professional learning research alliance virtual team...

Professional Learning Research Alliance

1 | P a g e

Virtual Team Meeting Notes

February 10, 2016

Meeting Goals:

• To connect in meaningful and productive ways with fellow PLRA members; • To gain insight into professional learning models and discuss ideas for measurement/evaluation of impact; and • To introduce the PLRA workgroups as we chart their course for 2016.

Meeting Agenda: Noon – 12:10 pm Welcome, Meeting Goals, and Agenda 12:10 – 12:20 pm Connections 12:20 – 12:30 pm Take Aways from Learning Forward Conference Attendance 12:30 – 01:10 pm District and School PD Models and Evaluation/Measurement 01:10 – 01:20 pm PLRA Workgroups Discussion 01:20 – 01:30 pm Reflections and Considerations

Cindy welcomed members and provided a brief recap of PLRA’s December meeting when MSDE shared information about all of the terrific initiatives they are undertaking in their department including the training of a cadre of master teachers who are still involved with MSDE initiatives (please refer to meeting notes and slides from December 2015 meeting for full details!). Cindy then reviewed the goals of the meeting which included connecting with our PLRA colleagues; actively learning about/digging deep into PD strategies that districts are using to meet teacher needs as they relate to student learning and thinking further about the idea of embedded evaluation of these PD strategies and district initiatives; and hearing about the PLRA workgroups and what’s in store!

The bulk of the discussion focused on the work done as part of a technical assistance project for the NJDOE around district PD structures/systems – we also heard from several folks who attended the Learning Forward annual conference about lessons learned and talked a bit about the PLRA workgroups.


2 | P a g e

The festivities began with Connections/Introductions. Members were introduced briefly and new members from Southern Tioga took a moment to introduce themselves (Sam Tioga and Jesse Maine). They are a rural district, about 1800 students in central north PA. They have been doing formative assessment PLCs (have variety of teams at different levels; 1/3rd to one-half of faculty have gone through this). They have been involved with their IU and the ‘Teach to Lead’ program. In addition, they have been developing a ‘Teachership’ framework for developing teacher leaders and getting administrators closer to the work of teachers (with Dr. Rita Bean; UPitt).

(Re Learning Forward conference): Angie shared that this was the first time that they presented more than one time –

and it was exhausting but overall a terrific experience. Cecilia stated that LF asked them to do the 2nd session and that

doing 2 presentations did not allow them to attend as many other sessions as they had in the past – however, at the

same time, they have gotten smarter at choosing sessions (important point!!). The keynotes were terrific and moved

everyone think more deeply about PL topics and concerns. Cindy shared that her presentation – the fast forward type –

with 20 slides for 20 seconds each (on a timer) – was tough to do and was not stellar. She also shared about a session

she attended on the report by Ben Jensen and others on PD in Shanghai and other countries – was interesting how they

set up their structures. Cathy (attended as presenter on results of formative assessment grant as well as part of group

on leadership development) – very clear messages about how PL is important for school administrators and leaders –

and their needs – and how for them, PL looks different – networking with colleagues – focused on the job supports, such

as coaching. Another theme she found was focused on Leadership Prep and the question of – how do we know what we

are doing is of high quality?

Cathy shared information on the project background including the work that the Reform Support Network folks had

done with them and information the department received from focus groups on PD – several themes that came out of


3 | P a g e

this work was that they have this policy framework in NJ about what the purpose of PD is; what the standards are; etc.;

but, they did not have a lot of information about what was actually happening on the ground or what people doing it

were thinking about it in terms of a systemic perspective. So, they wanted to obtain some basic information about what

was happening on the ground and requested TA around this.

NJ adopted the Learning Forward standards that were developed by many people across the country. Cathy discussed

how they try to capture important criteria about what should guide the planning, implementation, resourcing, and

evaluation of professional learning, that they are vision statements but also important components to consider, and that

research has shown that they connect to student outcomes.

It’s important to note that the professional learning standards are really focused on student learning and ways in which

we need to support educators to improve student learning. Standards reflect areas we want to be thinking about...

Specifically, the standards in (a) 1 through 7 above serve as indicators to guide the policies, activities, facilitation,

implementation, management, and evaluation of professional development.


4 | P a g e

Cecilia discussed how Maryland is moving towards adopting the PL Standards as well. Asked if NJ had any suggestions for

MD before they go before the state board. Cathy explained that it wasn’t a heavy lift to implement these standards since

had ones place – and that she would be glad to speak further with Cecilia off-line. Cecilia is concerned that since they

have standards in place already and the questions around the common core now – might there be a question as to why

change them now. Cathy indicated that the LF standards are based on further research. Jerry (from PA) suggested (in

case haven’t done this already) – that it would be important for MD to have briefed the sub-committee and chairman

and interim superintendent – and if those folks are on board before the meeting – would be helpful. Cathy said that in

NJ, there is a PL committee to give recommendations to the state board so had practitioner support and that might be

something that helped. Cindy asked what was happening around this in DE. Matt indicated that DE has not supported

adopting state-level standards and that each district is using their own. They have an interest in learning more about the

standards and how translate standards into structures and processes in schools and districts that are doable and make

sense. Cathy mentioned another piece of feedback from the policy analysis the state was involved in was that there

were many people that didn’t know that the state had these standards so it’s on the state to make sure people know

they exist and how to use them. She has tried to use them to guide how they frame the expectations around grant

funding as one way to do this but they are trying to communicate this more at the state level.

Every Student Succeeds (not Success) Act (ESSA)! Everything we’re talking about can help school turnaround efforts and

may be part of some district plans. ESSA is inclusive of a definition on PD and focus on what kind of evidence we have on

PD/PL. Interesting to note that school climate must be in place (e.g., trust) to allow teachers and others to collaborate, a

culture/climate that is looking toward teachers as leaders. Exciting time in general and for us and in particular (perhaps)

for us as an RA!


5 | P a g e

(Note re limitations of this project) - Given the exploratory nature of the study, the purposive sampling of school

districts, and the small number of interviews conducted, the findings of this study cannot be generalized to represent

the PD experiences of all school districts in the State, nor was it designed for this purpose. The goal of the study was to

describe what the participating districts are doing at present in response to state mandates and to generate insights and

ideas that may help guide current thinking and future systematic research on this topic – not to explain why districts are

doing what they are doing or to evaluate the efficacy of their efforts.


6 | P a g e

There are many standards in NJ that they use as vision/policy standards – including content standards – so the

professional learning standards provide a framework about high quality PD but in executing PD, the content standards –

and possibly other standards – also come into play. Cathy indicated that it might be helpful for the state to do more to

explicate the different standards and their purposes/roles. Angie thought this would be a great thing to do. Jerry

thought it was important that there is regulation or law along with it – that alignment piece – to perhaps take it to the

next level, to be taken seriously. Cecilia indicated that she believes it’s important that the PD standards are adopted at a

state level (so that everyone is using the same standards). Currently, in MD, there seems to be some confusion about

what standards are being used (based on the findings of a recent survey). Rob mentioned the need for this as well

especially given we know that teacher development is one of the most important aspects of student learning and

achievement. The major concern is (as with many things) that this requires a significant financial investment, however,

PLCs may be an answer to be able to do this in a cost-effective way. Cindy mentioned her concern/interest is in the

translation of the standards into actual high quality PD (activities and then outcomes) and also that there might be a

need to think further about how to systematize some of this more – right now, much seems person/individual focused.

Keisha mentioned that they are looking at district-wide trends in PL – likes this as a standard of PD – so they are on the

same page at least in terms of philosophy.


7 | P a g e


8 | P a g e

Keisha discussed that they are starting this and have a feedback protocol they are using. Starting small and then will

grow this throughout their schools. Rob mentioned that the principals are covering for the teachers in small part so that

the teacher can be freed up to observe colleagues – and this allows principals to get into the classrooms a bit as well

(further thinking about ways to be creative in issues around teacher time). Jesse discussed (and shared in the chat box)

that when he was a STEM instructional coach at IU5 that they developed a plethora of PD opportunities and used the

Standards for Professional Learning in conjunction with ISTE Standards to anchor their PD in research-based approaches

to adult learning (perhaps he will share a bit on this at an upcoming meeting).

Districts differ in the depth of training of teachers receive to provide the PD as well as how formalized the in-house PD

program is but all districts (we visited) are using it in some way.


9 | P a g e


10 | P a g e


11 | P a g e

Cathy indicated that a big take away for her from this project was the focus on in-house PD. In past, there was a concern

about the expense and quality of bringing others in but this now makes her grapple with what’s the state’s role in how

to support districts in their provision of high-quality PD; what can the state do to help them have better outcomes.

Mike K. mentioned that the state has much more leverage than individual districts and perhaps there is a way that the

state can be involved with securing high-profile and knowledgeable people/entities to work with multiple districts across

the state while potentially helping to offset some of the costs to districts.

To Cindy, at least, ESSA seems to present a real opportunity for all stakeholders to engage in a productive process or

dialogue of re-envisioning how we engage with and assess the delivery of high-quality PD in a way that is most

responsive to local needs and at the same time builds on local strengths (knowledge, experience, skills). To connect back

to the findings of the PD profile study, districts appear to be quite capable of coming up with innovative and potentially

effective solutions to the same set of challenges they face regarding the delivery of high-quality PD, so perhaps the goal

should be to support these efforts the best we can – which means building their capacity to do this in a sustained,

intensive, collaborative, job-embedded and evidence-based way.

So what Cindy is proposing (and it’s completely open to discussion), is that PLRA engage in a process of participatory

design or a collaborative re-envisioning the way we can most usefully incorporate evaluation into building our capacity

to provide high-quality PD that meet these standards AND generate credible evidence that it is making a difference at

the level of teachers, students, and schools.


12 | P a g e

If we want to do this in a systematic way, Cindy believes we need to take on 5-related tasks. However, there may be

items missing, there may be items here that shouldn’t be, etc.

Angie, Dan, Cecilia (all three MD), Matt (DE), and Mike K. (NJ) indicated that they are currently doing 1 (articulation of

high-quality PD in relation to actual needs), and, in addition, this one resonated most for GJSD, Cecilia, and Matt.

For Mike K, a clear articulation of benchmarks for tracking progress resonated most due to the challenge of it.

For Angie and Dan, a clear articulation of a process for collecting and analyzing the most relevant, timely, and cost-

effective data resonated most. While they are still trying to articulate the PD program and activities, understanding data

and collecting data should help drive this.

Mike K. also mentioned 4 and 5 (articulation of a process for collecting and analyzing data, and articulation of how to

use and communicate findings) as items Monroe are currently doing.


13 | P a g e

Poll results: Cecilia and Cathy volunteered to help facilitate on alternative models of PLCs at a future meeting.

Rob and Angie volunteered to help facilitate and/or present on evidence supporting PD strategies’ impact on teachers

and student learning at a future meeting.

Angie and Cecilia volunteered to help facilitate and/or present on the use of social media for professional development

and/or communication at a future meeting.

If additional individuals have any interest in the above topics or others – in terms of facilitating and/or co-presenting at a

future PLRA meeting - please just let Cindy know! Thanks to all!!

Cindy thanked everyone for attending and the meeting was adjourned!!

professional learning research alliance virtual team...

Documents