audit of ks state pd policies pg 27-54

8/9/2019 Audit of KS State PD Policies Pg 27-54

1/28

Agenda Number: 8Meeting Date: 05/11/2010

To: Interim Commissioner Diane DeBacker

From: Pamela Coleman

Subject: Professional Development Audit Task Force Final Report

Date: 04/20/2010

Board Goals: Providing a caring, competent teacher in every classroom

In the fall of 2009, the Board approved a contract for the Kansas State Department of Education to

collaborate with the National Staff Development Council (NSDC) to convene a state-wide task forcecharged with development of a comprehensive professional learning system for Kansas. A

comprehensive learning system ensures that all Kansas educators engage in effective professional

learning focused around core expectations and aligned with state initiatives, content standards,regulations and legislation.

Joellen Killion, Deputy Executive Director, NSDC guided the task force in review, development andrecommendations for a statewide, comprehensive professional learning system for Kansas. The task

force met six times beginning in November of 2009. Members sought input and feedback from

constituencies across the state as they completed their work.

Joellen will be presenting to the Board the policy recommendations of the task force.

The National Staff Development views high quality professional learning as essential to creating schools

in which all student and staff members are learners who continuously learn. The Board has endorsed the

use of the NSDC professional development standards.

Teacher Education and Licensure

Phone: 785-296-2288

Fax: 785-296-4318

TTY: 785-296-6338

27


2/28

28


3/28

Audit of Kansas State

Professional Development Policies

Submitted by

Kansas Professional Development

Task Force

May 2010

29


4/28

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................... 2

Act 96 Professional Development Defined ............................................................... 3

Executive Summary .................................................................................................. 4

The Role of Professional Learning in Promoting High-Quality Teaching,

Leadership, and Student Achievement ..................................................................... 8

Audit Process .......................................................................................................... 14

Areas of Strength Commitment to Continuous Improvement ............................................................ 15 Task Force Consensus on the Purpose of Professional Learning .......................... 15 Tiered Points for Licensure Renewal .................................................................... 15 Article 96. Professional Development Programs .................................................. 15 Professional Development Councils...................................................................... 15 Standards for High-Quality Professional Development ........................................ 16

Areas for Improvement Definition of Professional Development ............................................................... 16 Inequity of Access ................................................................................................. 16 Individual versus School Improvement ................................................................. 16 Limited Application and Impact Level Professional Development ...................... 17 Integrated System for Professional Development ................................................. 17

Recommendations Recommendation 1: Definition of Professional Development .............................. 17 Recommendation 2: Accountability ...................................................................... 18 Recommendation 3: Backwards Design ................................................................ 19 Recommendation 4: Professional Pathway ........................................................... 19 Recommendation 5: Licensure Renewal ............................................................... 19 Recommendation 6:Professional Preparation ........................................................ 20 Recommendation 7:Educators Roles ................................................................... 20 Recommendation 8:Funding for Professional Development ................................. 21 Recommendation 9: Time for Job-Embedded Professional

Development ......................................................................................................... 21

Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 22

References ............................................................................................................... 24

30


5/28

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The foresight of the Kansas State Board of Education and Department of Education

to conduct an analysis of the states professional development policies and theimpact of those policies on professional development practices throughout the statedemonstrates the ongoing commitment of the Board and Department to ensuring

educators participate in high-quality professional development that results in

improved learning for Kansas students.

Particular appreciation is extended to the Professional Development Task Force

members representing various constituencies, listed below, who committed timeand energy for six months and who contributed significantly to the

recommendations. NSDC further acknowledges the support of the Kansas State

Department of Education staff, particularly Pamela Coleman, Director of TeacherEducation and Licensure; Susan Helbert, Assistant Director, TEAL; Lynn Bechtel,

Education Program Consultant; Kathy Boyer, Education Program Consultant; andJanet Williams, Sr. Administrative Assistant, for organizing a broad array ofdocuments for review, convening the Professional Development Task Force, and

supporting the meetings of the Task Force.

Educators, school board members, and state legislators throughout Kansas took

time to share insights and suggestions during the Task Forces work and provide

feedback on the draft recommendations enriched the work of the Task Force.

Barbara Bunting USD 373-KASBWalter Carter USD 229-KNEA

Mike Cook ESSDACK-Service Centers

Sandee Crowther Executive Director-KSDCGlennys Doane Board of Directors-KASBPeg Dunlap Director-KNEAJeff Eastman USD 205-KNEA

David Flowers USD 308-KASA

Randy Freeman USD 372-KASA

Diane Gross USD 261-KSDCDavid Hofmeister Southwestern College -Non-public IHEPam Irwin USD 305-PDC Representative

Anna Moon Bradley USD 456-KNEAShirley Palmer District 4-Kansas House of Representatives

Larry Patrick Smoky Hill Education-Service Centers

Suzan Patton USD 382-Curriculum DirectorsCesar Pena USD 374-KAMSA

Michele Penner USD 259-KNEA

Joshua Robinson USD 290-KAESP

Kris Sherwood USD 260-KASSPGail Shroyer Kansas State University-Board of Regents IHESheryl Spalding District 29-Kansas House of Representatives

Diana Wieland USD 315-Curriculum Directors

31


6/28

Article 96--PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS 72-

9601. Citation of act; legislative declaration and intent. This actshall beknown and may be cited as the education professional

development act. It is hereby declared that it is essential to the welfare

of the people of Kansas that the provision of quality educational

opportunities for all pupils in the state be assured. Therefore, it is theintention of this act to promote continuous professional development,

diversification in academic foundations or subject knowledge,

improvement in job effectiveness, enhancement of skills and

techniques, and competent on-the-job performance of all certificatedpersonnel serving regularly in the accredited elementary and secondary

schools of the state of Kansas.

32


7/28

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYPurpose of the Study

The Kansas State Department of Education commissioned a statewide task force

facilitated by Joellen Killion, deputy executive director of the National StaffDevelopment Council, to conduct an audit of states professional developmentpolicies. This audit will be utilized to inform the work of the Department of

Educations revision and alignment of policies related to educator standards,

licensure, licensure renewal, professional development, and school improvement.The specific focus of the Professional Development Task Force was to review and

recommend changes in policies (statutes, regulations, and guidelines) for

professional development for Kansas educators to ensure a system of seamless andcontinuous improvement from preservice through the entire continuum of

educators career so that it contributes to both educator practice and pre-K through

20 student academic success. The Professional Development Task Force examinedseveral key questions, including:

What are the strengths of the Kansas professional development policies,especially in comparison to other states?

Where are leverage points in Kansass professional development policiesthat can strengthen the quality of educator professional development and

tighten its link to improved leadership, teaching, and student learning?

What recommendations can be made for Kansass professional developmentpolicy revision?

Audit ProcessThe audit consisted primarily of document review (regulations, statutes, andguidelines), study of research, principles, and practice, dialogue among Professional

Development Task Force members, feedback from constituents, and examination of

current practice reported by task force members. The Professional DevelopmentTask Force analyzed documents and identified both strengths and areas for

improvement, drafted recommendations, sought and studied constituent feedback,

and revised recommendations for inclusion in this document.

Strengths

In its analysis, several strengths in the current statute, regulations, and guidelinesemerged. They are listed below.

Commitment to Continuous Improvement Task Force Consensus on the Purpose of Professional Learning Tiered Points for Licensure Renewal Article 96. Professional Development Programs Professional Development Councils Standards for High-Quality Professional Development

33


8/28

Areas for Improvement

A number of areas for improvement emerged from the analysis of state policies.When taken together these areas increase the likelihood that effective policies fall

short of their intended effects.

Definition of Professional Development Inequity of Access Individual versus School Improvement Limited Application and Impact Level Professional Development Integrated System for Professional Development

Recommendations

The broad recommendations in this section encompass many of the specific

recommendations identified in Areas for Improvement and can be viewed as areasfor task force work, used to sequence and prioritize action plans based on this

policy audit, and become the focus of required budgetary priorities for the

Professional Standards Board and Department of Education.

Policy is best recommended by those who are responsible for administering it as

well as those who will be affected by it, therefore this policy audit report will bemost helpful to those who develop, implement, and support policy on professional

development. It is NSDCs suggestion that a representative group of thoughtful

educators be appointed to review the report for purposes of relevance and accuracy.Following that review, the policy audit report can serve as a guide for revising the

necessary policies.

Recommendation One

:Define effective professional development by

specifying its essential attributes and its intention to improve student

learning to guide revision in policies and practices.

Recommendation Two

:Establish a system of accountability for high-quality

professional development with specific checks at multiple points within thedesign, implementation, support, and evaluation of professional

development.

Recommendation Three:

Design and implement professional development

in the districts and schools that reaches beyond developing educator

knowledge to application and impact on student learning.

Recommendation Four

:Ensure that all individuals involved in the education

process participate in career-long learning. Each develops a professionaldevelopment plan during his/her initial preparation based on his/herstrengths and areas for improvement that is continuously revised to follow

the educator throughout his/her career.

Recommendation Five: Ensure that educator professional learning

incorporate application and impact on student learning.

34


9/28

Recommendation Six

:Ensure that state standards for teachers and schooland district leaders currently under revision align with and include concepts

and practices of high-quality professional development including active

participation in and facilitation of both job-embedded and externallyprovided professional development.

Recommendation Seven

:Engage every educator in focusing on a continuumof learning that contributes to enhanced student achievement.

Administrators are simultaneously learners and facilitators of systemic

change within their districts and schools by ensuring that professionaldevelopment addresses knowledge acquisition, application to practice, and

impact on student learning. Teachers, as administrators, are simultaneously

learners who actively engage in professional development for continuousimprovement and who facilitate professional learning while contributing to

growth in student achievement.

Recommendation Eight

:Require general fund budgets to reflect funds set

aside for Pre-K-20 educator professional development.

Recommendation Nine

:Ensure that local districts provide 40-80 hours of

student achievement-focused professional development for licensed

educators and support staff directly involved in student learning each year aspart of the student contact hours as established in KS Law 72-1106. Because

the majority of professional development is job-embedded, there will not be

the need for additional special days within school calendars devoted toprofessional development as time away from the classroom. Professional

development can occur in classrooms and school during student contact time

or within educators workday. Time for professional development during theschool day includes teacher collaboration time driven by specific goals for

educator learning that are based on an analysis of student achievement data.

ConclusionThe Kansas State Department of Education has a significant responsibility to ensure

that it allocates the resources, supports the development work recommended in this

policy audit, and facilitates changes in the structure of the school day to ensure thatprofessional development is not viewed just as a mechanism for renewing educator

licenses, but rather a fundamental responsibility of all professional educators that is

vital to meeting the states goals for improved student academic success.

35


10/28

PURPOSE OF THE AUDIT OF KANSAS STATE

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENTPOLICIES

The Kansas State Board of Education and Department of Education authorized an

audit of the states professional development policies. The National StaffDevelopment Council, with experience in conducting similar studies for otherstates, was commissioned to lead the audit process. The recommendations emerging

from the study will be used by the Kansas State Department of Education to guidepolicy revisions that ensure Kansas educators engage in effective professional

development to improve student academic success.

Kansas State Board of Education and Department of Education have both the

responsibility and authority to establish 1) criteria for effective professional

learning for all educators; 2) systems for monitoring the quality and equitable

access to effective professional development for all Kansas educators; and 3)guidelines for time allocations and fiscal support for the implementation of effective

professional development.

State policies exist within a context set by federal policies, the Elementary and

Secondary Education Act (ESEA), scheduled for reauthorization. Proposed changesin ESEA may impact guidelines and expectations for professional development

funded with federal funds, Kansas State Department of Education will want to be

positioned to respond to any potential changes by beginning now to examineresearch and recommendations for improving professional development that are

likely to be associated with the reauthorization of ESEA. In addition, reviewing and

updating the states professional development policies position Kansas StateDepartment of Education to ensure that professional development has a greater

impact on teaching quality, leadership, and student achievement.

State policy plays an important role in professional development. By describing the

expected professional development results and assigning accountability to one or

more entities for these results, policy becomes the means through which thepublics interest in educators continuous learning is protected. It is essential to the

success of Kansas students to develop policy that establishes a clear definition for

professional development, its role in improving student learning, systems tomonitor and evaluate its effectiveness, and parameters for its practice. Time and

resources for educators to participate in professional development will be necessary

to achieve the desired results.

Because professional development occurs in many different contexts, e.g., school,

district, state, out-of-state, makes it important to provide guidance about theconditions and context essential for professional learning to produce the identified

resultsincreased student achievement. Policy and funding to monitor the

implementation of staff development, evaluate its results, and publicly report the

36


11/28

findings to determine whether professional development is improving

administrators leadership and teachers instruction is essential. The question is nothow much professional development policy is necessary, but which policies are

necessary to achieve the result of improved performance levels of, first, educators

and then students.

Professional development is not an option. Taxpayers have a right to expect that

educators will engage in a continuous improvement throughout their careers tostrengthen their practice and prepare them for the ever-changing landscape of

education. At the same time, educators have a right to expect that their professional

development is aligned with their role and responsibilities and applicable to theclassrooms, schools, and communities. However, in too many communities

throughout the United States, both taxpayers and educators are disappointed with

the execution of professional development. Quite frequently, it is poorly conceived,ineffectively implemented, and rarely evaluated. Many educators have experienced

such consistently poor professional development that they have come to regard it as

more of a burden than an opportunity. Furthermore, many taxpayers and theirelected representatives see little evidence that professional development produces

the positive student effects they anticipated.

In far too many school systems nationwide and still in some in Kansas, the

prevailing mode of professional development continues to be a didactic

presentation, often by a consultant who understands little about the context in whichthe educators work. Frequently, the purpose of this form of learning is the

transmission of information rather than the engagement of educators in dynamic

and relevant learning experiences they can translate to their daily practice.Whatever the purpose or type of professional development, there is seldom follow-

up support to provide educators with the classroom, school, or workplace support

necessary to apply their new learning or to assess the effectiveness of their learningon practice or student learning. Specific policies and guidelines about the both the

purpose and design of professional learning and its connection to educators

authentic work and expected results improve both the quality of professional

learning and its impact.

THE ROLE OF PROFESSIONAL LEARNING IN PROMOTING

HIGH-QUALITY TEACHING, SCHOOL LEADERSHIP, AND

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

What teachers know and do influences what students know and do. Consensus fromnearly two decades of research confirms that the quality of teaching students

experience influences their learning. So strong is this consensus that current state

and local efforts to revamp teacher evaluation systems seek ways to include at leastsome measure of student learning. While teaching quality is the primary influence

on student academic success, what school leaders do to support effective teaching

influences the quality of teaching in classrooms. In recognition of the importance of

37


12/28

teacher and leadership quality, the accountability measures inNo Child Left BehindAct(NCLB) of 2001 increased the expectation for states to ensure teaching qualityas well as demonstrated improvement in student achievement. As ESEA

reauthorization takes center stage in the US House and Senate in the month ahead,

states and school districts can anticipate new policy expectations to ensure measuresof teaching effectiveness and student achievement. Professional learning contributes

to both. When educators learn, their students learn.

States use educator standards and licensure regulations to guarantee that new

teachers and school leaders are highly qualified and prepared for their respective

roles in teaching rigorous content standards and leading school improvement.Strong mentoring with induction systems ensure that novice educators,

approximately 25% of educators, have substantive support to move from a state-

approved preparation program to the educator workforce. Professional developmentfor educators who become or are already working in schools, districts, and agencies

throughout the stateapproximately 75% of educators, on the other hand, is a

states policy lever for ensuring that teachers and school leaders continue to deepenand expand their professional knowledge and practices. As with other professionals,

educators retool, deepen their content knowledge, expand their pedagogical and

leadership expertise, and refine practice over time to meet the changing demands ofstudents, families, and communities and the changing expectations of education

systems to ensure students meet rigorous content standards, are college and career

ready and prepared for life and work in the 21st

Century and beyond. Newinitiatives such Kansass Multi-Tier System of Support depend on building human

capital for successful implementation. Ongoing learning and continuous

improvement are the hallmarks of the professions.

Teaching in a standards-based environment means that both teachers and school

leaders shift practices from teacher-centered instruction to student-centeredinstruction. To teach in the ways envisioned by standards reformers, teachers need

strong content knowledge and the ability to change their pedagogical repertoire as

well as their underlying beliefs and attitudes about it. To do this successfully,

teachers need opportunities for deep learning of content as well as opportunities tolearn how to use reform-oriented strategies, practice those strategies in the

classroom, and observe their effects on student learning. Therefore, standards-based

professional development is the cornerstone of a standards-based system (Snow-Renner & Lauer, p. 3). Evidence that improved professional development for

teachers and principals leads to increases in student learning is growing. Timperly

& Alton-Lee (2008) in their synthesis of the research on professional development

noted, Some of the most effective professional development identified in oursynthesis results in more than 3 times the expected gain over the same period for

students who do not typically achieve well (p. 335). They acknowledge that policymakers are beginning to recognize that improving education systems, particularly

teaching quality, is an important way to meet the challenges of a knowledge society.

Not all professional learning, research concludes, is equally effective in improving

38


13/28

educator practice and student achievement. Over the last decade, research in

professional development has defined the core attributes of professionaldevelopment that is more closely associated with changes in educator practice and

student learning. NSDC, drawing on research in both education and business and

industry, states:

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The term professional

development means a comprehensive, substantiated, and intensiveapproach to improving teachers and principals effectiveness in

raising student achievement --

(A) Professional development fosters collective responsibility for

improved student performance and must be comprised of professional

learning that:(1) is aligned with rigorous state student academic

achievement standards as well as related local educational

agency and school improvement goals;

(2) is conducted among educators at the school and facilitatedby well-prepared school principals and/or school-based

professional development coaches, mentors, master teachers,or other teacher leaders;

(3) primarily occurs several times per week amongestablished teams of teachers, principals, and other

instructional staff members where the teams of educators

engage in a continuous cycle of improvement that

(i) evaluates student, teacher, and school learningneeds through a thorough review of data on teacher

and student performance;

(ii) defines a clear set of educator learning goals

based on the rigorous analysis of the data;

(iii) achieves the educator learning goals identified in

subsection (A)(4)(ii) by implementing coherent,sustained, and evidenced-based learning strategies,

such as lesson study and the development of

formative assessments, that improve instructional

effectiveness and student achievement;

(iv) provides job-embedded coaching or other formsof assistance to support the transfer of new

knowledge and skills to the classroom;

(v) regularly assesses the effectiveness of the

39


14/28

professional development in achieving identified

learning goals, improving teaching, and assisting allstudents in meeting challenging state academic

achievement standards;

(vi) informs ongoing improvements in teaching and

student learning; and

(vii) that may be supported by external assistance.

(B) The process outlined in (A) may be supported by activities suchas courses, workshops, institutes, networks, and conferences that:

(1) must address the learning goals and objectives established

for professional development by educators at the schoollevel;

(2) advance the ongoing school-based professionaldevelopment; and

(3) are provided by for-profit and nonprofit entities outsidethe school such as universities, education service agencies,

technical assistance providers, networks of content-area

specialists, and other education organizations andassociations (National Staff Development Council,

(http://www.nsdc.org/standfor/ definition.cfm)

The McKinsey study of 25 of the worlds school systems, including 10 of the top

performers, provided information on the common factors and tools they use to

improve student outcomes. The experiences of these top school systems suggeststhat three things matter most: 1) getting the right people to become teachers; 2)

developing them into effective instructors; and 3) ensuring that the system is able to

deliver the best possible instruction for every child. These systems demonstrate that

these best practices for achieving student success work irrespective of the culture inwhich they are applied. The authors analysis demonstrates that substantial

improvement in student outcomes is possible in a short period of time and that

applying these three best practices universally could have enormous impact inimproving failing school systems wherever they may be located (Barbour &

Mourshed, 2007).

In a research study conducted by Stanford Universitys School Redesign Network,entitledProfessional Learning in the Learning Profession: A Status Report on

Teacher Development in the United States and Abroad, the research team identifiedmultiple differences in teacher professional development between the U.S. and

countries that out-perform the U.S. on international exams. Notable among the

difference are the length of time teachers invest in professional learning,collaborative efforts with peers to improve student learning, focus on teacher

40


15/28

professional learning on rigorous content standards, and amount of classroom

support (Darling-Hammond, et al, 2009).

Economist Eric Hanushek (2005), in his analysis of the relationship between

academic outcomes and economic growth, concluded that governmentalinvestments should focus on school quality because they have such powerful

economic impacts . . . The most likely way to improve student performance is to

improve the quality of teachers (p. 9, 14). The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development also highlighted the importance of professional

development as a policy lever for improving student learning. At the level of the

education system, professional development of teachers is a key policy lever (p.20).

Jackson and Bruegmann (2009), in a study published by the National Bureau ofEconomic Research based on longitudinal data about teachers and students,

conclude that elementary school students have larger test score gains when their

teachers colleagues improve in observable characteristics of related to effectiveteaching.

In an attempt to determine the mechanisms behind these spillovers, wetest for empirical patterns that are consistent with peer related learning.

First, we show that less experienced teachers are generally more

responsive to changes in peer quality than more experienced teachers.We also find that teachers who are certified and have regular licensure

are generally more responsive to peer quality. The most compelling

piece of evidence supporting the learning hypothesis is that the effect ofteacher peer quality is persistent over time. Most peer effects that

operate either through the education production function or through

peer monitoring/pressure will have a contemporaneous effect. We showthat for both math and reading, the quality of a teachers peers the year

before, and even two years before, affect her current students

achievement. For both subjects, the importance of a teachers previous

peers is as great as, or greater than, that of her current peers. Thecumulative effect over three years of having peers with one standard

deviation higher effectiveness is 0.078 standard deviations in math and

0.072 standard deviations in reading. Because teachers have about threepeers on average, this is about one third of the size of the own-teacher

effect, suggesting that over time, teacher peer quality is very important.

Lastly, we find that peer quality in the previous two years explains

away about one fifth of the explanatory power of individual teachers.This suggests that a sizable part of the own-teacher effect is learned as a

result of exposure to her previous peers (pp. 22-23).

The continuous improvement of all teachers within a school, particularly in teams

of teachers who have responsibility for the same students and curriculum, ratherthan some, such as those who are renewing their license, calls for changes in

41


16/28

policies that support individually focused professional learning if there is an intent

to increase the impact of professional learning on student achievement. Jacksonsand Bruegmanns research has implications for mentoring and induction, teacher

placement, teacher leadership, and systems of teacher evaluation and support.

Two recent scientifically rigorous studies of professional development make it clear

that even after barely a year of implementation, the programs, one in literacy and

one in mathematics, impact teaching performance (Garet, et al, 2008, 2010). Whilethe results of the first year studies do not yet show evidence of improved student

learning, primarily because the period of implementation prior to student testing

was too brief to have a substantive impact, there is strong evidence of impact onteaching practices. As Desimone (2009) notes changes in teaching practice precede

changes in student achievement. To improve teaching and learning in Kansas

classrooms, it is essential to closely examine professional development policy, alignit to research and standards of excellence, and provide adequate funding,

monitoring, and support for implementation.

Current research on effective professional development suggests that a reform

approach to professional development rather than traditional approach is associated

with improved teaching and student learning. Yoon et al (2007) reviewed theevidence on how teacher professional development impacts student learning. After

an extensive review, researchers identified nine studies confirming that sustained

(49 hours or more), high-quality professional development is associated with gainsin student achievement. In their landmark, national, empirical study on the impact

of the Eisenhower Math and Science Program professional development, Garet et al

(2001) concluded that reform-oriented teacher professional development is moreeffective in changing teacher practices than traditional approaches to professional

development such as one-shot or short-term workshops or college courses. Reform-

oriented professional development has specific structural features, e.g., teacherstudy groups sustained over time; collective participation by teachers from the same

school; focus on the content; active, inquiry-oriented learning approaches; and a

high level of coherence with other reform initiatives, content, and performance

standards in the teachers local context.

A study of professional development conducted by Peneul et al (2007) reached

similar conclusions. This study, associated with the implementation of an inquiryscience program, concluded that increases in teacher knowledge and practice

correlate with coherence between district goals for student learning and teachers

goals for professional development; collective participation by teachers from a

school; ongoing, in-classroom support with equipment, resources, and practices;time to plan for implementation; and focus on the programs content.

Cohen and Hill (2000) concluded that teacher professional development focused on

specific curricula resulted in more reform-oriented instructional practices than

general professional development. Reform-oriented instructional practices arepositively related to increases in student achievement. Banilow (2002) reported a

42


17/28

positive relationship between the extent of teacher participation in professional

development and student achievement. Data from the Merck Institute for ScienceEducation program evaluation (Corcoran et al, 2003) provides support for collective

participation in professional development. Student performance correlated to the

proportion of teachers in a school who were engaged in professional development.When a large proportion of teachers (at least 78%) participated, student

performance increased.

In quasi-experimental study focused on the benefits of moving teacher learning

closer to the classroom, Saunders, Goldenberg, and Gallimore (2009) report that

the practice of teachers meeting in grade level teams to focus collaboratively

on instruction, provided evidence that grade-level teams focused on improving

student learning does produce school-level effects of both statistical and

practical significance (p. 1026). Further, this study reinforces the role of

teacher leadership in facilitating grade-level or subject-area professional

learning teams. The greatest gains in student achievement in this three-year

study did not occur in the first year when principals alone facilitated learningteams. Only in the second and third year, when teachers facilitated their own

learning teams, did changes in teaching and learning occur.

Research in the last decade confirms that professional development must be

integral to school improvement processes, the continuum of educator

development, and focused on producing changes in practice and student

learning. The current Kansas professional development statute, Article 96

Professional Development Programs, emphasizes the link between content,

educator practice, and student learning, yet practice is remote from the

intention of the statute. The shift from a pullout program for adults that

centers learning away from school to a system that centers learning in schoolsfor both students and educators requires a greater change in practice than

policy. Increasing opportunities for collaboration, collective responsibility,

peer support, and continuous improvement is essential. The Department of

Education will need to create systems of accountability for this change in

practice, provide the resources to school and district leaders, statewide

agencies and associations, and teachers to make this transition, and minimize

the reliance on knowledge-building or awareness level professional learning

that produces little return on investment in professional development.

AUDIT PROCESS

The audit consisted primarily of document review (regulations, statutes, and

guidelines), study of research, principles, and practice, dialogue among Professional

Development Task Force members, feedback from constituents, and examination ofcurrent practice reported by task force members. The Professional Development

Task Force analyzed documents and identified both strengths and areas for

improvement, drafted recommendations, sought and studied constituent feedback,and revised recommendations for inclusion in this document. The audit process did

43


18/28

not include revising specific statute, regulation, or guideline language or developing

implementation processes for the recommendations. Department of Education staffwill lead that work, upon acceptance of the task forces recommendations.

STRENGTHSIn its analysis, several strengths in the current statute, regulations, and guidelines

emerged. They are reported below.

Commitment to Continuous Improvement

The Kansas State Board of Education and Department of Education model

continuous improvement by charging the Professional Development Task Force toreview policies and recommend improvements. This commitment to ongoing

review and revision ensures that Kansas educators and their students are provided

effective, equitable opportunities for learning.

Task Force Consensus on the Purpose of Professional LearningStrong consensus emerged from Task Force members that the primary goal ofprofessional learning is student success. In addition, members coalesced around the

importance of providing equitable and highly effective, school-based, coherent,

content-specific professional learning is a fundamental lever for improving studentsuccess and advancing state, district, and school initiatives.

Tiered Points for Licensure Renewal

Current regulations that allow educators to accrue three levels of points based on

the outcome of the learning experience provide a framework for acknowledging the

application and impact of professional learning. While this system rewards andacknowledges educators commitment to extend their learning beyond the

knowledge level, educators rarely access the higher levels of points.

Article 96. Professional Development ProgramsThe current Kansas statute on professional development programs includes a

number of strengths including a funding formula, standards for quality, requirementfor evaluation of professional development local school board maintenance of

professional development programs, state aid, professional development fund, and

technical advice and assistance to local school districts and agencies.

Professional Development Councils

The establishment of local professional development committees, at the district and

in some cases at the school level, ensures the involvement of educators, selected torepresent both teachers and administrators, in decisions regarding their professional

development and hold them accountable for developing a local board approvedprofessional development plan. Members must participate in annual training to

serve on the councils to ensure implementation of Kansas professional development

regulations.

44


19/28

Standards for High-Quality Professional Development

The Kansas State Board of Education endorsed the National Staff DevelopmentCouncils Standards for Staff Developmentin 2008. These standards establish

criteria for effective professional development that guide the design,

implementation, and evaluation of professional development.

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT

A number of areas for improvement emerged from the analysis of state policies.When taken together these areas increase the likelihood that effective policies fall

short of their intended effects.

Definition of Professional Development

The current definition of professional development fails to establish the primary

purpose of professional learning as improving student success. As defined in Act96: Professional Development Programs, professional development is:

(a) " Professional development means any planned learning opportunitiesprovided to certificated personnel employed by a school district or otherauthorized educational agency for purposes of improving the performance of

such personnel in already held or assigned positions (72-9602. Definitions).

When the definition of professional development falls short of identifying impact

on student academic success, its implementation will also fall short of producing

substantive impact. The definition also ties professional development to personnelperformance, emphasizing the individual focus, rather than to school improvement

and student academic success.

Inequity of Access

Kansas School Board Association annually collects data on school district

calendars. In analyzing data from the current year, the Task Force identifiedsubstantial disparities in educators access to professional development within the

school calendar. The range of days allocated to professional development in Kansas

school district ranged from one day to 11 days. The scope of this discrepancyimpacts opportunities for educator learning to refine or extend their practice and to

contribute to student success. It also contributes to districts capacity to implement

innovations.

Individual versus School Improvement

The challenge of balancing individual professional development with that designed

to achieve district and school improvement as a part of the Kansas QualityAssurance Program complicates the administration of professional development

programs. More recent research in professional development suggests thatprofessional development is most effective when it is centered at schools among

teams of educators, sustained over time, focused on rigorous content standards,

follows a cycle of continuous improvement, is evaluated regularly, and is supportedby school-based and/or classroom assistance for implementation. Current licensure

45


20/28

renewal procedures emphasize individual professional development rather than to

integrate licensure renewal as a part of the seamless system of school and districtimprovement. When professional development resources are aligned with priorities

established by local school boards and schools, all the resources contribute to the

achievement of established goals. Balancing individual professional developmentfor licensure renewal points or performance improvement with professional

development for school and district improvement requires difficult decisions about

how to maximize the impact of all professional development resources.

Limited Application and Impact Level Professional Development

Educators in Kansas can be rewarded for applying and demonstrating the impact oftheir professional development. However, few educators, according to reports from

Task Force members, take advantage of this opportunity. The effort to recognize

and reward application and impact level professional development is commendable,however, all professional development, if designed to meet identified student

achievement needs and strengthen educator practice, should minimally require

evidence of application and impact.

Integrated System for Professional Development

An integrated system for professional development identifies roles of allconstituents. Those stakeholders include Kansas State School Board, Kansas State

Department of Education, local school district boards of education and central

office staff, school leaders, teacher leaders, teachers, agency staff, other non-instructional educators, support staff, and parents and community members. When

the system delineates roles for each stakeholder group, an integrated and cohesive

system of support for effective professional learning exists. This system is currentlyfragmented. Some stakeholders have clearly defined roles; others do not.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Policy makers frequently develop policies in response to new priorities, crises, or

special interests; however, as they are developed, all too often there is limitedanalysis of how the new policies interact with those already in existence. It is

instructive for states and other political entities to engage in an interactive process

to reevaluate and revise policies on a regular basis.

The following broad recommendations encompass many of the specific

recommendations identified in Areas for Improvement. These broad categories

identify areas for the Kansas State Department of Education to develop prioritizedaction plans based on this policy audit, other policy reviews and revisions, and

available state resources.

Recommendation One: Definition of Pr ofessional DevelopmentDefine effective professional development by specifying its essential attributes andits intention to improve student learning to guide revision in policies and practices.

46


21/28

Rationale

: By defining what effective professional development is, using researchand effective practice, educators will be able to design, implement, and evaluate the

quality of professional learning. Defining the attributes of high-quality professional

development provides criteria for the Kansas State Department of Education toevaluate the professional development statewide, strengthen educators access to

effective professional learning, and facilitate implementation of high-quality

professional development to increase the return on its investments in professionallearning.

Explanation

: Clear criteria clarify expectations, guide practice, provide guidance forevaluation systems, and improve practice. The criteria, based on research, will

ensure that professional learning is aligned with goals, focused on results for

students, and more job-embedded within educators work day. A concomitantstrategy to defining professional development will be shifting educators perception

that professional development occurs only when students and educators are away

from school to one that recognizes that professional learning is a continuous cycleof improvement that occurs most effectively in schools among teams of educators.

Recommendation Two: AccountabilityEstablish a system of accountability for high-quality professional development with

specific checks at multiple points within the design, implementation, support, and

evaluation of professional development.

Rationale

The Kansas Constitution ensures that schools must provide Kansasstudents with public education characterized by quality and equity.

: Systemic accountability is necessary to monitor the completion of action

plans and to ensure that professional development leads to demonstrable studentachievement.

Schools must meet local, state, and national standards for continuousimprovement.

A clearly articulated system of checks and balances throughout theprocess clarifies expectations and redirects actions as necessary.

Accountability measures ensure quality control throughout the state forall pre-K 20 education personnel.

Accountability encourages experimentation and innovation.Explanation: As Kansas educators move toward meeting local, state, and national

standards of student achievement and national standards of professional

development, it is imperative that they are accountable for meeting standards.Without accountability it is unlikely that Kansas school districts can ensureequitable access to professional development and student achievement.

Accountability must be built into the system specifically defining the role and

responsibility of each stakeholder, from the state legislature, the Department ofEducation, teacher preparation institutions, to the local education agencies. All

47


22/28

educators will benefit from professional development that exists within a clearly

articulated system of accountability.

Recommendation Three: Backward Design

Design and implement professional development in the districts and schools thatreaches beyond developing educator knowledge to application and impact on

student learning.

Rationale

: Effective professional development goes beyond knowledge, to

application and measurable impact on student learning. Professional development

engages educators in long-term processes that include practice, modeling, coaching,and collaboration to improve effectiveness and student results. A focus on data and

student learning drives all aspects of professional practice, including the design of

professional development. As professionals, educators share expertise andsystematically address problems of practice by developing shared knowledge,

engaging in reflective practice, and assessing the impact of their work (Hirsh and

Killion, 2009).

Explanation

: Professional development must start at the broad policy level with a

focus on student learning. If student learning is the beginning of the professionaldevelopment planning process, this approach to backwards design by beginning

with the end in mind will lead to a professional development model that has a

greater likelihood of achieving its identified and intended results.

Recommendat ion Four: Professional PathwayEnsure that all individuals involved in the education process participate in career-long learning. Each develops a professional development plan during his/her initial

preparation based on his/her strengths and areas for improvement that is

continuously revised to follow the educator throughout his/her career.

Effective professional development connects professional learning to the needs of

students, educators and their career continuum, school and district, and communityto improve teaching, leadership, and student learning.

Rationale:

Explanation

: Each educator develops an individualized professional developmentplan to guide career-long professional learning. This plan guides the mentoring and

coaching provided during the first two years of educators service. An ongoing

professional learning plan will be based on the needs of pre-K-20 students, the

individual educator, the district, school, and state initiatives and will continuethroughout the educators career. The plan should be include specific, results-

oriented, and standards-based goals for growth and development.

Recommendation Five: Licensure RenewalEnsure that educator professional learning incorporate application and impact onstudent learning.

48


23/28

Rationale

: Knowledge that results in increasing the growth of student learners andeducators reaches beyond the knowledge level. Professional learning that

transforms practice and produces impact on students requires changes in

knowledge, skills, disposition, and behavior. Educators should approach allprofessional development with the intention that it will impact student learning and

educator practice.

Explanation

: A framework that recognizes that multiple forms of professional

learning are integrated to improve educator practice and positively impact student

learning while advancing the education system.

Recommendation Six: Professional Preparation

Ensure that state standards for teachers and school and district leaders currently

under revision align with and include concepts and practices of high-quality

professional development including active participation in and facilitation of both

job-embedded and externally provided professional development.

Rationale

: Educators cannot be expected to recognize, demand, provide, or facilitatehigh-quality professional development without deep knowledge about its attributes

and related practices. By including knowledge and skills related to high-quality

professional development planning, implementation, facilitation, and evaluationinto educator performance standards, every educator will leave their preparation

programs better prepared to expect and experience the kind of professional

development that ensures that every educator engages in effective professionallearning every day so every student achieves (NSDC).

Explanation

: NSDCs definition of and standards for professional development

should be the foundation of revisions in state and district professional developmentpolicies, regulations, guidelines, and practices. In addition to knowing how to

recognize high-quality professional development, teachers and administrators mustalso know how to advocate for quality professional development practices.

Recommendation Seven: Educators Roles

Engage every educator in focusing on a continuum of learning that contributes toenhanced student achievement. Administrators are simultaneously learners and

facilitators of systemic change within their districts and schools by ensuring that

professional development addresses knowledge acquisition, application to practice,and impact on student learning. Teachers, as administrators, are simultaneously

learners who actively engage in professional development for continuousimprovement and who facilitate professional learning while contributing to growthin student achievement.

Rationale: Professional learning is not a temporary experience, but rather a career-long process that begins with preparation programs and continues throughout an

educators career to expand, extend, and refine professional knowledge, skills,

dispositions, and behaviors to improve student learning. By engaging in

49


24/28

professional learning communities educators can deepen their knowledge and skills,

receive support for changes in practice, and reflect on and evaluate the impact oftheir practice on student learning. Professional learning communities encourage

sharing expertise within a school or district and establish and maintain a culture of

collaboration and collective responsibility. Job-embedded professional learningmoves learning closer to the site of implementation and impact increasing the

likelihood of achieving specified goals.

Explanation

Recommendation Eight: Funding for Professional Development

: Student academic success demands professional educators who

engage in professional development every day within a culture of support and

collaboration. This occurs when educators collaborate within teams of peers, haveopportunities to work with and be coaches of peers, and engage with facilitators of

professional learning throughout their career.

Require general fund budgets to reflect funds set aside for Pre-K-20 educator


Rationale

: Designated funding for professional development ensures an effectiveteacher in every classroom and effective leaders at schools and within districts.

Designated funds ensure that funds for professional development are a protected

line item so that they cannot be easily removed.

Explanation

: Continuous professional development of all educators is essential to

improve student achievement. Adequate funding is necessary to ensure that alleducators engage in continuous professional development. Funds for professional

development include funding for both job-embedded and externally provided


Recommendation Nine: Time for Job-Embedded Professional Development

Ensure that local districts provide 40-80 hours of student achievement-focusedprofessional development for licensed educators and support staff directly involved

in student learning each year as part of the student contact hours as established in

KS Law 72-1106. Because the majority of professional development is job-embedded, there will not be the need for additional special days within school

calendars devoted to professional development as time away from the classroom.

Professional development can occur in classrooms and school during studentcontact time or within educators workday. Time for professional development

during the school day includes teacher collaboration time driven by specific goals

for educator learning that are based on an analysis of student achievement data.

Rationale: Meaningful professional development that produces changes in practice

and student learning requires that learning move beyond knowledge to include

application and impact. Changes in educator practice takes time, therefore it isessential to build time into the schedule. Time for practice of new skills and

strategies, including opportunities for preparation, peer coaching, feedback, and

evaluation, is essential to impact student learning. The span from 40-80 hours

50


25/28

provides Kansas school districts with the flexibility to meet their own student

achievement needs and professional development goals of educators.

Explanation

: Results-focused professional development is guided by studentachievement needs. If time is provided for job-embedded professional development,

haphazard approaches to professional development must cease. Since this time is

built into the 1116 hours required for student contact, additional cost for substitutesis not necessary not an increase in salaries. Some change to KS Law 72-1106 may

be necessary to clarify this. Currently the interpretation is that 50% of a

professional day can count toward student contact hours (i.e. 6 hours of professionaldevelopment = 3 hours of student contact time).

CONCLUSION

Policymakers may want to consider this question: If the State of Kansas began with

the proverbial blank sheet of paper to create a system of professionaldevelopment for the ultimate purpose of enabling students to achieve rigorous

content standards and be college and career ready in the 21st

Century, how wouldthat system be similar to and different from the current arrangement? This is a

difficult question, one that calls for incorporating new learning about effective

professional development as well as setting aside institutional allegiances in favorof efficiencies, practices, core assumptions, and resources that will produce better

results.

Asking and soberly answering the hard question above is a prerequisite for actions

that will allow the state to meet its ambitious goals for professional development. It

is not realistic to expect entities responsible for professional development toabandon their own interests to fashion a new, comprehensive system with greater

potential to engage local educators in professional development and that improves

their practice. The states current approach to professional development was createdby the state legislature and Department of Education, and only these entities have

the authority to create a new system that is both more coherent and effective. The

recommendations of the Professional Development Task Force are just thebeginning of this reform process. Because this process must be thoughtful and

deliberate, without an expectation of silver bullet solutions or a rush to judgment,

the Department of Education is best positioned to lead the statewide considerationof creating a new professional development system for Kansas grounded in current

research and noteworthy practices.

During any serious review of the states current policies, many issues will surface.

It is not appropriate for this report to pre-empt the role of the Kansas State

Department of Education by prioritizing the recommendations and implementationof them. However, in addition to the recommended revisions, it will be crucial to

ensure that whatever revisions result in effective professional development practices

also improve student academic success. The Department of Education has a

51


26/28

significant responsibility to ensure that it allocates the resources, supports the

development work recommended in this policy audit, and facilitates changes in thestructure of the school day to ensure that professional development is not viewed

just as a mechanism for renewing educator licenses, but rather a fundamental

responsibility of all professional educators to meet student learning needs, improveschools, and meet the states goals for improved student academic success.

A new vision of professional development will emerge in Kansas one in whichskillful, professional educators who engage in accountable interactions and share

collective responsibility for the success of every Kansas student. Implementation of

this vision and the results it will produce ensure that Kansas will attract and retaineducators who develop as professionals throughout the continuum of educator

development from preparation to expert professional, and who serve as leaders

within a world-class educational system.

52


27/28

REFERENCES

Banilow, E. (2002).Results of the 2001-2002 study of the impact of the local

systemic change initiative on student achievement in science. Chapel Hill,

NC: Horizon Research.

Cohen, D., & Hill, H. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance:

The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102(2),

294-343.

Corcoran, T., McVay, S., & Riordan, K. (2003). Getting it right: The MISEapproach to professional development. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium forPolicy Research in Education.

Desimone, L. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers professionaldevelopment: Toward better conceptualizations and measures.Education

Researcher, 38(3), pp. 181199.

Garet, M., Cronen, S., Eaton, M., Kurki, A., Ludwig, M., Jones, W., Uekawa, K.,

Falk, A., Bloom, H., Doolittle, F., Zhu, P., and Sztejnberg, L. (2008). TheImpact of Two Professional Development Interventions on Early Reading

Instruction and Achievement(NCEE 2008-4030). Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center

for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, 2008.

Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K. (2001). What

makes professional development effective? Results from a national sampleof teachers.American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), pp. 915-945.

Garet, M., Wayne, A., Stancavage, F., Taylor, J., Walters, K., Song, M., Brown,S., Hurlburt, S., Zhu, P., Sepanik, S., and Doolittle, F. (2010). Middle

School Mathematics Professional Development Impact Study: FindingsAfter the First Year of Implementation (NCEE 2010-4009). Washington,DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance,

Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Darling-Hammond, L, Wei, R. Andree, A., Richardson, N., Orphanis, S. (2009).

Professional Learning in the Learning Profession: A Status Report onTeacher Development in the United States and Abroad.Oxford, OH:

National Staff Development Council.

Hanushek, E. (2005).Economic outcomes and school quality: Education Policy

Series.International Academy of Education and International Institute for

Educational Planning, UNESCO.http://www.smec.curtin.edu.au/iae/

53


28/28

Hirsh, S. and Killion, J. (2009). When educators learn, students learn: Eight

principles of professional learning,Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), pp. 464-469.

Jackson, C. and Bruegmann, E. (2009). Teaching students and teaching each

other: The importance of peer learning for teachers. Working Paper 15202.Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w15202

National Staff Development Council. (2001).National Staff Development

Council Standards for Staff Development Revised. Oxford, OH: Author.

Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2005). I. Paris:

Author.

Peneul, W., Fishman, B., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. (2007). What makes

professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum

implementation. (2007).American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), pp.921-958.

Snow-Renner, R., & Lauer, P. (2005). McREL Insights: Professional

development analysis. Denver, CO: Mid-Continent Research for Education

and Learning.

Timperly, H. & Alton-Lee, A. (2008). Reframing teacher professional learning:

An alternative policy approach to strengthening valued outcomes for diverse

learners.Review of Research in Education, 32, pp. 328-369.

Saunders, W., Goldenberg, C., and Gallimore, R. (2009). Increasing

achievement by focusing grade level teams on improving classroom

learning: A prospective, quasi-experimental study of Title I.American

Educational Research Journal, 46(4), pp. 10061033.

Yoon, K., Duncan, T., Lee, S., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the

evidence on how teacher professional development affects student

achievement(Issues & Answers, REL 2007-No. 033). Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Educational Sciences, National

Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, RegionalEducational Laboratory Southwest. Retrieved from

http://ies.gov/ncee/edlabs.

audit of ks state pd policies pg 27-54

Documents