Session 9: Professional Development

Describe an excellent and a poor experiences in PD- Key similarities and differences.

When being part of a professional development experience, or if I am the one creating it, I find there are 5 indispensable components that need to be in any workshop-
1) Inspire and model what it should look like (See)
2) Break it down into manageable parts (Hear)
3) Hands-On (Do)
4) Evaluation(Change)
5) Follow-up(Care)

Imagine, if you will, a Wednesday afternoon, after the kids are gone, and you are sitting in an after school workshop on creating websites for your classroom. In the "typical" PD experience, you would be talked to about the benefits of using a website for your classroom- you would then be shown a PowerPoint that illustrates how to begin your own website. You would be told the various features of the website protocol and the ways you can access them. You would be given a print out of the very PowerPoint being used to teach the workshop, and you would be encouraged to use the program as soon as you could; an hour and a half later, the presenter would leave, and the subject would not be broached again.

Same Wednesday afternoon. Same crowd. However, the workshop begins with the shared commitment to increase parent communication and parent involvement. Also, the collective commitment to increase student homework and student involvement. Finally, the collective commitment for increasing the use of technology to facilitate learning and communication would be reviewed. Once the purpose for the technology had been set, then the learning would begin.

The presenter would then have teachers on computers, with working examples of websites that have been created by teachers in the respective grades. The communication, ease of posting notices, assignments and calendars would be highlighted as the teachers explore the teacher-created websites. Various on-line templates would be shared, and teachers would create a single entry for their own webpage.

Teachers would then break into workgroups that are grade or level specific, and they would work together to create their webpages. The facilitator would be there to help, there would be clear guidelines for creating websites posted around the room, and in hand outs, as well as models of websites projected on walls. Finally, there would be weblinks to videos showing how to complete their webpages on their own in accessible, step-by-step formats

Evaluations would be on-line, using SurveyMonkey, and results would be instant.

The Facilitator follows up on-line, and answers questions, suggests links to model websites, offers step-be-step directions for ONE MORE piece of the website. The principal features screenshots of teacher's websites as part of her weekly bulletin, and offers links to other staff webpages in her staff e-mails.

Although both scenarios have a presenter, a group of teachers, and a technology lesson to impart, they are different in both tone, substance and style. The latter is focused, broken down into manageable parts, meets the predetermined needs of the institution, is supported by both the principal and the presenter later on, and offers multiple models and entry points into the training for the various learning styles of the participants.

For me, both as a participant, and as a trainer, the second scenario is more empowering, more effective, will have long-term results, and will produce more bang-for-the-SD-dollar. This kind of workshop presentation could be used for other topics other than technology, and would garner much more staff buy-in, and, in the end, cost less than constantly coming out to the site to train those who "didn't get it the first time".