Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
In the fall of 2009, the Board approved a contract for the Kansas State Department of Education to
collaborate with the National Staff Development Council (NSDC) to convene a state-wide task force
charged with development of a comprehensive professional learning system for Kansas. A
comprehensive learning system ensures that all Kansas educators engage in effective professional
learning focused around core expectations and aligned with state initiatives, content standards,
regulations and legislation.
Joellen Killion, Deputy Executive Director, NSDC guided the task force in review, development and
recommendations for a statewide, comprehensive professional learning system for Kansas. The task
force met six times beginning in November of 2009. Members sought input and feedback from
constituencies across the state as they completed their work.
Joellen will be presenting to the Board the policy recommendations of the task force.
The National Staff Development views high quality professional learning as essential to creating schools
in which all student and staff members are learners who continuously learn. The Board has endorsed the
use of the NSDC professional development standards.
27
28
Audit of Kansas State
Professional Development Policies
Submitted by
Kansas Professional Development
Task Force
May 2010
29
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................... 2
Areas of Strength
x Commitment to Continuous Improvement ............................................................ 15
x Task Force Consensus on the Purpose of Professional Learning .......................... 15
x Tiered Points for Licensure Renewal .................................................................... 15
x Article 96. Professional Development Programs .................................................. 15
x Professional Development Councils...................................................................... 15
x Standards for High-Quality Professional Development ........................................ 16
Recommendations
x Recommendation 1: Definition of Professional Development .............................. 17
x Recommendation 2: Accountability ...................................................................... 18
x Recommendation 3: Backwards Design ................................................................ 19
x Recommendation 4: Professional Pathway ........................................................... 19
x Recommendation 5: Licensure Renewal ............................................................... 19
x Recommendation 6:Professional Preparation........................................................ 20
x Recommendation 7:Educators’ Roles ................................................................... 20
x Recommendation 8:Funding for Professional Development................................. 21
x Recommendation 9: Time for Job-Embedded Professional
Development ......................................................................................................... 21
Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 22
References ............................................................................................................... 24
30
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The foresight of the Kansas State Board of Education and Department of Education
to conduct an analysis of the state’s professional development policies and the
impact of those policies on professional development practices throughout the state
demonstrates the ongoing commitment of the Board and Department to ensuring
educators participate in high-quality professional development that results in
improved learning for Kansas students.
Educators, school board members, and state legislators throughout Kansas took
time to share insights and suggestions during the Task Force’s work and provide
feedback on the draft recommendations enriched the work of the Task Force.
31
Article 96--PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS 72-
9601. Citation of act; legislative declaration and intent. This act
shall beknown and may be cited as the education professional
development act. It is hereby declared that it is essential to the welfare
of the people of Kansas that the provision of quality educational
opportunities for all pupils in the state be assured. Therefore, it is the
intention of this act to promote continuous professional development,
diversification in academic foundations or subject knowledge,
improvement in job effectiveness, enhancement of skills and
techniques, and competent on-the-job performance of all certificated
personnel serving regularly in the accredited elementary and secondary
schools of the state of Kansas.
32
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Purpose of the Study
The Kansas State Department of Education commissioned a statewide task force
facilitated by Joellen Killion, deputy executive director of the National Staff
Development Council, to conduct an audit of state’s professional development
policies. This audit will be utilized to inform the work of the Department of
Education’s revision and alignment of policies related to educator standards,
licensure, licensure renewal, professional development, and school improvement.
The specific focus of the Professional Development Task Force was to review and
recommend changes in policies (statutes, regulations, and guidelines) for
professional development for Kansas educators to ensure a system of seamless and
continuous improvement from preservice through the entire continuum of
educators’ career so that it contributes to both educator practice and pre-K through
20 student academic success. The Professional Development Task Force examined
several key questions, including:
Audit Process
The audit consisted primarily of document review (regulations, statutes, and
guidelines), study of research, principles, and practice, dialogue among Professional
Development Task Force members, feedback from constituents, and examination of
current practice reported by task force members. The Professional Development
Task Force analyzed documents and identified both strengths and areas for
improvement, drafted recommendations, sought and studied constituent feedback,
and revised recommendations for inclusion in this document.
Strengths
In its analysis, several strengths in the current statute, regulations, and guidelines
emerged. They are listed below.
x Commitment to Continuous Improvement
x Task Force Consensus on the Purpose of Professional Learning
x Tiered Points for Licensure Renewal
x Article 96. Professional Development Programs
x Professional Development Councils
x Standards for High-Quality Professional Development
33
Areas for Improvement
A number of areas for improvement emerged from the analysis of state policies.
When taken together these areas increase the likelihood that effective policies fall
short of their intended effects.
x Definition of Professional Development
x Inequity of Access
x Individual versus School Improvement
x Limited Application and Impact Level Professional Development
x Integrated System for Professional Development
Recommendations
The broad recommendations in this section encompass many of the specific
recommendations identified in Areas for Improvement and can be viewed as areas
for task force work, used to sequence and prioritize action plans based on this
policy audit, and become the focus of required budgetary priorities for the
Professional Standards Board and Department of Education.
34
Recommendation Six: Ensure that state standards for teachers and school
and district leaders currently under revision align with and include concepts
and practices of high-quality professional development including active
participation in and facilitation of both job-embedded and externally
provided professional development.
Conclusion
The Kansas State Department of Education has a significant responsibility to ensure
that it allocates the resources, supports the development work recommended in this
policy audit, and facilitates changes in the structure of the school day to ensure that
professional development is not viewed just as a mechanism for renewing educator
licenses, but rather a fundamental responsibility of all professional educators that is
vital to meeting the state’s goals for improved student academic success.
35
PURPOSE OF THE AUDIT OF KANSAS STATE
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
The Kansas State Board of Education and Department of Education authorized an
audit of the state’s professional development policies. The National Staff
Development Council, with experience in conducting similar studies for other
states, was commissioned to lead the audit process. The recommendations emerging
from the study will be used by the Kansas State Department of Education to guide
policy revisions that ensure Kansas educators engage in effective professional
development to improve student academic success.
Kansas State Board of Education and Department of Education have both the
responsibility and authority to establish 1) criteria for effective professional
learning for all educators; 2) systems for monitoring the quality and equitable
access to effective professional development for all Kansas educators; and 3)
guidelines for time allocations and fiscal support for the implementation of effective
professional development.
State policies exist within a context set by federal policies, the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA), scheduled for reauthorization. Proposed changes
in ESEA may impact guidelines and expectations for professional development
funded with federal funds, Kansas State Department of Education will want to be
positioned to respond to any potential changes by beginning now to examine
research and recommendations for improving professional development that are
likely to be associated with the reauthorization of ESEA. In addition, reviewing and
updating the state’s professional development policies position Kansas State
Department of Education to ensure that professional development has a greater
impact on teaching quality, leadership, and student achievement.
36
findings to determine whether professional development is improving
administrators’ leadership and teachers’ instruction is essential. The question is not
how much professional development policy is necessary, but which policies are
necessary to achieve the result of improved performance levels of, first, educators
and then students.
In far too many school systems nationwide and still in some in Kansas, the
prevailing mode of professional development continues to be a didactic
presentation, often by a consultant who understands little about the context in which
the educators work. Frequently, the purpose of this form of learning is the
transmission of information rather than the engagement of educators in dynamic
and relevant learning experiences they can translate to their daily practice.
Whatever the purpose or type of professional development, there is seldom follow-
up support to provide educators with the classroom, school, or workplace support
necessary to apply their new learning or to assess the effectiveness of their learning
on practice or student learning. Specific policies and guidelines about the both the
purpose and design of professional learning and its connection to educators’
authentic work and expected results improve both the quality of professional
learning and its impact.
37
teacher and leadership quality, the accountability measures in No Child Left Behind
Act (NCLB) of 2001 increased the expectation for states to ensure teaching quality
as well as demonstrated improvement in student achievement. As ESEA
reauthorization takes center stage in the US House and Senate in the month ahead,
states and school districts can anticipate new policy expectations to ensure measures
of teaching effectiveness and student achievement. Professional learning contributes
to both. When educators learn, their students learn.
States use educator standards and licensure regulations to guarantee that new
teachers and school leaders are highly qualified and prepared for their respective
roles in teaching rigorous content standards and leading school improvement.
Strong mentoring with induction systems ensure that novice educators,
approximately 25% of educators, have substantive support to move from a state-
approved preparation program to the educator workforce. Professional development
for educators who become or are already working in schools, districts, and agencies
throughout the state—approximately 75% of educators, on the other hand, is a
state’s policy lever for ensuring that teachers and school leaders continue to deepen
and expand their professional knowledge and practices. As with other professionals,
educators retool, deepen their content knowledge, expand their pedagogical and
leadership expertise, and refine practice over time to meet the changing demands of
students, families, and communities and the changing expectations of education
systems to ensure students meet rigorous content standards, are college and career
ready and prepared for life and work in the 21st Century and beyond. New
initiatives such Kansas’s Multi-Tier System of Support depend on building human
capital for successful implementation. Ongoing learning and continuous
improvement are the hallmarks of the professions.
38
educator practice and student achievement. Over the last decade, research in
professional development has defined the core attributes of professional
development that is more closely associated with changes in educator practice and
student learning. NSDC, drawing on research in both education and business and
industry, states:
39
professional development in achieving identified
learning goals, improving teaching, and assisting all
students in meeting challenging state academic
achievement standards;
The McKinsey study of 25 of the world’s school systems, including 10 of the top
performers, provided information on the common factors and tools they use to
improve student outcomes. The experiences of these top school systems suggests
that three things matter most: 1) getting the right people to become teachers; 2)
developing them into effective instructors; and 3) ensuring that the system is able to
deliver the best possible instruction for every child. These systems demonstrate that
these best practices for achieving student success work irrespective of the culture in
which they are applied. The authors’ analysis demonstrates that substantial
improvement in student outcomes is possible in a short period of time and that
applying these three best practices universally could have enormous impact in
improving failing school systems wherever they may be located (Barbour &
Mourshed, 2007).
40
professional learning on rigorous content standards, and amount of classroom
support (Darling-Hammond, et al, 2009).
41
policies that support individually focused professional learning if there is an intent
to increase the impact of professional learning on student achievement. Jackson’s
and Bruegmann’s research has implications for mentoring and induction, teacher
placement, teacher leadership, and systems of teacher evaluation and support.
Cohen and Hill (2000) concluded that teacher professional development focused on
specific curricula resulted in more reform-oriented instructional practices than
general professional development. Reform-oriented instructional practices are
positively related to increases in student achievement. Banilow (2002) reported a
42
positive relationship between the extent of teacher participation in professional
development and student achievement. Data from the Merck Institute for Science
Education program evaluation (Corcoran et al, 2003) provides support for collective
participation in professional development. Student performance correlated to the
proportion of teachers in a school who were engaged in professional development.
When a large proportion of teachers (at least 78%) participated, student
performance increased.
43
not include revising specific statute, regulation, or guideline language or developing
implementation processes for the recommendations. Department of Education staff
will lead that work, upon acceptance of the task force’s recommendations.
STRENGTHS
In its analysis, several strengths in the current statute, regulations, and guidelines
emerged. They are reported below.
44
Standards for High-Quality Professional Development
The Kansas State Board of Education endorsed the National Staff Development
Council’s Standards for Staff Development in 2008. These standards establish
criteria for effective professional development that guide the design,
implementation, and evaluation of professional development.
Inequity of Access
Kansas School Board Association annually collects data on school district
calendars. In analyzing data from the current year, the Task Force identified
substantial disparities in educators’ access to professional development within the
school calendar. The range of days allocated to professional development in Kansas
school district ranged from one day to 11 days. The scope of this discrepancy
impacts opportunities for educator learning to refine or extend their practice and to
contribute to student success. It also contributes to districts’ capacity to implement
innovations.
45
renewal procedures emphasize individual professional development rather than to
integrate licensure renewal as a part of the seamless system of school and district
improvement. When professional development resources are aligned with priorities
established by local school boards and schools, all the resources contribute to the
achievement of established goals. Balancing individual professional development
for licensure renewal points or performance improvement with professional
development for school and district improvement requires difficult decisions about
how to maximize the impact of all professional development resources.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Policy makers frequently develop policies in response to new priorities, crises, or
special interests; however, as they are developed, all too often there is limited
analysis of how the new policies interact with those already in existence. It is
instructive for states and other political entities to engage in an interactive process
to reevaluate and revise policies on a regular basis.
46
Rationale: By defining what effective professional development is, using research
and effective practice, educators will be able to design, implement, and evaluate the
quality of professional learning. Defining the attributes of high-quality professional
development provides criteria for the Kansas State Department of Education to
evaluate the professional development statewide, strengthen educators’ access to
effective professional learning, and facilitate implementation of high-quality
professional development to increase the return on its investments in professional
learning.
Explanation: Clear criteria clarify expectations, guide practice, provide guidance for
evaluation systems, and improve practice. The criteria, based on research, will
ensure that professional learning is aligned with goals, focused on results for
students, and more job-embedded within educators’ work day. A concomitant
strategy to defining professional development will be shifting educators’ perception
that professional development occurs only when students and educators are away
from school to one that recognizes that professional learning is a continuous cycle
of improvement that occurs most effectively in schools among teams of educators.
Explanation: As Kansas educators move toward meeting local, state, and national
standards of student achievement and national standards of professional
development, it is imperative that they are accountable for meeting standards.
Without accountability it is unlikely that Kansas school districts can ensure
equitable access to professional development and student achievement.
Accountability must be built into the system specifically defining the role and
responsibility of each stakeholder, from the state legislature, the Department of
Education, teacher preparation institutions, to the local education agencies. All
47
educators will benefit from professional development that exists within a clearly
articulated system of accountability.
Explanation: Professional development must start at the broad policy level with a
focus on student learning. If student learning is the beginning of the professional
development planning process, this approach to backwards design by beginning
with the end in mind will lead to a professional development model that has a
greater likelihood of achieving its identified and intended results.
Rationale:
Effective professional development connects professional learning to the needs of
students, educators and their career continuum, school and district, and community
to improve teaching, leadership, and student learning.
48
Rationale: Knowledge that results in increasing the growth of student learners and
educators reaches beyond the knowledge level. Professional learning that
transforms practice and produces impact on students requires changes in
knowledge, skills, disposition, and behavior. Educators should approach all
professional development with the intention that it will impact student learning and
educator practice.
49
professional learning communities educators can deepen their knowledge and skills,
receive support for changes in practice, and reflect on and evaluate the impact of
their practice on student learning. Professional learning communities encourage
sharing expertise within a school or district and establish and maintain a culture of
collaboration and collective responsibility. Job-embedded professional learning
moves learning closer to the site of implementation and impact increasing the
likelihood of achieving specified goals.
50
provides Kansas school districts with the flexibility to meet their own student
achievement needs and professional development goals of educators.
Explanation: Results-focused professional development is guided by student
achievement needs. If time is provided for job-embedded professional development,
haphazard approaches to professional development must cease. Since this time is
built into the 1116 hours required for student contact, additional cost for substitutes
is not necessary – not an increase in salaries. Some change to KS Law 72-1106 may
be necessary to clarify this. Currently the interpretation is that 50% of a
professional day can count toward student contact hours (i.e. 6 hours of professional
development = 3 hours of student contact time).
CONCLUSION
Policymakers may want to consider this question: If the State of Kansas began with
the proverbial “blank sheet of paper” to create a system of professional
development for the ultimate purpose of enabling students to achieve rigorous
content standards and be college and career ready in the 21st Century, how would
that system be similar to and different from the current arrangement? This is a
difficult question, one that calls for incorporating new learning about effective
professional development as well as setting aside institutional allegiances in favor
of efficiencies, practices, core assumptions, and resources that will produce better
results.
Asking and soberly answering the hard question above is a prerequisite for actions
that will allow the state to meet its ambitious goals for professional development. It
is not realistic to expect entities responsible for professional development to
abandon their own interests to fashion a new, comprehensive system with greater
potential to engage local educators in professional development and that improves
their practice. The state’s current approach to professional development was created
by the state legislature and Department of Education, and only these entities have
the authority to create a new system that is both more coherent and effective. The
recommendations of the Professional Development Task Force are just the
beginning of this reform process. Because this process must be thoughtful and
deliberate, without an expectation of “silver bullet” solutions or a rush to judgment,
the Department of Education is best positioned to lead the statewide consideration
of creating a new professional development system for Kansas grounded in current
research and noteworthy practices.
During any serious review of the state’s current policies, many issues will surface.
It is not appropriate for this report to pre-empt the role of the Kansas State
Department of Education by prioritizing the recommendations and implementation
of them. However, in addition to the recommended revisions, it will be crucial to
ensure that whatever revisions result in effective professional development practices
also improve student academic success. The Department of Education has a
51
significant responsibility to ensure that it allocates the resources, supports the
development work recommended in this policy audit, and facilitates changes in the
structure of the school day to ensure that professional development is not viewed
just as a mechanism for renewing educator licenses, but rather a fundamental
responsibility of all professional educators to meet student learning needs, improve
schools, and meet the state’s goals for improved student academic success.
52
REFERENCES
Banilow, E. (2002). Results of the 2001-2002 study of the impact of the local
systemic change initiative on student achievement in science. Chapel Hill,
NC: Horizon Research.
Cohen, D., & Hill, H. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance:
The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102(2),
294-343.
Corcoran, T., McVay, S., & Riordan, K. (2003). Getting it right: The MISE
approach to professional development. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for
Policy Research in Education.
Garet, M., Cronen, S., Eaton, M., Kurki, A., Ludwig, M., Jones, W., Uekawa, K.,
Falk, A., Bloom, H., Doolittle, F., Zhu, P., and Sztejnberg, L. (2008). The
Impact of Two Professional Development Interventions on Early Reading
Instruction and Achievement (NCEE 2008-4030). Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center
for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, 2008.
Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K. (2001). What
makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample
of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), pp. 915-945.
Garet, M., Wayne, A., Stancavage, F., Taylor, J., Walters, K., Song, M., Brown,
S., Hurlburt, S., Zhu, P., Sepanik, S., and Doolittle, F. (2010). Middle
School Mathematics Professional Development Impact Study: Findings
After the First Year of Implementation (NCEE 2010-4009). Washington,
DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance,
Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
53
Hirsh, S. and Killion, J. (2009). When educators learn, students learn: Eight
principles of professional learning, Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), pp. 464-469.
Peneul, W., Fishman, B., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. (2007). What makes
professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum
implementation. (2007). American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), pp.
921-958.
54