Professional Development In The Age Of Student Achievement Based upon the work of Thomas R. Guskey

1. Professional Development In The Age Of Student AchievementBased upon the work of Thomas R. Guskey Peter Bonaccorsi, Ed.D. May 15, 2014 NAESP

2. A Little Bit About Me… Peter Bonaccorsi • BMus: Music Education, Boston University • MA: Elementary Education, University of Connecticut • CAGS: Admin & Supervision, Southern CT State University • Ed.D.: Educational Leadership, Nova Southeastern University • Began teaching music in 1977 (Massachusetts & Connecticut) • Taught at K-12 and college levels (U.S.C.G.A.) • Began my administrative career in 1986 • Teaching Principal of a K-6 school (66 students and 4 FT teachers) • Asst. Principal of a 1-5 school (450 students and 22 FT teachers) • Principal of a 2-5 school (730 students and 67 FT teachers) • Professional focus • Mentoring of Principals and Aspiring Principals • Professional Development – Design, Implementation, and Evaluation • Response To Intervention • Educational Leadership • Federal Relations (Currently serving as NAESP State Representative for NH)

3. Heron Pond Elementary School • Located in Milford, NH • Built in 2001 for Grades 2-4, Expanded in 2006 to include Grade 5 • 40 classrooms, maximum capacity 900 students

4. Today’s Expected Outcomes Examine Guskey’s 5 levels of professional development evaluation. • Gain an introductory level of knowledge and understanding about each level and how each pertains to: • planning targeted professional development. • evaluating targeted professional development. • connecting targeted professional development with student learning outcomes.

5. A Bit About Thomas Guskey Thomas R. Guskey, Ph.D., is Professor of Educational Psychology in the College of Education at the University of Kentucky. • Ph.D. from the University of Chicago • M.Ed. from Boston College • B.A. from Thiel College • Began his career in education as a middle school teacher. • Served as an administrator in Chicago Public Schools. • Authored/edited 18 books and over 200 articles published in prominent research journals.

6. Before We Start: A One Question Quiz “…professional development leaders [are] charged with ensuring that educators have the knowledge and skills needed to help all students reach the high levels of learning described by these newly defined standards.” Thomas R. Guskey Of what standards was Guskey speaking? The NCTM’s first set of standards, published in 1989.

7. FROM WHERE SHALL WE START? “Let's start at the very beginning. A very good place to start.”The Sound of Music by Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein II (1965) “What we call the beginning is often the end. And to make an end is to make a beginning. The end is where we start from.” T. S. Eliot (N.D.)

8. A Quick Look At Guskey’s 5 Levels • Participants’ (Teachers’) Reactions • Participants’ (Teachers’) Learning • Organization (School & District) Support and Change • Participants’ (Teachers’) Use of New Knowledge and Skills • Student Learning Outcomes Guskey, T. R. (2002). Does it make a difference? Evaluating professional development. Educational Leadership, 59(6), 45-51.

9. When Evaluating Professional Development… We start at the beginning, Level 1: Teachers’ Reactions, and work progressively through each subsequent level until we reach Level 5: Student Learning Outcomes.

10. When Planning Professional Development… We start at the end. “…to improve student learning…plan ‘backward’, starting where you want to end and then working back.” Guskey, T. R. (2002). Does it make a difference? Evaluating professional development. Educational Leadership, 59(6), 45-51.

11. A Closer Look At Guskey’s 5 Levels and How They Impact Planning Professional Development Activities

12. 3 Essential Questions To Ask When Planning PD Activities • How does this activity relate to the school mission? • What are the intended student learning outcomes? • What evidence best reflects those outcomes? From: Guskey, T. R. (2010). Professional Development: How Best to Spend Your Money. Conference of the Near East South Asia Council for Overseas Schools. Kathmandu, Nepal

13. Level 5 – Student Learning OutcomesThe GOLD Standard • What was the impact on students? • Did it affect student performance or achievement? • Did it influence students’ physical or emotional well-being? • Is student attendance improving? • Are dropouts decreasing?

14. Level 5 – Student Learning Outcomes How Will Information Be Gathered? • Student records (data, data, data) • School records (more data) • Parental/Teacher input • Portfolios What Is Measured or Assessed? • Student OUTCOMES • Cognitive (performance & achievement) • Affective (attitudes & dispositions) • Psychomotor (skills & behaviors)

15. Level 4 – Teachers’ Use of New Knowledge and Skills • Did teachers effectively apply the new knowledge and/or skills?

16. Level 4 – Teachers’ Use of New Knowledge and Skills How Will Information Be Gathered? • DIRECT observations • Formal and informal • Conversations • Plan books • Surveys • Reflections (written/oral) • Video & audio recordings • Portfolios What Is Measured or Assessed? • DEGREE and QUALITY of implementation • Walking the walk • Automaticity • Systemic integration

17. Level 3 – Organization Support & ChangeRemember…Organization Means School and District (I suggest this is the second most important level) • Was implementation advocated? • Was the support public andovert? • Were sufficient resources made available? • Were successes recognized and shared? • What was the impact on the organization?

18. Level 3 – Organization Support & Change How Will Information Be Gathered? • School & district records • Minutes from follow-up meetings • Surveys • Interviews with school or district administrators What Is Measured or Assessed? • The ORGANIZATION’S • Advocacy • Support • Accommodations • Facilitation • Recognition

19. Why Is Level 3 So Important? Without the support of the “higher-ups”: principal; superintendent; school board; community; state… Would you be willing to take the risks necessary to become fully invested in a new or expanded training initiative?

20. Level 2 – Teachers’ Learning • Did the teachers learn and/or acquire the intended knowledge and/or skills?

21. Level 2 – Teachers’ Learning How Will Information Be Gathered? • Paper & pencil instruments • Simulations • Demonstrations • Reflections (written/oral) • Portfolios What Is Measured or Assessed? • NEW knowledge and skills of teachers • Instructional strategies • Behavioral interventions • New curriculum

22. Level 1 – Teachers’ Reactions • Did they like it? • Was it worth their time and effort? • Do they think it will be useful? • Was the presenter knowledgeable? • Was the room temperature comfortable? • Was the food tasty? • Were the chairs comfortable?

23. Level 1 – Teachers’ Reactions How Will Information Be Gathered? • Surveys administered at the ENDof the session What Is Measured or Assessed? • INITIAL satisfaction with the event • Gut reaction • Emotional reaction • Irrational reaction • First reaction

24. Any Questions So Far?

25. When EVALUATING When Planning

26. Adult Basic and Literacy Education (ABLE) Another Model: Ohio ABLE Professional Development Evaluation Framework (2010) Ohio Board of Regents, University System of Ohio

27. Side-by-Side Comparison Thomas Guskey Ohio ABLE

28. For Example: At Heron Pond Elementary • We SUSPECTED that our students’ basic math skills were not strong enough. • We analyzed data from our NECAP and NWEA math results for the three previous years. We determined that our students underperformed on their basic math facts. As a result, we developed the following goal. • Our Math Goal: Improve our students’ basic math fact assessment scores by offering the teachers targeted professional developmentactivities. • The next step was to develop the targeted PD!

29. We Answered Guskey’s 3 Questions 2. What are the intended student learning outcomes? • Improve students’ knowledge and use of basic math facts. 1. How does this activity relate to the school mission? • To provide a quality education that challenges all students to succeed. 3. What evidence best reflects those outcomes? • NWEA MAP (Numbers & Operations) • State approved assessments (NECAP) • Publisher’s unit assessments (EDM) • Teacher-generated assessments

30. Our Results: Our EvidencePercentage of students at or above proficiency in math on the NECAP

31. The Student Outcome Gap…(Guskey’s Level 5) • Subgroups • State and Federal Accountability Requirements • NCLB, RTTT, Waivers • Teacher Evaluations • NCLB, RTTT, Waivers, Local Requirements • Program/Budget • Other Local/Building Issues

32. The Professional Development Gap… The PD gap is the gap between our beliefs about effective PD and the evidence we have to validate those beliefs. • Applying Guskey’s 5 Levels of PD Evaluation will provide you with the evidence needed to work on closing the PD gap.

33. Some General Thoughts About Closing The PD Gap • Reviewing the Evidence on How Teacher Professional Development Affects Student Achievement (Yoon et al. 2007) • 9 of 1300 had sufficient data to draw valid conclusions • Does Teacher Professional Development Have Effects on Teaching and Learning? (Blank, de las Alas, & Smith 2008) • 7 of 25 had measurable effects of PD on student outcomes

34. More Unsettling Thoughts • Schools rarely implement innovations one at a time; instead, they implement multiple innovations simultaneously. • School leaders seldom collect reliable evidence on the effectiveness of their professional development offerings. • Best Practices are mostly generalizations. • OUCH!!! • “…valid and scientifically defensible evidence on the relationship between professional development and improvements in student learning is exceptionally scarce.” - Guskey, 2009

35. Some Favorite Einstein Quotes • Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. • Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning. • A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new.

36. In Conclusion… “Powerful professional development that incorporates these five essential understandings will not lessen the challenge involved in this process [to improve student learning]. It will, however, ensure that efforts remain focused on the issues most vital to success.” Thomas R. Guskey (2005)

37. Contact Information & Upcoming Events Peter Bonaccorsi • bonaccor@nova.edu NAESP Annual Conference • “Designing and Evaluating Effective Professional Development Activities: A Path Towards Improving Student Achievement Results” Thursday, July 10, 2014 at 3:15 – 4:45 p.m. Gaylord Opryland Hotel, Bayou C