2016

Editor’s NotESchools across the country are tailoring professional development to meet the individual needs of teachers. In this Spotlight, explore the movement towards micro-credentialing in teacher PD, how schools are grooming teacher-leaders, and the benefits of coaching principals.

CoNtENts

2 Can ‘Micro-Credentialing’ Salvage Teacher PD?

4 Ed-Tech Coaches Becoming Steadier Fixture in Classrooms

6 To Tailor PD, D.C. Looks To Groom Teacher Leaders

Commentary8 5 Reasons Principals

Should Be Coached

9 Professional Development: Are You Content With the Scenario?

11 Trends in Professional Development for Globally Minded Educators

13 Why Professional Development Should Be More Like ‘MasterChef’

Personalized Professional develoPment

Jessica Scherer, right, leads a one on one microcredentialing session with Katie Schlueter at Kettle Moraine Middle School in March, 2016, in Dousman, WI.

—Tom

Lynn for Education Week

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 2

You hope that, over time, people who have demonstrated these skills agree to become reviewers for others. And you hope that it never reaches the lowest common denominator, and that it really is a powerful peer-review, peer-learning opportunity.”Stephanie hirSh EXEcuTivE dirEcTor, LEarning ForWard

Published March 30, 2016, in Education Week

Can ‘Micro-Credentialing’ Salvage Teacher PD?By Stephen Sawchuk

Last year, Kay Staley and Jes-sica Scherer, literacy coaches in the Kettle Moraine dis-trict in Wisconsin, led groups of teachers in a book study on

close reading—a complex and important skill emphasized in the Common Core State Standards.

Participants were paired with a coach and peers as they wrestled with how to teach kids to analyze details of an au-thor’s narrative technique. At the end of the school year, the teachers documented how they applied close-reading instruc-tion in class and how it impacted student learning. A panel of educators reviewed the submissions, and the best earned those teachers salary increases worth several hundred dollars.

Welcome to the brave new world of teacher “micro-credentialing,” an effort to make professional development more per-sonalized, engaging, and relevant to teachers. All in all, the two Wisconsin teachers say, it’s a lot more focused and practical than the stereotypical continu-ing-education class.

“You think back to, ‘I took basket-weaving, and it moved me up on the sal-ary scale,’ and people are like, ‘What the heck?’” said Staley, who works at the dis-trict’s middle school. “But with micro-cre-dentials, you have to show that the learn-ing applies right now. And that matters.”

A small but growing handful of advo-cates think that initiatives like Kettle Moraine’s have the potential to move the moribund professional-development field forward.

Among other things, they note, micro-credentials offer an opportunity to shift away from the credit-hour and continuing-education requirements that dominate the PD apparatus in most states, toward a system based on evidence of progress in specific instructional skills.

It is an appealing idea for an indus-try that has struggled to rigorously evaluate its effects—and that is grap-pling with a series of dispiriting studies

concluding, invariably, that much of the training teachers get is ineffective.

That said, micro-credentialing is not without challenges.

“You hope that, over time, people who have demonstrated these skills agree to become reviewers for others,” said Stepha-nie Hirsh, the executive director of Learn-ing Forward, a teacher-learning mem-bership organization that, with several partners, is exploring micro-credential-ing. “And you hope that it never reaches the lowest common denominator, and that it really is a powerful peer-review, peer-learning opportunity.”

There is no formal, agreed-upon defi-nition for a micro-credential. Indeed, the term itself irritates some because of its vagueness and because it implies an in-dependent, accredited stamp of approval from some kind of government body.

In any case, the idea refers to bite-sized competencies that, via samples of student work, videos, and other artifacts, teachers show that they’ve mastered to students’ or colleagues’ benefit. Then, in vetting each teacher’s submission, the micro-creden-tial’s authorizer either asks the teacher to go back and dig deeper, or approves the submission—sometimes issuing the teacher a digital “badge” to represent at-tainment of the skill.

To be sure, supporters say, micro-cre-dentials don’t replace traditional profes-sional-development channels so much as give them focus and coherence.

“We’re agnostic about how you actu-ally develop these skills,” said Karen Ca-tor, the chief executive officer of Digital Promise, a nonprofit group that last fall unveiled a platform on which educators can earn some 120 micro-credentials, from one on disaggregating data to one on classroom management. “There are just so many ways of learning things, and we want to see many more opportunities, whether it’s through online communities of practice, watching videos, talking to your peers, getting a coach. It’s an expan-sive view of professional learning.”

A district’s storyThe Kettle Moraine district stumbled

onto micro-credentialing while struggling to put into practice personalized and com-petency-based student learning, concepts its school board had directed it to prioritize.

“We came to an understanding that teachers had never experienced it them-selves, and were struggling with how to do it in the classroom,” said Patricia F. Deklotz, the district’s superintendent. Ultimately, the district’s solution was to set broad instructional goals, and to allow individual or groups of teachers to pro-pose their own courses of study aligned to them—just as Kay Staley and Jessica Scherer did.

“Jessica and I talked about falling in love with close reading as part of our own

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 3

training, and we thought, ‘Huh. I won-der if anyone else would want to do this? ’ And then we wondered, ‘Could this be a micro-credential? ’” Staley said.

A 10-member panel of educators pre-approves which projects will count as a micro-credential. It also sets how much successful completion will improve a teacher’s salary—by anywhere from $100 to $600 a pop.

“Micro-credentials really allow our teachers to self-organize around learn-ing concepts and dig in, and to do the coaching, the modeling, and the feedback around those concepts,” Deklotz said.

The district estimates that about 80 percent of its 280 teachers have at least engaged in the process, and about half of them have completed one micro-cre-dential.

While it’s unclear how extensive that kind of experimentation is, other dis-tricts also are testing the process.

North Carolina’s Surry County school system just wrapped up a micro-credentialing pilot for a handful of its teachers. Beginning this month, teach-ers will be able to access an online platform and participate in a number of “quests”—self-guided modules often with a game component—that conclude with a micro-credential.

The district has developed around a dozen, mostly on the application of tech-nology in classrooms, such as how to make effective use of Twitter or Skype, said Lucas Gillispie, the district’s direc-tor of academic and digital learning.

States are interested, too. This sum-mer, Tennessee plans to pilot micro-cre-dentials with about 40 teachers, pairing top-notch teachers with novices. It will begin by offering a select few from the Digital Promise platform that are tied to key skills in the state’s teacher-eval-uation system—such as using question-ing and problem-solving techniques in the classroom.

“We think those are areas where teachers probably struggle the most, even beyond our novice teachers,” said Kathleen Airhart, the state’s deputy education commissioner. “And our prin-cipals struggle in how to give feedback in those areas.”

setting standardsOne of the major challenges is that,

like a new currency, the idea of micro-credentials hinges on many different people—from educators to school lead-ers to policymakers—coming to value

it. But the landscape is diffuse, and there is no single issuer or authorizer of the competencies.

Digital Promise is taking steps to establish a quality threshold, by cor-ralling partners to help develop micro-credentials, write guidelines for vet-

Kay Staley leads a group microcredentialing meeting at Kettle Moraine Middle School on March 23, in Dousman, WI.

—Tom

Lynn for Education Week

ting the submissions, and score them rigorously.

Among its partners are the Center for Teaching Quality, a North Carolina based nonprofit that has crafted micro-credentials on teacher leadership; the Relay Graduate School of Education, which has adapted its own curriculum to create micro-credentials relating to teachers’ ability to check for student understanding in their classrooms; and the Friday Institute, based at the Uni-versity of North Carolina, which offers several for boosting student motivation.

A for-profit tech company, Bloom-Board, has developed an infrastruc-ture that Digital Promise and its partners use for managing teachers’ portfolios, but actual submissions are scored and vetted by the creator of the micro-credential. It takes 50 submis-sions to build up enough data to make basic determinations about a micro-cre-dential’s validity.

But all these efforts are still only months old, and not all of the creden-tials have had enough takers to reach a critical mass. Only a handful of teachers—perhaps five—have submit-ted portfolios for the Relay-sponsored micro-credentials, said Brent Maddin, Relay’s provost.

There are also conceptual chal-lenges, including the slippery question of just how “micro” a micro-credential should be.

One of the potential shortcomings that we need to work through is what happens when you begin to atomize teaching too much. Do you lose sight of the whole? Is there something powerful about how multiple techniques, or moves, or strategies, or competencies move together that are an even better indication of what a teacher can know and do in the classroom.”Brent Maddin ProvosT, rELay graduaTE schooL oF EducaTion,

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 4

“One of the potential shortcom-ings that we need to work through is what happens when you begin to atomize teaching too much,” Mad-din said. “Do you lose sight of the whole? Is there something power-ful about how multiple techniques, or moves, or strategies, or com-petencies move together that are an even better indication of what a teacher can know and do in the classroom?”

Getting more teachers to rec-ognize potential value in micro-credentials also means confronting the existing incentive structures in most states.

Every state requires teachers to fulfill continuing-education requirements or college classes to maintain or renew a license. Fitting what are in essence per-sonalized accomplishments into those seat-time-based structures has proved a challenge of the square-peg-round-hole variety. A handful of states now permit teachers to translate micro-cre-dentials they’ve earned into a certain number of continuing-ed-ucation units or points. In North Carolina and Wisconsin, districts have the ability to make those approvals. And if after examina-tion Tennessee’s pilot program shows promise, the state will con-sider allowing teachers to use the credentials for maintaining a li-cense, Airhart said.

Building ConfidenceStill, Kettle Moraine appears to

be the only district to have linked micro-credentials to pay—a power-ful lever to prod teachers to engage with them.

There is also uncertainty about another supposed benefit of micro-credentials: their portability. Dig-ital Promise’s micro-credentials come with digital badges—sym-bols teachers can display in an electronic backpack or CV, and that they could potentially use to make the case for a promotion within a district or even for anoth-er job elsewhere.

The problem is that it’s unclear whether the average teacher needs or wants that feature, or how many districts are tech-savvy enough to look for digital badges.

Published June 6, 2016, in Education Week’s Technology Counts 2016 Report

Ed-tech Coaches Becoming steadier Fixture in ClassroomsBy Robin L. Flanigan

When South Carolina chemistry teacher Jus-tin Simpson decided to use the water crisis in Flint, Mich., as a

backdrop for a water-quality project, he turned to his school’s technology coach, Tami Lenker. She brainstormed ways to use apps and other software programs that Simpson didn’t know about—or have the time to learn.

Then Lenker popped into the class-room every now and then to offer sup-port to both Simpson and his students at Blythewood High School in Blythewood, north of Columbia.

“She came in a lot in the beginning,” Simpson said. “Then she weaned us away from needing her so much, but she would check in on us. I still bounce ideas off her and touch base every day.”

The use of technology coaches in class-rooms is on the rise, according to ed-tech experts. While coaches still meet with teachers outside the school day to plan, re-hearse, and reflect, they are now becom-ing a steadier fixture inside classrooms. They do everything from observing to co-teaching, passing on their knowledge about technology so that teachers can be more productive and effective.

The use of tech coaches varies by dis-trict, but many align job responsibilities with the standards for coaching laid out by the International Society for Technol-ogy in Education, or ISTE. The standards are divided into six categories: visionary leadership; teaching, learning, and assess-ments; digital-age learning environments; professional development and program evaluation; digital citizenship; and content knowledge and professional growth.

“Everybody keeps talking about stu-dents needing 21st-century skills, but to-day’s kindergartners will be one-third of the way through the 21st century when they graduate from high school,” said

Michelle Jaeckel, the technology coach at Abingdon Elementary School in Arling-ton, Va. “We need to be preparing stu-dents for what’s next, not just right now.”

Jaeckel was a classroom teacher for seven years while earning a master’s de-gree in integrating technology in schools, then took her current position. She coach-es teachers through the SAMR model—substitution, augmentation, modifica-tion, redefinition—for ways to transform traditional paper-and-pencil activities to iPads and computers, demonstrating how technology can best affect instruction and student work.

Jaekel offers a rundown of a typical day: “Two weeks ago, I went from a kin-dergarten classroom for reading to 1st grade for math, to 2nd grade for social studies, then lunch, then 3rd grade, then back to 2nd grade for a grade-level meet-ing, and then back to 1st grade for word study. Then I met with the gifted resource teacher-specialist after school.”

In the classroom, she either models instruction, co-teaches, or simply offers support when needed. She also vets apps and websites, designs curriculum, and creates tutorials, demos, and materials. Dividing the workload with the classroom teacher, she said, provides the most suc-cessful environment for students: “I say, ‘That didn’t go well. Next time, what can we change to be successful for you and the students?’ or ‘That went really well. How can we go deeper?’ “

Maria deOlazo, a 2nd grade teacher at Abingdon Elementary with more than 25 years of teaching under her belt, was both excited and nervous about using new technology at first. She compares the need for technology coaches to being in the driver’s seat for the first time.

“Kids don’t learn to drive a car at 16, they learn from the age of 2,” she ex-plained. “They’ve been watching lots of different processes happening at the

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 5

same time for years—looking through the windshield, the two side mirrors, the rear-view mirror. Adults need the same oppor-tunity to watch and learn from those more expert than themselves. Also, people often forget that we sometimes have to do some-thing with somebody for a while before we can do it successfully on our own.”

Successful partnerships take trust and encourage risk, two traits leaders in the 9,850-student Flagstaff Unified school district in Arizona say they’ve increas-ingly seen with their technology coaches.

“The teachers who have someone there to be their cheerleader and coach them through their failures, those are the ones we see transforming their teaching prac-tice,” said Heather Zeigler, the district’s digital-literacy specialist, who helps pro-vide training and oversight of the coaches. “We find so often that teachers who try a new technology lesson or integration strategy without a coach are reluctant to ever try it again.”

Technology coaches in the Flagstaff district are full-time teachers who have applied to work closely with one or two peers during the day, typically during common collaboration times, before and after school, when they can get someone to cover their classroom for a bit, or when students are otherwise occupied. They only receive a $300 annual stipend, but they are given more formalized train-ing and support through a personalized-learning network designed to help them become better teachers.

That arrangement is based on re-search demonstrating that job-embedded training connected to classroom practice has a much greater impact in the class-room than other forms of professional de-velopment, said Zeigler.

The number of coaches fluctuates yearly depending on district initiatives: In 2013-14, during iPad rollouts, there were 33; in 2015-16, there are 11.

Luis Melo is one of them. “Being part of the first group of tech coaches for my school district helped me to go above and beyond,” said the 5th grade Spanish teacher at Puente de Hozho Trilingual Magnet School. He even uses his students to help his peers achieve mastery of the latest technology—buoying youngsters’ confidence with their own mastery in the process. “Having my students be part of each one of my presentations for teachers proves that students learn by interacting with concepts and contents.”

In South Carolina’s Richland County School District Two, which serves some 27,000 students, officials found that when

professional development was provided by a technology coach, teachers reported higher satisfaction. The teachers cited more oppor-tunities for personalized learning, authen-tic real-world applications, student collabo-ration, and technology integration.

The district has 36 full-time tech coaches, in a role that has shifted dramat-ically over the past five years and whose success has drawn visitors from other districts both in and out of the state, ac-cording to Donna Teuber, the director of technology integration and innovation.

Lenker, one of the district’s tech coaches, said the most common question

she would get from teachers used to be, “What’s the newest tool I’ve got to use?” These days, they are more apt to ask, “What do I want to do with it?”

“Now, I feel like I’m talking more about teaching than technology,” Lenker said.

Coverage of trends in K-12 innovation and efforts to put these new ideas and approach-es into practice in schools, districts, and classrooms is supported in part by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York at www.carnegie.org. Education Week re-tains sole editorial control over the content of this coverage.

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 6

Published September 30, 2015, in Education Week’s Special Report: Teacher PD in the Common-Core Era

To Tailor PD, D.C. Looks To Groom Teacher LeadersAn initiative in the nation’s capital aims to give select teachers more time to work with colleagues

By Anthony Rebora

wa s h i ng t on

on a sweltering morning in late July, dozens of stal-wart District of Colum-bia teachers were gath-ered around tables in an

air-conditioning-challenged elementary school gymnasium, laptops and water bottles spread before them.

“I want you to close your eyes … and imagine you are a teacher and one of your colleagues is going to be your coach,” said presenter Matt Radigan, a leadership coach with the New Orleans-based non-profit Leading Educators. “What would you want in an initial conversation?”

It was an apt reflection. The educators in the room were all newly minted teacher leaders, charged with providing hands-on mentoring to their peers and helping their schools reach their learning objectives in the year ahead. Over the course of this weeklong training at HD Cooke Elemen-tary School, they would dissect some of the finer points of instructional coaching, learning how to craft conversations with skeptical colleagues, gather evidence from classroom observations, and provide nu-anced feedback.

The summer coaching intensive is a key component of the District of Co-lumbia’s Teacher Leadership Innovation program, or TLI, a 2-year-old initiative designed to provide structural support for teacher-leader roles in schools. At the heart of the undertaking is the idea that, given time and resources, expert teachers can play an instrumental role in driving overall school improvement at a time of mounting instructional challenges, in-

cluding integration of the Common Core State Standards.

“First and foremost, it’s about ex-panding the reach of great teachers and ensuring we get more feedback to more teachers,” said Katie Michaels Burke, the district’s director of teacher leadership. “It’s a way of pushing great practice.”

The program in the District of Colum-bia is one of a small but growing number of initiatives around the country aimed at giving more concrete and practical form to “teacher leadership,” a term that has often remained vague in U.S. schools de-spite its rising cachet.

Formal efforts to give some teachers advanced roles outside the classroom are not new, extending back at least to the 1980s. But experts say that, though they are not without inherent risks, such pro-grams have gained standing in recent years as school leaders and policymakers have sought both to provide principals with greater bandwidth to make instruc-tional changes and give accomplished teachers more opportunities for career development. They’ve also been given a distinct boost by the Teacher Incentive Fund, or TIF, a federal grant program es-tablished in 2006 to provide financing for districts to establish performance-based-pay programs for teachers.

More than a titleThe District of Columbia’s initiative

is backed in large part by a five-year TIF grant and operated in partnership with Leading Educators, which special-izes in creating leadership-development models for teachers. The organization

supports similar programs in Kansas City, Mo.; Memphis, Tenn.; New Or-leans; and New York.

The program in the nation’s capital is voluntary for schools. A total of 29 of the district’s 111 schools—with 105 teacher leaders—are participating, up from 21 schools last year.

One explicit goal of the TLI is to make “teacher leader” more than an adulatory moniker. Teachers chosen for the position are given an annual stipend of $2,500—not a life-changing amount, district offi-cials concede, but on par with raises given for other promotions in the system. Per-haps no less important, the teachers have significant stretches of release time—as much as half their total hours—built into their schedules to observe and work with their colleagues.

There is also the training aspect. The coaching intensive was the second of two weeklong sessions held for new teacher leaders this past summer. In the first, the teachers worked with facilita-tors and their schools’ leadership teams to frame out how the new arrangement would work in the year ahead, develop-ing school and individual action plans, detailing teacher-practice and student-learning goals, and aligning schedules. (Picture classroom walls strewn with dense networks of sticky notes and marked-up easel-pad pages.)

During the school year, the teacher leaders meet weekly with coaches from Leading Educators to review their prog-ress, analyze data, and hone their tech-niques. They also attend quarterly group-training sessions organized by the district on coaching and leadership.

While some prominent national teach-er-leadership efforts are predicated on giv-ing accomplished teachers a greater voice in education policymaking, the District of Columbia’s TLI program focuses on har-nessing their instructional know-how.

In particular, the program seeks to leverage teacher-leaders’ experience to create a model for more customized, school-specific professional-development opportunities in schools.

Since the teacher leaders are work-ing alongside their mentees, the “PD [is] much more targeted to schools’ needs, and much more honed to the teacher-practice needs,” said Burke, the district’s teacher-leadership director. “This isn’t some per-son from central office coming in and say-ing, ‘This is what we’re doing now.’ “

The educators involved in the pro-gram tend to subscribe to this notion instinctively.

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 7

Rhonda Ferguson, a new teacher lead-er in early childhood at Turner Elemen-tary, a high-poverty school on the city’s southeast side, believes that the teachers she’s supervising will have an advantage she didn’t have in her first years in the classroom.

“They’ll have someone who under-stands the work we do and what they’re going through,” she said. “I’ll be helping them figure out how to make these things work—able to spell out priorities while also being able to step back if needed and look at the individual needs of the teachers.”

For school administrators, meanwhile, the prospect of expanded instructional-leadership capacity within a school can be difficult to pass up. Ferguson’s principal, Eric Bethel, says that the primary reason he chose to adopt the program this year is that “the work of turning around a school is too much for just a principal and a lead-ership team and [one] coach.”

Bethel is in his second year at Turner Elementary, tasked with making signifi-cant achievement gains in a school that is among the city’s lowest performing. He said that, by freeing up three of his top teachers to guide their colleagues, the TLI program “essentially builds capacity to do more, faster,” including deepening use of the common standards.

“Last year, we kind of attacked defi-cits at a smaller scale,” Bethel said. “With TLI, we can extend the work. We can con-centrate on using data [more effectively] to target areas of need and develop strate-gies to grow.”

inherent ChallengesSo far, at least as judged by educators’

perceptions, the program appears to be meeting expectations.

The district has not yet parsed the stu-dent-outcome data in connection with the TLI, but according to an internal survey conducted last winter, 90 percent of teach-ers who were supported by teacher leaders said the program has had a positive im-pact on their practice, while 95 percent of teacher leaders said their new role has al-lowed them to expand their influence and reach more students. Fully 100 percent of the principals who responded said the program has improved collaboration and instruction in their schools.

But experts caution that, despite their common-sense appeal, high-quality teach-er-leadership or -advancement programs can be difficult to sustain. Historically, they have even been “a little bit fraught,” said Ju-lia E. Koppich, a San Francisco-based edu-

cation consultant who has provided techni-cal assistance to recipients of TIF grants.

Koppich said that one common problem with career-ladder programs for teachers is that they often rest on the assumption that “just because you’re a good teacher ... means you’re going to be a good mentor.”

“But some great teachers don’t neces-sarily know how to work well [in advis-ing] adults,” she said. “Not everyone’s a good mentor—which maybe can’t be learned in a week.”

Another potential risk is that, particu-larly in high-pressure situations, school leaders can come to rely on teachers with outside-the-classroom roles to take on administrative responsibilities for which they have not been trained or paid.

“Exploitation has happened in a num-ber of cases,” said Koppich. “There’s been some abuse of programs by principals, though not usually intentionally. They just saw another person who could help with the tasks that needed to be done.”

But the coordinators of the District of Columbia’s initiative believe that, particularly after making some early recalibrations, they have been deliber-ate enough in their planning to counter such complications.

Burke pointed to the program’s ex-plicitly team-oriented developmental ap-proach, saying that the ongoing training is designed to deepen both teachers and principals’ understanding of their roles and their school and individual action plans. She also noted that the district con-ducts quarterly reviews of each participat-ing school to make sure the program is on track and to make adjustments as needed.

“We know this is incredibly hard work,” she said.

Coverage of policy efforts to improve the teaching profession is supported by a grant from the Joyce Foundation, at www.joycefdn.org/Programs/Education. Education Week retains sole edito-rial control over the content of this coverage.

Top: District of Columbia teacher leaders study documentation during the summer training on instructional coaching at HD Cooke Elementary School. The district’s Teacher Leadership Innovation initiative is intended to leverage teacher leaders’ experience to create more customized, school-specific professional-development opportunities.

Bottom: Newly minted teacher leaders from Bancroft Elementary School in Washington go through an exercise during a summer training session on instructional coaching. The summer coaching intensive is a key component of the District of Columbia’s Teacher Leadership Innovation program, designed to provide structural supports for teacher-leader roles in schools.

— Photos by T.J. Kirkpatrick for Education W

eek

Educator Viewpoints on Personalized Professional Learning

Strategies that Work Austin ISD Assures Relevant, Engaging, Aligned Professional Learning

BackgroundAustin, Texas, is often called “Silicon Hills”—and Austin Independent School District (Austin ISD) blazes a visionary trail to prepare its students for a high-tech, fast-paced future. Covering over 230 square miles and 130 sites, the District’s mission sets a Texas-sized goal: to reinvent the urban school experience ensuring that all 83,364 students graduate college-, career-, and life-ready.

The District’s Professional Development team—charged with providing ongoing learning opportunities for its 13,000 staff members—ensures teachers and leaders are prepared to fulfill that goal. According to the District’s Professional Development Guide, “We believe that continuous and innovative professional learning created through collaborative partnerships is inclusive and responsive to individual needs, empowering staff to facilitate all students in achieving their potential; and we know from research and experience that professional development is an integral component of transformational change.”

The ChallengeBut it’s not easy. The District’s Professional Development Guide continues, “To flourish in a context where change-making is expected, people need new skills: the flexibility to rapidly and openly adapt to change, to think creatively and solve complex problems, to be comfortable with ambiguity, to use incomplete information and collaborate in robust networks to solve new problems. Our professional development must be infused with innovative instructional practices that build capacity and expertise in these new skills.”

Austin faced challenges on the road to more personalized professional development; how could they…

• Deliver consistently high quality, aligned, differentiated professional learning for teachers and principals?

• Unify professional development opportunities in a district with a culture of site-driven decision-making?

• Shift people from a compliance mindset to a growth mindset?

• Address the time pressures that everyone feels?

• Give teachers more power to choose their own pathway?

• Leverage new technologies to address persistent professional development issues?

If the District was asking teachers to differentiate, personalize and juggle in a high stakes, high profile environment, how could the Professional Development team do the same for Austin ISD’s educators? How could they provide the structures needed to retain, reward, and value their teachers?

ADVERTISEMENT

Educator Viewpoints on Personalized Professional Learning

Solution OverviewThe Austin ISD team dedicated four years to pivot from compliance to connection in professional development. This includes a theory of action whereby:

• Consistently high quality professional development…

• Improves staff’s content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and skills…

• Leading to improved instructional and classroom practice…

• That results in better outcomes for students.

The theory of action came to life through two interlocking initiatives: a new, online human capital management platform and the Professional Pathways for Teachers program.

First, Austin ISD implemented a comprehensive Human Capital Platform (HCP) to automate professional development and appraisal processes. The platform unifies PD and appraisal throughout the District, creating one cohesive solution for teacher and principal professional growth. The solution allows educators to discover, register for, and participate in all kinds of professional learning opportunities—from in-person sessions to professional learning networks, online courses, on-demand resources, and more. Staff can browse the catalog for the activities that will enhance their professional skills. Plus, the solution facilitates alignment between appraisal outcomes and professional development opportunities, so teachers and appraisers can find professional learning opportunities targeted at specific growth needs.

Second, the Professional Pathways for Teachers program was developed to bring together appraisal, compensation, leadership pathways, and professional development. David Reinhart, Administrative Supervisor for Professional Development shares, “Teachers choose a pathway that best suits their needs and aspirations. With this approach, professional development ties back to the appraisal to meet individual needs and provide leadership growth. This work focuses resources on building the capacity of our teachers through a comprehensive system of supports. The ultimate goal of the new teacher appraisal system is to promote professional growth for all teachers.” And Sunset Valley Elementary teacher Katelyn Reinhart notes, “The PPfT Appraisal is more of a tool than an appraisal because it helps teachers guide their own learning and discover their own strengths and weaknesses within the profession.”

But in a district that values site-based autonomy as well as cross-organizational collaboration, no one department crafted these initiatives—it’s always a team effort. A wide variety of constituencies shared their voices in the creation of this new approach to professional development, appraisal, and pathways. Stakeholder groups represented all invested departments—Professional Development, Appraisal, Human Resources, Management, Information Systems, Principals and Curriculum Staff—as well as representatives from the District’s associations, Education Austin and the American Federation of Teachers.

Superior Professional

Development

Improved Knowledge

& Skills

Improved Practice

ImprovedStudent Results

ADVERTISEMENT

Educator Viewpoints on Personalized Professional Learning

Making Professional Learning “REAL”RelevantProfessional learning in Austin ISD is more relevant than ever before. With the Human Capital Platform, professional development choices are in a teacher’s hands. David explains, “PD used to be top down. An administrator would decide what PD was happening on the campus for the teacher. Now teachers can choose and have their own ability to create their own plan and decide for themselves in what areas they want to grow.”

And, with the Professional Pathways for Teachers in place as a district practice, embedded in the Human Capital Platform, teachers can create their own pathway. So, PD now is bottom up—teachers create their own PLP and decide what PD is relevant to them. Plus, the connection between the appraisal and PD options gives the district a chance to more easily recommend professional development that is aligned to the growth needs of the teachers.

None of this could happen without the automation muscle of the District’s Human Capital Platform. David expounds, “We love that we’re able to have teachers’ appraisals and PD in one place—that’s a powerful thing.” Plus, perhaps surprisingly, Director of Professional Development Jan John notes, “The electronic link between appraisals and PD created more buy-in than anything else we’ve done.”

EngagedThe Austin ISD Professional Development team doesn’t take engagement for granted—it makes sure every provider is prepared to create highly engaging, high quality professional learning opportunities through its Designing Effective Professional Learning program. This initiative ensures that professional learning is built with adult learning principles in mind and specifically addresses active learning to keep engagement high. See further details on this in the “A Tool to Use” section, which outlines the District’s approach to training PD providers.

Plus, Austin ISD is working at the cutting edge of professional development delivery. In today’s day and age, teachers expect highly engaging learning experiences and collaboration that leverages the digital ecosystem. David notes, “Collaboration has changed a lot. It used to be just contained with the campus. Now, with technology, we have the ability to expand that. You have the opportunity to build your own professional learning network and personal learning network, anywhere at anytime.”

The Human Capital Platform includes three “assurances” that PD providers must answer to ensure alignment between professional learning and district initiatives.

1. How is this course aligned to district initiative programs and/or goals and what measurable student achievement outcomes will be achieved through these professional development efforts?

2. How will you provide continued support for implementation of learning to ensure long term change?

3. How does this professional learning opportunity model a 21st century classroom including the use of technology tools and resources to support engaged students with flexible skillsets that enable them to contribute to and thrive in a connected and perpetually changing world?

ADVERTISEMENT

Educator Viewpoints on Personalized Professional Learning

Aligned Alignment between professional development, the district’s strategic initiatives, and teacher’s professional learning needs is a tricky business. As David notes, “One of the biggest challenges we face is consistency and alignment. It’s difficult to get all PD aligned to the strategic plan and to make sure everyone has the opportunity to receive differentiated PD that’s aligned to needs, goals and campus initiatives.”

Austin ISD is highly intentional about being sure that professional development is aligned with strategic goals. The District requires every professional development opportunity that is listed in the Human Capital Platform to show alignment to district initiatives, the Professional Pathways for Teachers, instructional strands of the appraisal, focus/content/subject areas and student outcomes, among other things.

With the alignments in place, teachers can find PD aimed at their needs and interests. Not only can teachers search by the alignments—appraisers can also use the alignments to recommend or require professional development based on a teacher’s growth areas, further strengthening the connection between areas of need and professional learning.

LearningAustin ISD is committed to the assessment of the effectiveness of professional development in supporting student achievement. The District assessment process is based on Thomas R. Guskey’s Five Levels of Professional Development and informs ongoing improvements in system effectiveness, efficiency, and customer satisfaction. The PD team is working to build accountability directly into the Human Capital Platform by implementing two surveys—one that is provided to PD participants immediately after a learning experience and another six weeks later to gauge impact on instructional practices and student achievement. As the District’s Professional Development Guide observes, though, “Due to the complex nature of teaching and learning and the many intervening variables, it is not possible to make simple causal inferences. However, we can collect good evidence about the contributions of professional development on student outcomes. By including systematic information gathering and analysis as a central component of professional development, the success of the learning opportunities is enhanced.”

AMPProfessional Learning

meaningfulactionable personalized

Looking for More Real-life Examples?Performance Matters’ Salon Series: Educator Viewpoints on Personalized Professional Learning offers a fresh way for K-12 school district leaders to engage in ongoing, open, constructive, true-to-life, energizing dialogue to propel the creation of more personalized professional learning climates for teachers. Each “episode” of the 2016 Salon Series highlights a key aspect of crafting a personalized professional learning environment—with topical reports that unpack the insights gleaned from the Performance Matters-sponsored Personalized Professional Learning Survey and focused interactions about what has and hasn’t worked best—and how to move forward into a future with more actionable, meaningful, and personalized professional learning for educators.

Access the complete highlights from the Personalized Professional Learning Survey. Learn more about the survey results, best practices and obstacles in personalized professional learning. Download episode guides at insights.performancematters.com

ADVERTISEMENT

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 8

CoMMENtArY

Published October 23, 2016, in Education Week’s Finding Common Ground Blog

5 reasons Principals should Be CoachedBy Peter DeWitt

if you’re a principal, would you work with a coach?

The premise around coaching has always been that coaches help teachers become better at their

practice. Some of those teachers may need growth in a few areas like class-room management and student engage-ment. Other times those teachers may excel in many areas, like Michael Jor-dan excelled in basketball and Wayne Gretsky did in hockey (I’m showing my age with those two examples), and they need strategies to help them go from asking students questions to inspiring students to do the asking.

One of the other beliefs about coach-ing is that it’s good for all teachers, and no one should be ashamed to work with a coach. Many principals believe that all of their teachers should engage in a coach-ing relationship with an instructional coach. The focus is always on growth.

We’re supposed to have a growth mindset, right? We always ask our stu-dents to have one.

If it’s so important for teachers to work with a coach, then why aren’t more principals working with a coach to im-prove their leadership practices? Since posting this blog (If Coaching Is So Im-portant, Why Aren’t More Principals Be-ing Coached?), I have heard from some districts, organizations and leaders who are being coached, which is awesome. It gives hope that principals are learners as well as leaders.

However, many leaders believe that coaching is only good for teachers. Why? Why is it good for one group in a school but not for the people responsible for running the school? Is it because principals know everything they need to know already? That can’t be true, because education is about lifelong learning, so we don’t know everything we always need to know.

Research by experts like Jim Knight (I’m an instructional coaching trainer

for Knight), show that coaching is one of the most impactful forms of profes-sional development because it’s individu-alized and based on a goal chosen by a teacher or co-constructed with the coach if the teacher needs help choosing a goal. Knight’s research showed that when teachers (and most likely principals too) attend a normal sit-and-get professional development session they lose up to 90% of what they learned.

It makes sense, right? We attend PD and see some great speaker that we’ve always wanted to see, but we never take the time...or aren’t allowed the time...to truly see how what the speaker suggests

fits into our practice (That’s why full day workshops can be more beneficial be-cause the presenter should be helping at-tendees see how it all fits together). We get back to our classrooms after seeing the dynamic speaker, and we put our learning to the side of our desk...and don’t use most of it because real life gets in the way and we revert to old habits.

What we can learn from Knight’s research is that working with a coach can help us retain up to 90% of what we learned. It’s easy to figure out why. When the teacher, or in this case the principal, chooses the goal they are more likely to do the work to reach the goal. If the principal doesn’t know what goal to go after, the coach can help them co-construct one.

Additionally, a coach helps the prin-cipal go through the learning process by sharing resources with them and talking through those resources. Then, the coach observes the principal in action and pro-vides feedback focused on that goal the principal chose.

Feedback is the key in any relation-ship. It doesn’t matter if we’re talking about principal to teacher, teacher to teacher, coach to teacher, etc. According to Hattie (I work with John as a Visible

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 9

Learning trainer), feedback can have around a .75 effect size. The reason why it’s effect size is almost double Hattie’s hinge point of .40 which provides a year’s worth of growth for a year’s input, is that the feedback given is focused on the goal chosen.

What doesn’t happen in most feedback conversations though is the discussion of success criteria. Success criteria is sim-ply the discussion about what success looks like, and it is crucial to providing effective feedback (Hattie).

For example, if a leader and coach choose the goal of having more im-pactful teacher observation post con-versations, the success criteria would involve such examples of watching an expert video showing a successful post conversation or the coach and leader would engage in a role playing activ-ity to get a better understanding of how a successful conversation should go. They might even video tape it and watch it together to critique each oth-er’s role in the dialogue.

So, in the cycle the coach and leader would choose the goal, provide success criteria of what the goal should look like, and then provide feedback on the goal to get it closer to the success cri-teria they set. And yes, I know what you’re thinking. If we provide the suc-cess criteria at the beginning, why does the learner need the coach or teacher anymore? They still need that outside expert because, just because they know what success looks like, doesn’t mean they know how to put it into action. For example, I may know what a successful

tennis match looks like but it doesn’t mean I’m instantly going to be able to do a powerful serve and volley.

5 reasons to Consider CoachingOne of the most important aspects to

any coaching program is to make sure the right coach is chosen. After the coach is chosen the relationship between the coach and the learner is critical because they need to have a relationship where they believe they can be vulnerable with one another.

There are at least 5 reasons why prin-cipals, just like teachers, can benefit from coaching.

those reasons are:Everyone needs feedback —Many

times superintendents do not have the time to observe their principals in action during those times that are most impor-tant (i.e. Teacher observations, faculty meetings, etc.). Principals need to give feedback but they also need to get it too so they can improve on their practice. Ac-cording to Otto Scharmer, we all have a blind spot that we lead from. Coaches can help principals understand their blind spot by observing them during those most important times.

Learning—The whole premise be-hind coaching is that the coach and par-ticipant learn with each other and learn from each other. When principals en-gage in learning, and model that need to learn to their staff, it can have power-ful results.

Time—We often state that we don’t have time to get things done, but we waste the very time we often have on oth-er things when we could be engaging in powerful conversations. Coaches can help principals utilize their time better when it comes to faculty meetings, walkthroughs, PLC’s and teacher observations. Coaches can also help leaders save time by becom-ing more proactive as opposed to reactive.

Growth—If we believe that coaches can help teachers grow as practioners, we should also believe that coaches can help principals grow as well. This does not just mean as a learner, but in their relationships with staff, students and parents. However, the coaches have to be high quality professionals who have leadership experience and understand research as well as high impact strate-gies. Those coaches also need to be able to listen to the context that the principal is working in.

Connecting the Dots—Very often leaders suffer from initiative fatigue in the same way that teachers do. It hap-pens because district leaders may quickly chase after the new shiny toy and never fully explain how that new shiny toy fits into their context. Coaches often have the experience of working in many different school districts and can help principals see how they all fit together.

If you’re a principal, would you work with a coach?

Peter DeWitt, Ed.D. is the author of several books including Collaborative Leadership: 6 Influences That Matter Most (September, 2016. Corwin Press). Connect with Peter on Twitter.

CoMMENtArY

Published July 10, 2016, in Education Week’s Finding Common Ground Blog

Professional development: Are You Content With the scenario?By Peter DeWitt

“Just because you’re stuck with their pol-icies doesn’t mean you need to be stuck with their mindset.” —Michael Fullan A

hh ... professional devel-opment. The big P.D. We all go through it. Some-times we want to be a part of it. Other times

we’re “voluntold” for it. And many times it feels as if it has been forced upon us because of a “district/division initiative,” state mandate or account-ability measure.

If PD is not done correctly it can help lead to teachers feeling enabled instead of empowered, which leads to more and more teachers finding themselves with a low level of self-efficacy. A low level of self-ef-ficacy means that those teachers feel like they have little impact on the students sit-ting in their room (Ashton & Webb).

Why do they feel this way? For many reasons. Some may be personal while oth-ers are professional. They work in a build-ing where they have to follow all sort of rules, and have to attend PD where they have little voice.

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 10

Fortunately, there are a large variety of types of PD that can help meet the needs of teachers. We have edcamps, which are free and loaded with teacher voice, and we have state and national conferences as well. We also have opportunities for learning which include district/division-wide, building lev-el, regional or individual/partner.

It’s great to have so many opportunities, but it also puts us at risk of going in a num-ber of different directions. Everyone should be able to dive into their own learning...es-pecially our students, but it’s also important to think about offering better PD as a group. PD that can focus on important learning for all (centered on students), that also happens to include opportunities to include teacher and leader voice.

When planning Pd, try to answer the following questions:

• Do people know why they’re attending?• Does the presenter have learning inten-

tions/success criteria that match what you want?

•Have you had multiple opportunities to speak to the presenter about what you need?

• When possible make sure that the PD chosen has been selected by a group (i.e. teachers, leaders, specialists, etc.) that is representative of the district/division (sometimes schools don’t have a choice because it’s a mandate from the state or ministry).

• Will this PD help you improve on your current reality?

• Are leaders and teachers going to attend it together so they can engage in impor-tant open and honest dialogue?

Content With the scenario

Recently, I had the opportunity to work with leaders and teachers from the New Brunswick Teacher’s Association (NBTA) in Atlantic Canada. The NBTA institute is sponsored by the four teacher org’s in the region in the PEITF (PEI), NBTA (New Brunswick), NSTU (Nova Scotia), and the NLTA (Newfoundland and Labrador). They brought their A game and were high-ly engaged in asking questions, pushing back on issues they didn’t agree with, and creating new ideas together.

As I was sitting in the room after par-ticipants left for the day improving on the plan for the next day, Meghan, an educa-tor who specializes in working with disen-franchised youth, came to me to say they

were all “content with the scenario.” I took it as a compliment, and assumed it was Canadian for, “Wow! You’re awesome!”

We laughed about it that day, and then her colleagues laughed about it with her for many hour after. She explained later that “content with the scenario” meant that they were onboard with the content, engaged in the process, and were leaving each day thinking more about how it was practical for them, whether they were a teacher or a leader.

As a former teacher and principal, I have been on the receiving end of really great...and really bad...PD, and have been thinking a lot about it, especially because I engage in it every week. To engage in au-thentic, rather than compliant PD, there needs to be the following elements:

Content —When it came to working with NBTA, day one focused on research (Hattie) and day 2 focused on instructional strategies and understanding the com-plexities of working with adults (Knight). Day 3 focused on putting it all together in the context that each participant can un-derstand. The content of the PD is impor-tant, and I know that sounds like common sense, but not everyone who engages in PD opportunities has given a lot of thought around the content being taught.

Context—It’s important for everyone in the room, including the consultant/facilitator to understand the context that people were working in. As hard as someone may work to understand it before the actual PD, it’s really impor-tant to set up a dynamic where we can learn more about the context during the collaborative conversations we set up. It does not mean that the context becomes a barrier to why we can’t do it, but rath-er the context helps us understand our needs so we can do it better.

Clarity—Whenever PD is delivered, it’s important that we are all clear on why we are learning together, and why this content is important. It should not be about a program, as much as it’s about a mindset change and how to move forward to make sure we have developed practical applications. It also means that the facilitator was able to deliver the info in their head that participants can clear-ly understand. People shouldn’t walk out scratching their heads wondering what it was all about.

Collaboration—During workshops it’s important to get people up and mov-ing a lot. PD should be about building syn-ergy within the room, and setting up new relationships where people can “phone a friend” when they are finding themselves

struggling. People should walk out of PD meeting several new people who they can use as part of their professional/personal learning network. Sit and get should be a thing of the past.

Climate—From the very beginning, the facilitator needs to set up a classroom climate that is conducive for learning. This is not always easy to do in a one hour or one day session, but it’s important that participants feel welcome, and also feel as if they can ask questions or pushback on things they disagree with.

in the EndThe conversation that participants

have in PD is equally as important as the content we are trying to cover. Those con-versations allow for facilitators to walk around and formatively assess whether participants are on board and understand-ing what is being learned. There is no point in covering curriculum if the learn-ers in the room are lost in translation.

Which brings me back to the educa-tors from NBTA. They took 3 days out of their summer, and paid to be a part of PD where they had to sleep in dorm rooms on a university campus, because the PD was held on that same cam-pus. They stayed together, ate together, played together and learned together. They were highly engaged.

Which brings me back to the first point of all of this. The educators of NBTA came ready to learn because they wanted to be there. As much as we can, in those times that we have some sort of control, we should be offering PD that people want to be a part of, and not PD people feel they have to attend. That will only lead to en-abling instead of empowering.

What helps even more is when the learners, regardless of whether they feel they want to be there, approach all PD with an open mind about what is being learned, because it may be something that helps change their mindset, and helps reach a few more students in their class-rooms. Michael Fullan said it best, when he stated, “Just because you’re stuck with their policies doesn’t mean you need to be stuck with their mindset.” And that leads back to content, context, clarity, collabora-tion and climate.

When it comes to your PD...are you con-tent with the scenario?

Peter DeWitt, Ed.D. is the author of several books including Collaborative Leadership: 6 Influences That Matter Most (September, 2016. Corwin Press). Connect with Peter on Twitter.

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 11

CoMMENtArY

Published June 16, 2016, in Education Week’s Global Learning Blog

Trends in Professional Development For Globally Minded EducatorsBy Jennifer Williams

inspirational. Empowering. Rel-evant. Customized. Collaborative. Supercharged. Fun! All words used by educators when asked to describe their ideal type of profes-

sional development. Many of today’s edu-cators are seeking alternatives to tradi-tional forms of professional learning in an effort to enrich their practice and support student success in the classroom. Globally minded educators are finding a host of innovative ways to design their professional development (PD) plans to meet the needs of in-structional learning objectives. Sophisticated, self-directed models allow teachers to truly view the world as their learn-ing spaces and harness the transformational power of both collaboration and new tech-nologies. Armed with voice and choice, educators are able to ex-amine global perspectives and incorporate both formal and in-formal activities to extend their understandings of the world. Recent trends in modern pro-fessional development are revo-lutionizing the process of learn-ing for teachers and shifting practice in classrooms around the world.

trend #1: Backward design Planning

Current models of profes-sional development are action-able. Charged with a clearly designed, intentional purpose, many educators are looking at the end goal that connects to a larger vision and working backwards to create PD plans. Once purpose is defined, educators can strategically match learning opportuni-ties to objectives and create action steps

to achieving knowledge on topics. For in-stance, a globally minded educator seek-ing to create an international audience for student writing may look to better under-stand both standards of practice and tech tools for collaboration. In this example, a teacher customizing a year-long PD plan may select an online conference for learn-

ing more on international writing stan-dards, a book study on global collabora-tion with Professional Learning Network (PLN) peers, and expert interviews with educational consultants from several ed-tech companies. With an intentional focus

on gaining skills and competencies, this educator can effectively meet stated goals to best support instruction and student learning.

trend #2: responsive to Multiple Learning styles

Lecture-style, one-size-fits-all PD is being reimagined with modern formats that respond to varying learning styles. Educa-tors today looking for flexible options to match schedules and personalized needs are find-ing choices that are hands-on, social, and multimodal, incor-porating text, audio, video, and graphics. These learner-centric offerings empower educators to take charge of professional growth in their search for natural connections between content, experience, and avail-able resources. If we move beyond mandated PD that is designed-for-many and viewed as sit-and-get direct instruc-tion, then personalized experi-ences connecting educators to their core beliefs about teach-ing and learning in global ed-ucation can become a reality. Personalized and matched to multiple learning styles, many global educators are participat-ing in the #100DayChallenge, an open-ended call to action allowing participants to select one growth activity to complete daily for 100 days. Committed to extending knowledge of glob-

al topics in education and overall personal happiness, many teachers are choosing to complete the challenge by watching one TEDTalk of their choice each day and then documenting learning in the form of sketchnotes. These visual representations

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 12

of how concepts are understood are then shared on social media, such as Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook, for discussion and extension. Diverse contexts such as these bring together multiple learning styles for a better and more authentic learning experience that can be scaled for global learning.

trend #3: Crowd-sourced Learning

Participatory learning opportunities are bringing focus to the importance of the collective input of educators gathered through crowd-sourcing practices. By in-corporating the voices of many and enlist-ing all educators in the decision making process, learning experiences can essen-tially put teachers at the center of their own learning. Educators seeking to bring the world to their classrooms and bring their classrooms to the world can dive deeply into relevant dialogue with peers and experts and can have the ability to ap-ply new learning to school designs in real time. In turn, these practices are person-alizing professional learning—making the peer-to-peer learning movement the “PD of choice” for many educators. As part of this shift, Edcamps as “unconference events” are quickly becoming primary components of PD plans for many educa-tors of the world. With Edcamps, learn-ing is participant-driven as sessions for the day are determined organically with teachers themselves indicating topics on which they want to learn and topics on which they want share. Edcamps are free and open to all educators worldwide, and learning is centered on the passions and questions relevant in the lives of attend-ees and their learning communities.

trend #4: Micro-Credentialing & digital Badging

In addition to being empowered to de-sign personalized plans for professional growth, educators are now charged with also determining how learning will be demonstrated and validated for recogni-tion. Evidencing practices, such as micro-credentialing and digital badging, can serve to document professional growth in ways that are universally recognizable for educators around the world. These compe-tency-based models provide systems that can continuously recognize professional learning and sharing of best practices regardless of time, place, or rate of learn-ing. Global educators seeking to document skills and competencies in PD plans in a

practical and focused manner can earn micro-credentials through multiple orga-nizations and agencies. Once an appro-priate program is selected, an educator can follow steps of (1) selecting skills or competencies for development, (2) collect-ing and organizing evidencing materials (e.g., class videos, photos capturing work, video logs of progress, field notes, etc.), and (3) submitting evidence in the form of a portfolio or digital artifact to showcase development of specified skill. Following submission, field experts review provid-ed documentation to ensure established standards of mastery are met, and rec-ognition is awarded. Often times, digital badges are offered to serve as a recogniz-able validation of accomplishments, posi-tioning educators as valued resources in their global learning networks.

trend #5: sustained inquiryFor a true shift in practice, educa-

tors need to be supported with space and time to develop depth of knowledge over extended periods and across mul-tiple learning environments. Sustained inquiry allows for educators to approach questions in their worlds through an it-erative process of design thinking with trial, evaluation, redefining, and reimag-ining. Learning can be collaborative, net-worked, and continuous, and by working together in connected spaces (both with-in schools and within virtual PLNs), edu-cators can work together with others to gain understandings from diverse ideas and perspectives and reflective think-ing. Viewed by many as the main-stay of connected learning and sustained inquiry, Twit-ter has evolved to be a virtual space enabling educators to take ownership over their professional growth. E d u -cators with personal- i z e d Professional Learn-ing Networks are es-tablishing cultures of transparent shar-ing in 140 characters or less. Addressing challenges, explor-ing new practices, and celebrating successes, inspired educators of the world are exemplify-ing sustained inquiry with use of hashtags and Twit-ter chats, such as #globaled-chat and #edchat. More, with Twit-

ter as an entry point for dialogue and discussion, many educators are extend-ing conversations with new colleagues of the world to other networked platforms, such as blogging, Voxer, Periscope, In-stagram, and even collaborative study trips, for further exploration.

Set to develop a professional develop-ment plan for learning and growth, glob-ally minded educators can thoughtfully and purposefully explore topics that are significant in the worlds of their students and their own lives as professionals. These new trends in global PD are not only characterized as providing purpose and motivation, but also serve to empower educators with autonomy and agency to revolutionize the landscape of education and positively change the practice of how educators access and share information for professional growth.

Jennifer Williams is a literacy specialist at Cal-liope Global and adjunct professor at Saint Leo University.

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 13

CoMMENtArY

Published May 24, 2016, in Education Week Teacher

Why Professional development should Be More Like ‘MasterChef’By William J. Tolley

the alarm goes off. You roll out of bed, sidle to the kitchen, and have a glass of water while you fumble for the button on the cof-fee maker. Semi-alert, you sud-

denly remember: Today is a professional development day. Perhaps you just issued an imaginary sigh of relief, reassured by your school’s focus on staff development and eager to engage with your colleagues over meaningful professional develop-ment. Or perhaps your spirit just died and you counted in your head how many sick days you still have in your bank.

The trending apathy toward PD is ironic in that it coincides with rich de-velopments in teaching. Maker spaces, gamification, personalized learning, stan-dards-based grading—while not taking hold everywhere, these modern learning concepts define the current conversation on enhancing learning for students, so why not teachers? How many times do we have to hear that interactivity and inqui-ry are the best forms for learning from a hired expert lecturing from a text-laden PowerPoint presentation before someone does the math?

Here’s an idea. What if teacher pro-fessional development looked more like what transpires on the popular reality show “MasterChef”? What if our trainers were expert chefs, and we engaged with our peers the way they ask their amateur chefs to? What are the best practices of “MasterChef” that should be brought to our PD table?

GamificationAs the most obvious and distinct char-

acteristic, “MasterChef” gamifies learn-ing for its contestants. It is important here to recognize the distinction between games and gamification. On the show, proficient home cooks race around the “MasterChef” kitchen competing in “chal-lenges” that push them to cook this, cut that, or recognize essential ingredients in

a context that motivates them to meet their goals.

Of course, it is also important for the PD developer to realize that some teach-ers, just like people everywhere, are not as tuned into gaming as others. They should also remember that one of the key com-plaints teachers have about their PD is that they are often treated like children. The majority of teachers won’t mind a lit-tle competition, but no teacher likes to be treated like they don’t know what they’re doing.

Mastery Learning, differentiation, Personalization

The amateur chefs on “MasterChef” get multiple opportunities as members of teams and in individual challenges to prove their mastery of a particular skill. Those who demonstrate mastery are “safe” and removed from competition in that particular challenge. Then they are allowed to advise their peers, and may be

taken away for a personalized training session with one of the hosts—advanced training they have proven themselves qualified for.

Back in the studio, the contestants who have not yet mastered the task are given further opportunities to improve and prove competence under the close supervi-sion of the expert hosts. This is the very definition of differentiated learning—how have TV cooks gotten there before us?

Peer and Expert Evaluation (With a Nice Aussie touch)

Teachers aren’t scared of tough-talk—they are scared of the perceived repercus-sions. If an experienced mentor or peer tells a young teacher to work on classroom management, counsels on how to achieve this goal, and supports regularly through direct observation, the teacher is not going to cry because he or she is a professional adult. The fear creeps in when a teacher thinks that an appraisal of an isolated as-

—source: M

asterchef on Fox

Personalized Professional Development / edweek.org 14

pect of the total skill set will result in an unsatisfactory yearly rating. We tell our students to not be afraid to fail, so why do we still let this fear fester among teach-ers? Professional development should nev-er provide cause for permanent censure.

By contrast, the contestants on “Mas-terChef” work in an environment that keeps the pressure on, but in a way that motivates and inspires. When they are working hard, they get kudos. When they are slacking, they get a kick in the patookas. Even the normally sweet Aus-tralian hosts George, Gary, and Matt (“MasterChef” U.S. host Gordon Ramsay is a tad too aggressive for our purposes) will lay down the science when a dish is ill-prepared or tastes bad. But the contes-tants almost always get a chance to re-deem themselves and try again.

This sounds like a relationship most teachers yearn for when starting their careers. Instead, far too often, without hands-on guidance, we are told to aspire to “satisfactory.” I don’t know a single pro-fessional educator who wouldn’t be willing to nurse a few bruises to their ego in ex-change for truly constructive critique.

MicrocredentialsThe ultimate prize in “MasterChef” is

the coveted golden immunity pin. Once in possession of a pin, contestants can use it to sit out any elimination contest, surviv-ing to fight another day.

Translated into the teacher’s world, the case for microcredentials is strong and growing. Among their many benefits, just like on “MasterChef,” microcredentials prove mastery of a particular subject or skill and can relieve teachers of being forced to repeat training unnecessarily. By designating who is trained on certain issues, schools can also identify experts in these areas to lead sessions (rather than sit through them) and assign mentors to less-proficient peers.

Speaking of leading sessions, re-member those hired guns lecturing at their keynotes? Let’s trade that model for this one and see what synergy we conjure up when teachers don’t passive-ly listen to the big-name instructional experts of the world, but those lumi-naries throw on their aprons and dig in to help—or compete with—teachers in writing units, crafting lesson plans, and designing project-based learning experiences. I would suggest that the teacher who produces a better back-wardly designed unit than Jay Mc-Tighe has earned the right to sit out the

next Understanding by Design training session—or lead it!

redemption and EmpowermentProfessional development that borrows

from the model of “MasterChef” will chal-lenge teachers in a way that builds grit, instills meaning, and conveys all the ben-efits we attribute to competitive sports—and extol to our students. Yes, we will have to brace ourselves for the occasional critique, sometimes in the presence of our peers, but we also create opportunities for praise and commendation. When was the last time an expert watched one of your lessons and told you it was perfection?

The “MasterChef” franchise has even worked out that this environment works on escalating levels as your career ad-vances and thus has created spin-offs like “Junior MasterChef” for children and “MasterChef Australia the Professionals” for seasoned chefs. This makes perfect sense if, like we tell our students, learn-ing is a lifelong process.

Of course, the one difference we must maintain between our profession and the model of “MasterChef” is that as working education professionals, we are not limit-ed to a television season’s timeframe, nor do we need to declare a final winner. We can repeat the cycle of supportive, mean-ingful, fun, personalized professional de-velopment as long as it takes for all of our colleagues to become proud of their work, but still keep improving with the encour-agement of a community of peers.

Bill Tolley, a New York Times Teacher Who Makes a Difference, and a graduate of Teach-ers College, Columbia University is currently a teacher and learner at the International School of Beijing and a staff blogger for the Center for Teaching Quality. His profes-sional interests include innovative learning strategies, future-building, and redefining learning space/time. He is eager to partici-pate in professional learning networks world-wide. Connect with him @wjtolley.

Copyright ©2016 by Editorial Projects in Education, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication shall be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means, electronic or otherwise, without the written permission of the copyright holder.

Readers may make up to 5 print copies of this publication at no cost for personal, non-commercial use, provided that each includes a full citation of the source.

For additional print or electronic copies of a Spotlight or to buy in bulk, visit www.edweek.org/info/about/reprints.html

Published by Editorial Projects in Education, Inc. 6935 Arlington Road, Suite 100 Bethesda, MD, 20814 Phone: (301) 280-3100 www.edweek.org

SEPTEMBER 2011

Schools Find Uses for

Predictive Data Techniques

By Sarah D. Sparks

Published June 30, 2011 in Education Week

T he use of analytic tools to predict

student performance is exploding

in higher education, and experts say

the tools show even more promise for K-12

schools, in everything from teacher place-

ment to dropout prevention.

Use of such statistical techniques is

hindered in precollegiate schools, however,

by a lack of researchers trained to help

districts make sense of the data, according

to education watchers.

Predictive analytics include an array of

statistical methods, such as data

mining and modeling,

used to identify

the factors that

predict the

likelihood of

a specifi c

result.

They’ve long been a standard in the

business world—both credit scores and

car-insurance premiums are calculated

with predictive analytic tools. Yet they have

been slower to take hold in education.

“School districts are great at looking an-

nually at things, doing summative assess-

ments and looking back, but very few are

looking forward,” said Bill Erlendson, the

assistant superintendent for the 32,000-stu-

dent San José Unified School District in

California. “Considering our economy sur-

vives on predictive analytics, it’s amazing to

me that predictive analytics

don’t drive public edu-

cation. Maybe in

Editor’s Note: Access to quality

data provides district leaders with

the opportunity to make informed

instructional and management

decisions. This Spotlight

examines the potential risks and

advantages of data systems and

the various ways in which data can

be used to improve learning.

INTERACTIVE CONTENTS:

1 Schools Find Uses for Predictive

Data Techniques

4 Leading the Charge for Real-Time

Data

6 Proposed Data-Privacy Rules

Seen as Timely for States

7 States Make Swift Progress on

Student-Data Technology

8 Surviving a Data Crash

9 ‘Data Mining’ Gains Traction

in Education

COMMENTARY:

11 My Nine ‘Truths’ of Data Analysis

12 Education as a Data-Driven

Enterprise

13 Data Rich But Information Poor

RESOURCES:

15 Resources on Data-Driven

Decision Making

On Data-Driven Decision Making

iSto

ck/1

23re

nder

Education WEEK Spotlight on implementing common StandardS n edweek.org

1

2012

On Implementing Common StandardsEditor’s Note: In order to implement the Common Core State Standards, educators need instructional materials and assessments. But not all states are moving at the same pace, and some districts are finding common-core resources in short supply. This Spotlight highlights the curriculum, professional development, and online resources available to help districts prepare for the common core.

InteractIve cOntentS: 1 Educators in Search of

Common-Core Resources 4 Higher Ed. Gets Voting Rights on Assessments

6 Common Core’s Focus on ‘Close Reading’ Stirs Worries 7 Few States Cite Full Plans for Carrying Out Standards

8 Common Core Poses Challenges for Preschools

10 Common Core Raises PD Opportunities, QuestionscOmmentary: 11 Standards: A Golden

Opportunity for K-16 Collaboration

12 The Common-Core Contradiction

reSOurceS: 14 Resources on Common Core

Published February 29, 2012, in Education Week

Educators in Search of Common-Core Resources

iSto

ck/k

yosh

ino?

???

By Catherine Gewertz

A s states and districts begin the work of turning com-mon academic standards into curriculum and instruc-tion, educators searching for teaching resources are often finding that process frustrating and fruitless.

Teachers and curriculum developers who are trying to craft road maps that reflect the Common Core State Standards can

The Achievement Gap l Algebra l Assessment l Autism l Bullying l Charter School Leadership l

Classroom Management l Common Standards l Data-Driven Decisionmaking l Differentiated

Instruction l Dropout Prevention l E-Learning l ELL Assessment and Teaching l ELLs in the Classroom l Flu and Schools l Getting The Most From Your IT Budget l Gifted Education l Homework l Implementing Common Standards l Inclusion and Assistive Technology l Math Instruction l

Middle and High School Literacy l Motivation l No Child Left Behind l Pay for Performance l Principals l Parental Involvement l Race to the Top l Reading Instruction l Reinventing

Professional Development l Response to Intervention l School Uniforms and Dress Codes l Special

Education l STEM in Schools l Teacher Evaluation l Teacher Tips for the New Year l Technology

in the Classroom l Tips for New Teachers

www.edweek.org/go/spotlightsView The CoMPleTe ColleCTion of eDuCaTion week SPoTliGhTS

Get the information and perspective you need on the education issues you care about most with education week Spotlights

PAGE 2>

Wanted: Ways to Assess the Majority of Teachers

Editor’s Note: Assessing teacher performance is a complicated issue, raising questions of how to best measure teacher effectiveness. This Spotlight examines ways to assess teaching and efforts to improve teacher evaluation.

INTERACTIVE CONTENTS:

1 Wanted: Ways to Assess the Majority of Teachers

4 Gates Analysis Offers Clues to Identification of Teacher Effectiveness

5 State Group Piloting Teacher Prelicensing Exam

6 Report: Six Steps for Upgrading Teacher Evaluation Systems

7 Peer Review Undergoing Revitalization COMMENTARY: 10 Moving Beyond Test Scores

12 My Students Help Assess My Teaching

13 Taking Teacher Evaluation to Extremes

15 Value-Added: It’s Not Perfect, But It Makes Sense

RESOURCES: 17 Resources on Teacher Evaluation

Published February 2, 2011, in Education Week

On Teacher Evaluation

By Stephen Sawchuk

T he debate about “value added” measures of teaching may be the most divisive topic in teacher-quality policy today. It has generated sharp-tongued exchanges in public forums, in news stories, and on editorial

pages. And it has produced enough policy briefs to fell whole forests.

But for most of the nation’s teachers, who do not teach sub-jects or grades in which value-added data are available, that debate is also largely irrel-evant. Now, teachers’ unions, content-area experts, and administrators in many states and communities are hard at work examining measures that could be used to weigh teachers’ contributions to learning in subjects ranging from career and technical education to art, music, and history—the subjects,

iSto

ck/

olan

desi

na

Spotlight