient time for teachers to plan or to effectively learn new teaching methodologies or strategies.

Wycoff et al. (2003) also discusses in detail the major issues teachers express with regard to traditional staff development. Teachers often indicate that traditional professional development opportunities do not optimally match the variety of knowledge and skill levels in a group of educators. Just as students come to the classroom with different learning needs, teachers also come to workshops with different skill sets and learning goals. Professional development geared toward optimal individual growth needs to take these varying levels into account. Wycoff et al. (2003) asserts that schools need to consider teacher expertise in order to maximize the value and transferability of knowledge to teachers.

Wycoff et al. (2003) further discusses the fact that staff development opportunities need to provide opportunities for teachers to practice new concepts free from evaluation. When applying new skills and methodologies, teachers need to be given time to practice and weave new instructional strategies into their every day craft. They also advise that teachers need to be provided with follow-up workshops or study groups to help them reflect on their experiences and continue to learn from each other. Traditional staff development opportunities often ignore these needs and hope to achieve positive results quickly and efficiently without follow-up or time to actually uncover what teachers need in order to individually improve and grow.

As more and more researchers and educators realize traditional staff development workshops have not provided the type of ongoing, meaningful learning opportunities teachers need to grow professionally; literature has increased the emphasis on the critical role of sustained, ongoing professional development connected to every day experiences at a level commensurate with teacher ability and skill level. Garet et al. (2001) found that sustained, ongoing, intensive professional development is more likely to impact instructional practice on a broader level than are shorter, limited staff development workshops. However, one major problem exists: many schools are not organized or structured in such a way to promote ongoing, meaningful professional development connected to every day classroom experiences. Therefore, schools need to shift the focus toward organizational structures that promote the type of continual learning necessary to enhance teacher expertise (Kohler et al., 1997; cited in Farrell & Little, 2005).

New Approaches to Staff Development

This section highlights some of the more common professional development opportunities that schools are using today to address the concerns raised by teachers. The following models all involve sustained, ongoing professional development geared toward individual teacher professional growth and development:

Models of Professional Development

Critical Friends Groups

Critical Friends Groups (CFG) were initiated by the Annenberg Foundation and are currently supported by the National School Reform Faculty (Norman, 2005). CFG's consist of a small group of six to ten teachers who work together consistently for a long period of time to encourage positive professional growth and significant instructional improvement. A CFG is very similar to a teacher support group in that the group meets regularly to work on improving practice and to address issues related to teaching. The group is usually facilitated by a "coach" who takes responsibility for developing a set of structured procedures to help create focused, equitable and meaningful dialogue around teaching and learning (Norman, 2005). CFG's usually focus on examining teacher and student work, solving problems, discussing professional literature and observing other teachers in practice (Bambino, 2002: cited in Norman, 2005).

Bambino (2002) indicates that CFG's help teachers work collaboratively through a democratic and reflective community. This type of learning community is not established overnight and is not one in which members are required to participate. CFG's are created by teacher volunteers who are committed and dedicated to examining and challenging instructional practice and different perspectives on student learning. When teachers believe in the mission of the group and truly want to set aside time to participate in the critical conversations, they are more invested in the group and more willing to allow the professional development experience to influence their teaching.

To ensure the success of a CFG, the group must be willing to engage in open, honest communication about teaching and learning. Teachers must come to the group honestly believing that something about their teaching or their students' learning is worth close examination (Norman, 2005). A significant amount of time is devoted to developing a deep sense of trust to help teachers feel comfortable to engage in direct, honest, purposeful conversations about their craft (Bambino, 2002). Furthermore, teachers must be willing to shift the blame for poor student learning outcomes from the student or home environment to something tangible in the actual approaches used to help students learn. Through structured protocols for meaningful dialogue, teachers are able to both give and receive feedback about their instructional practice (Bambino, 2002).

A key, defining characteristic of a CFG is that the group meets consistently on an ongoing basis throughout the school year to engage in these critical conversations. CFG's differ greatly from traditional professional development opportunities in that they are not a one-time workshop and they are not designed as a one-size fits all approach. Rather, CFG's maximize expression of teacher individuality and provide the opportunity for teachers to direct their own professional growth needs and desires. Thus, teachers have ownership over their own learning and are therefore more invested in the process and in actually transferring what they learn to their every day classroom practice.

Lesson Study

Lesson Study began in Japan as a professional development opportunity for teachers. After much research regarding the benefits of the approach and the influence on teacher practice, Lesson Study has slowly become a popular tool for professional growth and staff development in the United States (Cohan & Honigsfeld 2006). Due to recent increased interest, lesson study centers such as those created at Columbia University and Mills College have been initiated to study the benefits of this particular approach for professional development of teachers (Cohan & Honigsfeld, 2006). The approach again involves a group of teachers working together to improve instructional practice through observation, discussion and feedback. However, Lesson Study involves extremely focused objectives for instructional improvement as the approach focuses on one lesson and the myriad of possible ways in which the lesson can be taught.

The lesson study approach involves an extremely careful examination of one specific lesson that is taught numerous times by different teachers until the lesson is perfected. The process begins with a group of teachers who work together to plan a lesson around a particular unit of study. One teacher from the group teaches the lesson, as planned, while the other teachers observe. The group meets to discuss the observations, revise the lesson and then a new member volunteers to teach the lesson. This cycle of observation, discussion and revision is repeated numerous times throughout the process until the group feels they are ready to move on to a new lesson (Cohan & Honigsfeld, 2006).

Kolenda (2007) discusses the formation of lesson study teams and the actual process used to facilitate the development of lessons and the critical conversations that follow. He indicates that teams generally consist of three to six teachers at each grade level who trust and respect each other, offer different perspectives on teaching and learning and who are willing to come together to explore multiple instructional strategies and methodologies (Kolenda, 2007). The actual formation of the group is critical as it is important to ensure the teachers work well together and respect each other.

The lesson study process begins with the identification of a goal or objective for the actual time spent together and the student learning outcome(s) desired. From there, members of the group decide the content topic. Researchers recommend that teachers choose a content area that is relatively difficult to work with, an area of the curriculum that is new, or a topic teachers know will create and encourage debate and dialogue (Lewis 2002; cited in Kolenda, 2007). Next, teachers design the actual unit of study and the lesson to be critiqued and analyzed.

Trust & Respect

The next phase of the process involves a tremendous amount of trust and respect for individual members in the group as one teacher must volunteer to teach the lesson while other group members observe and collect objective data for analysis. Kolenda (2007) indicates that the observation of the lesson is intended solely to collect data on how the students react to the lesson and what they learn, as opposed to an evaluation of the actual teacher. He further suggests that members of the lesson study group collect data related to student engagement, gender differences, student interactions, success of a particular instructional strategy, etc. (Kolenda, 2007).

Immediately afterwards, team members meet to discuss the lesson and the objective data collected. Usually, the lesson study protocol requires the lesson presenter to begin the process with his/her own reflections on the lesson followed by a discussion of the objective data collected and further dialogue regarding ways to improve the lesson (Kolenda, 2007). The process then continues as the lesson is revised and a new teacher takes on the role of lesson presenter.

Kolenda (2007) highlights the many benefits of the lesson study approach for professional growth and staff development. He indicates the approach promotes staff collaboration as teachers work together to grapple with the ways in which students learn best. Kolenda (2007) further illuminates that teacher's feel empowered as a result of this process because they identify the goal, develop the lesson and essentially take control of every stage of the study. Perhaps more importantly, the lesson study approach provides an opportunity for teachers to really engage in critical conversation about teaching practice and to truly devote their time to studying curriculum in more depth as opposed to working furiously throughout the year to cover a tremendous amount of material without much reflection.

Professional Learning Communities

One of the main concerns expressed by teachers regarding the traditional staff development approach used by schools for many years is the fact that traditional opportunities provide no time for teachers to create their own meaning and dialogue with other professionals to determine how new instructional methodologies affect student learning outcomes (Thompson et al., 2004). Professional Learning Communities directly address this concern by setting the foundation for the critical conversations that must happen frequently in schools in order to improve student learning. Elmore & Wisenbaker (2000) indicate that to ensure dynamic change in schools, schools must empower teachers to take initiative and to become instructional leaders who yearn for best practices (Thompson et al., 2004). In order to realize this objective, schools need to shift the predominant culture toward teacher empowerment and leadership through meaningful dialogue and collaboration. Professional Learning Communities create the conditions necessary for this type of dynamic change. As Thompson et al. (2004) indicate, many schools are working to become professional learning communities, hopefully to improve student learning as adults talk collaboratively about instructional practice and take action to transfer new found knowledge to the classroom setting.

Thompson et al. (2004) asserts that the principal is the lead teacher and the lead learner when a school takes action to become a professional learning community. Without a strong instructional leader who values individual development and growth, such a community cannot be successful. The principal must create the conditions necessary for a safe, respectful exchange of ideas among colleagues and must ensure that all teachers are comfortable challenging their own and others' beliefs about teaching and learning (Thompson et al., 2004).

A professional learning community can take on any form as long as the leader sets the expectation for individual growth and each member of the faculty is held accountable to take on the responsibility for his/her own learning within the community (Thompson et al., 2004). Examples of a professional learning community in action involve small group meetings to discuss classroom applications of new instructional methodologies and study groups designed to encourage sharing, inquiry and reflection regarding articles and books (Thompson et al., 2004).

Duffy et al. (2006) highlight five criteria necessary for the successful development of professional learning communities. First and foremost, such a community includes a leader who shares power and decision making abilities. Second, the entire school shares a common vision for improved student learning and a thorough commitment to working toward this reality. Also, schools that value professional learning communities create a collaborative culture and provide the opportunities necessary for collegial work (Duffy et al., 2006). Each teacher in a professional learning community values life long learning and is invested in sharing his/her knowledge with others to encourage professional growth for all members of the community.

Online Staff Development

In recent years, teachers have turned to online staff development opportunities to receive the professional growth training that previously was only offered in person during one-time workshops and seminars. Sprague (2006) asserts that online professional development opportunities give teachers direct access to experts in the field in a flexible format that allows teachers to match their schedule and direct the development of their own learning opportunities. Furthermore, Sprague (2006) indicates that online learning opportunities create the conditions necessary for teachers to interact with each other in a non-threatening environment that encourages and enhances possibilities for immediate sharing and collaboration. Lock (2006) further highlights that online learning communities provide teachers with new opportunities and new roles as their work becomes public and they are able to network and interact with groups of people from around the world with mutual topics of interest.

Lock (2006) indicates that in order for online professional learning opportunities to be successful the fundamental culture of schools must adapt to embrace such a professional development tool. Schools need to value ongoing professional development and create the conditions necessary for teachers to interact online with others from around the globe. Lastly, schools need to think critically about how online learning can be interwoven into already existing professional development opportunities to maximize individual learning potential and development (Lock, 2006).

Although online learning environments provide enticing opportunities for professional growth and development, researchers highlight the many pitfalls of online learning communities that need to be considered when deciding whether or not to adopt such a model for staff development. Sprague (2006) indicates that even though online learning communities provide direct access to experts in the field, sometimes experts are not the best teachers, especially in an online environment. Therefore, online presenters need extensive training in how to interact with individuals through such a medium. Also, Sprague (2006) indicates that online professional development opportunities require a significant amount of time to ensure resources are updated and readily available and that the online community is maintained on an ongoing basis.

At a more practical, every day level, Lock (2006) highlights the fact that many teachers are still not comfortable with technology and schools cannot assume that working online is commonplace for teachers. Lock (2006) asserts that in order for teachers to be active, willing participants in online professional development opportunities, they need to be self motivated, independent, and they need to have a certain level of expertise when it comes to navigating online learning communities. Also, Lock (2006) indicates that the school culture can deter from the success of online professional development opportunities if schools do not set aside the time necessary for teachers to actively participate.

Peer Coaching

When participating in peer coaching opportunities, teachers support each other as they apply new teaching methodologies in the classroom to meet the learning needs of students (Swafford, 1998). Showers (1996; cited in Swafford, 1998) defines peer coaching as entire faculties working together to identify the most pressing learning needs and the training necessary to meet these needs. Robbins (1995; cited in Swafford, 1998) defines the peer coaching model as a process through which two teachers collaborate to reflect upon current instructional practices, build new skills, teach one another, and solve problems.

Peer coaching may include activities such as planning lessons, developing curriculum, participating in study groups, solving problems together, and observing each other teach (Swafford, 1998). Swafford (1998) further delineates different models of coaching including technical, expert, reciprocal, and cognitive coaching.

• Technical Coaching involves transferring instructional methodologies and strategies from the workshop to the classroom setting.

• Expert Coaching involves a teacher who is an expert in a specific instructional methodology working with other teachers to observe and provide feedback regarding practice (Swafford, 1998). Often times, schools hire specific coaches (i.e. literacy or math coaches) who are experts in a particular discipline and can impart content specific knowledge and expertise to teachers in need of modeling and practice.

• Reciprocal Coaching involves two teachers observing and providing feedback to each other regarding instructional practice, and

• Cognitive Coaching involves engaging teachers in ongoing, meaningful dialogue about instructional practice (Swafford, 1998).

Although peer coaching takes on many different forms, the overarching objective of all models is to improve instructional practice and thereby to improve student learning outcomes. The type of coaching used depends on the specific situation and the specific teachers in need of coaching. Schools can combine the different approaches or subscribe to one particular form of coaching to enhance and improve instructional practice. Swafford (1998) asserts that peer coaching provides the support necessary to implement new methodologies and ideas in the classroom, encourages the change process, and allows for the exchange of different perspectives on teaching.

Terms & Concepts

Cognitive Coaching: Cognitive coaching involves engaging teachers in ongoing, meaningful dialogue about instructional practice.

Critical Friends Groups (CFG): A CFG is very similar to a teacher support group in that the group meets regularly to work on improving practice and to address issues related to teaching. CFG's usually focus on examining teacher and student work, solving problems, discussing professional literature and observing other teachers in practice

Expert Coaching: Expert coaching involves a teacher who is an expert in a specific instructional methodology working with other teachers to observe and provide feedback regarding practice.

Lesson Study: The lesson study approach involves an extremely careful examination of one specific lesson that is taught numerous times by different teachers until the lesson is perfected.

Online Staff Development: Online professional development includes opportunities offered on the internet to give teachers direct access to experts in the field in a flexible format that allows teachers to match their schedule and direct the development of their own learning opportunities.

Peer Coaching: When participating in peer coaching opportunities, teachers support each other as they apply new teaching methodologies in the classroom to meet the learning needs of students.

Professional Learning Communities: Professional Learning Communities set the foundation for the critical conversations that must happen frequently in schools in order to improve student learning. Groups of teachers meet in a variety of contexts to dialogue about instructional practice.

Reciprocal Coaching: Reciprocal coaching involves two teachers observing and providing feedback to each other regarding instructional practice.

Technical Coaching: Technical coaching involves transferring instructional methodologies and strategies from the workshop to the classroom setting.

Traditional Staff Development: Traditional staff development opportunities usually take the form of one-size-fits-all, one-day workshops. Topics of focus are usually determined by central administrators and teachers are expected to attend workshops in order to take away key understandings about teaching and learning or specific instructional methodologies and strategies they can employ in the classroom for immediate positive results.

Bibliography

Abilock, D., Harada, V. H., & Fontichiaro, K. (2013). Growing schools: Effective professional development. Teacher Librarian, 41, 8-13. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=91262429&site=ehost-live

Bambino, D. (2002). Critical Friends. Educational Leadership, 59 , 25. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. Educational Forum, 71 , 81-92. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=6504020&site=ehost-live

Bubb, S., & Earley, P. (2013). The use of training days: Finding time for teachers’ professional development. Educational Research, 55, 236-248. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=89866799&site=ehost-live

Cohan, A., & Honigsfeld, A. (2006). Incorporating "lesson study" in teacher preparation. Educational Forum, 71 , 81-92. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=22991051&site=ehost-live

Duffy, E., Mattingly, K., & Randolph, D. (2006). A culture of learning. Independent School, 65 , 24-28. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=23008703&site=ehost-live

Elmore, R., & Wisenbaker, J. The crabapple experience: Insights from program evaluations. Kappan, 82 , 280-283.

Farrell, P., & Little, B. (2005). Peer coaching as a support to collaborative teaching. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 13 ; pp. 83-94.

Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38 , 915-945.

Kohler, F, Crilley, K. M, Shearer, D. D., & Good, G. (1997). Effects of peer coaching on teacher and student outcomes. Journal of Educational Research, 90 , 240-252. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=9704143077&site=ehost-live

Kolenda, R. (2007). Japanese lesson study, staff development, and science education Reform - The Neshaminy story. Science Educator, 16 , 29-33. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=25430039&site=ehost-live

Lewis, C. (2002). Lesson study: A handbook for teacher-led improvement of instruction. Philadelphia, PA: Research for Better Schools.

Lock, J. (2006). A new image: Online communities to facilitate teacher professional development. Journal of Technology & Teacher Education, 14 , 663-678. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=21735200&site=ehost-live

Norman, P., Golian, K., & Hooker, H. (2005). Professional development schools and critical friends groups: Supporting student, novice and teacher learning. New Educator, 1 , 273-286.

Patton, K., Parker, M., & Pratt, E. (2013). Meaningful learning in professional development: Teaching without telling. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 32, 441-459. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=90601637&site=ehost-live

Robbins, P. (1995). Peer coaching: Quality through collaborative work. In J. Block, S.F. Everson & T. R. Guskey (Eds), School improvement programs: A handbook for educational leaders . New York: Scholastic.

Showers, B. (1996). The evolution of peer coaching. Educational Leadership, 53 ,12-16. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. -Journal of Technology & Teacher Education, 14 , 657-661. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=9603172616&site=ehost-live

Snell, M. E., Forston, L., Stanton-Chapman, T. L., & Walker, V. L. (2013). A review of 20 years of research on professional development interventions for preschool teachers and staff. Early Child Development & Care, 183, 857-873. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=88353739&site=ehost-live

Sprague, D. (2006). Research agenda for online teacher professional development. Journal of Technology & Teacher Education, 14 , 657-661. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=21735199&site=ehost-live

Swafford, J. (1998). Teachers supporting teachers through peer coaching. Support for Learning, 13 , 54. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=4374495&site=ehost-live

Thompson, S., Gregg, L., & Niska, J. (2004). Professional learning communities, leadership, and student learning. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 28 , 35-54. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=15567629&site=ehost-live

Wycoff, M., Nash, W., Juntune, J., & Mackay, L. (2003). Purposeful professional development. Gifted Child Today, 26 , 34. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=11265898&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Bezzina, C. (2006). "The road less traveled": Professional communities in secondary schools. Theory into Practice, 45 , 159-167. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=20742096&site=ehost-live

Downing, J., Brewer, R., Reid, M., & Rhine, B. (2003). Peer coaching: Students teaching to learn. Intervention in School & Clinic, 39 , 113-126. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=11022318&site=ehost-live

Engstrom, M. & Danielson, L. (2006). Teacher's perceptions of an on-site staff development model. Clearing House, 79 , 170-173.

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluation professional development . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Joyce, B. (2004). How are professional learning communities created? Phi Delta Kappan, 86 , 76-83.

Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (1988). Student achievement through staff development . New York: Longman.

Lebec, M., & Luft, J. (2007). A mixed methods analysis of learning in online teacher professional development: A case report. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 7 , 554-574. Retrieved July 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=25539152&site=ehost-live