According to everything the class taught us, data analysis and the subsequent action plan take up the majority of the time in the project.  We, the students, had three weeks to collect data and one week to analyze and conclude.  I am not complaining, I get it.  I get that this was an introduction to the process and now we can implement this practice with our districts, but I really go into it.  I am disappointed that I could not possibly put all of that data into a coherent form in just a few days.  I can’t believe it, but I am disappointed that I didn’t have time to write a bigger, better paper.  Looking at my schedule, odds are I will not get back to it for quite sometime. 

 That said, here is a small piece and please save your comments about my awful APA citation for an argument with a college professor :     (FYI: InfoSource is an internet based content delivery system that we are using to update MS Office skills)

            Question two will unfortunately remain unanswered until further research is conducted.  It is my opinion that offering online, on demand personal development is a more effective delivery method; however, the data collected from InfoSource (Pearce, 2007) proves the contrary.  A yearly assessment report showed over 300 failures, 54 incomplete tests, and only 45 passing scores in 2006-2007.  A quick look at the time spent showed that the average participant is spending less than 30 minutes on each quiz and often logging off after less than 10 minutes because of a failure of the pretest.

This is the only online assessment tool that we have, but it is my belief that it is not an accurate reflection of the medium.  In my personal experience InfoSource is tedious and difficult, offering material as drill and skill rather than exploration and reflection.  I point to the short amounts of time spent and the staggering amount of failures as proof of this.  As a side note, I am also taking issue with InfoSource’s overall data reporting.   To my knowledge, the system provides only one report listing access times and success or failures.  There is no way to filter, import, or export data making assessment beyond pass/fail difficult.  Chalmers and Keown (2006) suggested that the success of any program is equal to the amount of support provided.  Infosource is a stand alone quiz machine and, in my opinion, is proving to be an expensive experiment with very little reward.  

Although not addressing professional development on a mass scale, another popular method of teacher development is the conference.  With the assistance of the district office, I was able to access and manually record conference request data for the years of 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 (D.A.S.D., Appendix A).  For the last two school years there were 1086 individual requests filed.  Not having other data from other schools makes conclusions difficult, but cross checking the requests with the given rationale yielded some interesting trends.   Less than half of the requests appeared to be related to pedagogy.  Only 79 of the requests involved educational technology, while 364 requests were related to the administration and guidance departments.  The question that needs explored now is why teachers do not seek out more opportunities within their content area?     

1.  Rushed (Having to use or re-teach material/software within a week)

2.  Errors!  (A training model that is poorly constructed and functions sporadicly at best)

3.  The Unknown (District application is still a week away, what is it going to look like?)

4.  The Presenter (Most software people don’t speak in normal everyday terms, nor do they have the the fortitude to stick with “non-techies”)

5.  Local Knowledge (Teachers are partial to certain functionality in grading, the presenter should be somewhat prepared for how the audience works)

The list could go on and on.  Why are teachers being trained before the tech department?  Why would you show your audience the entire system in three hours?  It is extremely aggravating all around.  The bottom line is when things like this happen you leave people with the option of not adapting.  “It didn’t work,”  I didn’t get it,” “I’ll never have time to learn all that.” 

I realize sometimes time is an issue, but as the old saying still goes, “poor planning on your part does not constitute and emergency on mine”.  We will get it done.  We have a great staff and we always mange to shine no matter what is handed to us.  I just hope that in the future more voices are brought into the mix of professional development and system change.  All of this could have been avoided with a short conversation.

I didn’t learn much about our new grade book, but I did learn a valuable lesson.       

I was pulled from the workshop several times today.  I was out a few times for a laptop and a projector having a fight and a few times for some administrative issues.  Sadly those interruptions lead to a lack of focus on today’s information and practice.  Never the less, I will push on like I know what I am talking about.  Just be aware that my understanding may not be as comprehensive as the others.

Today started with a review of instructional strategies by grouping and using interactive large group strategies to tell more about ourselves. 

Moving on, the main focus today was on comprehension strategies including:

Making Connections

Asking Questions

Visualization

Drawing Inferences

Determining Importance

Synthesizing Information

and Monitoring Comprehension

It is the opinion of the presenters that if you choose to focus on instructional and comprehension strategies that it would work best with a full district commitment.  That said, if you choose to change your own practice, I think a teacher could do worse than teaching reading comprehension skills to students.   The book recommended here is Strategies that Work by Stephanie Harvey and Anne Goudvis.  

After the instructors modeled large group interactive instruction, focusing on comprehension strategies, (Great method using enlarged text to focus attention where you want it) it was up to us to develop a lesson.  Pairing with a content partner we were to select a passage of text that may pose problems.  My partner and I chose a passage from Poe’s Cask of Amontillado.  Recognizing the descriptive language, we felt comfortable using Visualization as our strategy.   

For tomorrow our plan is increase compression by gaining a visual of what is happening.  We are going to question the student’s mental images and use pictures to identify complicated words or passages.  

I’ll let you know how it goes. 

Here is how it went down.  After some back forth between the director, I, and a well intentioned technician, the conversation changed from what could go wrong to whose responsibility is it when something does go wrong. Each side had valid points.  The techs feel they need to protect both the system and the students, while I see internet use on company time as an adult decision.  The sticking point was really a common argument; if something goes wrong who is responsible, the user or the provider.  There was a real worry that if a large problem was revealed that the “well they let me” defense could be invoked. 

In the end there seemed to be a small, albeit contentious, agreement.  Decision: Teachers (I say professionals) are capable of making decisions regarding what resources are necessary to effectively teach.  The caveat is that if they find evidence of misuse, they reserve the right to lock it back down.  Frankly, I am okay with that if it is done the right way.  I hope the right way goes something like this: run the reports, collect evidence, and provide a warning.  If the violation is recorded again then the person needs to be taken through the proper discipline channels. 

We all agreed that violations are things like gambling, eBay shopping, or fantasy sports.  What the majority of us call complete stupidity if you are supposed to be at work.  (Unfortunately also a reality) 

It’s a start and we’ll see how it goes, but I think this may be a move that will be looked upon as positive for all parties.  The teachers are treated like capable, professional adults, the administration shows trust in the staff, and the students have a chance to learn from up-to-the-minute material located on the web.       

Or did I just give myself a whole lot o’ rope?      

Here are some interesting responses from real teachers across the US. 

1.  If we could select ourselves what areas we believe would help us in doing a better job on a day to day basis. While I always like to learn, at times, some of the programs we must attend are not able to be used in a day to day basis. If could have a “salad bar” of PD would be nice.

2.  Direct relevance to the field of online learning. Opportunities to share as well as learn. Doing more than sitting there and listen to/watch someone present something.

3.  If it were differentiated and ongoing. Too much “spray and pray” happens in districts–I give you a too much info in one sitting and pray you implement it

4.  I would like to be offered more choices. Also, when we receive training, that is as far as it goes. There is no opportunity later to discuss what we learned or how we are using it. If something I learned fails, I have no chance of receiving insight from others as to what might have happened or what might make it work in the future. Therefore, I am more likely to try it and give up than I would be if I had an opportunity to discuss it.

5.  If there were more options and not everyone had to attend the same PD opportunities within the school district. For example, I may feel that I need to learn more about behavior management so I could choose that and another person might choose reading, and another person might choose technology in the classroom. Outside of school there are many PD opportunities and it is nice that the school district often helps with or covers the cost of these opportunities.

6.  Having release time after a PD session to reflect on and build the new learning into the classroom programme. Too often we attend PD but then get sucked up into the business of our class to be able to properly internalise the PD experience.

Bonus: To provide balance 1.  I don’t know

Honestly the last answer is one of the best.  Jim Gates brought up an excellent point when we discussed the fact that 50% of the participants said they were happy with the PD provided them.  Jim said, people are happy because they are unaware of what is possible.  How can we expect folks to want change who don’t know it exists?  Needless to say I felt like I was pushed all the way back to go.

Thus far, and I am far from finished, I find that there is a need to begin breaking PD up into smaller and smaller groups.  I like the conference approach to summer PD where a teacher/staffer can choose from a list, but how does that work during the year.  There is a need for ongoing PD, but will the current system of both school and union make it difficult for teachers to progress.  As one person said, “PROGRESS!!!..being allowed to progress and affect the changes that need to be made.” 

Will the majority of our efforts be blocked by business as usual?

(Note: I made no attempt to correct or alter any of the responses except “Progress”.  They are word for word.)

One anomaly that puzzles me is in the response to questions #3:  What types of training is provided most often?  Behavioral, Pedagogical, Adminstrative, Technological

It is entirely possible that this question is poor, but if 70% of the participants feel they are being provided with pedagogical training then where is the disconnect?  My district is obsessed with behavioral issues.  We do not have a behavior problem per say, but we often find ourselves in program after program focusing on the “proper” way to “deal” with the children of today.  In no way am I discounting any of these programs.  Some of them have teachers raving; I am just trying to illustrating my point.  My district spent the entire 2006-2007 school year on behavioral issues and, in my mind, sacrificed teaching skills.  (I suppose were supposed to already have that down already, right?)

I do find some clues in the 5th question that was an open ended response to:  What would encourage you to participate in more PD?  The answers range from more money to small group collaboration, but the common thread that runs throughout 90% of the responses is relevance.  Relevance to “my” classroom, “my” situation, or dealing “real” classroom issues.  I believe these teachers are asking for more pedagogical training and, of course, that coincides with the overwhelming feeling the 75% of of feel disconnected from the professional development process. 

Although, quick and dirty, I feel this survey has merit.  Teachers are not engaged in professional development the way it is offered today.  They want choice, they want personal relevance, and this should be to know one’s surprise, they want more. 

I look forward to taking this information and applying it to my situation as a new technology integrator at my district.  I will differentiate, I will use small groups and online collaboration, but most of all I heed the words of one participant and provide refreshments, numerous breaks…and treat you like adults.        

Punch and pie anyone?